Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit

[kmrumble]

Ah, the rotary would stretch it out a lot. Was the CSRL ultimately adopted? I had thought so but seem to remember someone here correcting me that the rotary is actually B-2 specific.

As in every "common" program I ever worked on, they ended up going with something program specific. But, this occurred after I left the program at the end of 1984, so I couldn't tell you why it didn't work out.

 

[Hydroman]

Hopefully this is the right thread for this; there are a bewildering number of B-2 topics.

What drove the B-2s bomb bay requirements, specifically in length? The primary weapons were to be free fall bombs, with B83 being the largest/heaviest in inventory at 12 feet, 18 inches, 2400 lbs. I assume SRAM carriage was also envisioned (I assume SRAM was fully integrated). But the bay is much longer than necessary for either of those - did the USAF require a large enough bay for AGM-86 as a way of future proofing?

Yes, for AGM-86. SRAM II got the axe with SALT or START, can't remember. CALCM was slated for the aircraft. Plus there were plans for other payloads which I think were classified which drove bay size. TSSAM was only 14ft in length. The B-2 has big bays, lots of versatility for various payload types.

 

[NMaude]

SRAM II got the axe with SALT or START,

IIRC the SRAM II got cancelled as a result of the post-Cold War peace-dividend (Which turned out to be extremely shortsighted).

In regards to the B-2's initial bomb-bay specifications I wonder if any consideration had been given to carriage of the B53?

 

[Hydroman]

IIRC the SRAM II got cancelled as a result of the post-Cold War peace-dividend (Which turned out to be extremely shortsighted).

In regards to the B-2's initial bomb-bay specifications I wonder if any consideration had been given to carriage of the B53?

I am not sure about the B53. I know the B-1 can carry few more 500lb JDAMs on their bomb racks. The B-2 can carry 80 500lb JDAMs. A little story, in the mid-90s during flight test, we had an informal competition with the B-1 folks involving who could empty there bays the quickest when loaded with dummy 500lb shapes. For the B-2, the millisecond spread of releases, it looked like both our bays just dumped simultaneously, no hung stores, 80 500lb shapes.

The B-1, could not get close to our release rate and they had a hung store. The B-1 back then used squibs to release the weapons, the B-2 SBRA does not use squibs, don't know what the B-1 uses now, maybe still using squibs? Our B-2 SBRA are a nice linear design, very clean and seems to be easy to load. The B-1 has a clustered, crowded and staggered installation for their racks, hence greater potential for hung stores.

 

[Josh_TN]

IIRC the SRAM II got cancelled as a result of the post-Cold War peace-dividend (Which turned out to be extremely shortsighted).

In regards to the B-2's initial bomb-bay specifications I wonder if any consideration had been given to carriage of the B53?

It wasn’t short sighted since I am not sure SRAM survived until B-2 production.

To your lattter question I am going to guess no, given the retirement schedule of the weapon and the fact B83 was its replacement.

 

[Josh_TN]

I am not sure about the B53. I know the B-1 can carry few more 500lb JDAMs on their bomb racks. The B-2 can carry 80 500lb JDAMs. A little story, in the mid-90s during flight test, we had an informal competition with the B-1 folks involving who could empty there bays the quickest when loaded with dummy 500lb shapes. For the B-2, the millisecond spread of releases, it looked like both our bays just dumped simultaneously, no hung stores, 80 500lb shapes.

The B-1, could not get close to our release rate and they had a hung store. The B-1 back then used squibs to release the weapons, the B-2 SBRA does not use squibs, don't know what the B-1 uses now, maybe still using squibs? Our B-2 SBRA are a nice linear design, very clean and seems to be easy to load. The B-1 has a clustered, crowded and staggered installation for their racks, hence greater potential for hung stores.

Was the SRBA ever cleared for weapons outside mk82 variants?

 

[Hydroman]

Was the SRBA ever cleared for weapons outside mk82 variants?

I left NG and the CTF in 1996. I know it can carry quite a few SDBs don't know exactly how many. I think the RLA can carry quite a few SDBs with some adaptation. Honestly, I had not followed B-2 load outs in recent times.

 

[NMaude]

To your lattter question I am going to guess no, given the retirement schedule of the weapon and the fact B83 was its replacement.

The authorisation for the last 25 or so B53s wasn't issued till 2010 so I suspect it might've been possible on a contingency basis.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The authorisation for the last 25 or so B53s wasn't issued till 2010 so I suspect it might've been possible on a contingency basis.

Except that the last B53s were laydown weapons only. So the carrying aircraft would have to be down in the weeds as low as they can fly and then hoping that they could get clear of the blast radius.

 

[Josh_TN]

Except that the last B53s were laydown weapons only. So the carrying aircraft would have to be down in the weeds as low as they can fly and then hoping that they could get clear of the blast radius.

B-2 was redesigned to be able to physically do that, though I do not think it had the avionics to do so until much later or possibly ever.

 

[NMaude]

Except that the last B53s were laydown weapons only. So the carrying aircraft would have to be down in the weeds as low as they can fly and then hoping that they could get clear of the blast radius.

As far as I know the B-2s are capable of laydown deliveries.

 

[James1978]

It wasn’t short sighted since I am not sure SRAM survived until B-2 production.

AGM-69 SRAM ≠ AGM-131 SRAM II. They are two distinct systems.

I believe NMuade was referring to AGM-131 SRAM II cancellation (1991) as being shortsighted. Had the program proceeded, it seems likely it wold have been integrated on the B-2. And given the limited size of the fleet, a stand-off nuke would be nice to have instead of just gravity bombs.

The AGM-69 left service in 1993 due to safety concerns.

 

[Scott Kenny]

B-2 was redesigned to be able to physically do that, though I do not think it had the avionics to do so until much later or possibly ever.

It'd be exciting trying to fly that wing down in the weeds fast enough to not get your tail feathers singed by 10MT of boom. Or hoping your target set has a mountain you can hide behind.

Not to mention that carrying B53 would mean one per bay (I don't think that B-2 bomb bay is long enough to carry 2 in tandem), while B83s fit 8 weapons just fine on the rotary racks. Do you want to plan a mission with 2 bombs or 16?

 

[NMaude]

I believe NMuade was referring to AGM-131 SRAM II cancellation (1991) as being shortsighted.

I was referring to the SRAM II.

The AGM-69 left service in 1993 due to safety concerns.

Ironically in the late 1970s there was a replacement for the AGM-69A and that was the AGM-69B SRAM B but it was cancelled.

 

[jeffb]

Not sure if this should go here or in the Iran War thread.

B-2 Spirits Heading To Iran Appear With Puzzling Features On Their Wings

New images of B-2s heading out on an Epic Fury sortie show two jets with prominent squares arranged along their leading edges.

www.twz.com

 

[quellish]

Not sure if this should go here or in the Iran War thread.

B-2 Spirits Heading To Iran Appear With Puzzling Features On Their Wings

New images of B-2s heading out on an Epic Fury sortie show two jets with prominent squares arranged along their leading edges.

www.twz.com

Like so many things... we just don’t know what we are looking at.

The most accurate line ever written by TWZ, ever.