![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
THE CASE FOR LONG-RANGE STRIKE: 21ST CENTURY SCENARIOS.
http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publicati..._for_Long-.pdf |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in
service by 2020 if The Force starts now. Three more years of F-22 production to keep the line warm then restart production with FB-22s and every city on Earth will be hostage to prompt stealth strike from existing USAF bases. Of course this would require long range planning and initiative on the part of The Force, so don't hold your breath. -HJC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
hcobb ha scritto:
FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in service by 2020 if The Force starts now. Three more years of F-22 production to keep the line warm then restart production with FB-22s and every city on Earth will be hostage to prompt stealth strike from existing USAF bases. I'm wrong or there's a serious mission overlapping between this FB-22 and the B-1 & 2 ? Best regards from Italy, Dott. Piergiorgio. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 2:19 am, "dott.Piergiorgio"
wrote: hcobb ha scritto: FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in service by 2020 if The Force starts now. I'm wrong or there's a serious mission overlapping between this FB-22 and the B-1 & 2 ? The FB-22 would have an innate air to air combat ability that the B-1/2s lack. The FB-22 would be much faster than the B-1 and so able to get in and out of trouble faster. The FB-22 would be much more stealthy than the B-2 and so able to sneak in and out of dangerous places better. And finally the FB-22 would have much more range than the F-22 and so able to reach places that would otherwise require tanker support in harm's way. So there is a gap in capability that the FB-22 would cover, but it would not be a replacement for the missions currently covered by the B-2s or B-1s. However the best mission for the Hustler II would be to open the way for the big bombers with a hunt and destroy of air defenses. -HJC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 8:28*am, hcobb wrote:
On Feb 9, 2:19 am, "dott.Piergiorgio" wrote: hcobb ha scritto: FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in service by 2020 if The Force starts now. I'm wrong or there's a serious mission overlapping between this FB-22 and the B-1 & 2 ? The FB-22 would have an innate air to air combat ability that the B-1/2s lack. The FB-22 would be much faster than the B-1 and so able to get in and out of trouble faster. The FB-22 would be much more stealthy than the B-2 and so able to sneak in and out of dangerous places better. And finally the FB-22 would have much more range than the F-22 and so able to reach places that would otherwise require tanker support in harm's way. So there is a gap in capability that the FB-22 would cover, but it would not be a replacement for the missions currently covered by the B-2s or B-1s. *However the best mission for the Hustler II would be to open the way for the big bombers with a hunt and destroy of air defenses. -HJC Who do we know that has the properties that an FB-22 would attack? That a Peacekeeper or Trident (if that's the latest nomenclature) would not hit? The new dispensation seems to be reduction of the "strategic" arms in favor of the theater or tactical arms. This seems like a system looking for a target. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 5:40 am, Jack Linthicum wrote:
Who do we know that has the properties that an FB-22 would attack? That a Peacekeeper or Trident (if that's the latest nomenclature) would not hit? The new dispensation seems to be reduction of the "strategic" arms in favor of the theater or tactical arms. This seems like a system looking for a target. Next generation integrated mobile air defenses. High level terrorists. Mobile cruise missile launchers with WMD warheads. The targets the Hustler II hunts are mobile, low profile and high value. The FB-22's sensors (being the next step past the B-2, F-22 and F-35) are as important as its weapons. These are things you can't spot from space and you can't wait for an ICBM to get to the last known GPS grid, but you probably do not want to start a nuclear war over. -HJC |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article
, (hcobb) wrote: The FB-22 would be much faster than the B-1 and so able to get in and out of trouble faster. The FB-22 would be much more stealthy than the B-2 and so able to sneak in and out of dangerous places better. Err, do you mean much faster than the B-2 (slow and stealthy) and much stealthier than the B-1 (fast, but not stealthy)? -- John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 7, 12:44*am, hcobb wrote:
FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in service by 2020 if The Force starts now. Three more years of F-22 production to keep the line warm then restart production with FB-22s and every city on Earth will be hostage to prompt stealth strike from existing USAF bases. Of course this would require long range planning and initiative on the part of The Force, so don't hold your breath. -HJC We already have the B-1B. That aircraft can fire missiles. Attack mode can be added to F-22s, but the B-1B is already up and running. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 7:28*am, hcobb wrote:
On Feb 9, 2:19 am, "dott.Piergiorgio" wrote: hcobb ha scritto: FB-22 "Hustler II" firing a long range ramjet missile can be in service by 2020 if The Force starts now. I'm wrong or there's a serious mission overlapping between this FB-22 and the B-1 & 2 ? The FB-22 would have an innate air to air combat ability that the B-1/2s lack. The FB-22 would be much faster than the B-1 and so able to get in and out of trouble faster. The FB-22 would be much more stealthy than the B-2 and so able to sneak in and out of dangerous places better. And finally the FB-22 would have much more range than the F-22 and so able to reach places that would otherwise require tanker support in harm's way. So there is a gap in capability that the FB-22 would cover, but it would not be a replacement for the missions currently covered by the B-2s or B-1s. *However the best mission for the Hustler II would be to open the way for the big bombers with a hunt and destroy of air defenses. -HJC Put your comic books away. There hasn't been any air to air combat with strategic bombers of any consequence since WWII. If there's any probablity of offense, you send in tac air with the strike package. or use standoff weapons. Much cheaper to build standoff than a goofy ramjet FB-22. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 3:32*pm, hcobb wrote:
On Feb 9, 5:40 am, Jack Linthicum wrote: Who do we know that has the properties that an FB-22 would attack? That a Peacekeeper or Trident (if that's the latest nomenclature) would not hit? The new dispensation seems to be reduction of the "strategic" arms in favor of the theater or tactical arms. This seems like a system looking for a target. Next generation integrated mobile air defenses. High level terrorists. Mobile cruise missile launchers with WMD warheads. The targets the Hustler II hunts are mobile, low profile and high value. *The FB-22's sensors (being the next step past the B-2, F-22 and F-35) are as important as its weapons. These are things you can't spot from space and you can't wait for an ICBM to get to the last known GPS grid, but you probably do not want to start a nuclear war over. -HJC Yeah, we did so well against mobile SCUDs in DS/DS. Dream on. Who has the money to build integrated air defenses? We negated everything we went up against. Remember Libya, Iraq? All those great places we managed to put iron on target. Or are you gunning for that job? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to build a 21st century Stuka??? | Victor Smootbank | Piloting | 7 | August 30th 07 01:45 AM |
PRATT & WHITNEY PROPOSES F-22A ENGINE VARIANT FOR LONG-RANGE STRIKE | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 0 | May 30th 07 02:44 PM |
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century | [email protected] | Soaring | 6 | September 5th 06 08:16 AM |
Is there a place for Traditional CAS in the 21st century? | Charles Gray | Military Aviation | 87 | March 20th 04 07:05 AM |
"Missile Defense for the 21st Century" | Mike | Military Aviation | 0 | March 8th 04 08:35 PM |