Military Review

Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider: details and unknown

92
Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider: details and unknown
First B-21 on the shop floor



On December 2, the US Air Force and Northrop Grumman Corporation held an official public presentation of the first experienced long-range bomber B-21 Raider. The finished aircraft was taken out of the workshop and demonstrated to the public for the first time. For reasons of secrecy, they did not show it in all its details, but the presentation was also of great interest. For the first time, it became possible to consider a real aircraft, and not its image of an unknown degree of reliability.

From project to presentation


It should be recalled that the development of a promising strategic bomber for the US Air Force has become one of the most complex and lengthy projects of recent times. Preliminary study of this topic started at the beginning of the 2015s, but was suspended. In the tenth, a new program was launched, and in XNUMX, Northrop Grumman Corporation received a contract to develop a full-fledged project and build several prototype aircraft.

By the end of the last decade, the contractor completed the design and began preparations for the construction of prototypes. The assembly of new equipment was entrusted to plant No. 42 (Palmdale, California), which has experience in participating in projects of particular importance. The construction of the first prototype B-21 began in 2019. It took several years to complete.

In early 2022, it was reported that six Raiders were already in various stages of construction. The assembly of the first, which has the working designation T1, was completed in March. After that, the aircraft was transferred to a separate workshop equipped for ground testing, verification and calibration of systems. Such events continued until recently.


On December 2, at factory No. 42, in a solemn atmosphere and in the presence of Pentagon leaders, the official presentation of the new bomber took place. The plane was rolled out of the workshop and the cover was removed from it. The most daring statements were made about the importance and prospects of the new project, and so on.

It is curious that an experienced bomber was shown from only a few angles. The event was organized in such a way that the aircraft could only be seen from the front corners. There are no other angles in the official photo and video materials either. Apparently, the customer and contractor do not yet consider it possible to show a side projection, tail or upper surface of the aircraft.

However, such a demonstration of the aircraft is of great interest. For the first time, not computer images are shown, but a full-fledged prototype. At the same time, we can expect that in the near future it will be shown from other angles, as well as new information will be revealed that will significantly complement the existing picture.

Visible features


As has been repeatedly reported earlier, the B-21 project uses ideas and solutions previously implemented by Northrop-Grumman in the B-2A aircraft. Again, the long-range bomber is made according to the "flying wing" scheme with the widespread use of stealth technologies. The dimensions and weight have decreased in comparison with the previous sample. There are other notable differences that point to the development of initial ideas and the application of new developments.


Airplane under cover

First of all, other proportions of the wing and rudimentary fuselage attract attention. Apparently, the wing received a thicker profile, which provided an increase in internal volumes. The upper protruding "fuselage" has a different length and proportions. Unlike the B-2A, on the new B-21, the air intakes were able to fit completely into the plane of the wing, and there are no protruding elements.

The surface of the airframe is made as smooth as possible. Any hatches or removable panels are missing, or well sealed or not visible from the proposed angles. It can be assumed that the aircraft receives all the necessary electronic systems, but their antennas are hidden under radio-transparent panels and fairings.

Officials said that the aircraft's avionics have an open architecture, and this will allow for further upgrades and new functions. Earlier it was reported that even an unmanned modification of the B-21 may appear in the future. Now the possibility of performing both shock and reconnaissance missions is mentioned.

However, the first prototype aircraft remains manned. The double cockpit in the nose of the airframe received specific glazing. Panels of reduced size and complex shape are used. It can be assumed that such a glazing option reduces radar visibility, but at the same time worsens forward-downward and sideways visibility. Perhaps the lack of visibility is compensated by the capabilities of modern instrumentation.

A new chassis has been developed for the B-21. The three-point scheme has been retained, but the main racks received only two wheels each instead of the two-axle bogies of the predecessor. In addition, the doors of the landing gear compartments do not have characteristic broken edges associated with a decrease in visibility.


First open demonstration

The topic of weapons is still undisclosed. However, at the presentation it was reported that the B-21 will be able to carry a promising weaponwhich hasn't even been developed yet. Earlier it was reported that the payload of the new Raider will not be inferior to the existing B-2A.

Plans for the future


Since March, the first prototype T1 bomber has been undergoing the necessary ground tests. They were briefly interrupted for an official presentation, and now the aircraft is returning to the test station. Various checks are ongoing and may take several more months.

Based on their results, the B-21 will receive permission to enter flight tests. The first flight is scheduled for next year in 2023, but the exact date has not yet been named - and may not yet be determined. At the same time, a crew has already been appointed, which will have to lift the bomber into the air. Test pilot Chris Moss will participate in the flights from the developer company, and Lieutenant Colonel Clifton Bell will represent the customer in the person of the Air Force.

In the future, the following experimental aircraft will join the flight tests. The use of several boards will speed up the necessary checks, as well as work out the possibilities of group use, etc. The full cycle of flight tests of the B-21 should be completed in the middle of the decade.

In parallel with the tests, serial production will be prepared. By the middle of the decade, Northrop Grumman should lay down the first serial bombers, and their delivery to the customer is scheduled for 2026-27. By 2030, the first unit on the new aircraft should reach initial operational readiness.


According to current plans, starting in 2025, the Pentagon will annually pay for the construction of six or seven new aircraft. After 2030, the output can be increased to 12-15 units. in year. The required amount of equipment has not yet been determined. The Air Force wants to receive at least a hundred aircraft, and if possible they would like to have twice as many. It is not yet known how many aircraft will eventually be able to find money.

Due to the serial B-21 Raider, they are going to replace the existing B-1B and B-2A aircraft. They will be completely withdrawn from the combat composition of the long-range aviation, and the modern "Raiders" and the newly modernized B-52H will remain in service. How long they will keep such a mixed park is not reported. Perhaps there are simply no plans for such a distant future yet.

Subtotals


Thus, the B-21 Raider bomber project is moving forward. The first prototype has been built and handed over for ground testing, and the assembly of the next few machines continues. In addition, they have already considered it possible to show the first aircraft to the public. The first flight is also being prepared, but its date has not yet been determined. Plans are being made for the distant future, incl. related to the series and re-equipment of combat units of the Air Force.

Apparently, the Pentagon has cause for optimism. The B-21 project will be completed and will allow long-range aviation to be re-equipped. However, several questions remain unanswered at this stage. So, it is not yet known what characteristics and capabilities the new "Raider" will have and how much it will correspond to the original terms of reference. In addition, the final financial indicators of the program and the timing of its implementation have not been determined. As experience shows, in these areas there can be the most serious problems.
Author:
Photos used:
US Department of Defense, Northrop Grumman
92 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 6 December 2022 05: 07
    +1
    An interesting car like everything new ... let's see what new items the Americans will shove into it.
    Well, on our part, it is already necessary to work out software for our air defense systems specifically for this bomber ... by the time it is released into series, our air defense officers should be ready to shoot it down on the way to the borders of Russia.
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 6 December 2022 06: 20
      +5
      by the time it is released into the series, our air defense officers should be ready to shoot it down on the way to the borders of Russia.

      why should he approach our borders, and even more so at the distance of launching anti-aircraft missiles? It has the main filling - KR with a range of> 800 km (AGM-158) and 3500 (AGM-129).
      In general, a strange concept - to get even a slightly cheaper, but truncated version of the B-2 for what? Where will its characteristics of low visibility manifest itself? Are they going to throw cast iron with them? Or do they need it for the ancient B61?
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 6 December 2022 06: 32
        -1
        Quote: Ka-52
        why should he approach our borders, and even more so at the distance of launching anti-aircraft missiles? It has the main filling - KR with a range of> 800 km (AGM-158) and 3500 (AGM-129).

        The main thing for me is that he doesn’t shoot at my dacha in the center of Siberia. smile
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 6 December 2022 06: 38
          +6
          The main thing for me is that he doesn’t shoot at my dacha in the center of Siberia.

          shoot, do not hope. According to the dropshot plan, 2 nuclear bombs were supposed to fall on my Krasnoyarsk. I think there is hardly more humanity in the current plans.
      2. bar
        bar 6 December 2022 07: 10
        -2
        Quote: Ka-52
        In general, a strange concept - to get even a slightly cheaper, but truncated version of the B-2 for what?

        The usual American concept - "than the old wash, it is better to give birth to a new one." Lost technology to maintain the airworthiness of the same B-2. They regularly lose them, after the completion of contracts for the production of the next new product, funding stops and the development team disbands. When a roasted rooster pecks, tenders are announced and everything starts all over again. Prior to this, the F-22 was also changed to a penguin. Simple practice. They can do it, they print bucks.
        1. Civil
          Civil 6 December 2022 07: 23
          +6
          It remains only to envy evil ... we are not up to stealth bombers now.
          1. bar
            bar 6 December 2022 07: 49
            -5
            Quote: Civil
            It remains only to envy evil ...

            It would be something to be jealous of. Design schools cannot be replaced by advanced polygraphy.
        2. cold wind
          cold wind 6 December 2022 08: 59
          +8
          The F-35 does not replace the F-22. different class of fighters. The raptor is being replaced by the NGAD program.
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 6 December 2022 09: 18
            -1
            The F-35 does not replace the F-22. Various types of fighters

            just replaces. Just at the moment there was a revision of the concept for the choice of a fighter. At first, the Americans followed the path "let's do it so cool that no one else has it." And as received, so wept. And they began to change the concept of fighter aircraft - let the pipe be lower, smoke thinner, but cheaper. And if you create an aircraft on the design basis of the previous model, and even push the costs on partners, you will also make money. Voila, pants turn into elegant shorts - in F-35
            1. cold wind
              cold wind 6 December 2022 09: 26
              +11
              The revision of the concept is only in your head, nothing like this happens in reality.
              F-35А/С replacing F-16 and FA-18A/B, respectively, continues their concept. Massive, cheap multifunctional fighters.
              To replace the F-22, a future air superiority complex (NGAD) is being created, where there will be a 6th generation twin-engine fighter. Here it is a direct replacement for the F-22.
              1. Ka-52
                Ka-52 6 December 2022 09: 47
                -4
                The revision of the concept is only in your head, nothing like this happens in reality.

                Well, your maniareality is of little interest to me.
                NGAD

                do not pass off your nonsense for information. NGAD doesn't even have R&D status yet.
                1. cold wind
                  cold wind 6 December 2022 09: 55
                  +5
                  Hmm, no R&D...
                  Doesn't it bother you that the prototype of the fighter under the NGAD program took off more than 2 years ago?
                  https://topwar.ru/175158-novye-tehnologii-i-pervyj-polet-uspehi-programmy-ngad.html?ysclid=lbbv5s6aj6399352795
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 6 December 2022 10: 08
                    -5
                    Doesn't it bother you that the prototype of the fighter under the NGAD program took off more than 2 years ago?

                    no one bothers that you're lying?
                2. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 6 December 2022 17: 58
                  +1
                  NGAD doesn't even have R&D status yet.

                  Well, with this you also got excited.
                  The US Department of Defense DoD system involves the following steps:
                  1) Material Decision Analysis (MSA) phase
                  2) Technological Maturity and Risk Reduction Stage (TMRR)
                  3) Development and production development phase (EMD)
                  4) Production and deployment phase (PD)
                  5) Operation and support (O&S) phase
                  Since June of this year, the status of the NGAD project is EMD
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 7 December 2022 10: 12
                    -1
                    I don’t need to start again mournful songs “about the main thing”. For the Americans, the development system works on the same principles as ours. But only more clearly and consistently: 1. idea formation, 2. perspective assessment, 3. formation of technical specifications for primary design 4. design competition (with funding for concepts), 5. competition among concepts 6. determination of the final winner with an order guarantee for formation production program. As far as I know, there was no design competition among American aircraft manufacturers. While everything is going according to the principle - DARPA is mastering some of its own budgets, aircraft manufacturers are picking up ideas for future concepts in the format of their own budgets. Everything is done in the hope that someday cancer will hang and Congress will allocate loot for all this canoe. That's when the main saw will begin. In the meantime, you and ColdWind can entertain the local public with stories about the imminent 6th generation of American MFIs
                    1. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 7 December 2022 11: 58
                      +1
                      you can entertain the local public with tales about the imminent 6th generation of American MFIs

                      No need to attribute what I did not say. The Americans openly say that before 2030 you should not count on the transition to the next stage.
                      As far as I know, there was no design competition among American aircraft manufacturers.

                      How much do you know..? Do you also know about the level of secrecy of the project? What is an open competition, what are you talking about? Read an interview with the Minister of the Air Force, maybe some thoughts will appear.
                      1. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 7 December 2022 12: 49
                        -1
                        How much do you know..? Do you also know about the level of secrecy of the project?

                        well, don't be stupid. The level of secrecy is TK, and then up to a certain point. And the very fact of the competition was certainly never a secret.
                        Read an interview with the Minister of the Air Force, maybe some thoughts will appear.

                        yes, I did read it. The usual seventh water on jelly and blablabla. Pentagon officials are no better than ours at times.
                      2. cold wind
                        cold wind 7 December 2022 13: 22
                        +1
                        So funny) Tell me how much, for example, the RQ-170 project cost, what kind of competition it was and how many they were made in general))

                        There are generally 2 NGAD programs, from the Air Force and the Navy. The work is being done by Lockheed, Boeing and Northrop. The skunks were brought to a flight prototype, the rest is unknown. They have all the tools and money to create prototypes, there will be no publicity at this stage. When the Air Force and Navy decide on the concept of future air dominance, they test prototype fighters and UAVs, only then will they go to Congress with specific requests. After that, a competition for the production and operation program will appear, most likely closed, we will only be told the amount.
            2. AC130 Gunship
              AC130 Gunship 6 December 2022 18: 26
              +3
              No, it doesn't replace. The F22 came to replace the F15, and the F35 replaced the F16. These are machines of a different class, created to solve different problems. Both F15 and F22 in the US perform exclusively air defense tasks. A kind of Su15 in the USSR. In other countries, the F15 was sold as a multifunctional fighter
              1. cold wind
                cold wind 6 December 2022 19: 09
                +2
                F-15s are very different.

                The F-15 AJ Eagle is an air superiority fighter. Instead, they planned the F-22, but the USSR ended. Now they are being replaced by the F-15EX.

                F-15E Strike Eagle - multirole fighter (fighter-bomber). It is not yet going to be removed from service. But the EX variant also fulfills its tasks.
        3. Mikhail Krivopalov
          Mikhail Krivopalov 6 December 2022 09: 03
          +4
          And in our country, according to what concept of technology are lost?
        4. Alex_mech
          Alex_mech 6 December 2022 09: 34
          +7
          How much can you believe in the myth of the printing press? Zimbabwe also printed dollars, I even have 10 million in one piece of paper. But for some reason, neither an airplane nor even just bread can be bought with these dollars.
      3. Vladimir80
        Vladimir80 6 December 2022 09: 15
        +4
        the concept may be strange, but we don’t have such a thing ... we pump oil, we pump gas to the west - but for what????
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 6 December 2022 09: 24
          -1
          the concept may be strange, but we don’t have such a thing ...

          why do we need the same? We and the Americans have different doctrines. For now.
          we pump oil, we pump gas to the west - but for what????

          each government has its own recipes for replenishing the budget. I would not want to have the same ones that were in the 30-50s. Yes, thinking you yourself would start whining and asking to go back, send you there. So oil and gas abroad is far from the worst option.
          1. bayard
            bayard 6 December 2022 10: 02
            0
            Quote: Ka-52
            why do we need the same?

            So they do it - PAK YES. The same flying wing, but larger, even more B-2A. But also with two engines and internal weapons bays. The engine for them has already been dragged away for bench tests (NK-23D) and it seems that they even want to arm with explosives (SD and MD) for self-defense. So that even from enemy missiles explosives could fight back. yes Here is such an "answer to Chamberlain" they are grinding ... while we are being bombed by Engels-2.
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 6 December 2022 10: 12
              +3
              That's how they do it - PAK YES

              do they do it right? laughing You know, I've never even heard of this at work. And you are already writing. Yes, R & D is underway, but this is still at the level of technology calculation. It's like with the Armata - conceptually this is a new generation tank, but it's easier and cheaper to make the T-90 "Breakthrough" and upgrade the T-72 to the BZ level.
              1. bayard
                bayard 6 December 2022 12: 41
                +2
                Quote: Ka-52
                do they do it right?

                I mean, the work is going on. Where can they be made if there are no engines for them yet? But they say that the cockpit was made, the glider is either a mock-up, or for static tests, perhaps not the whole one. lol But they want something exactly like this - a flying wing. I'm talking about conceptual choice.
                Quote: Ka-52
                It's like with the Armata - conceptually this is a new generation tank, but it's easier and cheaper to make the T-90 "Breakthrough" and upgrade the T-72 to the BZ level.

                This is a great blessing from above that Ahura Mazda (Lord of Reason) took the towers away from the idea of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXblaunching "Armata" in a series. We would be in a completely ridiculous position now.
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 7 December 2022 12: 54
                  +1
                  This is a great blessing from above that Ahura Mazda (Lord of Reason) took the towers away from the idea of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXblaunching "Armata" in a series

                  you truly speak
          2. AC130 Gunship
            AC130 Gunship 6 December 2022 19: 31
            +1
            I was told about different doctrines in the army many, many years ago. A lot has changed since then
      4. bayard
        bayard 6 December 2022 09: 55
        +3
        Quote: Ka-52
        Where will its characteristics of low visibility manifest itself? Are they going to throw cast iron with them? Or do they need it for the ancient B61?

        In general, I don’t see such aircraft on the European theater of operations - here the distances are small, the airfield network is developed, and carriers
        Quote: Ka-52
        (AGM-158)

        there may be tactical aircraft.
        But in the Pacific theater of operations, their appearance is fully justified - to carry out an attack / launch of a CRBD in China and our Far Eastern bases to the line. A secret exit to the launch line of the CD (due to low visibility) over the ocean, followed by withdrawal to remote bases.
        And free-falling bombs will definitely not load it. They now have CRBD even BTA planes are allowed.
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 6 December 2022 10: 15
          -2
          But in the Pacific theater of operations, their appearance is fully justified - to carry out an attack / launch of a CRBD in China and our Far Eastern bases to the line

          And why do they need Raiders when they can do the same with Lancers? Moreover, bombers are unlikely to go without fighter aircraft cover.
          1. bayard
            bayard 6 December 2022 12: 54
            +2
            Quote: Ka-52
            And why do they need Raiders when they can do the same with Lancers?

            First, the resource. Cold War bombers fly on the remnants of the resource. While the "Raiders" pass a set of tests, refinements, launch into a series and the series itself is built, the old ones are already flying off.
            It is possible to launch the CRBD with carrier-based aircraft, and massiveness can also be completely ensured. That's just the exit of an aircraft carrier from all over the AUG to the area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe release of decks, space reconnaissance may not escape. And they will cover the AUG itself. And almost no stealth.
            But an inconspicuous bomber with a decent combat radius and the ability to refuel in the air is a much more flexible and secretive tool. And operational (just compare the speed of the AUG and the bomber).
            Therefore, their appearance in the Pacific theater of operations is fully justified. moreover, only jump airfields can be organized for them there, or they can be used only at the time of combat deployment in a theater of operations. And in peacetime / interwar time, they can be based on their continent.
            Flexibility , efficiency , secrecy .
            Quote: Ka-52
            Moreover, bombers are unlikely to go without fighter aircraft cover.

            I heard that they want to include in the composition of the RVV weapons for self-defense (including with the possibility of intercepting enemy explosive missiles).
            By the way, they are now talking that 100 V-21s will not be enough, they want to build up to 200 units.
            1. Alex_mech
              Alex_mech 7 December 2022 12: 43
              +1
              Well, to order 200, you first need to take at least 50 into service. So no one dares to immediately double the order. The risks are still great.
              1. bayard
                bayard 7 December 2022 13: 54
                0
                They started talking to Arosto that hundreds of such bombers would not be enough. And only practice will show how and how much they will build in real life. In the meantime, he did not even take off - he is going to next year.
      5. the most important
        the most important 6 December 2022 11: 08
        0
        Quote: Ka-52

        why should he approach our borders, and even more so at the distance of launching anti-aircraft missiles? It has the main filling - KR with a range of> 800 km (AGM-158) and 3500 (AGM-129).
        In general, a strange concept - to get even a slightly cheaper, but truncated version of the B-2 for what? Where will its characteristics of low visibility manifest itself?

        I don't understand why this is needed at all. Well, okay, the states - there is nowhere to put the bucks. Well, why do we need such a thing as PAK YES? It will not enter the air defense zone, the speed is subsonic ... How many times I asked the VO about the goals of its creation, but no one could answer. For me, it would be better if they created something similar to the TU-16, for throwing a cast iron in a war with an enemy who does not have air defense.
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 6 December 2022 11: 22
          -1
          several answers:
          1. so that the urya-patriots do not gouge with the questions "what is it with us ?!"
          2. development of technology. Any development of technology affects the current situation in the industry.
          3. demonstration that we can.
          depending on the level of the reader, he can choose any.
        2. malyvalv
          malyvalv 6 December 2022 15: 24
          +1
          I don't understand why this is needed at all.

          For delivering the first disarming blow. They clearly expect that by the year 30 they will have mastered hypersound. He is especially good at short distances when the enemy does not even have time to come to his senses. That is, over the ocean, you can sneak up unnoticed and launch missiles that will reach the target in 5 minutes. And no early warning system will detect in advance.
          This thing is cooler than any ballistic or cruise missile, which will take half an hour to fly to the target and such a massive strike of Kr or BR is detected with a 100% probability.
          1. the most important
            the most important 6 December 2022 21: 49
            0
            Quote: malyvalv

            malyvalv (Valery)
            Today, 15: 24
            NEW

            +1
            I don't understand why this is needed at all.

            For delivering the first disarming blow.

            Long-range aviation divisions and strategists are given three days to be ready for combat work. During this time, any intelligence will know everything
            1. malyvalv
              malyvalv 7 December 2022 10: 46
              +1
              So what does he know? You never know there are exercises or relocation. And after the exercises, you can bang right away. Or not immediately.
          2. Ka-52
            Ka-52 7 December 2022 10: 02
            0
            That is, over the ocean, you can sneak up unnoticed and launch missiles that will reach the target in 5 minutes.

            This is not the first time I've read this nonsense. Suppose the Americans are foolish enough to send billions of bombers without fighter cover. Suppose they were discovered by some miracle 400 km from the coast (not a fact, given the difficulties of detecting targets on the water surface). So what? There is no way to hit the air defense system. Call in air defense fighters? Well, those, depending on the location, can fly from an hour to two to the point of interception. During this time, the strategists will shoot back and will already be approaching Seattle.
            1. malyvalv
              malyvalv 7 December 2022 10: 52
              +1
              That's exactly what they shoot. And not for 400 km, but as soon as enemy air defenses are detected. That is, given the smaller size, stealth stealth and low altitude, at best, 40 kilometers. And there, 500-1500 km remain to the targets. And the strike is not with cruise missiles, but with hypersound. That is, the enemy no longer has time for a counter-retaliatory strike. The answer will be only those that survive. If survive.
              Essentially the same option as the NATO missiles near Kharkov, only a little more expensive.
        3. AC130 Gunship
          AC130 Gunship 6 December 2022 19: 35
          +1
          Those. to create a separate type of bomber specially for an enemy of the level of "bad guys in Syria" ???
    2. Yngvar
      Yngvar 6 December 2022 06: 20
      -1
      In general, seven feet above his keel!
      And the fate of V-2!
    3. Aristarkh Pasechnik
      Aristarkh Pasechnik 6 December 2022 06: 23
      -8
      Stealth is not invisibility for radars, stealth is only "small" visibility. Serbs, F-117 shot down by the old Soviet S-125 air defense system! Moreover, Russia has long been working on a photon radar.
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 6 December 2022 06: 43
        +6
        Moreover, Russia has long been working on a photon radar.

        So far, more legends are associated with "photon radars" than real achievements. Regarding the F-117, as far as I remember, the optical channel contributed there, coupled with the carelessness of the Americans flying along the same route. Which made it possible to ambush them. But I can be wrong
        1. Alex_mech
          Alex_mech 6 December 2022 09: 36
          +2
          No, everything is like that, the 117th was seen precisely by "eyes", and not by radar.
          1. Ka-52
            Ka-52 6 December 2022 09: 48
            -3
            No, everything is like that, the 117th was seen precisely by "eyes", and not by radar.

            translate the phrase into human language
            1. Alex_mech
              Alex_mech 7 December 2022 12: 47
              0
              It is just in human language, without special terms.
              1. Ka-52
                Ka-52 7 December 2022 12: 52
                0
                before you poke a minus out of a stupid habit, explain what it is to "see with your eyes." You can with the terms, you won't be scared. The air defense system has an optical channel, there is guidance and tracking by a radar. What is a frog with "eyes" - I don't understand
                1. Alex_mech
                  Alex_mech 8 December 2022 10: 00
                  0
                  Well, since we switched to "you", then I will answer you: Firstly, there are 3 minuses and I, with all my desire, could not put so much, a childish insult from an adult uncle. Secondly, I won’t explain anything to you, you already understood everything, but for some reason you get into polemics. I don’t have time for these stupid things, I have to assert myself with myself.
                  1. Ka-52
                    Ka-52 8 December 2022 10: 36
                    0
                    that is, you wrote a bunch of stupid words, but you didn’t have the ability to explain your answer? ... well, you would have written that you don’t know and blurted out too much. And it turns out he wrote "everything is wrong", but to the question "how?" swam with stupid excuses.
                    1. Alex_mech
                      Alex_mech 8 December 2022 10: 44
                      0
                      Once again, I don't owe you anything. I wrote the way I wanted, your opinion is not just not interested in me. Well, if you want, give me a "deuce" for the exam or "fail" and calm down already on this. smile
                      1. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 8 December 2022 11: 09
                        -1
                        are you a clown or what? If you are not interested in my opinion, then why did you write to me in response to my comment? If you want to express an opinion, express it. If you have information that refutes my argument - write it. And go in, fart inappropriately, and then with an offended mine to write "it's none of your business, I won't explain anything" - well, this is completely in the style of some kind of teenage trolls
                      2. Alex_mech
                        Alex_mech 8 December 2022 15: 43
                        0
                        I have already expressed my opinion as I see fit. What is not clear?
  2. Pavel57
    Pavel57 6 December 2022 05: 13
    +2
    The Chinese made a similar H-20. When will the Tupolevs roll out their analogue?
    1. Vladimir80
      Vladimir80 6 December 2022 09: 13
      +5
      analogue never, we will have "unparalleled", in 1 copy. 10 years later ... unfortunately ....
    2. Alex_mech
      Alex_mech 7 December 2022 12: 47
      -1
      The Chinese have NOT done anything yet. That's what the Americans did and showed.
  3. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 6 December 2022 06: 43
    -1
    Quote: Ka-52
    shoot, do not hope. According to the dropshot plan, 2 nuclear bombs were supposed to fall on my Krasnoyarsk.

    I have one consolation... the well is nearby if I dive into it... at least it's minus 22 outside.
    I will finally rejoice in a breath of air and water. crying
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 6 December 2022 06: 48
      0
      the well is nearby if I dive into it ... at least it’s minus 22 outside

      well, you’re lucky, I have a well in my dacha, I won’t squeeze through the pipe ((although the basement is not bad - stock up on food, there is water, attach some kind of FVU - you can. Around the mountain - the shock wave from the city will dissipate. Only here’s what to do with third hand, hooves and scales - it's not clear request
    2. garri-lin
      garri-lin 7 December 2022 08: 14
      +1
      What for??? To being alive to envy the dead????
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 6 December 2022 07: 31
    -3
    Plans for the future
    Minke whales have many plans for the period after 2027 ....
    What, how, why and why, they themselves cannot decide what will happen, but they are preparing, this is understandable ...
    And the plane ... another "wunderwaffle", which will actually be produced just then, hardly earlier.
  5. Proctologist
    Proctologist 6 December 2022 08: 35
    +7
    Indeed, B-21 seems very similar to B-2, no clear progress is visible. But he is! I'll start with the numbers: the B-2 has become a fantastically expensive bomber, even for the United States. Wikipedia talks about numbers under 1B dollars, moreover, dollars are "1997"! That is, the figure can be safely doubled, I think! Also, R&D costs are modestly left out. So that your eyes do not burst from the true price, probably ...

    The B-21 is valued at $500M in 2022. For comparison, a civilian Boeing 787 costs $250M in its base configuration. Knowing how much more expensive everything costs the Pentagon (nuacho? And they are sawing there, and there are complex and lengthy procedures for certification, acceptance, secrecy, etc., all this multiplies the price tag), 500M "military" dollars - this, it turns out, is almost nothing, or what? ..

    The sequel is also about the economy. B-21 is third stealth generation. B-117, then F-22/F-35 and now B-21. Technologies improved, materials improved, R&D puffed - we should expect a radical (I think, by orders of magnitude, not several times) reduction in the cost of operating a bomber. Instead of inventing something breakthrough - a hypersonic or orbital bomber, for example - they "licked" the existing working solution. Instead of a Lamborghini, which is not scary to roll out of the garage only for the weekend, they made a Ford, a workhorse. And they plan to rivet 100 of these "Fords". 100 most modern stealth, I remind you!
    1. Proctologist
      Proctologist 6 December 2022 08: 40
      +8
      The next aspect is IT. If the F-22 has 386 processors, then the B-21 should be expected to introduce the latest achievements of the network-centric concept of weapons, which is why the B-21 bomber can only be considered conditionally. He will also be a scout, and a target designator, and a repeater, and everything, everything, everything. Remaining stealth, an extremely difficult target.

      100 of these will become a strong threat to China.
      1. KCA
        KCA 7 December 2022 06: 56
        -1
        Processors are good, but programming does not depend on the processor, the Buran had landing engines and automatically landed, the shuttles landed without engines and were manually controlled, although their processors were much more powerful, and, by the way, the F-22 does not have 386 processors cost, and PowerPC
        1. arkadiyssk
          arkadiyssk 8 December 2022 10: 58
          0
          Why are you dragging here fakes about the automaticity of Buran? To land Buran, a special landing system Course was created, consisting of a bunch of radars that tracked his position, weather and calculated the optimal landing trajectory - all this was transmitted to Buran, where the computer controlled the planes to follow a given course. There was no super breakthrough in this - the S-300 missiles flew to the target in exactly the same way.
    2. cold wind
      cold wind 6 December 2022 08: 43
      +5
      Yes, that's right. The Americans want to build a workhorse, not a doomsday machine. His class is between strategic and tactical, forgotten long-range bombers. They took developments from the "old" stealths, improved them. The dimensions are smaller than B-2 by 15~20%, the range is about the same. Two serial, economical engines. Obviously it is created for constant, routine work. Accordingly, the use of guided bombs for him will be the norm.
      It will be interesting whether the integration of the SM-6, in which case they will have a universal missile against ground, sea and air targets. ARRW may not fit, but HAWC will definitely fit. CD and nuclear bombs of course.
      1. Maxim G
        Maxim G 6 December 2022 11: 10
        -1
        Here the question is how the use of an inconspicuous bomber, an inconspicuous tanker, inconspicuous bombs and missiles correlates with the use of conventional bombers like the B-52, B-1.
        And should we make an inconspicuous one based on fitting a glider to it, instead of making an ordinary long-range and even a strategic low-cost bomber with limited glider measures in terms of stealth.
        1. cold wind
          cold wind 6 December 2022 13: 00
          +3
          They already have B-1/52, if B-1 is decommissioned, then B-52 is planned to be used until the middle of the century.
          In general, I think we need an inconspicuous Tu-16, a cheap and mass-produced missile-carrying bomber. China just uses the Tu-16.
          I see little use from strategists, very expensive but replaceable aircraft.
          In principle, our air forces (Air Force, Navy) need 3 types of fighter / bomber: Su-57, Su-75 and "inconspicuous Tu-16". The current zoo needs to be stopped.
          1. Maxim G
            Maxim G 6 December 2022 13: 12
            0
            What are replaceable? Missiles?
            Quote from cold wind
            I see little use from strategists, very expensive but replaceable aircraft.
            1. cold wind
              cold wind 6 December 2022 13: 17
              0
              Конечно.
              There are no problems to make an intercontinental cruise missile.
              We take the X-101, add a dropable PTB, make a ground-based launcher with an accelerator and get a missile launcher with a range of 8-10 km
              "Storm" modern technical level.
              1. Maxim G
                Maxim G 6 December 2022 13: 30
                0
                Clear.
                I partially agree with you.
                The fact that a revision of military equipment is needed, what to leave, and what to say goodbye to.
                Strategic bombers / missile carriers also have their advantages. How much they cover the cons is a question.

                The fact that a long-range bomber / missile carrier is needed, maybe a new model, can resume production of the Tu-22M *, seems obvious to me, I'm not sure about the strategic ones.
                1. cold wind
                  cold wind 6 December 2022 13: 33
                  +2
                  You definitely don’t need to cut them, let them serve as long as they can. It's pointless to make new ones.
                2. cold wind
                  cold wind 6 December 2022 13: 40
                  +2
                  As for the Tu-22M, it has no advantages over the Tu-16, but there are a lot of disadvantages. The concept of a supersonic air defense breakthrough failed, leaving an unreasonably expensive price and the complexity of production and maintenance. There used to be a Tu-16/22 navigator here, he confirms this.
                  1. Maxim G
                    Maxim G 6 December 2022 13: 45
                    +1
                    I read his opinion (there is a broken face on the avatar, sort of).
                    But the Tu-22M can probably be reproduced.

                    The question is the price, both of the machine and the operation, and stealth.

                    I do not see the last need, in view of the use of missiles, and, if possible, planning bombs.
                    Those. launch / reset outside the zone of destruction of the air defense system.
                  2. Osipov9391
                    Osipov9391 8 December 2022 03: 00
                    0
                    All Tu-22M3s (about 4 dozen out of 250 built) are already on the verge of decommissioning.
                    There are cracks in the wing swivel joints, hopelessly outdated electronics and even very unreliable ejection seats that practically do not give salvation at low altitudes.
                    None of this has been made for a long time.
                    From conversations, I heard that in parts of the MRAP, many members of the crews of the Tu-16, when switching to the "Troika" (as this car was called), did not really complain about it.
                    Such a masterpiece as the Tu-160 did not work out from this machine.

                    And China is in no hurry to make big bombers. Although the Tu-95 or even Tu-160, Tu-22M3 through Ukraine at one time could be obtained.
                    But they operate an analogue of the Tu-16.
  6. Alex_mech
    Alex_mech 6 December 2022 09: 31
    +2
    Oh, this "unique style" of Kirill Ryabov. Lots of water and little information. You can read through a line or even through two.
  7. Alex_mech
    Alex_mech 6 December 2022 09: 41
    +3
    The American approach is good. They know how to count money (money is resources) When they realized that the B-2 did not suit them in many respects, they postponed it for a while, changed their minds about the concept and made the B-21 on a new round. B-2 in this sense was an expensive experiment that made it possible to make B-21.
    1. spirit
      spirit 6 December 2022 15: 01
      +2
      It will be the same with Zamvolt, even though it is abundantly watered with everyone, the Americans quickly curtailed production, but a new destroyer is now being riveted on its basis, and all these billions for Zamvolt will eventually significantly save the development of a new destroyer hi
      1. Alex_mech
        Alex_mech 7 December 2022 10: 25
        0
        I won’t say according to Zumvolt, I don’t understand the marine theme. But most likely you are right. The approach is the same. This is not the USSR with pseudo-socialism, where there were 3 models of tanks at the same time, this is capitalism, where every cent saves a dollar.
      2. arkadiyssk
        arkadiyssk 8 December 2022 11: 09
        0
        So it was with submarines as well. From the expensive uncompromising Sivulf, they made a successful Virginia and rivet it in dozens. And the construction of the Sivulfs was stopped.
  8. Bingo
    Bingo 6 December 2022 10: 29
    -3
    Well, we must also mention that nothing is shown, to put it mildly, and that there are clearly jambs there - so it was clear about 7 years ago when it was revealed that this was another cut:
    What is so terrible divulged in his Forbes column by the director of the Lexington Analytical Institute, Lauren Thompson? What can you write about while sitting on the couch about a top-secret program? That the future B-3 will be specially "atomized" - that is, adapted to operate in conditions of close nuclear explosions (since it is unlikely that it will be able to throw bombs from a pitch-up or from a half-loop)? That equipment to save money will be "built" on the basis of "open architecture"? Or TTX analysis?
    Figushki! Lauren only blurted out that the $3 billion R&D cost for the B-21,4 was over double the price offered by the winner (Northrop). Just. “We are just taking risks!” - justified the general. Yeah, this is what the “downed pilot”, our sick, McCain, often says: “Price +”! (an obvious overestimation of the cost of the contract for the sweetest and least controlled - for R&D).
    Where did Lauren get this "important data" from? Since the publication appeared on the day of the appeal against the results of the competition of another participant - the Boeing consortium - Lockheed Martin, it seems that outraged competitors leaked information explaining the essence of their protest: from the very beginning of the competition, Northrop offered an extremely low price for R&D, which became the basis for declaring her the winner of the competition. Only it really turns out that Northrop will receive as much as 10 billion more than it requested! It's a shame, yes...
    Well, Boeing and Lockheed, of course, were tritely screwed up ... But what about the Air Force's "excuses" that the difference is based on "unforeseen risks"? Let's take a look at the data of the US Air Force itself: How to flip a third of a trillion dollars with its beak
    It is clearly seen that the growth in the cost of targeted R&D usually does not exceed 30%. United, yes, they grow up to 70%, but this is not our case. It turns out that at least 6-7 billion dollars are pledged ABOVE possible insurance. This means one of two things: either the Northrop company is being returned the money for which it artificially lowered the possible price of the contract in order to become the winner of the tender, or these $ 7 billion simply wanted to ... uh-uh-uh share ("In working hours, Yuri Vladimirovich!” (c) During the sequestration, Obama Khuseinovich!).
    Yes, no wonder such numbers are super-hyper-mega-secret and...tax-free!
  9. Glagol1
    Glagol1 6 December 2022 11: 22
    +2
    Even if they buy “only” 100 aircraft, this is already cool. In terms of cost, it is quite realistic, estimates say about 0,5 billion per piece.
  10. Battle Toads
    Battle Toads 6 December 2022 13: 01
    -2
    Quote from cold wind
    The revision of the concept is only in your head, nothing like this happens in reality.
    F-35А/С replacing F-16 and FA-18A/B, respectively, continues their concept. Massive, cheap multifunctional fighters.
    To replace the F-22, a future air superiority complex (NGAD) is being created, where there will be a 6th generation twin-engine fighter. Here it is a direct replacement for the F-22.


    It's impossible. To create a 6th generation aircraft, the US must create at least the 5th generation.
  11. APASUS
    APASUS 6 December 2022 13: 18
    -2
    The amount was not named, but it was emphasized that the price would be lower than that of B2. To be honest, I doubt that cheap weapons are made in the USA Considering the plans for the purchase, Northrop Grumman opened a mine immediately with faceted diamonds
  12. Ura65
    Ura65 6 December 2022 13: 34
    -3
    I don’t see any point in pumping a lot of money into a superbomber of what the hell future. By the way, this also applies to us. Those that exist are quite enough for existing tasks. Modernization, of course, is needed.
  13. EFIM LYUBIN
    EFIM LYUBIN 6 December 2022 16: 48
    -2
    This aircraft was not created for war, but for cutting the budget of the Pentagon! The Northrop B-2 Spirit cost over $2 billion with accessories. This one will pull on 3-4 billion! Such cuts are fantastic for Russian oligarchs! The US is going to build 100 or 200 aircraft...
  14. AC130 Gunship
    AC130 Gunship 6 December 2022 18: 27
    +1
    And what is there to hear about the roll-out of a similar Tupolev? Or is it still on paper?
    1. Alex_mech
      Alex_mech 7 December 2022 10: 26
      0
      Better on paper. It will be cheaper. And if you make a layout, then a lot of money will go to PR.
  15. runway-1
    runway-1 6 December 2022 20: 28
    +1
    In early 2022, it was reported that six Raiders were already in various stages of construction.
    ...
    The dimensions and weight have decreased in comparison with the previous sample. There are other notable differences that point to the development of initial ideas and the application of new developments.
    Serious approach to business, unlike some.
  16. cash
    cash 7 December 2022 09: 05
    +1
    In parallel with the tests, serial production will be prepared. By the middle of the decade, Northrop Grumman should lay down the first serial bombers, and their delivery to the customer is scheduled for 2026-27. By 2030, the first unit on new aircraft should reach initial operational readiness

    eh, we would have such a pace for PAK YES, he only has to get on the wing by the year 25-26 ...
  17. yuriy55
    yuriy55 7 December 2022 13: 05
    0
    Apparently, the Pentagon has cause for optimism. The B-21 project will be completed and will allow long-range aviation to be re-equipped.

    What is the weapon that will not be used? (This is a rhetorical question)
    Russia started to create a similar "product 80" nine years later, but suggests:
    the first flight is currently expected to be carried out in 2025, adoption by 2027

    Let's see if there is a prospect of shooting down the American stealth (this is what the Americans are betting on) from the S-500 and other promising Russian air defense systems. Excuse me, but just like that, stealing $750 is worth a lot...
    Once 117, 22, 35 were positioned invisible...
    Right there already "6th generation" !!! fellow
    How scary it becomes to live ... crying
  18. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 8 December 2022 11: 19
    0
    Quote: Proctologist
    He will also be a scout, and a target designator, and a repeater, and everything, everything, everything. Remaining stealth, an extremely difficult target.

    This is a wonderful idea - an invisibility that radiates like a reconnaissance or a repeater. It will be fun to watch.