List of cancelled military projects

Canadian Forces

Land Forces
Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle

Israel Defense Forces

Aviation
IAI Lavi

Polish Air Force
PZL-230 Skorpion

Royal Air Force
BAC TSR-2

Royal Canadian Air Force

Fighters
Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow

Missiles
Velvet Glove AAM

United States Army Air Corps

Bombers
Huff-Daland XB-1
Douglas Y1B-7
Fokker XB-8
Boeing Y1B-9
Douglas YB-11
Martin XB-13
Martin XB-14
Boeing XB-15
Martin XB-16
Douglas XB-19
Boeing Y1B-20
North American XB-21
Douglas XB-22
Martin XB-27
North American XB-28

Fighters
Douglas XP-48
Lockheed XP-49
Grumman XP-50

United States Army Air Forces

Bombers
Lockheed XB-30
Douglas XB-31
Consolidated B-32 Dominator
XB-33 Super Marauder
Boeing YB-40 Flying Fortress Gunship
Consolidated XB-41 Liberator Gunship

Fighters
Vultee XP-54
Curtiss XP-55 Ascender
Northrop XP-56 Black Bullet
Lockheed XP-58 Chain Lightning
Bell P-59 Airacomet
Curtiss XP-62
McDonnell XP-67 Bat
Republic XP-72
Fisher (General Motors) P-75 Eagle
Bell XP-76
Northrop XP-79
Convair XP-81
Bell XP-83

United States Air Force

Bombers
XB-35
YB-49
XB-70 Valkyrie
B-1A

Fighters
Northrop YA-9
Lockheed YF-12
Republic XF-103
North American F-107
XF-108 Rapier
Bell XF-109
Northrop F-20 Tigershark
Northrop YF-23

United States Navy/United States Marine Corps

Fighters
Grumman XF5F Skyrocket
Goodyear F2G
Douglas A2D Skyshark
A2J Super Savage
F6D Missileer
XF10F Jaguar
General Dynamics F-111B
A-12 Avenger II

United States Army

Small arms
Heckler & Koch XM8
Heckler & Koch XM29 OICW
Heckler & Koch HK CAWS
Special Purpose Individual Weapon
Heckler & Koch G11

Armor
MBT-70

Artillery
XM2001 Crusader
M247 Sergeant York

Aviation
AH-56 Cheyenne
Boeing Vertol YUH-61
Boeing Vertol XCH-62
RAH-66 Comanche
Bell ARH-70

United States Department of Defense
Project Camelot

German Air Force
EWR VJ 101

wikipedia.org

This list is incomplete from the above website

What do you think of these?

[edit on 26/8/2009 by Conspiracyintheuk]

Hush money to suppress technology is drying up.
Mostly the Illuminati figure these companies have no clue any more.

Sometimes I wonder if these technologies are really about bringing the inventions to the battlefield, or of they're about getting our enemies to spend big bucks trying to counter something we have no intention of finishing. Meanwhile, the Military Industrial Complex gets paid billions of dollars for a bunch of products they'll never have to actually spend time or resources finishing. Win/Win for everyone but the taxpayers.

I think the U.S.'s *real* top-of-the-line weapons and strategies are far beyond stuff like those canceled projects. The U.S. military has three types of war it needs to prepare for:

1. War with a major power. Nuclear power covers that base. Why build F-22s when everyone knows that in a war with the likes of China or Russia, whichever side started to lose first would take it nuclear anyways?

2. War with weak countries who are still decades behind even our most aging equipment and weapons. Current technology and power projection capabilities keep that base covered. It doesn't take stealth helicopters and laser beams to overthrow governments that protect themselves with weapons built 30 years ago.

3. A martial law scenario within the United States itself. I think they're working on developing that capability in Iraq and Afghanistan as we speak, and I think that's where the bulk of their focus lies.

1. War with a major power. Nuclear power covers that base. Why build F-22s when everyone knows that in a war with the likes of China or Russia, whichever side started to lose first would take it nuclear anyways?

I believe that any three of these countries could potentially use tactical nuclear weapons in combat, but I doubt they would use strategic nukes. If they did, they would lose any global credibility which all three of them could not stand to lose.

I think nuclear war is just something people like to refer to because they're too lazy to consider all of the conventional factors between superpowers. I honestly doubt anyone would be stupid enough to use nuclear weapons on a serious scale these days simply because it is easy to detect, counter and respond to them.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


Nevertheless, that seems to be the U.S.'s strategy. Reviews of our ability to defend against a homeland attack by an aggressor have put us at below 20% readiness to defend the borders. Who needs to fight the individual invaders, when you can threaten to wipe the invading country off the map?

Similarly, our conventional powers frequently come up short when compared to the state of the art stuff being produced by Russia and China (and even Europe.) The ability to keep up is clearly there, but for whatever reasons, the drive is not.

Neither country would ever attack us (or each other, or any other country with a massive nuclear stockpile) outright, nor do I think we would attack them (for the same reason,) so I think our military is just not concerned with fighting a conventional war with them. Otherwise, all of that high-tech stuff they're "working on" right now would be built by now, instead of canceled (or has it been?)

It's not a matter of being too lazy to compare conventional powers. It's a matter of the point being moot. Even a tactical nuclear weapon being used by either side would probably spark nuclear holocaust - "MAD," and all that psychopathy. Since nobody wants to be the ruler of a radioactive wasteland, I just don't see any nuclear powers going to direct war for that reason... at least not the *current* nuclear powers.

Like I said, I think a lot of these projects just get put on the table to provoke a response and make some money for the politicians' golf buddies in the M-I-C.

The YF23 was not cancelled.
It was the 'competition' ot ht F22, with the F22 obviously being chosen over the YF23 as the next generation fighter of the USAF.

reply to post by mattifikation


I agree but at the same time, I also believe that the power and effect of nuclear weapons happens to be very exaggerated. I mean they are indeed much more decisive than conventional weapons, but I doubt they can turn the world into a nuclear wasteland.

I know that radiation is a big deal though, even look at American use of depleted uranium and its mass effects on the Iraqi population. Though I believe if radiation was affecting a large population of the world, humans would learn to adapt to it (it's the only thing we do well).

Predator Drones sucess makes many Other weapon systems of US military cancelled in favor of this, especially when there are made up for 21st century.

about all the tech I say all that money is relly going into the duebdalas project in witch the goverment is useing the stargate to get technologie to build intergalactic battle cruisers they have no need for these new wepons because they could just blast them from space to bad my race could blast them away with one shot and if the planet earth dosnot get peaceful we will be forced to reveal our selfs and declare planetary martial law and peace will come at least till the quantorians come and nuke you pathetic planetText Orange

As I posted here, I'm wondering if anyone has, is aware of, or if we can work together to come up with a "master list" of weapons. It would be interesting to read for various reasons - not just getting angry for the waste and evil. Some of the science and concepts behind the weapons is interesting and should be recognized, even if the use of such weapons isn't for ideal aims.