LRS-B... The B-21

[Nige321]

Looks familiar from somewhere...

http://www.combataircraft.net/central/images/articles/9464.jpg

From Combat Aircraft Mag... (http://www.combataircraft.net/view_article.asp?id=9464)

And suggestions are invited for a name... How about the B-2a

Secretary of the US Air Force Deborah Lee James has revealed an artist impression and designation of the LRS-B. Inviting people to name the new bomber during her speech at the Air Force Association Air Warfare Symposium.

The public disclosure of B-21 follows the US Government Accountability Office denying Boeing’s protest over the award of the $60 billion LRS-B contract award to Northrop Grumman. The decision was announced on February 16 following a 100-day review.
Boeing said it will review its legal options to continue its protest.
The GAO said it found ‘no basis to sustain or uphold the protest’. US Air Force chiefs welcomed the news and clearance to proceed with the program, which had been on hold since the Boeing protest was lodged.
Boeing reiterated that it feels it is offering the best LRS-B solution with its partner Lockheed Martin. It could take its complaint to the US Court of Federal Claims, but risks further inconveniencing its important USAF customer.

The USAF is keen to stress that it isn’t fighting the last war and that it is focused on the future threat that will evolve through the introduction of advanced air defense systems and development of more capable surface-to-air missile systems. It says that these demand a long-range, highly survivable bomber capable of penetrating and operating in tomorrow’s anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) environment. The LRS-B will replace the B-1B and B-52H fleets to provide the strategic ability to strike any target on the face of the planet at any time in both conventional and nuclear roles.

The B-21 looks uncannily like the B-2, also built by Northrop Grumman. The initial LRS-B contract is composed of two parts. The EMD phase is a cost-reimbursable type contract with cost and performance incentives. These effectively incentivize industry to achieve cost, schedule and performance goals. The second part of the contract involves options for the first five low-rate initial production lots, comprising 21 aircraft out of the total planned fleet of 100 bombers. Unit cost is an important measure here, and each B-21 is required to be equal to or less than $550 million per aircraft in 2010 dollars, based on the procurement of 100 aircraft. That comes in considerably cheaper than a B-2, which some calculate as being around $1.5 billion per airframe!

[ORAC]

Cost of the B-2 included all the R &D, to quote Global Security....."Northrop had estimated that it would cost between $2 billion and $4 billion to reopen the production line, including nonrecurring costs. Each new aircraft would cost about $500-700 million for a production run of 40 aircraft...... In 2001 Northrop Grumman Corporation offered to build 40 more aircraft at a cost of $735 million apiece"....
That included the cost of reopening the line, so deduct $100M per airframe, to get it down to $635M each.

The price of the LRSB? It is smaller and simpler, the risk is lower and tech more proven, and the costs spread over 80-100 aircraft instead of 40, so say another $100M off each aircraft, to about $500-550M each?
"...In the briefing Tuesday, the Air Force announced it will pay $564 million per bomber for the first 21 aircraft, for a total initial procurement cost of $11.8 billion. Research and development for the first bombers is expected to cost $23.5 billion, the Air Force said."

......."The service requested that two independent government cost estimators look at the program. The two groups projected that each bomber will cost $511 million in 2010 dollars on average if 100 planes are built, Air Force officials told reporters on Tuesday — substantially less than the original $550 million target cost set by then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. This translates to $564 million per plane in fiscal year 2016 dollars." Oh!!! And, why you may ask, the B-21 rather than the B-3? Well, makes senses as it seems a derivative. But also remember, no-one is allowed to mention the B-3 bomber......

vp_WfB2yKD4

[GlobalNav]

Well, to borrow from a former US senator from Illinois: "A half billion here, a half billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."

[Haraka]

Looks about as plausible as the "stealth " Blackhawk.

[BossEyed]

Why's that implausible? You think the CIA decided to transport some junk to Abbotabad as a disinformation tactic?

[Heathrow Harry]

"and the costs spread over 80-100 aircraft instead of 40"

that is the whole nub of the issue - if they can build 100 it'll be cheaper -

if they get into the cost/cancellation spiral...................... :(:(:(

[Haraka]

Why's that implausible? You think the CIA decided to transport some junk to Abbotabad as a disinformation tactic?

In simple language:
Yes.

[barnstormer1968]

What would be the point of transporting the 'junk' for other countries to see and presumably wonder what the helicopter looked like before the 'crash' when complete renderings and drawings were already available online before the OBL raid?

Would the idea be that the Americans saw pictures online of the stealth helicopter they didn't actually have, then made a rear end section to look exactly like the published articles. Then on the day of the raid they transported the fake rear end to the raid site and left it there.

[cokecan]

Barnstormer. yes, obviously - why wouldn't they?

wake up Sheeple etc..

[MPN11]

So ... this is the 'enhanced B-2'? So the ziggy-zaggy trailing edges were a waste of time/money? Cool ... the B-21 looks nice. ;)

[And calling it the B-3 would indeed be a give-away, as would B-4]

[GlobalNav]

"So ... this is the 'enhanced B-2'? So the ziggy-zaggy trailing edges were a waste of time/money?"

The "ziggy-zaggy trailing edges" on the B-2 were in the vicinity of the topside engine exhausts, which the B-21 does not seem to have either. I posit that the pic is a bit of fiction, anyway. Why would such sensitive details be released publicly so soon?

It is a think of beauty, I agree, so the US Navy won't want it. (just joking;))

[PersonFromPorlock]

And suggestions are invited for a name... How about the B-2aOr, "How the B-29D Became the B-50."

The frustrating thing for me is that back in the late '70s, when the B-1 was going through one of its periodic cancellations, I (a B-52 EW) tried to persuade SAC to consider instead a low-reflectivity flying-wing platform with the engine inlets and exhausts on top and gold-plated windows to keep radar from bouncing off the pilot's fillings. The response I got was basically 'If we want ideas, we'll hire a civilian to have 'em.'

The satisfaction of having been right is much overrated.

[7478ti]

Just like the A-11, A-12, and RS-71 (the SR-71 speech mistake of President Johnson)

Was it perhaps instead meant to be "B-2.1" ??

O:)

[Martin the Martian]

Nice to see North American back in the business. Mind, that artists' impression looks nothing like the real thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_XB-21#/media/File:North_American_XB-21_4.jpg

[BossEyed]

In simple language:
Yes.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/attachments/elections/14922d1203442021-obama-illegals-share-same-message-n522306244_197290_3718.jpg

[Haraka]

Says it all really above , for the contribution from such obviously well informed aviation Tech Int. Analysis comment.
But then of course, what could I possibly know in the light of such self proclaimed expertise?
Haraka Out.

[BossEyed]

Go on then, educate me: What evidence at all is there that such a thing was done, and/or that there was an operational imperative that night to do it?

[Haraka]

Boss eyed,
I have no intention whatsoever of trying to illuminate you .Time will tell I think , not me.
Goodnight.
H.

[BossEyed]

Ah. None then. Fair enough.

[TheWestCoast]

Barnstormer - where did you see the "complete renderings and drawings" of the Blackhawk before the raid?

Genuinely curious.

[barnstormer1968]

The West Coast.
I saw the renderings on various internet sites. From memory, as this was some time ago, I first saw a drawing after viewing a stealth mock up of a helicopter. Another poster said that the mock up was inaccurate and that there were already drawings of 'the actual' stealth Blackhawk online and that the Chinese (no mention of who in China) had posted the drawings.

The mock up was all black and with a person dressed in black in front of it (it may have been a movie prop, I can't remember now, but maybe you have seen the same pic) whereas the 'Chinese' picture was in dark grey and a side profile just like Sqn pics and looked exactly like the tail section left at OBL's house.
The same 'Chinese' drawing appeared on all sorts of sites within 24 hours of the raid.


I'm not entirely sure why the idea of a stealthy (using stealthy loosely) helo is so far fetched. Even though the US is downsizing its military it still has a lot more cash to spend than anyone else, and has poured a lot of money into this idea already. We only need to consider the advance from the F117 to the F22 to perhaps assume that things have improved since the Comanche.

[sandiego89]

Undoubtedly there will be some surprises when the real thing rolls out at Palmdale and she will look a bit different from the drawing- but it sure does look like lower risk won the day. I think the Pentagon had very little appetite for a clean sheet design and big promises....

[TheWestCoast]

Barnstormer - are you thinking of the photographs and profile pictures here -
The Aviationist » stealth helicopter (http://theaviationist.com/tag/stealth-helicopter/)
These were all produced after the raid.

[barnstormer1968]

The West Coast.
The top image was the initial pic I saw while looking for something entirely different. It's funny, but working from memory I remembered the chap in front wearing black.

The rendering of the 'real' item was different to the other pics you posted. I saw those too after the raid.

A rendering side on like the top version here, rather than a photo style side on view below.

http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/xx9/barnstormer1968/DE3C7FDB-5621-4ABF-A60B-91C19605BBAC.png (http://s736.photobucket.com/user/barnstormer1968/media/DE3C7FDB-5621-4ABF-A60B-91C19605BBAC.png.html)

I'm sorry I can't give you more detail but my searches were in relation to apaches as I had planned to model a (made up) stealth Apache for a display.

[Haraka]

Thanks very much indeed barnstormer1968. All you need to do now, to substantiate your case, is to provide incontrovertible evidence to the forum that these "Stealth Blackhawk " images actually pre-date the timing of the raid itself.....In which event I totally accept that my individual analysis collapses;.
Can you do so?
I would also love to see any alleged likely images of this machine ( from whatever source) over the half decade plus of its alleged squadron service.
( Not, of course including the pathetic photo shopped nonsense on a couple of kiddy sites)

However, , if this is not the case.............

[barnstormer1968]

Hakara.
I'm not sure I follow the case you put. How would a rendering from before the raid prove anything to YOU.
If we were to assume that what ever was left at the raid site (be it real or fake) was built before the raid, and maybe at least six months to a year before so how would a pic from before the raid prove anything to you.
The rendering could be a rendering of a fake helicopter.

I'm not really a fan of conspiracies and am happy to accept that he US has the capability and the cash to built a stealth Blackhawk, that they also have a long history of building aircraft that can spend a long time unseen and of using those aircraft on OPs.
To clear things up for me a little are you suggesting the Anericans didn't build the aircraft (even though they have built something similar before) or that they couldn't build it?

[BossEyed]

There's actually incontrovertible evidence that the images posted on this thread do NOT pre-date the raid.

The photo with a human being in it is from the set of "Zero Dark Thirty", which is easily Google-able and by definition cannot pre-date the raid.

The artists' impressions from David Cenciotti's weblog (http://theaviationist.com/) are stated at the source to have been based on the wreckage pictured at Abbotabad, so also don't pre-date the raid.

If there are any other images of a stealth Blackhawk that purport to be a real aircraft (there are some videogame constructs) and which pre-date the raid, I'd love to see them but I don't think they were around.

[barnstormer1968]

Well spotted boss eyed.
The rendering isn't the one in question as I pointed out above, but was used as an example to show a rough idea to point out that the Chinese image wasn't like the lower pic, but more basic like the top pic.
Clearly I can't go back and retrace web searches, but do know I made the model after seeing images but some time before the raid because it was on display at a kids party. For what it's worth my 1/32 stealth Apache had a fenestron canted tail rotor, larger cover on top of the rotor mast and side ladders for picking up downed crew (taken from a computer game).

Remember, you saw it here first!

[Davef68]

Barnstormer1968 (Good number BTW)

Sounds like the RAH-66,

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Rah-66.jpg

[barnstormer1968]

Davef68

The tail was just like that. The model I made was loosely based on the Apache from a console game called desert strike. The Apache in that game used the tail from the Comanche for some reason, but then also had rope ladders it lowered to pick people up :)
Sorry for drifting this into a spotter/modeller text.

[Mechta]

It's interesting to see how others are thinking along the same lines about that 'stealth' helicopter, as I wrote last year.
18th May 2015 20:24 by Mechta
There's always the possibility in the OBL raid, that after the hit itself, a sizable piece of a redundant experimental helicopter was dropped on the site (maybe from one of the CH-47s reportedly involved in the raid) to:

Make an iconic photo opportunity of an otherwise pretty nondescript location.
Give other nations the impression that the Americans were further ahead with putting stealth helicopters into service than they really were.
Add a significant amount of 'wow-factor' to the story.
Establish the level of co-operation between the Pakistanis/Chinese and/or others, before the subsequent retrieval of the 'wreckage'.
The Americans would have been well aware that the wreckage would soon be inspected by knowledgable foreign parties, thus a film set type mock-up would have been rapidly outed. Whatever was left behind would have had to be pretty convincing. I'm still looking forward to some contradictory evidence. By the way, has anyone got a good photo showing damage to the wall or chewed up soil from where this 'stealth' helicopter thrashed itself to pieces? All the videos I've seen of helicopters dismantling themselves involve a considerable amount of earth and debris being flung around.

[melmothtw]

It's interesting to see how others are thinking along the same lines about that 'stealth' helicopter, as I wrote last year.

Quote:
18th May 2015 20:24 by Mechta
There's always the possibility in the OBL raid, that after the hit itself, a sizable piece of a redundant experimental helicopter was dropped on the site (maybe from one of the CH-47s reportedly involved in the raid) to:

Make an iconic photo opportunity of an otherwise pretty nondescript location.
Give other nations the impression that the Americans were further ahead with putting stealth helicopters into service than they really were.
Add a significant amount of 'wow-factor' to the story.
Establish the level of co-operation between the Pakistanis/Chinese and/or others, before the subsequent retrieval of the 'wreckage'.
The Americans would have been well aware that the wreckage would soon be inspected by knowledgable foreign parties, thus a film set type mock-up would have been rapidly outed. Whatever was left behind would have had to be pretty convincing.



I'm still looking forward to some contradictory evidence.


By 'others' you of course mean 'one other'. As for offering 'contradictory evidence', the great thing about conspiracy theories is that you can't disprove them...

[Haraka]

the great thing about conspiracy theories is that you can't disprove them..
But you can in this case of course.(bearing in mind that this is not 'per se" a conspiracy theory ,merely objectively citing the lack of firm evidence supporting a popularly encouraged assertion .)
The popularly implied version of events can be supported simply by showing incontrovertible evidence of the existence (pre or post the event) of the alleged :"Stealth Blackhawk" , which so far only exists in the public domain from merely commercial artists' impressions of an entire vehicle. These themselves only being based upon the sole evidence of an apparent tail pylon and rotor assembly dumped at the scene.
This alleged evidence of such a machine has been seen ,only once, half a decade ago and after a mission shrouded , of necessity in that political environment, in disinformation.

Oh , and I am pretty confident to say the least, that I not the "one other " supporting this analysis.

[melmothtw]

Given that the stealth Black Hawk was never meant to be seen by public, I think it's a fairly safe assumption to say that neither myself nor anyone else without the highest level of clearances is going to be to provide you with that evidence, incontrovertible or not.


That said, it does not "only exist in the public domain from merely commercial artists' impressions of an entire vehicle". It exists in the public domain in photographs taken of the tail section of the aircraft which crashed.


If it is the artists' impression in particular that troubles you, you may wish to note that most new aircraft have been introduced to the public in such a fashion before they were ever seen in the flesh, so to speak.


And as for it being half-a-decade since the event, I am not sure how that makes the case one way or the other for the existence or not of the stealth hawk. It was close to a decade from the F-117's first flight to the public finally catching sight of it.


As I said before, you really can't disprove conspiracy theories - they're like Chinese finger-traps, where the harder you pull you more you get dragged in.

[Tourist]

Haraka

I would dearly love to believe that it were true that a bunch of SF guys had dumped a fake tail at the scene of a raid just to mess with the Chinese/Russians.

It would be truly fantastic and I would be in awe of their ambition and sense of humour.

Unfortunately, this is the real world.

The idea that onto an already very risky and highly complex mission with enormous capacity for embarrassing the POTUS if anything went wrong you would add on unnecessary complications like carrying in a tail just for a little disinformation is truly the realms of tinfoil hats.

[melmothtw]

Occam's Razor, Haraka - Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions (they crashed a helicopter) should be selected, or in other words the simplest answer is most often the correct answer.

[TheWestCoast]

It's a cool idea, but if the tail assembly WAS fake and dumped on the edge of the compound, anyone inspecting it would certainly try to get their hands on at least some of the remains of the rest of the helicopter wreckage and surely any inspection of that would reveal if the tail was the same material as the burnt out section.

How would you fake that? Wouldn't an entire airframe need to be dropped on the site and then blown up?

[Haraka]

Wouldn't an entire airframe need to be dropped on the site and then blown up?
Agreed , IF they had access and that was the point of the exercise.
Any evidence of this? Photos etc?

[Haraka]

Occam's Razor indeed Melmoth.
The only bit of evidence supporting a hypothesis of a certain type of Stealth Helicopter appeared during an otherwise highly classified operation in a politically complex area and where indeed such an alleged capability could arguably provide deniable cover for other cooperating agencies.

So with no verifiable collateral supporting information before or since over many years, would not the simplest explanation be that it never existed,as such, in the first place?

[melmothtw]

...would not the simplest explanation be that it never existed,as such, in the first place?

No, given that photographs of (parts of) it exist.

Anything else is just conspiracy-fuelled hokum. As Tourist rightly points out, there was already too much hanging on this mission without adding a further level of complication for no discernible reason.

[Haraka]

there was already too much hanging on this mission without adding a further level of complication for no discernible reason.


Obviously you didn't actually read what I wrote.
where indeed such an alleged capability could arguably provide deniable cover for other cooperating agencies.

Let's just leave it there .

[melmothtw]

where indeed such an alleged capability could arguably provide deniable cover for other cooperating agencies.

Except that it couldn't.

Let's just leave it there .

Agreed.

[Tourist]

Haraka

If you imagine that Pakistani help would have been possible or welcome, then you really are in tinfoil hat land.

Can you imagine trusting their security services with this sort of information?!?

Far too much riding on it.

[JFZ90]

The helicopter incident seems such a long time ago now, with little new info.

The interesting thing for me was:

1. it was clearly an accident, given the context of the raid
2. it clearly had a completely standard burnt out blackhawk main rotor head. It may have had some sort of stealth covering that may have been burnt off, but the main rotor head mechanics were identical to a standard blackhawk. There are clear photos of this.
3. the tail was unburnt - having collapsed the other side of the wall. this was clearly unlike any known helicopter at all - and clearly nothing like any known standard blackhawk derivative.

This proves that the helicopter was real, and an unknown type, likely based on a blackhawk, with significant modifications related to stealth.

The US has a long history of trying to build silent helicopters going back to vietnam. Much of this is online.

I don't see the need for any conspiracy theories - its just a bespoke special ops helicopter that is still classified for reasonably obvious signature reasons.

I'm looking forward to seeing one for real, but won't be surprised if its 10+ years before its made public, if ever.

[BossEyed]

Within the reality based community, a far more interesting question to me than any of this is: Why is the horizontal stabilizer (is it a stabilator like the conventional Blackhawk?) forward swept?

[Tourist]

Within the reality based community, a far more interesting question to me than any of this is: Why is the horizontal stabilizer (is it a stabilator like the conventional Blackhawk?) forward swept?

Same reason all stealthy aircraft have funny angles and no square corners?

Or is it because it looks cool?

[Haraka]

Haraka

If you imagine that Pakistani help would have been possible or welcome, then you really are in tinfoil hat land.

Can you imagine trusting their security services with this sort of information?!?

Far too much riding on it.

You assume that there is such a cohesive element as "their security services" in a country being supplied American military and financial assistance and with a complex record of affiliations and relationships., many of which remain deliberately obscure.

Could you therefore give us any grounds for your assumption?

[ORAC]

Which is a very interesting mix of helicopter history and conspiracy theory - which has absolutely nothing to do withe the subject of the thread....

[Haraka]

My fault ORAC for initially comparing the provenance of a somewhat suspect artist's impression of the "B-21" with a sequence of even more unlikely artists' impressions of a hypothetical helicopter, derived from imagery of a bit of tail pylon assembly.

[Tourist]

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/jet_fuel.png

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/conspiracy_theories.png

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/semicontrolled_demolition.png

[Davef68]

Regarding the OBL raid helicopter, I seem to remember a report not long after which quoted a 'source' as saying that the type wasn't classified per se, just that it was never flown/exposed in circumstances where anyone who wasn't supposed to see it would have access.

[melmothtw]

... it was never flown/exposed in circumstances where anyone who wasn't supposed to see it would have access.

I guess, in the same way that the Manhattan Project wasn't classified - they just didn't tell anyone about it that didn't need to know.

[chopper2004]

Its official now, named the Raider

cheers

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/longranger158/160919-F-YZ001-003_zpspaisyius.jpg


http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/September%202016/September%2020%202016/B-21-Raider.aspx

[Lonewolf_50]

I am fascinated to see zero links to the RotorHeads thread (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/450511-identify-helo-bin-laden-compound.html)on the stealth Blackhawk topic.


@Chopper2004


As to the B-21 Raider, Julio Douhet's wet dream once again inflicts itself upon the DoD budget cycle. The bomber that "will always get through."

[Turbine D]

ORAC,
Which is a very interesting mix of helicopter history and conspiracy theory - which has absolutely nothing to do withe the subject of the thread....
Not only this but there is a thread in JB that deals with 9/11 conspiracy theories. It went dead and I was hoping it would stay that way...

[ORAC]

As to the B-21 Raider, Julio Douhet's wet dream once again inflicts itself upon the DoD budget cycle. The bomber that "will always get through."

B-21 Bomber Estimate By CAPE: $511M A Copy (http://breakingdefense.com/2016/09/b-21-bomber-estimate-by-cape-511m-a-copy/)

".....Walden also made clear the Air Force will probably pursue a deep penetrating fighter to accompany the bomber to heavily defended targets deep inside a country. He didn’t say it but my understanding is war games have shown the B-21 is incapable of making it to western China to destroy the missile and artillery units there.........."

[Lonewolf_50]

B-21 Bomber Estimate By CAPE: $511M A Copy (http://breakingdefense.com/2016/09/b-21-bomber-estimate-by-cape-511m-a-copy/)

".....Walden also made clear the Air Force will probably pursue a deep penetrating fighter to accompany the bomber to heavily defended targets deep inside a country. He didn’t say it but my understanding is war games have shown the B-21 is incapable of making it to western China to destroy the missile and artillery units there.........."
A "deep penetrating fighter" is the dream of a lot of fighter jocks, and has nothing to do with aircraft. :p

My prediction: B-21 will be unmanned. Saves tons of weight. The tech is already here.

[tartare]

Shades of the D-21.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_D-21
Maybe the PCAP will be unmanned - flying in formation with the B-21.
Or maybe they just need to build an updated version of this. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229) ;)

[chopper2004]

The B-21 Raider: A Bomber for the Future (http://www.northropgrumman.com/MediaResources/MediaKits/B21/default.aspx?utm_source=PrintAd&utm_medium=Redirect&utm_campaign=B21_Redirect)

[KiloB]

It's interesting that there is still no further information come to light, about the aircraft spotted at high level over Texas, which clearly had no central 'duck-tail'. Wonder where IT fits into the future plan?

[chopper2004]

A top secret desert assembly plant starts ramping up to build Northrop's B-21 bomber - LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-fi-northrop-bomber-20171110-htmlstory.html)

[Heathrow Harry]

This worried me a little.............

"More than a thousand new employees are working for the time being in rows of temporary trailers, a dozen tan-colored tents and a vast assembly hangar at the desert site near the edge of urban Los Angeles Count"

Tents???? How very 1905...............

[pr00ne]

A Top Secret factory...

...on a regional airport.......

[West Coast]

Nothing wrong with tents says the guy who has to pay for the permanent structures.

[sandiego89]

A Top Secret factory...

...on a regional airport.......

Well this “regional airport” at Palmdale has seen some of the most cutting edge and secret programs come out: B-2, F-117, several technology demonstrators, the major drone programs, and was long associated with the A-12, SR-71 and U-2 (assembled elsewhere). So the site may be fairly well known, but what goes on behind the walls can indeed be very cutting edge and secret. Remember how surprised folks were when the stealth shapes saw the light of day. Plant 42 is perhaps the greatest example of hiding in plain sight.

[Heathrow Harry]

Nothing wrong with tents says the guy who has to pay for the permanent structures.

If I was working on a cutting edge aircraft costing zillions I'd hope they could shell out for decent accomodation - pay peanuts get.............

[chopper2004]

https://theaviationist.com/2017/11/28/are-we-seeing-b-21-raider-development-and-testing-activity-at-area-51/

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4547/38852642682_0acb5ec4d8_b.jpg

[chopper2004]

Just got back from (laughingly) Vegas for Heli Expo 2018 including a nice desert drive to Rachel:E:cool::cool::mad:.

Anyhow came across this story below where the B-21 maybe heading to Edwards soon for official testing.

B-21 Raider Officially Heading To Edwards Air Force Base For Testing - The Drive (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18997/b-21-raider-officially-heading-to-edwards-air-force-base-for-testing)

cheers

[sandiego89]

Just got back from (laughingly) Vegas for Heli Expo 2018 including a nice desert drive to Rachel:E:cool::cool::mad:.

Anyhow came across this story below where the B-21 maybe heading to Edwards soon for official testing.

B-21 Raider Officially Heading To Edwards Air Force Base For Testing - The Drive (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18997/b-21-raider-officially-heading-to-edwards-air-force-base-for-testing)

cheers


Seems to confirm that the program has been going on for some time quietly, even before the official award (maybe with demonstrators even flying). Going with son-of-B2 was likely smart than the clean sheet Boeing design.

[ORAC]

is supposed to be based on. They haven’t even got to the “iron bird” hanger integration model yet.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/03/07/some-hiccups-with-engine-design-but-b-21-on-track-wittman-says/

[chopper2004]

Mysterious B-21 Raider Combined Test Force Patch Emerges - The Drive (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/19726/mysterious-b-21-raider-combined-test-force-patch-emerges)

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/898/40205789245_da2e3e05ce_b.jpg

[ORAC]

B-21 bomber finishes preliminary design review, and Air Force official is 'comfortable' with progress (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-b-21-progress-20180418-story.html)

A U.S. Air Force official told a Senate subcommittee Wednesday that the new B-21 bomber has completed its preliminary design review and that he was "comfortable" with the progress made by builder Northrop Grumman Corp.

The bomber is now on its way to critical design review, said Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch Jr., the military deputy of the office of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition. Citing the "nature of the work,"

Bunch declined to go into further detail about how the Air Force planned to spend the $2.3 billion it requested for the bomber program for fiscal year 2019 when asked by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). However, he said the program was "continuing engineering manufacturing development" and "some of those risk reduction areas."

The first set of software for the platform has been delivered, and the program is getting "set up" for the next set of software to come in, Bunch told the Senate Armed Forces Subcommittee on Airland during a hearing about Air Force modernization efforts.

"We're making everything ready to begin our test program in the future," he said. "We're making good progress. I'm comfortable today with where we're at, and the progress that Northrop Grumman is making on the program."....

[chopper2004]

B-21 bomber finishes preliminary design review, and Air Force official is 'comfortable' with progress (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-b-21-progress-20180418-story.html)

A U.S. Air Force official told a Senate subcommittee Wednesday that the new B-21 bomber has completed its preliminary design review and that he was "comfortable" with the progress made by builder Northrop Grumman Corp.

The bomber is now on its way to critical design review, said Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch Jr., the military deputy of the office of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition. Citing the "nature of the work,"

Bunch declined to go into further detail about how the Air Force planned to spend the $2.3 billion it requested for the bomber program for fiscal year 2019 when asked by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). However, he said the program was "continuing engineering manufacturing development" and "some of those risk reduction areas."

The first set of software for the platform has been delivered, and the program is getting "set up" for the next set of software to come in, Bunch told the Senate Armed Forces Subcommittee on Airland during a hearing about Air Force modernization efforts.

"We're making everything ready to begin our test program in the future," he said. "We're making good progress. I'm comfortable today with where we're at, and the progress that Northrop Grumman is making on the program."....

Air Force selects locations for B-21 aircraft > U.S. Air Force > Article Display (http://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1510408/air-force-selects-locations-for-b-21-aircraft/)

When they closed the west coast BUFF bases at end of Cold War / desert Storm...the likes of Castle AFB, kept Mather and March but took out the BUFFs etc ...one would have thought with tensions in Far East (yes I know Andersen etc are good FOBs) that somewhere ACC now GSC would consider a return to bomber dets say at Fairchild or Edwards or even March?

cheers

[chopper2004]

is supposed to be based on. They haven’t even got to the “iron bird” hanger integration model yet.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/03/07/some-hiccups-with-engine-design-but-b-21-on-track-wittman-says/

Some would say this sighting is just another B-2 in for maintenance / test work etc, some reckon it’s could be the Raider?

https://theaviationist.com/2018/08/24/whats-this-mysterious-aircraft-spotted-at-edwards-afb-the-secretive-b-21-raider-the-rq-180-drone-or-just-a-b-2/https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/1541x623/9ac89d01_ef96_470c_a4ba_220599597e33_a18c630659506d3c3ce052f fadd364dd37f36b9b.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/1552x887/77351194_31e5_436b_87d4_20addc4c43c4_3ea8de8f9dfa7ea93087947 256a8733e0102ccd5.jpeg

[Rhino power]

https://theaviationist.com/2018/08/24/whats-this-mysterious-aircraft-spotted-at-edwards-afb-the-secretive-b-21-raider-the-rq-180-drone-or-just-a-b-2/https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/1541x623/9ac89d01_ef96_470c_a4ba_220599597e33_a18c630659506d3c3ce052f fadd364dd37f36b9b.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/1552x887/77351194_31e5_436b_87d4_20addc4c43c4_3ea8de8f9dfa7ea93087947 256a8733e0102ccd5.jpeg




What a load of complete and utter drivel...

-RP

[chopper2004]

What a load of complete and utter drivel...

-RP

Then again, Brigadier General Schaefer ( in charge of 412th Test Wing) did hint in a speech that the B-21 maybe heading to Edwards sooner than


How to write several pages of sighting a plane that even not passed CDR...


Then again, recently BG Schaefer ( CO of 412th TEst Wing) hints that the Raider be officially coming to Edwards for T&E....

Cheers

B-21 Raider Officially Heading To Edwards Air Force Base For Testing - The Drive (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18997/b-21-raider-officially-heading-to-edwards-air-force-base-for-testing)

[Rhino power]

Then again, Brigadier General Schaefer ( in charge of 412th Test Wing) did hint in a speech that the B-21 maybe heading to Edwards sooner than...

I was referring more to mathematical equations used and the apparent suggestion of the dimensions indicating it can't be a B-2, all taken from a pi$$ poor, out of focus, low-res, grainy photo taken at night in poor lighting! :ooh:

-RP

[Haraka]

So, around seven and a half years after my being sneered at on this forum for doubting the existence of the "Stealth Black Hawk" regarding the Bin Laden operation,there is now another fable growing (which may or may not be true)
:)

[dead_pan]

Looks like the Aurora to me...

[glad rag]

https://theaviationist.com/2017/11/28/are-we-seeing-b-21-raider-development-and-testing-activity-at-area-51/

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4547/38852642682_0acb5ec4d8_b.jpg

looks like a big Hunter!

[chopper2004]

According to press release below , Edwards will host the Raider Combined Test Force while Tinker will host maintenance and support through their Air Force Sustainment Center, albeit suppprted by Robins and Hill.

Air Force Sustainment Center at Tinker AFB has an Air Logistics Complex

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1693107/air-force-announces-bases-to-support-b-21-raider-mission/

cheers

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/12/07/blink-and-youll-miss-it-the-b-21-bomber-accomplishes-another-big-review/

Blink and you’ll miss it: The B-21 bomber accomplishes another big review

WASHINGTON — The Air Force’s super-secret new bomber recently completed its critical design review (https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2017/03/08/b-21-raider-covertly-completes-preliminary-design-review/), an Air Force official confirmed Dec. 6. The official, who was not authorized to speak on the record on the program, offered no further details about the status of the B-21 Raider (https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/2018/02/12/air-force-requests-1563-billion-in-fy19-plans-to-retire-b-1-b-2-fleets/). However, Air Force officials had stated that the milestone was slated to occur by the end of 2018 — putting the program on pace (https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/03/07/some-hiccups-with-engine-design-but-b-21-on-track-wittman-says/) to begin fielding aircraft around 2025......

The Air Force has only sparsely released information about the Northrop Grumman-produced bomber, and details about the exact status of the plane’s development — such as whether a prototype exists or has been flown — continue to be shrouded in mystery.........

[Asturias56]

ORAC - can you shed some light on why someone would think that "not speaking on the record" was any different from speaking to the press? Seems really weird to me...... I'm baffled........... if they don't want to let people know he should have kept quiet......

[chopper2004]

Happy Xmas all

As it’s getting to the end of the year...will the New Year bring a revelation from the depths of the Mojave Desert?

cheers

[chopper2004]

The US Air Force announces Ellsworth AFB will be first B-21 Raider base.

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1797946/air-force-announces-ellsworth-afb-as-first-b-21-base/

Cheers

[chopper2004]

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a27115013/b-21-raider-first-flight/?utm_campaign=socialflowFBPOP&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social-media

[Asturias56]

Expect Trump to be there and to tell everyone all the details we've always wanted to know...............

[ORAC]

I like the last line.....

The B-21 will not replace the B-52 Stratofortress, which could fly into the 2040s. The B-52 will just never die.

[West Coast]

I like the last line.....



Taxpayers got their money’s worth with the buff.

[chopper2004]

The first B-21 is being assembled..

cheers

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/us-air-force-builds-first-b-21-raider-test-stealth-bomber

[chopper2004]

[QUOTE=ORAC;10124703]B-21 bomber finishes preliminary design review, and Air Force official is 'comfortable' with progress (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-b-21-progress-20180418-story.html)

A U.S. Air Force official told a Senate subcommittee Wednesday that the new B-21 bomber has completed its preliminary design review and that he was "comfortable" with the progress made by builder Northrop Grumman Corp.

The bomber is now on its way to critical design review, said Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch Jr., the military deputy of the office of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition. Citing the "nature of the work,"

Bunch declined to go into further detail about w the Air Force planned to spend the $2.3 billion it requested for the bomber program for fiscal year 2019 when asked by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). However, he said the program was "continuing engineering manufacturing development" and "some of those risk reduction areas."

The first set of software for the platform has been delivered, and the program is getting "set up" for the next set of software to come in, Bunch told the Senate Armed Forces Subcommittee on Airland during a hearing about Air Force modernization efforts.

"We're making everything ready to begin our test program in the future," he said. "We're making good progess. I'm comfortable today with where we're at, and the progress that Northrop Grumman is making on the program."....[/QUOTE

According to the USAF Vice Chief of Staff, he says the B-21 will fly in Deceember 2021 all being well and program on track.

Air Force Magazine (http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2019/July%202019/B-21-to-Fly-in-December-2021-More-B-52s-to-Come-Out-of-Boneyard.aspx)


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/650x436/b21_illustration_0b34b99bf190dc067c5f8f27863bc82d1b9dfe96.jp g

[Asturias56]

Seriously - can someone remind me what cap[abilities this will have over the B-2?

Or is it an admission they should have bought a few more of the original stealth bomber?

[ORAC]

Apart from the 30 years of upgrades in the way of stealth, engines, electronics, sensors and network capability?

Reportedly the other major change is that the entire design is based around rapid update capability for sensors, communications, weapons etc. I am presuming that means an open architecture based on a multiparty fibre database network and standardised racks etc.

Oh, and its reportedly optionally manned.......

[dead_pan]

So no advances in large stealthy bomber external shape in what 30 years years since the B-2 first flew?? Is that really as good as it gets?

As for the hot-swappable sensors, this is pretty much what is being developed for the Tempest, according to their sales people at RIAT.

[Asturias56]

Apart from the 30 years of upgrades in the way of stealth, engines, electronics, sensors and network capability?

Reportedly the other major change is that the entire design is based around rapid update capability for sensors, communications, weapons etc. I am presuming that means an open architecture based on a multiparty fibre database network and standardised racks etc.

Oh, and its reportedly optionally manned.......
I take the point on the systems tho not o sure about the stealth - but I'd guess it may be more maintainable stealth

[Just This Once...]

I'm sure it will have a reduced signature compared to its predecessor, especially against the updated and predicted threat list. As for the overall shape not changing that much, well the physics of RF propagation have not changed at all and same goes for the physics of atmospheric flight.

The large physical size of the platform gives it an RCS advantage over smaller aircraft when it comes to lower frequency threat systems and gives space for big fan engines, fuel, weapons, sensors and crew. Once you have the volume for those 5 requirements in an aerodynamic and low RCS package the remaining artistic freedom is limited.

Arguably the biggest change is the robustness, repeatability and maintainability of the 'stealth' coatings with a much-reduced cost-of-ownership.

[Asturias56]

yes - all modern volume produced cars look the same, all modern airliners look the same

[Haraka]

As with all sensitive projects, there is a degree of disinformation..

It's now over eight years on from a certain even in Pakistan in May 2011 : anybody got a photo of a stealth Blackhawk yet ? :) Some may have noticed that Imran Kahn made an interesting comment about that mission recently which could be interpreted as supporting my much mocked supposition over the years.

[dead_pan]

What supposition was that, Haraka?

[Mil-26Man]

...which could be interpreted as supporting my much mocked supposition over the years

or not.

PS; I have no idea what your much mocked supposition is, but I'm guessing from the inference that you felt/feel the stealth Black Hawk wasn't really a stealth Black Hawk, or something along those lines.

[ORAC]

What supposition was that, Haraka?

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/575340-lrs-b-b-21-a.html#post9283101

[Mil-26Man]

Quote:
Why's that implausible? You think the CIA decided to transport some junk to Abbotabad as a disinformation tactic?
In simple language:
Yes.

Bingo. Conspiracists are so easy to read.

[Haraka]

Conspiracists are so easy to read.
Of course!
:)

Then there's no point in me saying any more at the moment then is there ? ( until hard evidence of a Stealth UH-60 from over 8 years ago emerges perhaps ... )

[Haraka]

Thanks ORAC for putting that back up. If anybody is interested they might like to read the comments about Pakistani / USA agency relations made at the time on this thread, then compare them with recent comments made by Imran Kahn .

[hoodie]

Would you quote in context the specific Imran Khan comments you mean, please? A link would be ideal.

[Haraka]

https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/news/1840340-5207172-98abi3/index.html


Then of course the case for "plausible denial" of co-operation in such a high profile operation can be postulated. A "stealth helicopter" coming a cropper (and dumping redundant technology) might fit the bill to exonerate any local agency knowledge of involvement,

[hoodie]

Thank you. So no direct link to the equip[ment used in the raid, though - lots of "might be" "could have", "it's possible that".

Do you have anything other than speculation that suggests the operational risk and logistic challenges of doing what you propose was done would be in any way worthwhile?

So much could have gone wrong yet you're suggesting that it (planting a fake wrecked aircraft) all went right, at night, in a couple of hours, almost in public and in parallel with a highly demanding super-high-profile operational mission*.

I can't see that theory is in any way credible, let alone that it has anything to support it other than open speculation.



*(I'm assuming that you are not denying the reality of the rest of the Bin Laden operation.)

[Mil-26Man]

...lots of "might be" "could have", "it's possible that".

...is how conspiracies work.

[Haraka]

*(I'm assuming that you are not denying the reality of the rest of the Bin Laden operation.)
Not at all...(I have no grounds to.)

"Do you have anything other than speculation that suggests the operational risk and logistic challenges of doing what you propose was done would be in any way worthwhile?"

The ongoing protection of extremely high value cooperating sources at a critical time in an admitted complex political environment.
Admittedly for different reasons, but bells rang in my head at the time about the (failed) Son Tay raid when ,as part of the plan, a helicopter was deliberately crashed in to a prison compound.

[hoodie]

"Do you have anything other than speculation that suggests the operational risk and logistic challenges of doing what you propose was done would be in any way worthwhile?"
The ongoing protection of extremely high value cooperating sources at a critical time in an admitted complex political environment.
But that is onlyspeculation. Nothing firmer than that?

[Haraka]

This speculation would be comfortably blown apart if there was any concrete evidence of an in-service "Stealth Blackhawk" and there hasn't been for over eight years now. Nor is there for any other practical stealth helicopter for that matter, and I suspect probably for very good technical and operational reasons.

[hoodie]

By definition, concrete evidence of a 'black' programme isn't going to be there. So using the absence of that is going to prove nothing.

As is often said, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

From a technical perspective, there's lots that is feasible. For example, Google "The Quiet One" OH-6 from the Vietnam era. See also RAH-66 Comanche for other LO.

[Haraka]

Time will tell (perhaps) :) I am well aware of The Quiet One, and the Comanche BTW . Not really comparable concepts, but apparently eventually dead end in themselves at least .

[Mil-26Man]

Time will tell (perhaps) :) I am well aware of The Quiet One, and the Comanche BTW . Not really comparable concepts, but apparently eventually dead end in themselves at least .


"Time will tell..." reminds me of conversations I've had with Argentinians who swear blind Invincible was hit and damaged during the war.

Impossible to argue against, because the 'proof' will emerge at some unspecified point in the future.

[melmothtw]

As with all sensitive projects, there is a degree of disinformation..

It's now over eight years on from a certain even in Pakistan in May 2011 : anybody got a photo of a stealth Blackhawk yet ? :) Some may have noticed that Imran Kahn made an interesting comment about that mission recently which could be interpreted as supporting my much mocked supposition over the years.

Seems your supposition is still being mocked all these years later.

You cite the lack of evidence over the years for a stealth helicopter as evidence that there never was one. By the same token then, the lack of evidence over the years that a disinformation mission took place should suggest that it probably didn't.

[Haraka]

After more than eight years now since my first airing the topic on Pprune , no sign of a stealth Blackhawk..
Such a platform would have been a reasonable justification for exonerating any Pakistani agency involvement, were it to exist practicably as part of an extremely sensitive and very high value operation politically in the area.
It was key to the operation that Pakistani involvement be plausibly denied, Indeed such an admission could be seen to jeopardize other area ops.Any cooperation would have to have been covert for pretty obvious reasons..
The USA has thrown helicopters away deliberately in the past on sensitive ops (admittedly for different reasons) . so that might have spurred the germ of the idea-even dumping a discontinued prototype .
Following years of silence Imran Kahn has now recently guardedly stated that there was Pakistani intelligence involvement in the operation, contrary to initial statements at the time of the op from the USA. .
There are no known operational stealth american helicopters to this day, neither do they seem to be in the offing in the near future. .
So let' s now get back to the B-21 shall we? (and apologies for the diversion)

[melmothtw]

After more than eight years now since my first airing the topic on PPRuNe , no sign of a stealth Blackhawk...

After more than eight years now since your first airing the topic on PPRuNe , no evidence of a deception mission to plant a fake stealth helicopter...

[unmanned_droid]

After more than eight years now since my first airing the topic on Pprune , no sign of a stealth Blackhawk..
Such a platform would have been a reasonable justification for exonerating any Pakistani agency involvement, were it to exist practicably as part of an extremely sensitive and very high value operation politically in the area.
It was key to the operation that Pakistani involvement be plausibly denied, Indeed such an admission could be seen to jeopardize other area ops.Any cooperation would have to have been covert for pretty obvious reasons..
The USA has thrown helicopters away deliberately in the past on sensitive ops (admittedly for different reasons) . so that might have spurred the germ of the idea-even dumping a discontinued prototype .
Following years of silence Imran Kahn has now recently guardedly stated that there was Pakistani intelligence involvement in the operation, contrary to initial statements at the time of the op from the USA. .
There are no known operational stealth american helicopters to this day, neither do they seem to be in the offing in the near future. .
So let' s now get back to the B-21 shall we? (and apologies for the diversion)

Your conspiracy theory fails Occams Razor test.

You simply aren't able to view the information required to make any kind of authoritative statement one way or another.

You don't know what you don't know.

[Haraka]

So let' s now get back to the B-21 shall we? (and apologies for the diversion)

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/08/21/the-b-21-raider-looms-large-over-the-celebration-of-b-2s-first-flight/

[tartare]

If I am interpreting this statement correctly, it sounds like the first test aircraft - not just an iron bird - is already in production:

https://www.afmc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1961588/acting-secaf-donovan-announces-b-21-manufacturing-testing-locations/fbclid/IwAR0mZmQYVYKQAKQa-CyEVott5aI9ChjbGPWHkQTlBzPKQtUbyCgWS4xZGOA/

[tartare]

Ideas being floated down here that Australia could partner with the US in B-21 development, as a replacement for F-111 lost capability.
https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/strike-air-combat/4793-growing-concern-about-affordability-of-expanded-us-bomber-fleet-paves-way-for-allied-participation
At the moment, just wishful thinking...

[ORAC]

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. --

The 420th Flight Test Squadron was reactivated following an assumption of command ceremony here Oct. 4. The squadron will plan, test, analyze and report on all flight and ground testing of the B-21 Raider.

The 420 FLTS is organized under the 412th Test Wing, which is part of the Air Force Test Center, headquartered at Edwards. The squadron, along with the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office, will ensure the Air Force delivers this asymmetric capability to the warfighter.

The B-21 will be a highly survivable, next-generation bomber with the ability to penetrate modern air defenses and hold any target at risk globally. The program has a mature and stable design and is transitioning to manufacturing development of the first test aircraft in Palmdale, California.

“The first flight of the Raider will take it from Palmdale to Edwards AFB, where the legacy of excellence will continue with the reactivation of the 420th Flight Test Squadron,” said Acting Secretary of the Air Force Matthew Donovan, during the Air Force Association Conference Sept. 16.

This legacy of excellence began July 17, 1989, when the B-2 Spirit, the world’s first stealth bomber, took off from Northrop Grumman’s production facility at Plant 42 in Palmdale, and landed 112 minutes later at Edwards for developmental testing by the 420th FLTS.

[chopper2004]

Little bit by little bit, more is being revealed about the Raider. Though could it be another F-117 misleading re the shape when the Pentagon showed off a short stubby airframe artists impression.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/the-raider-takes-shape/


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x700/6b5a58af_1183_43bf_9057_08b4e7088338_984bdc2bb31dcde609c8cd5 3871159f7d953422d.jpeg

[chopper2004]

https://www.airforcemag.com/b-21-images-show-new-details-of-secret-bomber/


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1675x1172/6bdcc05c_f7ae_4d7f_b10e_7337d07b1d3a_da1aa3eebb0a574ab9cefd0 5695a168c884a406f.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1692x1267/92529597_7d16_4869_9c3e_c3828fb43c80_e02ed756f866ec6e3060a13 2d409b351fcdb92a0.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1361/a0e4cc50_e2e0_402f_a1ac_fc044f84795f_5f3367acc26253403bcb925 66cd950d577f10c46.jpeg

[ORAC]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2020/02/28/air-force-general-two-bomber-fleet-is-the-future/

Air Force general: Two-bomber fleet is the future

The future of the Air Force’s bomber fleet will be the B-21 Raider (https://www.airforcetimes.com/air/2019/08/21/the-b-21-raider-looms-large-over-the-celebration-of-b-2s-first-flight/), now under development, and a heavily modified version of the Cold War-era B-52 Stratofortress (https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/10/10/b-52-stratofortresses-deploy-to-england/), Lt. Gen. David Nahom, deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, told lawmakers on Thursday.

Nahom said getting to that two-bomber fleet (https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/03/27/ellsworth-to-be-first-operational-b-21-base/?utm_expid=.jFR93cgdTFyMrWXdYEtvgA.1&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#jwvideo) is important as the Air Force shifts to a strategy focused on what the Pentagon calls “great power competition” — preparing for a conflict with a peer or near-peer nation such as China or Russia. “On the bomber fleet, there’s nothing more important to the Air Force,” Nahom told the House Armed Services subcommittee on seapower and projection forces. “If you look at what the bombers bring, no one else brings it. Our joint partners don’t bring it, our coalition partners don’t bring it.”

The B-1B Lancer and B-2 Spirit are important in the meantime, and each bring important capabilities, Nahom said. The B-2′s ability to penetrate enemy airspace and carry nuclear weapons, and the volume of ordnance the B-1 can carry, make each aircraft crucial for now, he said. The Air Force needs to keep the B-2 until the B-21 is delivered and nuclear-certified, he said, which will likely take about a decade.

Keeping the B-1 is trickier, Nahom said, largely because the Air Force has flown it so hard over the last several years. “We’ve used that airplane, and overused it over many years,” Nahom said of the B-1. “It’s broken, in many ways.”

The Air Force reported a 51.75 percent mission-capable rate for its 62 Lancers in 2018. But last August, Gen. John Hyten, now vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers that just six B-1 Lancers were fully mission-capable, indicating the fleet is in much worse shape than was previously known. Some B-1s at Ellsworth and Dyess Air Force bases are so far gone, Nahom said, that it made more sense to take them offline. That way, maintainers could instead focus on fixing the Lancers that have a better shot at returning to flying status, he said. That’s why the Air Force proposed cutting 17 B-1s as part of its fiscal 2021 budget, released earlier this month.

“That takes the worst actors offline, and lets the maintainers now concentrate on the airplanes that have a better road to recovery,” Nahom said. “We think, by doing this, we’ll get the mission-capable rate to a more acceptable level.” By doing that, Nahom said, the Air Force should be able to maintain the B-1 fleet until the B-21 becomes operational.

Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, noted that the Air Force is talking about retiring relatively younger aircraft and keeping the much-older B-52s — some of which might be flying until they’re 100 years old.

While Nahom acknowledged that many B-52s are old in years, they’re relatively young in terms of flying hours, because they sat on nuclear alert during the Cold War and weren’t flown as hard. By upgrading key parts of the B-52, including replacing engines, adding a new radar and other new technologies, “we’re going to be able to do things with that airplane that we would not be able to do with a B-1 or a B-2,” Nahom said.

The re-engining of the B-52 is going well, and the service’s request for proposal should be released this year, said Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics. Roper also quoted Indiana Jones as he discussed the B-52′s potential longevity: “It’s not the years, it’s the mileage. That very much applies to airplanes.”

[tdracer]

Maybe this is a dumb question, but if many of the B-1Bs are in such sad shape, they parked ~20 B-1Bs several years ago (I'm thinking around year 2000, when they were relatively young) to concentrate limited resources on the remaining fleet. Wouldn't it make sense to take those aircraft out of mothballs, update them with the latest kit from the most heavily used B1, and bring them back on-line?

[weemonkey]

Maybe this is a dumb question, but if many of the B-1Bs are in such sad shape, they parked ~20 B-1Bs several years ago (I'm thinking around year 2000, when they were relatively young) to concentrate limited resources on the remaining fleet. Wouldn't it make sense to take those aircraft out of mothballs, update them with the latest kit from the most heavily used B1, and bring them back on-line?


See you and your logic td....

[tdracer]

See you and your logic td....

Yea, I'd never get far in politics...

[sandiego89]

Maybe this is a dumb question, but if many of the B-1Bs are in such sad shape, they parked ~20 B-1Bs several years ago (I'm thinking around year 2000, when they were relatively young) to concentrate limited resources on the remaining fleet. Wouldn't it make sense to take those aircraft out of mothballs, update them with the latest kit from the most heavily used B1, and bring them back on-line?

I seem to recall that most of the earlier B-1B retirements were the earliest blocks of aircraft that had some differences from later blocks, and they were the first to go to help reduce "fleet within the fleet" issues. When the fleet went from ~92 to ~60, 24 went to the boneyard, but only around 10 were placed in the top level of long term storage. 8 went to museums. So bringing them back may take quite a bit more, and you still may have some fleet within the fleet issues.

[RAFEngO74to09]

The current fleet B-1B have had major upgrades over the last few years - not likely to be regenerating any from the boneyard unless the fleet goes below a critical level before its planned retirement date.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o32iRlPe_Yc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR-Xj7bGqnU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIphzlqjI7w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nmrSh8RGnw

[tdracer]

RAFE, I suspect you are in a far better position to know, but this bit:

But last August, Gen. John Hyten, now vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers that just six B-1 Lancers were fully mission-capable, indicating the fleet is in much worse shape than was previously known. Some B-1s at Ellsworth and Dyess Air Force bases are so far gone, Nahom said, that it made more sense to take them offline. That way, maintainers could instead focus on fixing the Lancers that have a better shot at returning to flying status, he said.
Really, 10% mission capable? Yes, I know taking new kit and putting it on an older airframe is not trivial, but 10%? That implies some serious structural issues that are not going away.

[Asturias56]

It's probably a reasoned decision that they don't need more right now with operations winding down in Afghanistan, the Turks & Russians beating on each other in Syria & China hamstrung by the virus.

Time to get all those upgrades & maintenance done

[RAFEngO74to09]

USAF gives update on B-21 Raider:

https://www.aero-mag.com/b-21-raider-northrop-grumman-17082020/

[tartare]

Crikey - could it in fact be... shudder... on time and on budget?

[tdracer]

Crikey - could it in fact be... shudder... on time and on budget?
No...
Interesting that the linked article notes Orbital ATK as a major subcontractor. Their primary product is solid propellant rocket motors (they did the solid boosters for the Space Shuttle and are providing the solid strap-ons for the SLS) - rather curious what they'd be doing for the B-21.

[etudiant]

No...
Interesting that the linked article notes Orbital ATK as a major subcontractor. Their primary product is solid propellant rocket motors (they did the solid boosters for the Space Shuttle and are providing the solid strap-ons for the SLS) - rather curious what they'd be doing for the B-21.

Think they had a fair bit of work on composite structures, so perhaps not so strange.

[ORAC]

Think they had a fair bit of work on composite structures, so perhaps not so strange.


February 2018:

“Orbital ATK has successfully completed the production of the 5,000th composite part for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter aircraft.....

The company currently produces approximately 90% of the upper and lower wing skins, engine nacelles, access covers, and fixed skins for the F-35 aircraft at its Aerospace Structures Division facility in Clearfield, Utah, US.”.......

[chopper2004]

Ideas being floated down here that Australia could partner with the US in B-21 development, as a replacement for F-111 lost capability.
https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/strike-air-combat/4793-growing-concern-about-affordability-of-expanded-us-bomber-fleet-paves-way-for-allied-participation
At the moment, just wishful thinking...

it would not surprise me I have read / heard (please forgive the pun) that enthusiasts over Nevada way claim they have Heard- British type accents on the airwaves over the ‚box‘. and it was not Red Flag time either and the platform flying was not stated. So maybe they were RAAF TPS ( on an amusing note I myself have been confused with sounding like down under by various cabbies in USA and even in my other neck of the woods in Austria!! 😁)

Tbh also with Loyal Wingman program sold to RAAF and already entering service with one airframe, says it all about special relationship is a tad different to our one.

Then again what’s Austtalian strategic vision regarding the pacific areas and if we had the dish could we partake or even in an alternate universe go back to the days of strategic bombing...

cheers

[NutLoose]

Ideas being floated down here that Australia could partner with the US in B-21 development, as a replacement for F-111 lost capability.
https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/strike-air-combat/4793-growing-concern-about-affordability-of-expanded-us-bomber-fleet-paves-way-for-allied-participation
At the moment, just wishful thinking...

I wonder how that would work, one of the reasons the UK turned down ownership of the F117 was that still being “black” the RAF would have had to operate them in the USA, I could see these being along those lines.

[ORAC]

https://www.airforcemag.com/8th-af-boss-on-hypersonics-b-21-long-range-strike-and-b-52-re-engining/

8th AF Boss on Hypersonics, B-21, Long-Range Strike, and B-52 Re-Engining

....On the B-21, Weatherington said the first bomber, which is now under construction, will fly “no earlier than ’22,” which is slightly beyond a late 2021 estimate offered by Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Stephen W. “Seve” Wilson last year. Otherwise, though, he said the new secret bomber is “on track, on schedule,” and coming in at “a little less” than the predicted unit cost.

He confirmed that the Air Force is considering accelerating the program—not its development, but the rate at which the service buys the airplane. That would allow the Air Force to more quickly eliminate the B-2 and B-1 bombers, reducing the logistics and training footprint of the bomber force and helping it become more efficient. “If we get a steeper ramp, then you’ll see an earlier IOC,” or initial operational capability date, he said.

Weatherington said it’s likely the bomber force will contract before it begins to grow again. That will create a challenge for building a seasoned bomber pilot force, so Global Strike Command is working with Air Education and Training Command to push more B-1 Weapon System Officers into pilot training. There were two B-1 WSOs in the first Pilot Training Next class last year, he noted. “We have to leverage the talent” already in the force, he said.

The arrival of the B-21 will change the complexion of the bomber fleet considerably, Weatherington noted. “Your bomber force will become two-thirds low observable, from one that is only 20 percent LO today.” This is a “big change” and affects “how we plan, operate, the facilities we use, everything.”

“Spreading the stealth enterprise “across multiple bases instead of just one base, currently at Whiteman (Air Force Base, Mo.), will force us to organize and operate differently than we do now,” he said.

While he’s aware of calls to cancel the Long Range Standoff missile on the grounds that a cruise missile with either conventional or nuclear warheads would be destabilizing, Weatherington said it has been that way for decades with the Air-Launched Cruise Missile. Adversaries also seem to “embrace ambiguity” in capabilities, “from ‘little green men’ to cruise missiles to ballistic missiles,” he said. The LRSO is “not escalatory.”

“I’m sure they would be delighted” if the U.S. unilaterally moved to limit its bomber capabilities, Weatherington asserted. Cruise missiles, he said, “are not new,” and he lamented that “we get trapped in these intense theoretical debates” that limit U.S. capabilities needlessly. As for the escalatory nature of cruise missiles, “we message intentions. We monitor telltale signs” of adversary movements toward a first strike, he said.

The LRSO program downselected from two contractors to one earlier this year, and that step was also early. This in turn means the program could be accelerated, Weatherington pointed out. “The sole source [decision] in April provided an opportunity to accelerate some of the milestones; Milestone B or IOC by about a year each,” he said. “Global Strike Command … will look for opportunities to accelerate it.” He said the missile has “good funding and support.”......

Weatherington said that when the B-52 engine replacement program gets going, the fleet will see some “30-40 refurbs per year” of their powerplants, suggesting the installation program could happen over a period of three or so years instead of the 10 that AFGSC has previously mentioned. However, he noted the B-52 will also be getting a new radar, is finishing a connectivity upgrade, and will see improvements to its internal weapon carriage capability. The latter could provide the capacity equivalent of 20 additional bombers, he said.......

[chopper2004]

Number 2 is under construction as first Flight is next year..

https://www.airforcemag.com/second-b-21-under-construction-as-bomber-moves-toward-first-flight/?fbclid=IwAR2GDLwZgtzLYEG_sHj5l9I4RQxmg25jU96vNyaKD2t9HTFd31 4uL6XgR50

[ORAC]

https://www.afgsc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2506441/afgsc-paving-way-for-b-21-begins-retirement-of-b-1-aircraft/

AFGSC paving way for B-21, begins retirement of B-1 aircraft

[Less Hair]

While the remaining B-52s are set to get new engines.

[ORAC]

The B-52s are like Trigger's broom - constantly repaired with parts and wing skins replaced. Whilst from what I have read some parts of the B-1are either impossible or prohibitively expensive to replace.

Plus it spent a lot of time in a high stress low=level role - and strangely spending a long term loitering at high level with the wings swept forward - for which it was not designed, as proved as punishing.

https://www.airforcemag.com/b-1s-can-make-it-to-finish-line-but-big-repairs-will-be-common-along-the-way/

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32213/b-1b-loses-low-level-mission-annual-flight-hours-capped-heres-how-it-got-to-this-point

[chopper2004]

At Ellsworth AFB, a temporary experimental, temporary shelter for the B-21 recently erected.

https://www.airforcemag.com/b-21-bomber-shelter-may-reveal-size-of-secret-jet/


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1536x1025/210226_f_ym413_011_1536x1025_b7b98453cef5579adc5a12522e0b581 094cf11d4.jpg

I reckon all being well, and looking ahead when say it deploys here to Fairford,could fit four in the existing infrastructure on base.

and also

https://www.b21eis.com/index.aspx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_xY7egwj4

[chopper2004]

https://www.edwards.af.mil/News/Article/2600338/b-21-flight-test-aircraft-build-progresses-while-b-21-combined-test-force-takes/

‚Gen. Timothy Ray, the Commander of Air Force Global Strike Command and Air Forces Strategic-Air, U.S. Strategic Command, visited several organizations across the bomber test enterprise to receive first-hand updates on the progress of the B-21 program during a visit to Edwards Air Force Base and Plant 42, in California, May 5-6.

His first stop was to Edwards AFB, where he met with the 419th Flight Test Squadron, Global Power Bomber Combined Test Force. He was updated on the organization’s continued efforts to test upgrades to the B-2 Spirit in order to modernize the B-2 and integrate future weapons systems.

He then visited the 420th Flight Test Squadron, B-21 CTF. Ray was briefed on the construct for the Combined Test Force and the benefits it will bring to bear for the B-21 program. The B-21 CTF is an integrated team of test professionals from Northrop Grumman, 420th FLTS and Detachment 5, Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center. The B-21 CTF provided a comprehensive update on the team’s readiness to support the B-21 program when it transitions into flight test.

On the following day, Ray visited the Northrop Grumman facilities on Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, California, and saw the significant progress made on the build of the first flight test aircraft that will one day make its way to Edwards AFB for flight testing. Northrop Grumman personnel updated Ray on build progress and the value of building those test articles using the same production line, tooling and procedures that will manufacture the final production aircraft.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x557/12a74b13_a6b4_459c_8bcc_69859c5ee68c_5972d8d1810576e5409b623 3808ea5e6f780dcc9.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x557/f303c7dd_df93_43df_b205_5ceba0ecc046_7e77602d90356c800fad10f f46ead0baa460e9d3.jpeg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x557/7f148f46_e089_4292_8399_b9d584a0551e_aadd8650552540ce390ec51 db70327a0b37d07cb.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x439/6c82bbd2_e9b9_43fb_8640_2f0e05809730_0a59aa5b0257566da22c616 0ed9a086206463485.jpeg

Cheers

[West Coast]

More tidbits coming out.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42451/five-b-21-raider-stealth-bombers-are-now-in-final-assembly?fbclid=IwAR1PgRuMLGQcBDoYOt5VOW9bnWoQkOFy8lzN-61bqGKuHHrRQw5SofM66kY

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/thedewline/status/1457772977978707975?s=21

[Asturias56]

Probably will cost $1 million per unit................

[tdracer]

Whilst from what I have read some parts of the B-1 are either impossible or prohibitively expensive to replace.


IIRC, Ken V posted that on a similar discussion (or perhaps this one?) some time ago (when he was still a regular). Apparently the same is also true of the B2, while the more conventional construction of the B-52 allows relatively easy and cost effective structural repairs and updates.

I sure hope those retired Bones end up in good homes (i.e. museums) rather than simply being scrapped. To my eyes, the B-1 is one of the best looking big aircraft ever (especially with the wings fully swept) - a classic example of form following function. Certainly the best looking of the jet powered big bombers.

[Less Hair]

How about converting them to drones if the structural life is nearing it's end? Keep them ready and utilize them low hours only.

[Asturias56]

"Certainly the best looking of the jet powered big bombers."

No - that was the Victor

[tdracer]

"Certainly the best looking of the jet powered big bombers."

No - that was the Victor
I guess we're going to have to disagree on that - I think the Victor looks awkward and badly proportioned.

[KiloB]

The original Victors looked great, but then later versions got all the upgrades mounted on the outside rather than inside which spoilt the lines more than a bit.

[West Coast]

"Certainly the best looking of the jet powered big bombers."

No - that was the Victor

Sorry, can’t drink the Victor pretty or skinny.

Now if you mean best looking like the way a F4 looked, we might find agreement.

[t43562]

Sorry, can’t drink the Victor pretty or skinny.

Now if you mean best looking like the way a F4 looked, we might find agreement.
Lots of aircraft are "cool" or pretty but the Victor looks like alien technology to me. Less run of the mill and therefore interesting to look at.

[West Coast]

Lots of aircraft are "cool" or pretty but the Victor looks like alien technology to me. Less run of the mill and therefore interesting to look at.

Yah, I can see that aspect. Interesting if not aesthetically pleasing.

[Asturias56]

RA-5C Vigilante is my all time favourite

[chopper2004]

Happy New Yaar all

It should be unveiled within the year maybe autumn?

In the throes of a Dale Brown novel with the Old Dog the B-21 could be a drone mothership

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a38267494/b-21-raider-could-do-more-than-just-drop-bombs/

cheers

[chopper2004]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44235/a-sixth-b-21-raider-stealth-bomber-is-now-being-built?fbclid=IwAR3GnRvXU9030YvWwEwJgD4WRGl29DmuaB1N_BVOONqSa 8KxbCTmyGR5P1s

[ORAC]

First production line items being ordered…

https://twitter.com/thedewline/status/1512184348337967117?s=21&t=SZeezOynrsg8izky5q0BnQ

[West Coast]

Lookey loos at Plant 42….

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/04/as-classified-b-21-bomber-nears-flight-secret-facility-sees-more-curious-probing/?fbclid=IwAR3YfooAu8__huPUz5w1za1yxZ90x9X6YwcCvtBsgX03u2eMQh A-fZuSXxg

[chopper2004]

Not sure what to make of this https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/b-21-first-flight-now-set-2023

cheers

[tdracer]

Not sure what to make of this https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/b-21-first-flight-now-set-2023


Another article - this one not behind a paywall:
The B-21 Raider’s First Flight Has Slipped to 2023 (yahoo.com) (https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/b-21-raider-first-flight-153800165.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_11)

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/mil_std/status/1564320636872310784?s=21&t=HFSe1jPk6jLamLgcMln3cg


Northrop’s cost estimate for developing the new B-21 stealth bomber has come in lower than the US Air Force’s $25.1 billion projection, a rare early-stage success story among major weapons programs

https://t.co/Y7MrLE2gdu

[chopper2004]

Australian musings...if they were supplied Loyal Wingman then perhaps this is not without the realms of possibility and they still looking for missing long range strike since the F1-11 'Pig' was retired.

https://eurasiantimes.com/after-nuke-submarines-us-open-to-provide-b-21-stealth-raider/

[rattman]

Australian musings...if they were supplied Loyal Wingman then perhaps this is not without the realms of possibility and they still looking for missing long range strike since the F1-11 'Pig' was retired.

https://eurasiantimes.com/after-nuke-submarines-us-open-to-provide-b-21-stealth-raider/

Dont know who the they and the we are but, but think Australia is farther along on the flight hardware, but the US is further along on the software part. Could go to a combined development, aus supplies the flight hardware and does the integration with Awacs / tankers and other single seaters and the US provides the software and integration with F-35 and possibly B-21, assuming they can work out a solution to range differences

[RAFEngO74to09]

USAF Head of Acquisition has announced that the B-21 will be unveiled in the first week of December.

[steamchicken]

Six years to a jet, pretty good going!

[Asturias56]

lets niot get excited - it might be a decade to service

[ORAC]

https://twitter.com/northropgrumman/status/1583096331853533184?s=61&t=pZliK-1JQD0Ali_vxF5xRQ
To be unveiled on 2nd Dec to be exact.

[ORAC]

If genuine…..

​​​​​​​https://twitter.com/combat_learjet/status/1596141082986696704?s=61&t=zjOoNPLCJdXDjwVGvs8qtg

[chopper2004]

If genuine…..

Looks like a B-2 to me

cheers

[dead_pan]

If genuine…..

B2 in Guam - that vid has been doing the rounds for a while now

[RAFEngO74to09]

The unveiling is going to be streamed live

(2) Northrop Grumman on Twitter: "We can’t wait for the world to see the real thing. Join us for a live-stream of the reveal of B-21 Raider this Friday: https://t.co/4ZHRxsU8TX This changes everything. #DefiningPossible #RiseoftheRaider https://t.co/GwU8i8Wl6n" / Twitter

[Lyneham Lad]

In The Times this afternoon.

America ready to unveil its new B-21 Raider stealth bomber (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eba76b32-6ff2-11ed-8a5b-f385de7508fe?shareToken=6362336834f87da7339fdffa32b8229e)

For years the US company tasked with building a new generation of strategic stealth bomber has operated in total secrecy, giving only subtle hints as to what it will look like through artist’s impressions.

The veil of mystery is now about to be lifted, with the debut on Friday of the new B-21 Raider, which will form the backbone of America’s airborne nuclear force in the future.

The official roll-out will take place at Palmdale, California, where Northrop Grumman, the company selected to design the futuristic bomber, has been developing the classified programme. Although the flying-wing shape will be similar to the B-2 Spirit bomber built more than 30 years ago, the Raider will be smaller and more finely designed, making it far more difficult to spot by enemy radar. If the revolutionary B-2 was super-stealthy, the B-21 is expected to be barely visible in combat operations.

Click the link for the remainder.

[sandiego89]

B2 in Guam - that vid has been doing the rounds for a while now

Believe it is Diego Garcia., but happy to be corrected. The approach at Anderson AFB Guam, is not so close to the beach.

Excited for the rollout. Will surely not be as surprising to most of us as the B-2 roll out was, but I am sure there will be a few minor items to note. I will be looking at the canopy glass to see if that odd angle from the renderings makes it, the landing gear, intakes and trailing edge especially.

[GlobalNav]

Believe it is Diego Garcia., but happy to be corrected. The approach at Anderson AFB Guam, is not so close to the beach.

Excited for the rollout. Will surely not be as surprising to most of us as the B-2 roll out was, but I am sure there will be a few minor items to note. I will be looking at the canopy glass to see if that odd angle from the renderings makes it, the landing gear, intakes and trailing edge especially.

No doubt the PRC will pay close attention, too.

[Flugzeug A]

I assume it’ll be Xbillion per airframe.
I haven’t read the entire post but , how many are the USA claiming they’ll order right now & how many do people think they’ll ACTUALLY buy?
It strikes me as one of those ‘Brilliant but too expensive...’ pieces of kit.
On that basis & with other factors , I can’t see Australia buying any!

[tdracer]

I assume it’ll be Xbillion per airframe.
I haven’t read the entire post but , how many are the USA claiming they’ll order right now & how many do people think they’ll ACTUALLY buy?
It strikes me as one of those ‘Brilliant but too expensive...’ pieces of kit.
On that basis & with other factors , I can’t see Australia buying any!
Supposedly the B-21 is being 'designed to cost' and it's at least being claimed that they are actually below budget and ahead of schedule (although I'd view that with a healthy dose of skepticism). I've heard a target price of ~$500 million/per copy, out the door (so including non-recurring costs). If they pull it off, a bargain compared to the ~$2 Billion each for the B-2.

[T28B]

Supposedly the B-21 is being 'designed to cost' and it's at least being claimed that they are actually below budget and ahead of schedule (although I'd view that with a healthy dose of skepticism). I've heard a target price of ~$500 million/per copy, out the door (so including non-recurring costs). If they pull it off, a bargain compared to the ~$2 Billion each for the B-2.
Not meaning to be cynical, but the F-35 had a projected price that didn't quite pan out.

[tdracer]

Not meaning to be cynical, but the F-35 had a projected price that didn't quite pan out.
I have a couple former co-workers and good friends who were on the Boeing JSF team. When the Lockmart design got chosen, they were aghast because it was so apparent that they'd never be about to build it at the advertised cost. They claimed that the Boeing proposal really was 'designed to cost' while it was readily apparent that the winning bid wasn't - in their words 'they won't be able to build it for twice what they are quoting'.
Which turned out to be a pretty accurate prediction :*

[melmothtw]

I have a couple former co-workers and good friends who were on the Boeing JSF team. When the Lockmart design got chosen, they were aghast because it was so apparent that they'd never be about to build it at the advertised cost. They claimed that the Boeing proposal really was 'designed to cost' while it was readily apparent that the winning bid wasn't - in their words 'they won't be able to build it for twice what they are quoting'.
Which turned out to be a pretty accurate prediction :*

Well, Boeing shouldnt have designed the X-32 to look so wrong - it was never going to win. Also, given how Boeing eventually won the KC-X contract, a case of the pot calling the kettle black I think.

[melmothtw]

Not meaning to be cynical, but the F-35 had a projected price that didn't quite pan out.

But it has panned out - now at about $80 million per unit for the A for the DoD (slightly more for FMS).

[rattman]

But it has panned out - now at about $80 million per unit for the A for the DoD (slightly more for FMS).


Yeah its actually cheaper than an Apache. I will let that sink in, you can buy 3 F-35A's for every 2 Apache

[Asturias56]

shall we say - it's taken some time..................... and all those different build versions...........

[chopper2004]

No doubt the PRC will pay close attention, too.

Mind you thought PLAAF were reportedly gonna unveil their H-20 at Zhuhai Air show, evidently it did not happen ...

However have been following Modern Chinese Warplanes FB page

https://scontent-lcy1-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/316687326_169858535674616_7741278641992986886_n.jpg?_nc_cat= 103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=yk-WdaFamR0AX9WGu_n&_nc_ht=scontent-lcy1-2.xx&oh=00_AfB7M7V0IDg-D2gfc3Xzl_U_hjyRZFDGcYQtl4Ot3hJO_w&oe=638C0FC7

https://scontent-lcy1-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/316827647_169858605674609_1627981997479318814_n.jpg?_nc_cat= 106&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=fi61ZhGjqTgAX-uGsF4&_nc_ht=scontent-lcy1-2.xx&oh=00_AfAEU3msp4dUkTzZRDotT_HNPGjXCGerWtjlkIJm8KDf4A&oe=638C92E4
https://scontent-lcy1-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/316955068_169858642341272_7638275993779882533_n.jpg?_nc_cat= 111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=mS0U509rxfYAX9N095D&_nc_ht=scontent-lcy1-2.xx&oh=00_AfDUG-qgEYVsCmCYe5S44wZi926tnuNvidbVpkJu1Mkd9Q&oe=638D471C

Anyhow the Raider rollout will probably be in the hangar with sci fi lighting effects and the sheet chucked off it...

If I am correct it be 1600 their time when event will happen? Be down the pub for late one.....that night

cheers

[tdracer]

But it has panned out - now at about $80 million per unit for the A for the DoD (slightly more for FMS).
You need to another ~$20 million for the F-35 engine (engines for the F-35 are accounted for in a separate contract than the airframe). Which gets it right up to that "twice" number...

[henra]

shall we say - it's taken some time..................... and all those different build versions...........
But still it is currently terrific military value for the money. You can complain a lot about the sometimes somewhat twisted way up to this point. You can complain about details which are not yet working perfectly. But if you now buy an F-35A and especially if you wait for the Block IV you (will) get A LOT of bang for the buck.
With e.g. JASSM-ER and Meteor you have an extremely powerful platform for not much more money than legacy platforms.
But this comes as a result of huge quantities (and there also the big Export quantities) where you can distribute even 2- digit billion development costs easily. This is for me the big question mark with the B-21. This will be an exclusive US strategic Bomber. There will be no (big) Export Sales. Each development cost increase and each reduction in quantities will have a direct and massive impact on Unit cost.

[melmothtw]

You need to another ~$20 million for the F-35 engine (engines for the F-35 are accounted for in a separate contract than the airframe). Which gets it right up to that "twice" number...

Nope, that's no longer the case and hasn't been for quite a while now - the unit cost includes the engine.

[sandiego89]

Supposedly the B-21 is being 'designed to cost' and it's at least being claimed that they are actually below budget and ahead of schedule (although I'd view that with a healthy dose of skepticism). I've heard a target price of ~$500 million/per copy, out the door (so including non-recurring costs). If they pull it off, a bargain compared to the ~$2 Billion each for the B-2.

The cost per airframe is always a bit interesting, imagine that ~$500m is if the program goes to the full 100+ airframes. The B-2 was always going to be pricy, but with the buy cut down applying the entire program costs to only 21 airframes the "per airframe" costs get eye watering. Think the B-2 was intended for @120 airframes. Of course a large buy also costs lots of money.

Other low production wallet busters: Space Shuttle (5 airframes), Air Force one replacement (2), F-22 (179), Japanese US1/PS1/F-2, C-1...

Makes the A-12/SR-71 seem like a bargain.

[RAFEngO74to09]

Sat 030030Z Dec 22 / Fri 02 1630 US PST Dec 22

(2) Northrop Grumman on Twitter: "We are one day away from the big reveal. Join us tomorrow at 4:30 pm Pacific to get your first look at the B-21: https://t.co/U2Who6wi3f This changes everything. #DefiningPossible #RiseoftheRaider https://t.co/A3mszU1fAm" / Twitter

[chopper2004]

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/9f1a834c_0edb_4de0_8a41_f2fe911fac48_4e00c19ccea17f52076a362 e97040b350d64d3d9.jpeg



Here she is

[rattman]

About as fugly as I expected

[melmothtw]

About as fugly as I expected

Came here for some expert analysis. I wasn't disappointed.

[ORAC]

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/image_e5310babaf5f3d5dca94750abbe14986a6c9b116.jpeg

[henra]

Another picture:
https://www.thedrive.com/uploads/2022/12/03/IMG_7333-scaled.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1440
and
https://www.thedrive.com/uploads/2022/12/03/B21-flag-scaled.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1440
The side windows are interesting. Wonder what the reasoning behind their very low positioning and their existance at all (what usefull can you see when looking out of those windows?) is.
Otherwise looks like a neat refinement of the B-2. Smoother with the engines better hidden. Even less orthogonal angles mainly in the cockpit area. Would be intersting what the actual size is compared to B-2.

[alf5071h]

Hype, fact, fiction ?

https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/b-21-raider/10-facts-about-northrop-grummans-b-21-raider/

[Asturias56]

seems to sit pretty low - not much space to get a munitions trolley under there as portrayed.

[henra]

seems to sit pretty low - not much space to get a munitions trolley under there as portrayed.
The 'thick' area of the fuselage appears relatively wide (see the first picture in my last post). Maybe a wide and rather flat bomb bay?

[rattman]

seems to sit pretty low - not much space to get a munitions trolley under there as portrayed.

probably angle if you look at the video, you can see a guy standing the rear and you can see the head and neck are obcured by the aircraft, so thats about 5 feet at least between belly and ground

[Liffy 1M]

Main gear seems to be just two wheels on each leg rather than the four on the B-2. Smaller and lighter aircraft, perhaps.

[Jhieminga]

Hype, fact, fiction ?

https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/b-21-raider/10-facts-about-northrop-grummans-b-21-raider/
I like this one:
6. Open Architecture.To meet the evolving threat environment, the B-21 has been designed from day one for rapid upgradeability. Unlike earlier generation aircraft, the B-21 will not undergo block upgrades. New technology, capabilities and weapons will be seamlessly incorporated through agile software upgrades and built-in hardware flexibility. This will ensure the B-21 Raider can continuously meet the evolving threat head on for decades to come.
I guess that means that halfway through a bombing raid, or just when you're about to land, the system will suddenly restart and show a screen with 'Working on updates - 20% completed - Don't turn off your B-21 Raider'.

[8674planes]

Do we think the airframe that was rolled out was a mock up or genuine?

[gums]

Salute!.

Sure looks smaller to me than the B-2.

I worked on the B-2 loadout for JDAM and that thing has two humongous bays - imagine 80 MK-82 dumb bombs or 16 JDAM's/alcm's on the rotary launchers.

I suspect less conventional/dumb bombs so more room for gas.

Gums sends...

[BlankBox]

Does it have a Lavazza machine?

[tdracer]

What I'm hearing is smaller, but longer range than the B-2. Those two things don't normally go together, but perhaps this is the exception...

[tartare]

Not too worried about what it looks like.
Long as it can't be seen, and can put warheads on foreheads - that's good enough.

[ORAC]

Do we think the airframe that was rolled out was a mock up or genuine?


https://www.defensenews.com/air/2022/12/03/deterrence-the-american-way-the-new-b-21-bomber-debuts/

….This B-21, number 001 and designated T1 for the first flight test aircraft, is one of six Raiders in various stages of construction at Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale. More will follow, though Jones would not say when construction on the seventh B-21 will likely begin.

The first B-21 has undergone ground tests in recent months, as well as final assembly and application of coatings and paint before its debut.

Its next major step will be its first flight to Edwards Air Force Base in California, expected to occur sometime in 2023. Northrop Grumman has said the date of that first flight will be based on the results of future additional ground tests. Those tests will include powering the Raider’s systems on and off, running its engines, performing taxiing test runs, and other integration tests.

Once the Raider is at Edwards, the Air Force will conduct further flight tests.

This first bomber is a production representative aircraft, essentially identical to the production aircraft that will eventually be produced by Northrop Grumman.

Jones said this differs from most new aircraft programs, which usually have their first flight conducted by a nonproduction-representative aircraft, leading to longer testing periods. He said using a production representative aircraft for the B-21′s flight tests is meant to speed up the process….

[West Coast]

The fellas who will conduct some of the jet’s testing.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-test-pilots-talk-about-its-upcoming-first-flight?fbclid=IwAR3AW6GvcIRiehG7ahfk9HpntWhis9nV59pmd0Ijv_9N AdUoMjd7TNEEKs4

[Tango and Cash]

Too early to place bets whether the B-52 will still be in service when the last B-21 is retired?

[Flugzeug A]

A quick Google reckons the USAF want at least 100 of them , “manned or unmanned”.
I assume the aircraft will be the same flightdeck-wise, or will it?
Can anyone enlighten me?

[Buster15]

Not too worried about what it looks like.
Long as it can't be seen, and can put warheads on foreheads - that's good enough.

Can't be seen?
Are they claiming that.

[rattman]

A quick Google reckons the USAF want at least 100 of them , “manned or unmanned”.
I assume the aircraft will be the same flightdeck-wise, or will it?
Can anyone enlighten me?

Unmanned has been scrapped, as to numbers officially still unknown, they would need 120 to replace the B1 and B2 1 for 1

[tdracer]

Unmanned has been scrapped, as to numbers officially still unknown, they would need 120 to replace the B1 and B2 1 for 1
Not quite - although they initially built 100 B-1s, quite a few B-1s are permanently out of service (and have been for decades) and a few were lost in accidents. Current fleet is only 61 aircraft (and operationally available numbers are pretty bad).

[Commando Cody]

Not quite - although they initially built 100 B-1s, quite a few B-1s are permanently out of service (and have been for decades) and a few were lost in accidents. Current fleet is only 61 aircraft (and operationally available numbers are pretty bad).

B-1 never enjoyed the priority of the priority of the B-2 for support, so maintenance was deferred, and parts were harder to get. Plus, given the number of wars it's participated in with very rough missions including grouind support, the fleet is just wearing out. I believe the authorized fleet is down to 45 aircraft, with four more in reclaimable storage.

[Commando Cody]

Do we think the airframe that was rolled out was a mock up or genuine?

Probably the real deal. No reason to roll out a mockup.

[Commando Cody]

Salute!.

Sure looks smaller to me than the B-2.

I worked on the B-2 loadout for JDAM and that thing has two humongous bays - imagine 80 MK-82 dumb bombs or 16 JDAM's/alcm's on the rotary launchers.

I suspect less conventional/dumb bombs so more room for gas.

Gums sends...

Most of the informed opinions state that it is smaller than the B-2 with a smaller payload, but probably maintains the range. The two wheel MLG Liffy 1M points out tends to support the lower weight position.

[Commando Cody]

Unmanned has been scrapped, as to numbers officially still unknown, they would need 120 to replace the B1 and B2 1 for 1

The official number as of now is 100. However, USAF officials say they are planning for a bomber fleet of 225 aircraft. If they succeed in re-engining 75 B-52Hs (not a certainty since the cost has risen 50% just since contract award), that would imply a requirement for 150 B-21s.

[gums]

Salute!

Good poop, Commando.

As with the F-22 reduction on the buy bid , I cannot see the U.S. congress going much above 100 Raiders. One of my acquaintances from way back in the Viper years became very high in the pecking order and he forecast between 250 amd 300 Raptors verus the 700+ bargained for. And only plane he and I saw since the early 60's that went above the original bid was the Viper. The 35 might be the second one, as unit price seems to be coming down and it seems to have mucho versatility.

One thing folks need to remember about the Bone was it was airborne artillery over the 'stan. Using JDAM's for CAS was a breakthru, but remember that the threat was non-existent.

Gums sends...

[Lonewolf_50]

One thing folks need to remember about the Bone was it was airborne artillery over the 'stan. Using JDAM's for CAS was a breakthru, but remember that the threat was non-existent. What do you mean by "the threat was non existent" there gums? :confused:
Most of the time (in my experience) the ground units usually didn't want a JDAM, they usually (but not always) wanted a different munition.
There was a limited number of A-10's in Bagram, so we didn't always have Warthogs to direct to the scene. Sometimes it was "you get a Bone or you get nothing"
(This was before Bones showed up with the smaller bombs)

[tartare]

An interesting, detailed and thoughtful analysis on Australia acquiring the B-21.
https://www.aspi.org.au/report/impactful-projection-long-range-strike-options-australia
There have been howls of laughter online "...they wouldn't even give you the F-22, the B-21 is too sensitive airframe innovation wise to export, US law won't let them, the USAF hasn't even got it yet, it's too expensive..."
But I personally think AUKUS and geopolitics have changed everything.
Seven years ago the idea of Australia acquiring nuclear subs was laughed out of the room...

[Lonewolf_50]

But I personally think AUKUS and geopolitics have changed everything.
Seven years ago the idea of Australia acquiring nuclear subs was laughed out of the room...
Won't bet against you. :ok:

[Asturias56]

"Seven years ago the idea of Australia acquiring nuclear subs was laughed out of the room..."

there are a number of posters here who will believe it when they see it - the costs will be an easy political target for many years

[Gooey]

Then you have not fully understood the recent change in the strategic environment Asturia56 and the bi-partisan acknowledgment of this in Australia.

[Asturias56]

No but I recently spent several weeks in S Australia and not everyone I met was a fan of the AUKUS programme

Once the politicians can see a cost someone will run against it. Bi-partisanship is of course central to Australian politics as we all know ;)

[West Coast]

A new pic…

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-seen-from-above-in-new-image?fbclid=IwAR1Bpdh5PfPA-8QUBVxYCsES6pfnoD2_BgQKsbUiYfMa5Ed8_xUqUnfYacE

[ORAC]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-seen-like-never-before-in-new-images

During Air Force Chief of Staff Charles Q. Brown's speech at this year's Air & Space Forces Association's mega conference outside of Washington, D.C., the soon-to-be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs dropped two new images of the B-21 Raider (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/the-b-21-raider-is-and-isnt-a-b-2-spirit-2-0). While the stealth bomber was rolled out in December (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/this-is-the-b-21-raider-stealth-bomber) of last year, it remains cloaked in secrecy. Brown, the top Air Force uniformed officer, didn't specifically reference the images in his presentation.

Up until today, only one angle of the full aircraft has been seen by the public — head-on — and in a very controlled environment at the bomber's unveiling. Aside from a close-up of the cockpit area at an angle, all imagery published since then (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-seen-from-above-in-new-image) has been from the same head-on perspective, although it has progressively shown the aircraft in more detail. Now we have our first quartering view of the flying-wing jet, which provides significant details about its design. A new head-on image also gives us a better idea of the bomber's actual size. Both images were taken at Northrop Grumman's facility at Plant 42 in Palmdale, California.



https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1876x1055/b21_side_view_d6b1b1a96d08a5026cdc3523e27ce7ff86daa3c0.jpg



https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1124/b21_raider_2_scaled_0d44961d296fb60de62088fcc9f35ae7c1246341 .jpg

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1124/b_21_raider_3_scaled_753d67f0e830de8e6cd6cdbb231567762bb2498 d.jpg

[ORAC]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2023/09/14/b-21-ground-tests-proceed-as-bombers-first-flight-deadline-approaches/

B-21 ground tests proceed as bomber’s first flight deadline approaches

[chopper2004]

https://theaviationist.com/2023/10/25/b-21-taxi-tests/?fbclid=IwAR0iFPtVsi0LpYhILwOD1krVCgrLPAddpjtME-0UFsMRvCDq38HGemQdrjo

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/b21_ground_taxi_1b167aec0fc704aa6b922db96f4d5816e5f6e66e.jpg

cheers

[Lonewolf_50]

I have seen shapelier backsides ...

[GlobalNav]

I have seen shapelier backsides ...
I don’t see anything. 😏

[West Coast]

I have seen shapelier backsides ...

Was Captain Jack involved?

[fdr]

I have seen shapelier backsides ...

I don’t see anything. 😏

Was Captain Jack involved?

Would have preferred that image wasn't on the interweb. Would think that the photographer may get a rev-up in due course. It's one thing to have publicity photos, it is another to have candid ones, that one is far too revealing.

[Less Hair]

Is it a twin?

[West Coast]

Would have preferred that image wasn't on the interweb. Would think that the photographer may get a rev-up in due course. It's one thing to have publicity photos, it is another to have candid ones, that one is far too revealing.

Assuming the photographer was in a place he/she was allowed to be, it’s legal to take the picture. The burden is on the military/manufacturer to keep it away from prying eyes.

Reminds me of the “clandestine flight” to get images of the B2 on its rollout back in 1989.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/story-behind-aviation-weeks-b-2-rollout-photo-scoop

[chopper2004]

Lonewolf_50 WestCoast

Laughingly or not you talk about rear end and taking photos, there are many aviation groups enthusiasts go on tours say RAF Lakenheath, and see either then F-15C Eagle or F-15E Strike Eagle in the HAS, the rule of thumb from the Public Affairs tour guide "take any photos up close, selfies but please do not take of the engines at the back or else".

Which is strange as any airshow the old Mildenhall Air Fete or RIAT, 9/10 you can walk behind one of Lakenheath's finest and see close up of the engines.

cheers

[Less Hair]

That is inside their base, not outside the fence of a public airport.

[chopper2004]

I have seen shapelier backsides ...

Assuming the photographer was in a place he/she was allowed to be, it’s legal to take the picture. The burden is on the military/manufacturer to keep it away from prying eyes.

Reminds me of the “clandestine flight” to get images of the B2 on its rollout back in 1989.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/story-behind-aviation-weeks-b-2-rollout-photo-scoop

That is inside their base, not outside the fence of a public airport.

the Plant 42 area or outside the N-G hangar itself.

Strictly speaking it is an airport, anyhow has anyone on here been to Plant 42 / Palmdale?

Anyone with a decent DSLR, say Cannon EOS7D and a long range lens (one of the ones which is 4 figure sum) and shoot it from the highway or somewhere public. I do not think the photographer is an employee of either USAF AFSC or N-G or anyone else there hell he has his own watermark signatory.

cheers

[Less Hair]

Apologies, I meant to say the picture seems to be taken from outside the Palmdale airport fence, so it should be okay. If USAF-PR people suggest to not take certain pictures during a base visit inside a military installation, that is okay as well.

[West Coast]

the Plant 42 area or outside the N-G hangar itself.

Strictly speaking it is an airport, anyhow has anyone on here been to Plant 42 / Palmdale?

Anyone with a decent DSLR, say Cannon EOS7D and a long range lens (one of the ones which is 4 figure sum) and shoot it from the highway or somewhere public. I do not think the photographer is an employee of either USAF AFSC or N-G or anyone else there hell he has his own watermark signatory.

cheers

PMD is a joint use airport, civilian aircraft can land there.

[SLXOwft]

Car (automobile) manufacturers are given to putting false contours on prototypes before public launch - I assume that isn't beyond Northrop's capabilities prior to transfer to Edwards.:).

[RAFEngO74to09]

First flight today!

(3) Disclose.tv on X: "JUST IN - First flight of the U.S. military's B-21 Raider strategic bomber. https://t.co/lk5qqbaXt9" / Twitter

[RAFEngO74to09]

B-21 Raider Has Flown For The First Time | The Drive (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-has-flown-for-the-first-time)

[ORAC]

B-21 first flight…

​​​​​​​https://x.com/theaviationist/status/1722998179572903958?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A

[Ninthace]

You would think for all that money, it would have had retractable undercarriage :E

[ORAC]

https://x.com/jonspaceharper/status/1723036373244924361?s=61&t=rmEeUn68HhlFHGKbTPQr_A


The exterior is continuously curved, with all leading edges swept at the same angle (including hatches).

The bomb bay is the only flat surface (and this may have a gentle curve we cannot see in this lighting).

This is mathematically a nightmare for radars. 🤘

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1213x729/image_58982d45169189678aa8b22d49769110d10a57c6.png
​​​​​​​

[magyar_flyer]

Probably a dumb question but isn't acoustic stealth part of the package?

[tartare]

Sounded pretty quiet to me in the video.