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