US work on a new strategic bomber

American companies are actively working to create a next-generation strategic bomber, the characteristics of which will significantly exceed the B-2 Spirit, reports "Military Industrial Courier" with reference to defense news.




It is noted that the Pentagon "in the near future, perhaps before the end of September" will provide a contract for the creation of this aircraft. The largest American military-industrial companies participate in the fight for it: the tandem of Boeing and Lockheed Martin, as well as Northrop Grumman.

According to reports, the new bomber will have even less visibility for radar than the B-2, thanks to advanced composite materials. In addition, the aircraft will be able to carry nuclear weapon.

The new bomber will have a smaller size than the B-2, but the shape of its “flying wing” will remain. It is possible that the range and maximum weight of the ammunition will also decrease.

Currently American long-distance aviation uses bombers B-2, B-5. According to the plans of the Pentagon, they will be replaced by new aircraft from around the mid-2020s. In total, it is planned to purchase up to 100 new bombers worth at least $ 550 million each.
Photos used:
modernweapon.ru
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mainbeam 4 September 2015 06: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    From the Yankos we quickly learn the technical characteristics of PAK YES than from our own.

    Rephrase. The Yankos will announce the characteristics of a promising bomber, and will select one sample from three developed by different companies (Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman) on a competitive basis. Ours quickly get the "adequate" answer. So we find out the "promising" characteristics of PAK YES. Well, maybe, if not distant, then at least strategic.
    1. drunkram 4 September 2015 06: 36 New
      • -5
      • 0
      -5
      it should be so, they have scouts, and with us only the Internet and literature
    2. anokem 4 September 2015 08: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It is unclear what their B-2 does not suit.
      1. Tanais 4 September 2015 09: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: anokem
        It is unclear what their B-2 does not suit.

        The fact that the original T-160 was already inferior ...
        1. Aleksey_K 4 September 2015 10: 21 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Tanais
          Quote: anokem
          It is unclear what their B-2 does not suit.

          The fact that the original T-160 was already inferior ...

          Judging by the article, then the new strategist will be inferior to the Tu-160, both in range, and in speed, and in flight altitude, and in bomb load. Americans want to further reduce visibility, because The Soviet old air defense system managed to bring down the 2 B-2 bomber. And, apparently, they want to arm them with new types of nuclear weapons. Probably the old B-2 does not allow for the appropriate modernization of bomb and missile containers. And finally, reducing the size and weight will significantly reduce the cost of the bomber.
    3. Deniska 4 September 2015 09: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      US long-range aviation uses B-2, B-52 and B-2 bombers


      wassat and they eat buttered oil ...
  2. Vladimirets 4 September 2015 06: 36 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    B-2, B-52 and B-2

    Already three different planes. laughing
    1. nimboris 4 September 2015 06: 41 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Perhaps B-1B was meant what
      1. Deniska 4 September 2015 14: 53 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Maybe it’s possible, but it’s written ... And U-2 multiplies wassat


        PS Damn, I look like a troll ...
    2. Engineer 4 September 2015 13: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      already In-5 was
  3. kostyan77708 4 September 2015 06: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "At the moment, American long-range aviation uses the B-2, B-52, and B-2 bombers." Is that how? only three bombers uses or a mistake))? Correct the author.
    1. Vladislav 73 4 September 2015 06: 39 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      I will answer for the author repeat Mistake. B-2, B-52 and B-1 Lancer.
  4. Andrey Yuryevich 4 September 2015 06: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "news" in what? and we are working on PAK YES ... request
    1. Tanais 4 September 2015 07: 06 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Andrew Y.
      "news" in what? and we are working on PAK YES ...

      And at the same time, they are working on the "packaging" of the "new generation" iron "old glider" Tu-160 "iron" with a progressive ideology ...

      And thus, the updated Tu-160 (and this is not about MODERNIZATION, but the construction of NEW aircraft), will most likely be a flying platform for testing promising PAKDA units ...
  5. Reserve buildbat 4 September 2015 06: 39 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Forward! Now they will begin designing, then they will long and hard give birth to the same flightless “it” as B-2, F-22, F-35 ... again they will make superdough at a super price. They have not yet begun to do, but the price has already been indicated not less than 550mln apiece. Really get 3 yards at least laughing
    Begin to enter the Air Force from the end of 2020, they will be able to take off this year to 2035
    1. Starover_Z 4 September 2015 06: 50 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: stock buildbat
      Now they will begin designing, then they will long and hard give birth to the same flightless “it” as B-2, F-22, F-35 ... will again make super-sludge at a super price.

      Let's hope that artificial intelligence is provided there,
      which will not allow to ultimately fly to Russia,
      Feeling the radiation of radar systems of missile defense and air defense!
      Because of the fear that they will be knocked down, absolutely!
      1. meriem1 4 September 2015 09: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Starover_Z
        Quote: stock buildbat
        Now they will begin designing, then they will long and hard give birth to the same flightless “it” as B-2, F-22, F-35 ... will again make super-sludge at a super price.

        Let's hope that artificial intelligence is provided there,
        which will not allow to ultimately fly to Russia,
        Feeling the radiation of radar systems of missile defense and air defense!
        Because of the fear that they will be knocked down, absolutely!



        That's nice !!! spend a lot of money. let it go.
      2. Vadim237 4 September 2015 10: 08 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Against air defense systems in the United States, anti-aircraft systems were made; one of them imitates the attack of 140 aircraft at once.
    2. Tanais 4 September 2015 07: 26 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: stock buildbat
      they will persistently give birth to the same flightless “it” as B-2, F-22, F-35 ...


      "Fanned by the legends of the F-117," forgot ...

      The wreckage of the F-117 at the Museum of Aviation of Serbia.
      1. Reserve buildbat 4 September 2015 20: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I sincerely apologize. This hunchbacked .ka I somehow did not count with 1999-2000 by plane)))
  6. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 06: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    whose characteristics will significantly exceed the B-2 Spirit

    The main characteristic will be the price of 12 billion? laughing

    The rogue has no money. wink
  7. SAM 5 4 September 2015 06: 43 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    According to reports, the new bomber will have even less noticeability for radars than the B-2, thanks to advanced composite materials.

    It is necessary to restore the S-75, he then sees them because of the centimeter range.
    1. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 07: 01 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      No one has canceled turbulence either ...
      1. rotmistr60 4 September 2015 07: 18 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        You probably wanted to say the inverse trace. What does turbulence have to do with it?
        1. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 07: 49 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: rotmistr60
          What does turbulence have to do with it?

          Turbulence, outdated. turbulence (from the Latin. turbulentus - turbulent, erratic), turbulent flow - the phenomenon consists in the fact that with an increase in the velocity of the fluid or gas in the medium, numerous nonlinear fractal waves and ordinary, linear of various sizes, without external, random, forces disturbing the environment and / or in their presence. To calculate such flows, various turbulence models were created. Waves appear randomly. That is, their size and amplitude change randomly in a certain interval. They occur most often either at the boundary, near the wall, and / or upon the destruction or overturning of the wave. They can form on jets. Experimentally, it can be observed at the end of a steam jet from an electric kettle. Turbulence was experimentally discovered by the English physicist and engineer O. Reynolds in 1883 when studying the flow of water in pipes.


          ANY moving object leads to turbulence.

          Condensation trail (obsolete. Inversion trail, jarg. Reactive trail - erroneous names) - a visible trail of condensed water vapor that occurs in the atmosphere behind moving aircraft under certain atmospheric conditions. The phenomenon is most often observed in the upper layers of the troposphere, much less often in the tropopause and stratosphere. In some cases, it can be observed at low altitudes.
          1. abrakadabre 4 September 2015 07: 57 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            ANY moving object leads to turbulence.
            Watching at what speed. Everything can be laminar. But not in the case of an airplane, of course.
            1. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 08: 13 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: abrakadabre
              Everything can be laminar.

              Let's go from slugs and snails to man-made machines. wink
          2. rotmistr60 4 September 2015 08: 14 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            For VseDoFeNi

            Dear, I studied thermodynamics and hydraulics at one time. You took information from the Internet and copied. Now explain how turbulence affects the "vision" of the locator?
            1. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 08: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: rotmistr60
              Now explain how turbulence affects the "vision" of the locator?

              In the theory that underlies the development and locators including in turbulent flows there is a difference in air densities even if it is possible to level the exhaust temperature. But this difference in densities can be detected - we all see how the air trembles over a heated surface ...
              1. rotmistr60 4 September 2015 08: 48 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                What does the "trembling air" over the earth's surface? Do you understand the principle of the locator? For first graders - the sent signal is reflected from the surface and returns ..
                1. Deniska 4 September 2015 14: 58 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  I'm certainly not special, but the passage of waves, as well as the possible reflection in my opinion from the density, is changing. Or, in the absence of an object, all the waves simply go into space and there is not even the slightest reflection from dust, etc. ?? Explain who is versed.
                2. VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 19: 04 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: rotmistr60
                  For first graders - the sent signal is reflected from the surface and returns ..

                  If you see air with different densities, the locator can just as well see it. The wave is reflected from an obstacle that is formed by the same air with a different density. So in the wake of discovering submarines.

                  Actually, here.
                  But specialists recognize in it the Spear-A airborne early warning radar station. And maybe, if military secrets allow, they will tell you that they are equipped with Ka-27 multi-purpose ship helicopters. The station allows you to control the territory in a circular zone with a viewing radius of up to 250 km, is adapted to work in weather conditions of increased complexity, is capable of recording small surface and ground objects, can used when mapping the coastal zone with a resolution of up to 10 meters and detect meteorological conditions and dangerous zones of turbulence.
  8. Armored optimist 4 September 2015 06: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Let them work. They will have a couple more trillions. Our answer should be asymmetric. By the criterion of cost-effectiveness.
    1. goblin xnumx 4 September 2015 13: 33 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      so it was in the USSR, not the fact that it will be now, no one likes to save upstairs, incomes suffer from this
  9. sagitch 4 September 2015 06: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Russia's largest aircraft corporations will enter the battle for a contract to create a new American strategic bomber ?! - with a defect, so as not to fly towards Russia!
  10. dsi
    dsi 4 September 2015 06: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The new bomber will have a smaller size than the B-2, but the shape of its “flying wing” will remain. It is possible that the range and maximum weight of the ammunition will also decrease.

    According to reports, the new bomber will have even less noticeability for radars,

    What is not clear here, cut ...
  11. Voha_krim 4 September 2015 06: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    They are, of course, "radishes" large, but it would be surprising if they did not!
  12. mamont5 4 September 2015 06: 55 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "According to reports, the new bomber will have even less noticeability for radars than the B-2, thanks to advanced composite materials."

    And thanks to this, it will not be destroyed by the C-125 missile (as in Yugoslavia), but by the C-300, C-400 or C-500.
    1. abrakadabre 4 September 2015 07: 59 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      According to reports, the new bomber will have even less noticeability for radars than the B-2, thanks to advanced composite materials.
      good old plywood, percale, varnish ...
    2. 222222 4 September 2015 09: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      “On October 25, 2013, Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced a partnership to participate in the LRS-B program. Boeing will be the general contractor. Both companies previously merged for the program in 2008, but the partnership ended in 2010, when requirements changed.
      The bomber will become a transitional link to the new supersonic project - “2037 Bomber” (Bomber of 2037). Work on this project will begin no earlier than the 2020s. "
  13. fa2998 4 September 2015 07: 04 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    "news" in what? and we are working on PAK YES ... request

    What's the news - I think that we will be the first to see an American bomber. Maybe someone will not like it - the first round Russia (USSR) lost in accepting bombers. There are 3 generations - V-52-Tu-95, V-1V -Tu-160, but there is no such type of V-2 aircraft in Russia. One chatter. They have a printing press and Silicon Valley, and we have solid promises and Skolkovo. The scales are different. no hi
    1. VP
      VP 4 September 2015 08: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Sorry, but what is its superiority over the TU-160?
      Speed? Ceiling? Range? Load?
      1. Vadim237 4 September 2015 10: 16 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Seeing a new bomber, the LRSB will carry a larger missile bomb load than the Tu 160 and have less noticeable technology, including new engines that reduce the visibility of the aircraft in the infrared range.
  14. afdjhbn67 4 September 2015 07: 28 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Quote: fa2998
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    "news" in what? and we are working on PAK YES ... request

    What's the news - I think that we will be the first to see an American bomber. Maybe someone will not like it - the first round Russia (USSR) lost in accepting bombers. There are 3 generations - V-52-Tu-95, V-1V -Tu-160, but there is no such type of V-2 aircraft in Russia. One chatter. They have a printing press and Silicon Valley, and we have solid promises and Skolkovo. The scales are different. no hi

    Do not bother the people of Ur to shout .. laughing
    We noticed that the Americans only announced that we had already been “shot down”, re-targeted, accused of corruption, I’m sitting there waiting for pedophilia with pederasty to whip or not
  15. sv68 4 September 2015 07: 31 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    We just need to be scared, or how? Yes, a shaitan to help you and a giant saw in your hands! And so that your machine burns out quickly.
    1. afdjhbn67 4 September 2015 08: 56 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Try to treat everything with humor, the psyche will be wholehearted .. there’s no need to be scared, curse it, etc. Dare Humor - Companion of Intelligence laughing
  16. VP
    VP 4 September 2015 08: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The cost of one spirit is more than two billion.
    New will be more expensive.
    Question: Will the Americans risk sending such an aircraft to where it is likely that these cute myards can turn into wreckage?

    About a trillion has already been spent on the F-35 program. How much will it take and what directions will the Pentagon have to close due to lack of funding?
  17. Polite Moose 4 September 2015 08: 33 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Something everyone began to drive into this stealth. But to make invisible in all ranges of aircraft at the current level of technology development is unrealistic. Therefore, I imagine the PAK DA version in this form: a large lifting platform with optimal aerodynamics for a long flight. Internal and external weapons suspension units. Mandatory availability of electronic warfare funds (in double quantity) of all kinds of "Levers", "Presidents-S", "Mercury", "Khibiny", etc. as well as a package of short-range air defense missiles. And let this object shine on radar like a Christmas tree. Destroy it with conventional air defense systems will be problematic. And all this stealth sooner or later will be multiplied by zero with new means of detection.
    1. VP
      VP 4 September 2015 08: 45 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Not only in all ranges is unrealistic, but in all angles.
      When advertising (and unchecked) EPR numbers are given, they only give the frontal projection along the axis, i.e. optimized direction.
      At the turn of the air defense, radiation comes from several spaced stations at different angles.
      Well, the ranges are different.
      In general, the big question is whether the costs of stealth are justified by the achieved effect, in the foreign press this question is being asked more and more often.
      1. Polite Moose 4 September 2015 09: 01 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        I have an option for our military-industrial complex to cut dough from adversaries.
        It is necessary to agree with the developers and manufacturers of promising US bombers for 10-20% of the money invested in the project that when they inform about the need or the beginning of the development of the next wunder-waffle, we get hysteria in the media and an imitation of panic, which lasts until the developer receives the money in full.
        In my opinion, a good business. wink
    2. Vadim237 4 September 2015 10: 20 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Vryatli these aircraft will be included in the air defense zones, most likely their trump cards will be strategic hypersonic missiles.
  18. AdekvatNICK 4 September 2015 12: 59 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Zoltan Dani - the winner of the stealth aircraft - http://topwar.ru/26667-zoltan-dani-pobeditel-samoleta-nevidimki.html
  19. Ze Kot 4 September 2015 14: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Алексей_К
    because the Soviet old air defense system managed to shoot down 2 B-2 bombers.


    This is when and where?