[quote][b][url=/v3/forum/%C3%A9tats-unis-31/topic/le-meilleur-bombardier-lourd-en-service-486/?post=24517#post-24517]ex-mijou[/url] a dit le 30/08/2008 à 23:19 :[/b]

[quote="wiki"]The B-1R is a proposed replacement for the B-1B fleet.[32] Boeing's director of global strike integration, Rich Parke, was first quoted about the "B-1R" bomber in Air Force Magazine.[33] Parke said the B-1R (R stands for "regional") would be a Lancer with advanced radars, air-to-air missiles, and Pratt & Whitney F119 engines (originally developed for the F-22 Raptor).[url=http://www.boeing.com/ids/allsystemsgo/issues/vol2/num2/story01.html][33][/url] Its new top speed of Mach 2.2 would be purchased at the price of a 20% reduction of the B-1B's combat range. This proposal would involve modifying existing aircraft. The FB-22 and YF-23-based design are alternative proposals.

Boeing's proposal appears to modify the B-1B into a design able to serve these two purposes. For the bomb-truck role Boeing proposes the modification of existing external hardpoints to allow them to carry multiple conventional warheads, dramatically improving overall warload. For the air-to-air role, both defensive and offensive, they propose to add active electronically-scanned array radar and allow some of the hardpoints to carry anti-aircraft missiles. Even with its somewhat reduced range as compared to the original B-1B, its fuel capacity remains quite large. This would allow it to escape from unfavorable air-to-air encounters by simply running away; there are few enough aircraft capable of Mach 2+ performance in general, and those that are deployed can maintain these speeds for only very short periods of time.[url=http://www.afa.org/magazine/nov2004/1104strike.asp][32][/url]

In general terms the B-1R most closely resembles the original F-111 concept, as opposed to a pure bomber role. However, it would be able to carry out these missions at ranges even greater than the F-111.[/quote]

[url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-1b-variants.htm]Me remerciez pas[/url][/quote]