Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

[MC72]

The Cerberus Flight
In November the long-awaited new Northrop B-21 Raider stealth bomber flies, singularly it is done without the classic veil of secrecy that usually surrounds these important black projects until their total maturation; The reasons for this propaganda display may be due to several reasons, such as a way to give face to the new game changer of the Air Force, which in these complex times are an important asset on the geopolitical level, both for allies and adversaries, It is also important to show the image of a healthy defense industry that is powerful and at the technological forefront, at least one generation ahead in this specialty, when China or Russia are still trying to match the B-2 Spirit of the first generation, which is now 33 years old, The United States launches the second strong generation in addition to all the experience gained from the three-decade operation of the B-2; On the other hand, the maximum secrets that surround the fleeting morphology of the brand new B-21 Raider are not exposed excessively, which in a certain way emphasizes the lines of the old B-2 Spirit, but that surely keeps in its bowels the numerous high-level technologies that are jealously guarded inside.

Even so, the “generous” images of the first flight of the Northrop B-21 Raider allow us to refine a somewhat more precise idea of the general configuration of this new bomber and be able to establish certain concepts:
1- From the new images taken from various angles, it can be established that the B-21 Raider has a single large weapons bay with capacity for a multipurpose rotary launcher (the B-2 has 2)
2- It is also highlighted that the propulsion of this bomber is Bi-engine and not Tetra-engine as in the case of the larger B-2 Spirit; There remains a cloak of secrecy over the selected propellant, which could be a variant of the military PW-9000 derived from the civil PW-1000 family. Another candidate may be a variant based on the PW F-135 used in the F-135 program. 35, and finally there is also the GE XA-100 which is expected to replace some variants of the same PW F-135 (except the STOVL variant).
3- Between the central warehouse and the engine bays appear what appear to be smaller warehouses in the same style as those of the USAF F-22 or the PLAAF J-22, which could be intended for Air-Air weapons and also to additional Air-Ground or Air-Sea attack weaponry. It is not ruled out that in the future they could house energy weapons.
4- The B-21 has its wings angled at 40º degrees and not at 35º as suggested by the previous interpretation of numerous publications to date that replicate the angulation applied to the B-2 Spirit; This greater arrow of the B-21 Raider in its entire configuration suggests higher transonic speed performances than those of the B-2.
This angulation is repeated throughout the perimeter (front and rear, producing a symmetrical central body in the shape of a rhombus with vertices of 100º in the bow and stern and 80º on the sides, which configures a load-bearing body with great volumetric capacity where they are installed. all the specialized elements of this new bomber, the extension of the sides forms the wings with their fuel tanks.
5- The fenestration of the cockpit of the B-21 Raider is particularly small, surely seeking to reduce the surface of these windshields as much as possible with sufficient vision for general flight activities. The cabin internally must have space for the pilot and co-pilot seats. On the other hand, pilots must have electronics that provide them with a very high “Situational Awareness” of high quality provided by both on-board electronics and satellite links or between similar units.
6- Last but not least, it is suggested and not at all unlikely that to increase the deterrent power of this machine that it can fly in “Drone” mode (without a crew), multiplying the capabilities of this bird by not depending on the human resistance, being able to fly long missions solely dependent on in-flight resupply with Tanker Drones, which implies that the 100 planned units can have a 24/7 presence and projection.

Greetings MC72

 

[MC72]

The new images available after the inaugural flight of the B-21 Raider bomber on November 15, 2023 allow us to clear up several unknowns regarding the interior distribution, a fairly uniform central section can be seen, an even flat bottom and with a large volumetric capacity as can be seen. Compare with the estimate from the previous year. A main weapons bay (E) with an LRA rotary launcher has been confirmed; flanked by two smaller holds (D) for AA weapons and with a lot of future development potential for directed energy weapons. Between the landing gear and the central weapons bays are housed the power plants (C) under development, probably the announced P&W 9000 military line based on the high-efficiency civil P&W 1000 line. The landing gear bay (B) is a little closer between the two and they retreat forward. The interior fuel tanks (A) are

Greatings MC72

 

[MC72]

Regarding the angle adopted by the B-21, it would not be the 35 degrees used by the predecessor B-2.
However, thanks to the numerous photos taken by witnesses, the prototype of the B-21 passes almost vertically to the viewer with minimal angular distortion that compared to the version that appeared in Aviation Week in October 2023, an appreciable difference in the wing angle is noted. and as a result a rhomboidal central body that is noticeably more compact and capable.
Greatings MC72

 

[flateric]

compared to the version that appeared in Aviation Week in October 2023

this is not October, but updated postflight November Joe Picarella art

 

[paralay]

let 's compare

 

[MC72]

The best comparison in this case is with a real photo taken almost vertically from the photographer with minimal distortion and compare it with the various alternatives with a simple parallel line common to all images.
The 35 degree inclined wing of the B-2 Spirit, taken up by Aviation Week, has caused a lot of confusion in the world of aviation fans, but in reality in light of the inaugural flight of the B-21 Raider it is evident that this new aircraft handles a greater angle that is or is close to the value of 40° degrees, otherwise very well graphed in an early post from the same Paralay where the nose angle was almost completely close to 100° and not 110° of the B-2 Spirit.
This angular difference causes the central box of the plane as well as the wingtips to be deformed with respect to the plane seen in public on its first flight in November.
On the other hand, it fits very well the 40° into the overall geometry of this prototype.
Greatings MC72

 

[flateric]

@MC72 https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/northrop-grumman-b-21a-raider-lrs-b.25915/post-635232

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The detailed underside views you are relying on are not from directly below - so your conclusions on wing angle are probably incorrect.

 

[Hydroman]

The Cerberus Flight
In November the long-awaited new Northrop B-21 Raider stealth bomber flies, singularly it is done without the classic veil of secrecy that usually surrounds these important black projects until their total maturation; The reasons for this propaganda display may be due to several reasons, such as a way to give face to the new game changer of the Air Force, which in these complex times are an important asset on the geopolitical level, both for allies and adversaries, It is also important to show the image of a healthy defense industry that is powerful and at the technological forefront, at least one generation ahead in this specialty, when China or Russia are still trying to match the B-2 Spirit of the first generation, which is now 33 years old, The United States launches the second strong generation in addition to all the experience gained from the three-decade operation of the B-2; On the other hand, the maximum secrets that surround the fleeting morphology of the brand new B-21 Raider are not exposed excessively, which in a certain way emphasizes the lines of the old B-2 Spirit, but that surely keeps in its bowels the numerous high-level technologies that are jealously guarded inside.

Even so, the “generous” images of the first flight of the Northrop B-21 Raider allow us to refine a somewhat more precise idea of the general configuration of this new bomber and be able to establish certain concepts:
1- From the new images taken from various angles, it can be established that the B-21 Raider has a single large weapons bay with capacity for a multipurpose rotary launcher (the B-2 has 2)
2- It is also highlighted that the propulsion of this bomber is Bi-engine and not Tetra-engine as in the case of the larger B-2 Spirit; There remains a cloak of secrecy over the selected propellant, which could be a variant of the military PW-9000 derived from the civil PW-1000 family. Another candidate may be a variant based on the PW F-135 used in the F-135 program. 35, and finally there is also the GE XA-100 which is expected to replace some variants of the same PW F-135 (except the STOVL variant).
3- Between the central warehouse and the engine bays appear what appear to be smaller warehouses in the same style as those of the USAF F-22 or the PLAAF J-22, which could be intended for Air-Air weapons and also to additional Air-Ground or Air-Sea attack weaponry. It is not ruled out that in the future they could house energy weapons.
4- The B-21 has its wings angled at 40º degrees and not at 35º as suggested by the previous interpretation of numerous publications to date that replicate the angulation applied to the B-2 Spirit; This greater arrow of the B-21 Raider in its entire configuration suggests higher transonic speed performances than those of the B-2.
This angulation is repeated throughout the perimeter (front and rear, producing a symmetrical central body in the shape of a rhombus with vertices of 100º in the bow and stern and 80º on the sides, which configures a load-bearing body with great volumetric capacity where they are installed. all the specialized elements of this new bomber, the extension of the sides forms the wings with their fuel tanks.
5- The fenestration of the cockpit of the B-21 Raider is particularly small, surely seeking to reduce the surface of these windshields as much as possible with sufficient vision for general flight activities. The cabin internally must have space for the pilot and co-pilot seats. On the other hand, pilots must have electronics that provide them with a very high “Situational Awareness” of high quality provided by both on-board electronics and satellite links or between similar units.
6- Last but not least, it is suggested and not at all unlikely that to increase the deterrent power of this machine that it can fly in “Drone” mode (without a crew), multiplying the capabilities of this bird by not depending on the human resistance, being able to fly long missions solely dependent on in-flight resupply with Tanker Drones, which implies that the 100 planned units can have a 24/7 presence and projection.

Greetings MC72

Looking at the top of the aircraft, forward of the inboard elevons, if the aircraft does in fact has inlayed surfaces, I would assume they would be used during landing as a type of spoiler, these would be from the X-47A and B. Very early on in the program for the B-2 there was aft, outboard underbelly flaps which were completely ineffective and were pinned up in-place for AV1-AV3 then removed completely during the next block upgrade. I'm pretty sure that AV4 and on, they were non-existent. When we built the iron bird at Pico, the actuators but were installed but in-active then removed.

 

[MC72]

The detailed underside views you are relying on are not from directly below - so your conclusions on wing angle are probably incorrect.

Dear overscan (PaulMM), the Photo in question of the Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (I repeat) is taken almost vertically to the impartial observer, it is a very powerful and undeniable document, the theoretical distortion with a total vertical by trigonometry is very minimal and the angle of the nose of this aircraft has even been measured, a value that is 99° and fraction (Post by Mr. Paralay in an early and accurate post), in short it is practically 100° for the nose of the B-21, very far from the mythical 110° of the B-2 Spirit's nose and the distorted material previously delivered by interested agencies.
I can understand wanting to think of a greater semantic brotherhood between the B-2 and B-21 in this aspect, but the evidence is clear that the wing angle of attack of the B-21 is greater than that of its brother B-2.
Greatings MC72

 

[flateric]

Once more. What the sweep angle on these photos?

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/northrop-grumman-b-21a-raider-lrs-b.25915/post-635232

 

[MC72]

Looking at the top of the aircraft, forward of the inboard elevons, if the aircraft does in fact has inlayed surfaces, I would assume they would be used during landing as a type of spoiler, these would be from the X-47A and B. Very early on in the program for the B-2 there was aft, outboard underbelly flaps which were completely ineffective and were pinned up in-place for AV1-AV3 then removed completely during the next block upgrade. I'm pretty sure that AV4 and on, they were non-existent. When we built the iron bird at Pico, the actuators but were installed but in-active then removed.

Indeed
There are two surfaces on the underside that perform (I assume) the same joint air brake function.
Due to the photographic material available, although the general shape is clear, there is still no complete vision of the exact configuration and distribution of the different surface elements.

Looking at the top of the aircraft, forward of the inboard elevons, if the aircraft does in fact has inlayed surfaces, I would assume they would be used during landing as a type of spoiler, these would be from the X-47A and B. Very early on in the program for the B-2 there was aft, outboard underbelly flaps which were completely ineffective and were pinned up in-place for AV1-AV3 then removed completely during the next block upgrade. I'm pretty sure that AV4 and on, they were non-existent. When we built the iron bird at Pico, the actuators but were installed but in-active then removed.

Indeed
There are two surfaces on the underside that perform (I assume) the same joint air brake function.
Due to the photographic material available, although the general shape is clear, there is still no complete vision of the exact configuration and distribution of the different surface elements in the top view of this aircraft.
Greatings MC72

 

[flateric]

There are no any underside surfaces on B-21 that looks any close to underbelly flaps on first B-2 found unusable even prior to FCHIL tests. Theory that B-21 has them on upper surface was based on presentation image that has - it was clear from the beginning - little in common with a real dog configuration.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'm still not totally sold on the bays between the engines and the central weapons bay being weapons bays. Or at least not for their entire length.

 

[flateric]

And talking again of suggested topside flaps - I'm pretty sure spotters were observing hours of open air maiden flight preps that surely included hydraulics/actuators/control surfaces movement checks so if they have seen those it would be shoot/known.

 

[Q-nimbus]

I'm still not totally sold on the bays between the engines and the central weapons bay being weapons bays. Or at least not for their entire length.

Me neither. They’re maintenance hatches for the engines and bombing rack.

 

[flateric]

Engine and weapons bays have their own doors for that.
ECS, EDG, APU, may be OBIGGS access.

 

[flateric]

35 vs. 40 for dog ears

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

35 vs. 40 for dog ears

I think we've demonstrated its 35 beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[MC72]

Once more. What the sweep angle on these photos?

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/northrop-grumman-b-21a-raider-lrs-b.25915/post-635232

Dear,
with the many photos available but out of context, it is almost more of a problem because if they are taken out of context, a cherry picking can be done tailored to the argument that you want to promote or vice versa, so first it is important to put these in a common context and thus understand how the relative position with respect to a fixed observer can easily fool the eye about the geometry of a moving 2D object. The ideal is a document that involves objectively verifiable time and sequence, such as a video; I have taken a 7-second fragment of a video published on YouTube with the name “B-21 Raider & B-2 Spirit Takeoff” (which I attach to the respective Link) (second T+51' to T+57' precisely)

There you can see the dynamics of the movement dissected like in anatomy the second keys of a Flyover of the B-21 Raider over a fix observer where you can observe and understand how this figure quickly changes shape in a few seconds, but that the sequence within the context common of the video clarifies us and brings us closer to the true nature of its Shape.

Each frame has its respective Time threading the entire sequence; I measured all the apparent angles of the B-21's nose in each frame and how this value goes down until the Flyover (Frame Sec. T+56') above the observer and then begins to go up again.

The silhouette of the B-21 is advancing along a straight axis (Z axis), at the moment of the Flyover over the observer we have a minimum of distortion in the Z axis and some in the X axis (wing plane).
At that moment the nose of the B-21 appears with a value of 93° (which indicates the lateral distortion with respect to the observer). The Flyover is also the moment of least distortion of the entire flight observation, because there is only a single variable left on the X axis (wing plane).

The sequence also shows the B-21 precisely with the silhouette proposed by Aviation Week that corresponds to frame T+53',with the nose of the plane at an angle of 111° (Three seconds before the Flyover) therefore with a lot of distortion due to the two axes (X and Z) where the wing dimensions (X) are oversized to the detriment of the longitudinal ones (Z), which are on the contrary undersized, showing the central body as an elongated rhombus (instead of the more square one in the Flyover) and the peculiar very sharp wing tips.

Last but not least
Another important piece of information that can be extracted from the Flyover sequence is that we know in advance that the longitudinal line of the plane, if it intersects with the line that passes through the wingtips, forms a perpendicular intersection with four 90° angles.
If the Y axis (height) is constant, if the forward Z axis is in its Flyover over the observer and only the X axis (wing plane) has a little distortion, the value that presents the smallest difference between the angles is also the figure with the most auspicious proportions.

Greatings MC72

 

[Sundog]

If you understand how perspective works and construct the vanishing point at the correct location, you only need one image.

Dear,
with the many photos available but out of context, ....

 

[quellish]

B-21 shelter prototype is in place at Ellsworth

B-21 Prototype Environmental Protection Shelters construction, test underway

Air Force Global Strike Command and the B-21 Program Office are testing various prototype shelters to identify the most effective and affordable designs that could be used across all three B-21 Main

www.af.mil

44.153439, -103.100403

 

[flateric]

Dear,
with the many photos available but out of context, it is almost more of a problem because if they are taken out of context, a cherry picking can be done tailored to the argument that you want to promote or vice versa, so first it is important to put these in a common context and thus understand relative position with respect to a fixed observer can easily fool the eye about the geometry of a moving 2D object.

I thought that common understanding is that photographer standing almost right below flightpath gets more accurate planform view on overflight than those standing a mile or so to the side.

 

[MC72]

If you understand how perspective works and construct the vanishing point at the correct location, you only need one image.

This is Wonderful and it's so simple
So I hope you will enlighten us shortly

 

[flateric]

Engine and weapons bays have their own doors for that.
ECS, EDG, APU, may be OBIGGS access.

Dark spots on upper surface are placed not above engine bays but seemingly right above mystery bays so APU exhausts with their hot air may be there - just like APU inlets (I don't see any at the bottom but they shouldn't be big - but should be doubled as there are two APU as there are two spots on top. Or...who knows.
So spots should save RAM structure and topcoat from burns or/and soot. Some white objects barely seen inside spots on ground shots.
Just a theory though.

 

[Sundog]

This is Wonderful and it's so simple
So I hope you will enlighten us shortly

Just this once, I will. I'll enlighten you to something called "Google." It took me less than a minute to find this.

View: https://youtu.be/0lJy61KMT88?si=DlJ2XLtpYOLLh0gz

 

[flateric]

I'd try ImageModeler or ReCap.

 

[MC72]

Just this once, I will. I'll enlighten you to something called "Google." It took me less than a minute to find this.

View: https://youtu.be/0lJy61KMT88?si=DlJ2XLtpYOLLh0gz

Thank you, it will surely help me improve some forgotten techniques; Last year I made a very speculative cutaway of what the B-21 could be, with two engines in the central bomb bay and at that time the idea of reproducing the wing angle without many references was 35 degrees. In the future I hope to order all the news in a new cutaway Aggiornato of the B-21.
Greatings

 

[MC72]

Looking at the top of the aircraft, forward of the inboard elevons, if the aircraft does in fact has inlayed surfaces, I would assume they would be used during landing as a type of spoiler, these would be from the X-47A and B. Very early on in the program for the B-2 there was aft, outboard underbelly flaps which were completely ineffective and were pinned up in-place for AV1-AV3 then removed completely during the next block upgrade. I'm pretty sure that AV4 and on, they were non-existent. When we built the iron bird at Pico, the actuators but were installed but in-active then removed.

The upper part of this new bird maintains several doubts and mysterious hints, such as the dark patches on the back or the exact geometry of the air intake or exhaust lips.
The presence of airbrakes is still speculative until the braking method is clarified, or if it is done with a reverse engine, with airbrakes or parachutes, I do not find the latter desirable for a new airplane generation.
Greatings

 

[MC72]

Indeed
There are two surfaces on the underside that perform (I assume) the same joint air brake function.
Due to the photographic material available, although the general shape is clear, there is still no complete vision of the exact configuration and distribution of the different surface elements.

Later there is a photo where a cable comes out of one of these figures.
Being a prototype on its first flight, I don't think they were subtracted from an airbrake, especially on the first flight, which leaves the braking system in flight a mystery or at least until a landing video of a B-21 appears.
Greatings

 

[quellish]

Later there is a photo where a cable comes out of one of these figures.
Being a prototype on its first flight, I don't think they were subtracted from an airbrake, especially on the first flight, which leaves the braking system in flight a mystery or at least until a landing video of a B-21 appears.
Greatings

That was a static air data source. The first B-2 had one as well.

Trailing cone - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[flateric]

which leaves the braking system in flight a mystery or at least until a landing video of a B-21 appears.
Greatings

You have three control surfaces on outer wing sections, why have dedicated airbrakes if you can open say pair of three in scissors mode to act as airbrakes?

 

[Q-nimbus]

Dark spots on upper surface are placed not above engine bays but seemingly right above mystery bays so APU exhausts with their hot air may be there - just like APU inlets (I don't see any at the bottom but they shouldn't be big - but should be doubled as there are two APU as there are two spots on top. Or...who knows.
So spots should save RAM structure and topcoat from burns or/and soot. Some white objects barely seen inside spots on ground shots.
Just a theory though.

The APU is for ground operations only so it’s off during flight. There’s only one APU.

They might also be exhausts for the airconditioning packs although I would expect them to be somewhere near the engine exhausts for stealth reasons.

 

[flateric]

The APU is for ground operations only so it’s off during flight. There’s only one APU.

Fact they are off during flight doesn't mean you don't need bother of exhaust temps on the ground. And how do you know it's "only one" APU? For example - as it was said above - B-2 has two (in MLG bays).

 

[TomcatViP]

Only one door would be open if the 2nd APU was a backup unit.
We still have to see if during regular operation both doors are open but if that is the case, that points toward a separate system.

 

[Orionblamblam]

I'd try ImageModeler or ReCap.

I tried ImageModeler. I'm garbage at running this program, but I managed to get a sweepback angle of between 33.9 and 35.0 degrees.

Meh.

I'm satisfied to wait for a clear overhead view. I'm sure the Chinese have several.

 

[sferrin]

I tried ImageModeler. I'm garbage at running this program, but I managed to get a sweepback angle of between 33.9 and 35.0 degrees.

Meh.

I'm satisfied to wait for a clear overhead view. I'm sure the Chinese have several.

China could probably just take a measurement in the CAD files. I fully expect to hear in the coming years that the B-21 is utterly compromised.

 

[Orionblamblam]

China could probably just take a measurement in the CAD files. I fully expect to hear in the coming years that the B-21 is utterly compromised.

Oh, sure. But they'll probably leak the photos they took of the test flight from a balloon first.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I tried ImageModeler. I'm garbage at running this program, but I managed to get a sweepback angle of between 33.9 and 35.0 degrees.

Meh.

I'm satisfied to wait for a clear overhead view. I'm sure the Chinese have several.

That's pretty conclusive that it isn't 40 degrees though.

 

[Orionblamblam]

That's pretty conclusive that it isn't 40 degrees though.

Just you wait: all the whackadoodle conspiracy theories about stealth bombers having "plasma stealth" or "active camouflage" or "cloaking devices" will of course turn out to be bunk, but we'll eventually find out that the B-21 is the first aircraft to be fitted with a Perspective Muddler, and the sweepback is actually 47 degrees.