Military aviation, Part II

The Long Range Strike Bomber program (LRS-B) is a development and acquisition program to develop a long-range strategic bomber for the United States Air Force, intended to be a heavy-payload stealth aircraft capable of delivering thermonuclear weapons. Initial capability is planned for the mid-2020s. A request for proposal to develop the aircraft was issued in July 2014. The Air Force plans to purchase 80–100 LRS-B aircraft at a cost of $550 million each (2010 dollars). A development contract was awarded to Northrop Grumman for its B-21 Raider in October 2015.

On 19 May 2009, Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz said that the USAF's focus in the 2010 budget was on "Long-range strike, not next-generation bomber" and will push for this in the Quadrennial Defense Review. In June 2009, the two teams working on next-generation bomber proposals were told to "close up shop". On 16 September 2009, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates endorsed the concept of a new bomber but insisted that it must be affordable, stating: "What we must not do is repeat what happened with our last manned bomber. By the time the research, development, and requirements processes ran their course, the aircraft, despite its great capability, turned out to be so expensive – $2 billion each in the case of the B-2 Spirit—that less than one-sixth of the planned fleet of 132 was ever built." On 5 October 2009, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Ashton Carter said that the DoD was still deciding if the USAF needed a new bomber and that, if approved, the aircraft would need to handle reconnaissance as well as strike missions. In July 2010, Carter said he intended to "make affordability a requirement" for the next-generation intelligence and strike platform.

On 11 December 2009, Gates said that the QDR had shown the need for both manned and unmanned long range strike and that the 2011 budget would likely include funding for the future bomber. The USAF plans for the new bomber to be multi-role with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. As a bomber, the LRS-B will be under Air Force Global Strike Command, while ISR assets are managed by Air Combat Command's 25th Air Force.

In 2010, Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, questioned a reliance on short range aircraft like the F-35 to manage China in a future conflict and promoted reducing the F-35 buy in favor of a longer range platform like the Next-Generation Bomber; then-United States Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne had rejected this plan in 2007. During debate on the New START treaty in December 2010, several senators raised the LRS-B as a reason to oppose or delay ratification.

On 6 January 2011, Secretary of Defense Gates made a speech on the U.S. defense budget for FY 2012, which announced a major investment in developing a long-range, nuclear-capable bomber, also to be optionally remotely piloted. He also said the aircraft "will be designed and developed using proven technologies, an approach that should make it possible to deliver this capability on schedule and in quantity. It is important that we begin this project now to ensure that a new bomber can be ready before the current aging fleet goes out of service. The follow on bomber represents a key component of a joint portfolio of conventional deep-strike capabilities—an area that should be a high priority for future defense investment given the anti-access challenges our military faces." In July 2011, Joint Chief Vice Chairman James Cartwright called for a large UAV instead of a manned aircraft, including for the nuclear mission. Retired Air Force colonel and Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments analyst Mark Gunzinger has called for an optionally manned bomber, stating that purely unmanned bombers would be at a disadvantage without direct human pilot awareness and vulnerable to communication disruption.

In March 2011, the USAF decided to purchase 80 to 100 aircraft. The Global Strike Command indicated that one requirement for the bomber is to carry a weapon of similar effect to the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. In addition to the strategic bombing, tactical bombing, and prompt global strike roles typical for a bomber, the aircraft is to be part of a family of systems responsible for ground surveillance and electronic attack. The Obama Administration in its 2012 budget request asked for $197 million and a total of $3.7 billion over five years to develop the bomber, including modular payloads for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), electronic attack (EA), and communications. It shall be nuclear-capable, but shall not be certified as such until older bombers are set to retire.

In 2011, the House Armed Services Committee added language that would require two engine programs for the bomber; Ashton Carter objected that the addition would interfere with plans to reuse an existing engine. Reportedly, the two most likely engines are the Pratt & Whitney PW9000 engine, which uses a combination of Pratt & Whitney F135 and commercial turbofan technology, and a derivative of the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136. In May 2011, Air Force Undersecretary Erin Conaton announced that a program office was being set up for the bomber. The USAF asked for $292 million for the program in its 2013 budget request. The program has also been referred to as "Long-Range Strike-B" (LRS-B). In 2012, former Pentagon weapons tester Thomas P. Christie speculated that the bomber program had been initiated so that the Air Force would have a sacrificial program to offer during anticipated defense budget shortfalls. The USAF seems committed to the program, given a lack of other non-nuclear options to deal with "deeply buried and/or hardened targets, and committed two percent of their investment budget to the project, compared to three percent to sustain existing bombers.

As of August 2013, the USAF believes that the LRS-B can reach Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in 2025. Reportedly, the main risk is funding, in light of the F-35 Lightning II's acquisition difficulties and a lack of an "urgent threat". Prior bomber programs were hindered by a lack of funding, only 21 B-2 Spirits were produced out of 132 planned and fewer B-1 Lancers were built than were envisioned; both programs were scaled down due to spiraling per aircraft costs. Research funding was allocated, as stealthy technologies to counter anti-access/area-denial threats were spared from budget cuts. The USAF stated the LRS-B is a top priority as it is believed that China will overcome the B-2's low-observable features by the 2020s. Where possible, existing technologies and proven subsystems will be used in order to keep it within budget, instead of developing new and riskier ones. Components such as engines and radars may be off-the-shelf or adaptions of existing models, such as derivative technologies of the F-35. The LRS-B is intended to perform any long range mission, rather than one specialized mission, which drove up the cost of the B-2. The USAF expects it to cost $1 billion each with development costs factored in and aims for a per-aircraft cost of $550 million, considered reasonable for a limited production run military aircraft.

On 25 October 2013, Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced their teaming up for the LRS-B. Boeing will be the prime contractor. The two companies previously joined together for the program in 2008, but the partnership ended in 2010 when requirements shifted. Boeing believes that as the program had evolved, they can readdress their partnership to specifically address requirements. The team has Boeing's bomber experience and Lockheed Martin's stealth experience. At the time of the announcement, official details about the LRS-B were that it will likely be optionally manned and use stealth technology. On 30 January 2014, Northrop Grumman stated their intention to invest in developing needed technology for the bomber, such as stealth designs, mission management systems, and autonomous controls.

In January 2014, General Schwartz said that the Pentagon should abandon plans to outfit the F-35 with nuclear weapons in favor of the LRS-B. A 2010 Nuclear Posture Review stated that replacing the F-16 with the F-35 retains dual conventional and nuclear delivery capabilities for USAF fighters. The Congressional Budget Office determined that upgrading the F-35 for nuclear deployment would cost $350 million over the next decade. Schwartz said that without financial support from NATO, where some nuclear-capable F-35s would be deployed, those funds should be transferred to the LRS-B. At the same time, Congress cut funding for the B61 nuclear bomb, stripping $10 million from F-35 integration and $34.8 million for life extension; Schwartz stated that B61's life extension must proceed.

On 20 February 2014, the USAF reasserted the bomber's need at the annual Air Force Association Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Fla. It was stated it will be fielded in the mid-2020s, and between 80 and 100 of the bombers will be procured. Lt. Gen. Burton Field clarified the 80 to 100 range is due to uncertainty over the price rather than a figure representing the minimum number of bombers needed to mitigate risk. Some USAF leaders expect the unit cost limit of $550 million per aircraft will be exceeded with additional equipment added to the airframe. The cost goal is to set design constraints to prevent extra requirements for capability growth desires and untested technologies that would increase the price more from being incorporated during development. Though the final cost may be greater than planned, a fixed price objective is expected to keep average procurement costs affordable. Rather than the price ceiling being too low to meet requirements, the USAF sees this arrangement as itself and the potential contractor being disciplined about the bomber's missions and roles. Research and development expenses are likely to be "significant", but not expected to be double the cost of production aircraft.

The USAF intended to release a full request for proposals (RFP), a final RFP, and begin the competition for the Long-Range Strike Bomber in fall 2014. Two teams, Northrop Grumman and Boeing–Lockheed Martin, were working on pre-proposals for the competition. In June 2014, the USAF revealed that the LRS-B RFP would be released "soon," with proposals to be submitted by fall 2014 and evaluations completed in early 2015, with a contract award after that. Some public information includes that it will be operational in the mid-2020s, based on existing technologies, have a large payload, may possibly be optionally-manned, and is being designed to work with a "family of systems" that includes ISR, electronic attack, and communication systems. Early aircraft will be designed around fixed requirements with mature technologies that will be adaptable through open architecture for future sensor and weapons capabilities. Although the LRS-B request for proposals (RFP) was to be released by the end of June, the USAF hesitated to publicly announce it to keep the process fair and less likely to give sensitive information to "potential adversaries". Public announcements of future acquisition milestones are to be "released as appropriate.

The USAF released its RFP for the LRS-B on 9 July 2014. By entering the competitive phase of acquisition, the USAF is limited with what it is able to release, and few details were expected to be made public until the contract is awarded in the second quarter of 2015. The LRS-B is expected to replace the B-52 fleet, possibly replace a portion of the B-1 fleet, and complement the B-2 fleet. According to an Air Force study, the Boeing B-52 Stratofortresses and Rockwell B-1 Lancers currently in inventory will reach the end of their service lives by 2045.

Northrop Grumman could base production in Florida if they won the contract, which would provide tax credits, while California passed a bill offering tax credits to the manufacturer if they build it in their state, which would mainly benefit the Boeing–Lockheed Martin team. On 14 August 2014, the California legislature passed a measure to apply for tax benefits equally to prime and subcontractors. The previous measure only applied to subcontractors, meaning Lockheed Martin as part of the Boeing–Lockheed Martin team, placing Northrop Grumman at a near half-billion-dollar disadvantage in the bidding; the new measure levels the tax benefit field by also applying them to prime contractors, as Northrop Grumman has no subcontractor and also has operations in Palmdale.

With a target price of $550 million per aircraft, Defense News quoted a source with knowledge of the program predicting that the LRS-B may be smaller than the B-2, perhaps half the size, powered by two engines in the Pratt & Whitney F135 power class. The target unit cost of $550 million is based on 2010 dollars and is $606 million in 2016 dollars. One of the program's main effects will be its impact on the industrial base; three of the country's five largest defense firms are competing. After the LRS-B, the USAF will not have another major attack aircraft program until the 2030s for a new fighter, with a follow-on bomber after that. With that stretch of time in between, the loser may be forced to leave the industry entirely; Northrop Grumman would likely not retain the infrastructure required for the next major undertaking, and Boeing's main aircraft field is now its commercial products. The industrial impact may cause any contract to be contested by Congress from representatives that receive campaign donations from a company whose award would create jobs for constituents. In addition to competing with other USAF priorities, budgets may put the LRS-B at odds with other services' priorities such as the Ohio Replacement Submarine.

In April 2015, Pentagon undersecretary for acquisition Frank Kendall revealed that individual technologies for the LRS-B will be completed to enhance flexibility, increase competition, and drive down costs. This means even though one team will build the aircraft, other competitors will have the chance to compete for sustainment and upgrade features. Although a contract was planned to be awarded in early summer 2015, it was pushed back to September 2015 to ensure the optimal contractor was selected. Prolonging this part of the process is seen as a time and money-saver later in the acquisition to ensure the resulting bomber can be useful over a 50-year lifespan.

In September 2015, the USAF revealed that the LRS-B's development was much further along than had been publicly acknowledged, and more than usual before a contract award. Final requirements had been finalized since May 2013. Both competitors had mature proposals with prototyping activities and wind tunnel tests along with subsystems, although no demonstrator had been built. The designs are "very different" from each other with different teams on subsystems such as engines, electronic warfare suites, and communications systems; subcontractors will likely not be announced when the winner is picked. The bomber seems similar to the B-2, but more advanced using improved materials for superior low observability, similar to or smaller in size, and will operate alone or as part of a strike package with other airborne assets. Conducting of tests and risk reduction this early in the acquisition process is in part because the program has been handled by the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office since 2011, which has more freedom in how it procures technologies. To reduce risk, the aircraft's production rate will probably remain steady and fairly modest over the course of the aircraft's production. In late September 2015, the contract award was again delayed.

On 27 October 2015, the Defense Department awarded the development contract to Northrop Grumman. The initial value of the contract is $21.4 billion, but the deal could eventually be worth up to $80 billion. The deciding factor in the selection of the Northrop design cost. On 6 November 2015, Boeing and Lockheed Martin protested the decision to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Development costs have been estimated to be from US$10 to $23 billion. On 16 February 2016, the GAO denied the protest, and Northrop Grumman resumed work on the project. In February 2016, Boeing and Lockheed decided not to pursue a lawsuit against the US Air Force over the selection of Northrop Grumman.

At the 2016 Air Warfare Symposium, the LRS-B aircraft was formally designated B-21. The head of the US Air Force Global Strike Command expects that 100 B-21 bombers is the minimum ordered and envisions some 175–200 bombers in service. A media report states that the bomber could also be used as an intelligence gatherer, battle manager, and interceptor aircraft.

Carpet bombing, also known as saturation bombing, is a large aerial bombing done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land. The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs.

The term obliteration bombing is sometimes used to describe especially intensified bombing with the intention of destroying a city or a large part of the city. The term area bombing refers to indiscriminate bombing of an area and also encompasses cases of carpet bombing, including obliteration bombing. It was used in that sense especially during World War II. Carpet bombing of cities, towns, villages, or other areas containing a concentration of civilians is considered a war crime as of the 1977 Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.

One of the first cases of carpet bombing was by the German Condor Legion during the Spanish Civil War against Republican Infantry during the Battle of El Mazuco, where the targeted troops were dispersed on rocky slopes and the Condor Legion learned that carpet bombing was not very effective in such terrain.

In the European Theatre, the first city to suffer heavily from aerial bombardment was Warsaw on 25, September 1939. Continuing this trend in warfare the Rotterdam Blitz was an aerial bombardment of Rotterdam by 90 bombers of the German Air Force on 14 May 1940, during the German invasion of the Netherlands. The objective was to support the German assault on the city, break Dutch resistance and force the Dutch to surrender. Despite a ceasefire, the bombing destroyed almost the entire historic city center, killing nearly nine hundred civilians and leaving 30,000 people homeless. The destructive success of the bombing led the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe (OKL) to threaten to destroy the city of Utrecht if the Dutch Government did not surrender. The Dutch capitulated early the next morning.

As the war progressed, the Battle of Britain developed from a fight for air supremacy into the strategic and aerial bombing of London, Coventry, and other British cities. In retaliation to this, the British built up RAF Bomber Command, which was capable of delivering many thousands of tons of bombs onto a single target, in spite of heavy initial bomber casualties in 1940. The bomber force was then wielded by Arthur Travers Harris in an effort to break German morale and obtain the surrender which Douhet had predicted 15 years earlier. The United States joined the war and the USAAF greatly enforced the campaign bringing in the 8th air force into the European Theatre. Many cities, both large and small, were virtually destroyed by Allied bombing. Cologne, Berlin, Hamburg, and Dresden are among the most infamous, the latter two developing a fire storm. W. G. Sebald's book, On the Natural History of Destruction, comments on the carpet bombing of German cities and asks why it does not play a larger part in the German national consciousness, and why virtually no German authors have written about the events. Despite the lack of literary coverage, a style of film shot among the urban debris and depicting the gritty lives of those who had to rebuild the destroyed cities called the rubble film, developed in the years after the end of World War II.

Carpet bombing was also used as close air support (as "flying artillery") for ground operations. The massive bombing was concentrated in a narrow and shallow area of the front (a few kilometers by a few hundred meters deep), closely coordinated with the advance of friendly troops. The first successful use of the technique was on 6 May 1943, at the end of the Tunisia Campaign. Carried out under Sir Arthur Tedder, it was hailed by the press as Tedder's bomb-carpet (or Tedder's carpet). The bombing was concentrated in a four by three-mile area preparing the way for the First Army. This tactic was later used in many cases in Normandy Campaign, for example in Battle for Caen.

In the Pacific War, carpet bombing was used extensively against Japanese civilian population centers, such as Tokyo. On the night of 9–10 March 1945, 334 B-29 Superfortress heavy bombers were directed to attack the most heavily populated civilian sectors of Tokyo. In just one night, over 100,000 people burned to death from a heavy bombardment of incendiary bombs, comparable to the wartime number of U.S. casualties on the entire Pacific theater. Another 100,000 to one million Japanese were left homeless. These attacks were followed by similar ones against Kobe, Osaka, and Nagoya, as well as other sectors of Tokyo, where over 9,373 tons of incendiary bombs were dropped on civilian and military targets. By the time of the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, light and medium bombers were being directed to bomb targets of convenience, as most urban areas had been already destroyed. In the 9-month long civilian bombing campaign, over 400,000 Japanese civilians died.

During the Vietnam War, with the escalating situation in Southeast Asia, twenty-eight B-52Fs were fitted with external racks for twenty-four 750-pound (340 kg) bombs under project South Bay in June 1964; an additional forty-six aircraft received similar modifications under project Sun Bath. In March 1965, the United States commenced Operation Rolling Thunder. The first combat mission, Operation Arc Light, was flown by B-52Fs on 18 June 1965, when 30 bombers of the 9th and 441st Bombardment Squadrons struck a communist stronghold near the B¿n Cát District in South Vietnam. The first wave of bombers arrived too early at a designated rendezvous point, and while maneuvering to maintain station, two B-52s collided, which resulted in the loss of both bombers and eight crewmen. The remaining bombers, minus one more that turned back to mechanical problems, continued toward the target. Twenty-seven Stratofortresses dropped on a one-mile by two-mile target box from between 19,000 and 22,000 feet, a little more than 50% of the bombs falling within the target zone. The force returned to Andersen AFB except for one bomber with electrical problems that recovered to Clark AFB, the mission having lasted 13 hours. Post-strike assessment by teams of South Vietnamese troops with American advisors found evidence that the VC had departed the area before the raid, and it was suspected that infiltration of the south's forces may have tipped off the north because of the ARVN troops involved in the post-strike inspection.

Beginning in late 1965, a number of B-52Ds underwent Big Belly modifications to increase bomb capacity for carpet bombings. While the external payload remained at twenty-four 500-pound (227 kg) or 750-pound (340 kg) bombs, the internal capacity increased from twenty-seven to eighty-four 500-pound bombs or from twenty-seven to forty-two 750-pound bombs. The modification created enough capacity for a total of 60,000 pounds (27,215 kg) in one hundred eight bombs. Thus modified, B-52Ds could carry 22,000 pounds (9,980 kg) more than B-52Fs. Designed to replace B-52Fs, modified B-52Ds entered combat in April 1966 flying from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. Each bombing mission lasted 10 to 12 hours with an aerial refueling by KC-135 Stratotankers. In spring 1967, the aircraft began flying from U Tapao Airfield in Thailand giving the aircraft the advantage of not requiring in-flight refueling.

The zenith of B-52 attacks in Vietnam was Operation Linebacker II (sometimes referred to as the Christmas Bombing) which consisted of waves of B-52s (mostly D models, but some Gs without jamming equipment and with a smaller bomb load). Over 12 days, B-52s flew 729 sorties and dropped 15,237 tons of bombs on Hanoi, Haiphong, and other targets. Originally 42 B-52s were committed to the war; however, numbers were frequently twice this figure.

 

A strategic bomber is a medium to long range penetration bomber designed to drop large amounts of air-to-ground weaponry onto a distant target for the purposes of debilitating the enemy's capacity to wage war. Unlike tactical bombers, penetrators, fighter-bombers, and attack aircraft, which are used in air interdiction operations to attack enemy combatants and military equipment, strategic bombers are designed to fly into enemy territory to destroy strategic targets (e.g., infrastructure, logistics, military installations, factories, and cities). In addition to strategic bombing, strategic bombers can be used for tactical missions. There are currently three countries that operate strategic bombers: the United States, Russia, and China.

The modern strategic bomber role appeared after the strategic bombing was widely employed, and atomic bombs were first used in combat during World War II. Nuclear strike missions (i.e., delivering nuclear-armed missiles or bombs) can potentially be carried out by most modern fighter-bombers and strike fighters, even at intercontinental range, with the use of aerial refueling, so any nation possessing this combination of equipment and techniques theoretically has such capability. Primary delivery aircraft for a modern strategic bombing mission need not always necessarily be a heavy bomber type, and any modern aircraft capable of nuclear strikes at long range is equally able to carry out tactical missions with conventional weapons. An example is France's Mirage IV, a small strategic bomber replaced in service by the ASMP-equipped Mirage 2000N fighter-bomber and Rafale multirole fighter.

The first strategic bombing efforts took place during World War I (1914–18), by the Russians with their Sikorsky Ilya Muromets bomber (the first heavy four-engine aircraft), and by the Germans using Zeppelins or long-range multi-engine Gotha aircraft. Zeppelins reached England on bombing raids by 1915, forcing the British to create extensive defense systems including some of the first anti-aircraft guns which were often used with searchlights to highlight the enemy machines overhead. Late in the war, American fliers under the command of Brig. Gen. Billy Mitchell was developing multi-aircraft "mass" bombing missions behind German lines, although the Armistice ended full realization of what was being planned.

Study of strategic bombing continued in the interwar years. Many books and articles predicted a fearful prospect for any future war, paced by political fears such as those expressed by British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin who told the House of Commons early in the 1930s that "the bomber will always get through" no matter what defensive systems were undertaken. It was widely believed by the late 1930s that strategic "terror" bombing of cities in any war would quickly result in devastating losses and might decide a conflict in a matter of days or weeks. But theory far exceeded what most air forces could actually put into the air. Germany focused on short-range tactical bombers. Britain's Royal Air Force began developing four-engine long-range bombers only in the late 1930s. The U.S. Army Air Corps (Army Air Forces as of mid-1941) was severely limited by small budgets in the late 1930s, and only barely saved the B-17 bomber that would soon be vital. The equally important B-24 first flew in 1939. Both aircraft would constitute the bulk of the American bomber force that made the Allied daylight bombing of Nazi Germany possible in 1943–45.

At the start of World War II, so-called "strategic" bombing was initially carried out by medium bomber aircraft which were typically twin-engined, armed with several defensive guns, but only possessed limited bomb-carrying capacity and range. Both Britain and the U.S. were developing larger two- and four-engined designs, which began to replace or supplement the smaller aircraft by 1941–42. After American entry into the war, late, in 1941, the U.S. 8th Air Force began to develop a daylight bombing capacity using improved B-17 and B-24 four-engine aircraft. The RAF concentrated its efforts on night bombing. But neither force was able to develop adequate bomb sights or tactics to allow for often-bragged "pinpoint" accuracy. The post-war U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey studies supported the overall notion of the strategic bombing but underlined many of its shortcomings as well. Attempts to create pioneering examples of "smart bombs" resulted in the Azon ordnance, deployed in the European Theater and CBI Theater from B-24s.

Following the untimely death of the top German advocate for strategic bombing, General Walther Wever in early June 1936, the focus of Nazi Germany's Luftwaffe bomber forces, the so-named Kampfgeschwader (bomber wings) became the battlefield support of the German Army as part of the general Blitzkrieg form of warfare, carried out with both medium bombers such as the Heinkel He 111, and Schnellbombers such as the Junkers Ju 88A. General Wever's support of the Ural bomber project before WW II's start dwindled after his passing, with the only aircraft design that could closely match the Allied bomber force's own aircraft – the early November 1937-origin Heinkel He 177A, deployed in its initial form in 1941–42, hampered by a RLM requirement for the He 177A to also perform medium-angle dive bombing, not rescinded until September 1942 – unable to perform either function properly, with a power plant selection and particular power plant installation design features on the 30-meter wingspan Greif, that led to endless problems with engine fires. The March 1942-origin, trans-Atlantic ranged Amerika Bomber program sought to ameliorate the lack of a seriously long-ranged bomber for the Luftwaffe, but resulted with only three Messerschmitt-built and a pair of Junkers-built prototypes ever flown, and no operational "heavy bombers" for strategic use for the Third Reich, outside of the roughly one thousand examples of the He 177 that was built.

By the end of the Second World War in 1945, the "heavy" bomber, epitomized by the British Avro Lancaster and American Boeing B-29 Superfortress used in the Pacific Theater, showed what could be accomplished by area bombing of Japan's cities and the often small and dispersed factories within them. Under Major General Curtis LeMay, the U.S. 20th Air Force, based in the Mariana Islands, undertook low-level incendiary bombing missions, results of which were soon measured in the number of square miles destroyed. The air raids on Japan had withered the nation's ability to continue fighting, although the Japanese government delayed surrender, resulting the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

During the Cold War, the United States and the United Kingdom on one side and the Soviet Union on the other kept strategic bombers ready to take off on short notice as part of the deterrent strategy of mutually assured destruction (MAD). Most strategic bombers of the two superpowers were designed to deliver nuclear weapons. For a time, some squadrons of Boeing B-52 Stratofortress bombers were kept in the air around the clock, orbiting some distance away from their fail-safe points near the Soviet border.

The Royal Air Force's British-produced "V bombers" were designed and designated to be able to deliver British-made nuclear bombs to targets in European Russia. These bombers could have been able to reach and destroy cities like Kiev or Moscow before American strategic bombers.

The Soviet Union produced hundreds of unlicensed, reverse-engineered copies of the American Boeing B-29 Superfortress, which the Soviet Air Forces called the Tupolev Tu-4. The Soviets later developed the jet-powered Tupolev Tu-16 "Badger".

The People's Republic of China produced a version of Tupolev Tu-16 on license from the Soviet Union in the 1960s which they named the Xian H-6; it remains in service today.

During the 1960s France produced its Dassault Mirage IV nuclear-armed bomber for the French Air Force as a part of its independent nuclear strike force, the Force de Frappe, using French-made bombers and IRBMs to deliver French-made nuclear weapons. Mirage IVs served until mid-1996 in the bomber role, and to 2005 as a reconnaissance aircraft.

Today the French Republic has limited its strategic armaments to a squadron of four nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, with 16 SLBM tubes apiece. France also maintains an active force of supersonic fighter-bombers carrying stand-off nuclear missiles such as the ASMP, with Mach 3 speed and a range of 500 kilometers. These missiles can be delivered by the Dassault Mirage 2000N and Rafale fighter-bombers; the Rafale is also capable of refueling others in flight using a buddy refueling pod.

Newer strategic bombers such as the Rockwell International B-1B Lancer, the Tupolev Tu-160, and the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit designs incorporate various levels of stealth technology in an effort to avoid detection, especially by radar networks. Despite these advances earlier strategic bombers, for example, the B-52 (last produced in 1962) or the Tupolev Tu-95 remain in service and can also deploy the latest air-launched cruise missiles and other "stand-off" or precision guided weapons such as the JASSM and the JDAM.

The Russian Air Force's new Tu-160 strategic bombers are expected to be delivered on a regular basis over the course of 10 to 20 years. In addition, the current Tu-95 and Tu-160 bombers will be periodically updated, as was done during the 1990s with the Tu-22M bombers.

Strategic bombers of the Cold War were primarily armed with nuclear weapons. During the post-1940s Indochina Wars, and also since the end of the Cold War, modern bombers originally intended for strategic use have been exclusively employed using non-nuclear, high explosive weapons. During the Vietnam War, Operation Menu, Operation Freedom Deal, Gulf War, military action in Afghanistan, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq, American B-52s and B-1s were mostly employed in tactical roles. During the Soviet-Afghan war in 1979–88, Soviet Air Forces Tu-95s carried out several mass air raids in various regions of Afghanistan.

Bombers listed below were used in the main or represented a shift in long-range bomber design (Maximum bomb load). In practice, bomb loads carried are dependent on factors such as the distance to the target and the individual type, size or weight of bombs used.

Nomenclature for size classification of aircraft types used in strategic bombing varies, particularly since the time of World War II due to sequential technological advancements and changes in aerial warfare strategy and tactics. The B-29, for example, was a benchmark aircraft of the heavy bomber type at end of World War II due to its size, range and load carrying ability; as the Cold War began, it became an intercontinental range strategic bomber with the development of new techniques, such as aerial refueling (which also greatly extended the range of another medium- to long-range bombers, fighter-bombers, and attack aircraft).

During the 1950s the U.S. Strategic Air Command also briefly brought back the outdated term "medium bomber" to distinguish its Boeing B-47 Stratojets from somewhat larger contemporary Boeing B-52 Stratofortress "heavy bombers" in bombardment wings; older B-29 and B-50 heavy bombers were also redesignated as "medium" during this period. SAC's nomenclature here was purely semantic and bureaucratic, however as both the B-47 and B-52 strategic bombers were much larger and had far greater performance and load-carrying ability than any of the World War II-era heavy or medium bombers.

Other aircraft such as the twin-jet U.S. FB-111, Douglas A-3 Skywarrior, and France's Dassault Mirage IV had nominal warlords of less than 20,000 lb (9,100 kg), and were significantly smaller in size and gross weight compared with their strategic bomber contemporaries, based on which they might be classified as medium bombers. In the nuclear strike role, France would replace its Mirage IVs beginning in the late 1980s with the even smaller, single-engine Mirage 2000N fighter-bomber, a further example of advancing technologies and changing tactics in military aviation and aircraft design. France's newer twin-engine Dassault Rafale multirole fighter also has nuclear strike capability.

The aerial bombing of cities in warfare is an optional element of strategic bombing which became widespread during World War I. The bombing of cities grew to a vast scale in World War II, and is still practiced today. The development of aerial bombardment marked an increased capacity of armed forces to deliver ordnance from the air against combatants, military bases, and factories, with a greatly reduced risk to its ground forces. Civilian and noncombatant casualties in bombed cities have variously been a purposeful result of the bombings, or unavoidable collateral damage depending on intent and technology. A number of multilateral efforts have been made to restrict the use of aerial bombardment so as to protect noncombatants.

The first bombs delivered to their targets by air were launched on unmanned balloons, carrying a single bomb, by the Austrians against Venice in 1849, during the First Italian War of Independence.

The first ever air raid was conducted during the Italo-Turkish War by Italian forces against the Ottoman province of Libya on November 1, 1911. Giulio Gavotti dropped 1.5 kg of bombs on Ain Zara, a village 8 km west of the capital Tripoli.

Adrianople (presently Edirne) was bombed by Bulgaria in 1912 in the First Balkan War. Historically, it was the first bombardment of a city from a heavier-than-air aircraft. In the morning of 29 October 1912 at 9:30 a.m. the plane Albatros F-3 took off from an airfield near the village of Mustafa Pasha - present day Svilengrad, Bulgaria. The pilot was captain Radul Mikov with a spotter and Bombardier Prodan Tarakchiev. The airfield was specially created to carry out the takeoff and landing. According to the report weather conditions were perfect. The flight lasted for 1 hour and 20 minutes and the altitude was 500m. During the flight, the crew flew over the city of Edirne, discovered hidden Ottoman forces in the nearby villages and flew towards to city railroad station, near the village of Karaagach. The plane was equipped with two bombs, which were released at 10:00 am over the station. The crew landed successfully at the airfield with 4 holes on the hull. A number of journalists and military attachés attended the site.

In May 1914, during the revolution of 1910–17, General Venustiano Carranza, later president, ordered a biplane to bomb Neveria Hill adjacent to the downtown area of Mazatlán in order to take the city. The bomb landed not on target but in a city street and in the process killed two citizens and wounded several others.

The first civilian target to be bombed from the air was the Belgian city of Antwerp. This city, at that moment the National Redoubt of Belgium, was bombed during the night of 24–25 August 1914. Instead of targeting the surrounding fortresses, the Zeppelin LZ 25's intention was to bomb the clearly distinguishable historical center of the city. After dropping approximately ten bombs, ten people were killed and forty injured. The British Royal Naval Air Service (RNAS) undertook the first Entente strategic bombing missions on 22 September 1914 and 8 October, when it bombed the Zeppelin bases in Cologne and Düsseldorf. The airplanes carried twenty-pound bombs, and at least one airship was destroyed. On 19 January 1915 two German Zeppelins dropped 24 fifty-kilogram (110 lb) high-explosive bombs and ineffective three-kilogram incendiaries on the English towns of Great Yarmouth, Sheringham, King's Lynn, and the surrounding villages; in all, four people were killed, 16 injured, and monetary damage was estimated at £7,740.

London was bombed for the first time on 30 May 1915. In July 1916, the German government allowed directed raids against urban centers, sparking 23 airship raids in 1916 in which 125 tons of ordnance were dropped, killing 293 people and injuring 691. Gradually British air defenses improved and the Germans also introduced large bomber aircraft for bombing Britain. In 1917 and 1918 there were only eleven Zeppelin raids against England, and the final raid occurred on 5 August 1918, which resulted in the death of KK Peter Strasser, commander of the German Naval Airship Department. By the end of the war, 51 raids had been undertaken, in which 5,806 bombs were dropped, killing 557 people and injuring 1,358[citation needed]. In the course of the Zeppelin raids, the Germans lost more than half their airships and 40% of their crew. It has been argued that the raids were effective far beyond material damage inflicted, in diverting and hampering wartime production and diverting twelve squadrons and over 10,000 men to air defenses. The British developed an Independent Force of long-range bombers that could bomb Berlin, but the war ended before these raids began.

After the war, bombers' increasing sophistication led to the general belief that aerial bombing would both destroy cities and be impossible to stop; as Stanley Baldwin stated in a 1932 speech, "The bomber will always get through".

After World War 1, there were protests in Iraq against continued British rule. Many Iraqis across a wide spectrum of opinion opposed the British Mandate for Iraq. The Iraqi revolt against the British began, with peaceful demonstrations in May 1920. Initial demands were rejected by the British administration, and fighting broke out in June 1920. This was suppressed, with many deaths, and at very high costs to the Empire. A policy of 'aerial policing', an invention of Winston Churchill's was brought in. This amounted to bombing restive civilians, followed up by pacification by ground troops. This continued up to the mid-1920s. The aerial campaign included Sir Arthur Harris, 1st Baronet, who commanded a Vickers Vernon squadron engaged in the bombing and strafing of recalcitrant civilians. Harris felt that the Arab civilians required this kind of "heavy hand" treatment.

Following the end of World War I, the British stepped up their efforts in their war against the Somali Dervish state, led by the so-called "Mad Mullah", whom they had been fighting for the control the area formerly known as British Somaliland. However, they had been unable to defeat the Dervish state for nearly 25 years. In January 1920, the British launched a combined aerial and land attack, bombarding Taleeh, the capital of the Dervish State. The Somaliland Campaign has been described as one of the bloodiest and longest-running conflicts in the history of sub-Saharan Africa and the Somali forces are noted for concurrently repelling the invading British, Italian and Abyssinian forces for a period of 25 years.

During the Cristero War in Mexico in 1929, Irish pilot and mercenary Patrick Murphy mistakenly dropped several improvised "suitcase bombs" on the border town of Naco, Arizona, while bombing government forces in the adjacent town of Naco, Sonora, for the Cristero revolutionaries. The bombing, which caused damage to many buildings and injured several bystanders on the American side of the international border, became the first aerial bombardment of the Continental United States by a foreign power in American history.

The Italians used aircraft against the Ethiopian cities in the Second Italo-Abyssinian War. For example, in February 1936, the Italian invasion forces in the south prepared for a major thrust towards the city of Harar. On 22 March, the Regia Aeronautica bombed Harar and Jijiga as a prelude. Both cities were reduced to ruins even though Harar had been declared an "open city".

 

 

 

 

References

Military aviation, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_aviation

Aversa, R., R.V.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2017a. Nano-diamond hybrid materials for structural biomedical application. Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, B. Akash, R.B. Bucinell and J.M. Corchado et al., 2017b. Kinematics and forces to a new model forging manipulator. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 60-80.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella, I.T.F. Petrescu and J.K. Calautit et al., 2017c. Something about the V engines design. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 34-52.

Aversa, R., D. Parcesepe, R.V.V. Petrescu, F. Berto and G. Chen et al., 2017d. Process ability of bulk metallic glasses. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 294-301.

Aversa, R., R.V.V. Petrescu, B. Akash, R.B. Bucinell and J.M. Corchado et al., 2017e. Something about the balancing of thermal motors. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 10: 200.217. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2017.200.217

Aversa, R., F.I.T. Petrescu, R.V. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016a. Biomimetic FEA bone modeling for customized hybrid biological prostheses development. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1060-1067. DOI: 10.3844/ajassp.2016.1060.1067

Aversa, R., D. Parcesepe, R.V. Petrescu, G. Chen and F.I.T. Petrescu et al., 2016b. Glassy amorphous metal injection molded induced morphological defects. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1476-1482.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016c. Smart-factory: Optimization and process control of composite centrifuged pipes. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1330-1341.

Aversa, R., F. Tamburrino, R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and M. Artur et al., 2016d. Biomechanically inspired shape memory effect machines driven by muscle like acting NiTi alloys. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1264-1271.

Aversa, R., E.M. Buzea, R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and M. Neacsa et al., 2016e. Present a mechatronic system having able to determine the concentration of carotenoids. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1106-1111.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, R. Sorrentino, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016f. Hybrid ceramo-polymeric nanocomposite for biomimetic scaffolds design and preparation. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1096-1105.

Aversa, R., V. Perrotta, R.V. Petrescu, C. Misiano and F.I.T. Petrescu et al., 2016g. From structural colors to super-hydrophobicity and achromatic transparent protective coatings: Ion plating plasma assisted TiO2 and SiO2 Nano-film deposition. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1037-1045.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016h Biomimetic and Evolutionary Design Driven Innovation in Sustainable Products Development, Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1027-1036.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016i. Mitochondria are naturally micro robots-a review. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 991-1002.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016j. We are addicted to vitamins C and E-A review. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1003-1018.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016k. Physiologic human fluids and swelling behavior of hydrophilic biocompatible hybrid ceramo-polymeric materials. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 962-972.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016l. One can slow down the aging through antioxidants. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1112-1126.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016m. About homeopathy or jSimilia similibus curenturk. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1164-1172.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016n. The basic elements of life's. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1189-1197.

Aversa, R., F.I.T. Petrescu, R.V. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016o. Flexible stem trabecular prostheses. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1213-1221.

Mirsayar, M.M., V.A. Joneidi, R.V.V. Petrescu,    F.I.T. Petrescu and F. Berto, 2017 Extended MTSN criterion for fracture analysis of soda lime glass. Eng. Fracture Mechanics 178: 50-59.     DOI: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.04.018

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013a. Lockheed Martin. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 114.

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013b. Northrop. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 96.

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013c. The Aviation History or New Aircraft I Color. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 292.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2012. New Aircraft II. 1st Edn., Books On Demand, pp: 138.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2011. Memories About Flight. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 652.

Petrescu, F.I.T., 2009. New aircraft. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Mechanics, Oct. 29-30, Brasov, Romania.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2016a Otto Motor Dynamics, GEINTEC-GESTAO INOVACAO E TECNOLOGIAS, 6(3):3392-3406.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2016b Dynamic Cinematic to a Structure 2R, GEINTEC-GESTAO INOVACAO E TECNOLOGIAS, 6(2):3143-3154.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014a Cam Gears Dynamics in the Classic Distribution, Independent Journal of Management & Production, 5(1):166-185.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014b High Efficiency Gears Synthesis by Avoid the Interferences, Independent Journal of Management & Production, 5(2):275-298.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu R.V., 2014c Gear Design, ENGEVISTA, 16(4):313-328.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014d Balancing Otto Engines, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(3):473-480.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014e Machine Equations to the Classical Distribution, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(2):309-316.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014f Forces of Internal Combustion Heat Engines, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 7(1):206-212.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014g Determination of the Yield of Internal Combustion Thermal Engines, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(1):62-67.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014h Cam Dynamic Synthesis, Al-Khwarizmi Engineering Journal, 10(1):1-23.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu R.V., 2013a Dynamic Synthesis of the Rotary Cam and Translated Tappet with Roll, ENGEVISTA  15(3):325-332.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013b Cams with High Efficiency, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 7(4):599-606.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013c An Algorithm for Setting the Dynamic Parameters of the Classic Distribution Mechanism, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 6(5B):1637-1641.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013d Dynamic Synthesis of the Rotary Cam and Translated Tappet with Roll, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 6(2B):600-607.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013e Forces and Efficiency of Cams, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 7(3):507-511.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012a Echilibrarea motoarelor termice, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2012, ISBN 978-1-4811-2948-0, 40 pages, Romanian edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012b Camshaft Precision, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2012, ISBN 978-1-4810-8316-4, 88 pages, English edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012c Motoare termice, Create Space publisher, USA, October 2012, ISBN 978-1-4802-0488-1, 164 pages, Romanian edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011a Dinamica mecanismelor de distributie, Create Space publisher, USA, December 2011, ISBN 978-1-4680-5265-7, 188 pages, Romanian version.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011b Trenuri planetare, Create Space publisher, USA, December 2011, ISBN 978-1-4680-3041-9, 204 pages, Romanian version.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011c Gear Solutions, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2011, ISBN 978-1-4679-8764-6, 72 pages, English version.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2005. Contributions at the dynamics of cams. Proceedings of the 9th IFToMM International Symposium on Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, (TMM’ 05), Bucharest, Romania, pp: 123-128.

Petrescu, F. and R. Petrescu, 1995. Contributii la sinteza mecanismelor de distributie ale motoarelor cu ardere internã. Proceedings of the ESFA Conferinta, (ESFA’ 95), Bucuresti, pp: 257-264.

Petrescu, FIT., 2015a Geometrical Synthesis of the Distribution Mechanisms, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(1):63-81. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.63.81

Petrescu, FIT., 2015b Machine Motion Equations at the Internal Combustion Heat Engines, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(1):127-137. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.127.137

Petrescu, F.I., 2012b Teoria mecanismelor – Curs si aplicatii (editia a doua), Create Space publisher, USA, September 2012, ISBN 978-1-4792-9362-9, 284 pages, Romanian version, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2917.1926

Petrescu, F.I., 2008. Theoretical and applied contributions about the dynamic of planar mechanisms with superior joints. PhD Thesis, Bucharest Polytechnic University.

Petrescu, FIT.; Calautit, JK.; Mirsayar, M.; Marinkovic, D.; 2015 Structural Dynamics of the Distribution Mechanism with Rocking Tappet with Roll, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(4):589-601. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.589.601

Petrescu, FIT.; Calautit, JK.; 2016 About Nano Fusion and Dynamic Fusion, American Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(3):261-266.

Petrescu, R.V.V., R. Aversa, A. Apicella, F. Berto and S. Li et al., 2016a. Ecosphere protection through green energy. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1027-1032. DOI: 10.3844/ajassp.2016.1027.1032

Petrescu, F.I.T., A. Apicella, R.V.V. Petrescu, S.P. Kozaitis and R.B. Bucinell et al., 2016b. Environmental protection through nuclear energy. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 941-946.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu R.V., 2017 Velocities and accelerations at the 3R robots, ENGEVISTA 19(1):202-216.

Petrescu, RV., Petrescu, FIT., Aversa, R., Apicella, A., 2017 Nano Energy, Engevista, 19(2):267-292.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 ENERGIA VERDE PARA PROTEGER O MEIO AMBIENTE, Geintec, 7(1):3722-3743.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Under Water, OnLine Journal of Biological Sciences, 17(2): 70-87.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Apicella, A., Petrescu, Fit., 2017 Nano-Diamond Hybrid Materials for Structural Biomedical Application, American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 13(1): 34-41.

 

Syed, J., Dharrab, AA., Zafa, MS., Khand, E., Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Influence of Curing Light Type and Staining Medium on the Discoloring Stability of Dental Restorative Composite, American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology 13(1): 42-50.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Chen, G., Li, S., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Kinematics and Forces to a New Model Forging Manipulator, American Journal of Applied Sciences 14(1):60-80.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., Calautit, JK., Mirsayar, MM., Bucinell, R., Berto, F., Akash, B., 2017 Something about the V Engines Design, American Journal of Applied Sciences 14(1):34-52.

Aversa, R., Parcesepe, D., Petrescu, RV., Berto, F., Chen, G., Petrescu, FIT., Tamburrino, F., Apicella, A., 2017 Processability of Bulk Metallic Glasses, American Journal of Applied Sciences 14(2): 294-301.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Calautit, JK., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Yield at Thermal Engines Internal Combustion, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 10(1): 243-251.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Velocities and Accelerations at the 3R Mechatronic Systems, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 10(1): 252-263.

Berto, F., Gagani, A., Petrescu, RV., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 A Review of the Fatigue Strength of Load Carrying Shear Welded Joints, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 10(1):1-12.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R.,  Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Anthropomorphic Solid Structures n-R Kinematics, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 10(1): 279-291.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Chen, G., Li, S., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Something about the Balancing of Thermal Motors, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 10(1):200-217.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Inverse Kinematics at the Anthropomorphic Robots, by a Trigonometric Method, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 394-411.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Calautit, JK., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Forces at Internal Combustion Engines, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 382-393.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Gears-Part I, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 457-472.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Gears-Part II, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 473-483.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Cam-Gears Forces, Velocities, Powers and Efficiency, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 491-505.

Aversa, R., Petrescu, RV., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 A Dynamic Model for Gears, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 484-490.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Kosaitis, S., Abu-Lebdeh, T., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Dynamics of Mechanisms with Cams Illustrated in the Classical Distribution, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 551-567.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Bucinell, R., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Kosaitis, S., Abu-Lebdeh, T., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Testing by Non-Destructive Control, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 568-583.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Li, S., Mirsayar, MM., Bucinell, R., Kosaitis, S., Abu-Lebdeh, T., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Electron Dimensions, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2): 584-602.

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Kozaitis, S., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Deuteron Dimensions, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(3).

Petrescu RV., Aversa R., Apicella A., Petrescu FIT., 2017 Transportation Engineering, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(3).

Petrescu RV., Aversa R., Kozaitis S., Apicella A., Petrescu FIT., 2017 Some Proposed Solutions to Achieve Nuclear Fusion, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(3).

Petrescu RV., Aversa R., Kozaitis S., Apicella A., Petrescu FIT., 2017 Some Basic Reactions in Nuclear Fusion, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(3).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017a Modern Propulsions for Aerospace-A Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017b Modern Propulsions for Aerospace-Part II, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017c History of Aviation-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017d Lockheed Martin-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017e Our Universe, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017f What is a UFO?, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 About Bell Helicopter FCX-001 Concept Aircraft-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Home at Airbus, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Kozaitis, S., Abu-Lebdeh, T., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Airlander, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 When Boeing is Dreaming – a Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

History of aviation, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_aviation

History of ballooning, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ballooning

Airship, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airship

 

 

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com