USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Area dedicata alla discussione sull’Aviazione Militare, gli Aerei, i Reparti e le Basi, le Pattuglie acrobatiche

Moderatore: Staff md80.it

Rispondi
Avatar utente
Gliding Bricola
02000 ft
02000 ft
Messaggi: 288
Iscritto il: 1 giugno 2011, 23:32

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da Gliding Bricola » 27 ottobre 2015, 22:51

Contratto assegnato a Northrop-Grumman

(fonte: streaming dal Pentagono)
Leonardo

Se l'uomo fosse stato creato per volare avrebbe avuto più soldi!

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 27 ottobre 2015, 23:13

Gliding Bricola ha scritto:Contratto assegnato a Northrop-Grumman

(fonte: streaming dal Pentagono)

I primi commenti .....
The US Air Force has chosen Northrop Grumman to build America’s next stealth bomber in a landmark decision announced at the Pentagon today.
Northrop’s victory in the $55 billion Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) competition has been described as “stunning upset” against the cashed-up team of Boeing and Lockheed Martin, and secures the B-2 creator’s place as a top-tier military aircraft manufacturer for decades to come.
Fonte ..... "Northrop Grumman wins LRS-B contract" ..... https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ct-418278/
Northrop Grumman won the contract to build the US Air Force’s next-gen Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B), an industry-shaping deal that breathes new life into the world's sixth-largest defense company.
Fonte ..... "Northrop Grumman Wins Air Force's Long Range Strike Bomber Contract" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74661394/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 0:07

Bill Sweetman .....
LRS-B: Why Northrop Grumman Won Next U.S. Bomber .....

Bill Sweetman - AW&ST - (Oct. 27, 2015)

Northrop Grumman is the winner of the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) contest, beating a rival team with six times its annual sales.
The U.S. Air Force announced Oct. 27 that Northrop Grumman had beat a Boeing/Lockheed Martin team in a competition to develop and build 100 of the bombers, which are expected to first be operational in the mid-2020s.
The Pentagon says the initial phase of the work, through engineering and manufacturing development, should cost $21.4 billion in 2010 dollars.
Through production, the program has been estimated to represent $80 billion in business.
The targeted unit cost for the aircraft, which will be capable of carrying conventional and nuclear weapons, is $564 million per aircraft in 2016 dollars, assuming a 100-aircraft buy.
The stakes for LRS-B were so huge that industry analysts have long predicted that the losing bidder would protest the award.
Boeing is no stranger to that tactic.
In 2008, the company successfully protested the Air Force’s 2008 award of a contract for refueling tankers to a Northrop-EADS team and ultimately won the contract in a second competition.

While details of the competition remain highly classified, it is likely that the winning bid rested on Northrop Grumman's operational experience with wideband, all-aspect stealth technology on the B-2 bomber and the still-secret RQ-180 intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) unmanned air vehicle.
But the winning formula was most likely not just a question of delivering more stealth or more range. In LRS-B, the winner had to meet a complex set of requirements that stress risk reduction, an open systems architecture, agile management and manufacturing technology.
The LRS-B contest was unique in three particularly important ways.
First, the requirement had emerged from the ashes of the previous Next-Generation Bomber program (NGB), canceled in April 2009, with its goals scaled down and schedule stretched out, and unit cost as a key performance parameter (KPP).
Second, rather than funding demonstration programs, the Pentagon supported two teams through preliminary design review (PDR), probably for almost two years, 2013-15.
A third key feature of the LRS-B is that its management has been assigned to the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO), which, Air Force acquisition chief William LaPlante said Oct. 21, has “an incredible track record of delivering eye-watering capabilities - not just one-offs, but things going into production.”
Significantly, LaPlante describes the 80-strong LRS-B project office within the RCO as like the team that produced the Lockheed F-117 stealth fighter 35 years ago: “A small empowered group of warfighters, acquisition people and maintainers.”
Although the RCO’s only acknowledged aerospace platform is the Boeing X-37B spaceplane, its technical focus can be gauged by the fact that a 2012 recruitment notice for its deputy director identified only three mandatory areas of “significant experience ... low-observables, counter low-observables and electronic warfare.”
Like the F-117, the LRS-B is apparently designed to meet its goals with mature subsystems in a new platform.
However, LaPlante added, the RCO team has substantial oversight from the Pentagon, Congress and Government Accountability Office, and the program incorporates red team/blue team exercises to validate it against possible threats.
The LRS-B contest set an average procurement unit cost of $550 million - in fiscal 2010 dollars based on building 100 aircraft - as a KPP.
“The risk is that you pick the wrong number. If you have firm requirements and do the analytics, you have a shot at pulling that off,” LaPlante says.
Some of the key technologies in the LRS-B are both secret and mature.
“Not only have some technologies been wind-tunnel-tested, prototyped or flown - some of them have been used operationally,” LaPlante said Oct. 21.
However, LaPlante also emphasized that delays and overruns cannot be eliminated.
“Integration is always a risk,” he said, “and we have put together a schedule with the right margins to accommodate delays.”
LRS-B, too, is planned to be upgraded easily and competitively, “with space and weight provision for things we can’t imagine today,” LaPlante said.
Open architecture, he said, could allow the Pentagon to procure a new or upgraded subsystem competitively, “provide it to the prime and say, integrate this.”
Along with the cost of maintaining the bomber’s low-observable systems, upgrades will account for a large proportion of the bomber’s life-cycle cost - which will be much greater than its procurement bill.
There is one other way in which LRS-B will differ from other programs: its production rate.
The number is based on a “fundable profile, without the big ramp-up you see on F-35,” LaPlante said.
“We have set it up to be resilient,” with affordable annual funding.
“That would be $550 million times your production rate, which might be seven or eight per year,” he said.
The rate is much lower than recent combat aircraft programs but also means the line will be moving until almost 2040.
Many bomber advocates quietly argue that if LRS-B delivers, and Asia-Pacific operations remain important, the Air Force will need more than 100 of the bombers.
Northrop Grumman is less than one-sixth the size of the Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon team, with total revenues of $160 billion.
Boeing and Lockheed Martin agreed to team on NGB in early 2007 and revealed that arrangement in January 2008.
The team re-formed for LRS-B, adding Raytheon.
Together, Lockheed Martin and Boeing have been prime contractors on almost every combat aircraft in U.S. service today, while Lockheed Martin has been the prime contractor on four out of five production stealth programs.
But the fact that they were allowed to team for NGB and then re-form the team for LRS-B indicated that the Pentagon leadership did not see this as an impediment to a fair fight.
Rules have changed, too.
Briefing reporters Oct. 21, LaPlante emphasized the importance of independent cost estimates - produced by the Pentagon’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) directorate - under the 2009 Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act.
“All programs have an independent estimate, and we are funded to that level,” LaPlante said.
Nor is the estimate a single review process: The program office has been briefing CAPE estimators from the outset.
The development cost quoted today is the independent cost estimate, not the winner’s or program office’s estimate.
The goal is to make underbidding less likely and less effective.
Not only did Boeing and Lockheed Martin outgun their rival fiscally, but they were also teamed on a government-funded demonstrator aircraft, identified as the Next-Generation Long-Ranger Strike Demonstrator, under an effort that started in the early days of NGB and continued after the ambitious bomber was canceled.
The stealth-technology group within Boeing’s Phantom Works, headed by Alan Wiechman, led the low-observables side of the program, although Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works built the airframe.
Alongside stealth, Phantom Works pioneered the use of new manufacturing technology.
This has led to the closely held Boeing-wide initiative known as Black Diamond, which was identified this summer as a possible major competitive advantage in LRS-B.
Lockheed Martin brought its experience with stealth systems integration to the party.
But the history of the F-22 - where upgrades have been constrained by a tightly integrated architecture, so that every change requires painstaking regression testing to ensure that other functions are not affected - was exactly what the LRS-B program’s open architecture is designed to avoid.
While Northrop Grumman may have shared some NGLRS-D technology, the most important experience that company brought to the table may well have been the RQ-180.
From conversations with industry sources, it appears that one of the major breakthroughs in the design of this very stealthy, high-altitude UAV was its combination of stealth with aerodynamic and propulsive efficiency, largely the result of better computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and computational electromagnetics (CEM).
The B-2 had achieved a high level of stealth, but the design was a difficult compromise between stealth and aerodynamics, and the complex shape of the center body and wing section, with strongly three-dimensional stream and shock patterns, pushed the state of the art in both computer modeling and testing.
Given its high fuel fraction, its 6,000-nm unrefueled range showed that, at best, its efficiency was no better than that of the B-52.
In sharp contrast, some early-2000s Northrop Grumman designs were described by one engineer as having “sailplane-like” efficiency.
While the RQ-180 will almost certainly be shown to be a much lighter aircraft than the LRS-B, its wingspan is likely quite close to that of the bomber, and its development will have validated the CFD and CEM codes used in the design, along with radar-absorbent materials and coatings.
The UAV will also be providing operational experience with new stealth technologies, underpinning Northrop Grumman estimates of the LRS-B’s operating cost.
While Lockheed Martin’s RQ-170 UAV is widely considered to have been an RCO program, meaning that all three aircraft companies in the LRS-B competition have worked with RCO, the RQ-180 experience would be most relevant.
Despite the B-2’s reputation for high cost, Northrop Grumman says its experience with the program was a plus.
“It is behaving like a legacy aircraft now,” says one company executive, with flight-hour costs that are not out of line with other small-volume fleets of large aircraft in the Air Force.
Operating costs for such aircraft, the company says, seem to be driven by fixed costs and by the inevitably slow learning curve for depot-maintenance visits.
Each B-2 today goes into depot for 12 months every nine years.
At the same time, the B-2’s signatures “have improved significantly” through the use of new materials.
Northrop Grumman has also made a radical move to contain its costs, although its impact on the LRS-B bid is uncertain: Under the codename Project Magellan, it has established a manned-aircraft center of excellence in Melbourne, Florida.
Across the U.S. combat-aircraft business, this represents a reversal of a decades-long consolidation that has seen major engineering locations dwindle to three centers: Los Angeles/Palmdale, St. Louis and Fort Worth.
The company has already opened a new 220,000-sq.-ft. building in Melbourne and has plans for another new 500,000-sq.-ft., 1,500-person facility by 2019.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 8:57

Aggiornamenti .....

Prime reazioni .....
As the Air Force announced Northrop Grumman will produce the service's next-generation bomber, reactions from industry, Wall Street and the Hill began quickly flowing in.

This article will be updated with comments as they come in.
Fonte ..... "Defense World Reacts to Northrop LRS-B Win" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74707400/

E NG apre un sito ..... "Northrop Launches LRS-B Website Hours After Bomber Contract Award" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74710378/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 9:20

Intanto ..... cominciano a filtrare le prime granulose immagini sul possibile aspetto del velivolo .....

Immagine

8)

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 10:52

Come lo vedono ..... dal mare .....
Current Air Force bombers and tactical fighters rarely travel without Navy or Marine Corps electronic attack aircraft in contested airspace.
For example, during the 2011 Libyan airstrikes of Operation Odyssey Dawn, a squadron of U.S. Navy EA-18G Growlers provided electronic attack and electronic warfare support to Air Force units during strike missions.
Air Force Global Strike Command commander Gen. Robin Rand said that joint operations would be a focus of the yet-unnamed LRS-B platform, when asked by USNI News during the briefing.
The new bomber will work closely with “the grandsons of whatever systems we have today in electronic attack or [information surveillance and reconnaissance], the [suppression] of enemy air defenses (SEAD) — whatever those are when this aircraft is fielded.”
Fonte ..... "Air Force Picks Northrop Grumman to Build Long Range Strike Bomber, Promises Joint Interoperability" ..... http://news.usni.org/2015/10/27/air-for ... perability
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 11:04

richelieu ha scritto:Intanto ..... cominciano a filtrare le prime granulose immagini sul possibile aspetto del velivolo .....

Immagine

8)
..... e sulle sue straordinarie caratteristiche .....

Immagine

:shock:

Avatar utente
flyforever85
10000 ft
10000 ft
Messaggi: 1381
Iscritto il: 23 aprile 2006, 5:07
Località: Dayton, OH

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da flyforever85 » 28 ottobre 2015, 15:52

trovo onestamente abbastaza improbabile che il costo per singola unita' resti intorno al mezzo miliardo di dollari a pezzo considerando che l'aereo (se tutto va bene) vedra' la luce solo tra 10 anni (ma mi gioco sopra i 15 personalmente)
"Una volta che avrete conosciuto il volo, camminerete sulla terra guardando il cielo, perchè là siete stati e là desiderate tornare" di Leonardo da Vinci
Immagine

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 28 ottobre 2015, 20:45

Il segreto continua .....
After Bomber Award, Secrecy Continues .....

John A. Tirpak (10/28/2015)

The Air Force announced ( http://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/C ... cle/626128 ) Tuesday that Northrop Grumman won the Long-Range Strike Bomber contract, but released precious little new information and offered no details about the actual amount of the contract awarded, how close the contest was with the Boeing/Lockheed Martin team, what the Key Performance Parameters of the program were, or even a blurred artist’s concept of the new airplane.
Service spokesmen said the amount of the contract is being withheld “to balance accountability to the taxpayer with our nation’s security,” saying that revealing the contract value “can provide a window” into development.
Service acquisition chief William LaPlante would say only that Northrop Grumman offered the “best value” proposal.
LaPlante and his military deputy, Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, ( http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/Biographies/D ... ch-jr.aspx ) acknowledged that details they promised only a week ago would ​not be disclosed after all, offering no reason for the reversal of plan.
What was revealed was the projected cost of development - which the Air Force pegs at $23.5 billion in fiscal year 2016 dollars - and that independent cost estimates actually put the per-unit price of the aircraft at $564 million each in Fiscal 2016 dollars for 100 airplanes.
LaPlante said “we hope to beat” even that amount.
This is some $42 million less than the budgeted price (and the Air Force’s own unit cost estimate) of $606 million (the same $550 million in base year 2010 dollars that the Air Force has stated all along).
Read the full cost comparison ..... http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Do ... bomber.pdf
Mele con mele .....
Apples to Apples .....

John A. Tirpak (10/28/2015)

​The Air Force released a chart ( http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Do ... bomber.pdf ) showing that the Long-Range Strike Bomber’s development costs, in apples-to-apples, inflation-adjusted dollars, comes in between the amounts spent on the B-1A/B ($19.3 billion) and B-2 ($37.2 billion) bomber programs.
Some $1.9 billion has been spent so far for “risk reduction” efforts.
Air Force acquisition chief William LaPlante repeated a previous statement that the first five production lots will cover 21 aircraft and have fixed-price options.
Mistero sul motore ..... e, addirittura, anche sulla designazione .....
The Engine and Nomenclature Mystery .....

John A. Tirpak (10/28/2015)

​The Air Force declined to say what engines will power its LRS-B - and in fact declined even to say what the nomenclature for the new airplane will be, such as B-3 or B-4.
“We won’t go into any details of components or subcontractors due to classification and enhanced security,” Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, military assistant to USAF acquisition executive William LaPlante said.
However, a service spokeswoman said the engine “is included in the overall contract.”
Each competitor “conducted a competition to determine the engine that would be used on the LRS-B aircraft” as required in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, she reported, and the costs of the engine were included in the program cost figures provided Tuesday.
Though the Air Force declined to say anything about who is on Northrop Grumman’s LRS-B team, United Technologies’ Pratt & Whitney issued a statement congratulating “Northrop Grumman for their selection on this very important program,” but the company declined “to comment on any other questions regarding the Long-Range Strike Bomber program.”
As for nomenclature, Air Force spokesmen said that none has been set, and that Global Strike Command will determine what the nomenclature should be.
Air Force officials have said privately there was some wrestling over whether the LRS-B’s designation should include “Q,” since future versions will be optionally unmanned, and “Q” designates remotely piloted, or unmanned, aircraft in DOD parlance.
Ricorso in vista .....
Boeing, Lockheed To Review LRS-B Selection, Protest Possible .....

Brian Everstine (10/28/2015)

Boeing and Lockheed Martin will have “discussions with our customer” before deciding to protest the award of the Long-Range Strike Bomber contract, which was awarded to Northrop Grumman on Tuesday.
The companies said in a release ( http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-10-27- ... r-Decision ) issued shortly after the award was announced that they want to know more about how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk, and that the two companies have the “experience, capability, and resources” for the important program.
Boeing and Lockheed have 10 business days from the contract announcement, or five days from the debriefing, whichever is later, to file a bid protest.
The Government Accountability Office then has 100 calendar days to review the protest and make a decision.
Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, the military deputy in the office of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, said Air Force officials will make themselves available as early as Friday to debrief the Boeing, Lockheed team on why their offer was not selected.
The Air Force “will monitor” any possible moves to protest the bid, Bunch said.
Il tutto dal ..... 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 29 ottobre 2015, 8:55

Quello che ancora non si sa .....
The Air Force has not released crucial details about the plane itself.
The LRS-B's size, weight and payload remain unknowns, as do the extent of its stealth capabilities.
Top officials also declined to say what companies will build key components of the aircraft.
The Pentagon did not even disclose the value of the Oct. 27 award, leaving the aerospace community to guess at the dollar amount of the initial development contract.
Fonte ..... "Northrop’s Long Range Strike-Bomber: What We Still Don’t Know" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74766346/

Immagine
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 30 ottobre 2015, 10:09

A proposito del possibile ricorso del team Boeing/LM ..... un commento di Andrea Shalal-Esa .....

Immagine

..... dell' agenzia Reuters ..... che aveva presenziato alla conferenza stampa tenutasi al Pentagono in occasione dell' annuncio dell' assegnazione del contratto .....
The U.S. Air Force is due to brief Boeing Co on Friday about its decision to award Northrop Grumman Corp a huge contract to build a next-generation long-range strike bomber, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
Boeing, which had teamed up with Lockheed Martin Corp , told its staff in a memo on Tuesday that it would "rigorously deliberate" whether to protest the contract award, with a decision likely within two weeks.
"U.S. Air Force to brief Boeing Friday on bomber contract loss - sources" .....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/ ... nnel=11563
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 30 ottobre 2015, 23:58

Ricorso ..... la pratica va avanti .....
US Air Force officials are today debriefed Boeing on its selection of Northrop Grumman for the $80 billion Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) programme ahead of a possible bid protest that could come as soon as next week.
Northrop’s classified bomber offering was chosen over one from a Boeing-lead team, and a spokesman for the company says the team will “digest” the information over several business days before deciding whether to file a formal protest with the US Government Accountability Office.
Fonte ..... "Boeing debriefed on USAF’s Northrop bomber selection" .....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-418445/
.

anonymous12345

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da anonymous12345 » 31 ottobre 2015, 9:45

Oramai tempi e spese per i ricorsi son già inseriti nella pianificazione tecnico/finanziaria di un progetto..

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 3 novembre 2015, 0:16

Rivelazioni si ..... ma col contagocce .....
Slowly Revealing the LRS-B .....

John A. Tirpak (11/3/2015)

The Air Force is working on a “classification guide” regarding what information can be released about the Long-Range Strike Bomber, and when, according to USAF acquisition chief William LaPlante.
“We’ve just started that review,” LaPlante said in an Oct. 30 telephone interview, but he hopes to release some additional information on the secret bomber program “around the time we have to send the SAR [Selected Acquisition Reports] to Congress;” roughly when the Fiscal 2017 President’s Budget is sent to Capitol Hill.
“My intent,” he added, was to release “in public form some of what we said to Congress” just before Northrop Grumman was announced as the winner of the program last week.
The announcement included no details about the bomber’s design, nor did it disclose any information about Northrop Grumman’s industrial team. ​
The SAR itself, which gives overall costs on the program, may be classified, he noted.
Once completed, the classification guide will be “frequently updated,” LaPlante also asserted.
On previous classified projects, such as the F-117 stealth attack jet, heavy secrecy was estimated to add a premium of 10 percent on program cost.
LaPlante said the number of test articles in the program - which he had previously said would be a releasable figure- is still considered too sensitive to discuss.
During a meeting with reporters on Oct. 21, he said the LRS-B test fleet would be comparable to that of the KC-46 program, which will have four test airplanes.
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 3 novembre 2015, 0:29

A contratto appena assegnato (e già sotto la spada di Damocle in vista di sicuri ricorsi) ..... esplodono i malumori in relazione alla suddivisione degli stanziamenti .....

"Bomber Award Kicks Off Interservice Fight for Funding" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74836976/

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 4 novembre 2015, 15:39

Cercasi disperatamente ..... parto indolore .....
OPINION: USAF desperately needs LRS-B birth to be pain-free .....

04 November, 2015 (by: Flight International - London)

"The B-52 is going to fall apart on us before we can get a replacement for it.”

Gen Curtis LeMay, the legendary cigar-chomping US Air Force (USAF) chief of staff, made that ill-timed prophecy in 1964, only nine years after Boeing’s eight-engined strategic bomber entered service.
However, the spiritual father of Strategic Air Command would no doubt be surprised to learn that even 51 years later, his rather pessimistic prediction had still not yet come to pass.
But so it was after months – or even decades – of waiting, the USAF on 27 October finally selected Northrop Grumman to develop and deliver the stealth bomber that would eventually replace the Boeing B-52 and Rockwell B-1.
Some might detect faint echoes of the air force’s then-secret decision to select Northrop to build the B-2, the bomber originally intended to replace the B-52.
Lockheed was on the losing end of both programmes, first when its Senior Peg design lost in 1981 and then as a subcontractor to Boeing for the current Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) programme.
The contract protest process was available in 1981, but Lockheed never seriously considered it.
Times have changed in the defence business though.
Opportunities to win new programmes are scarce.
Boeing now faces being shut out of the combat-aircraft business altogether, unless it wins the T-X trainer contest and manages to eke out F/A-18E/F production.
As the victor, Northrop may yet face the tougher challenge – keeping LRS-B sold.
The B-2, of course, was originally intended to replace the B-52 fleet, but cost overruns and schedule delays, combined with changing priorities and budget cutbacks, reduced the programme to 21 aircraft.
Commercial aviation is so safe that fatal accidents occur only when a set of unusual circumstances combine in one moment.
It seems the opposite effect holds true in military acquisitions, when programmes are successful only in random combinations of lucky events.
The USAF must keep its requirements steady and budget on track, despite evolving needs and a looming modernisation shortfall.
Northrop, meanwhile, must keep costs down and schedules tight, knowing there will be failed tests and technical surprises.
Congress is like a legislative fifth column – a risk to be managed.
But it is worth noting that the B-52 has no more time to spare. If LRS-B fails, LeMay’s 51-year-old warning might actually come true.

Immagine
We’re still flying the B-52 ?
Fonte ..... 'Flightglobal.com' .....

L' affermazione del coriaceo generale LeMay risale dunque al 1964 (secondo altre fonti al Marzo dell' anno successivo) ..... periodo in cui il B-70, allora destinato a sostituire il B-52, pur avendo appena iniziato i voli di collaudo, era già avviato sul viale del tramonto a causa dell' avvento dei missili balistici intercontinentali e dei nuovi sistemi missilistici antiaerei sovietici in grado di contrastarlo efficacemente ..... per non parlare dei caccia di nuova generazione svelati a Tushino nel Luglio del 1961.

Già che ci siamo ..... è di questi giorni la notizia che l' unico esemplare di XB-70 tuttora esistente è in fase di sistemazione definitiva in un nuovo hangar in fase di avanzato approntamento presso il Museo dell' USAF .....

"XB-70 Valkyrie moved into museum's new fourth building" .....
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Upcomi ... lding.aspx

Immagine
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 4 novembre 2015, 20:15

Silenzio ..... si taglia ..... :mrgreen:
The US Air Force’s delayed selection of Northrop Grumman for the Long-Range Strike Bomber programme could see project funding halved this fiscal year, with congressional authorisers recommending another $230 million reduction because of contract delays.
In all, the programme is likely to receive just $556 million for fiscal 2016 compared to the $1,25 billion requested by the Pentagon back in February.
Congress has already pulled $460 million at the request of the air force, since that money would have expired before being spent.
Fonte ..... "LRS-B budget trimmed again in defence spending revision" .....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... is-418597/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 6 novembre 2015, 9:29

Quale motore ?
Bill Sweetman presenta un' ipotesi .....

Some observers have hypothesized that the bomber is powered by two off-the-shelf Pratt & Whitney F135 engines, which would be the right size for a half-scale B-2.
But the F135 is heavy and expensive, and a higher-bypass-ratio engine would be more efficient and have a cooler exhaust.
Thermal, mechanical and acoustic stress on the “aft deck” structure behind the exhausts has been a perennial B-2 problem.
Pratt & Whitney has discussed an engine named PW9000, with a medium bypass ratio (about 4:1) and the core of the PW1000G commercial engine, and such a development would be low-risk.
It is possible that the LRS-B has four smaller engines.

Immagine
Pratt & Whitney’s PW9000 engine study was associated with the Next-Generation Bomber project, but the engine itself, with a PW1000G core and new low-pressure system, would be relatively low-risk.
Credit: PRATT & WHITNEY

.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 6 novembre 2015, 18:34

Quando si dice ..... puntualità ..... :mrgreen:

"Boeing and Lockheed protest USAF’s bomber award to Northrop" .....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -n-418723/

"Boeing Protests Northrop's Long Range Strike Bomber Contract" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /75225206/

Il comunicato ..... "Boeing, Lockheed Martin Protest Air Force Bomber Contract Award" .....
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-11-06- ... ract-Award
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 6 novembre 2015, 23:36

Il comunicato di Northrop Grumman .....

"Northrop Grumman Statement on Boeing's Protest of the Long-Range Strike Bomber Program" .....
http://www.globenewswire.com/newsarchiv ... d=10155556

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 7 novembre 2015, 9:35

Boeing/Lockheed Martin protestano ..... l' USAF replica .....
The Air Force Responds to Boeing's LRS-B Protest .....

John A. Tirpak (11/9/2015)

The Air Force on Friday defended its handling of the Long-Range Strike Bomber competition, despite Boeing’s protest of the award.
Though “it is every competitor’s right to file a protest, the Air Force is confident that the source selection team followed a deliberate, disciplined, and impartial process to determine the best value for the warfighter and taxpayer,” USAF spokesman Maj. Robert Leese said.
“The Air Force will fully support the [Government Accountability Office’s] independent process. Once resolved, we look forward to proceeding with the development and fielding of the LRS-B aircraft.”
The GAO has 100 days from today to evaluate Boeing’s claims: that Northrop Grumman underbid the contract, that new technologies and the experience of the Boeing/Lockheed Martin team were not properly credited, and that Northrop Grumman lacks the financial ability to carry the project through.
The 100 days is an upper limit; the GAO may determine in a shorter period of time that the protest lacks merit.
If the GAO determines there is merit in the protest, remedies could range from clarifying or resubmitting certain aspects of the competitors’ offers all the way up to throwing the competition out and demanding the Air Force start over.
That’s what happened in 2008, when Boeing protested the Air Force’s award of the KC-X tanker contract to a team of Northrop Grumman and EADS (now Airbus).
When the Air Force established new rules for a recompetition of the contract, Northrop Grumman withdrew, saying the requirements had been written to favor Boeing’s 767-based proposal.
Airbus re-bid the KC-45 but lost the contest to what became the Boeing KC-46 tanker.
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 7 novembre 2015, 23:57

IPOTESI .....

Secondo il blog svizzero 'avia news' .....

Immagine

"Northrop-Grumman remporte le contrat du futur bombardier !" .....
http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/archive/201 ... 60015.html


Secondo 'AW&ST' .....

Immagine

Immagine


Da un post del 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....

Immagine

:?:
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 9 novembre 2015, 9:45

Retroscena .....
Behind Boeing’s Protest .....

John A. Tirpak - (Nov. 9, 2015)

It would have been tough for Boeing to explain to its shareholders why it didn’t protest losing the Long-Range Strike Bomber contract - potentially an $80 billion chunk of work - especially when there was a reasonable chance the Government Accountability Office might sustain the complaint, and Boeing captured the $44 billion KC-46 contract after its protest threw that program back open for competition.

“We have to take a shot,” an industry official said simply.

Those familiar with the particulars behind the protest said Boeing believes the Air Force didn’t give the company and its partner Lockheed Martin sufficient credit for producing large numbers of airliners, F/A-18 fighters, and F-35 fighters in recent years, for technology advances that gave them an edge in large-scale, lower-cost production techniques, or their grand system integration chops.

The Air Force was instead relying on cost and schedule experience with previous bomber programs, Boeing complained.

“The totality of expertise” in aircraft manufacturing should have been a deciding factor, one observer familiar with the protest said.
“Northrop Grumman builds a few UAVs a year … how can they be as efficient” as Boeing and Lockheed, who have extensive, hot production lines?

Moreover, Boeing believes Northrop Grumman’s price offer was too good to be true, considering that Northrop Grumman doesn’t have Boeing’s extensive worldwide supplier network and volume benefits.

Boeing itself underbid the KC-46, and is now more than $500 billion in the red, after taxes, on that program.
But while Boeing is responsible for any overages on the tanker, the bomber contract is cost-plus, meaning that while Northrop Grumman will lose incentive fees if it fails to deliver, the Air Force will have to cover overages.

One source suggested that both Boeing and Northrop Grumman bid “far, far below” USAF’s stated developmental cost of $21.4 billion for LRS-B development.
Overall, “The Air Force did not adequately assess risk, and the capabilities of the offerors,” one official said.

For its part, the Air Force has emphasized in recent press briefings (*) that it is required by law to use historical data on similar kinds of projects to estimate costs on the LRS-B.
It has also said it intends to produce the LRS-B in small lots of perhaps seven airplanes a year, potentially negating the value of the very large-scale production expertise that Boeing and Lockheed tout.

The protest actually hits at Northrop Grumman’s bottom line because it is enjoined from working on the project until the protest is resolved, but must still keep its design team together with the meter running.

The Air Force was not immediately able to say if there are any potential penalties on Boeing if the protest is not upheld.

(*) ..... http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Transc ... range-stri
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 10 novembre 2015, 10:32

Questo è un contratto ..... 'a tenuta stagna' ..... 8)
The Air Force is “confident” the award of the Long Range Strike-Bomber (LRS-B) contract to Northrop Government can withstand the protest recently filed by losing team Boeing and Lockheed Martin, top leadership said here today.
“I am confident that we collectively — and again, 'we' the Air Force, but we had independent peer reviews as well — that collectively we did a very thorough job,” Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James said during a press conference at the Dubai Air Show Nov. 10.
“The evaluation was done according to the [Request for Proposal] evaluation factors.”
Fonte ..... "Air Force ‘Confident’ Bomber Contract Award Is Airtight" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /75500676/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 11 novembre 2015, 18:48

M.me Lee James è certa che Northrop Grumman supererà l'esame del GAO .....
The secretary of the US air force expects that selection of Northrop Grumman for the Long-Range Strike Bomber programme will hold up to scrutiny by the Government Accountability Office following Boeing’s bid protest last week.
Speaking 10 November at the Dubai Air Show, Deborah Lee James said the source-selection process was very deliberate and based on multiple independent cost estimates that took into account more than just historical data.
Fonte ..... "DUBAI: USAF head stands by bomber award as Northrop downs tools" .....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... op-418958/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 12 novembre 2015, 20:55

L' un contro l'altro armato ..... :leftfighter5: :rightfighter2:
Constrained US Air Force budgets over the coming decade will likely pit the Joint Strike Fighter against the Long Range Strike Bomber, potentially making the bomber project vulnerable to congressional deficit hawks, a panel of experts said Tuesday.
Fonte ..... "LRS-B Faces Challenging Budget Outlook" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /75538024/
The F-35 is going to eat up so much of the Air Force’s procurement budget going forward that the service will likely have to reduce the number of joint strike fighters it buys to pay for other things, such as the Long Range Strike-Bomber, experts said on Tuesday.
Fonte ..... "Experts: Bomber cost could upset F-35 plans" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/milita ... /75528532/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 13 novembre 2015, 18:23

Stroncatura .....
Opinion: A New Bomber For $550 Million? Not Likely .....

Tom Z. Collina and Will Saetren - Aviation Week & Space Technology (Nov. 13, 2015)

The Pentagon has chosen Northrop Grumman to build the U.S. Air Force’s next strategic bomber, and Boeing, which led the competition, has filed a protest.
But regardless of how that turns out, the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) is part of an unrealistic, $1 trillion plan to rebuild the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
Like much of the nuclear strategy, the proposed bomber is out of sync with military needs and budget reality.
Instead of rushing headlong into disaster, as the Air Force did with the previous bomber, the B-2, the Obama administration needs to cool its jets.

The first problem is cost.
The Air Force plans to build 100 new LRS-B aircraft, unofficially known as the B-3, for $550 million each plus $21 billion for development, for a total production cost of about $100 billion with inflation.
Right off the bat, the bomber program will actually cost at least twice the advertised sticker price.
This will not inspire public confidence.
We have seen this movie before.
Back in the 1980s, the B-2, also built by Northrop, was sold to Congress and taxpayers for about $550 million each, or $860 million in today’s dollars.
But the bombers ended up costing what would be $3.4 billion per copy today - a fourfold increase.
Initial plans called for 132 aircraft, and then the price rose and the Berlin Wall fell.
In 1992, President George H.W. Bush cut production to 21.
Other Air Force programs, including the F-35 and F-22, have also experienced massive cost overruns in recent years.
If you believe each B-3 will really cost $550 million, or that Congress will actually buy 100 of them, you are ignoring history.
“How many times are we going to go down this overpriced bomber road?” asks Gordon Adams, who oversaw defense budgeting under President Bill Clinton.
“It’s like Lucy with the football. We never get to kick an affordable aircraft through the goalpost.”
And what about the “need” for 100 of the new bombers?
Has anyone missed those 111 B-2s the Air Force never built?
Yes, we had older aircraft to cover the gap, but this just shows how little we need a high-tech bomber.

The second problem is timing.
The B-52H, in service since the 1960s, is expected to keep flying until the 2040s, as is the newer B-1, and the B-2 will fly until 2060, if not longer.
So why start the new bomber now?
The B-3 can safely be delayed by 10 years without compromising the integrity of the bomber fleet.
Current plans call for the new aircraft to enter service by 2025.
By pushing it back, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Air Force could save up to $34 billion over the next decade, just as other parts of the nuclear arsenal - submarines and land-based missiles - will be in development as well.
We can’t afford, and don’t need, to do it all at the same time.

The third problem is mission.
The new bomber will be designed to evade air defenses so it can enter enemy airspace to deliver precision gravity bombs, such as the B61 nuclear bomb.
But current plans also call for the bomber to carry a new $25 billion nuclear-tipped Air-Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) to evade air defenses.
Do we need a penetrating cruise missile on a penetrating bomber?
No. It’s like bringing a long bow into a boxing ring.
Former Defense Secretary William J. Perry, who oversaw development of the current ALCM 35 years ago, recently wrote a Washington Post op-ed with his colleague, former Assistant Defense Secretary Andy Weber, calling on President Barack Obama to cancel plans for a new nuclear cruise missile.
Good idea.
As the Air Force rushes into the B-3 and the new cruise missile, it is the next president who will have to deal with the inevitable cost increases and budget crises.
Rather than locking his successor into an unsustainable program, President Obama can do the next commander-in-chief a favor by delaying the bomber and canning the cruise missile.
For once, Charlie Brown should just say “no” to Lucy and her football.

Tom Z. Collina is the policy director at Ploughshares Fund, a global security foundation, where Will Saetren is the Roger L. Hale Fellow.
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 13 novembre 2015, 21:01

Dal lato dei favorevoli ..... fioccano critiche sull' USAF che sarebbe considerata troppo morbida quando, parlando di numeri, menziona un programma che prevede un acquisto che si aggira fra gli 80 e i 100 velivoli .....
Long-Range Strike Bomber advocates are calling on the US air force to drop its “squishy” requirement for 80 to 100 next-generation heavy combat aircraft to replace the B-1B and B-52 and instead focus on the "bare minimum" number of 100.
The call comes amid concern that statements by senior air force leaders about the need for “80 to 100” production bombers makes the requirement seem weak and unanalysed, which could put the programme at risk when US lawmakers decide levels of funding for the programme.
Fonte ..... "Bomber advocates target USAF’s ‘squishy’ LRS-B requirement" .....
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ui-419079/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 16 novembre 2015, 23:50

Prossimo aggiornamento nucleare .....
B61-12 Passes Developmental Test Drops .....

Arie Church (11/17/2015)

The upgraded B61-12 nuclear free-fall bomb completed its third and final developmental test drop from an F-15E at Tonopah Test Range, Nev., late last month, the National Nuclear Security Administration announced.
The B61 Mod 12 Life Extension Program began developmental testing in 2012, and is aimed at improving the safety, security, and reliability of the Air Force's legacy air-dropped tactical nuclear weapon.
The current B61 is the primary nuclear weapon for the B-2 bomber, and equips both the F-16 and F-15E, providing forward-deployed deterrence to allies.
“Completing this guided B61-12 flight test provides additional evidence of the nation's continued commitment to our nation’s security and that of our allies and partners," NNSA Deputy Administrator Madelyn Creedon said in a Nov. 16 release.
The B61-12 mates upgraded and refurbished B61 warheads with a new, guided tailkit assembly, and will eventually be integrated onto the F-35A as well as the next generation bomber.
NNSA and the Air Force began fli​ght testing in July, and conducted the last inert test-drop on Oct. 20, paving the way for the start of production engineering work in 2016 .....
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 17 novembre 2015, 0:11

Subcontraenti ..... comincia ad alzarsi il velo .....
As the aerospace world anxiously awaits the Government Accountability Office’s verdict on whether to allow Northrop Grumman to begin construction on the Pentagon’s Long Range Strike-Bomber (LRS-B), new details help paint a clearer picture of who will build crucial parts and systems.
Fonte ..... "New Details Emerge On LRS-B Subcontractors" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /75882906/
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 19 novembre 2015, 10:16

Quelli che ne vogliono 200 .....
Lawmakers and analysts renewed calls Wednesday for the Pentagon to build significantly more next-generation bombers than currently planned, arguing that the Air Force needs a fleet of 200 advanced bombers to project power in a more dangerous world.
In study released today by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies (*), retired Lt. Gen. Michael Moeller made the case for the Pentagon to procure a modernized bomber force of 200 aircraft by 2045.
Fonte ..... "Advocates Call For 200 Next-Generation Bombers" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /76016714/

(*) ..... "US BOMBER FORCE: Sized to Sustain an Asymmetric Advantage for America" .....
https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaw ... _Final.pdf
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 19 novembre 2015, 11:02

Essenziale la sua futura presenza nel teatro del Pacifico .....
LRS-B on Guam .....

John A. Tirpak (11/19/2015)

The Long-Range Strike Bomber is a critical future capability for Pacific Air Forces, PACAF chief Gen. Lori Robinson told defense writers in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday.
“The theater is very big,” comprising “52 percent of the world,” Robinson said.
It will be essential to “power-project throughout the theater” and “show our commitment” to allies in the region that the US takes its role there seriously and is willing to put its best equipment forward, she added.
Robinson expects the LRS-B to take its place in the rotation for the continuous bomber presence deployments to Andersen AFB, Guam, and potentially to Australia, where she said an agreement is near on a routine of deploying USAF bombers and aerial refueling tankers at Royal Australian Air Force Bases Tindal and Darwin.
Part of the LRS-B mission will also be “messaging” to US enemies in the region like North Korea, Robinson said, acknowledging that B-2 bombers have been sent to the region to deter North Korea from acting on its belligerent anti-US rhetoric.
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 2 dicembre 2015, 23:55

Tutelarlo dai tagli di bilancio è la priorità .....
Protecting LRS-B .....

Brian Everstine (12/3/2015)

​Over the next few months, the Air Force needs to “figure out how to live with” significantly less funding in Fiscal 2017, while still looking to protect its major procurement programs - the Long-Range Strike Bomber, the KC-46 tanker, and the F-35, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said.
Although budgeters are happy the bipartisan budget deal provides some relief for the next two years, the Pentagon as a whole faces a $17 billion cut in 2017, James said.
The Air Force is committed to buying the top number in the range of 80 to 100 LRS-Bs the service has repeatedly said is required.
The number is 100,” James said during a Dec. 2 speech at the National Press Club at Washington, D.C.
Frank Kendall, the defense undersecretary for acquisition, said on Tuesday the bomber is a “priority” and will be protected from future budget cuts, reported Defense News .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaki ... /76657622/
The Air Force announced Northrop Grumman won the contract to produce the LRS-B fleet in late October, with a target cost of about $550 million per aircraft and an initial operating capability goal of the mid-2020s.
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 3 dicembre 2015, 20:38

Fuga di notizie e ..... espressioni di disappunto ..... :x
LRS-B Leaks .....

John A. Tirpak (12/3/2015)

The Air Force is unhappy about information published about the Long-Range Strike Bomber program when Boeing protested the contract award to Northrop Grumman last month.
“We did have a concern about end data that should not have been released,” Welsh said at an Atlantic Council event in Washington, D.C., Dec. 1.
“It was made known to the press in some way, shape or form and I think it’s our duty to try and keep the process as pure as we can. And so that’s why the Air Force highlighted that as an issue.”
Welsh was referring to a Forbes magazine article (*) claiming that both LRS-B competitors bid about half of what USAF thought the LRS-B would actually cost.
William LaPlante, former USAF acquisition chief, labored to tell the press in recent weeks that USAF was required by law to factor-in historical bomber costs when making LRS-B estimates.
Welsh emphasized that he had no part in the bomber source selection and is unaware of a formal investigation into the issue of the leaks, but said he’s “intentionally staying as far away … as I can” from the source selection and protest “until it’s done.”
An Air Force spokesman could not immediately say if a formal investigation is underway or who might be conducting it, but pointed out that Welsh did not say that classified information had been revealed.

(*) ..... http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomps ... ly-flawed/
Fonte ..... il 'Daily Report' dell' AFA .....
.

Avatar utente
richelieu
FL 500
FL 500
Messaggi: 10102
Iscritto il: 22 dicembre 2008, 21:14

Re: USAF ..... verso un nuovo bombardiere strategico .....

Messaggio da richelieu » 17 dicembre 2015, 9:17

Marcia indietro ..... :mrgreen:
The prominent Washington defense analyst who accused the US Air Force of fouling up its cost estimates in picking Northrop Grumman to build its new multibillion-dollar bomber is walking back the criticism he levied in a commentary last month.
Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute think tank acknowledged in a Dec. 11 email to Defense News that the Air Force is correct that analysis in his Nov. 6 Forbes commentary (*) about the competition for the Long Range Strike Bomber was misleading.
(*) ..... http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomps ... ly-flawed/
However, since the service has released few concrete cost figures, "it is a meaningless point to anybody trying to understand the selection process," he said.
Fonte ..... "Analyst Walks Back Cost Claims on Air Force Bomber" .....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /77103162/
.

Rispondi