Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

Isn't DoD moving towards a distributed, very low orbit GPS alternative anyway? Plus INS are a lot more accurate than back in the day.
 
GreenBullet said:
If those squares are for air data, and they function when covered, as I assume they must unless they only did it because the test probe is attached (why?), what kind of sensor are they? My lay understanding is that the current state of the art flush air data sensors are laser based. Is it possible there is a different way to do it that works through a co-designed, sensor transparent RAM? Ultrasonic or microwave or something?
Click to expand...
The test probe is to give known good data to compare to the flush air data sensors.
 
GreenBullet said:
Isn't DoD moving towards a distributed, very low orbit GPS alternative anyway?
Click to expand...
The US Congress, among others, are very sceptical about this concept. Not surprising, given that such a system would be very vulnerable to pop-ups, not to mention things like air and ship launched ASAT missiles. And I rather doubt that the hype about replenishing such constellations at will would hold up in wartime (and perhaps not even in peacetime, or what passes for it these days).

(This time the reply system worked, what ever was up.)
 
Forest Green said:
Never understood why ACM was scrapped.
Click to expand...

It apparently had reliability issues, which is definitely something you don't want in a nuclear weapon. But also, axing it allowed a "vertical cut" that eliminated a whole maintenance and training infrastructure. If they kept ACM they still needed some ALCMs as well to meet the target numbers (and for CALCM at the time, which had no ACM counterpart). That means keeping two training schoolhouses or courses, for example.
 
Grey Havoc said:
The US Congress, among others, are very sceptical about this concept. Not surprising, given that such a system would be very vulnerable to pop-ups, not to mention things like air and ship launched ASAT missiles. And I rather doubt that the hype about replenishing such constellations at will would hold up in wartime (and perhaps not even in peacetime, or what passes for it these days).

(This time the reply system worked, what ever was up.)
Click to expand...


Understood. I'm also skeptical that the notional system would enter service in the window of time in which the B-21 would be most expected to perform. So AINS all around.
 
Scott Kenny said:
The test probe is to give known good data to compare to the flush air data sensors.
Click to expand...

Apologies, I failed to articulate what I was saying properly: Knowing that it doesn't make sense that those flush sensors would be rendered useless in testing, I'm wondering what kind of air data sensor works through a solid medium. I'm not an expert in these things, but I recall a laser based solid state sensor being the way to go for LO air data, although a young technology. So either it's just a very small port/window embedded in the covering material, not visible in picture, or there is a way to do it that works through whatever material they've laid over it. My first intuitions are microwave or ultrasonic, but I'm not qualified to even judge the feasibility of that.
 
GreenBullet said:
Apologies, I failed to articulate what I was saying properly: Knowing that it doesn't make sense that those flush sensors would be rendered useless in testing, I'm wondering what kind of air data sensor works through a solid medium. I'm not an expert in these things, but I recall a laser based solid state sensor being the way to go for LO air data, although a young technology. So either it's just a very small port/window embedded in the covering material, not visible in picture, or there is a way to do it that works through whatever material they've laid over it. My first intuitions are microwave or ultrasonic, but I'm not qualified to even judge the feasibility of that.
Click to expand...
Ah, gotcha!
 
TomS said:
It apparently had reliability issues, which is definitely something you don't want in a nuclear weapon. But also, axing it allowed a "vertical cut" that eliminated a whole maintenance and training infrastructure. If they kept ACM they still needed some ALCMs as well to meet the target numbers (and for CALCM at the time, which had no ACM counterpart). That means keeping two training schoolhouses or courses, for example.
Click to expand...

I did not hear about reliability issues but I seem to recall maintenance was more costly (stealth coatings?). But in any case the main issue was not enough of them being built to support requirements (which I assume was an end of the Cold War/peace dividend thing) and a desire to downsize to a single platform and parts/training stream as you say.
 
Are there any rendered images of the view from the cockpit made by anyone?
 
Shirley any interior views would be a LONG way down the line, anything produced now or short term would be pure guesswork.
 
Foo Fighter said:
Shirley any interior views would be a LONG way down the line, anything produced now or short term would be pure guesswork.
Click to expand...
i don't mean any views of the cockpit and instrumentation itself, I mean the view out of the cockpit. Someone should be able to do this as we know what the shape of the windows look like and as such the view out of them (excepting any restricted view because of the instrumentation panel housing itself). I'm interested as the cockpit windows are so unusual.
 
Hydroman said:
To my knowledge, the only platforms which used the AINS:
A-12/SR-71
Snark
B-52
B-2
It's quite a pricey piece of equipment as well but yes, would be smart if the B-21 uses AINS.
Click to expand...
FB-111 had one, the B-52 is a sextant port (still there, not used), I also believe the KC-135 had had a sextant port (I'll have to check with the former -135 pilot I work with in the morning)
 
So we should stop calling the B-21 prototype a prototype then from Airpower2.0s view, that actually makes more sense now Forest Green. Could that mean that the six production representative B-21s could ultimetely enter service?
 
FighterJock said:
So we should stop calling the B-21 prototype a prototype then from Airpower2.0s view, that actually makes more sense now Forest Green. Could that mean that the six production representative B-21s could ultimetely enter service?
Click to expand...
I'd actually hope not.

Firstly because that means Congress is buying more than a handful.
Second because at least one of those will be a structural test airframe, and that's the last bird I'd want flying on the grounds that the fatigue tests should have greatly weakened the structure.
Third because the Test squadron will always need a couple airframes for weapons quals and other things.
 
If the USAF used the test articles instead of actual service B-21s then that would quite possibly mean that there will be more Raiders available than there otherwise would.
 
Forest Green said:
Is due in service by 2027.
theaviationist.com

Second B-21 Raider Under Construction As The First One Approaches Roll-Out In Early 2022

The lessons learned from the construction of the first B-21 Raider bomber are being used to improve the second one, which will be used for structural
theaviationist.com theaviationist.com
Click to expand...
I thought there were SIX under construction a year ago?

www.defensenews.com

New in 2024: With first B-21 flight done, Northrop eyes next contract

The first B-21 flight came nearly a year after its highly publicized December 2022 debut in California.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

"The Air Force has confirmed at least six B-21s are in various stages of construction by Northrop Grumman or are undergoing tests."
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'd actually hope not.

Firstly because that means Congress is buying more than a handful.
Second because at least one of those will be a structural test airframe, and that's the last bird I'd want flying on the grounds that the fatigue tests should have greatly weakened the structure.
Third because the Test squadron will always need a couple airframes for weapons quals and other things.
Click to expand...
Hopefully, it will pass the tests and then go on display somewhere secure. Possibly the desk of the president. Granted he or she will require a bit of an extension for that.
 
I suspect all four EMD aircraft are raised to production standards, assuming any modifications are even necessary. That does not preclude those airframes from being used for testing.
 
sferrin said:
So there should be even more than six now, no?
Click to expand...

Officially the B-21 is in low rate production, though I have not read anything indicating the rate of progress since it was declared that six airframes were in some state of production. Unclear if any of the six have been completed outside the test airframe.
 
There has not been any further news from Northrop in regards to anything outside of low rate production but obviously that may change given the time that it takes NG to build the six airframes.
 
No one has mentioned any dates or times for production to my knowledge. All I’ve read is that LRIP will be across five lots of a total of twenty aircraft, and presumably full rate starts afterwards.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom