B-21 Raider: Next step, First flight!

originally posted by: SnowBox2022
a reply to: Zaphod58

the fact the Air Force is touting they no longer have to tape and spay after EVERY flight of the new bomber isnt that shocking, i would hope so in the day and age of advanced ceramics and metalic glasses.

They haven't had to "tape and spray" after every flight. They have to inspect the skin after every flight, and may have to make minor repairs to the skin, but that hasn't been a thing for several years, since the new coatings were added.

real question do you think this bomber needs other eyes and ears so to speak to fufil its role?

Every bomber needs other eyes and ears to do its mission. You don't wander for hours over enemy territory looking for targets. You use other assets to find them ahead of time.

i dont think the B-21 is going to get away with the same RADAR tricks the B2 did/does~

The B-21 is significantly stealthier than the B-2 ever was. It doesn't use the same tricks that the B-2 does, anymore than the F-22 used the same tricks that the F-117 did.

Someone familiar said it looks like 737 landing gear, likely from the P-8 parts bin. Any corroboration here?

That should put the bird under 200k and likely a single weapons bay without space for the MOP.

a reply to: aholic

There hasn't been enough detail yet. I doubt they are though. As of now, they haven't said that UTC Aerosystems is one of the suppliers.

a reply to: Zaphod58

i guess is what I'm saying is with China and their apparent 'long rage' doctrine

they are making or already have AMRAAM(high speed ones) clones and I'm sure with hypersonic boosters will have quite the reach.

unless these can turn invisible(RADAR, IR, acoustic etc.) the B21 will be nothing more than a stealthy bomb truck, and that's okay.

there has to be a ultra stealthy fast smaller strike aircraft running wild weasel missions other wise the bombers will get blown out of the air.

unless the USAF is going to rely on standoff weapons, again fine but not optimal.

a reply to: SnowBox2022

The B-21 stealth is on a level never seen before, by any aircraft. They don't need to turn invisible to be able to do their mission. Finding an aircraft visually is ridiculously hard. I've had tankers, with a group of fighters go overhead, and never saw them. I've even had a hard time finding a C-5 that was descending into the area, and was only a couple miles horizontally, at less than 20,000 feet vertically. And that's when I knew where it was, thanks to ADS-B. Even automated systems are going to have a hard time finding this thing if they have to search the entire sky, optical stealth or not.

For landing gear comparison B-2 and B-21….



….and the 737

👽

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Any aircraft of a certain size and weight uses a two wheel landing gear. I can point to several of them that have a similar landing gear.

B-21 pilots talk "first flight" prep:

www.flightglobal.com...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Nice! I’ve been trying to get my hands on CTF stuff, but they haven’t shown up anywhere I could trade for them. I missed out on the RQ-180 stuff at Edwards sadly.

Last of the bday goods…long t and jacket



Now just wait for some diecast metal mfg to produce a B-21 model

👽

Revell have probably got a Plastic Model kit on the way already..

Someone I know who lurks here but can't post for for fear of reprisal was surprised at just how much is off-the-shelf in this bomber. Pretty much everything except the airframe. Even the avionics to a major extent are grown from the F-35. Reminds me of how the F-117 was cobbled together from F-111 actuators, F-16 flight computer / INS and F-18 engines...

This is promising for the safety of the program but it means a long list of suppliers.

a reply to: Zaphod58

they said the same thing about the F117 yeah i know the missile commander was above and beyond and poor mission planning but they still managed to shoot one down with a visual lock.


lets assume the Raider has a RCS of.000000000000000000001 DbSM we both know there are radars that can see turbulence in the air(jet exhaust), if you know an attack is coming all you would have to use is a mix a low and HF radars to find the holes in the sky and let the computer figure a firing solution on the moving hole in the sky and fire a missile with millimeter seekers and see ya.

i noticed you didnt answer the other poster about a new type of wild weasel type craft accompanying these bombers. OR any comment on the USAF's apparent reliance on standoff munitions.

honest question here, the 180 has been seen by TONS of people why not just release it and show off a bit, China for sure knows about so why hide it from US taxpayers?

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
For landing gear comparison B-2 and B-21….

….and the 737

👽

That's an A320, not a 737.

Just FYI

Cheers

a reply to: sqweegee99

The F-117 was flying on the same route, on multiple nights, at the same time. But anyone that has half a brain, which rules out most of the internet, knows that stealth doesn't make you invulnerable, it just makes you really hard to shoot down. There was, and always will be a risk of losing a stealth aircraft, but the F-117 record was one lost, one damaged, and thousands of combat missions. In Desert Storm alone, they flew through some of the most heavily defended airspace, and were the only aircraft allowed over Baghdad. They flew 1,271 missions, with no aircraft damaged or lost. They flew 44 missions over Yugoslavia, with one lost and one damaged. They flew over 100 missions in Iraqi Freedom for none damaged or lost. No matter how you slice it, that says a lot about stealth. That one F-117 that was shot down, was within 8 miles of the SAM system that hit it.

Stealth reduced the detection range significantly. That S400 that can see an F-15 at 200 miles, can detect an F-35 at an estimated 30-40 miles. That's well within weapons range of the F-35, and is the reason that the US relies on stand off weapons. Stand off weapons increase survivability even more drastically. Just about everyone relies on stand off weapons now because of that. If you have a missile with a range of 300 miles, against an air defense system with a range of 200 miles, you'd be stupid not to use stand off weapons.

The reason that low frequency radars work against stealth fighters is because they have a vertical fin. There is an eddy behind the tail that the radar can detect, but it can't do more than generalize. Stealth bombers don't have vertical fins, so they don't have that eddy, which dramatically reduces the ability of low frequency radar to detect them. And the B-21 is optimized against HF/VHF radar, which further dramatically reduces their signature. The key to your statement about detecting is if you know an attack is coming. Unless you're willing to keep that radar on 24/7, and dramatically increase maintenance and failure rates, a bomber coming from the US is going to have a good chance of making it to the area, and hitting your radar system and opening a hole in your defenses, which is exactly what stealth is supposed to do.

As for the idea for firing at holes in the sky, that's not how SAMs work. There's a reason that they use X-Band for fire control systems and missiles. You can't just shoot it at a hole in the sky, and expect it to detect a target and home in. You might be able to guide fighters in, but not missiles. Their Pk would be single digits, if it even worked.

As for the questions I didn't answer, I don't answer every question put to me, and I'm not going to start now. I choose what I'm going to talk about, and I don't answer, then that's the end of it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Nighthawks also had alittle help....

and it wasnt 2022...


there are other kinds of seekers other that IR,UV, Radar.

Lets take the current conflict, Russia would not be crazy to think that at least stealthy ISR(funny the b21 press junket said that was one of its main features) might fly close to or over the Ukrainian borders and I'm sure they have ALL their radars up around the border area.

what costs more a new s400 or simple maintenance?

Russia arguably has one of the tightest air defense networks around what they care about they still use nuclear interceptors around Moscow for crying out loud.

also you are leaving out the fact that a distributed and connected air defense network would NOT have to light up all their radars only 1-3 and send the info across the net. Yeah a HARM might take out a few sites but when the weapons bay opens up how many vertical surfaces are on those doors? at least 2 and that's not all the stuff up in the bay the radar may reflect off of.


And if everyone is going to standoff and hypersonics why would we need to use stealth to pernitrate any airspace before clearing the way.


last i checked a C-130 with a rack system can unleash a hell storm on the ground.

who is this aircraft made for? If we go to war with China it will be a Naval battle and fighters with bombers mopping up the rest but at that point the B2 would work just fine.


so than you do think there is a new EF-111 or even a new companion....


if this bomber is ment for the likes of China/Russia or NK they are always on guard and watching the sky's.


i was also using 'holes in the sky' flippantly if all of a sudden your radar reads different and you can track that it is likely an aircraft.

forward observers and overhead sats would see them launch or fly over head anyway as well as the tankers so of course if our rivals saw us start putting tankers in the air and B21's taking off loaded down along with whatever escorts and ISR aircraft

i just don't see the point of this aircraft if we have things like PGS(conventional) B-2's, F-35's and god knows what else it seems a bit redundant

a reply to: sqweegee99

You're right, it's wasn't 2022, and if you think ONLY defensive systems have evolved, you have another think coming. The B-21 is the most advanced aircraft ever built, and uses new techniques that have never been revealed. People seem to think that air defenses are moving forward in leaps and bounds, while stealth is exactly the same as it was in the 1970s when the F-117 was developed. Just like air defenses, stealth systems are 50 years ahead of where they were when they were introduced.

Yes, and if you're aware that there are other kinds of seekers, so are the people developing counters to them. And they have a lot more information than you can find on the internet about them. They also have great detail on ways to counter them. And then the defensive systems will come up with ways to counter the counters, and both will evolve.

what costs more a new s400 or simple maintenance?

And what happens when your operators aren't capable of performing some of that maintenance, and you have to have someone brought in? Or do you think specialists are just sitting around with the missile units?

Russia arguably has one of the tightest air defense networks around what they care about they still use nuclear interceptors around Moscow for crying out loud.

And we've all seen how well Russian air defenses have done this year against Ukraine attacks. They might be the tightest around, but if their performance holds up similar to other units in the field, it's not going to be amazing. Still enough to take out older platforms, but not amazing.

also you are leaving out the fact that a distributed and connected air defense network would NOT have to light up all their radars only 1-3 and send the info across the net. Yeah a HARM might take out a few sites but when the weapons bay opens up how many vertical surfaces are on those doors? at least 2 and that's not all the stuff up in the bay the radar may reflect off of.

If only planners had some way to figure that out, and find the locations of dispersed systems. Some way of getting them to turn the radars on, or monitoring alternating sites when they're used.

if this bomber is ment for the likes of China/Russia or NK they are always on guard and watching the sky's.

Again, we've seen how well Russia monitors their airspace. They're not watching every single square meter of it, 24/7/365. According to the crew, which survived, Korean 902 overflew a Soviet city while they were lost in Soviet airspace, before they were intercepted, and shot down. That was apparently one of the reasons Soviet commanders were adamant that Korean 007 be shot down, even if it was in international airspace. Because of the embarrassment of Korean 902.

forward observers and overhead sats would see them launch or fly over head anyway as well as the tankers so of course if our rivals saw us start putting tankers in the air and B21's taking off loaded down along with whatever escorts and ISR aircraft

The B-21 is designed, like the rest of our bomber fleet, from CONUS to the target areas. Unless you believe that China and Russia will have people parked outside the base 24/7/365, forward observers are not going to be monitoring launches. As for satellites, they're easily predictable, and on fixed tracks that can be avoided. The bombers are in covered hangars on the ground, and catching a plane in flight, by satellite, is more a matter or pure, dumb luck than anything else.

i just don't see the point of this aircraft if we have things like PGS(conventional) B-2's, F-35's and god knows what else it seems a bit redundant

PGS is not operational, and won't be for years to come. The F-35, on internal weapons, carries 5,000 pounds. The B-21, on internal weapons, is estimated to carry 30,000 pounds. So yes, let's send in 6 F-35s, that are more detectable, to do the mission one B-21 can do. The B-21 is designed to do things the F-35 doesn't, and the F-35 is designed to do things where the B-21 would be overkill. The B-2 is being retired and replaced by the B-21, so it's not going to be around much longer. And the B-21 is far more capable than the B-2 has ever dreamed of being.

a reply to: Zaphod58

at the end 0of the day it is a physical object, you are ASSUMING Russia or China cant pick it up or some other signature

Russia milit6ary units have no SGT.s its not part of Russian doctrine

as far as people watching bases what about the Road Runners of area 51 fame


the Korean flight was also in from or behind a surveillance aircraft. Don't want to get shot down don't fly over war zones. And the KLA flight strayed off course and ignored tracer fire shot over their bow and attempted radio contact. Still a HUGE tragedy but so was Lockerbie both decades old and not comparable


who cares how much they can carry load up whatever heavy bomber or cargo craft to be bomb and missle trucks with their rack system


le6ts say a salvo of BUK and s300 nd s400 rounds were fired and they have an idea of where the aircraft was they would not use a seeker with a database to match to make sure its the right target.


How is PGS not ready we have a million types of missiles we could build and even air dropped missiles so there is no ground launch



who is going to run intercept for the B21 if it doesnt have some sort of escorts or maybe it has something like the old lenticular anti aircraft weapon


Radar can be spoofed to the point there are TONS of aircraft blinking in and out on the scopes of civilian watch dogs


as far as Russian conscripts and alike they are for sure not manning S300 and S400 sites i find that silly and dangerous/wasteful


lastly the most advanced in the white world

The B-21 is designed, like the rest of our bomber fleet, from CONUS to the target areas. Unless you believe that China and Russia will have people parked outside the base 24/7/365, forward observers are not going to be monitoring launches. As for satellites, they're easily predictable, and on fixed tracks that can be avoided. The bombers are in covered hangars on the ground, and catching a plane in flight, by satellite, is more a matter or pure, dumb luck than anything else.

Absolutely i think that Russia might have Americanized KGB agents watching all the big bomber bases and tanker deployments/

edit on 16-12-2022 by sqweegee99 because: spelling

originally posted by: sqweegee99
at the end 0of the day it is a physical object, you are ASSUMING Russia or China cant pick it up or some other signature

And you're ASSUMING that stealth aircraft are useless and can be easily defeated.

as far as people watching bases what about the Road Runners of area 51 fame

I know all about base watching. And do you know when they AREN'T watching? In the middle of the night, when there is no reason to be.

the Korean flight was also in from or behind a surveillance aircraft. Don't want to get shot down don't fly over war zones. And the KLA flight strayed off course and ignored tracer fire shot over their bow and attempted radio contact. Still a HUGE tragedy but so was Lockerbie both decades old and not comparable

No they didn't. I'm not talking about Korean 007, I'm talking about Korean 902, which happened in 1978. Their first warning of the Soviet fighter was when it appeared on the wrong side from where international convention said it should be.

who cares how much they can carry load up whatever heavy bomber or cargo craft to be bomb and missle trucks with their rack system

So on the one hand, our enemies have this great air defense setup that can easily detect and track tankers, and potentially do something about them or have fighters waiting for the stealth aircraft, but on the other, they're going to totally ignore heavy bombers and cargo aircraft that have a huge RCS?

le6ts say a salvo of BUK and s300 nd s400 rounds were fired and they have an idea of where the aircraft was they would not use a seeker with a database to match to make sure its the right target.

Again, not how SAMs work. You can't just launch them and let them detect and track their own targets. They work by homing in and leading the target, and detonating above and ahead of the target for a head on shot.

How is PGS not ready we have a million types of missiles we could build and even air dropped missiles so there is no ground launch

PGS isn't even close to being ready. No ground launch? That's the point of PGS. It's a conventional ballistic missile. The Common-Hypersonic Glide Body has been tested, and a rocket motor for VLS tubes was tested, but they aren't even close to a full up test.

who is going to run intercept for the B21 if it doesnt have some sort of escorts or maybe it has something like the old lenticular anti aircraft weapon

Or, they actually have tricks up their sleeve to escort themselves and don't need a huge strike package to go with them.

Radar can be spoofed to the point there are TONS of aircraft blinking in and out on the scopes of civilian watch dogs

Make up your mind. Either the B-21 is detectable and needs escorts, or they can spoof radar systems and deal with them.

as far as Russian conscripts and alike they are for sure not manning S300 and S400 sites i find that silly and dangerous/wasteful

You're the only one talking about conscripts. But the average radar operator, even in a professional military, isn't going to be doing heavy repairs to their equipment. That's one reason why you don't operate systems full up in exercises, because it puts time and wear on equipment, and risks something breaking when you need it to work.

where did i say they were useless? and easily defeated when Russian and China have to spend BILLIONS just for a chance to shoot it down stealth is not useless but it isnt Excalibur either.

Base watching doesn't need a human in a lawn chair emitting radio and IR frequencies. You could easily put a passive camera somewhere and collect pics later or hell just MAKE agents sit out side bases and watch or buy housing or land near bases or under flight lines, not all bases are in the US and most of the sightings of various test items have been seen across the pond.

Mia Copa on Korean air lines 007 but they still were way off course and were by no fault of their own, shot down because a US spy aircraft was pushing the limits and yeah i know they don't have windows on those aircraft where civilian ones do but as I'm sure you know it was an awful night as far as weather.

So you see 20MM tracer and MiG's wing rock you and decide to keep going? the US would shoot them down as well.

Cargo aircraft ad B52's way outside SAM reach using ER stand off weapons in swarms along with eletronic decoys that can fl0od a radar has nothing to do with stealth

there is no way, not for a million bucks could anyone convince me that we don't have even in a early phase hypersonic missiles with intercontinental reach that is conventional or just launch them at the boarder of your adversary and reduce the flight time even more, and what system does Russia or China have that can intercept a extremally low flying Mach 3+ missile(see flying crow bar)

So your saying missiles ,like the S400, SM3, Patriot etc. cant adjust targets on the fly? why have a data link than.

as far as radar spoofing i never said it was the B21 doing it but rather some other asset like pandora or something else.

Conscripts are who is fighting the war for Russia, sure they have special teams but they are getting deleted every day, who do you think they fill that empty space with?

Its a kind of like fish or cut bait, keep you IAD's up and just maintain them or they get taken out.


the USWAF said the B21 was one part of a family of aircraft so clearly it needs some help in various areas otherwise it would just do it but its self.