Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (LRS-B)

[Black Dog]

Superbowl Ad. Looks rather like the intakes are positioned in the same place as the above designs.

The Pentagon isn't going to telegraph that far in advance it's next new bomber in a super bowl ad. However, they did telegraph the existence of a still secret aircraft with the incident in Texas 1.5 years ago. The shrouded plane in the super bowl isn't the new bomber. Also, the commercial wasn't solely heavy bombers. Most likely that aircraft (from Texas) was again being used to telegraph a message to potential adversaries.

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

The aircraft from Amarillo was very much of a cranked kite configuration.

 

[LowObservable]

The design team for a supersonic bomber could include everyone in the industry with experience of designing and building a large supersonic-cruise aircraft and still fit in a phone booth.

 

[sferrin]

The design team for a supersonic bomber could include everyone in the industry with experience of designing and building a large supersonic-cruise aircraft and still fit in a phone booth.

Figure even the B-1A (not necessarily designed for supersonic cruise but supersonic dash) was designed what, 40+ years ago? It's scary how many people think you can just take a team with no experience and design something like that just because somebody else built one before. Even less radical aircraft are having growing pains due to lack of experienced personnel.

 

[Stargazer]

Figure even the B-1A (not necessarily designed for supersonic cruise but supersonic dash) was designed what, 40+ years ago?

Make it about 45. It first flew in 1976 if I'm not mistaken, so it must have been on the drawing boards since about 1970 (blessed times when it took only six years from conception to first flight!).

 

[sferrin]

Figure even the B-1A (not necessarily designed for supersonic cruise but supersonic dash) was designed what, 40+ years ago?

Make it about 45. It first flew in 1976 if I'm not mistaken, so it must have been on the drawing boards since about 1970 (blessed times when it took only six years from conception to first flight!).

When one considers the B-1 came from the XB-70s ashes that tells you how long ago it was. Thing is there were probably a LOT of people who worked the XB-70 program who took that experience to the B-1A.

 

[flanker]

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

They did? When?

 

[DrRansom]

Quellish - you said something about wings? Can you elaborate?

 

[Airplane]

Superbowl Ad. Looks rather like the intakes are positioned in the same place as the above designs.

The Pentagon isn't going to telegraph that far in advance it's next new bomber in a super bowl ad. However, they did telegraph the existence of a still secret aircraft with the incident in Texas 1.5 years ago. The shrouded plane in the super bowl isn't the new bomber. Also, the commercial wasn't solely heavy bombers. Most likely that aircraft (from Texas) was again being used to telegraph a message to potential adversaries.

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

Have Blue, Tacit Blue, BOP, were demonstrator aircraft. No way in hell were demonstrators of this ultra classified program flown in daylight in that part of the continent, in those numbers. I'd wager that what they were was under the tarp of the NG commercial. Someone was sending a message to the rest of the world with that tacit reveal.

 

[sferrin]

I'd wager that what they were was under the tarp of the NG commercial.

That was CGI. I doubt it had anything whatsoever to do with anything that's actually flown, or planned to fly.

 

[martinbayer]

It reads "keep the nation safe" & "support the new bomber".... I guess they´re organising a crowdfunding for in case the program should get curtailed again at 21 aircraft. :

Hmmm, Zeppelinspende, Nationalflugspende, Spitfire Fund, Wings for Victory, Tanks for Attack, Warship Week - why not...

What is truly annoying is that the only quantitative program data provided so far are approximate fleet size and cost figures .

Martin

 

[marauder2048]

Adaptive cycle can give much lower SFC (in the order of 18-35%) especially in cruise without losing high thust option by effectively varying bypass ratio. Its not necessarily about high speed, it would be valuable for a high-subsonic bomber.

GE Aviation won up to $325 million in additional funds in January 2015 to work on an adaptive cycle engine under phase three of the Versatile affordable advanced turbine engines (VAATE) program that preceded ADVENT.

GE have run demonstrator engines in phase 1 and 2, so this isn't Powerpoint engineering. This looks rather suitable for a B-3....

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010SET/Thomson.pdf

I think we're inferring based on P&W's public congratulations to NG on winning that NG partnered with P&W on the propulsion front.
The proposals for AETP were in before the bomber decision.

If P&W had an advantage on efficiency that might have enabled NG to go the active flow control route for the wing (possibly of the morphing variety) to get good cruise and good loiter.

 

[Sundog]

Superbowl Ad. Looks rather like the intakes are positioned in the same place as the above designs.

The Pentagon isn't going to telegraph that far in advance it's next new bomber in a super bowl ad. However, they did telegraph the existence of a still secret aircraft with the incident in Texas 1.5 years ago. The shrouded plane in the super bowl isn't the new bomber. Also, the commercial wasn't solely heavy bombers. Most likely that aircraft (from Texas) was again being used to telegraph a message to potential adversaries.

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

The aircraft from Amarillo was very much of a cranked kite configuration.

The aircraft seen over Texas had a straight leading edge from nose to wingtip, therefore it was not a cranked kite configuration.

 

[Sundog]

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

They did? When?

Somewhere over the past five to ten years. It was in the Aviation Week article that stated the Pentagon funded Boeing and Lockmart to fly a long range strike demonstrator. I don't recall when they got the contract for it, maybe 2009? So I would expect such a demonstrator to fly somewhere between 2011 and 2012.

If it was 2011, then it probably would have flown in 2013. Maybe it was one of the proof of concept vehicles for Boeings Black Diamond program?

 

[flateric]

I think we're inferring based on P&W's public congratulations to NG on winning that NG partnered with P&W on the propulsion front.

P&W has sent public congrats to NG?

 

[bring_it_on]

I am sure they have done so privately, but a reporter for Defensenews was able to get a quote from P&W congratulating NOC but nothing else.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

If anything that makes me more certain its GE who haven't commented at all so far. GE are further along with next gen as they don't have a huge contract for F-35 engines to worry about. Also giving the LRS engine job to GE allows GE to derive an F-35 engine from it relatively easily which allows the AF to pressure Pratt on the F-135 without the expense of developing an alternative from scratch.

 

[Steve Pace]

With "billions and billions" of bucks up for grabs on the LRSB program I'm curious to know just how soon Boeing or Lockheed Martin tries to buy Northrop Grumman. "There's always a bigger fish." -SP

 

[Mat Parry]

More art courtesy of flateric

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,191.msg242199.html#msg242199

(Reply #1381)

Source was identified here (reply #1396)
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,191.msg242391.html#msg242391

 

[sferrin]

With "billions and billions" of bucks up for grabs on the LRSB program I'm curious to know just how soon Boeing or Lockheed Martin tries to buy Northrop Grumman. "There's always a bigger fish." -SP

LM already tried once and got told no. Can't imagine they'd tell Boeing any different.

 

[DrRansom]

Lockheed is the largest defense contractor, so them getting Northrop is unlikely. It is marginally more likely for Boeing, because that would leave two major aerospace defense contractors.

This contract does preserver the three aircraft prime for the next two decades.

I wonder if LO had two articles ready to go at 5pm for the deal.
This is why Northrop Grumman won the LRS-B contract
This is why Lockheed / Boeing won the LRS-B contract

Or, did he quickly type out the article? On first reading, that was pretty rough. Maybe type now and edit for clarity later?

 

[marauder2048]

If anything that makes me more certain its GE who haven't commented at all so far. GE are further along with next gen as they don't have a huge contract for F-35 engines to worry about. Also giving the LRS engine job to GE allows GE to derive an F-35 engine from it relatively easily which allows the AF to pressure Pratt on the F-135 without the expense of developing an alternative from scratch.

P&W was left off the early ADVENT wins and spent a good chunk of IRAD to catch up as they clearly have on AETD.

Assuming the powerplant pairings were exclusive, Boeing would almost certainly have gone with GE. The KC-46a notwithstanding, GE has been the preferred or exclusive powerplant on pretty much Boeing's entire military and commercial range.

 

[Flyaway]

With "billions and billions" of bucks up for grabs on the LRSB program I'm curious to know just how soon Boeing or Lockheed Martin tries to buy Northrop Grumman. "There's always a bigger fish." -SP

LM already tried once and got told no. Can't imagine they'd tell Boeing any different.

If anyone is going to lose their military aviation section now it will be Boeing. Once the F/A-18 manufacturing comes to an end what else do they have on-hand, not a lot is the answer.

Analysts Cheer Northrop Grumman Defense Department Contract Win

Analysts Cheer Northrop Grumman Defense Department Contract Win

blogs.barrons.com

 

[LowObservable]

Dr R - Sources and methods, dude. I could tell you, but then I'd have to maroon you on a volcanic atoll with Spudman and Sferrin.

 

[marauder2048]

Dr R - Sources and methods, dude. I could tell you, but then I'd have to maroon you on a volcanic atoll with Spudman and Sferrin.

There you go again...I thought we had tabled the IR missile debate in another thread?

 

[Flyaway]

Oh well with that out the way we can start speculating what the rest of the family of systems are, RQ-180 seems a safe bet but what else is included & does the B-2 count as part of it?

 

[Mr London 24/7]

If anyone is going to lose their military aviation section now it will be Boeing. Once the F/A-18 manufacturing comes to an end what else do they have on-hand, not a lot is the answer

Maybe, maybe not: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,10481.msg98770.html#msg98770

 

[marauder2048]

If anyone is going to lose their military aviation section now it will be Boeing. Once the F/A-18 manufacturing comes to an end what else do they have on-hand, not a lot is the answer

If anyone knows how to operate aircraft production lines at very low but still economically viable "keep alive" rates its Boeing.

 

[Ian33]

Oh well with that out the way we can start speculating what the rest of the family of systems are, RQ-180 seems a safe bet but what else is included & does the B-2 count as part of it?

B2 is stand alone. A beneficiary of the family, not a blood relative.

Manned LRS-B
Unmanned LRS-A for the fast and high portion. Mach 6 with four 2000lb JDAM.
RQ-180 for the absolute pinnacle of defended airspace penetration.
Manned Penetrating Airborne Electronic Attack for the door kicking.

That's my LRS family tree.

 

[Triton]

I don't understand why Boeing is going to necessarily exit the military aviation business with the loss of the LRS-B contract. The company has responded to RFIs and RFPs for manned fighter programs before it acquired McDonnell Douglas. Boeing Phantom Works has been working on UCLASS and the T-X trainer and completed work on the Triple Target Terminator (T3) missile.

Assembly of the LRS-B is expected to be performed at the United States Air Force Plant 42 located in Palmdale, CA. People seem to presume that parts manufacturing of LRS-B would be performed at the Boeing manufacturing plant, formerly belonging to McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, located in Berkeley, MO near St. Louis. If manned fighter assembly ended in Berkeley, I am not sure if the facility would be used to manufacture LRS-B parts. Boeing has manufacturing facilities and engineering centers located across the country,

 

[Triton]

With "billions and billions" of bucks up for grabs on the LRSB program I'm curious to know just how soon Boeing or Lockheed Martin tries to buy Northrop Grumman. "There's always a bigger fish." -SP

Northrop Grumman is expected to hire thousands in Palmdale, CA for LRS-B. If Boeing were to purchase Northrop Grumman, would there still be manufacturing jobs in Berkeley, MO at the old McDonnell Aircraft Corporation plant?

 

[Sundog]

My guess is Boeing would want to build TX and possibly a UCAV in MO, if they can ever get the DOD to figure out it's UCAV needs.

 

[Steve Pace]

Militarily speaking Boeing has B-52H and B-1B updates, Super Hornet, Growler, P-8, and the KC-46 manufacturing programs. Lockheed Martin has F-22 updates, F-35 production, C-130J, and the C-5M. Northrop Grumman has the RQ-4 (and X-47B) and radar systems.

??????

 

[Black Dog]

Superbowl Ad. Looks rather like the intakes are positioned in the same place as the above designs.

The Pentagon isn't going to telegraph that far in advance it's next new bomber in a super bowl ad. However, they did telegraph the existence of a still secret aircraft with the incident in Texas 1.5 years ago. The shrouded plane in the super bowl isn't the new bomber. Also, the commercial wasn't solely heavy bombers. Most likely that aircraft (from Texas) was again being used to telegraph a message to potential adversaries.

They've acknowledged that Boeing and Lockmart flew an LRSB demonstrator and I'm more inclined to think that's what we saw over Texas as it didn't have the cranked kite configuration like the vehicle in the Northrop ad.

The aircraft from Amarillo was very much of a cranked kite configuration.

The aircraft seen over Texas had a straight leading edge from nose to wingtip, therefore it was not a cranked kite configuration.

Doesn't look like it to me

 

[Sundog]

Considering the nose is at the top of the image it sure looks like a straight leading edge to me and nothing like a cranked kite configuration. I think you're confusing the changing chord thickness and the difference in leading edge radius and how it is affected by the lighting for a small kink in the leading edge.

 

[Steve Pace]

straight leading edge is undulating - curved in - curved out

 

[quellish]

Northrop Grumman is expected to hire thousands in Palmdale, CA for LRS-B.

That's what the local press is reporting, however the reality is a bit different. The 1500-2500 new hires at Palmdale number is several years out of date and was highly speculative even then.

The state of CA has actually gone out of its way in the last 5 years to harm NG's bomber efforts. The AV is going to suffer as much of the LRS work will be done elsewhere.

 

[Triton]

Boeing decided to close the Douglas Aircraft Company factory in Long Beach, CA after the end of C-17 Globemaster III production. The facility competed against other Boeing-owned factories for 777X work and lost.

 

[Triton]

I wonder if the Department of Justice, supported by the Department of Defense, would sue to block the acquisition of Northrop Grumman by Boeing or Lockheed Martin on antitrust grounds. Remember that Lockheed Martin abandoned its $8.3 billion acquisition of Northrop Grumman in 1998 to avoid an antitrust lawsuit court fight.

 

[Flyaway]

I notice NG keeps moving staff around from Scaled Composites, are they moving all the best of them from SC to the LRS-B program?

 

[sferrin]

Northrop Grumman is expected to hire thousands in Palmdale, CA for LRS-B.

That's what the local press is reporting, however the reality is a bit different. The 1500-2500 new hires at Palmdale number is several years out of date and was highly speculative even then.

The state of CA has actually gone out of its way in the last 5 years to harm NG's bomber efforts. The AV is going to suffer as much of the LRS work will be done elsewhere.

They should have made it prop powered and told the CA pols those were wind turbines. They'd have been on that like stink on ----.