FighterJock
ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Joined
- 29 October 2007
- Messages
- 5,028
- Reaction score
- 4,897
Is that a part of the engine exaust that I see on the side veiw of the B-21? Or am I seeing things.
From this side view the windows shape is really weird.Wow…..
Not weirder than the B-2....From this side view the windows shape is really weird.
I'd guess APU exhaust.This side view is really mesmerizing
I really wonder even more today if the tiny cockpit does not retract backward in flight (hence the angled side windows).
I can identify some kind of outlets on the upper side of the aft central body. What are those? Nozzles?
Rear gunner of courseThis side view is really mesmerizing
I really wonder even more today if the tiny cockpit does not retract backward in flight (hence the angled side windows).
I can identify some kind of outlets on the upper side of the aft central body. What are those? Nozzles?
WOAW AwesomeLightened images better showing lower details from The Drive: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-seen-like-never-before-in-new-images
A Lance!The "spike", the long pitot tube for flight testing, looks deadly too.
The jutting out leading edge reminds me of the Tacit Blue.Darn the more you see of the B-21 the weirder and smaller it looks. Those cockpit windows are just bizarre.
New leading edge RAS allowed to make it narrower and move cockpit forward on B-2 during redesign.The original ATB design had the cockpit placed a bit further back with a 'duckbill' too.
My guess about the windows is that they're the largest the engineers would allow and the smallest the pilots would tolerate, probably because the material is not as stealthy as the coating on the rest of the plane.
Their odd shape is the result of strictly-determined sight lines for very specific purposes passing through angled an curved planes - slice pyramids at an angle and you get trapezoids or rhomboids. The side windows give a view of the inlets and leading edges and the forward ones are for takeoff/landing and refuelling. A high altitude bomber doesn't need any more than that, though probably there's a synthetic vision system also.
I wonder if the AF has thought of recruiting submariners to fly it?
Those of us around the B2 remember the trailing cone system used for calibration during the early flight test program on AV-1. Once the flush port system is calibrated, the boom pitot will go away.The "spike", the long pitot tube for flight testing, looks deadly too.
In fact top sets are present too - visible in front of windshields on heated metallic plates just like on B-2.Would speculate that the three sets of four small "squares" are for the quad-redundant air data system ports. That all of these sets are below the leading edge means that a $1 billion lesson was learned from the B-2 "Spirit of Kansas" mishap on Guam.
Apparently the future of aerial combat will be jousting.A Lance!
There are mil specs I guess that determine minimums for pilot FoVs that still may have been adapted for advanced designs (I wonder how process did look for XF-103 or X-59A). Also minimizing tranparencies area saves _a lot_ of weight.My guess about the windows is that they're the largest the engineers would allow and the smallest the pilots would tolerate.
I find it very interesting that so far each photo is taken at such an angle that it's impossible to see just how that knick in the upper inlet lip works.
The air data ports are spread farther apart also as compared to B-2. The flight test boom is in an interesting location. Behind the outlined escape hatches you can see the painted pattern for the aerial refueling receptacle. You know Cancerman, I'm still not thrilled with the dual NLG doors, hopefully they do not get into any out sequence conditions. When I was at the CTF for B-2, I am one of only a few engineers who never dropped the NLG on the wheel door during special ground gear configurations for testing. Looks to have the same number of flight surfaces as the B-2 but they would not need the GLAS surface. The aircraft may not have split rudders like the B-2, they may just split the outboard elevons for yaw control since there is no low altitude requirement.Those of us around the B2 remember the trailing cone system used for calibration during the early flight test program on AV-1. Once the flush port system is calibrated, the boom pitot will go away.
The port position was determined by the data collected during wind tunnel testing. The outer skin shape effects pressure at different angles of attack and beta positions. I sure that the dual NGD is the compromise of the forward position and the shape and contour of the lower nose area and it's structure underneath. Looks overly complex but maybe that was the trade off. Yeah the GLAS panel was just that, a Gust Load Alleviation Panel. I'm sure that when the ship (B21) is at low level / pattern / approach altitude, it won't be over 250 Knots. The split rudder does several things, provides Yaw control, used as speed brake, glide path control, and at pattern speeds below 250 Knots, increases the response and effectivness of the rudder itself, thats why you always see them extended until it's around .6 mach or higher. When you hit the "Go to war"configuration, so to speak, they fully retract to reduce RCS as well as the pop up antennas, Aux doors, etc. All surfaces can be commanded to provide whatever it takes to get the airplane to do what it's commanded to. Most people have no idea just what the B2 can do flight wise. The planform is basically the result of RCS vs aerodynamics. The math and it's compromises are why the NG stealth planes looks the way they do, good or bad! Why mess with success, right? Still would have loved to see our ATA in the air. The RQ-180 also is a result of this, as well as the X-47. The cranked arrow was mission driven as well.The air data ports are spread farther apart also as compared to B-2. The flight test boom is in an interesting location. Behind the outlined escape hatches you can see the painted pattern for the aerial refueling receptacle. You know Cancerman, I'm still not thrilled with the dual NLG doors, hopefully they do not get into any out sequence conditions. When I was at the CTF for B-2, I am one of only a few engineers who never dropped the NLG on the wheel door during special ground gear configurations for testing. Looks to have the same number of flight surfaces as the B-2 but they would not need the GLAS surface. The aircraft may not have split rudders like the B-2, they may just split the outboard elevons for yaw control since there is no low altitude requirement.
Really glad they are moving forward, maybe we'll see some taxi test videos and then first flight. Also, can't beat the shaping: original B-2 planform, our ATA and now B-21, don't mess with success.
I think it's still got the B-2 "Toothpick" LE shape...Did my own enhancement of the image.View attachment 707716
There are 3 outboard surfaces, two of which are elevons, most outboard is a combination split rudder/elevon, and the inboard is a elevon, just outside of the exhaust trough. Nothing too sneaky.I think the dark patch behind and above the intake is a discoloration or shadow. One thing that did stand out to me is that it looks like there are three flaps on the wing*, but a forth one to the right of those looks to be at a different angle such that it must be tail mounted. That would point to a unified diamond shape tail as in the renderings, though so far we've not confirmed the actual item has that geometry. Also a control surface in that position must be in, above, or most likely directly below the exhaust stream, which is interesting.
*EDIT: we can rule out any active airflow control mechanism or flex wing arrangement; control surfaces seem conventional. Or at least major movements still use conventional control surfaces, even if there is some kind of alternative stealthy mechanism for minor control inputs.
CM, you are probably right, like the B-2, inboard, mid, outboard elevons and upper/lower rudders but no GLAS surface. For keeping costs down (related to my area of subsystems, primarily hydro and actuation, I assume like the B-2, distributed hydraulic systems (maintaining the 4000 psi system, could be 5000 psi for some weight savings) and Moog flight control actuators, I don't think its using EHAs, they are extreme electrical power hogs. Weapons bay door drive system is probably Moog as well. The F-22 uses Curtiss-Wright drive systems (main and side bays). ECS could be vapor cycle (more efficient) instead of bleed air and all avionics/radar are liquid cooled, more than likely PAO.There are 3 outboard surfaces, two of which are elevons, most outboard is a combination split rudder/elevon, and the inboard is a elevon, just outside of the exhaust trough. Nothing too sneaky.
Retractable perhaps?Apparently the future of aerial combat will be jousting.