Airbus to move further into military AC inc Heavy Bombers

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:49:27 -0000, Mycroft wrote:
According to the Financial Times Airbus want to expand further into the
military field, they have even done studies on how they could produce
bombers based on their civil aircraft.

I get an image of someone throwing a Storm Shadow out the
back of an A400M.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

The P-3 and Nimrod both started out as airliners, so it's perfectly
feasible. I'd be very suprised if Boeing isn't pitching a 'bomb truck'
civil-based aircraft to the Pentagon at the moment.

Matt

"Mycroft" david wrote in message
...
According to the Financial Times Airbus want to expand further into the
military field, they have even done studies on how they could produce
bombers based on their civil aircraft.

Myc

--
" We need a socio-polical nerd to offset our overwhelming coolness".

To reply just remove the X's

In article ,
killfile wrote:
The P-3 and Nimrod both started out as airliners, so it's perfectly
feasible. I'd be very suprised if Boeing isn't pitching a 'bomb truck'
civil-based aircraft to the Pentagon at the moment.

Matt

"Mycroft" david wrote in message
...
According to the Financial Times Airbus want to expand further into the
military field, they have even done studies on how they could produce
bombers based on their civil aircraft.

IIRC there was also consideration given to military variants - bombers
- of both VC-10 and Concorde, and back in the prehistory of jet airliners
there was one (IIRC) Avro Ashton which got under-wing bomb panniers.
NO idea if that was purely as a trials testbed for bomb sights for the
V-bomber fleet or whether it was actually in the frame as a second-
line fallback if the most conservative of the V-bombers (Vickers
Valiant)and the first-line backup (the Short Sperrin) both ran
into development problems.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

killfile wrote:
The P-3 and Nimrod both started out as airliners, so it's perfectly
feasible. I'd be very suprised if Boeing isn't pitching a 'bomb truck'
civil-based aircraft to the Pentagon at the moment.

Boeing looked at a variant of the 747 as a cruise missile platform. IIRC
the idea was to eject them out the side cargo door.

They also have ideas about an ASW platform based on the 737.

Cheers
David

In article ,
phil hunt wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:49:27 -0000, Mycroft wrote:
According to the Financial Times Airbus want to expand further into the
military field, they have even done studies on how they could produce
bombers based on their civil aircraft.

I get an image of someone throwing a Storm Shadow out the
back of an A400M.

*I'm* getting the image of the "triple threat"[1] A380 gunship..

[1] Bomb you. Shoot you. Land on you [2]
[2] Gavin Bull, IIRC.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

After the dust settles it will probably become apparent that no one today
has a need for a big bomber carrying many bombs. The problem today is the
penetration of complex air defenses to strike selected pinpoint targets.
There is really not much need for hauling as many bombs as possible over a
target nowadays. also airliners are probably too big and bulky to meet
today's low observables criteria

WDA



end


"Mycroft" david wrote in message
...
According to the Financial Times Airbus want to expand further into the
military field, they have even done studies on how they could produce
bombers based on their civil aircraft.

Myc

--
" We need a socio-polical nerd to offset our overwhelming coolness".

To reply just remove the X's

There is really not much need for hauling as many bombs as possible over a
target nowadays. also airliners are probably too big and bulky to meet
today's low observables criteria

Still, it's nice to have options. Very few Air Force types believed
that the army really needed the A-10 Warthog, or at least not enough
to send the poor thing into harm's way. Who could have foreseen in
1985 that there would come a time when the opposition had had no air
force to speak of?

We need precision bombers now. That may not always be the case, and we
may not always have the B-52 at our disposal.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

EADS has had the idea to develop bomber aircraft through its EFW
conversion facility (former Junkers). Airbus 300-series conversion
bombers would cargo drop smart APs, or AeroPallets armed with missiles
and possibly other munitions. Another German idea is to drop a UCAV
mothership that would launch a "swarm" of UCAV killvehicles into enemy
airspace or against strong armored formations on the ground.
Dornier also has a design for a wedge-shaped tactical bomber. But the
most futuristic concept is the NiMet- a "Meta-bomber". This concept is
way beyond anything the US has concieved for the as-of-yet
undetermined B-3.

Rob

This concept is
way beyond anything the US has concieved for the as-of-yet
undetermined B-3.

Rob


And how do you know what ideas our engineers, scientists and military have come
up with, that makes them inferior to the EADS idea?

I somehow doubt LockMart, Boeing and Northrop include you in their discussions
of designs and ideas.


Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

On 20 Nov 2003 05:39:14 GMT, 362436 (Ron) wrote:

This concept is
way beyond anything the US has concieved for the as-of-yet
undetermined B-3.

Rob


And how do you know what ideas our engineers, scientists and military have come
up with, that makes them inferior to the EADS idea?

I somehow doubt LockMart, Boeing and Northrop include you in their discussions
of designs and ideas.


Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

Herr Arndt is off in his fantasy land again. Airbus is not capable of building a
B-2 equivalent, much less an aircraft "way beyond".

Al Minyard