Modern Heavy Bomber News, Pictures Thread (Non-Chinese)

[kwaigonegin]

The US was capable of building the ultimate high altitude high speed bomber, the XB-70...but it was cancelled by a liberal administration. If we had built a couple of hundred of those, we would still be fluying about 100 of them and it would be hard for anyone to touch them to this day. Too bad...that was a beautiful bird...and very, very capable.

View attachment 36491

Mach 3.1 at 80,000 feet.

LOL, I wouldn't call Eisenhower a liberal but that's just me . Kennedy officially canceled it but it actually started during Eisenhower's tenure.

The cost thing aside my personal believe on why it was canceled stemmed from a few primary reasonings. The 'technical'/operational aspect and the 'political/mythological' aspect.

1. 6 very advanced high BP turbofans would make for extremely difficult maintenance and low mission readiness. This was an aircraft design for deep penetration into Warsaw Pact territory and would've played a crucial role in the nuclear triad. Operational readiness was critical.

2. She couldn't release anything over Mach 3+ thereby mitigating her primary advantage in hostile airspace.

3. Missile mafia. Often controversial and subjective however they certainly did exist. Back in the 50s and 60s you have a select groups of highly influential and powerful people who genuinely believed that missiles was the end all be all. Why need a high flying expensive bomber when you can build more ICBM, SLBMs etc?
These are the same group of folks just like the 'fighter mafias' who thought the F4s doesn't need a gun!

Anyway I have seen a static display of the XB70 when I visited wright pat in the 90s. Not sure if she still there but most certainly an amazing piece of machinery and way ahead of it's time!

 

[Jeff Head]

LOL, I wouldn't call Eisenhower a liberal but that's just me . Kennedy officially canceled it but it actually started during Eisenhower's tenure.

The cost thing aside my personal believe on why it was canceled stemmed from a few primary reasonings. The 'technical'/operational aspect and the 'political/mythological' aspect.

Anyway I have seen a static display of the XB70 when I visited wright pat in the 90s. Not sure if she still there but most certainly an amazing piece of machinery and way ahead of it's time!

Kennedy canceled it after he took office because McNamra and the people coming in with him felt the B-70 was "unjustifiable," and that even at Mach 3 and 80-,000 feet they thought the Rusians would be able to shoot them down willy nilly.

But Mcnamara and those whom he relied on were on a mission, much as other liberal presidents liand their adminnistrations have been on "missions" to cancel high cost military programs and use them as a source for their liberal, failed, wefare and social "justice" programs.

Never mind that not a single SR-71 was ever shot down which had similar characteristics...the XB-70 was a huge program and not a few one off dreamland aircraft...it was a major program where they could get a lot of funding...and so they did.

In reality, it was McNamara who was the main push for cancelling it...and he was about as liberal as you could possibly get in that era. He canceled quite a few things back then.

If we had built a coupld of hundred XB-0s and maintained them...they would still be flying and still be a viable aircraft for threats to enemies of the US.

But...we do not have them and have moved on from that design and that mentality a long time since...and come up with just as viable programs.

but again, where we should have built a couple of B-2s, we built 20. Perhaps we actually will build over 100 B-21s. I hope so.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Hindsight is always 20/20. Like I said back then the mentality was SLBMs and ICBMs and the high price tag of the XB70 program cost and per u it cost basically killed it.

As to the comparison to the SR71, the fact that it never got shot down during her service life is moot because we're talking late50s/1960 and the SR71 has not even flown yet.

Also as I mentioned in my earlier post, XB70 cannot release her ordnance at Mach 3+ and had to significantly reduce her speed for weapons release thereby increasing the probability of hull loss. At that time I think many if not most folks thought missiles including Soviet SAMs were far more deadly and effective than they actually were further cementing the mentality of obsolete bombers.

At the end of the day obviously $$ talks and certain quarters were just too nervous that Xb70 program if continued would've siphoned funds from the other very high priority ventures like the Titan, Polaris, Minuteman and Atlas programs.

 

[Gloire_bb]

To certain degree this was true: bomber with thermonuclear bomb within won't be shot by conventional SAM either, and everyone thought nukes at that point.

 

[delft]

Anyway I have seen a static display of the XB70 when I visited wright pat in the 90s. Not sure if she still there but most certainly an amazing piece of machinery and way ahead of it's time!

That's the survivor. The one way to get rid of her is to demolish, you can't fly her away. And I can hardly imagine a barbarian capable of destroying her.

 

[delft]

If we had built a coupld of hundred XB-0s and maintained them...they would still be flying and still be a viable aircraft for threats to enemies of the US.

I can't imagine that maintenance would have been at an acceptable cost. B-58 couldn't be maintained and was scrapped for that reason. I might be wrong but I think B-52 is a very special case.
As for interception Tu-126 and MiG-25 were developed for that purpose.

 

[FORBIN]

I think B-52 is a very special case.

B-52 Stratofortress somewhere over Iraq, Syria

 

[FORBIN]

B-52 flying over Iraq !

 

[FORBIN]

Another B-21 Preliminary Design Review
The B-21 bomber program, the progress of which remains largely secret, has passed yet another preliminary design review, this one ordered by Congress, an Air Force spokesman said. Last week, Air Force vice chief of staff Gen. Stephen Wilson told the House Armed Services Committee that the bomber had recently passed a PDR, but USAF officials had previously stated that the bomber concepts offered by both Boeing/Lockheed Martin and the eventual winner of the bomber contest, Northrop Grumman,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Explaining the discrepancy, the spokesman said, “During the Technology Development phase, the program conducted a weapon system PDR with both offerors prior to source selection.” As part of the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase, “and directed by the Congressional Defense Committees, an additional PDR was conducted to provide additional insight and fidelity into the program design since Technology Development.” The spokesman would only say that the second PDR “was conducted earlier this year” and wouldn’t say when the Critical Design Review—the milestone that locks down the design before manufacturing is set up—will take place. “Due to the critical nature of the technology and capability” of the B-21, “specific details are protected by enhanced security measures,” he said. The program is “moving along on schedule as planned,” he added.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[FORBIN]

2 excelent videos with AGM-158A, AGM-86, mines Mk 62 and bombs !!!
For 2018 as B-1B armed with AGM-158B after for B-2 also.

B-52 Reloading

B-52 Bombers Scrambling