Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

[Mat Parry]

If it did, there would be nothing to gained by disclosing the fact. I'd imagine USAF would prefer to keep those kind of capabilities to themselves for as long as possible

 

[zhuravlik]

How about this capability?

 

[dark sidius]

What is this drawing ?

 

[SpudmanWP]

Stealth version of this?

or this?

 

[dark sidius]

A bomber abble to launch paratroopers ? This drawing have something to see with the B-21 ?

 

[Orionblamblam]

What is this drawing ?

Looks like a Rutan concept from some years back for stealthy insertion of troops. In this case via a capsule; plane would drop the capsule, troops would get out and do their thing, then the capsule would be recovered via Fulton system.
http://stargazer2006.online.fr/aircraft/pages/tidds.htm

Pity about the low rez of the images on this page...

 

[Mat Parry]

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,20555.msg201828.html#msg201828

MODEL 223 CAPSULE DELIVERY/RECOVERY SYSTEM
Capsule-delivery/recovery turbofan

The Model 223 system, illustrated in two separate three-views, (one for delivery and one for recovery) shows a different approach to the basic problem of sneaking in and sneaking out unobserved. Instead of attempting to hover and infil with the entire aircraft and the return fuel. Only the payload is delivered to the landing zone. The payload delivery system is different from a standard airdrop scenario, however. A large (approximately 4 foot deep) airbag shock attenuation system allows the payload capsule with six passengers to be dropped at a sink rate of approximately 50 feet per second while limiting the impact accelerations to less than l2Gs. This can be further reduced to approximately 9Gs using stroking seats. The high sink rate delivery allows the capsule to be targeted with precision similar to the precision delivery of a smart bomb. Position designators or GPS is used to provide a landing area reference and the descent parachute is steerable in any lateral direction in order to position the payload into a small area. The “bomber” comprises its low observable shape only for the extraction, then can orbit undetected or return for refueling during ground operations of the infil crew. For recovery, the ground crew deploys a lanyard with a helium balloon, similar to the C-130 rescue system developed for the Vietnam era personnel recovery system. The mother ship picks up the payload lanyard and hauls it onboard for the high altitude stealthy cruise home. Thus, only the payload plus approximately 2,000 pounds is delivered to the high intensity area.

 

[Kiltonge]

Incorrect. The engine case (not cowling, that's aircraft structure) is generally intended to stop (low speed) fan blades. Not "a high speed turbine at tens of thousands of rpms".

FAA certification requirement AC 33-5: "Turbine Engine Rotor Blade Containment/Durability."

b. Critical rotor blade means the compressor or fan blade, and the turbine blade, which when released provides the most challenge to the containment structure

Your engine will NOT be certificated if it cannot contain the tangential trajectory of a blade:

(3) Test Results. The engine is acceptable if:

(i) At completion of the test, the damage resulting from a critical rotor blade failure is contained
by the engine structure

The requirement also requires analysis be conducted and submitted showing the energy levels and trajectories of fragments outside the reinforced sections of casing e.g. coming out the exhaust.

 

[antigravite]

Hi.

For What it's worth. Here is an "old" design patent from Northrop-Grumann (#D588519S) for a "Flying Wing Aircraft", filed in 2007 and issued on March 17, 2009. Team engineers named here were certainly involved in the design of B-21. This patent is - obviously - quite different from the preliminary artwork unveiled some time ago, but it is certainly part of the history (design process) leading to what is currently known as B-21, prior its name is crowdsourced.

A.

 

[Mr London 24/7]

Hi.

For What it's worth. Here is an "old" design patent from Northrop-Grumann (#D588519S) for a "Flying Wing Aircraft", filed in 2007 and issued on March 17, 2009. Team engineers named here were certainly involved in the design of B-21. This patent is - obviously - quite different from the preliminary artwork unveiled some time ago, but it is certainly part of the history (design process) leading to what is currently known as B-21, prior its name is crowdsourced.

A.

This is old (NGB) news here, please:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,191.msg54224.html#msg54224

Team engineers named here were certainly involved in the design of B-21

Really?: because its a flying wing?

 

[NeilChapman]

AF testifies that 100 B-21's is not a budget constrained number but a strategic number based on projected need of 170-200 bombers (legacy + B21). Ninety-six of just over 150 bombers are combat coded today.
They expect to look in future at requirements to determine additional B-21 needs "or some other platform toward the end of the buy."

Discussion startes @ 20 min mark.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hx1wf4eKOc&ebc=ANyPxKrTFispynwjgSwJ9IX9tuHSx79bhw0-xUClC7SAemsLEF_izsWxZeCzwOKBrtpq2j8iHu3cD86C-0wmCymGm30iOWGp6w

 

[bobbymike]

Lawmakers worry new B-21 bomber will be another F-35 money pit

Lawmakers are concerned that the Air Force’s newest proposed aircraft, the B-21 bomber, could see major cost overruns similar to those on the F-35, which is already estimated to be $160 billion over budget.

www.airforcetimes.com

Politicians are usually a major cause of this they seem to forget.

 

[Flyaway]

Sue Payton was the top acquisition official in the Air Force during one of the most difficult times in the service’s history, right after her predecessor Darleen Druyun was sent to prison and Boeing’s CEO was forced out over unethical and illegal activities connected with the tanker contract. Payton labored mightily then to build an Air Force acquisition system that boasted “transparency and integrity,” so she knows how hard it can be to shepherd a large and hard-fought contract through the political and military minefields. In the following op-ed, Payton offers her thoughts on why the current Pentagon and Air Force leadership fared well in awarding the B-21 contract for 100 bombers to Northrop Grumman.

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/03/b-21-is-one-big-win-for-air-force-acquisition-sue-payton/

 

[sferrin]

Lawmakers worry new B-21 bomber will be another F-35 money pit

Lawmakers are concerned that the Air Force’s newest proposed aircraft, the B-21 bomber, could see major cost overruns similar to those on the F-35, which is already estimated to be $160 billion over budget.

www.airforcetimes.com

Politicians are usually a major cause of this they seem to forget.

"We were supposed to have 600 F-22s, we got 187. We’re supposed to have 80-something B-2s, we got 20."

Somebody should educate that guy. We got 187 F-22s (instead of 750 not 600) because "nobody else will have a stealth fighter for 20 years" and we got 20 B-2s (instead of 132 not 80) because "the Cold War is over" and everybody was going to gather round for a round of kumbya.

 

[NeilChapman]

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/03/07/lawmakers-worry-new-b-21-bomber-another-f-35-money-pit/81319112/

Politicians are usually a major cause of this they seem to forget.

"We were supposed to have 600 F-22s, we got 187. We’re supposed to have 80-something B-2s, we got 20."

Somebody should educate that guy. We got 187 F-22s (instead of 750 not 600) because "nobody else will have a stealth fighter for 20 years" and we got 20 B-2s (instead of 132 not 80) because "the Cold War is over" and everybody was going to gather round for a round of kumbya.

Just to add to your statement about 187 F-22's in raw numbers. According to the AF we currently have 120 combat-coded F-22's.

 

[dark sidius]

The 67 are in reserve ?

 

[NeilChapman]

The 67 are in reserve ?

Already retired, don't contain a full set of avionics or weapons packages, ~50-60 maintained for training/testing purposes.

After you get to the 120 number, then you get the Mission Capable Rate (MCR). Supposedly for F-22 this is ~70% (In a Congressional Research Service document in 2009 the rate was 60%).

This takes the 120 number down to ~84.

 

[marauder2048]

What are other candidate engines?

F414
F110-GE-129/132
F118
New design (e.g. Advent studies)

The notional PW9000 @ 30,000 lbs s.t.

Apparently it's the not-so-notional PW9000

Air Force says Pratt & Whitney will build B-21 engine

Washington – Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford will build the engine for the Pentagon’s new super secret long-range bomber, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said Monday.

The new bomber, which has been called the B-21, will be built by Northrop Grumman. But the Air Force has kept the identities of the suppliers and subcontractors secret, citing national security.

But James said Monday she would identify some of the suppliers “in the spirit of transparency.”

Besides Pratt & Whitney, which will supply its PW9000 engine to power the plane, James said BAE, Rockwell Collins, Spirit Airlines, JKN and Orbital ATK will help make the bomber’s airframe.

The announcement of the suppliers came just days after the General Accounting Office rejected a protest from Boeing and Lockheed Martin to the awarding of the bomber’s contract to Northrop Grumman.

http://ctmirror.org/2016/03/07/air-force-says-pratt-whitney-will-build-b-21-engine

Emphasis mine.

EDIT: The article has been updated to say "probably [the] PW9000" so we probably need to wait for the official transcript.

 

[sferrin]

Sounds like anything but a 30k engine:

Pratt & Whitney lifts wraps on PW9000 future military engine

Pratt & Whitney has started working on a new family of engines for the military aircraft market based on a gear-less version of the PW1000G

www.flightglobal.com

"The company has begun a "limited development activity" to adapt the smallest version of the PW1000G - the 15,000lb-thrust (67kN) PW1215 - for military applications, says Jimmy Reed, P&W's director of advanced engine programmes."

Six years ago.

 

[dark sidius]

Not the advent engine ?

 

[Dragon029]

http://ctmirror.org/2016/03/07/air-force-says-pratt-whitney-will-build-b-21-engine
Emphasis mine.

I think you misquoted or they edited the article:

Besides Pratt & Whitney, which will supply one of its existing engines, most probably the PW 9000, to power the plane, James said BAE, Rockwell Collins, Spirit Airlines, JKN Janacki Industries and Orbital ATK will help make the bomber’s airframe and work on mission systems.
Emphasis mine - it could be the PW 9000, but it's not confirmed.

 

[NeilChapman]

Sounds like anything but a 30k engine:

Pratt & Whitney lifts wraps on PW9000 future military engine

Pratt & Whitney has started working on a new family of engines for the military aircraft market based on a gear-less version of the PW1000G

www.flightglobal.com

"The company has begun a "limited development activity" to adapt the smallest version of the PW1000G - the 15,000lb-thrust (67kN) PW1215 - for military applications, says Jimmy Reed, P&W's director of advanced engine programmes."

Six years ago.

That's not the impression I'm getting. Looks the the low-end was a concept engine.

ANALYSIS: Adaptive engine technology moves beyond the fan

A 10- to 15-year look ahead into Pratt & Whitney's vision for military engine technology reveals a very different kind of propulsion system.

www.flightglobal.com

P&W gears up for next-generation military engine

Patent applications offer clues to Pratt & Whitney's next-generation military engine, which could borrow from the manufacturer's commercial geared turbofan

www.flightglobal.com

Pratt & Whitney PW1000G - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[NeilChapman]

Makes sense to use the F135. They'll be plenty of parts in the depot system.

another bit of info...

Pratt Recovery on F135 Paves Way for Future | Aviation Week Network

Pratt & Whitney says retrofits of the F135 engine to enable unlimited operations in the F-35 are happening faster than originally planned and are on track for completion by early 2016.

aviationweek.com

"Pratt is working with the U.S. Navy on a fuel burn improvement program for the engine which, combined with other turbine cooling technologies recently tested on the XTE68/LF1 demonstrator engine, could be packaged as the first block of a two-step enhancement. Engine tests planned for 2016 should demonstrate a 5% fuel burn reduction. Pratt expects the main benefits of the upgrades to be used to lower operating temperatures and provide longer time on wing. The company has set a goal to reduce sustainment costs for the F135 by a factor of 30%.

For a longer term block two upgrade path, Pratt is studying the possibility of configuring the F135 with elements of a technology suite in development for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory’s (AFRL) Adaptive Engine Transfer Program (AETP). Designed to prepare the ground for an adaptive, 45,000-lb.-thrust-class combat engine for sixth-generation combat aircraft, AETP also provides a possible future re-engining candidate for the F-35."

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The original site has retracted the claim. It now says

"James said the plane would use an existing Pratt and Whitney engine, but did not specify which one. Speculation has centered on the PW9000."

 

[sferrin]

I wonder if whatever they're looking at at the moment is an "interim" engine. Hard to believe they'd spend all the time and money on HEETE / ADVENT and then not use it. ???

US Air Force Research Laboratory to combine Advent with HEETE technology

In the next six to 12 months the US Air Force Research Laboratory is to establish the goals for its proposed AD-HEETE project, a follow-on from its ongoing...

www.flightglobal.com

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

F135 makes sense from a risk reduction perspective. Even an F135-PW1000G hybrid could be acceptable (its all existing technology).

 

[marauder2048]

I wonder if whatever they're looking at at the moment is an "interim" engine. Hard to believe they'd spend all the time and money on HEETE / ADVENT and then not use it. ???

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-air-force-research-laboratory-to-combine-advent-w-225964/

AETP/AED will award two contracts later this year to GE and P&W and then down-select after a 5 year development program. Not sure where that intersects with B-21 development.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Historically engines took longer than aircraft to develop. Not sure this is still correct however.

 

[NeilChapman]

I wonder if whatever they're looking at at the moment is an "interim" engine. Hard to believe they'd spend all the time and money on HEETE / ADVENT and then not use it. ???

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-air-force-research-laboratory-to-combine-advent-w-225964/

I was thinking the same thing. The more I read about procurement reform the more I get the feeling that the pendulum is moving to an acknowledgement that you'll field a solution with an expectation of upgrades. This flying and developing of the F-35 is FUBAR. It will be nice to get another couple of hundred miles on an F35 sortie.

It's probably not out of the realm of possibility that B21 will get some sort of block upgrades to the existing F135 if only for additional stealth characteristics - let alone the additional thrust and range. I guess it depends on whether P&W can get all the AETP features certified in time.

 

[sferrin]

It will be nice to get another couple of hundred miles on an F35 sortie.

The F-35 isn't exactly hurting in the range department but there's no such thing as too much range.

 

[marauder2048]

I wonder if whatever they're looking at at the moment is an "interim" engine. Hard to believe they'd spend all the time and money on HEETE / ADVENT and then not use it. ???

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-air-force-research-laboratory-to-combine-advent-w-225964/

I was thinking the same thing. The more I read about procurement reform the more I get the feeling that the pendulum is moving to an acknowledgement that you'll field a solution with an expectation of upgrades. This flying and developing of the F-35 is FUBAR. It will be nice to get another couple of hundred miles on an F35 sortie.

It's probably not out of the realm of possibility that B21 will get some sort of block upgrades to the existing F135 if only for additional stealth characteristics - let alone the additional thrust and range. I guess it depends on whether P&W can get all the AETP features certified in time.

B-2 and F-35 were both provisioned from the start for upgrades. But the US Government owned no technical data rights for B-2 (it now owns some) , owns some data rights (and will own more in the future) for F-35 and should own most of the data rights for B-21.

Whether government ownership of data rights actually makes any material difference to the schedule/perf/cost of upgrades is IMHO a very open question.

 

[sferrin]

I wonder if whatever they're looking at at the moment is an "interim" engine. Hard to believe they'd spend all the time and money on HEETE / ADVENT and then not use it. ???

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-air-force-research-laboratory-to-combine-advent-w-225964/

I was thinking the same thing. The more I read about procurement reform the more I get the feeling that the pendulum is moving to an acknowledgement that you'll field a solution with an expectation of upgrades. This flying and developing of the F-35 is FUBAR. It will be nice to get another couple of hundred miles on an F35 sortie.

It's probably not out of the realm of possibility that B21 will get some sort of block upgrades to the existing F135 if only for additional stealth characteristics - let alone the additional thrust and range. I guess it depends on whether P&W can get all the AETP features certified in time.

B-2 and F-35 were both provisioned from the start for upgrades. But the US Government owned no technical data rights for B-2 (it now owns some) , owns some data rights (and will own more in the future) for F-35 and should own most of the data rights for B-21.

Whether government ownership of data rights actually makes any material difference to the schedule/perf/cost of upgrades is IMHO a very open question.

If the government doesn't own ALL of the rights to the B-2 who does? I'd think since it paid for it it owns it.

 

[marauder2048]

If the government doesn't own ALL of the rights to the B-2 who does? I'd think since it paid for it it owns it.

NG, Raytheon, BAE Systems, and GE.

As the B-2 undergoes its various modernization efforts, the government has been purchasing data rights.

 

[NeilChapman]

It will be nice to get another couple of hundred miles on an F35 sortie.

The F-35 isn't exactly hurting in the range department but there's no such thing as too much range.

It's like "too much horsepower" - a good start!

 

[sferrin]

If the government doesn't own ALL of the rights to the B-2 who does? I'd think since it paid for it it owns it.

NG, Raytheon, BAE Systems, and GE.

As the B-2 undergoes its various modernization efforts, the government has been purchasing data rights.

Are you talking about stuff that went into the bomber that had been previously developed by those companies on their own dime?

 

[marauder2048]

If the government doesn't own ALL of the rights to the B-2 who does? I'd think since it paid for it it owns it.

NG, Raytheon, BAE Systems, and GE.

As the B-2 undergoes its various modernization efforts, the government has been purchasing data rights.

Are you talking about stuff that went into the bomber that had been previously developed by those companies on their own dime?

It tends to be stuff that was developed in part with internal funds and in part with Federal funds.

Prior to 2012, the type of data rights the government could obtain for such developments varied and was negotiable. Now, the government gets, at a minimum, "government purpose" data rights which only
restrict commercial use of the data.

 

[NeilChapman]

FYI...

"The FY 2017 budget request centralizes the oversight and control of the nuclear enterprise by transferring ownership of Kirtland Air Force Base from Air Force Material Command (AFMC) to Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) and transferring the B-1 bomber / Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) mission from Air Combat Command (ACC) to AFGSC. These moves transferred over 8,600 military and civilian authorizations into AFGSC’s oversight."

I'm sure the first B-21's will go to Edwards. Not sure if this means B-21 to be stationed at Kirkland. Any thoughts?

 

[TomS]

No reason to think the B-21s will be based there. Kirtland doesn't host any other bombers and it shares runways with the Albuquerque Sunport commercial airport, so I think it's unlikely to be a bomber base in the future.

 

[NeilChapman]

No reason to think the B-21s will be based there. Kirtland doesn't host any other bombers and it shares runways with the Albuquerque Sunport commercial airport, so I think it's unlikely to be a bomber base in the future.

Thanks!

Any thoughts on what the various named suppliers will be doing?

http://www.janicki.com/f-35-halo-pole-model-inverted-for-testing/

"Janicki Industries’ expertise in building composite prototypes was tapped by Lockheed Martin in producing the Full Scale Pole Model for its F-35 stealth fighter jet program. The model is now being used to test radar signature and other key performance data."

Perhaps they've done the same thing for the B-21? They could also be helping with building tooling for the assembly line among other things.

 

[NeilChapman]

Evidently the LM DMS system on the B-2 never worked adequately.

Perhaps good assumption that B-21 will use the BAE EMS system that replaced it in B2, F35 and F22?

BAE Systems to Supply B-2 Threat-Warning System Upgrade | AIN

Business, Air Transport, Defense & General Aviation News

www.ainonline.com

Thoughts?