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

Josh_TN said:
I've not heard of a MOP replacement but it wouldn't surprise me if one is being worked on. But new variants of the GBU-57 are still being produced and the B-21 design was frozen in 2018, so I'd be surprised if it wasn't included as part of the B-21 requirements and retained the capability, even if a replacement weapon is in development.

ETA: from just last year -

Click to expand...

Back around 2010, there was a Next-Generation Penetrator RFP for a weapon described as being about a third the size of MOP (so, ~9000 lbs) to fit in smaller, more affordable aircraft, including the LRS aircraft. But I can't tell what happened after that. By 2011, there was a focus on a High-Velocity Penetrating Weapon, a 2000-lb rocket-assisted weapon to match the GBU-28 for the F-35 Now we have the GBU-72, a 5000-lb GPS weapon.
 
If B-2 planform would be presented in Richardson's address...it would look like this.
 

Attachments

  • 1227069-default-L.jpg
    1227069-default-L.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 303
Circling back to our SDB-II/Stormbreaker discussion, I happened to find a reference to a large capacity loading of the B-2 as a future modernization goal in a white paper. Unfortunately no information is given whatsoever outside of the "192" (96 per bomb bay) number - it doesn't describe what rack system would be used or any other configuration considerations. Page 18 on the pdf in this link:

www.hsdl.org

Summary - Homeland Security Digital Library

Search over 250,000 publications and resources related to homeland security policy, strategy, and organizational management.
www.hsdl.org www.hsdl.org

I've read in several different places that SDB-I intragration was shelved due to a perceived redundancy with the SBA rack and anticipation of integration of SDB-II which would have much greater capability. I can't locate any items mentioning such a capability being scheduled or budgeted though. Presumably it would be the next priority after F-35, but perhaps the whole idea has been shelved in favor of waiting for B-21s.
 
Josh_TN said:
Circling back to our SDB-II/Stormbreaker discussion, I happened to find a reference to a large capacity loading of the B-2 as a future modernization goal in a white paper. Unfortunately no information is given whatsoever outside of the "192" (96 per bomb bay) number - it doesn't describe what rack system would be used or any other configuration considerations. Page 18 on the pdf in this link:
Click to expand...

It does say 64-192, so clearly they had not worked out details yet. That 64 would be literally one quad BRU on each station of a rotary launcher (32 per bay), which is very simple but also rather disappointing. There's one graph that shows 80, just like the 500-lb JDAM, which implies one SDB per station on the existing SBA. That's the best cheap solution, probably. Getting to 96 SDB in each bay probably means a new SBA -- maybe 4 rows wide, 3 columns long, 8 bombs in each column.
 
TomS said:
It does say 64-192, so clearly they had not worked out details yet. That 64 would be literally one quad BRU on each station of a rotary launcher (32 per bay), which is very simple but also rather disappointing. There's one graph that shows 80, just like the 500-lb JDAM, which implies one SDB per station on the existing SBA. That's the best cheap solution, probably. Getting to 96 SDB in each bay probably means a new SBA -- maybe 4 rows wide, 3 columns long, 8 bombs in each column.
Click to expand...

I've see a quad launcher on a CSRL photographed with orange examples. Not sure if it was ever truly integrated. I would think it wouldn't be hard to integrate into the SBA, even if it required some kind of sabot carrier around the bomb and some extra connecting wiring. But I would hope the utility of building a system customized for the SDB would at least be developed for the B-21, even if it was deemed not worth pursuing for the small B-2 fleet. Although on the other hand, if they share the same bomb bay and rack/dispenser systems, it might not be that much of an over investment to enable the B-2s while you wait for B-21. Given that F-15 integration only recently happened and that apparently it is time consuming to load/integrate partially due to all of its capabilities, it is probably safe to say it hasn't happened yet. But I hope an effort is made to maximize the use of the B-21's payload.
 
Jackonicko said:
I thought the obvious one was the trailing edge control surfaces - what were you thinking?
Click to expand...
Edge alignment (not overall planform - it's surprisingly matching challenge coin silhouette). Inlet lips, internal control surfaces hinge line - if the were not parallel to trailing edges, last ones wouldn't be (seemingly) parallel to the ground as they are on photos. But still I may be wrong in the world of relaxed edge alignment rules that have came a decades ago. At least even on F-117A inlet lips were not aligned with leading edge. On first B-21 rendering lips were definitely aligned to LE. Change here can be result of publicized effort to fix problems with inlets/flow.
 
The B-2 is exactly the same though, but with 4 engines. So who knows. I think it's safe to say there will be at least one weapons bay. ;)
 
eagle said:
The B-2 is exactly the same though, but with 4 engines. So who knows. I think it's safe to say there will be at least one weapons bay. ;)
Click to expand...
Engines and landing gear on the B-2 are set farther apart, and the B-2 has a fatter belly.
 
Training edge control surfaces don't look like they extend nearly as far outboard toward the wingtips as on the B-2.
 
Bounce said:
Those saying they're disappointed it's so similar to the B-2 and were expecting some futuristic thing you're looking at it wrong, it just shows how far ahead the B-2 has been all this time...
Click to expand...
Someday mankind will learn about design perfection and all aircraft, from lowly E-VTOLs to hypersonic passenger transports, will be indistinguishable from the B-52.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I dunno, there seems to be a severe gravitas shortfall in that name...
Click to expand...
I-understood-that-reference.gif


Anyway, a multitude of names present themselves from a single line:
  • Underestimating Compactness of Modern Death
  • Compactness of Modern Death
  • Modern Death
  • Underestimating Compactness
  • Underestimating Modern Death
  • Underestimating Death
  • Throat Wobbler Mangrove
  • Death
  • Deeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaathhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
Last edited:
I doubt he's worrying, just saying it could be aux inlet door open.
 
So taxi tests are underway for the B-21 at last, by the way that door does look like an APU inlet.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom