Will companies like General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman ever

>>34373101
Northrup already got the contract for the B-21 and they're in direct competition with Boeing for the F/A-XX program, they're also dominating the Naval UAV/UCAV market atm.

>>34373121
and GDLS is still king of US vehicle procurement.

>>34373148
All vehicles or just aircraft? I thought that Oshkosh was #1 in this area and that GD made little else (in the way of military equipment) beyond the Abrams and drones.

General dynamics makes a mostly land vehicles nowadays. If I'm not mistaken they manufacture both the M1 tank and the Stryker. They're big into rocketry too things like Stinger manpads, tomahawk,and the rolling airframe missile. They're still around in a pretty big way.

As for NG, they just won the contract for the next-generation bomber and they make avionics for most USAF aircraft. They're also big into drones, as well as satellite tech.

Neither one of them are doing poorly right now, the only reason you hear about lockmart all the time is because of the F35 controversy.

>>34373101
Could a country like Turkey, for example, be able to contract these companies four defence development?

>>34373272
....I don't think that there's any law against it, but also if such a thing were to happen, then expect (US) government autism to ruin every part of that project.

>>34373181
Like >>34373148 said, General Dynamics LAnd Systems is king. If I recall correctly the only things Oshkosh makes for the DOD are "big-rig" style trucks and the MRAP, who's 15 minutes of fame are up and I have as sneaking suspicion was only designed to get the populace to chill out about the middle east death toll. If you notice, pretty much immediately after procuring the MRAP they sold off >50% to foreign allies and US police departments, and destroyed a large number (not sure of the exact count but it was many tens of thousands) because it was cheaper to liquidate than ship home.

>>34373101
Northrup-Grumman is onboard for the next-gen bomber project, and the interim B-21.
I just wait for the eventual merger between LockMart and NG...

>>34373408
>B-21 in it's scale and entirety is merely an interim project

Im starting to believe that meme that our air force might be a tad overfunded

>>34373272
ITAR kicks in

>>34373272
They regularly do; the technologies they're allowed to share however are controlled by ITAR and US laws / regulation. Northrop can't just share all of it's B-21 data to secure a contract with the UK or whatever.

>>34373441
B-21s are the replacement for aging B-1 and B-52 airframes. Next Generation Bomber is supposed to be the universal replacement for all four previous platforms.

>>34373297
>If you notice, pretty much immediately after procuring the MRAP they sold off >50% to foreign allies and US police departments, and destroyed a large number (not sure of the exact count but it was many tens of thousands) because it was cheaper to liquidate than ship home.

I don't think that's an indicator of anything. Like you said it they sold them off instead of paying billions to ship it all home, add in the overall force reduction and most of them would just sit somewhere taking up space anyway, might as well recoup some of the "debt" for buying them in the first place. Plus the US got to sow some goodwill by sharing their toys.

>>34373605
The B21 took the place of the NGB though

>>34373605
B-21 is essentially the product of a scaled back NGB program, the LRSB. The Air Force figured out that congress wouldn't fund a project like the NGB and that is why the B-21 is all existing technology.

>>34373101
They already are. We're in a weird place though since the end of manned combat aircraft is in view.

>>34373605
Why doesn't it also replace the B-2?

>>34374798
>Why doesn't it also replace the B-2?
The B-2 is bigger and probably has more whiz-bang gadgets than the B-21.

>>34374798
Not the guy you were replying to, but the B-2 isn't going anywhere, it is being modernized. The B-2 also can carry larger munitions. The B-21 is rumored to be 2/3rds the size and can't carry internally the same type of bunker buster bombs.

>>34375498
I'm betting that it's a testing platform. An intermediate milestone just to see if their newest ideas are actually workable.

>>34375529
Maybe.
I could see it. Budgets are shady as fuck.

>>34375529
The B-21? It's definitely not going to be a testing platform for something else; the USAF is asking for 165 B-21s.

One of the things that you're going to see over the next 20 years is the attempt to do incremental development / procurement. So rather than try to throw every new technology into a new fighter / bomber like with the F-22 and F-35, they're going to start out with a new airframe, then in set increments (think of them as block upgrades if you want) add new technologies to the jet.

The (at least political / PR) challenge with this is that the first increment of a new fighter / bomber might not necessarily be any better than its predecessors in various areas. The B-21 for example will definitely be stealthier than its predecessors, but it might be limited in its sensors, EW, defensive systems and weapons selection. When the B-21 Increment 2 or whatever comes around, it'll improve that.
Or with the USAF's NGAD next gen fighter, it'll be a new airframe that's stealthier, but it might only use F119s or F135s and end up being underpowered or even slower than the F-22 (seeing as it's almost certainly going to be a bigger jet). Maybe it won't have much in the way of IR sensors (like the F-22), or maybe it won't have some new laser that is then being integrated onto the F-35 or F-15E or whatever.

So when that first increment starts rolling out, the DOT&E starts talking about how it might not be operationally suitable for the bleeding edge fight, etc, POGO, WiB, etc start talking about it being a lemon, etc it'll be a major challenge for the USAF to remind the politicians that "yes it's inferior to our F-22/35s today, but this was intended to reduce risks and deliver an ultimately superior product, etc etc".

They're essentially going for something akin to the Super Hornet and how it was mediocre in Block 1, but became massively better with Block 2, except this time with a clean sheet design and not an enlarged copy of a 20 year old design.

>>34373297
Oshkosh makes:
>all HEMTT variants
>all medium trucks used by the US military
>the new JLTV
in addition to making the best MRAP, the M-ATV.

>>34375639

Worked so well for the f-14...