In the United States completed the modernization of the first strategic bomber B-2

October 30 2019 57

The American company Northrop Grumman is preparing for flight tests of the first modernized strategic bomber B-2 Spirit. As transmits "NPlus1" With reference to Aviation Week, the company carried out the modernization of aircraft self-defense systems.

In the United States completed the modernization of the first strategic bomber B-2

The first model of the strategic bomber B-2 Spirit with self-defense systems undergone extensive modernization, is preparing for flight tests, which will begin in the near future. Details of the upgrade were not reported, although it is known that the B-2 received EW systems, new antennas, as well as advanced computing systems. In the cockpit, developers mounted new information screens. All these improvements should provide the bomber pilots with more information about the detected threats, as well as detect the enemy radar and interfere.

If the flight tests of the first modernized B-2 are successful, the new systems will be installed on all 20 aircraft of this type that are part of the US Air Force.

The B-2 strategic bomber was developed at the end of the 1980's with the widespread use of stealth technologies to overcome enemy air defense zones. Flight range - up to 11,1 thousand km, speed - up to 1 thousand km / h. In two internal compartments, the B-2 can carry up to 18 tons of bombs, the maximum load is 23 tons.

The modernization was carried out due to the obsolescence of the aircraft, which was no longer able to conduct military operations in closed areas with the same efficiency. According to the military, after installing new systems, the aircraft will be able to operate in areas under the control of enemy air defense.

Earlier it was reported that all US Air Force B-2 bombers underwent modernization of control systems.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Operator

+8

30 October 2019 12: 14

Prior to modernization, the price of one B-2 was equal to 2,1 billion baks, after - 3 billion?
1. Thrall
  
  +8
  
  30 October 2019 12: 31
  
  Expensive "events in Crimea" cost NATO partners
2. Grigory Gromov
  
  +3
  
  30 October 2019 12: 34
  
  Quote: Military Review News
  According to the military, after the installation of new systems, the aircraft will be able to operate in areas under the control of enemy air defense.
  
  Hope is a waking dream!
  1. Chaldon48
    
    +1
    
    30 October 2019 12: 42
    
    The enemy is modernizing equipment and we can not be left behind!
3. Siberia 75
  
  +2
  
  30 October 2019 12: 34
  
  The Americans boasted that by the mid-20s, they would begin production of the B-21 Raider.
  Why spend so much money on modernization.
  Or not all is well with the new strategist.
  1. Voyager
    
    +3
    
    30 October 2019 12: 54
    
    Well, yes, it seems that everything is not going smoothly with PAK YES either, since the Tu-160 is being modernized, and production has been resumed ...
    1. knn54
      
      +2
      
      30 October 2019 13: 05
      
      Andrei, the Yankees and the B-52 are modernizing, though without resuming production, they either save problems or save money. Most likely, both.
  2. DimerVladimer
    
    +3
    
    30 October 2019 14: 10
    
    Quote: Siberia 75
    Why spend so much money on modernization.
    
    What they can count their money - they can afford and modernize and develop a new one.
    1. Krasnoyarsk
      
      +2
      
      30 October 2019 15: 16
      
      Quote: DimerVladimer
      Quote: Siberia 75
      Why spend so much money on modernization.
      
      What they can count their money - they can afford and modernize and develop a new one.
      
      I also always wonder - why are you so worried about the Amer’s budget? They will draw these greens as needed.
      1. Arturov
        
        0
        
        30 October 2019 16: 42
        
        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
        I also always wonder - why are you so worried about the Amer’s budget? They will draw these greens as needed.
        
        they think that a couple of lard states go bankrupt
  3. TermNachTer
    
    -2
    
    30 October 2019 19: 38
    
    I would like to know how much US rubles will such a modernization cost? And is there any sense in it, but a simple budget split by the Lockheed firm.
4. smart ass
  
  -2
  
  30 October 2019 12: 34
  
  This B2 can only carry freely falling bombs? something, I doubt his ability to enter the air defense zone and drop bombs
  1. Voyager
    
    +1
    
    30 October 2019 15: 01
    
    He actually has bombs and cruise missiles
  2. Alex_You
    
    -1
    
    30 October 2019 15: 02
    
    No, it only carries B-1 bombs.
    1. Voyager
      
      +1
      
      30 October 2019 20: 21
      
      I see in his nomenclature of weapons the AGM-158 missile
      https://www.webcitation.org/688aPvbdh?url=http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/americas_bomber/weapons.htm
Nycomed

-11

30 October 2019 12: 14

When will we have one? Or all the same, bet on drones?
1. Thrall
  
  -1
  
  30 October 2019 12: 28
  
  Quote: Nycomed
  When will we have one?
  
  What for? Chinese embassy bomb? So China is an ally.
  1. Nycomed
    
    +2
    
    30 October 2019 12: 31
    
    China is an ally only to itself. China does not need "allies". This is a very pragmatic nation. Companions, when it suits them, yes. No more.
  2. Chit
    
    +5
    
    30 October 2019 14: 06
    
    Ally, then ...
    I will never forget how the Tu-16 flight crew pounded in Spassk-Dalny during the events on Damansky during my youthful days .. How the flyers sat in the cockpits for hours and the wives of Valerian borrowed from each other.
    Ally ...
    We have a lot of them. Erdogan is now listed in the allies. Iran seems to be an ally.
    Only with such allies must one keep an eye out. And constantly look behind your back.
2. smart ass
  
  0
  
  30 October 2019 12: 38
  
  Why is it needed? Stupid thing from all sides
  1. Nycomed
    
    -6
    
    30 October 2019 12: 44
    
    Will the Tu-160 be more "ceilinged"?
    1. Thrall
      
      -1
      
      30 October 2019 13: 18
      
      Quote: Nycomed
      Will the Tu-160 be more "ceilinged"?
      
      in almost all respects
      1. Nycomed
        
        -3
        
        30 October 2019 13: 55
        
        Well, if so!
      2. Voyager
        
        +3
        
        30 October 2019 15: 02
        
        We are designing the exact same "stupid" stealth bomber.
    2. smart ass
      
      -1
      
      30 October 2019 18: 17
      
      Tu 160 at least carries missiles, no need to go into the air defense region
Uncle lee

+1

30 October 2019 12: 17

20 aircraft
And let their wings fall off after modernization!
1. Pedrodepackes
  
  +2
  
  30 October 2019 12: 47
  
  Quote from Uncle Lee
  20 aircraft
  And let their wings fall off after modernization
  
  a subtle joke when you consider that this B1 is one solid wing))
  1. Uncle lee
    
    0
    
    31 October 2019 07: 19
    
    + tail ...
    1. Pedrodepackes
      
      0
      
      31 October 2019 07: 22
      
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      plumage ....
      
      where?
      1. Uncle lee
        
        -1
        
        31 October 2019 08: 06
        
        Already gone! My friend, you can’t be so straightforward!
        PS And the screws are unscrewed ....
svp67

0

30 October 2019 12: 18

In the United States completed the modernization of the first strategic bomber B-2
Well, now the "arms race" has started, we have Tu-160, they have V-2 ...
1. vadson
  
  0
  
  30 October 2019 12: 22
  
  honestly, as far as I know, he can only carry freely falling bombs, i.e. not long-range missiles. why don't Americans teach him that?
  1. svp67
    
    0
    
    30 October 2019 12: 25
    
    Quote: vadson
    why don't Americans teach him that?
    
    Apparently they do not see this as necessary yet. For such missiles, they and the B-52 are enough.
    1. vadson
      
      0
      
      30 October 2019 12: 27
      
      only it glows like a christmas tree
      1. svp67
        
        +3
        
        30 October 2019 12: 42
        
        Quote: vadson
        only it glows like a christmas tree
        
        But it is capable of using weapons from such ranges where this light is not yet visible.
        
        KCA
        
        +1
        
        30 October 2019 12: 51
        
        SPRN will see from a range greater than the range of missiles, one B-52 will not cause strong suspicions, however, send one strategist against Russia, like farting in a puddle, but 10-20-30 pieces will be spotted for 3000-6000km and air defense and missile defense will immediately strain
        
        svp67
        
        +3
        
        30 October 2019 13: 22
        
        Quote: KCA
        and air defense and missile defense immediately tense up
        
        Something seems to me that by this moment there will be a lot of reasons for tension
        
        KCA
        
        -1
        
        30 October 2019 13: 28
        
        If there will be many reasons, then if the B-2, B-52 will take off from where, then there will definitely be nowhere to return
        
        svp67
        
        +2
        
        30 October 2019 13: 30
        
        Quote: KCA
        then there will definitely be nowhere to return
        
        Unlike our strategists, these alternate aerodromes are scattered around the world, so there’s something to find.
        
        Krasnoyarsk
        
        -1
        
        30 October 2019 15: 23
        
        Quote: KCA
        SPRN will see from a range greater than the range of missiles, one B-52 will not cause strong suspicions, however, send one strategist against Russia, like farting in a puddle, but 10-20-30 pieces will be spotted for 3000-6000km and air defense and missile defense will immediately strain
        
        They will take off after the entire territory, ours, is processed ballistic. For, so to speak, the final stripping. But they will have nowhere to return, if any of them can still return.
        
        svp67
        
        +3
        
        30 October 2019 20: 22
        
        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
        They will take off after the entire territory, ours, is processed ballistic.
        
        Well, judging by their tactics in the exercises, they take off before that and go to waiting areas ...
        
        yaros
        
        +1
        
        30 October 2019 14: 51
        
        I guess I’m grieving you, but the 52s are still tracked during take-off, I can’t say about B-2 because I haven’t served yet, but the B-1 is just like 52 ... besides the usual radar signature, there are many more signs of detection ....
        
        KCA
        
        -1
        
        30 October 2019 16: 01
        
        The following information should especially please Americans:
        
        A radar station capable of detecting drones made of plastic and wood is being created in Russia, Kirill Makarov, director general of the Scientific Research Institute for Long-Range Radio Communication (part of RTI), told RIA Novosti in an interview with RIA Novosti.
        
        "We are working on a specific station to detect low-flying targets, including drones capable of carrying a threat," Makarov said.
        
        According to him, such a station will be able to detect even drones made of wood or plastic.
        
        "We have never specialized in the creation of radars for detecting aerodynamic targets by any signals, this is done by electronic intelligence. We are engaged in radar reconnaissance. Any material has an effective dispersion surface, even if it is wooden, even plastic. What we do will allow us to detect, including such drones, "- explained the interlocutor of the agency.
The comment was deleted.
Free wind

+4

30 October 2019 12: 28

Beautiful infection.
rotmistr60

0

30 October 2019 12: 29

They are trying hard to spur an arms race, including and upgrading the armament samples. Ours also modernized both the Tu-22 and Tu-160, which will serve for a long time.
B-2 can carry up to 18 tons of bombs, the maximum load - 23 tons.
18 tons per head of the enemy is certainly not weak, but subject to overcoming air defense.
Galleon

-4

30 October 2019 12: 31

The aforementioned modernization speaks of confidence in the knowledge about our air defense systems of everything necessary: types of radars and their modes of operation, types of missiles and methods of their guidance, etc. But is this really so? Healthy skepticism seems to be more than appropriate in this matter, as well as inquisitive curiosity about the new stuffing of the electronic warfare of this "Spirit".
1. Livonetc
  
  +1
  
  30 October 2019 12: 43
  
  Confidence in such matters should not arise among professionals.
  And the collection of information about a likely and even incredible enemy is an ancient and endless topic.
2. SETSET
  
  0
  
  30 October 2019 12: 50
  
  Quote: Galleon (Andrey)
  Mentioned modernization speaks of confidence in the knowledge of our air defense systems in all the necessary: types of radars and their modes of operation, types of missiles and methods of their guidance, etc.
  
  Horror! Baby talk. Their intelligence also chews bread for a reason, as well as ours! Moreover, the operating modes and parameters of the radar are easily "removed", there are plenty of traitors in Russia - even they tried to transfer data on developments in the field of hypersound, and so on ...
  1. Galleon
    
    -4
    
    30 October 2019 14: 32
    
    Those. In your opinion, are the parameters of the combat operation of the modifications of the S-300 and the new S-400 known to the probable enemy through RTR? And what could not be obtained through RTR, then passed numerous traitors by transfer of documents? And not only in air defense radar, but also in hypersound? Maybe this is your sad baby talk?
    1. SETSET
      
      0
      
      30 October 2019 16: 10
      
      Quote: Galleon
      Those. in your opinion, the parameters of the combat operation of the modifications of the S-300 and the new S-400 are known to the probable enemy through RTR? ...
      
      You simply amaze me with your ignorance! The parameters of the radar transmitter can be easily removed at a distance: carrier frequency, power, duration and shape of the probe pulses, repetition frequency, the presence of intrapulse modulation, and so on. Maybe you do not know what signal compression is and what it is used for?
      Quote: Galleon
      Quote: SETSET
      Moreover, the operating modes and parameters of the radar are easily "removed", there are plenty of traitors in Russia - even they tried to transfer data on developments in the field of hypersound, and so on ...
      
      And what could not be obtained through RTR, then numerous traitors handed over the transfer of documents? ...
      
      Are you so naive I was figuratively told about numerous traitors and gave a recent example about information leaks abroad - on the development of hypersound in Russia. And the special services of the USA and NATO countries do not have to go far about the combat work of the S-300 - they received the S-300 complexes of the first modifications from Ukraine and, in principle, the work has already apparently been sorted out ... Especially the S-300 of other modifications armed with Greece, Slovakia - NATO countries and other countries.
      And you still have babble, according to your statement below:
      Quote: Military Review News
      No upgrade details reported, although it is known that the B-2 received electronic warfare systems, new antennas, as well as advanced computing systems.
      
      Quote: Galleon
      Mentioned modernization talking about of confidence knowledge of our air defense systems of all necessary: types of radars and their modes of operation, types of missiles and methods of their guidance, etc.
      
      You contradict yourself. The mentioned modernization does not say anything, and even more so about their confidence in the knowledge of our complexes ...
      Quote: Galleon
      ...But is it really? Healthy skepticism seems more than appropriate in this matter, as well as inquisitive curiosity about the new stuffing of the electronic warfare of this "Spirit".
      
      These are your expressions and there is babble, a pun for children.
      1. Galleon
        
        -1
        
        30 October 2019 16: 31
        
        I seem to have amazed you so much that you completely lost your cultural component and "in a state of passion" went beyond the ethical norms of dialogue. With your children, express yourself with baby talk and play on words for children, this is the first thing. Secondly, if you are not in the know, RES has permitted modes of operation for peacetime, but there are modes that are allowed to be used only when maintaining a database. It was like this on my ship in my time. If you are really a bit of an expert in radar and electronic warfare, then you should understand the difference. As for the different versions of the S-300 complex, you and I can only guess how they differ from each other. And even then you should not do this either on the pages of the open press, or in the kitchen over tea with cognac. Who need to know the. For a deep modernization of the radio-electronic stuffing of a strategic bomber and its operation in enemy air defense zones (i.e., our air defense zones), modernizers need to be confident that their electronic warfare means will be able to withstand air defense electronic equipment. In what I expressed my skepticism, on the one hand. On the other side of this skepticism is the hope and confidence in the immunity of our radars. Is this "baby talk"? "Everything is lost"? But all the same, refrain from running to those whom, in your expression, "in abundance."
Piramidon

-4

30 October 2019 13: 39

The United States completed the modernization of the first strategic bomber In-2

Interestingly, in the process of modernization, it will receive the name missile carrier?
1. Avior
  
  +4
  
  30 October 2019 14: 07
  But isn't he a missile carrier?
  1. Kettle
    
    0
    
    30 October 2019 15: 00
    
    Often repeated untruths become true.
    Of course, you’re right, oddly enough, for 10 years as a missile carrier.
    A pretty versatile badly visible bomber:
    for conflicts with low intensity, with a maximum MANPADS air defense - free-falling bombs, if desired, or small UABs, such as Payway,
    if there is an object-based air defense - then from a range of about 100 km they plan UAB type AGM-154 (so beloved by the Israelis),
    if serious complexes - please, the same AGM-154, only with engines - up to 500 km, or stealth short 4-meter cruise missiles, JASSM, - as in the photo - 1000 km.
Ros 56

+1

30 October 2019 14: 40

We have also upgraded the S-300, the S-400 is still normal, and the S-500 and higher numbers are on the way.
capsid

+1

30 October 2019 19: 56

Good luck to those who make changes, improvements to aircraft. Technologies should work, not justify
mvmptzna

-1

31 October 2019 01: 05

Old computers were replaced with new ones; Now you can fit all the power into the smartphone form factor - well, put it in a row with a dozen such smartphones. For this, the weight of all thrown out boxes will go directly to electronic warfare, radar and additional missiles. Then the coating is new, improved will come up. Then they will make it unmanned. Much more could be ahead of these aircraft. To build such a new one is so expensive that any modernization automatically justifies itself.