Thanks guys. I have references for the B-1A and am planning on giving it a shot (at least the first airframe, with the ejection capsule and the test probe etc) as well as some real life B-1B squadrons if I get the chance. Sadly it appears my request to have the Commonwealth nations build and fly the B-1 isn't going to be considered as there's no real need for a low-level penetration nuclear bomber in the fiction.
I just wonder, if you couldn't make a rotary launcher like what we did for the SRAM, and fill it with Harpoons, or later on, SLAM/SLAM-ER and put it on a B-1 for rapid response strike, though I guess older B-52s would work about as well for that.
You could always try to go Dale Brown, and attempt sell the idea of the B-1 as the world's largest fighter, loaded with Phoenix, and later on, AMRAAMs...I wonder how many you could squeeze into the weapons bay?
_________________ We can't stop here--this is Bat country!
If it's close enough to cast a shadow, I think the flying house wins initiative.
Bronies are like the Forsworn. Everyone agrees that they are a problem but nobody wants to expend the energy rooting them out.
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way."
Posts:2504 Joined: July 1st, 2014, 12:20 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:Website
No Nukes?
If so, then a bomber that must get through is even more important. Lay your munitions on a dime. Besides its one of the best looking bombers ever produced.
Low level is much harder to intercept than high level. The higher you go the more visible to everything you become.
Did the Lancer have a decent enough munition carrying capability?
(I enjoy the Dan Brown books as well OS, he came up with some good ideas, be interesting to see if they could work IRL.)