USAF, Northrup Unveil Next-Generation Bomber

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Like with everything else they've developed it's just a matter of trial and error. They learned more from this event than they learned from the previous event (no, not the B-2). So they'll incorporate those lessons, and go out and try it again on another platform. Or build a scale model platform and fly it around the try new things. And they'll eventually get it right.

a reply to: Zaphod58

interesting, now I gotta go research all of the recent Northrup designs and figure out what they were trying to achieve with each one to figure out this mystery tech that they couldn't get to work.

Cool, Aviation forum has a new puzzle to solve. What is it about the Northrup LRS-B entry were they trying to perfect that's related to previous birds they've designed and tested as of recently but isn't the B2 or her tech?

a reply to: BASSPLYR

My guess is the engines. But that's pure speculation on my part

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Did they ever get plasma to work beyond just the leading edges?

a reply to: aholic

That still pisses me off. I helped build the first six ship sets of flight controls for the B-2. We put up with the security hassles day after day. We never got to see what the finished aircraft looked like. Our prints just showed our components and the areas that they mated up with. My first look at the B-2 was on the evening news, the day that they came public with it, after my shift. It would have been nice if they had let those who kept the secret get an advanced look before everybody else. A couple lousy hours early would have been nice.

a reply to: nelloh62

Could be. I don't know. But I hope the engines are the advent ones and I hope they are coming along just fine. It could be something propulsion related though.

I gotta go look at the previous recent designs northrups been working on to see where they are going with their tech and what they are trying to achieve. But... it could be something that's not disclosed as to what the test designs were really for. But the aviation forum members are the most highly regarded here at ATS in my opinion for being adept at seeing past the façade into whats really going on with a project.

a reply to: JIMC5499

When the first B-2 came to Hickam, they let me wander wherever I wanted to, except for looking down on it from a stand, or anywhere I could see into the cockpit. Everywhere else was fair game, but the cockpit was still classified.

A week or two later, there was a four page, full color, power on photo in Popular Mechanics, and a report by one of their reporters that got to fly a training mission on board one of the aircraft.

To say I was pissed is an understatement.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Sounds like the Popular Science article about Soviet Submarines that came out in the early 80's. I was at a Navy training command and two of my roommates were training to be Anti-Submarine Warfare crewmen. You should have seen the look on their faces when I showed them the article. The information that was there was on the classified list for them.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Yep, I agree, I tilt my cap to you guys on ATS for giving us great info

a reply to: Zaphod58

Sorry Zaph, that had me chuckling. But I bet you were seething eh

a reply to: nelloh62

Oh, I laugh about it now. At the time though....yeah, that's one way to put it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Let me guess, it's some sort of blown fluidic/boundary-layer based flight control system to minimize elevon deflection and maintain the low RCS. A fluidic thrust vectoring system is also part of the system as are the ADVENT-type engines that power it.

There has been difficulty getting it to "play nice", possibly in relation to a B-2 style electrostatic aerodynamic system.

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Zaphod58

Let me guess, it's some sort of blown fluidic/boundary-layer based flight control system to minimize elevon deflection and maintain the low RCS. A fluidic thrust vectoring system is also part of the system and the ADVENT-type engines that power it.

There has been difficulty getting it to "play nice", possibly in relation to a B-2 style electrostatic aerodynamic system.

Hi. (pulls out notebook) So, I hear you have an interesting idea. Where did you get that from? Was it a guess?

Come, tell to me your name. Likewise your occupation, and where and whence you came.

a reply to: Bedlam

What's that red light you're holding? It's a lovely shade of red.


Wait.....Who are you again? Where am I?

a reply to: Bedlam

Haha, I life in New England and work in healthcare, it's the truth! I promise!

I don't even have a pilot's license!

But to further speculate:

If I were Northrop, I'd use the advent engines and the well-documented fluidic thrust vectoring system to take care of pitch and some yaw. For roll, I'd use a blown boundary layer disruption system to selectively stall the upper surfaces of the wing, almost like a virtual spoileron. It's the second part that I'd bet is giving them a hard time, especially if the LRS-B has an electrostatic system to smooth out airflow over its RCS-optimized planform. I'd imagine there could be the potential for some "interesting" interactions between the two systems, especially given the spin/stall characteristics of flying wings. That could very well explain the move away from the pure flying wing planform towards a more blended "cranked kite" design.

If I were Northrop, that is.

a reply to: Barnalby

That fits with what I was thinking too. Isn't that that "something sexy" that someone once here mentioned Boeing has that everybody wants on their new aircraft.