- Joined
- 6 August 2007
- Messages
- 3,292
- Reaction score
- 3,295
I am still kind of surprised that no one has written a story about the $77.13m military construction contract that was awarded as part of the original LRS-B award in 2015.
Towed decoys? Who knows...edit: likely some of these panels View attachment 728708
You don't understand the mission requirements. It has stealthy Chaff and low observable Flares.Chaff and Flares for the B-21? The B-2 never had either Chaff or Flares to defend itself instead it relied on pure Stealth. So I would think the same would be true for the B-21.
Do tell.I am still kind of surprised that no one has written a story about the $77.13m military construction contract that was awarded as part of the original LRS-B award in 2015.
that third picture was taken so carefully with that intake hiding perfectly under the wing.
Picture is a little deceptive about the angle of attack, I think...
I'm expecting a bit of Frankensteining happening. Like an F135 core with F101 or F118 fans on it, no afterburners. I don't believe it's running high bypass civilian fans, the engine bay doors aren't wide enough compared to their length.Really curious to find out what engines it's using.
The angle of the nose pitot/static source disagrees.Oh another thing Smythers was wrong about, it doesn't fly nose up.
That looks like it’s straight out of a fifties scifi film.
The angle seems to be similar to the B-2 for landing but for a flying wing, you have to fly the aircraft to the ground which means forward stick and don't try to flair, you'll just float down the runway in ground effect. I found that out the times I was in the flight simulator at Pico. I tried landing during one sim session with one of our excellent test pilots at the time, the late Kent Crenshaw and Kent told me to flair the aircraft, nope, just floated in ground effect.Oh another thing Smythers was wrong about, it doesn't fly nose up.
So... 800 million in todays dollars?
791, but close enough.So... 800 million in todays dollars?
Interesting to note that the artists' rendering looks just about identical to the Cerberus in terms of the visible structure of the aircraft...
looks like they made the side windows a LOT smaller between the time the render was released in June of 2021 and the rollout in December 2022!
View attachment 729921
View attachment 729919
I agree, it is 1:1 other than the window and markings. My guess is that they had a 3D model that was used for some digital testing or flight simulation, and just decided they they could render it without showing anything sensitive! (unlike the other 3d render they released that was black and had b-2 style windows and no modeled exhaust)You have to hand it too them; their render was totally accurate. They didn’t try to mislead at all, although obviously that angle does not reveal a lot.
Surprised we haven't seen #2 yet.So...any thoughts on how long until we see 2 - 6? It's been 18 months since the rollout and >8 months since ground testing began.
Well technically I think we would see #3; #2 I believe is a ground test item with next four being EMD aircraft.Surprised we haven't seen #2 yet.
Fair point, I was referring to the second aircraft for flight testing.Well technically I think we would see #3; #2 I believe is a ground test item with next four being EMD aircraft.
Uhhh...censorship or have we swapped something?
View attachment 730492