Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

y-v-r said:
B53 is retired.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that but apparently about 50 W53 physics-packages are in active retirement for planetary defence.

y-v-r said:
But the Biden Admin announced the retirement of the B83 in 2022, to be replaced by the B61-13.
Click to expand...

I won't be surprised at all if the Chump regime has quietly reversed that order.
 
Last edited:
SOURCES SOUGHT NOTICE For B21 Low Observable/Radio Frequency Hanger at Dyess Air Force Base, TX

Sam Acquisition 360

sam.gov sam.gov

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Fort Worth District has been tasked to solicit for and award a new 95,529 SF Low Observable Corrosion Control Hangar and a Radio Frequency Facility for the new B-21 weapons system. The hangar includes a steel frame, masonry walls, metal roof, secure spaces, and cybersecurity measures. The RF facility will have a reinforced concrete foundation, steel frame, metal roof, and powered hangar doors. Both will include fire protection, climate control, backup power, and RF shielding. Additional work includes a metal storage building, fenced staging area, and concrete pad for fuel tank storage. Site preparation covers clearing, grading, demolition of five buildings, utility rerouting, and roadways/parking improvements. New utilities will be provided, including power, water, gas, sewer, and fiber optics. Temporary facilities will be provided for displaced B4111 occupants. All work will meet DoD standards for security, anti-terrorism, and cybersecurity.
Click to expand...
 
JoshuaH said:
Couldn't find the actual paper, here are some excerpts on Chinese social media:

I think the news reporters completely missed the point... This is a paper describing an optimization software package that can optimize aerodynamics and RCS together. They do not know the actual 3D geometries of the B-21, so they casually drew a "B-21-type layout" and tried to optimize it. Since the starting point is not a real design but something they drew up for comparison, of course the software-optimized version got better aerodynamic performance and RCS characteristics...
Click to expand...
They also have calculated X-47B frontal RCS as 12 sq.m. and improved it to less than 1 sq.m. Fantastic raw data always give fantastic results.
 
JoshuaH said:
I think the news reporters completely missed the point... This is a paper describing an optimization software package that can optimize aerodynamics and RCS together. They do not know the actual 3D geometries of the B-21, so they casually drew a "B-21-type layout" and tried to optimize it. Since the starting point is not a real design but something they drew up for comparison, of course the software-optimized version got better aerodynamic performance and RCS characteristics...
Click to expand...
We’ve been through this…
 
Yeah, we've seen this from public papers which are literally posted here quite a while ago. In fact, most if not all of the "leaks" are from public research papers that you can download from CNKI or whichever journal they published it for free (If you have an affiliated account to a subscriber institution) or for a fee.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Attachments

  • Something different for Fuel Friday. A cross section of refueling events in the MOA. TGIF all....jpg
    Something different for Fuel Friday. A cross section of refueling events in the MOA. TGIF all....jpg
    15.6 KB · Views: 118
  • Something different for Fuel Friday. A cross section of refueling events in the MOA. TGIF all....jpg
    Something different for Fuel Friday. A cross section of refueling events in the MOA. TGIF all....jpg
    89 KB · Views: 126
Tomboy said:
Yeah, we've seen this from public papers which are literally posted here quite a while ago. In fact, most if not all of the "leaks" are from public research papers that you can download from CNKI or whichever journal they published it for free (If you have an affiliated account to a subscriber institution) or for a fee.
Click to expand...

Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica​


article now removed from preprint section, causing Much Ado About Nothing
 
Last edited:
Sferrin said:
But they need people to build them. This ain't China. (Schools have not been kind to the younger generations in the US.)
Click to expand...
. 20 Chinese per 1 US engineer. graduate each year Some mad ratio like that

Raiders could only be justified as ISR if they carry a larger radar than they already do. Raiders are to be stealth. Hard to accomplish stealth w huge emitter.
 
jsport said:
TB never saw svc though.
Click to expand...
But it was stealthy while operating the same radar as went into JSTARS.

Reason it never saw service is that the deployment plan needed some 587 sight-sensitive airframes, and the entire system was so classified that nobody on the US side could know where the data came from.

Now, however, it would be no problem to have such a thing. Stealth is known now, so the airframes wouldn't be sight-sensitive. Nor would the knowledge of where the data was coming from be a problem, because the US has been operating MALE/HALE ISR drones for decades now, nevermind using JSTARS for nearly 40.
 
Scott Kenny said:
But it was stealthy while operating the same radar as went into JSTARS.

Reason it never saw service is that the deployment plan needed some 587 sight-sensitive airframes, and the entire system was so classified that nobody on the US side could know where the data came from.

Now, however, it would be no problem to have such a thing. Stealth is known now, so the airframes wouldn't be sight-sensitive. Nor would the knowledge of where the data was coming from be a problem, because the US has been operating MALE/HALE ISR drones for decades now, nevermind using JSTARS for nearly 40.
Click to expand...
A GS-700 (HADES) is enough for Army...and they matter most;)
 
jsport said:
A GS-700 (HADES) is enough for Army...and they matter most;)
Click to expand...
Those are a little obvious on radar. And are easily targetable as such if we're talking about operating over the equivalent of Ukraine today.

I'm assuming that the ME-11B fleet will be replaced or supplemented by unmanned aircraft.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Those are a little obvious on radar. And are easily targetable as such if we're talking about operating over the equivalent of Ukraine today.

I'm assuming that the ME-11B fleet will be replaced or supplemented by unmanned aircraft.
Click to expand...
The Army needs analysis on board close the FLOT but away from enemy AD. HADES is new.. GH can do standoff radar deep.
 
jsport said:
. 20 Chinese per 1 US engineer. graduate each year Some mad ratio like that

Raiders could only be justified as ISR if they carry a larger radar than they already do. Raiders are to be stealth. Hard to accomplish stealth w huge emitter.
Click to expand...
LPI. The B-2 has TWO big AESAs. One on each side.
 

Attachments

  • 1775961562629.png
    1775961562629.png
    2.2 MB · Views: 192
jsport said:
The Army needs analysis on board close the FLOT but away from enemy AD. HADES is new.. GH can do standoff radar deep.
Click to expand...
No, the Army needs analysis wherever the data is downlinked to. Likely Division HQ.

And do you think that it's anything resembling safe**, for a freaking business jet to be flying within 100-200nmi of the FLOT?

** edit: for military values of safe, at that!
 
Last edited:
Sferrin said:
LPI. The B-2 has TWO big AESAs. One on each side.
Click to expand...
Yes, aware LPD/LPI is a thing for the raider and B-2. Every bomber a all weather hunter, however some surveillance dwell from a JSTARs, Tacit.. is called for in the dispersed, small unit action/maneuver future.
 
Scott Kenny said:
No, the Army needs analysis wherever the data is downlinked to. Likely Division HQ.

And do you think that it's anything resembling safe**, for a freaking business jet to be flying within 100-200nmi of the FLOT?

** edit: for military values of safe, at that!
Click to expand...
Surprised, someone as super savvy as you would advocate for often fraught downlinks Of course links r always being improved but FPV, ha, will always be preferred for surveillance from standoff.
..hopes DE defense pods will soon be on the offing so even biz jets (low density assets) will warned & safe.
 
jsport said:
Surprised, someone as super savvy as you would advocate for often fraught downlinks Of course links r always being improved but FPV, ha, will always be preferred for surveillance from standoff.
Click to expand...
You still need a downlink on the bizjet to tell the other grunts where to shoot.


jsport said:
..hopes DE defense pods will soon be on the offing so even biz jets (low density assets) will warned & safe.
Click to expand...
You will need a lot more power generation to stick a 50kW laser pod on a plane. ~150kW total extra to get 50kW out of the laser.
 
The Bizet solution obviously implies a fight against a non peer opponent. For the U.S. Army, there are only 1-2 countries that are outside that target set.
 
Scott Kenny said:
We should be planning on the fight against a peer, not the idiots.

Which means stealthy drones.
Click to expand...

I cannot see the Army having a major role in a war with the PRC and really no one else is a peer. The USAF has a fifth gen fighter for every combat aircraft the VKS has in total.
 
Josh_TN said:
I cannot see the Army having a major role in a war with the PRC and really no one else is a peer. The USAF has a fifth gen fighter for every combat aircraft the VKS has in total.
Click to expand...
HIMARs, Typhon, Dark Eagle, LR effects, USASOC, deep sensing, OWA drones, air defense, EW. Its a multi-domain battle, everyone plays a part
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2282.jpeg
    IMG_2282.jpeg
    374.4 KB · Views: 101
  • IMG_2281.jpeg
    IMG_2281.jpeg
    279.7 KB · Views: 65
  • IMG_2284.jpeg
    IMG_2284.jpeg
    12.8 KB · Views: 53
  • IMG_2285.jpeg
    IMG_2285.jpeg
    15.3 KB · Views: 56
  • IMG_2286.jpeg
    IMG_2286.jpeg
    21.3 KB · Views: 61
  • IMG_2287.jpeg
    IMG_2287.jpeg
    24.4 KB · Views: 63
  • IMG_2288.jpeg
    IMG_2288.jpeg
    15.1 KB · Views: 59
  • IMG_2289.jpeg
    IMG_2289.jpeg
    11.7 KB · Views: 54
Last edited:
raptor82 said:
Click to expand...

No exhaust "trough" or coating is surprising. I wonder how often they need to clean the surfaces, since they are light grey.

I would guess they chose this image because it does not give away more about the intakes than it needs to, thanks to the sun being overhead. DSI-like bump from original photos in 2022 can be seen, now with a little more definition. There is definitely some degree of lateral curvature in the ducts, especially when we look at the alignment of the aux. intakes and the exhaust. Super cool stuff! Screenshot 2026-04-15 000714.png

P.S. - Does anyone know what kind of AAR that is? Assuming it is unique to the aircraft.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom