Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!rabbit!wolit From: wolit@rabbit.UUCP (Jan Wolitzky) Newsgroups: net.aviation Subject: Re: B-58, et. al. Message-ID: <3188@rabbit.UUCP> Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 14:12:01 EDT Article-I.D.: rabbit.3188 Posted: Wed Sep 26 14:12:01 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 27-Sep-84 04:56:59 EDT Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 24 > We're making the B-1B strategic bomber initiative to counter today's > threat environment; I think even you'll concede that today's concept > of warfare is somewhat changed from the days of the B-58 or the B-70. > > Further discussion on this topic should be directed to net.politics or > some other appropriate place. Let's talk about aviation here. > > kurt That's right: today there are even more ICBMs and even better air defenses, both high- and low-altitude, than when the B-58 and B-70 were around. In other words, today there is even LESS reason to build the B-1 than there was to build those other failures. I can't think of a better place to discuss the need for, capabilities of, or any other aspect of past, present, or future aircraft than in net.aviation. Political types don't necessarily know anything about planes; we do, and many of us know the B-1's a loser. Besides, it's not quite proper to call a halt to a discussion after you've just given yourself the last word, even if that last word does include fancy euphemisms like "strategic bomber initiative" (what's THAT, I wonder?) and "threat environment." Jan Wolitzky, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ