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

[Richard N]

So "Raider" is the B-21's official name.

What is the name pilots and crews will give it?

 

[sferrin]

So "Raider" is the B-21's official name.

What is the name pilots and crews will give it?

TBD. What do they call the B-2? ???

 

[Flyaway]

The Raider? Oh well I'm sure aviation-minded Raiders fans will love that! I thought maybe they'd go with Le May or maybe something like Spectre.

Still, it's not a bad name. Lol

First thing that came to mind:

LOL, me too. ;D

Rather apt considering it will at some point likely be operating unmanned.

 

[BillRo]

The original Northrop Raider!

 

[Flyaway]

So now we know what it looks like. ;D

 

[FighterJock]

The original Northrop Raider!

Rather spooky. I think that whoever came up with Raider for the B-21 obviously did not know about it's ancestor. :

Why not rename this tread the Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider thread? Since the B-21 now has a name.

 

[Moose]

So "Raider" is the B-21's official name.

What is the name pilots and crews will give it?

TBD. What do they call the B-2? ???

Boomerang.

 

[Dragon029]

Also for those that missed the livestream; here's an excerpt of the announcement from Northrop's YouTube channel:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I41TbUyS57s

 

[marauder2048]

The advantage is that squadron ware is COTS.

 

[bobbymike]

I get choked up when I see the aged warriors who saved us from the two greatest man made terrors in human history, fascism and communism.

Stooped and frail needing a cane to walk yet inside each is a courage I could not begin to fathom. God bless every one of them who fought and died for my freedom words can never express my gratitude to their sacrifice.

 

[sferrin]

I get choked up when I see the aged warriors who saved us from the two greatest man made terrors in human history, fascism and communism.

Stooped and frail needing a cane to walk yet inside each is a courage I could not begin to fathom. God bless every one of them who fought and died for my freedom words can never express my gratitude to their sacrifice.

x2. A shame such recognition all too often gets met with scorn, ridicule, and ignorance.

 

[RAP]

As a member of the Raider Nation, I like it. Like the song goes: The Autumn Wind is a Raider. That should be playing when they roll it out.

 

[Dreamfighter]

What is the name pilots and crews will give it?

"Raidiator"

 

[UpForce]

First thing that came to mind:

That was my first association too.

Not entirely inappropriate either, as the Raider will have the UAV option as well - and just like those pesky Cylons they will presumably have some sort of a deep learning/AI capability wherein they can share and benefit from all their experiences as one. Upload their souls to the "cloudship" in a sense and be resurrected smarter and more capable each time.

Adapting on the fly. So yeah, "Raider" seems most curiously Sci-Fi relevant indeed.

 

[aim9xray]

As a member of the Raider Nation, I like it.

"Just bomb it, baby!"

 

[Richard N]

What else would you call a B-21 flown by an AI?

We created them to serve us!

 

[bobbymike]

More Than 100 B-21s

John A.Tirpak

9/20/2016

​Although Air Force requirements since 2010 have called for “80-100” B-21s, the actual number will most likely be more than that, Air Force Global Strike Command chief Gen. Robin Rand said at ASC16. During a panel discussion about the B-21—newly dubbed the “Raider”—Rand said there is “an Air Force analysis going on about what should be the number” of bombers in the 2030-2050 timeframe, which overlaps the first half of the B-21’s expected service. Though “we won’t set the official number” for some time to come, Rand said “I can’t imagine we would have one less bomber” in the mix during that period, because the existing fleet of about 160 B-52s, B-1s and B-2s is “fully gainfully employed” in the conventional as well as the nuclear mission, more missions are being added all the time and aircrews are “pedaling fast” to keep up. In a press conference later, Rand said GSC has developed its “bomber vector,” or roadmap and submitted it to Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein. ​

 

[Flyaway]

NATIONAL HARBOR: The Air Force’s new bomber, the B-21 Raider, should come in almost $40 million below the official $550 million a copy official estimate, says Randall Walden, director of the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office. So, $511 million is the new $550 million.

Walden also made clear the Air Force will probably pursue a deep penetrating fighter to accompany the bomber to heavily defended targets deep inside a country. He didn’t say it but my understanding is war games have shown the B-21 is incapable of making it to western China to destroy the missile and artillery units there.

The aircraft concept is called Penetrating Counter-Air (PCA). The program, I understand is called PCAP.

B-21 Bomber Estimate By CAPE: $511M A Copy - Breaking Defense

CORRECTED: Attribution of Air Force Buying New Advanced Fighter NATIONAL HARBOR: The Air Force’s new bomber, the B-21 Raider, should come in almost $40 million below the official $550 million a copy official estimate, says Randall Walden, director of the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office...

breakingdefense.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

A penetrating bomber that is incapable of penetration. Par for the course in the current era. [sigh]

 

[TomS]

Bombers that need help penetrating heavily defended airspace. Clearly a modern problem.

 

[Grey Havoc]

On the other hand, penetrating bombers are, by their very definition, supposed to be able to invade enemy airspace without such support.

 

[TomS]

On the other hand, penetrating bombers are, by their very definition, supposed to be able to invade enemy airspace without such support.

Arguably, but they're talking about the most demanding future threat environment around. Seems reasonable that you might expect to need a combined strike package to crack it.

 

[thefrecklepuny]

B-21 Persuader would have had a nice ring to it.

 

[sferrin]

B-21 Persuader would have had a nice ring to it.

B-21 Nuance would have been even better.

 

[marauder2048]

A penetrating bomber that is incapable of penetration. Par for the course in the current era. [sigh]

On the other hand, penetrating bombers are, by their very definition, supposed to be able to invade enemy airspace without such support.

Which is why the *penetrating* XB-70 was to have fighter escort provided by the XF-108?

 

[marauder2048]

On the other hand, penetrating bombers are, by their very definition, supposed to be able to invade enemy airspace without such support.

Arguably, but they're talking about the most demanding future threat environment around. Seems reasonable that you might expect to need a combined strike package to crack it.

Even a decade ago, the Air Force was talking about the possibility that the next generation penetrating bomber might need fighter escort depending on the scenario.

I would think the bigger issue for Western China is how to egress without:

1. Flying back through the defenses you just evaded
2. Overflying other nuclear powers
3. Overflying neutrals

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2303

As for the number of aircraft, Rand said there is no final decision yet, but he favors 100 bombers, which he considers a minimum. He bases that on current demands on the bomber force and force projections 15 to 30 years in the future. There are 158 bombers in the inventory now, he noted.

"I can't for the life of me imagine that our United States Air Force and our nation can have one less bomber than it currently has today," he added.

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2303

As for the number of aircraft, Rand said there is no final decision yet, but he favors 100 bombers, which he considers a minimum. He bases that on current demands on the bomber force and force projections 15 to 30 years in the future. There are 158 bombers in the inventory now, he noted.

"I can't for the life of me imagine that our United States Air Force and our nation can have one less bomber than it currently has today," he added.

Alas, I fear that he is doomed to disappointment.

A penetrating bomber that is incapable of penetration. Par for the course in the current era. [sigh]

On the other hand, penetrating bombers are, by their very definition, supposed to be able to invade enemy airspace without such support.

Which is why the *penetrating* XB-70 was to have fighter escort provided by the XF-108?

That was strictly an unsolicited proposal by North American to garner even more orders for the F-108 order book. The Air Force shoot it down (pun intended), pointing out quite reasonably that the B-70 wouldn't need an escort, as NA was already quite aware.

 

[Dynoman]

The stealthy LRSO (2000-3000 mile range with planned deployment of 1,000 weapons by 2026) is the planned work-around for a long range denied area target from what I understand. The B-21 would approach by stealth to a point just outside of the target country's defenses, launch stealthy LRSO's, and exit the area. Evasion of anti-aircraft maybe nullified by the B-21's range and stealth.

For conventional penetration missions the effectiveness of enemy air defenses would have to be considered. Escorting special mission support aircraft (i.e. EW aircraft and fighters) would depend on the compliment and abilities of the enemy's AD's.

The general concern would be regarding how destabilizing a stealth bomber with stealth cruise missiles would be to nuclear reduction efforts. For generals and designers this isn't their concern. For policy makers and citizens it'll be a growing point of contention.

 

[sferrin]

Well, they better change their message and sell it that way then. Right now the missile and bomber are seen as independent, and the usual suspects are trying to get the missile cancelled at all costs.

 

[FighterJock]

Well, they better change their message and sell it that way then. Right now the missile and bomber are seen as independent, and the usual suspects are trying to get the missile cancelled at all costs.

I think that they should develop the bomber and the missile as part of the package not separate, thus they would not dare cancel both.

 

[marauder2048]

That was strictly an unsolicited proposal by North American to garner even more orders for the F-108 order book. The Air Force shoot it down (pun intended), pointing out quite reasonably that the B-70 wouldn't need an escort, as NA was already quite aware.

Nonsense. It was an integral part of NA's winning proposal for the WS 110A competition.

 

[Grey Havoc]

That was strictly an unsolicited proposal by North American to garner even more orders for the F-108 order book. The Air Force shoot it down (pun intended), pointing out quite reasonably that the B-70 wouldn't need an escort, as NA was already quite aware.

Nonsense. It was an integral part of NA's winning proposal for the WS 110A competition.

Not as far as the USAF were concerned. During the original LRI-X program, there was some official consideration given for the new interceptor to be able to double as an escort fighter. By the time the program was 'restructured' (May 1956 - April 1957) and the NA-257 (F-108) selected as WS-202A however, Strategic Air Command had begun phasing out it's Fighter Escort and Strategic Fighter Wings, as the next generation of bombers (CPB/NPB) were intended to be able to successfully penetrate enemy airspace and reach their targets without fighter cover. Existing bombers, in particular the B-52, were intended to remain viable in the interim with the development of various weapons (under the general Bomber Defense Missile initiative) and support systems such as the GAM-72 Quail and the (ground launched) MX-2223 [SM-73] Bull Goose.

EDIT: On the other hand, if you were talking about parts commonality and the like between the two programs to save on development and operating costs, you would be certainly on to something there.

 

[robunos]

The full list of names submitted for the B-21 Raider has been released...

Here's the List of 4,600 Names Submitted For the B-21, Including '9/11 Cover-up' and 'Lowest Bidder'

The Air Force’s latest high-tech bomber is officially called the B-21 Raider, but there were lots of options. The name was chosen from over 4,600 names submitted to the US Air Force earlier this year, and we now have the complete list of entries, including everything from “Americas Revenge” to...

gizmodo.com

cheers,
Robin.

 

[stealthflanker]

Basilisk looks cool :3

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Looks like we missed out on the opportunity for the B-21 "Princess Sparkle Pony", while Explodey McBombface has a certain ring to it.

 

[FighterJock]

Looks like we missed out on the opportunity for the B-21 "Princess Sparkle Pony", while Explodey McBombface has a certain ring to it.

Oh help! we had enough of that when they tried to name that ship and ended up with McBoaty McBoatface. Raider has a bit more power behind it and suits the B-21.

 

[CiTrus90]

I've been mulling over the idea of trying to make a 3d model of the B-21 based on the only available rendering of it, but since the first time I saw it, I was bugged by a detail.

Looking at the inlets, I can't help but notice they seem to sink into the upper surface of the wing, in a semi-submerged way, rather than sticking out of its surface like on the B-2, pretty much in a similar configuration as previously seen on the Northrop Grumman Sensorcraft:

Now, I know this just a placeholder rendering, but am I the only one seeing this?

 

[Ogami musashi]

No but as you said i think it is a placeholder, i think the badge that was shown before the official naming of the plane is actually more accurate.

 

[Flyaway]

CAPITOL HILL: The B-21 will be America’s next bomber and the Air Force says it will be “optionally manned.” That’s fine, say some of America’s most experienced B-2 pilots. Just keep the pilots. You’ll want them for those rare moments when everything goes wrong and a human being needs to take the controls and make some decisions.

Keep The Pilots For B-21: Former B-2 Fliers - Breaking Defense

CAPITOL HILL: The B-21 will be America’s next bomber and the Air Force says it will be “optionally manned.” That’s fine, say some of America’s most experienced B-2 pilots. Just keep the pilots. You’ll want them for those rare moments when everything goes wrong and a human being needs to take the...

breakingdefense.com