U.S. To Build 80-100 New Stealth Bombers

[Purveyor]

BEIJING, Feb. 18 (Xinhuanet) -- The Pentagon announced the plan to spend 3.7 billion U.S. dollars on 80-100 new stealth bombers, according to Washington Times reports.

This comes after Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' two-year-delay of the new long-range bombers plan. It seeks to add new capabilities aimed at future threats.

Earlier this month the U.S. Navy said that it successfully tested its latest weapon in aerial warfare, the X-47B unmanned aircraft.

The plane accomplished its first flight at the Edwards Airforce Base in California.

The test team said the flight has met their objectives and moved the program forward.

The plane is the first drone capable of carrying out pre-programmed missions autonomously. Take-off, landing, in-flight refueling and the deployment of weapons are all controlled by computer.

(Agencies)

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-02/18/c_13738363.htm

[Billy Burnett]

1. Outsourced to China, for a bargain basement price? n/t

[tammywammy]

3. It's between Lockheed Martin & Northrop.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/144631-dod-comptroller-military-wants-80-to-100-new-bombers-

[HereSince1628]

2. Needed to crush union protests in American State Capitals, no doubt

It's sad that the government can build bombers but not high-speed rail lines.

[LawnKorn]

4. $3,700,000,000 is wrong. That price is not even in the right order of magnitude

I would be inclined to believe 3.7 Billion a YEAR for the next 15 years until they are completed. And even that number is low when the price of cost over runs and engineering design changes are added in.

[former9thward]

11. You are right.

I know that the B-2s cost about 2 billion each in 1993. Don't know what the current price is. So for 80-100 new ones probably cost somewhere around 250 to 300 billion in today's dollars. Typical poor and lazy reporting.

[GreenStormCloud]

17. Unmanned robotic aircraft are far cheaper to build.

The B-2 is a manned bomber. The new one is unmanned.

[Kaleva]

14. The bomber isn't expected to be in service until the mid 2020s

" WASHINGTON, Feb 14 (Reuters) - Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale told reporters on Monday:

* that the Pentagon is aiming to have a new long-range bomber enter service in

mid-2020s, compared to 2018 for previous program "

http://www.xe.com/news/2011/02/14/1701141.htm

The 3.7 billion over the next 5 years is for the design of the new bomber. The money doesn't cover the cost of building and testing of a prototype.

[NutmegYankee]

18. The article indicated they were automated drones

80 drones would fit within that price tag. They are not as expensive as planes for people. The bigger concern is automated drone bombers?!

[Sirveri]

25. I really love the name too, the X-47 Darkstar.

What a great name for a killing machine.

[Sinistrous]

33. X-47 Pegasus. "Darkstar" referred to another (cancelled) program.

[Sirveri]

41. AHHHH yes... I think that was the X-45 n/t

[GSLevel9]

35. I don't think we NEED any more killing machines. nt

[Sirveri]

42. It's never about what they need...

Because the MIC gets everything it wants, for no apparent reason...

[Kaleva]

34. That's a seperate plane. The article is poorly written.

[Statistical]

These are the existing B-2 stealth bombers they are new small unmaned stealth drones. n/t

[dixiegrrrrl]

5. Who the hell have we left unbombed????

And who can't we reach with drones?
Geez, we have enough firepower to wipe out 2 planets already.
Which seems to be our intent, as it turns out.

[Canuckistanian]

6. To bomb what? Where?

Doesn't the USAF already have the most bombers on Earth?

Who else needs to be killed in massive numbers now?

[n2doc]

7. Poor and Old Americans freezing next winter will feel safe, I'm sure

What a country I live in. :cry:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

22. No shit. It's obscene.

x(

[PufPuf23]

8. At some point there will be a hot WWIII unfortunately.

I cannot fathom the hell because I am an American.

Sad.

[notesdev]

9. I don't like this at all

Everything about it stinks, it's hard to know what to object to most, but I'd say the single most odious characteristic is having a computer decide on its own what to shoot at.

If it were up to me I'd say no shooting without a human on the button ready to take responsibility for the decision at the moment of truth.

[GreenStormCloud]

21. There will be humans in the loop, they just aren't on the plane.

It will be computer controlled from somewhere in the U.S. with a human making the final decisions.

[notesdev]

27. If that is so

then the article is wrong since it says "autonomously" and specifies "deploying ordinance" as one of the functions (implying that deployment is autonomous and has no human in the loop).

Wouldn't terribly surprise me, journalism is a lost art

[GreenStormCloud]

30. Think of it as a reusable cruise missile.

The target is selected and programmed by humans, then the plane is launched. Humans stay in the loop in case a change is needed, but if the control link is lost then it flies on memory.

The military doesn't really like the idea. No hero pilots to pin medals on, just computer operators thousands of miles from the war.

[Politicalboi]

28. Humans shoot innocent Iraqi's

As we all saw with that video a while back. I don't recall anyone taking responsibility for that. Just think how much this money would help with health care. Like the Repukes cutting spending for Planned Parenthood, we should sue to stop our tax dollars going to make bombs.

[IDemo]

10. In expectation that -

inhabitants of the newly discovered massive gas planet will be attacking soon?

[lib2DaBone]

12. This is sad.. it provides proof that we are on the path to oblivion...

We can already blow up the entire earth 10 times over. Now.. instead of plowshares.. we are building more Swords. We have high speed computers than can evesdrop on tax payers.. but we can't fund lunches for hungry school kids.

We need health care.. high speed rail.. a new electric grid... new schools... a new vision for America...

If only we could find leader with a vision, we could have these things.. just like CHINA. But I'm afraid the leader we "find" will end up to be Adolf Hitler.

[Raster]

19. We build swords in the United States because they are the most profitable...

...for the Lords of Money and their sycophants. War is profitable and enriches the privileged few. Peace, however, enriches society as a whole, and that is something the Lords of Money will not tolerate.

[Initech]

13. Hey right-wing fucknuts: THIS IS WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!

[williesgirl]

15. Folks are freezing and starving. SS, Medicare & Medicaid looking at cuts, but our war machine goes

on like always. Talk about fucked-up priorities. rec'd

[somone]

16. There is no shortage of cash for the MIC

Disgusting

[Raster]

23. The MIC and it's evil stepchild, The Pentagon, will bleed this country dry.

Money from our treasury, varied national resources, our elder's security, and even our children's blood will continue to flow into their coffers.

[BrklynLiberal]

20. "3.7 billion U.S. dollars". Obviously there was nothing better that could be done with that money.

:puke: :puke:

[Bigmack]

24. The Empire just goes on about its business ...

while the homeland falls apart.

Rome, anyone?

[Gregorian]

26. The military is just an employment agency

unfortunately their product is death

[pokerfan]

29. more than half the world's military expenditure

More than all the other countries combined.

The 2011 military budget is the largest in history, not just in actual dollars, but in inflation-adjusted dollars, exceeding even the spending in WWII, when the nation was on an all-out war footing. It represents 53.3% of total US federal spending.

http://politicalleft.blog-city.com/americas_military_spending_53_of_total_us_budget.htm

[Karmadillo]

31. Somebody email Obama! Quick! He needs to know! He'll stop this!

nt

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our first quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

[unhappycamper]

36. I'm laughing my ass off at "$3.7 billion U.S. dollars on 80-100 new stealth bombers"

The B-2 (we now have 20 left) cost $2.1 billion dollars each.

When was the last time the MIC ever produced something anything that cost less than its predecessor?

*crickets*

[sarge43]

37. Yup. Washington Times?

Crap detector just went red line. 3.7B wouldn't cover the cost overruns, let alone 100 plus state of the art bombers.

[Statistical]

39. Drones. These are drones.

Every drone produced has been less than the manned aircraft they replaced.

[sarge43]

40. If they were box kites, 3B still wouldn't cover. n/t

[DFW]

38. The figure is a joke

It might cover the legal fees of the lawyers that negotiated the transaction. A hundred of these planes
will cost $200 billion plus costs of maintenance and parts. A half trillion is more like it.

What was that about Republicans wanting to cut the budget and display some fiscal responsibility? I seem to
have some difficulty in remembering just what it is they were saying..........

[blindpig]

43. That was my thought...

but it ain't just the Republicans, the Defense budget is sacred to both parties, as is empire.