• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Northrop Grumman B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
318
Reaction score
122
I got the impression that production was going to be deliberately slow and drawn out...which might help keep the line open for additional buys. Two hundred sounds fanciful but then again if there’s a finalized design with a reasonable fly away cost, maybe that’s doable. Replacing the B-1 and B-2 would get rid of a lot of parts streams and maintenance costs.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,669
Reaction score
1,800
Problem with that is that I don't think they have the time left to stretch out production in that way.
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
318
Reaction score
122
Have they released any kind of schedule? I thought the production rate was to be rather slow, relatively speaking. I thought they'd be producing through the early 2030s.
 

In_A_Dream

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
168
Reaction score
59
Have they released any kind of schedule? I thought the production rate was to be rather slow, relatively speaking. I thought they'd be producing through the early 2030s.
With the recent increase in assertiveness by China and headlines about NGAD developments, I think things are going to pick up.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,773
Reaction score
271
Have they released any kind of schedule? I thought the production rate was to be rather slow, relatively speaking.
This is for a company that, for any type, produces at most a high single digit number of aircraft per year.
And they could very well be in a loss position on the first lot or two. So there's probably a desire
to be very gradual and ginger with the ramp.
 

haavarla

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
17
Reaction score
12
220? I honestly didn't expect that high and am doubtful it ever will.
I hope that the USAF stick to the 220 figure and do not cut the number.
What history has showed us.
You can take that prospect of planned total produced figure, then divide that by 2... then divide that by 2 again.
And by then we should be close to the reality.
 

Dagger

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Dec 24, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Note that that 220 figure is the total number of bombers, not the number of B-21's to be produced.
The planning is to build 100 B-21's.
The other 120 should then be existing B-52's, existing F-15E's, et cetera.
And I don't think they will actually retire the B-2's , and maybe not even all B-1's, espicially not if it turns out that the B-21 is going to be much more costly than planned (as is usually the case) and therefor less than 100 will be built.
 

Bhurki

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
78
Reaction score
47
220? I honestly didn't expect that high and am doubtful it ever will.
I hope that the USAF stick to the 220 figure and do not cut the number.
What history has showed us.
You can take that prospect of planned total produced figure, then divide that by 2... then divide that by 2 again.
And by then we should be close to the reality.
History now that is being referenced should be from 1970s era rather than 1990-2000 era since that is size of the threat thats emanating potentially from combined growth of military capabilities of peer adversaries.

As such, thinking the B21 program will go the way of B2 or F22 in terms of production cuts would be erring.

Unlike those programs, B21 isn't a program devoid of use cases to be applied to, rather, its a necessity to fulfill the gaps of capability that have formed in the last 20-30 years.
 

Josh_TN

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
318
Reaction score
122
Note that that 220 figure is the total number of bombers, not the number of B-21's to be produced.
The planning is to build 100 B-21's.
The other 120 should then be existing B-52's, existing F-15E's, et cetera.
And I don't think they will actually retire the B-2's , and maybe not even all B-1's, espicially not if it turns out that the B-21 is going to be much more costly than planned (as is usually the case) and therefor less than 100 will be built.
the B-1s are falling apart and the B-2s are bespoke airframes. It’s simply a question of which gets replaced first, not if.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,669
Reaction score
1,800

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,442
Reaction score
445
With respect to the current pacific situation. I think the contra temps will be sooner than any service introduction. Likely anyway.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,773
Reaction score
271
Open Source software / architecture has been more than a bit of a disappointment, not to mention that it is a security nightmare at the best of times. And these are far from the best of times.
Except it's not really open source (except for some of the containers for which there are decidedly closed source hardware isolation mechanism)

It's "open" in the sense that the government owns the data rights and the system integration labs.
 
Top