Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

Well that told us a whole heap of nothing other than who won it & a few cost figures.
 
"Good afternoon. Company X won. Good day folks."


I should've gone to Vegas.
 
Flyaway said:
Well that told us a whole heap of nothing other than who won it & a few cost figures.
Click to expand...

I don't know - I got the impression this bird will be one bad ass beast with teeth. Global strike from CONUSA? Dammit man, them engines must be pimp.

Well done Northrop.
 
Boxman said:
No mention as to who the engine manufacturer will be for the aircraft as per the classified nature of the program ( ::) ), though they said the engine manufacturer has been selected as part of the contract award.
(Unless, of course, I am misunderstanding what the folks at the podium are saying).
Click to expand...

What this most likely means is that the EMD contract to Northrop most likely includes the Engine as propulsion was part of their bid meaning most likely that Northrop Grumman had chosen an OEM for engines. This is different from fighter procurement where the cost of the fighter is a fraction of that of a bomber, and the engine is a fair change of that cost and the overall numbers procured make the engine contract so large that they compete it as well. If I had to guess I'd guess that they let the bidders pick their propulsion solutions.
 
bring_it_on said:
Boxman said:
No mention as to who the engine manufacturer will be for the aircraft as per the classified nature of the program ( ::) ), though they said the engine manufacturer has been selected as part of the contract award.
(Unless, of course, I am misunderstanding what the folks at the podium are saying).
Click to expand...

What this most likely means is that the EMD contract to Northrop most likely includes the Engine as propulsion was part of their bid meaning most likely that Northrop Grumman had chosen an OEM for engines. This is different from fighter procurement where the cost of the fighter is a fraction of that of a bomber, and the engine is a fair change of that cost and the overall numbers procured make the engine contract so large that they compete it as well. If I had to guess I'd guess that they let the bidders pick their propulsion solutions.
Click to expand...
That's what I got out of it, too.
 
NG's earnings conference call tomorrow will be interesting...or just an exercise in futility e.g."We can't comment on the bomber"
 
marauder2048 said:
NG's earnings conference call tomorrow will be interesting...or just an exercise in futility e.g."We can't comment on the bomber"
Click to expand...

Their stock has shot right up now.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/noc
 
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/626131/air-force-awards-lrs-b-contract.aspx

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article...-awards-contract-for-long-range-strike-bomber


The Long Range Strike Bomber contract is composed of two parts. The contract for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development, or EMD, phase is a cost-reimbursable type contract with cost and performance incentives. The incentives minimize the contractor’s profit if they do not control cost and schedule appropriately. The independent estimate for the EMD phase is $21.4 billion in 2010 dollars.The second part of the contract is composed of options for the first 5 production lots, comprising 21 aircraft out of the total fleet of 100. They are fixed price options with incentives for cost. Based on approved requirements, the Average Procurement Unit Cost (APUC) per aircraft is required to be equal to or less than $550 million per aircraft in 2010 dollars when procuring 100 LRS-B aircraft. The APUC from the independent estimate supporting today’s award is $511 million per aircraft, again in 2010 dollars.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    338.5 KB · Views: 900
marauder2048 said:
NG's earnings conference call tomorrow will be interesting...or just an exercise in futility e.g."We can't comment on the bomber"
Click to expand...
They won't be able to give specifics but I imagine a whole lot of back-slapping will be at hand.
 
Did I miss it or did no one ask when the general public would get a glimpse of it?
 
marauder2048 said:
Did I miss it or did no one ask when the general public would get a glimpse of it?
Click to expand...

I saw they were briefed beforehand not to ask too much because of classification.
 
So....

2xF135 or 4xF414?

My bet is F135 since future upgrades like AETD will benefit both.
 
flateric said:
boeing.mediaroom.com

Boeing and Lockheed Martin Statement on U.S. Air Force Long Range Strike-Bomber Decision

<p><strong>WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2015</strong> – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] today released the following statement on the U.S. Air Force’s decision to award Northrop Grumman the Long Range Strike-Bomber contract:</p>
boeing.mediaroom.com boeing.mediaroom.com
Click to expand...

We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk
Click to expand...

You guys and *everyone* else...
 
Too bad LM was on the "other" team.

It would have been SOOO easy to grab the avionics from the F-35 and adapt them to the LRS-B.

Throw in Fibermat & EOTS for good measure.
 
marauder2048 said:
flateric said:
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-10-27-Boeing-and-Lockheed-Martin-Statement-on-U-S-Air-Force-Long-Range-Strike-Bomber-Decision
Click to expand...

We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk
Click to expand...

You guys and *everyone* else...
Click to expand...

I sense a contract protest.
 
SpudmanWP said:
Throw in Fibermat & EOTS for good measure.
Click to expand...

It's Northrops any way isn't it? So they keep their toys inside their airframe.
www.northropgrumman.com

Home - Northrop Grumman

Northrop Grumman solves the toughest problems in space, aeronautics, defense and cyberspace to meet the ever evolving needs of our customers worldwide. Our 95,000 employees define possible every day using science, technology and engineering to create and deliver advanced systems, products and...
www.northropgrumman.com www.northropgrumman.com
 
Called it

boeing.mediaroom.com

Boeing and Lockheed Martin Statement on U.S. Air Force Long Range Strike-Bomber Decision

<p><strong>WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2015</strong> – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] today released the following statement on the U.S. Air Force’s decision to award Northrop Grumman the Long Range Strike-Bomber contract:</p>
boeing.mediaroom.com boeing.mediaroom.com

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2015 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] today released the following statement on the U.S. Air Force’s decision to award Northrop Grumman the Long Range Strike-Bomber contract:

The Boeing and Lockheed Martin team is disappointed by today’s announcement. We will have further discussions with our customer before determining our next steps. We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk, as we believe that the combination of Boeing and Lockheed Martin offers unparalleled experience, capability and resources for this critically important recapitalization program.

Boeing is the world’s largest aerospace company and leading manufacturer of commercial airplanes and defense, space and security systems. In addition, Boeing supports airlines and U.S. and allied government customers in more than 150 countries. The company’s products and tailored services include commercial and military aircraft, satellites, weapons, electronic and defense systems, launch systems, advanced information and communication systems, and performance-based logistics and training. Boeing employs more than 165,000 people across the United States and in more than 65 countries. Company revenues for 2014 were more than $90 billion. Follow us on Twitter: @Boeing.

Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 112,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s net sales for 2014 were $45.6 billion.
Click to expand...
 
SpudmanWP said:
Called it

boeing.mediaroom.com

Boeing and Lockheed Martin Statement on U.S. Air Force Long Range Strike-Bomber Decision

<p><strong>WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2015</strong> – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] today released the following statement on the U.S. Air Force’s decision to award Northrop Grumman the Long Range Strike-Bomber contract:</p>
boeing.mediaroom.com boeing.mediaroom.com

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2015 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] today released the following statement on the U.S. Air Force’s decision to award Northrop Grumman the Long Range Strike-Bomber contract:

The Boeing and Lockheed Martin team is disappointed by today’s announcement. We will have further discussions with our customer before determining our next steps. We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk, as we believe that the combination of Boeing and Lockheed Martin offers unparalleled experience, capability and resources for this critically important recapitalization program.

Boeing is the world’s largest aerospace company and leading manufacturer of commercial airplanes and defense, space and security systems. In addition, Boeing supports airlines and U.S. and allied government customers in more than 150 countries. The company’s products and tailored services include commercial and military aircraft, satellites, weapons, electronic and defense systems, launch systems, advanced information and communication systems, and performance-based logistics and training. Boeing employs more than 165,000 people across the United States and in more than 65 countries. Company revenues for 2014 were more than $90 billion. Follow us on Twitter: @Boeing.

Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 112,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s net sales for 2014 were $45.6 billion.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

flateric previously posted the link to this press release.
 
SpudmanWP said:
"We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk,. . .
Click to expand...

Yo, Boeing, how's that KC-46 coming along? When's the last time either you or Lockheed built a bomber? Oh, and there's the door. Don't let it hit you on the back side on the way out.
 
sferrin said:
Triton said:
marauder2048 said:
flateric said:
http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-10-27-Boeing-and-Lockheed-Martin-Statement-on-U-S-Air-Force-Long-Range-Strike-Bomber-Decision
Click to expand...

We are interested in knowing how the competition was scored in terms of price and risk
Click to expand...

You guys and *everyone* else...
Click to expand...

I sense a contract protest.
Click to expand...

Let them. Let them pay all the court costs of both sides when their protest is tossed out too.
Click to expand...


Hourly fees for expert witnesses and attorneys are capped (~$150/hr) for contract protests. 3DELRR is being recompeted on the basis of a handful of emails that weren't cc'ed. So who knows..
 
Swat Boeing with T-X, Lockheed can go be happy with the half the DoD they already own.
 
SpudmanWP said:
Too bad LM was on the "other" team.

It would have been SOOO easy to grab the avionics from the F-35 and adapt them to the LRS-B.

Throw in Fibermat & EOTS for good measure.
Click to expand...

Obviously NG met or exceeded the requirements. Why is too bad a decade old avionics suite won't grace the new bomber? The F35s sensor suite ain't black magic; it's solid state physics, optics, EE, and software. I'm sure some of the avionics on the new bomber are already flying in production aircraft today.

A stagnant engineering R&D base... it would be criminal to "cut and paste" too much c/o h/w.
 
OK, so now I want to know what the Boeing/ LM Long Range Strike Demonstrator looks like. Is that what we saw flying over Texas?
 
Northrop Grumman was selected to build 100 Long Range Strike Bomber (LRSB) aircraft on October 27, 2015 (today). Neither the LRSB's propulsive system nor its designation was given.

If it's to be unmanned it could be designated BQ-x, if manned it could be designated B-3. The reason no designation was given, as I see it, is that the USAF isn't firm on its crew situation as of yet - whether operators will be aboard it or on the ground. -SP
 
Airplane said:
SpudmanWP said:
Too bad LM was on the "other" team.

It would have been SOOO easy to grab the avionics from the F-35 and adapt them to the LRS-B.

Throw in Fibermat & EOTS for good measure.
Click to expand...

Obviously NG met or exceeded the requirements.
Click to expand...

Never in question but the relative weighting given to the reqs would be telling. It could have come down to the PW9000 having a single digit SFC advantage over a LEAP'ed F414.
 
I wonder if it was in light of the expected protest that they didn't even release details they were previously slated to.

Taken from NG's twitter feed it's their new bomber dedicated website.

Americasnewbomber

Support America's new bomber
www.americasnewbomber.com www.americasnewbomber.com
 
IIRC it was meant to be optionally manned, and given a 'global' range and a cost in excess of half a billion USD I'm certain it will at least be "optionally" manned. UAVs have a horrendous accident rate.
 
$550 million seems cheap, given the cost of a 787 Dreamliner these days (about $300 million). I'm guessing it won't be be B-52 sized.
 
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
$550 million seems cheap, given the cost of a 787 Dreamliner these days (about $300 million). I'm guessing it won't be be B-52 sized.
Click to expand...
Flyaway said:
I wonder if it was in light of the expected protest that they didn't even release details they were previously slated to.

Taken from NG's twitter feed it's their new bomber dedicated website.

Americasnewbomber

Support America's new bomber
www.americasnewbomber.com www.americasnewbomber.com
Click to expand...

That websites a pile of steaming shite. They should be ashamed to even put their name on such drivel. What utter Moron sanctioned that?
 
Flyaway said:
I wonder if it was in light of the expected protest that they didn't even release details they were previously slated to.

Taken from NG's twitter feed it's their new bomber dedicated website.

http://www.americasnewbomber.com/
Click to expand...

What. The. Hell.
In order to have a movement to "Save the bomber", does there not have to be some sort of movement to kill it? Does Northrop know something we don’t?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom