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

Sundog said:
OK, looking at the enhanced pic from Paul yesterday, here's my thought on the crew door. I arrived at this because I wanted to look at the nose gear to see if it folded in two. But now that I see the detail of the nose gear, I think the second door is just a nose gear door that opens when the gear retracts and closes again. Also, once I saw the door on side of the gear doors and given it's size, that seemed to me to indicate it's the crew door.
Click to expand...
Yes Sundog, that's it.
 
Hydroman said:
This is probably the reason for the aft NLG door. On the B-2, you can clearly see the crew entry door on left side. It looks like during the NLG retraction sequence, NLG up, front door close (front door may be mechanically linked to the NLG) then aft door close. Also if you notice and zoom in on the MLG, the door is linked to the MLG, seems not to be hydraulically sequenced like the B-2. I assume the cockpit is smaller as well, I had plenty of room (due to the 3rd man area not being used) in the B-2 and I am 6'4".
Click to expand...
As an aircraft mechanic, if you can rig up a mechanical linkage instead of fussing with hydraulic sequencers, DO IT!!!
 
Scott Kenny said:
As an aircraft mechanic, if you can rig up a mechanical linkage instead of fussing with hydraulic sequencers, DO IT!!!
Click to expand...
I agree, when I was on the program during the original flight test program, I had all hydraulics and everything actuated on the aircraft including the FCAS actuators. When I got out to the CTF in late 1991, I had to re-write the LG retest document. I agree, when possible, keep it simple.
 
Speaking of landing gear, look at all the moving parts (monkey-motion) in the MLG photos. Some aspiring ME must have worked up the B-58 for his/her practicum...
 
The photos provide remarkably detailed resolution. Does anyone have thoughts on how this first test article compares to the first B-2 as it relates to fit and finish?

Does this look like an airframe production ready?
 
NeilChapman said:
The photos provide remarkably detailed resolution. Does anyone have thoughts on how this first test article compares to the first B-2 as it relates to fit and finish?

Does this look like an airframe production ready?
Click to expand...
If you can see the screw heads from a thousand feet away after enhancement, it's not up to full stealth finish yet. Probably close, but My guess is that they didn't go OCD on the surface finish around the panels just for basic flight tests.
 
There is a lot of hand made surface finish. Look at the junction b/w leading edge and wing box for example. I am not sur they would build 200 like this.

Notice also that the airplane is climbing and outboard elevons are still up: this mean that, at least during takeoff, the plane is noze heavy and forward centered.
 
You won't have sub doors on weapons bays doors, so if there are defensive weapons bays only forward part is movable meaning something shorter than amraams. Or @NCQ and @Hydroman are right - ECS stuff etc. well, there are still many of doors on B-2 that a few know made what for (DMS antennas, PAS aperture, etc)
 
Last edited:
I think we can safely call those 2x2 bays defense-offence bays. The aft one are very similar to the F-35 arrangement.

It seems there is also a panel covering a turret that slide down on the left side (right on the picture). I am guessing that it has somewhat the same arrangement as the wing light but for something bigger like a dircim or more.
 
I can't connect the views from the side, front and top to each other yet. Probably all the hatches of the lower part of the fuselage will be moved forward
 

Attachments

  • b21_02.JPG
    b21_02.JPG
    389.1 KB · Views: 219
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
If you can see the screw heads from a thousand feet away after enhancement, it's not up to full stealth finish yet. Probably close, but My guess is that they didn't go OCD on the surface finish around the panels just for basic flight tests.
Click to expand...

That would be a risk reduction.
 
flateric said:
You won't have sub doors on weapons bays doors, so if there are defensive weapons bays only forward part is movable meaning something shorter than amraams. Or @NCQ and @Hydroman are right - ECS stuff etc. well, there are still many of doors on B-2 that a few know made what for (DMS antennas, PAS aperture, etc)
Click to expand...
It is a bit disappointment, that the B-21 only has one weapon bay:(
 
sferrin said:
No more modern than when the B-2 or B-1B came into service. Cruise missiles are the same size. Bombs are the same size. And a B-21 will never be able to do this:
Click to expand...
Yes, but 2x B-21 will be able to, while being more survivable, upgradable and not burning a hole in the pocket.
 
While the B-21 will not be able to drop the GBU-57 bomb sferrin, there may well be a successor bunker busting bomb in the works that will fit inside the B-21.
 
For the sake of discussion - what if this side bays are in fact direct energy weapons bays?
 
FighterJock said:
While the B-21 will not be able to drop the GBU-57 bomb sferrin, there may well be a successor bunker busting bomb in the works that will fit inside the B-21.
Click to expand...
How do you surmise it wont be able to carry 1x Gbu-57 if the weapon bay is identical in characterisitcs to the twins on B-2?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Peregrines?

Those are pretty impressive, half the size of an AMRAAM and allegedly the same range and performance. IIRC there's no warhead, so all that space isn't needed, and they're using a slightly more energetic fuel.



The shadows on the underside of the wing are very interesting indeed. Looks like the sharp edge curls over like a cornice and the bottom of the wing bellies out.
Click to expand...
Remember this photo from a few days ago?
Enlarge it and look at the underside of the leading edge... there is a slight curl.

B21-Raider-1-scaled.jpg
 
BLACK_MAMBA said:
Scott Kenny said:
BLACK_MAMBA said:
Such an large aircraft in the A2A role seems very strange. Perhaps as a missile truck in conjunction with NGAD/F-35? You only need the big bay for that, not secondary smaller bays. In the bombing role you would want to get in and out undetected and shooting your way in and out amoungst enemy aircraft is not the way to do it. Come in above enemy fighters from an unlikely direction is.
Even in the SEAD role it seems far too big and unmanuverable and again, shooting your way into a target hardly seems stealthy.

Either the USAF has gone mad in wanting an A2A role in such a huge aircraft, or we simply have no idea why those bays exist. My money is on the latter.
Click to expand...

A smaller bay with a smaller door can have a faster open/launch/close cycle, so less time for the radar to catch you with a large RCS. If that's the case with the doors on the B-21, I'd expect that they're for a couple of ARMs and any decoys or ALEs carried. AAMs are less likely, but possible, especially if Peregrines or CUDAs can intercept incoming AAMs as well as fighters.

There's a bit of a fun argument for a "Megafortress" type mission for the B-21, having one bird in the flight that is dedicated to SEAD/DEAD and loaded with AAMs and ARMs.

There's also the original reasoning for Bomber Defense Missiles as being able to intercept SAMs and AAMs.

.....

Remember that the A-12's design brief had space for 2x AMRAAMs, 2x HARMs, and 2x 2000lb bombs, so there's definitely precedence for stealth attack/bombers having A2A capabilities.
Click to expand...

The A-12 would fit the bill for an bomber that was manuverable enough to fight its way out if need so A2A weapons seem logical there.

Possible SAM interception weapons I do get.
Click to expand...

In Desert Storm A-6Es on a strike mission often carried a HARM in addition to A2G weapons.

On the first strike from Ranger the strike package had F-14s, EA-6Bs with HARMs, a pair of A-6Es with HARMS to back-up the EA-6Bs, and A-6Es with A2G weapons... and one Intruder in particular was carrying a pair of HARMs as well as its set of laser-guided bombs - because the pilot had noticed in his brief that there was a SA-2 site near his target that had not been accounted for by the SEAD birds.

On his run in the SA-2 radar lit up, so he launched the HARMs... and the radar went off right when the HARMs were due to reach it. That radar never powered up again throughout the entire air war.
 
Scott Kenny said:
It's been pointed out that the "side bays" have visible screw heads around the perimeter so are more likely to be access panels than weapons bays. I'm just not sure what systems you'd need to put there that result in a door longer than the engine.
Click to expand...
I've blown the enhanced pic up (as well as others), and all I can say for sure is that there are irregularities around the edges of ALL the panels - including the main bay doors!

Also, it looks like what is between the main bay and the engine doors is two separate panels on each side - with a diagonal meeting point. The rear panels also each have a smaller panel inset - which are different from each other.


B-21 belly enhanced.jpg
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
There is a lot of hand made surface finish. Look at the junction b/w leading edge and wing box for example. I am not sur they would build 200 like this.

Notice also that the airplane is climbing and outboard elevons are still up: this mean that, at least during takeoff, the plane is noze heavy and forward centered.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. The outside elevons are up and the ones inboard are down to control yaw. The B-21 like the B-2 is most likely neutrally stable.
 
BlackBat242 said:
I've blown the enhanced pic up (as well as others), and all I can say for sure is that there are irregularities around the edges of ALL the panels - including the main bay doors!

Also, it looks like what is between the main bay and the engine doors is two separate panels on each side - with a diagonal meeting point. The rear panels also each have a smaller panel inset - which are different from each other.


View attachment 711521
Click to expand...
Yes, the "sub weapons bay" doors are split diagonally. I believe they have fasteners on both front and rear sections, and are access bays, while the irregularities on the weapons bay edge are JPG artifacting, but its hard to tell without higher resolution images.
 
FighterJock said:
While the B-21 will not be able to drop the GBU-57 bomb sferrin, there may well be a successor bunker busting bomb in the works that will fit inside the B-21.
Click to expand...
I think B-21 should be able to drop one of them. There is only one bay, but it looks to be longer than the one on B-2, the largest possible single weapon is larger for B-21.
 
Northrop bland press release on 10th November:

news.northropgrumman.com

What You Need to Know About Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider

Benefitting from more than three decades of strike and stealth technology innovation, the B-21 is the next evolution of the U.S. Air Force strategic bomber fleet and the world’s first sixth-generation aircraft to reach the skies. When it comes to...
news.northropgrumman.com news.northropgrumman.com
 
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out already, but just to corroborate once more that the larger panels inboard of the landing gear are (in all likelihood) for access to the engines, the smaller panels on them have both the exact same orientation rather than being mirrored with regards to each other. I.e., since there isn't a left and right version of the engines, those panels need to be in the same position relative to the engine above them.
I've highlighted in red the areas I'm talking about:
B-21-eng.jpg
 
May be fast access to accessory gearbox that excludes need to open whole door and care of larger perimeter LO threatment thereafter. I don't see any signs of blade seals used on B-2 here as well. But who knows...
 
sferrin said:
No more modern than when the B-2 or B-1B came into service. Cruise missiles are the same size. Bombs are the same size. And a B-21 will never be able to do this:


or this:

Click to expand...
The SDB I/II would be more compact weapons than what the B-2 is known to carry. Given the narrow diameter and shorter length compared to even Mk82 I would expect ~100 could be carried on a specialized rack.

I haven’t seen any guesstimates of the size of the bomb bay, but I would expect a B-2 sized configuration. So half a B-2 load more or less.
 
sferrin said:
No more modern than when the B-2 or B-1B came into service. Cruise missiles are the same size. Bombs are the same size. And a B-21 will never be able to do this:


or this:

Click to expand...
Why wouldn't a B-21 be able to drop a GBU-57? I'll bet good money that center bay is at least the same volume as one of the B-2 bays, if not as long as the B-52's bay so it can carry ALCM-sized things internally. 28ft long and 6 ft wide.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Why wouldn't a B-21 be able to drop a GBU-57? I'll bet good money that center bay is at least the same volume as one of the B-2 bays, if not as long as the B-52's bay so it can carry ALCM-sized things internally. 28ft long and 6 ft wide.
Click to expand...

The USAF once gave a warload figure of 30,000 lbs, and we know that LRSO integration is planned. I suspect GBU-57 was a requirement for B-2 retirement.
 
Last edited:
There is also the possibility that those are grid with some sort of see-through features (given it's a prototype?).
 
Forest Green said:
1699786822765.png
Click to expand...
Personally, simply because the idea sounds cool I'm going to imagine it as a stack of three expendable decoys.
And with a bit more seriousness wonder whether it is a retractable pod containing some manner of targeting, designating, or direct countermeasures, equipment.
 
CiTrus90 said:
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out already, but just to corroborate once more that the larger panels inboard of the landing gear are (in all likelihood) for access to the engines, the smaller panels on them have both the exact same orientation rather than being mirrored with regards to each other. I.e., since there isn't a left and right version of the engines, those panels need to be in the same position relative to the engine above them.
I've highlighted in red the areas I'm talking about:
View attachment 711527
Click to expand...
Gotta be able to perform maintenance. The 21 has a distributed hydro system (I would think 4000 psi), gotta be able to get to the pumps, filter modules, the AMADs, etc. The bays between the engine bays and main weapons bay are probably secondary bays for just about anything (weapons, decoys, etc) as most have stated. Remember, the B-2 has bays outboard of the MLGs. The 21 has a lot in common with the B-2, don't mess with success, just evolve it into something better, the B-2 was very advanced for its time and now has a sibling.
 
Does this mean that B-21 has one rotary launcher, for approximately half the payload capacity of B-2?
 
DrRansom said:
Does this mean that B-21 has one rotary launcher, for approximately half the payload capacity of B-2?
Click to expand...
That's what it looks like. Plus possible some small bays for interesting things like decoy missiles etc. So technically a bit more than half the capacity.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom