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

sferrin said:
zjz said:
I am amazed at how they keep the wing span and sweep angle the same for all three!
Click to expand...
Sweep angle is not the same. 27 degrees vs 33 for the B-2A.
Click to expand...
Just like wingspan - it's not the same (more than 172.00)

AND NOW JUST PLEASE STOP OFFTOPIC
 
Last edited:
X-39 said:

Northrop Grumman B-21 Unveiling May Answer Lingering Mysteries​

Steve Trimble November 14, 2022


Slightly more than 34 years after the rollout of the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit on Nov. 22, 1988, the U.S. Air Force plans to unveil the B-21 Raider to the public on Dec. 2.

The rollout from the company’s Site 4 complex within the Air Force’s Plant 42 in Palmdale, California, will provide the first glimpse of the physical aircraft since the launch of the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) program over a decade ago.

The aircraft revealed during the rollout may seem very familiar, however. While most program information is classified, a perhaps surprising amount of detail about the B-21 Raider’s design, performance and capabilities has entered the public domain since the Pentagon awarded the LRS-B contract to Northrop on Oct. 27, 2015.

The Air Force has released three renderings of the bomber since 2016, showing the aircraft as viewed from above and below on the right side and from a level aspect on the left side. By comparison, the service released only a single rendering of the B-2 before its 1988 rollout, revealing its flying-wing shape and distinctive, sawtooth trailing edge.

Although described as falling short of photographic accuracy, the renderings consistently show a flying-wing bomber resembling the B-2’s familiar design, with certain critical differences.

In comparison to the B-2, the released B-21 renderings appear to reveal:


  • Extended, high-aspect-ratio, outboard wing sections compared with the B-2, which may offer improved lift characteristics at high altitude.
  • A single W-shaped trailing edge, which appears simplified compared with the double-W, sawtooth shape of the B-2. The latter was added by Northrop late in the B-2’s design phase due to a change in Air Force requirements, which changed to include a low-altitude penetration capability.
  • Inboard-canted, wingtop engine inlets. Instead of the B-2’s longitudinally flush, aft-canted inlets, the B-21 appears to deliver airflow to the engines through deeply embedded inboard-canted inlets.
  • A three-pane windscreen, including a single, central pane flanked by two upward-sloping, rectangular side windows. By comparison, the B-2 uses four windscreen panels that wrap around the cockpit. Program officials explain that the B-21’s windscreen design will be easier to maintain and should offer better visibility to the pilots during inflight refueling.
  • A two-wheel main landing gear. In comparison with the four-wheel bogies on the B-2, the B-21’s half-size gear, if accurately depicted, may indicate a smaller overall aircraft.
Despite these apparent revelations, the renderings leave many other critical details secret. As the Air Force allows the public to view the bomber for the first time, close observers will be on the lookout for confirmation or clues about the following items:

[end of excerpt]
Click to expand...

Northrop Grumman B-21 Unveiling May Answer Lingering Mysteries | Aviation Week Network

The U.S. Air Force has released many details about the mostly classified program, but much about the new stealth bomber remains secret
aviationweek.com aviationweek.com
Click to expand...
Copying and pasting the entire article is essentially theft. Excerpting and linking is fine. Thanks for reading
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say B-21 has four-pieces windscreen, the center frame clearly seen on last rendering
taking into account that canopy windows are load bearing structures on B-2 (that caused/causes a zillion problems) I doubt B-21 would use single-piece windshield
 

Attachments

  • crop.jpg
    crop.jpg
    24.6 KB · Views: 193
Kat Tsun said:
Getting a plane about half the payload of B-2, yet identical to B-52, and similar range of B-2, probably with the ability to be stored in conventional hangars, is more or less enough of an advancement. It's also coming in quantity rather than a paltry 20 bombers.

It makes perfect sense as a replacement for B-52 for the nuclear delivery role.
Click to expand...

and when the last B-21 retires lol, then the Buff will still be soldiering on...

cheers
 
Except it won't?

If the B-21 doesn't reach the number of production needed, it's more likely the US simply won't have a bomber leg of the triad anymore, rather than soldier on with an old airplane, though. The reason for 100 B-21s minimum is obvious: that replaces the 76 B-52Hs and the 21 20 B-2s in the GSC's order of battle, with spares.

B-52 will be gone in 20 to 30 years and likely sooner than later, whether it wants to be or not. Even if it's still there on paper it may very well end up being hollowed out to pay for new aircraft. If the USAF has to, I suspect it will cut into B-52 operational squadrons, and kill the re-engine program (or at least heavily foot drag it, like the A-10 rewinging program), to pay for B-21 and bring their squadrons online. Shuffling funding around from A-10s or B-52s to fund JSF or B-21 is pretty trivial.

The new bomber just needs to make the hop from testing to production, which it seems to be doing rather better than B-2, which is sort of to be expected. If B-21 doesn't shake out at the end of the day, then I think the US simply won't have a bomber force in the future. It's not a terrible outcome. Both Britain and France lack strategic bombers and they do just fine as regional powers go, and America could yet go the same way in the future.

Submarines are more survivable and silos have better readiness rates, after all. With those two alone, America will still have a strategic ladder to climb to the top of its nuclear awning and shout into the escalation vortex, even if it's not a three-legged barstool to slap someone over the back with in the Thermonuclear Bar Brawl 20XX, or whatever overwrought analogy of the day is being used.
 
Last edited:
When all the senior citizens stop getting elected and actually new people show up, i.e. Senators who lack the emotional attachment to the old planes, said old planes will go away.

It happened to the Army's Hueys and Cobras it'll happen to B-52 and A-10 too.
 
Kat Tsun said:
When all the senior citizens stop getting elected and actually new people show up, i.e. Senators who lack the emotional attachment to the old planes, said old planes will go away.

It happened to the Army's Hueys and Cobras it'll happen to B-52 and A-10 too.
Click to expand...

The B-52 will eventually have to be replaced in the not too distant future, what it will be replaced with that is another matter entirely.
 
There are literally only two options: B-21 or nothing at all.

The only question is whether B-52J(?) will be retired with or without replacement. B-21 is currently winning the argument but that could change at the drop of a hat. It would be unfortunate for Global Strike Command if they found themselves bereft of bombers in the coming decades, I guess, but not insurmountable. They would still have the ICBMs and the Navy still has the Columbias. F-35 can also deliver pretty much every meaningful article of ordnance in inventory.
 
Last edited:
Kat Tsun said:
When all the senior citizens stop getting elected and actually new people show up, i.e. Senators who lack the emotional attachment to the old planes, said old planes will go away.

It happened to the Army's Hueys and Cobras it'll happen to B-52 and A-10 too.
Click to expand...

on a humerous note, I think there are plenty of us on here would like to see many a Senior Citizen lol :p

The last active us army Bell AH-1F/S retired 2000/1 timeframe with the 25th ID 25th Aviation at Wheeler AAF and the last national guard ones not so far off, after millenium. Last bit of action the Army Cobra fleet saw after Op Desert Storm was Restore Hope in Somalia and very very last was IFOR op in Bosnia.

The very last last army UH-1H was the other year....

cheers
 
FighterJock said:
Kat Tsun said:
When all the senior citizens stop getting elected and actually new people show up, i.e. Senators who lack the emotional attachment to the old planes, said old planes will go away.

It happened to the Army's Hueys and Cobras it'll happen to B-52 and A-10 too.
Click to expand...

The B-52 will eventually have to be replaced in the not too distant future, what it will be replaced with that is another matter entirely.
Click to expand...

Refurbishing and upgrading airframes is a boon for manufacturers. You will not see a change in voting behavior by Congress whilst the 'river of life' is flowing to reelection coffers.

Boeing, in particular, will be exceptionally motivated to maintain the 'good will' of the peoples representatives. They have an egregious program record.
 
NeilChapman said:
FighterJock said:
Kat Tsun said:
When all the senior citizens stop getting elected and actually new people show up, i.e. Senators who lack the emotional attachment to the old planes, said old planes will go away.

It happened to the Army's Hueys and Cobras it'll happen to B-52 and A-10 too.
Click to expand...

The B-52 will eventually have to be replaced in the not too distant future, what it will be replaced with that is another matter entirely.
Click to expand...

Refurbishing and upgrading airframes is a boon for manufacturers. You will not see a change in voting behavior by Congress whilst the 'river of life' is flowing to reelection coffers.

Boeing, in particular, will be exceptionally motivated to maintain the 'good will' of the peoples representatives. They have an egregious program record.
Click to expand...

Boeing isn't in charge of the direction America's new bomber forces go. It would require B-21 to suffer some yet unforeseen problem, like suddenly losing favor in the Congress due to JSF style program bloat or the PRC evaporating, to really be competitive. Neither are particularly realistic, as Congress isn't dumb, and it sees how useful B-21 is going to be in the future. It's also on track unlike pretty much every other modern aircraft the USAF has bothered to buy.

B-21 (along with the T-7) is shaping up to be the only reasonably successful acquisition of a new aircraft for the USAF in 30 years.
 
Program wise, the B-21 is off to a very good start. Some of the folks I used to work with at N/NGC (very few now) seem to still like working for the company. I think NGC going it alone on B-21 helps not having to worry about a teammate/partner (i.e. Boeing) and concentrate on the work at hand. Scaled may not be a large player in B-21 but they contributed early on and they are a great prototype shop. I am looking forward to next Friday (12.2.22), unfortunately, I do not live in the AV any longer.
 

The Land Down Under the sea: AUKUS is about submarines, not bombers​

by Andrew I. Park and Steven Wills, Opinion Contributors - 11/27/22 11:00 AM ET
Click to expand...
A recent article by Mitchell Center for Aerospace Studies expert Robert Haddick asserts that the Australian government should acquire the B-21 Raider strategic bomber, instead of the nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) planned under the AUKUS trilateral partnership agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Click to expand...
The argument, however, does not comport with the fundamentals of the AUKUS partnership and the platform requirements desired by Australia.
Click to expand...
As the Australian Defense Minister Richrad Marles explained, “For a three-ocean nation, the heart of deterrence is undersea capability.” While long-range strategic bombers are an important part of nuclear deterrence and conventional strike mission, they are not a stand-alone, independent replacement for a joint force.
Click to expand...
Most importantly, Australia is not a great power that maintains a doctrine of employing a long-range strategic bomber against an adversary. A bomber force would present more lifetime costs to the Australians than would a nuclear submarine force. Simply, acquiring the B-21 is not now in the interest of the Australian government.
Click to expand...
The U.S. Air Force B-21 Raider is not yet in full rate production, and the cost for 100 such aircraft for the Air Force has been estimated at $203 billion by the Congressional Research Service. Australia might buy, for example, one-third of that amount (30-plus aircraft) but would still face a lifetime cost of $67 billion in U.S. dollars.
Click to expand...
The B-21 is still a new platform and no doubt will have “teething” issues, but the Virginia and Astute-class SSNs are mature platforms in full rate production.
Australia is already buying the F-35A as a strike fighter asset and has defined its air defense envelope that acquisition will support. The B-21 does not fit that requirement. The B-21 was examined for Australian use but the nuclear submarine was still the first choice.
Click to expand...
Comparing the B-21 and the nuclear submarine option for AUKUS is like comparing apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
thehill.com

The Land Down Under the sea: AUKUS is about submarines, not bombers

A recent article by Mitchell Center for Aerospace Studies expert Robert Haddick asserts that the Australian government should acquire the B-21 Raider strategic bomber, instead of the nuclear-powere…
thehill.com thehill.com
 

Podcast: A Guide To The B-21 Rollout | Aviation Week Network

On Dec. 2, the U.S. Air Force and Northrop Grumman will roll out the service’s first new stealth bomber in more than three decades. Listen in as Aviation Week defense editors discuss what details they are hoping to see and what is likely to come next for the B-21 Raider.
aviationweek.com aviationweek.com
 
From the Aviation Week podcast, some estimated timing info. Sounds like the rollout proper will probably happen no earlier than ~1700 PST, which means 2000 EST and 0100 GMT on Saturday. Sorry to our European colleagues.

Brian Everstine:

They're being very particular about it'll be rolled out and how we're going to look at it, even the time of day. It's going to be rolled out after dusk on the West Coast.

Steve Trimble:

I've checked the time for sunsets, 4:42 PM in Palmdale on December 2nd. So the sun goes down at 4:42 PM. I think you're supposed to arrive around three o'clock for the ceremony.
Click to expand...
 
A black project black aircraft rolled out in the dark. How novel.

Don't worry about us Europeans, we'll read all about it right here over Saturday breakfast.

It's either going to be "WOW its greatest aircraft EVER" or "ugghh, just the B-2 again dude" or "it was too freakin' dark for me to measure the intake splitter plates to within 0.0000001 millimetres."
 
TomS said:
From the Aviation Week podcast, some estimated timing info. Sounds like the rollout proper will probably happen no earlier than ~1700 PST, which means 2000 EST and 0100 GMT on Saturday. Sorry to our European colleagues.

Brian Everstine:

They're being very particular about it'll be rolled out and how we're going to look at it, even the time of day. It's going to be rolled out after dusk on the West Coast.

Steve Trimble:

I've checked the time for sunsets, 4:42 PM in Palmdale on December 2nd. So the sun goes down at 4:42 PM. I think you're supposed to arrive around three o'clock for the ceremony.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

No worries TomS, it's going to be a lot different than the B-2 unveiling that is for sure.
 
TomS said:
From the Aviation Week podcast, some estimated timing info. Sounds like the rollout proper will probably happen no earlier than ~1700 PST, which means 2000 EST and 0100 GMT on Saturday. Sorry to our European colleagues.

Brian Everstine:

They're being very particular about it'll be rolled out and how we're going to look at it, even the time of day. It's going to be rolled out after dusk on the West Coast.

Steve Trimble:

I've checked the time for sunsets, 4:42 PM in Palmdale on December 2nd. So the sun goes down at 4:42 PM. I think you're supposed to arrive around three o'clock for the ceremony.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Bummer (I am in Belgium)…

Any idea why they do after sunset? (for certain details not to be exposed, I presume?)
 
Slicknick said:
TomS said:
From the Aviation Week podcast, some estimated timing info. Sounds like the rollout proper will probably happen no earlier than ~1700 PST, which means 2000 EST and 0100 GMT on Saturday. Sorry to our European colleagues.

Brian Everstine:

They're being very particular about it'll be rolled out and how we're going to look at it, even the time of day. It's going to be rolled out after dusk on the West Coast.

Steve Trimble:

I've checked the time for sunsets, 4:42 PM in Palmdale on December 2nd. So the sun goes down at 4:42 PM. I think you're supposed to arrive around three o'clock for the ceremony.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Bummer (I am in Belgium)…

Any idea why they do after sunset? (for certain details not to be exposed, I presume?)
Click to expand...

Basically, it means that only features they choose to illuminate will be visible.
 
news.northropgrumman.com

10 Facts About Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider

Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider will be unveiled Dec. 2 at the company’s site in Palmdale, Calif., marking the first time the world’s first sixth-generation aircraft will be seen by the public. When delivered to the Air Force...
news.northropgrumman.com news.northropgrumman.com
 
FighterJock said:
TomS said:
From the Aviation Week podcast, some estimated timing info. Sounds like the rollout proper will probably happen no earlier than ~1700 PST, which means 2000 EST and 0100 GMT on Saturday. Sorry to our European colleagues.

Brian Everstine:

They're being very particular about it'll be rolled out and how we're going to look at it, even the time of day. It's going to be rolled out after dusk on the West Coast.

Steve Trimble:

I've checked the time for sunsets, 4:42 PM in Palmdale on December 2nd. So the sun goes down at 4:42 PM. I think you're supposed to arrive around three o'clock for the ceremony.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

No worries TomS, it's going to be a lot different than the B-2 unveiling that is for sure.
Click to expand...

prob be held inside hangar with cover thrown off???

cheers
 
RavenOne said:

prob be held inside hangar with cover thrown off???

cheers
Click to expand...

If it was going to be indoors, they wouldn't care about twilight, I'd think.

Judging from the AW&ST podcast, there are going to be a bunch of aircraft there highlighting Northrop Grumman and Doolittle Raider history, not just the B-21.

Which will give a lot of reference objects to compare the B-21 against.
 
TomS said:
RavenOne said:

prob be held inside hangar with cover thrown off???

cheers
Click to expand...

If it was going to be indoors, they wouldn't care about twilight, I'd think.

Judging from the AW&ST podcast, there are going to be a bunch of aircraft there highlighting Northrop Grumman and Doolittle Raider history, not just the B-21.

Which will give a lot of reference objects to compare the B-21 against.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what the historic Northrop Grumman aircraft will be.
 
Since the B-21 probably shares configuration elements with the unmanned, so-called RQ-180 (or whatever the real designation is) this may be the reason for the twilight roll-out. Disclosure of the unmanned platform could be down the road, maybe?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom