Northrop Grumman B-21A Raider (LRS-B)

[flateric]

Only one APU left on production B-2s as I know.
APU doesn't need inlet or exhaust door of such a coffee table size I think. Combining APU inlet with auxillary engine one would be good in terms of LO ...but who knows.

 

[raptor82]

And it looks like the B-21 has these panels /doors on both sides：

 

[Scott Kenny]

And It looks like the B-21 has these panels /doors on both sides：

Almost certainly auxiliary air inlets, then.

 

[Bounce]

Repost in isle 3.

 

[Hydroman]

Only one APU left on production B-2s as I know.
APU doesn't need inlet or exhaust door of such a coffee table size I think. Combining APU inlet with auxillary engine one would be good in terms of LO ...but who knows.

B-2 still has two APUs.

 

[Josh_TN]

I think one is enough.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/04/10/arts/10simpsons-apu-item/merlin_130087926_9200e27f-5b77-4dda-9f30-d32d9462494c-superJumbo.jpg

 

[Maro.Kyo]

Found this on Reddit. Link provided to original post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpecialAccess/comments/17gci7t

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/SpecialAccess/comments/17gci7t/the_b21_on_the_runway_for_taxi_tests/

View attachment 710396

go back a page

 

[TomcatViP]

B-2 still has two APUs.

Since it seems the APU door is also present on the other wing, we might well have a main APU doubled by a standby one... Hence two APU as per B-2.

 

[bobbymike]

Northrop Has to Fly the B-21 to Get the LRIP Contract

Northrop Grumman has to fly the B-21 in order to get the low-rate initial production contract, company officers said.

www.airandspaceforces.com

 

[Jeb]

I doubt he's worrying, just saying it could be aux inlet door open.

Looked like another aircraft tail in the background though.

 

[Hydroman]

Looked like another aircraft tail in the background though.

Could be?

 

[Sundog]

That looks like the vertical tail of another aircraft in the distance beyond the B-21.

 

[flateric]

But it's not. It would be hazed as f*ck like other background objects here

 

[Forest Green]

Northrop reports strong growth, expects ‘zero profit’ on B-21 contract

Northrop Grumman officials cautioned that the B-21 Raider won't be profitable at first, though they see it driving future growth.

www.defensenews.com

 

[publiusr]

I doubt he's worrying, just saying it could be aux inlet door open.

Bondo

 

[Robert]

Some more photos posted today. New higher res images of the B-21s back end.

 

[TomS]

You can clearly see that the fins/flaps/doors/whatever seen on the upper surface exist on both sides and are not from an object in the background.

 

[Sundog]

You can clearly see that the fins/flaps/doors/whatever seen on the upper surface exist on both sides and are not from an object in the background.

Yeah, I didn't see they were on both sides until that shot above. At first I thought they might be retractable aerials, but when I went to the site and saw them in the larger images, they do seem like the doors for the aux. intakes.

 

[Hydroman]

Those left and right hand doors seem to be aux inlet doors and are not used in flight, just for engine start, ground ops and taxi. Probably not required for take off or approach/landing (like the B-2 doors).

It also looks like there are no split rudders like the B-2, they probably split the far outboard and the next inboard for yaw control (maybe some ETM) since this is a medium to high altitude platform only. The X-47B splits the upper wing inlay surfaces with the outboard elevons.

 

[Forest Green]

You can clearly see that the fins/flaps/doors/whatever seen on the upper surface exist on both sides and are not from an object in the background.

Flaps or luneburg lens system?

 

[TomcatViP]

It could be luneburg. Deployable instead of crew mounted.

Inner flapperons are suspiciouscly short chord.

 

[aim9xray]

Inner flapperons are suspiciouscly short chord.

And somewhat non-aligned if the AvLeak art is to be relied upon. *shrug* To early to tell. By January, maybe. 2027. 8-P

 

[F119Doctor]

Those left and right hand doors seem to be aux inlet doors and are not used in flight, just for engine start, ground ops and taxi. Probably not required for take off or approach/landing (like the B-2 doors).

Auxiliary inlets are usually needed for high power / low speed operation where there is not enough forward speed for the regular inlets to feed sufficient undistorted airflow to the engines. They are likely open for takeoff and landing (for go around power application), and for high power ground runs. Leaving them open whenever the engines are running and landing gear down would simplify the door mechanization.

 

[bobbymike]

Northrop expects B-21 low-rate production contract by year-end

Defence contractor Northrop Grumman says it remains on track to fly the secretive B-21 Raider stealth bomber before the end of 2023, with the US Air Force expected to issue the company a low-rate initial production contract for the type shortly after that milestone.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[FighterJock]

Good news for the B-21 program entering low-rate production, I wonder when it will enter full scale production?

 

[Josh_TN]

Good news for the B-21 program entering low-rate production, I wonder when it will enter full scale production?

USAF has been tight lipped about anything to do with scale or timing of production. About all I've seen them say is that they are waiting for first flight before they sign the LRIP. I think they fear anything that could be seen as a major setback or bad program management after the F-35 and cancelation of NGB. They are putting out cautious statements with low expectations. I'm hoping things start to accelerate once flight testing is underway. I think USAF could make a good case to Congress for more money to accelerate production if NG can prove they have a solid working product.

 

[FighterJock]

So nothing concrete about full rate production for the B-21. I can see why the USAF are being tight lipped about it, just in case anything turns up that causes timing to slip that makes delays happen.

 

[TomcatViP]

It's also possible that the plane did already fly and we are presented here just a cover story. Correct me if I am wrong, but 2/3 months for a first flight is quite short for a bomber

 

[FighterJock]

I don't know about the B-21 having it's first flight already and NG hiding the fact, I would think that the enthusiasts among us would have found out about it by now.

 

[TomS]

It's also possible that the plane did already fly and we are presented here just a cover story. Correct me if I am wrong, but 2/3 months for a first flight is quite short for a bomber

Timing is pretty much the same from rollout to taxi to first flight as was planned for the B-2, though B-2 first flight was delayed due to technical issues discovered during the taxi tests.

 

[Hydroman]

B-21 has not flown yet. B-2 first flight delay was also due to a sinking landing gear in the soft asphalt in July summer heat. They are being methodical and cautious which is the right thing to do. The aircraft will probably follow the B-2 first flight profile, take-off Plant 42, buzz around then land at the B-21 CTF at EAFB.

 

[Scott Kenny]

B-21 has not flown yet. B-2 first flight delay was also due to a sinking landing gear in the soft asphalt in July summer heat. They are being methodical and cautious which is the right thing to do. The aircraft will probably follow the B-2 first flight profile, take-off Plant 42, buzz around then land at the B-21 CTF at EAFB.

100% expect that.

 

[Black Dog]

It's also possible that the plane did already fly and we are presented here just a cover story. Correct me if I am wrong, but 2/3 months for a first flight is quite short for a bomber

That seems unlikely. Maybe a (subscale) prototype if one ever existed. The B-2 didn't have a (known) prototype either, so seems not likely.

 

[FighterJock]

I agree with Hydroman's post above, the B-21 first flight will be to take of from the Northrop plant fly to Edwards AFB land and then start the test program the next day, very much echoing what the JSF prototypes did.

 

[Whisperstream]

That seems unlikely. Maybe a (subscale) prototype if one ever existed. The B-2 didn't have a (known) prototype either, so seems not likely.

I don't believe Northrop Grumman fielded a prototype/demonstrator for what ultimately became the B-21 Raider. I think the company leaned heavily on its manufacturing and development experience with the RQ-180 when they went after the new bomber contract. Northrop Grumman likely beat the Boeing/Lockheed Martin team because NG already had proven, mature technology.

Some years ago, it was rumored that the Boeing–Lockheed Martin team produced a government-funded Next-Generation Long-Range
Strike Demonstrator (NGLRS‑D) for flight testing.

 

[TomcatViP]

“It's going to add to the airborne, air-launched, air-delivered nuclear deterrence vision. Because it's so capable, it can get in and get out. We know that it can penetrate the defenses — there's no doubt about it," Cain said.

"And of course, the bad guys know that it can penetrate the defenses, too. So that's the deterrence aspect of it,” he said.

“I’m hoping and thinking that the test flight is not going to be a big deal. My take is, the simulation and the use of computers in the simulation environment has really just taken away all so much of the threat to the airplane’s capabilities," he said.

“I'm just sure we're going to have a very successful test,” Cain said.

"It's so capable, it can get in and get out:" Developing America's new stealth bomber in Brevard

The Air Force's B-21 Raider long-range stealth bomber — which will carry nuclear and conventional weapons — was designed and developed in Melbourne.

eu.floridatoday.com

 

[bobbymike]

“Once everyone's satisfied that everything's working well like that, we'll taxi the airplane. And we'll taxi slow at first. And then we'll taxi a little faster," he said.

"Everyone will go through our review process. And then we'll go fly the airplane and head over to Edwards (Air Force Base) and start the process of flight tests.”

 

[Hydroman]

I don't believe Northrop Grumman fielded a prototype/demonstrator for what ultimately became the B-21 Raider. I think the company leaned heavily on its manufacturing and development experience with the RQ-180 when they went after the new bomber contract. Northrop Grumman likely beat the Boeing/Lockheed Martin team because NG already had proven, mature technology.

Some years ago, it was rumored that the Boeing–Lockheed Martin team produced a government-funded Next-Generation Long-Range
Strike Demonstrator (NGLRS‑D) for flight testing.

NGC would leverage any work from the "RQ-180" which was started in the 2006-2007 timeframe. I am convinced the two programs share common design elements, would make sense. Also, it looks like the B-21 team is following the B-2 model to the tee from building on production tooling to the flight test program. No subscale demonstrator required.

 

[FighterJock]

Why would NG need a subscale demontrator anyway when they have all the data from the B-2 program, it would just cost money to build a demonstrator. And I think that would be the last thing that NG would be worried about.

 

[quellish]

Why would NG need a subscale demontrator anyway when they have all the data from the B-2 program, it would just cost money to build a demonstrator. And I think that would be the last thing that NG would be worried about.

Northrop Grumman appears to have landed classified next-gen bomber prototype | Aviation Week Network

Northrop Grumman received contracts totaling more than $2.5 billion for secret aircraft programs in the first quarter of 2008, strongly supporting reports and indications that the company has won a U.S. Air Force contract to build a prototype for the Next Generation Bomber (NGB) program...

aviationweek.com

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/us-next-generation-bomber-studies.191/page-3#post-35512