Military Review

New information about the project LRS-B

29
Currently, the leadership of the US military is doing everything possible to reduce their costs. To fulfill the conditions set by the Congress, it is necessary to abandon some promising projects and reduce others. In addition, savings are achieved at the expense of military units, including the famous aerobatic teams, the schedule of performances which has undergone major changes. Simultaneously with the reduction of expenses, the Pentagon has to optimize its spending on the development of promising areas. Despite the difficult financial situation, the armed forces need to create new types of weapons and military equipment.


One of these types should be a promising strategic bomber, which in the future will partially or completely replace the honored aircraft Boeing B-52 Stratofortress, Rockwell B-1B Lancer and Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit. For a number of reasons, at present no one is talking about the complete replacement of these aircraft. The new program LRS-B (Long Range Strike - Bomber, which translates as “Long-range strike bomber”) is primarily intended to replace only part of the existing bombers, which, despite their characteristics, do not meet the large number of requirements set by modern conditions.

The project of a promising long-range bomber was launched several years ago, but for economic and political reasons it underwent changes, and then it was completely closed for a while. In the course of all these events, the project changed several names: Bomber 2017 (“2017 Bomber of the Year” - it was precisely at this time that they originally planned to start delivering aircraft to the troops), NGB (Next-Generation Bomber - “Next Generation Bomber”) Lrs-b. The renewal of the project with the new name LRS-B was announced at the end of winter 2012. At the same time, the leadership of the US Air Force spoke about the timing of the start of mass construction of these aircraft.

Over the past 14 months, these plans have not been revised and now the beginning of the supply of LRS-B serial bomber dates back to the mid-twenties. Technical details of the project or even the technical specifications have not yet become public. Due to the fact that the creation of a bomber began recently, until even the exact list of participants was announced. Previously, during the Bomber 2018 program, Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman participated in the creation of a promising bomber. In addition, several dozen other firms claimed the role of subcontractors supplying certain items of equipment for new aircraft.

At the end of last April, new official data appeared regarding some conceptual points of the project. Thus, the situation with the unmanned version of the promising bomber, which was previously considered one of the main priorities of the entire program, became clearer. According to US Air Force Secretary M. Donley, the first aircraft created under the LRS-B program will be manned. The unmanned version of the aircraft is still in question, but the command of the US air force, given the service life of the new aircraft, hopes to defend it. If this part of the development program is not closed for financial reasons, then the first unmanned LRS-B will go to the troops no earlier than the mid-thirties. It is too early to make serious statements about the appearance of the war of that time and the role of long-range bombers. Probably, long-range drone UAV, unified with a manned bomber, may be useful in performing a number of tasks typical of future wars.



In the light of recent events, the financial side of the LRS-B project is considered as one of its most important parameters. Previously it was assumed that the NGB aircraft will cost no more than 450-500 million dollars per unit. The economic details of the new LRS-B have not yet been announced, but Donly has promised that his department will regularly report on project spending. For example, next year the Air Force intends to spend at least 350-370 million dollars on preliminary research and design work. However, the publication of detailed information on the implementation of the program will affect only finance. Technical details until a certain time remain secret.

In the future, technical information will also be disclosed, but it seems that this will not happen today or tomorrow. At the same time, the leaders of the US Air Force are already talking about the numerical aspects of the program. According to M. Donley, it is necessary to build at least 80 or even hundreds of promising LRS-B bombers. Thus, by replacing in a one-to-one proportion, the LRS-B will be able to oust from the air force either all B-52 or a fleet of exploited B-1B and B-2. However, it is too early to say which aircraft will have to give up their place. Probably the exact answer to this question is still not even the Pentagon.

A similar situation, obviously, exists in the field of appearance of a promising aircraft. To date, there are only fragmentary data on the approximate views of the US command on the new aircraft. According to reports, the promising LRS-B bomber will be barely visible to enemy air defense assets, will be able to carry a wide range of guided and conventional weapons, and will also be able to perform not only strikes on ground targets, but also reconnaissance, electronic warfare, etc.

Taking into account the expected dates for the start of deliveries of mass-produced aircraft to the troops, M. Donley said that active work on the development of the LRS-B bomber would begin no earlier than a couple of years. It is not difficult to guess that during this period the customer, represented by the US Air Force, can repeatedly change the specific requirements for the aircraft, and the United States Congress will also repeatedly protest against the cost of the program and demand savings.

Regardless of the timing and financial disputes, the people responsible for the LRS-B project will have serious and difficult work to do. They will have to formulate the exact requirements and appearance for the aircraft, which will begin its service only after more than ten years, after which it will be operational for several decades. Thus, Pentagon analysts and companies applying for a contract will have to analyze not only technical capabilities, but also trends in the development of air defense and the armed forces as a whole. If they fail to predict the appearance of the aircraft, whose capabilities will allow it to fully fulfill the tasks assigned to it in the middle of the 1st century, the LRS-B project risks repeating the fate of the B-2B and B-XNUMX aircraft. These bombers, despite the mass of innovations and advantages over the old technology, still have not been able to displace from the strategic aviation USA old B-52.


On the materials of the sites:
http://flightglobal.com/
http://janes.com/
http://arms-expo.ru/
http://lenta.ru/
Author:
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Wedmak
    Wedmak 7 May 2013 10: 10 New
    +1
    We closely monitor the cut of the Pentagon budget.
    1. Joker
      Joker 7 May 2013 10: 21 New
      +7
      Which cut? Do you know that this quarter for the first time in several years, the United States managed to pay off part of its debt? Maybe it's time to look at things sensibly already? All that we do is progress, but in the USA it’s cut. Maybe vice versa, huh? Lately, something hasn’t been accepted into our army, they only feed everything with breakfast, but in the USA they buy it annually in such volumes as we planned before 2020. Is it cut? In the USA, money is not earned like ours on kickbacks, cuts, etc. They earn them from oil and drugs, organ trading, but they themselves understand that they need a strong army and if their positions are shaken, they will immediately close the shop, so nobody climbs money from the military budget, unlike ours. Yes, many expensive projects were covered in the USA, BUT all the technologies that were obtained in these projects were implemented in others. So take off the pink glasses, otherwise they will knock on the cap.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 7 May 2013 10: 46 New
        0
        Oh, I would argue with you.
        Which cut? Do you know that this quarter for the first time in several years, the United States managed to pay off part of its debt?

        Are you talking about external debt? And how much did you manage to repay?
        Maybe it's time to look at things sensibly already? All that we do is progress, but in the USA it’s cut. Maybe vice versa, huh?

        So I look soberly ... Nothing worked at all after the collapse of the USSR. And now, one after another, production is opening. What is in America? Detroit is dying, budget cuts, unemployment is rising, something is not visible on the news of new industries.
        Something new hasn’t been accepted into the army lately, everyone is fed breakfast only, but in the USA they are bought annually in such volumes as we planned before 2020.

        Seriously? Not accepted? It’s even too lazy to give a list of what was adopted by our army.
        What is the United States purchasing? In what volumes? The latest aircraft (Yeah, the F-22 is no longer being produced, but the F-35 still doesn't fly normally)? Tanks (Well, yes, Congress imposed)? Submarines? Ships? Weapon?
        In the USA, money is not earned like ours on kickbacks, cuts, etc. They earn money from them from oil and drugs, organ trading, but they themselves understand that they need a strong army and if their positions are shaken, they will immediately close the shop, so nobody climbs money from the military budget, unlike ours.

        As they saw there, we are small children in front of them. Billions of dollars were thrown out on an air-based laser and where is it? Railguns .. yeah .. where are they? Mentioned already F-35, enchanting cut. I don’t even remember about frankly failed projects.
        Yes, many expensive projects were covered in the USA, BUT all the technologies that were obtained in these projects were implemented in others. So take off the pink glasses, otherwise they will knock on the cap.

        And here I agree. But where are the implemented technologies? The only "breakthrough" is drones. And then, with very ambiguous examples of their application.
        1. Joker
          Joker 7 May 2013 11: 41 New
          +6
          Oh, I would argue with you

          Let's bet the topic is interesting, I think hi
          Are you talking about external debt? And how much did you manage to repay?

          The agency will allocate billions of dollars to repay the debt of 35. Already progress is not it? Plus there is a reduction in the army by 150 000 people. Well, of course this is before the first war, as soon as they get in somewhere else, they will again occupy. Here is another interesting news
          According to nsnbc.me, the Federal Reserve has refused to audit Germany’s gold reserves held in US vaults.

          The German government deposited about half of its gold reserves with the US Federal Reserve, apparently to the New York Federal Reserve. Germany decided to return all its gold home, but the Fed said it was impossible to do this, and it would take time until 2020 of the year to be able to complete the return.


          So I look soberly ... Nothing worked at all after the collapse of the USSR. And now, one after another, production is opening. What is in America? Detroit is dying, budget cuts, unemployment is rising, something is not visible on the news of new industries.

          Where did we discover? Do you know that our economic growth rates have fallen? But the United States rose to 2's percent. This is despite the fact that their 2% as we have 15 percent. Detroit certainly died, but this happened because large companies curtailed their production and moved to China to reduce the cost of their products, the economy did not suffer much, but the residents, of course, were left without work, so they moved to other cities, by the way what’s in the photo show this is the center of Detroit, many people live on the outskirts now.
          It’s even too lazy to give a list of what was adopted by our army.

          This is all a drop in the bucket, we sell abroad more than we buy and nothing new has been received by the army, only modernization of the old, only new aircraft (but very few) and cars are dark, corvettes in piece copies, small arms have not been received, equipment has been reported. In general, very little. Now, in the United States, unfortunately I can’t find everything, I have to dig a long time, but I’ll throw it around for 5.
          -68 reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles RQ-7B Shadow
          -1 000 Robots Recon Scout XT
          -25 Chinook Transport Helicopters
          -250 medical vehicles Oshkosh
          -44 HIMARS missile systems
          142 million balloons
          -653 Hawk family helicopter
          -177 Stryker armored vehicles
          -13,5 thousands of sniper detection systems
          five thousand M2 machine guns
          US Army snipers in Afghanistan receive several new XM2010 sniper rifles
          - US Army buys Oshkosh trucks for 459 million dollars
          -Two patrol aircraft
          - Upgrades 160 US Army Trucks
          -210 tractor and truck
          And much more, this is what the search engine immediately gave me, if you climb specialized sites you can find MUCH more. So, as you see, our rearmament is ridiculous in comparison with the USA.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 7 May 2013 16: 34 New
            +2
            The agency will allocate billions of dollars to repay the debt of 35. Already progress is not it? Plus there is a reduction in the army by 150 000 people.

            MM .. I don’t know, in my opinion, against the backdrop of 15 trillions (or already 16?), These 35 billions somehow look pathetic. Given the US economy.
            Plus there is a reduction in the army by 150 000 people. Well, of course this is before the first war, as soon as they get in somewhere else, they will again occupy.

            That's for sure. They may not fit in, but they will help financially - that's for sure. Where did the money come from?
            The German government deposited about half of its gold reserves with the US Federal Reserve, apparently to the New York Federal Reserve. Germany decided to return all its gold home, but the Fed said it was impossible to do this, and it would take time until 2020 of the year to be able to complete the return.

            Do you know what conclusion begs the first? Gold is not there, it was sold. It remained only on paper. Therefore, they will pull until the 20 year to at least show something ... and there either the khan will die, or the donkey, or .. (well, remember, yes?)
            Where did we discover? Do you know that our economic growth rates have fallen? But the United States rose to 2's percent. This is despite the fact that their 2% as we have 15 percent.

            They did not fall, but slowed down. I'm really not an economist, it's hard for me to argue here. Nevertheless, somehow comparing the economy of the United States and Russia so far .. it is useless or something .. Different weight categories.
            This is all a drop in the bucket, we sell abroad more than we buy and nothing new has been received by the army, only modernization of the old, only new aircraft (but very few) and cars are dark, corvettes in piece copies, small arms have not been received, equipment has been reported. In general, very little.

            I agree that it’s far from the flow of new weapons, but somehow to compare our new strategic nuclear submarines with American helicopters, cars and robots ... They update tactical weapons, that is, what they are fighting.
            Although you are right in one thing - the pace is not so hot.
        2. Joker
          Joker 7 May 2013 11: 54 New
          +3
          As they saw there, we are small children in front of them. Billions of dollars were thrown out on an air-based laser and where is it? Railguns .. yeah .. where are they? Mentioned already F-35, enchanting cut. I don’t even remember about frankly failed projects.

          The laser is being finalized, at least the technology is already being used for a sea-based laser that has already been tested.
          Relsotron-K 2018 is planned to carry out the first water tests. By the 2020 year, these guns should go into service with the Zamvolt type destroyers being built in the USA, their modular design and electric transmission were calculated taking into account the promising EM weapons. By the 2025 year, it is planned to achieve the muzzle energy of 64 MJ.
          Mentioned already F-35, enchanting cut.

          Divide the money on 3, because 3 was built completely different aircraft, the price for one piece is high, but for that there is the latest technology and the sea. I am not a connoisseur of aviation, but still I think the F-35 is a less or less successful aircraft, the characteristics are certainly not a super duper, for that armament, electronic filling and capabilities are really amazing.
          But where are the implemented technologies? The only "breakthrough" is drones. And then, with very ambiguous examples of their application.

          Lasers, Railgun, Hypersonic rocket, ХМ25, F-22 and 35. Filling, exoskeleton. The Americans are already practically introducing all this into the army, while we cannot even catch up with even their current level.
          1. Kir
            Kir 7 May 2013 15: 25 New
            0
            A very important point is already practically and further ......., here, especially for lasers, sorry about them periodically recall and enter the devil already knows from what time, maybe we will survive when they really enter. or maybe even more likely a good part of all this will sink into oblivion and will remain in history only as projections. And with regards to cuts, the question is, where are they not?
            The only thing I can’t agree with Wedmak with is that they open up in the big one, etc., etc., well, even if they open up, the only question is what is produced on them. more precisely, according to whose "patterns" do they work? And forgive the prestige of the Country, it’s not always yesterday’s technology, and it should be disgusting to have such a scientific and industrial Russia-USSR School nowadays it’s no longer needed or even worse ... one to send there for an internship, so that the army of the pro-Western contingent would then be replenished.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Wedmak
              Wedmak 7 May 2013 17: 26 New
              +2
              The only thing I can’t agree with Wedmak with is that they open up in the big one, etc., etc., well, even if they open up, the only question is what is produced on them. more precisely, according to whose "patterns" do they work?

              You may not agree. smile As for patterns, we just bought some of the technology (and who doesn’t?). Of course, this does not smell like patriotism, but how much time would we spend developing our similar technology? If we had this time, we would not even bother. But despite what is happening in the world, time is just not enough for us.
              And this, forgive the prestige of the Country, to do it according to technology is not even always yesterday, and it should be disgusting to have such a scientific and industrial School of Russia-USSR nowadays it is no longer necessary to "eat" there, or even worse

              The school of the USSR has not gone anywhere, it works to this day. Do not compare the USSR and Russia, yet the possibilities are much different. But, as far as the sphere of military production is concerned, thank God, they began to listen to their scientists and do their own thing, despite the foreign prodigies.
              1. Kir
                Kir 7 May 2013 17: 50 New
                +1
                Unfortunately, some manufacturers are proudly on the Made in Russia website to exhibit, and there is only the territory with infrastructure and working personnel from us, and as for the one who doesn’t do it, the main thing is not to go on the knurled one, but that one may become like anecdote about the artist copyist, which the picture does not sit down to write all the copies are obtained. And Russia does not know how you meant Imperial RUSSIA.
                And with regards to the defense industry, give us to really listen to our own people and cease to appoint any managers to the managers.
                Regards Castor.
            3. rolik
              rolik 7 May 2013 23: 19 New
              0
              The food is a hypersonic rocket that has been trying to fly for a very long time. And also interesting news about state debts. Mattresses threw Germany with its gold. The gold that the Germans held in the states no longer exists. Keepers of another's gold have already managed to steal it. And now I forbid the Germans to be present at his revision. This is explained by the fact that there is no special waiting room for German controllers in the store, and this exposes the gold reserve and the store itself to danger. That's where the scribe is so dumb about the smear. Forgot, they promise to sell gold and return to ... 2020. The first swallow to return the dough from the mattresses flew. I wonder what kind of dumb excuse they come up with for the next demanders of their gold.
              1. dmi32167
                dmi32167 8 May 2013 08: 06 New
                0
                but the Germans are not the first, the first are the Norgians. the Germans then campaign after the kidalov her norgs and decided to see their charm.
          2. Wedmak
            Wedmak 7 May 2013 16: 43 New
            0
            The laser is being finalized, at least the technology is already being used for a sea-based laser that has already been tested.

            Laser at sea, a very mixed weapon. Whether he will work properly is another question.
            Relsotron-K 2018 is planned to carry out the first water tests. By the 2020 year, these guns should go into service with the Zamvolt type destroyers being built in the USA, their modular design and electric transmission were calculated taking into account the promising EM weapons. By the 2025 year, it is planned to achieve the muzzle energy of 64 MJ.

            Prototypes, no more.
            Divide money on 3, since 3 was built completely different aircraft

            As far as I remember, the vertical was abandoned. The rest, although in the "series" but fly not far, not high, and it costs absolutely insane money.
            for that weaponry, electronic stuffing and capabilities are truly amazing.

            If it concerned F-22, I would probably agree with you. In part. And about the F-35 ... no, I just can't.
            Lasers, Railgun, Hypersonic rocket, ХМ25, F-22 and 35. Filling, exoskeleton. The Americans are already practically introducing all this into the army, while we cannot even catch up with even their current level.

            They are not implemented, these are very expensive programs aka "Wars of the Future". Large series are out of the question. And we are not going to "catch up" with the Americans. We have the best defensive weapons in the world - who can we catch up with?
          3. Papakiko
            Papakiko 7 May 2013 17: 06 New
            -1
            Quote: Joker
            I am not a connoisseur of aviation, but still I think the F-35 is a less or less successful aircraft, the characteristics are certainly not a super duper, for that armament, electronic filling and capabilities are really amazing.

            What exactly and for what place shock you?
            Please submit the facts.
            1. Joker
              Joker 7 May 2013 22: 17 New
              +2
              Read about the pilot’s helmet and rockets operating at 360 degrees.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 8 May 2013 07: 54 New
                -1
                Read about the pilot’s helmet and rockets operating at 360 degrees.

                I read it. The conclusions are also ambiguous. Helmet - the flow of information is so great that the pilot often loses orientation and sense of location in space. Therefore, they refuse from the "transparent" cabin, it turned out to be more convenient to turn the head. They only frighten children with a helmet.
                Missiles - launch at an angle to the direction of flight, we had for a long time (like even on MiGs). As well as the helmet-mounted target designation system. Accompany the target by turning the head, the missile is guided, launch. Start back really made recently. At the same time, you don’t even have to hang the rocket backwards (and it seems that no one did), it turns around itself.
                So, nothing outstanding, alas, the Americans came up with here.
              2. dmi32167
                dmi32167 8 May 2013 08: 11 New
                0
                Yes, as if in the instant-29 it was implemented 30 years ago. just after him, everyone stirred
                http://www.soldiering.ru/avia/airplane/29boy.php
                especially liked the moment
                According to a former US Air Force chief, "the billions of dollars spent on developing the F-4 and F-15 are worthless in close combat with an enemy with a wide-angle missile and NSC."
              3. Papakiko
                Papakiko 9 May 2013 12: 27 New
                0
                Quote: Joker
                Read about the pilot’s helmet and rockets operating at 360 degrees.

                What a disappointment! sadness.
                Specifically, what is there?
                -Improved previous ideas.
                - It used a lot of coposites.
                -Receives in real time a lot of information from EW, avionics and satellite companions. (He doesn’t recognize it, but receives it)
                Without the support of the above funds, he is a tin can.
                And now the questions:
                Does he fly cruising in supersonic?
                Does it weigh at least 30% lighter than its counterparts?
                And TD and TD.
                Therefore, please, without great enthusiastic exclamations.
      2. mirag2
        mirag2 7 May 2013 17: 24 New
        0
        Say absolutely correctly, I don’t understand how other people can deceive themselves gently.
    2. cdrt
      cdrt 7 May 2013 18: 28 New
      +1
      And no less carefully follow PAK YES wink
      Actually the theme is the same, even the ideology (subsonic stealth aircraft of a large radius of action) is the same.
    3. Lone gunman
      Lone gunman 18 May 2013 01: 47 New
      0
      I WOULD SAY AN INTERESTING ARTICLE, INFORMATION FOR REFLECTING THE MASS, ONE I CAN SAY - OUR EXACTLY KEEP THE NOSE IN THE WIND ...
  2. _KM_
    _KM_ 7 May 2013 10: 51 New
    +2
    Where such scrap prices come from? Are they building platinum planes?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 7 May 2013 10: 53 New
      +2
      From titanium alloys. And how much will it take for a radar absorbing coating ... yy ... Which will need to be coated with a thick layer before each departure. smile
  3. super-vitek
    super-vitek 7 May 2013 10: 58 New
    +4
    Well done, Amera. Although they are both kapitaluyugi and their army hired without patriotism basically, but they clearly learned the rule that the state has only two friends ARMY AND Navy. I look at the attempts of rearmament in the RF Armed Forces. I read here on the website that the Air Force delivered the first SU-34 from the defense order of 2013. Well, really not laughter. Well, as they say, hope is killed last.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 7 May 2013 11: 04 New
      -1
      You do not compare the army of the United States and Russia. The first did not have 10 years of poverty, sale and plunder. Nevertheless, the number of new weapons in the US Army can be counted on the fingers. Mostly modernized old. And our pace will increase, do not be sad.
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. Simple
    Simple 7 May 2013 11: 26 New
    +4
    ...............














    http://www.arnold.af.mil/photos/index.asp
  6. Engineer Schukin
    Engineer Schukin 7 May 2013 14: 13 New
    -3
    Quote: Wedmak
    What is in America? Detroit is dying, budget cuts, unemployment is rising, something is not visible on the news of new industries.

    Omg, what a cave blindness and banal ignorance.

    Russia to the industrial level of the United States 50 years to develop at such a pace.

    It is very lazy to throw beads in front of such stupid pigs, so I will give an example only at the level of aircraft construction. Only one Boeing company produces ~ 600 aircraft a year, and all the design bureaus of the Russian Federation barely squeeze a hundred. Remind me what other giants of aircraft manufacturing in the USA are?

    Well, I just can’t stop being surprised at the zombies of the local circle of the young patriot.
    1. Kir
      Kir 7 May 2013 15: 08 New
      -2
      Perhaps it’s worth recalling something else that there is likely to be tolerated on a patriotic site such as here, and if very smart and so forth to liberalism forward.
      1. super-vitek
        super-vitek 7 May 2013 15: 31 New
        +1
        And here PATRIOTISM !!! Many of those who write patriots here are no less than you !!! Just those who are not engaged in the rearmament of our Army, but thieves and pro-American henchmen. They sleep and see how the mess begins in which they can warm their hands again !!!
        1. Kir
          Kir 7 May 2013 15: 42 New
          +2
          He will not call his pig, and even statements like 50 years! And with regards to who is currently steering this separate song, the more I should not bother singing it and read my comments on this site to understand which ones I am.
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 7 May 2013 18: 38 New
        +5
        600 Boeing civilian aircraft in comparison with several dozen of our (civilian) aircraft have nothing to do with patriotism (or not patriotism).
        It is just a reality.

        In the perception of the world, the main thing is not to take your desires for reality.

        The reality is that we are behind them in most industries, in labor productivity in industry, in terms of production.
        They are from us in production ... in fact, in no way behind.

        Catching up with us, last years so 100.

        There is nothing shameful in this.
        Chasing the economy as a leader is good.
        Everything else - inferiority complexes of writers - have nothing to do with patriotism.

        There is only one practical conclusion - if there are our achievements, enjoy it wink for truly achievements.
        Shouting that everything is blooming in our country and that it is bending over a hill is silly.
        Just imagine that there are two more people besides you: one, for example, in the states, is just as stupid as comparing the states with the Russian Federation, shouting that the Russian Federation is doing badly, and the United States is doing well, and the second, sitting for example in China, for which it’s stupid both Russian and American look wink
        At the same time, reality does not change wink
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 7 May 2013 20: 25 New
          0
          600 Boeing civilian aircraft in comparison with several dozen of our (civilian) aircraft have nothing to do with patriotism (or not patriotism).

          Still would. We recall where the Boeing takes titanium for its aircraft. And who is actually the leader in the processing of this very titanium.
          The reality is that we are behind them in most industries, in labor productivity in industry, in terms of production.

          We all know where this state of affairs came from.
          Catching up with us, last years so 100.

          Not in all areas. Space, aviation, underwater and surface fleets (even civilian - deep-sea vehicles "MIR"), engine building, heavy and light industry of the times of the USSR (now just moving away from the coma of the 90s). A separate topic is the nuclear industry. Here, in general, only the United States can barely keep up with us. There is a lot more to remember if you rummage through your memory.
          So about the last hundred years, you have bent ...
    2. Joker
      Joker 7 May 2013 22: 19 New
      +1
      Engineer, let's just insult okay? Can be explained in a civilized language.
  7. shinobi
    shinobi 7 May 2013 15: 20 New
    +4
    Russia to the industrial level of the United States 50 years to develop at such a pace.

    When Lenin told Herbert Wells about his plans for industrialization, he called him a "Kremlin dreamer." Harry Truman swore to Congress that Russia would be restored to its pre-war level for at least 70 years. Predictions are not a rewarding job, you shouldn't do it.
  8. _KM_
    _KM_ 7 May 2013 18: 02 New
    +2
    Quote: Wedmak
    Which will need to be smeared with a thick layer before each departure.


    Moreover, this coating is terribly volatile and expensive. Even from closed containers will disappear. :-)