Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

A new dedicated long range missile with combined rocket and scramjet engines for true hypersonic flight is what I am wanting but the AIM-260 will just have to do for now I suppose.
 
FighterJock said:
A new dedicated long range missile with combined rocket and scramjet engines for true hypersonic flight is what I am wanting but the AIM-260 will just have to do for now I suppose.
Click to expand...

I personally wonder if HACM will have an air to air mode for use against slow multi engine targets. ASALM apparently was going to have an air to air mode for anti AEW work, though presumably with a nuclear weapon (kinda cheating).
 
Josh_TN said:
I personally wonder if HACM will have an air to air mode for use against slow multi engine targets. ASALM apparently was going to have an air to air mode for anti AEW work, though presumably with a nuclear weapon (kinda cheating).
Click to expand...
Or will AARGM-ER have such a mode? After all we know ARMs can go after large aircraft, even if by mistake.
 
Forest Green said:
aviation.stackexchange.com

What are those hatches on the engines of a B-2 that are open during takeoff?

I just watched this drool-inducing video of Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit, And noticed that there are a couple of hatches near each engine, which were open: I initially thought they were open for some
aviation.stackexchange.com aviation.stackexchange.com


View attachment 728086
Click to expand...
The Raider's cat ears are no doubt secondary intake doors, just singular (for one engine). I believe that the individual door on the raider is significantly larger than either of those on the raider, likely since it is parallel to the airflow and doesn't force the air down into the intake.

Notably, having only 2 doors instead of 4 is significantly easier to maintain and actuate...
Screen Shot 2024-05-06 at 8.32.53 AM.png
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Or will AARGM-ER have such a mode? After all we know ARMs can go after large aircraft, even if by mistake.
Click to expand...

I do not see the point; it would not have a range advantage over something like AIM-260. Where as it appears that not only will HACM have a range measured in hundreds of miles/kilometers, it also would be holding speed through that entire flight path to shorten the intercept time. I cannot imagine that the tiny control surfaces would allow for air to air engagements again fighters, but for something like a four engine tanker or AEW plane, I would think it could just lead the target a bit with a dive and proxy fuse and probably put enough shrapnel in the air to get the job done.
 
4decaa said:
The Raider's cat ears are no doubt secondary intake doors, just singular (for one engine). I believe that the individual door on the raider is significantly larger than either of those on the raider, likely since it is parallel to the airflow and doesn't force the air down into the intake.

Notably, having only 2 doors instead of 4 is significantly easier to maintain and actuate...
View attachment 728104
Click to expand...
It can serve like tails:D:D
 
I have a question ? Why we can have photography of the B-21 rear while we never had on the B-2 before decades ? The B-21 is very classified but they show us the exhausts ?
 
dark sidius said:
I have a question ? Why we can have photography of the B-21 rear while we never had on the B-2 before decades ? The B-21 is very classified but they show us the exhausts ?
Click to expand...

The B-2 exhaust is still classified and the USAF is still touchy about what angle and distance you photograph it. It is hardly surprising that the new IR suppressing systems are at least as secretive, especially given that they are unwilling to even confirm how many engines it has.
 
dark sidius said:
Yes I don't understand why this is so easy to see the nozzle of the B-21 for a highly classified plane....
Click to expand...
One only can wonder what exactly nozzle secrets you have seen on fistful of pics full of heat haze when some couldn't even count their numbers.
 
What is remarkable in these cat* ears (nice call) is that contrary to the bypass inlets on the B-2, here the bracing structure for them is reversed, meaning that instead of acting against the air to flow in when not in use, they are structurally built to prevent air from flushing out.
It might only be a consequence of a stealth requirement but that doesn´t seems probable. I would say that ram air pressure due to the particular geometry of the inlets leads to this design alteration b/w both aircraft.

*Bat?!
 
Last edited:
An interesting photo that I don't believe was shared here, dated back to the initial reveal of the Raider. Note the departure from the B-2's nose design, with a far more pointy or even stretched shape....
1715151789850.png
 
4decaa said:
An interesting photo that I don't believe was shared here, dated back to the initial reveal of the Raider. Note the departure from the B-2's nose design, with a far more pointy or even stretched shape..
Click to expand...
The B-21 made public roll out in december 2022 this picture now is interesting but it was interesting before the roll out ....
 
dark sidius said:
I have a question ? Why we can have photography of the B-21 rear while we never had on the B-2 before decades ? The B-21 is very classified but they show us the exhausts ?
Click to expand...
The B-2 had one the day it was rolled out. It was on the cover of Aviation Week.
 
sferrin said:
The B-2 had one the day it was rolled out. It was on the cover of Aviation Week.
Click to expand...

That pic wasn't quite the "up-kilt" shot of the B-21 seen earlier in the thread. USAF is still pretty protective of what's inside the exhaust ducts.
 
TomS said:
That pic wasn't quite the "up-kilt" shot of the B-21 seen earlier in the thread. USAF is still pretty protective of what's inside the exhaust ducts.
Click to expand...
True but all you're really seeing is darkness. You can't see up it. (The shot earlier in the thread that is.)
 
Does anyone know of Aircraft with Panels that resemble those seen here on the Raider? Even with similar function (assuming that, these panels are for radiating heat from the exhaust/hot section of the engine...) Might the B-2, or any other aircraft designed around a low thermal signature? 1715296838369.png 1715296777048.png 1715296742551.png
 
They are not above engine bays. May be related to APU bays / APU exhausts
 
flateric said:
They are not above engine bays. May be related to APU bays / APU exhausts
Click to expand...
Yes, I do not disagree with this at all. if projected through the skin, they are directly above these "auxiliary" bays (which would make sense) 1715297609294.png
 
I really wanted there to be auxiliary bomb bays, but Im convinced everything is maintenance outside the center bomb bay.
 
Josh_TN said:
I really wanted there to be auxiliary bomb bays, but Im convinced everything is maintenance outside the center bomb bay.
Click to expand...
Yup. I wanted space for a couple of AARGM-ERs that didn't take space in the bomb bay, and could use a faster-moving door to the small bay.
 
Josh_TN said:
I really wanted there to be auxiliary bomb bays, but Im convinced everything is maintenance outside the center bomb bay.
Click to expand...
So did I... Once people noticed that these doors are both a. split into two main doors b. have different small panels on them, it was wraps for the missile bay idea
1715302268409.png
 
Josh_TN said:
I really wanted there to be auxiliary bomb bays, but Im convinced everything is maintenance outside the center bomb bay.
Click to expand...
As on the B-2, going outboard to inboard, MLG > possibly engine bay door (got to be able to engine swaps, hydro, ECS maintenance, etc) > possible small payload/weapons bay door(s) > then the single, main weapons bay. Don't know when we will see any top view images, probably not any time soon since there are no official flight test images or videos.
 
Hydroman said:
As on the B-2, going outboard to inboard, MLG > possibly engine bay door (got to be able to engine swaps, hydro, ECS maintenance, etc) > possible small payload/weapons bay door(s) > then the single, main weapons bay. Don't know when we will see any top view images, probably not any time soon since there are no official flight test images or videos.
Click to expand...
With those mid bays split the way they are, I'm eyeballing the length of the forward part to 6-8ft (roughly the width of the central bay). The aft part of those doors suggests things other than a weapons bay, and the forward part is too short to hold anything but a SDB.

Those bays between the engine access doors and the bomb bay are highly unlikely to be weapons bays just due to the length.
 
Josh_TN said:
Given that CCAs will start enter service around the same time as B-21, I would think they would end up having some or operating behind fighters that did

I was thinking SM-6 would be a fascinating piece of ordnance because it would be long range air to surface/anti ship/air to air, but more realistically SiAW will fill two of those roles and be carried in larger numbers, so presumably that would be adopted once available.
Click to expand...
SM-6 is a fantastic bit of kit. Whatever ordinance is prevalent with 1000 CCA's they need to value engineer for manufacturing volume and cost. $4M missiles won't cut it.
 
Scott Kenny said:
... and the forward part is too short to hold anything but a SDB.
Click to expand...
Possibly a similar purpose?
1553810000189-dadadac.jpg
 
_Del_ said:
Possibly a similar purpose?
1553810000189-dadadac.jpg
Click to expand...
I believe that it would make more sense for the decoy panel to be closer to the aft of the raider rather than sitting mostly in the middle of the underside… think one of the panels where the trailing air data probe was attached during the initial flight. (obviously instead of being externally attached it would release from the bay as it opens as on the f35)

edit: likely some of these panels 1715634869849.png
 
Last edited:
Chaff and Flares for the B-21? The B-2 never had either Chaff or Flares to defend itself instead it relied on pure Stealth. So I would think the same would be true for the B-21.
 
I am still kind of surprised that no one has written a story about the $77.13m military construction contract that was awarded as part of the original LRS-B award in 2015.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom