Next-Generation Bomber

Next-Generation Bomber
Next-Generation Bomber
Boeing/Lockheed Martin contender concept image
Role Stealth bomber
National origin United States
Primary user United States Air Force

The Next-Generation Bomber program (formerly called the 2018 Bomber) is a medium bomber under development by the United States Air Force. It was originally projected to enter service around 2018 as a super stealthy, subsonic, medium range, medium payload "B-3" type system to augment and possibly to a limited degree replace the U.S. Air Force's aging bomber fleet.

On 24 June 2010 Lt. Gen. Philip M. Breedlove said that the term "next-generation bomber" was dead and that the Air Force was working on a long-range strike "family" that would draw on the capabilities of systems like the F-35 and F-22 to help a more affordable and versatile bomber complete its missions.[1] On 13 September 2010 Air Force Secretary Michael Donley said that long range strike would continue cautiously with proven technologies and that the plan to be submitted with the 2012 budget could call for either a missile or an aircraft.[2][3][4] The bomber will be nuclear-capable, but will not certified for nuclear use until later.

Contents

Development

2018 Bomber

USAF Air Combat Command in 2004-06 studied alternatives for a new bomber type aircraft to augment the current bomber fleet which now consists of largely 1970s era airframes, with a goal of having a fully operational aircraft on the ramp by 2018.[5] Speculation that the next generation bomber would be hypersonic and unmanned were laid to rest when Air Force Major General Mark T. Matthews, head of ACC Plans and Programs said "Our belief is that the bomber should be manned" at a 1 May 2007 Air Force Association sponsored event.[6] He later cited that the bomber would also likely be subsonic due to the higher cost of development and maintenance of a supersonic or hypersonic bomber. The 2018 bomber is expected to serve as a stop-gap until the more advanced "2037 Bomber" enters service.[7]

USAF officials expect the new bomber to have top end low observability characteristics with the ability to loiter for hours over the battlefield area and respond to threats as they appear. Major General David E. Clary, ACC vice-commander, summed it up by saying the new bomber will be expected to "penetrate and persist". Deployment of cruise missiles is another issue for the new bomber. The B-52 is the only aircraft currently in the Air Force inventory allowed under treaty to carry and fire the cruise missiles. Major consideration was paid to operation readiness and flexibility. In 2006, the program expected that a prototype could be flying as early as 2009.[8] In September 2007, Air Force generals stated that even though the development schedule for the bomber is short, it could be fielded by 2018.[9]

On 25 January 2008, Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced an agreement to embark on a joint effort to develop a new U.S. Air Force strategic bomber, with plans for the new airplane to be in service by 2018.[10] This collaborative effort for a long-range strike program will include work in advanced sensors and future electronic warfare solutions, including advancements in network-enabled battle management, command and control, and virtual warfare simulation and experimentation.[11] Under the Boeing-Lockheed arrangement, Boeing, the No. 2 Pentagon supplier, would be the primary contractor with about 60% of the deal, said sources familiar with the companies' plans. Lockheed, the world's largest defense contractor, would have around 40%.[12] However on 1 March 2010 Boeing said that the joint project had been suspended.[13] Northrop Grumman received $2 billion in funding in 2008 for "restricted programs" – also called black programs – for a demonstrator which could fly in 2010.[14]

The Air Force was expected to announce late in 2009 its precise requirements for a new bomber that would be operating by 2018.[15] In May 2009 testimony before Congress, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates mentioned that the Pentagon is considering a pilotless aircraft for the next-generation bomber role.[16] Then in April 2009, Defense Secretary Gates announced a delay in the new generation bomber project that would push it past the 2018 date.[17] This was caused not only by budget considerations, but also by nuclear arms treaty considerations.[18]

Long-range strike

On 19 May 2009, Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz said that the USAF's focus in the 2010 budget was on “Long-range strike, not next-generation bomber” and will push for this in the QDR.[19] In June 2009, the two teams working on NGB proposals were told to "close up shop".[20]

On 16 September 2009, Defense Secretary Gates endorsed the concept of a new bomber but insisted that it must be affordable.[21] He said, "I am committed to seeing that the United States has an airborne long-range strike capability – one of several areas being examined in the ongoing Quadrennial Defense Review. What we must not do is repeat what happened with our last manned bomber. By the time the research, development, and requirements processes ran their course, the aircraft, despite its great capability, turned out to be so expensive – $2 billion each in the case of the B-2 – that less than one-sixth of the planned fleet of 132 was ever built."[22] On 5 October 2009, Ashton Carter said that the DoD was still deciding if the Air Force really needed a new bomber and that if the program was approved the aircraft would need to handle reconnaissance as well as strike.[23] And in July 2010 he said he intended to “make affordability a requirement" for the next-generation intelligence and strike platform.[24]

On 11 December 2009, Gates said that the QDR had shown the need for both manned and unmanned long range strike and that the 2011 budget would most likely include funding for the future bomber.[25] The Air Force plans for the new bomber to be multi-role with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.[26]

Andrew Krepinevich has questioned the reliance on a short range aircraft like the F-35 to 'manage' China in a future conflict and has called on reducing the F-35 buy in favor of a longer range platform like the Next-Generation Bomber, but then-United States Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne rejected this plan of action back in 2007.[27][28][29][30][31]

Recent developments

During the debate on the New START treaty in December 2010, several senators used the stalled bomber project as a reason to oppose or delay the ratification of the treaty.[32][33][34]

On 6 January 2011, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made a speech on the U.S. defense budget for FY 2012, announcing major investment to be made in developing a long-range, nuclear-capable penetrating bomber, optionally being remotely piloted. He also said the aircraft "will be designed and developed using proven technologies, an approach that should make it possible to deliver this capability on schedule and in quantity. It is important that we begin this project now to ensure that a new bomber can be ready before the current aging fleet goes out of service. The follow on bomber represents a key component of a joint portfolio of conventional deep-strike capabilities — an area that should be a high priority for future defense investment given the anti-access challenges our military faces".[35] In July 2011, Joint Chief vice chairman James Cartwright called for a large UAV instead of a manned bomber, to conduct even the nuclear mission.[36] Retired Air Force Colonel and CSBA analyst Mark Gunzinger has called for an optionally-manned bomber to be developed, stating purely-unmanned bombers to be at a disadvantage without direct human pilot awareness and vulnerable to communication disruption.[37]

As of March 2011, the Air Force intended to purchase from 80 to 100 of the aircraft.[38] Global Strike Command has indicated that one requirement upon the bomber is to carry a weapon of similar effect to the existing Massive Ordnance Penetrator.[39][40] In addition to the strategic bombing, tactical bombing, and prompt global strike roles typical for a long-range bomber, the new aircraft will be a part of a family of systems to be responsible for ground surveillance and electronic attack.[41] The Obama administration in its 2012 budget request asked for $197 million and a total of $3.7 billion over five years to develop the bomber which would include modular payload options for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), electronic attack (EA), and communications.[42][43] The bomber is to be nuclear capable, but will not be certified for the role until the current bomber force is due for retirement.[44][45][46]

In 2011 the House Armed Services Committee added language that would require two engine programs for the bomber, but Ashton Carter objected that this would interfere with plans to reuse an existing engine.[47] The two most likely engines are the Pratt & Whitney PW9000 engine, which uses a combination of Pratt & Whitney F135 and commercial turbofan technology and a derivative of the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136.[48][49] In May 2011 Air Force undersecretary Erin Conaton announced that a program office was being set up for the bomber.[50] In July 2011, an Air Force spokesman stated a program office has yet to be established.[36]

Design

The design goals in January 2011 were:[51]

  • Total program cost estimated at $40 to $50 billion[51]
  • Fleet size of 175 aircraft, 120 for 10 combat squadrons plus 55 for training and reserves[51]
  • Subsonic maximum speed
  • Range: 5,000+ nautical miles (9,260+ km)[51]
  • "optionally manned" (for non-nuclear missions)[51]
  • Total mission durations of 50 to 100 hours (when unmanned)[51]
  • A weapons load of 14,000–28,000 lb (6,350–12,700 kg)[51]
  • Ability to "survive daylight raids in heavily defended enemy territory"[52]
  • Ability to carry nuclear weapons[51]
  • Designed to use off-the-shelf propulsion, C4ISR, and radar technologies[53]
  • Intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance along with command and control gear to enable the crew to direct other aircraft and forces.[54]

An August 2008 paper by Northrop Grumman highlighted the following trends and requirements:[55]

  • Airfields available for American use have declined since the Cold War.
  • Hostile cruise and ballistic missiles could shut down the few available airfields.
  • Fewer fighter aircraft will be available to escort the bomber force.
  • Advanced fighter aircraft and surface to air missiles are being made available to potentially hostile states.
  • The current USAF bomber force is small and largely outdated.

See also

Aviacionavion.png Aviation portal

Related development
  • Lockheed Martin FB-22
Aircraft of comparable role, configuration and era

Related lists

References

  1. ^ Leader says future bomber won’t go solo. airforcetimes.com
  2. ^ "US Air Force takes 'cautious' approach to new bomber". Google.com. 13 September 2010. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iLoYI0SqumrBY8dra1NEawYt4CRA. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  3. ^ "Air Force secretary: 'Make hard choices now'". Govexec.com. http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=46087. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  4. ^ State of the Air Force - 2010
  5. ^ Grant 2007, pp. 17–20.
  6. ^ Grant 2007, pp. 6–7.
  7. ^ "RL34406, Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service. 22 December 2009. http://opencrs.com/document/RL34406/. Retrieved 30 March 2010. 
  8. ^ Adam J. Hebert (October 2006). "The 2018 Bomber and Its Friends". Air Force magazine. http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2006/October%202006/10062018.aspx. Retrieved 30 March 2010. 
  9. ^ "Senior Air Force Generals To Skeptics: We Can Field A New Bomber In 2018". Defense Daily, 26 September 2007.
  10. ^ "Boeing, Lockheed to work on new bomber" UPI.com
  11. ^ "Boeing and Lockheed Martin Team for Next Generation Bomber Program". Boeing
  12. ^ "Boeing, Lockheed team up on bomber project". TheStar.com
  13. ^ ""Boeing, Lockheed Put Bomber Partnership on Ice"". Defensenews.com. 1 March 2010. http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4519959&c=AME&s=AIR. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  14. ^ "Ultra Stealth". Aviation Week, 26 May 2008.
  15. ^ Boeing, Lockheed to team up against Northrop for bomber contract, Seattle Times
  16. ^ "Gates says next-generation bomber might fly without pilot". CongressDaily via GovernmentExecutive.com, 14 May 2009.
  17. ^ "Gates sees more changes to U.S. weapons in 2011". Reuters
  18. ^ USAF Bomber Grounded by More than Budget. Aviation Week
  19. ^ Schwartz: Service needs long-range capability, Air Force Times, May 2009, http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/05/airforce_hasc_hearing_051909w/ 
  20. ^ RL34406, "Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress". Congressional Research Service, 18 September 2009
  21. ^ "Gates endorses new U.S. bomber project". Reuters
  22. ^ Speech, Defense link, http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1379 
  23. ^ "Carter: DoD, White House Crafting New Presidential Helo Specs". Defense News
  24. ^ Pushes Efficiency With Contractors At Farnborough Carter Pushes Efficiency With Contractors At Farnborough, Aviation Week, http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/awst/2010/07/26/AW_07_26_2010_p43-242859.xml&headline=Carter Pushes Efficiency With Contractors At Farnborough 
  25. ^ "Gates sees funding for new bomber in fiscal 2011". Reuters.com. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BA30920091211?type=politicsNews. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  26. ^ Fulghum, David A. "New Bomber To Focus Heavily On ISR". Aviation Week, 17 December 2009.
  27. ^ Clark, Colin. "Strategy, What Strategy?" dodbuzz.com, 29 June 2010. Retrieved: 3 July 2010.
  28. ^ Kosiak, Steve and Barry Watts. "US Fighter Modernization Plans: Near-term Choices." Retrieved: 3 July 2010.
  29. ^ Wolf, Jim. "Air Force chief links F-35 fighter jet to China." Reuters, 19 September 2007. Retrieved: 3 July 2010.
  30. ^ "Us Fighter Modernization Plans: Near-Term Choices". Csbaonline.org. http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publications/PubLibrary/R.20070620.US_Fighter_Moderni/R.20070620.US_Fighter_Moderni.pdf. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  31. ^ Wolf, Jim. "Air Force chief links F-35 fighter jet to China". Reuters.com. http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1925736420070920?sp=true. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  32. ^ Kyl, Jon (8 July 2010), The New Start Treaty: Time for a Careful Look, The Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704293604575343360850107760.html 
  33. ^ Trinko, Katrina (20 December 2010), McConnell on new START: ‘A Flawed, Mishandled Treaty’, National Review, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/255680/mcconnell-new-start-flawed-mishandled-treaty-katrina-trinko 
  34. ^ "New Start votes expected Monday as GOP leaders decry process", The Cable, Foreign Policy, 2010‐12‐20, http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/12/20/new_start_votes_expected_monday_as_gop_leaders_decry_process, "Thune is interested in this issue because South Dakota, his home state, stands to benefit greatly from production of Boeing's Next Generation Bomber, which is meant to replace the aging fleet of strategic bombers being limited under New START" 
  35. ^ Gates, Robert M, Statement on Department Budget and Efficiencies, The Pentagon date= Thursday, 6 January 2011: Office of the Secretary of Defense, US Department of Defense, http://www.defense.gov/Speeches/Speech.aspx?SpeechID=1527/ 
  36. ^ a b Tirpak, John A. "Confessions of a 'Bomber Hater'." Air Force Magazine, 15 July 2011.
  37. ^ http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/2010.09.14-Sustaining-Americas-Strategic-Advantage-in-Long-Range-Strike.pdf
  38. ^ Reed, John. "Air Force Hopes to Buy 80 to 100 Next Gen Bombers." DoD Buzz, 30 March 2011.
  39. ^ Trimble, Stephen. "Penetrate faster, harder with new AFRL weapon." Flight Global, 20 February 2011.
  40. ^ "A Slimmer MOP". AirForce Magazine, Daily Report, 25 June 2010.
  41. ^ Majumdar, Dave (30 January 2010), Air Force can use savings for bomber, fighters, Air Force Times, http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/01/air-force-savings-used-for-bomber-fighters-013011w/, retrieved 31 January 2010 
  42. ^ Majumdar, Dave. "Budget shrinks; acquisition programs outlined" AirForce Times, 15 February 2011.
  43. ^ Shane, Leo. "Budget breakdown: Air Force." Stars and Stripes, 14 February 2011.
  44. ^ "Conventional First". Airforce-magazine.com. 13 September 2011. http://www.airforce-magazine.com/DRArchive/Pages/2010/September%202010/September%2013%202010/ConventionalFirst.aspx. Retrieved 6 November 2011. 
  45. ^ Majumdar, Dave. "New Bomber Won't Be Nuclear-Capable at First: USAF Chief." Defense News, 2 November 2011.
  46. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YYdc2sVuOpA#t=5051s
  47. ^ Bedard, Paul. "Pentagon, Obama Bomb House Bid To Revive Jet Engine." US News, 24 May 2011.
  48. ^ budget&s=TOP P&W Pitches Engine For Long-Range Strike, Defense News, http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4780815&c=policy; budget&s=TOP 
  49. ^ "Next Gen Bomber Linked To Self-Funded F136." Aviation Week, 4 May 2011.
  50. ^ Majumdar, Dave. "DoD OKs USAF Bomber Program Office." Defense News, 11 May 2011.
  51. ^ a b c d e f g h Majumdar, Dave. "U.S. Air Force May Buy 175 Bombers." Defense News, 23 January 2011.
  52. ^ Grant, Greg. "Air Force chief describes future bomber." Government Executive, 31 October 2007.
  53. ^ "U.S. Air Force: No 2009 Money for Next-Gen Bomber". Defensenews.com. http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3233524&C=america. Retrieved 6 September 2011. 
  54. ^ Majumdar, Dave. "New bomber could conduct long-range missions." AirForce Times, 12 February 2011.
  55. ^ The 2018 Bomber: The Case for Accelerating the Next Generation Long-Range Strike System[dead link]
  • Rose, Bill, 2010. Secret Projects: Flying Wings and Tailless Aircraft. Hinckley, England: Midland Publishing.

External links

v · d · eUnited States tri-service bomber designations post-1962

B-1  • B-2
See also: FB-22  • Next-Generation Bomber  • 2037 Bomber
v · d · eLists relating to aviation
General
Aircraft (manufacturers) · Aircraft engines (manufacturers) · Airlines (defunct) · Airports · Civil authorities · Museums · Registration prefixes · Rotorcraft (manufacturers) · Timeline
Military
Accidents/incidents
Records

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем написать курсовую

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Next-Generation Bomber — Tipo Bombardero furtivo Estado En desarrollo Usuario …   Wikipedia Español

  • NGB (Next-Generation Bomber) — Next Generation Bomber (Бомбардировщик следующего поколения), NGB  программа (проект) компании Northrop Grumman, рассчитанная на создание среднего бомбардировщика, для обновления устареваюшего авиапарка ВВС США (замены используемых сегодня… …   Википедия

  • 2018 Bomber — Infobox Aircraft name = 2018 Bomber type = Medium bomber manufacturer = not yet decided caption = designer = Northrop Grumman or Boeing/Lockheed Martin first flight = introduced = 2018 (projected) retired = status = Under study primary user =… …   Wikipedia

  • bomber — /bom euhr/, n. 1. Mil. an airplane equipped to carry and drop bombs. 2. a person who drops or sets bombs, esp. as an act of terrorism or sabotage. 3. See bomber jacket. [1910 15; BOMB + ER1] * * * Military aircraft designed to drop bombs on… …   Universalium

  • B-52-Bomber — Boeing B 52 Stratofortress …   Deutsch Wikipedia

  • B52-Bomber — Boeing B 52 Stratofortress …   Deutsch Wikipedia

  • Boeing B-52 Bomber — Boeing B 52 Stratofortress …   Deutsch Wikipedia

  • The bomber will always get through — was a phrase used by Stanley Baldwin in a speech to the British Parliament in 1932:cquote|I find myself at the close of a most interesting debate which has been well worth while I myself should not have regretted a second day in which there have… …   Wikipedia

  • First generation jet fighter — Aircraft classified as first generation jet fighters [ [http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread124336/pg1 Fighter Aircraft Generations: A Reference..., page 1 ] ] [ [http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0182.shtml Aerospaceweb.org |… …   Wikipedia

  • fourth-generation warfare — n. Warfare in which at least one side uses non traditional tactics and is composed of a non governmental military force. Example Citation: The U.S. defense and intelligence community may or may not be in denial over what is happening, but there… …   New words

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
… Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”