Military Review

US Air Force presented a visual project of a long-range bomber B-21

131
The representative of the US Air Force Deborah Lee James presented in Orlando a visual project of a promising strategic bomber LRS-B (B-21), developed by Northrop Grumman, reports Look with reference to Fox News.


US Air Force presented a visual project of a long-range bomber B-21


James noted that "B-21 will be able to deliver air strikes anywhere in the world." She also recognized his resemblance to the bomber, B-2 created by the same company.

“The main features of the bomber’s appearance have been leaked to the press for a long time. It also became known that the flight range of the LRS-B (B-21) without refueling will exceed 9 thousand kilometers. He should be able to fly to China and Russia. However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of a new car, ”the publication reported.

Earlier, the head of the Senate Committee on the US Armed Forces, John McCain, said he would not "authorize the project of the long-range strike bomber B-21" due to the fact that "there were costs beyond contractual arrangements."

Last year, the Pentagon’s plans to build 100 aircraft of this kind were reported. The cost of the first dozens of 2-s machines should be $ 511 million per unit in 2010 prices.
Photos used:
twitter.com/SecAF23
131 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. oleg-gr
    oleg-gr 27 February 2016 11: 35
    17
    Beautiful preparation for a new cut of candy wrappers. And McCain gave a voice so that he would not be forgotten when sharing. Interestingly, the F-35 will bring to mind? or stop there?
    1. DIVAN SOLDIER
      DIVAN SOLDIER 27 February 2016 11: 37
      17
      I would not say that, the arms race is gaining momentum, so I think the plans are quite serious.
      1. MASK
        MASK 27 February 2016 11: 41
        52
        Yugoslavia still remembers the "invisible" .. These are the next? Russia, is silent and smiles (modestly))
        1. SRC P-15
          SRC P-15 27 February 2016 11: 43
          +8
          It looks like a boomerang, maybe it will fly the same?
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Baikonur
            Baikonur 27 February 2016 11: 48
            36
            US Air Force presented a visual project
            Cool word - "visual"!
            Such "visual" in the internet - heaps!
            We've got it! So - F..a! your "visual"!
            1. Ruslan
              Ruslan 27 February 2016 12: 22
              +4
              about how this fighter resembles the planes from the movie "stealth". just a wing of another scheme :)
              1. cniza
                cniza 27 February 2016 12: 54
                +7
                Let them spend more money, we will find a worthy answer.
                1. zvereok
                  zvereok 27 February 2016 20: 59
                  +2
                  They do not spend their own. But if it goes on like this, then we will see the anniversary 20 stunts next year.

                  http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html

                  Although, what's the point?
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. Altona
              Altona 27 February 2016 12: 49
              +3
              Quote: Baikonur
              Such "visual" in the internet - heaps!
              We've got it! So - F..a! your "visual"!

              ----------------------
              So far, I see images of new units for the Star Wars saga. And what the Americans showed is already old junk in terms of the glider. It flies with difficulty and is very unstable in flight.
              1. avia1991
                avia1991 27 February 2016 15: 59
                +3
                Quote: Altona
                It flies with difficulty and is very unstable in flight.

                Science does not stand still. 30 years ago, engines with a variable thrust vector were only in projects - however, today it is a familiar attribute of a fighter. They can come up with something interesting, in the coming years, to improve flight performance .. The greatest difficulties, as far as I know, arose with the stabilization of the aircraft in the longitudinal direction, with a change in the center of gravity. Today, this task is being solved much more efficiently than at the time of the creation of B-2.
                1. adept666
                  adept666 27 February 2016 16: 28
                  +8
                  However, today it is a familiar attribute of a fighter.
                  Well, it’s not so ordinary yet that there are three mass-produced cars with such engines, and then only one is available all-aspect. The remaining manufacturers are only threatening.
                  The greatest difficulties, as far as I know, arose with the stabilization of the aircraft in the longitudinal direction, with a change in the center of gravity. Today, this task is being solved much more efficiently than at the time of the creation of B-2.
                  There is no keel, therefore, stability along the sliding angle is also subject to uncontrolled yaw. To overcome this effect, divided resistance wheels are used (in the photo below, at the ends of the wings are opened like books: split-drag rudder), except for this, in principle, there are some pluses for a bomber from a flying wing. hi
            3. ltc22A
              ltc22A 27 February 2016 16: 17
              +1
              Quote: Baikonur
              US Air Force presented a visual project
              Cool word - "visual"!
              Such "visual" in the internet - heaps!
              We've got it! So - F..a! your "visual"!

              I agree. Most likely not "visual" but virtual. It resembles a picture from THEIR fantastic films - beautiful, frightening, but it is not clear how it flies.
          3. Misha Honest
            Misha Honest 27 February 2016 12: 18
            +3
            They added one number, increased the range, reduced the bomb load ... Has something else changed? This is a manual on how to screw B-2 from B-21, while saving money in your own pocket ... request
            1. Zoldat_A
              Zoldat_A 27 February 2016 12: 36
              +6
              Quote: Misha Honest
              They added one number, increased the range, reduced the bomb load ... Has something else changed? This is a manual on how to unscrew B-2 from B-21, while saving money in your own pockets.

              John McCain stated that he would not “authorize the B-21 long-range strike bomber project” due to the fact that “There were costs beyond the agreement on the contract”.
              Apparently, the story of the solid gold F-35 taught America something and they decided to first count on a piece of paper and then print money to convert the old B-2 into a "new" B-21.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 38
                +4
                The all-cast was F-22, F-35 at current prices about 3 times cheaper. winked
              2. Misha Honest
                Misha Honest 27 February 2016 13: 42
                +3
                Quote: Zoldat_A
                Apparently, the story of the solid gold F-35 taught America something and they decided to first count on a piece of paper and then print money to convert the old B-2 into a "new" B-21.

                Most likely, McCain was simply not allowed to go to the feeding trough, so he is furious ... But he is a well-known lobbyist in Amer, and then everything passed by him - the mess means ...
            2. Iline
              Iline 27 February 2016 13: 17
              +8
              However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors.

              If for the sake of the so-called "invisibility" this parameter decreases, then the idea of ​​a strategic bomber dies along with this technical message.
              Stealth technologies are a bit "purple" for modern air defense systems, but there is silence about the systems of possible use of weapons on this aircraft.
              In my opinion, whatever the latest weapons systems are currently being hung on it, the development of air defense is not asleep in its development. And if this is a "miracle" and takes on board a pair of modern missiles, then this is just a couple and air defense with such a quantity will be much easier to cope with. And in this case, these aircraft must be ordered not 100, but at least 600 in order to fend off the threats of our old men Tu-95MS and Tu-160.
              But soon we will hear about the unique electronics on board and about the network distribution of tasks between aircraft.
              Lord! Even with I.V. Weapons were created for Stalin, which, among other advantages, with an electromagnetic pulse after undermining the nuclear warhead, destroyed the enemy's electronics (except for radio tubes).
              At a recent meeting between Kerry and Lavrov, the first one spoke up about the newest US-made weapon, the railgun. To which Lavrov said that such a weapon was created in Russia a long time ago and on a piece of paper he drew a semblance of a railway track with wagons on it. And he suggested that a similar "railgun" in Russia is called the "Barguzin" BRZhK.
              1. atalef
                atalef 27 February 2016 13: 22
                0
                Quote: Iline
                Modern air defense systems are a bit purple with stealth technologies

                It is strange why then the T-50 and
                The strategic missile carrier based on stealth technology will enter service with the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Air Force in 2025-2030. Major General Anatoly Zhikharev, commander of the Long-Range Aviation, told reporters on Tuesday that the aircraft will replace all existing types of long-range strategic bombers and missile carriers, ITAR-TASS reports.

                Quote: Iline
                And in this case it is necessary to order these aircraft, not 100, but at least 600 to counter the threats of our old people Tu-95MS and Tu-160.

                laughing
                Quote: Iline
                Lord! Even with I.V. Weapons were created for Stalin, which, among other advantages, with an electromagnetic pulse after undermining the nuclear warhead, destroyed the enemy's electronics (except for radio tubes).

                Only adversary wink
                Quote: Iline
                and at a recent meeting between Kerry and Lavrov, the first one spoke up about the newest US-made weapon, the railgun. To which Lavrov said that such a weapon was created in Russia a long time ago and on a piece of paper he drew a semblance of a railway track with wagons on it. And he suggested that a similar "railgun" in Russia is called the "Barguzin" BRZhK.
                1. Iline
                  Iline 27 February 2016 16: 39
                  +1
                  Quote: atalef
                  It is strange why then the T-50

                  But just the T-50 and strategic bombers are very different in their combat use and the approaches to their design are also different.
                  PAK YES no one has seen and does not know how he will eventually look. One thing I can say with certainty - he will take on board a large number of weapons, will be able to stay in the air for a long time and will be able to use his weapons outside the air defense zones of the likely enemy.
                  And all the rest of your smirks from a simple study of a similar topic on similar resources.
                2. velikoros-xnumx
                  velikoros-xnumx 27 February 2016 17: 34
                  +4
                  Good afternoon atalef. Maybe enough already, more than half of your comments are similar to banter. But if it concerns star-striped, then everything is fine, not a problem, little things. Tired of already reading. Well, you can one, another. And then the system is viewed, it is asked only for what purpose? Does banter deliver moral satisfaction and allow you to show your intellectual superiority?
          4. cumastra1
            cumastra1 27 February 2016 13: 01
            +1
            More like a boot, with a high heel. These used to be released.
          5. cumastra1
            cumastra1 27 February 2016 13: 01
            0
            More like a boot, with a high heel. These used to be released.
          6. iliitchitch
            iliitchitch 27 February 2016 13: 10
            +5
            If it is invisible, then why do we see it in the picture? They say God knows what, but in the end Shoigu, figuratively speaking, a barrel with nuts and a couple of kilos of TNT will be put into orbit, and that’s all - the obama-c outhouse cannot find it in the white house - the jeepies will be cut off. And the infantry will set the point in the war, as always, with engineer blades.
          7. Ros 56
            Ros 56 28 February 2016 08: 42
            +1
            Quote: СРЦ П-15
            It looks like a boomerang, maybe it will fly the same?

            In fact, all planes fly like that, back and forth. The difference from the boomerang is that if the boomerang hits the target, it remains there. Well, if they bring down the plane, too.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 27 February 2016 11: 46
          +5
          Quote: MASK
          Yugoslavia still remembers the "invisible" .. These are the next? Russia, is silent and smiles (modestly))

          In Yugoslavia, the United States in general became insolent and began to bomb directly with invisible weapons. B-21 is planned to be used so that it would be possible to go into the launch area of ​​cruise missiles unnoticed, launch missiles and go to base.
          1. KCA
            KCA 27 February 2016 15: 47
            +3
            taking into account the X101 / 102 launch range of 5000 km, the carcasses do not need invisibility or stealth, climbed over Engels, bombed and landed
            1. Ze Kot
              Ze Kot 29 February 2016 15: 43
              0
              Quote: KCA
              taking into account the X101 / 102 launch range of 5000 km, the carcasses do not need invisibility or stealth, climbed over Engels, bombed and landed


              Why bother raising carcasses then, wasting a resource? Attach solid fuel boosters and launch from the ground wink


              "However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of the new machine," the newspaper said.

              It turns out that the bombs cost so much that the price of the aircraft was 2 billion? Now there will be less bombs and the price is lower laughing
        4. Pereira
          Pereira 27 February 2016 11: 59
          +1
          It was really great. But it was a long time ago.
          1. Thunderbolt
            Thunderbolt 28 February 2016 13: 34
            0
            Quote: KCA
            The carcasses do not need invisibility or stealth, rose above Engels, bombed and landed
            Here the difference of doctrines is seen. If take-off from Engels is detected by the enemy, then this is a weapon of deterrence and retaliation. The Americans are developing the possibility of delivering a first, disarming strike. That's why they need this hundred of first wave planes. borders and deliver the very first strike at our command centers in order to paralyze control and make a breach. Invisibility will still be in the air, and tomahawks and strike aircraft will rush into these breaches. And in a normal war, such targets are extremely inconvenient. And will also go in the first wave, to sweep enemy air defenses.
        5. DMB_95
          DMB_95 27 February 2016 12: 20
          +4
          Of course he smiles, because they shot down a new Soviet missile. laughing
      2. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock 27 February 2016 11: 43
        +5
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        I would not say that, the arms race is gaining momentum, so I think the plans are quite serious.

        + B-52 must be replaced by the United States understand this. And so as not to happen like the last time with B2 when the bomber did not pull the budget at a price of 2 billion apiece, McCain requires guarantees from defense companies so that they promise that they will fit into the budget. After all, they plan to build this B-21 in an amount of at least 100 aircraft.
        1. Asadullah
          Asadullah 27 February 2016 13: 25
          +3
          at a price of 2 billion apiece,


          It is with equipment and weapons. The 21st with pampas will also pull for a billion. Not without reason in the South they immediately stopped flying Bedva, they robbed two billion racket, twenty greenes at a price ....
        2. kil 31
          kil 31 27 February 2016 13: 27
          10
          She also recognized his resemblance to a B-2 bomber created by the same company.
          I will show you how to save for 1 lam. You take the old spirit, reduce the bomb gate, put tanks and voila in the vacant space, an invisibility with a greater range and a lower bomb load. I’ll write the account number later. laughing
          1. cap
            cap 27 February 2016 14: 12
            +3
            Quote: keel 31
            I will show you how to save for 1 lam. You take the old spirit, reduce the bomb gate, put tanks and voila in the vacant space, an invisibility with a greater range and a lower bomb load. I’ll write the account number later. laughing


            You have revealed the terrible secret of the Pentagon am .
            Your accounts in Switzerland have been seized, also in America, Canada and the EU. laughing
      3. Ami du peuple
        Ami du peuple 27 February 2016 11: 44
        +6
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        the arms race is gaining momentum, so the plans I think are quite serious

        What are your plans? Build a smaller copy of the failed V-2 and name it B-21? The same eggs only in profile. It seems that American aircraft designers have a crisis of the genre.
        By the way, the declared value of half a yard is clearly not final. It seems that in the process of development, the price will be brought up to the round figure of $ 1 billion, which is comparable to "Spirit". American defense corporations know how to master budgets perfectly.
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock 27 February 2016 11: 53
          +9
          Quote: Ami du peuple
          What are your plans? Build a smaller copy of the failed V-2 and name it B-21? The same eggs only in profile. It seems that American aircraft designers have a crisis of the genre.

          From the point of view of stealth, the B2 fuselage design can’t be better imagined (without tail unit, the entire fuselage creates lift, and not just the wings, as in the case of a traditional aircraft), so they use this design further.
          1. Sid.74
            Sid.74 27 February 2016 11: 59
            17
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            From the point of view of stealth, the B2 fuselage design could not be better

            Only here zakovyrka, it was not the Americans who invented it ... laughing "Remember gentlemen, this country will be destroyed by corruption! ... repeat

            Horten Ho.VII

            1. alex86
              alex86 27 February 2016 12: 07
              +1
              Quote: Sid.74
              It was not the Americans who invented it at all.

              and what follows from this?
              1. Thunderbolt
                Thunderbolt 28 February 2016 13: 42
                0
                Quote: Sid.74
                It was not the Americans who came up with it at all ...
                Let's then close the plant supplying engines for our strategists, because "Kuznetsov" is a Junker school of engine building that has found fertile soil on the Volga shores.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 11
              +5
              March 1, 1944 (Horten H IX V1), the second - February 1945 (Horten H IX V2)
              Northrop N-9M flew in 1942, though with propellers rather than jet engines
            4. Forest
              Forest 27 February 2016 13: 30
              +1
              Northrop began to design tailless back in the late 20's, the Germans a little later.
          2. Asadullah
            Asadullah 27 February 2016 13: 29
            +2
            In terms of stealth ....


            laughing And in terms of maneuverability? Do not look at me please, but if you see, do not shoot?
        2. Sid.74
          Sid.74 27 February 2016 12: 17
          +1
          Quote: Ami du peuple
          What are your plans? Build a smaller copy of the failed B-2

          Not!!! stop A copy of Ho IX ...


          Just made a rebranding, styling and lifting ... and here's a new wonderful Litak. fellow
      4. Sid.74
        Sid.74 27 February 2016 11: 49
        0
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        I would not say so, the arms race is gaining momentum

        As an illustration of the "old-new" B-2 ... even the chief lobbyist of the US military-industrial complex has heard that the case smells like kerosene.
        Earlier, the head of the Senate Committee on the US Armed Forces, John McCain, said he would not "authorize the project of the long-range strike bomber B-21" due to the fact that "there were costs beyond contractual arrangements."

        Costs amerikosov now, it is impossible to report to the Pentagon about spending in the amount of 8 trillion dollars for a period of almost 20 years. By comparison, the total US national debt today is the amount of 19 trillion dollars.

        But that's not all ... these are beautiful examples ...
        The Securities Commission in Washington spent almost 4 million dollars to re-arrange furniture in its office.

        The total amount of abuse of public funds in medicine - 60 billion dollars.

        43 billion were spent on the construction of non-existent landfills for nuclear waste.

        The American Association of Diplomatic Services estimated that during Obama’s presidency, the proportion of diplomats selected from the ranks of his political donors and allies reached 37%, and since during his second term 53% of the appointed ambassadors were chosen from among his sponsors In particular, representatives in Italy, France, Germany and other leading US economic partners.
        1. cap
          cap 27 February 2016 14: 25
          +2
          Quote: Sid.74
          As an illustration of the "old-new" B-2 ... even the chief lobbyist of the US military-industrial complex has heard that the case smells like kerosene.

          Quote: Sid.74
          Costs amerikosov now, it is impossible to report to the Pentagon about spending in the amount of 8 trillion dollars for a period of almost 20 years. By comparison, the total US national debt today is the amount of 19 trillion dollars.

          But that's not all ... these are beautiful examples ...

          Quote: Sid.74
          Costs amerikosov now, it is impossible to report to the Pentagon about spending in the amount of 8 trillion dollars for a period of almost 20 years. By comparison, the total US national debt today is the amount of 19 trillion dollars.

          But that's not all ... these are beautiful examples ...


          I do not know how others, from such information I will drink validol laughing drinks
          That's how the mood is imperceptibly recovering. This is about a debt of 19 trillion.
          And a photo for the mood:
          f111
      5. Looking Petrovich
        Looking Petrovich 27 February 2016 11: 51
        +6
        The B-2 has twelve corners on the case, for this project 8 counted. The tendency to decrease angles is visible - with time, most likely, the corners will also be cut off from behind - and the concept will come to its logical end - a triangular glider.
        As for the arms race, it’s more like a hysteria of modern media. Both the United States and Russia, in fact, are cutting military budgets.
        1. Asadullah
          Asadullah 27 February 2016 13: 35
          +1
          and the concept will come to its logical end - a triangular glider.


          And plywood will fly over Paris .... in the absence of breakthrough ideas, the old ones are polished. It’s like knife sharpening, we sharpen it to the absence of metal.
      6. NIKNN
        NIKNN 27 February 2016 12: 26
        +3
        However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of a new car ”


        ... and paper planes will be launched instead of cruise missiles .... lol

        The point is to go backward (degrade performance) ... rather than work on improving technologies leading to cost reduction ... belay They have strange concepts, we don’t understand ... request
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 29
          0
          A smaller plane, less EPR, and here again the enemy must add +100 to his C hi
      7. DMB_95
        DMB_95 27 February 2016 12: 27
        +3
        One of the main drawbacks of the B-2 is the insufficient bomb load. The new one will have even less ...
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 33
          +3
          Yes, sort of ordinary.
          B-52 22.7 tons
          B-1B 34 tons
          B-2 27 tons
          Tu-95 20 tons
          Tu-160 standard 22.5 tons, max 40 tons.
          1. dakty
            dakty 27 February 2016 22: 09
            0
            And with what flight range with the indicated loads?
      8. Asadullah
        Asadullah 27 February 2016 13: 18
        +3
        arms race is gaining momentum


        Re-equipment planned. In theory, it was sewn to soap. In this case, the soap became somewhat cheaper.

        I saw the B-2 on Guam. Tight. Did not impress. From a distance it looks much better. Now this miracle will appear, two times cheaper, consider twice as worse. Sometimes it seems that at first Hollywood forms the templates, and then the designers are pulled together with the military. The impression that they are playing there in a beautiful toy, and then, it’s very a pity to ruin them with war. Better scare from afar.
      9. NEXUS
        NEXUS 27 February 2016 13: 45
        +1
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        I would not say that, the arms race is gaining momentum, so I think the plans are quite serious.

        Everything is very logical ... we are developing PAK YES and preparing to build Swans, and the mattresses will be paved with another flying gold bar.
        Rather, put the new TU-160 on the wing ...
        1. Thunderbolt
          Thunderbolt 28 February 2016 13: 46
          0
          And you and the price tag for our PAK YES already know what you say so? In addition, the concept of our PAK YES surprisingly looks like this "ingot of gold". So, the price tag in the studio!
      10. lopvlad
        lopvlad 27 February 2016 14: 01
        +1
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        the arms race is gaining momentum, so I think the plans are quite serious.


        The arms race during the Soviet era showed that Americans can by no means do everything. Each of them has Napoleonic plans, but the reality is cruel. Therefore, the Americans put loads on Russian engines into space.
        1. Morrrow
          Morrrow 27 February 2016 16: 20
          0
          And not only. Different missiles - different approaches.
      11. The comment was deleted.
      12. Koshak
        Koshak 27 February 2016 22: 09
        0
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        I would not say that, the arms race is gaining momentum, so I think the plans are quite serious.

        S-500 to help him.
    2. Pereira
      Pereira 27 February 2016 11: 53
      +9
      Well, so what, that cut? How much is needed, so much money will be printed. Or US Treasury obligations stamped. And they will be bought.
      Do not forget that the money spent on F-35 (and successfully sawn) is largely due to the infusion of money from the outside into the USA, stolen by elites of other countries from their peoples and hidden from confiscation in the USA. And do not forget about China, at the state level, who bought a pile of damnation accusations. This is more than a trillion dollars.
      That is, all these expenses are actually paid not by ordinary Americans, but by those who will then be bombed by these aircraft.

      How did Lenin say it? Will the capitalists sell us a rope on which we hang them? If my memory serves me right?
      In fact, we have a situation when Planet Earth is buying a new collar for the USA, a strict collar on which the USA is going to keep this planet Earth.
      And everyone understands this, but they can’t change anything, because so far the old collar is holding well. And many do not want to, because they themselves have a profit from this.
    3. Giant thought
      Giant thought 27 February 2016 11: 58
      +1
      The mattress workers still do not give up hope of gaining a military victory over Russia, and these new bombers will not help them in this, no matter how hard they try.
    4. gregor6549
      gregor6549 27 February 2016 13: 13
      0
      And what is it that we are so preoccupied with cutting money bills with whales. Indeed, in comparison with domestic sawmills, they are just cooks. Yes, in the process of tenders / competitions for the development and manufacture of new weapons, bribes and everything else are used, but as soon as the competition is won by a company, every dollar spent on the implementation of the order is subject to strict accounting. At the same time, the company's profit margin laid down in the contract is quite modest, somewhere in the 10% region. In a false case, it cannot be compared with 100% or more with the percentage of profit pledged by our companies. So who and how to cut grandmas is a big question. In general, counting other people's money in someone else's pocket is not a borzoi.
      1. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 27 February 2016 23: 46
        0
        Quote: gregor6549
        At the same time, the company's profit margin laid down in the contract is quite modest, somewhere around 10%. In a false case, it cannot be compared with 100% or more percent of profit pledged by our companies. So who and how to cut grandmas is a big question. In general, counting other people's money in someone else's pocket is not a borzoi.

        It seems to be so, but the question is, where do the fantastic amounts of development come from, which are sometimes an order of magnitude higher than Russian ones?
    5. rpek32
      rpek32 27 February 2016 13: 13
      0
      flying wing? Seriously? good luck to these gentlemen. oh lol laughing
    6. Vadim237
      Vadim237 27 February 2016 13: 15
      +1
      They used to say that he will be two less than B 2? and in the picture from the same sizes - they decided to create a serial clone B 2.
    7. Amnestied
      Amnestied 27 February 2016 13: 25
      +2
      Quote: oleg-gr
      Beautiful preparation for a new cut of candy wrappers. And McCain gave a voice so that he would not be forgotten when sharing. Interestingly, the F-35 will bring to mind? or stop there?

      Yes, yes! Nothing new, pilim-pilim-pilim! laughing
    8. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 27 February 2016 13: 49
      +2
      Yes, McCain. True, he suddenly became a miser "there were costs in excess of the agreements on the contract."
      And before, he demanded not to spare money for defense (for them for some reason it is called, to China and Russia).
    9. vodolaz
      vodolaz 27 February 2016 23: 41
      0
      I also drew racing cars at school))) Why didn’t I become the second Enzo Ferrari?) As practice shows: to promise does not mean to get married. Here already some countries began to refuse lightning, because they were tired of waiting for him to finish it at last.
    10. Dam
      Dam 28 February 2016 03: 09
      0
      Walking on a rake of mattresses does not teach anything. If this iron flies, it is very expensive and bad. Games in stealth, similar to our Rusnano, are expensive, but no results are visible
  2. SAG
    SAG 27 February 2016 11: 39
    +5
    She also recognized his resemblance to a B-2 bomber created by the same company.

    ... removed a couple of corners and sawed a billion! Diagnosis: Kleptomania!
  3. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 27 February 2016 11: 39
    +6
    For that kind of money and even with a lower bomb load than the B-2. What is the point of it?
    1. Sashka
      Sashka 27 February 2016 12: 38
      +2
      But the meaning is ...
      "Saw, Shura, saw ...." (c)
      Good day to all !!!
    2. tomket
      tomket 27 February 2016 15: 15
      +2
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      For that kind of money and even with a lower bomb load than the B-2. What is the point of it?

      In general, the B-2 concept included invisibility for hunting and destroying stationary objects and launchers "Pioneer" and "Poplar" in Siberia. It is clear that no one would have allowed them to run around there with impunity, just as there was no particular sense in that, because the attack on one "Poplar" inevitably provoked the launch of the rest. Then the Americans themselves realized the fallacy of this concept, but the B-2 had already been stamped. At the moment, it would be more expedient to carry out a massive launch of cruise missiles in order to push through the air defense. An example of this concept is the Tu-95 MS-16, which carries up to 16 cruise missiles. But here is the statement that the bomb load of the B-21 will be reduced for the sake of range, if there are bases around the world ... This is something with something ...
      1. Morrrow
        Morrrow 27 February 2016 16: 22
        0
        Stealth allows you to penetrate into closed areas.
        1. Koshak
          Koshak 27 February 2016 22: 17
          0
          Quote: Morrrow
          Stealth allows you to penetrate into closed areas.

          It has already been proven that "stealth" is a bluff invented to cut the Pindo budget. In Yugoslavia, even the old Soviet S-125 was shot down by the "invisible" F-117. What can we say about modern S-300/400
  4. sir_obs
    sir_obs 27 February 2016 11: 41
    +3
    Not otherwise "artificial intelligence" designed
  5. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 27 February 2016 11: 42
    +6
    In short, 4 times cheaper B-2))) And there is a suspicion that the same "highly effective".
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 27 February 2016 12: 03
      +4
      And there is a suspicion that the same "highly effective".

      The main minus of the B-2 (well, except for the cost) is its inability to carry long-range cruise missiles. After all, it was assumed that he would act directly in the enemy’s air defense zone, almost dropping free-falling bombs on the enemy.
      I am sure that the Americans took into account past mistakes, and will soon equip it with their counterpart X-101.
      This, by the way, is not good. request
      1. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 15
        +6
        B-2
        weaponry
        Combat load: up to 22 730 kg (up to 27 000 kg after modernization [13])
        Nuclear weapons: 16 V61 x-11 (340 kilotons) or 16 x B83 (1,1 megatons) or 16 x AGM-129 ACM or 16 x AGM-131 SRAM II
        Conventional bombs: 80 or 82 Mk.16 x x Mk.84 36 or cluster bombs x CBU-87 / CBU-89 GATOR
        Precision weapons: 8 x GBU-27 or AGM-154 JSOW or 12's JDAM
        Cruise missiles: 16 x AGM-158 JASSM [36]

        AGM-168 JASSM
        Range: 360 km (JASSM-ER up to 980 km)

        AGM-129
        Flight range: up to 3700 km

        hi Once upon a time already equipped
        1. Wiruz
          Wiruz 27 February 2016 14: 11
          0
          Once upon a time already equipped

          AMG-129 removed from service hi winked
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 27 February 2016 17: 04
            0
            And 200 of these missiles are stored in a warehouse, do you think if TMV really smells they will not be immediately attached back?
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 28 February 2016 17: 33
            0
            Too expensive missiles to simply dispose of them.
  6. pts-m
    pts-m 27 February 2016 11: 43
    +1
    this view of the Pendosovsky letak resembles ... the boomerang of the aborigines of Australia ..., with one difference, it can even reach its destination, but it’s already gotten to the place of deployment. Why spend so much dough ?.
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 27 February 2016 12: 07
      +2
      Allow me to cut back a little haha: with countries with weak air defense, this bomb will be enough for them, and in the event of a conflict with Russia or China, its return to the base is not particularly planned.
      The bomb load has not increased, what a sorrow, right? A greater load will require an increase in the size of the aircraft, which will complicate the breakthrough of air defense, increase the cost of the aircraft, reduce fuel efficiency ... War is a continuation of the economy, therefore, the cost / efficiency ratio plays a role here. And modernization is now mainly in the field of communication systems, control and guidance of the carrier and ammunition.
  7. PKK
    PKK 27 February 2016 11: 51
    +1
    Dreamers are Americans. They gather so much time to fatten on their pieces of paper.
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 27 February 2016 12: 08
      +2
      And they obviously succeed and will succeed for a long time! So far, the alternative, unfortunately, has not even been identified.
  8. Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 27 February 2016 11: 52
    +3
    They would have called the plane simply -B "point" - otherwise they dragged 21 out of place. ..
    1. Alexander 3
      Alexander 3 27 February 2016 12: 09
      +1
      B's "point" sounds better.
  9. sergant1.1
    sergant1.1 27 February 2016 11: 54
    +1
    make a movie about him and calm down. (as usual)
  10. Wiruz
    Wiruz 27 February 2016 11: 57
    +7
    Last year, the Pentagon announced plans to build 100 of these aircraft

    And these people tell the world about Russia's imperial ambitions? About "militarization" carried out by Putin? belay

    As in a joke:The Russians definitely want to attack us! See how close they placed their country to our military bases! laughing
  11. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 27 February 2016 12: 00
    +2
    So they didn’t learn anything. All their invisibility is compensated by the modernization of the radar transmitters and receivers. Exaggerate, of course.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 17
      +3
      What doesn’t stop the bombing with impunity, all who don’t have money to upgrade the radar, or cannot get it because of sanctions. winked
      1. Armored optimist
        Armored optimist 27 February 2016 13: 07
        +1
        And also it did not hurt to shoot down their stealth F-117 with an old S-125 in Yugoslavia.
        1. Blackmokona
          Blackmokona 27 February 2016 13: 54
          +1
          Which did not stop them from bombing Yugoslavia and now annexing it piece by piece to NATO and the EU.
          1 lost plane for thousands of successful flights is a minor loss.
        2. Morrrow
          Morrrow 27 February 2016 16: 24
          +1
          There was a tip on the optical channel.
  12. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 27 February 2016 12: 02
    +1
    Maybe this is just a picture for the public, but the real plane will be different?
  13. crumb
    crumb 27 February 2016 12: 09
    0
    However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of the new machine-B21 lite version B2
  14. LastLap
    LastLap 27 February 2016 12: 19
    +1
    "However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of the new machine," the newspaper said.

    9 thousand flies and delivers a high-precision grenade.)))) The co-pilot pulls out a check and drops it through a special form (a special invisible form) window.
  15. Warm Padded Jacket
    Warm Padded Jacket 27 February 2016 12: 23
    +2
    visual project is it like I’ve dreamed?)))
  16. 501Legion
    501Legion 27 February 2016 12: 35
    +1
    Yes, even the Americans blundered. where are their favorite species from the future. such an ordinary B2 only with steep insides. not impressed with one word)
  17. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 27 February 2016 12: 38
    +2
    They already got us into Star Wars. Such a "fool" was launched. Ours were led, institutes were built ... "Astrophysicists" on Tushinskaya stands as a monument to human stupidity ... I hope that this ".... yu" will not be involved. Let them have fun. As always, Russia's response will be much cheaper and completely unexpected.
  18. xam0
    xam0 27 February 2016 12: 38
    +2
    Spend so much time and already a huge amount of money to slightly poke the look of the B-2 image and pass it off as a wunderwafer! And the cost will increase with each next step, which has already been demonstrated repeatedly. What, what, and they learned to cut the budget perfectly, unlike everything else.
  19. semuil
    semuil 27 February 2016 12: 44
    +1
    The first decade is visual, the second is visual real (like f-35), in the third ten is unreal.
  20. demo
    demo 27 February 2016 12: 49
    +2
    "James noted that" the B-21 will be able to launch air strikes anywhere in the world. "

    This is just a breakthrough in American scientific thought!
    In give!
    Right at any point !?
    I can’t believe it.
    Especially against the background of the second passage.

    "It also became known that the flight range of the LRS-B (B-21) without refueling will exceed 9 thousand kilometers. It should be able to reach China and Russia."
    Those. crew return is not provided?

    And they agreed with our command on the account of the landing aerodrome?
    Maybe we won’t provide such a service to them?
    C400 can them
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 27 February 2016 12: 57
      +1
      Refueling in the air hi
  21. The comment was deleted.
  22. Lieutenant Izhe
    Lieutenant Izhe 27 February 2016 13: 20
    +3
    Did not impress.. request
    So, somewhere "in another place they are plotting a dirty trick"!
    and this "new" B-21 is a diversion mulka ..
  23. viktor.
    viktor. 27 February 2016 13: 38
    0
    Quote: Baikonur
    US Air Force presented a visual project
    Cool word - "visual"!
    Such "visual" in the internet - heaps!
    We've got it! So - F..a! your "visual"!

    Lord help hi
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. duchy
    duchy 27 February 2016 14: 34
    0
    The cost of the first 2 dozens of cars should be $ 511 million per unit in 2010 prices

    what But today is 2016 in the yard. What wealth will be lying homeless on the earth. laughing
  26. bk316
    bk316 27 February 2016 14: 59
    +3
    Pay attention to the prices of 2010.
    External debt is already over 18 trillion.
    The printing press does not stop.
    They will take it into service in the 30s.
    I hope it will cost not then half a billion, but 10 billion.
    Taking into account the inflation of estimates 20.
    Judging by the number of experienced F-35s, money will run out before being accepted for service.
    1. 0255
      0255 27 February 2016 15: 23
      -4
      Not tired of slogans about US foreign debt? The collapse of the United States due to debt from the 1970s is promised to us, and where is it?
    2. Morrrow
      Morrrow 27 February 2016 16: 27
      0
      The US has debt in dollars.
  27. valent45
    valent45 27 February 2016 16: 03
    0
    US foreign debt is a stone the size of Everest, which so far lies on the edge of the cliff.
    At the very edge. Some unsuccessfully blowing breeze and this community will fly down,
    sweeping away not only the Amerov’s economy, but also the rest of the world (in the majority).
    1. Morrrow
      Morrrow 27 February 2016 16: 27
      -1
      The US has no external debt. Only internal.
  28. Dr. Bormental
    Dr. Bormental 27 February 2016 16: 18
    +1
    The air intake reminds me of something ... so alluring ... with hairs .. humid. Hopefully it will fly just as it reminds me winked
  29. RUSIVAN
    RUSIVAN 27 February 2016 16: 20
    +1
    However, its bomb load will be less than that of its predecessors. This is mainly due to the need to reduce the price of a new car, ”the publication said.
    I propose to American engineers to make it without weapons at all, but that he would fly not 9000 km, but suppose 109000, but it is better to build a derezable, because while this "miracle" is being built, an S-600 will appear in Russia, which will fly to this plane faster than he to Russia ...
  30. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 27 February 2016 16: 32
    -1
    A vertical does not mean an optimus, but in Russia it is.
  31. DenZ
    DenZ 27 February 2016 17: 02
    0
    James noted that “the B-21 will be able to deliver air strikes anywhere in the world”

    Apparently forgot to add "where there is air." In general, a huge advantage for a bomber to bomb anywhere in the world. Straight only Americans can do this smile
  32. Region 23
    Region 23 27 February 2016 18: 03
    0
    Is the B-21 a new version of the iPhone? You need to search in Avito.
  33. Senior manager
    Senior manager 27 February 2016 18: 46
    0
    Americans play fake war, scare the nations of the world with their supposedly power. Very similar to soap bubbles inflated on exchanges. Our intelligence certainly will not share its knowledge about promising weapons developments, I think the work is underway, but for people you need a picture, a sight. In short, remember the story of Obama's physical exercise, I think the truth is somewhere not far away. The golden calf is at the head of this world action, and here we are discussing technical issues, we are discussing. Busy people are busy plucking the world, they hurt money, they very much believe that in the afterlife a little deny will be needed.
  34. X Y Z
    X Y Z 27 February 2016 19: 20
    0
    If it is now valued at $ 511 million, then it will really be 1 billion - 1,2 billion. It is not in the tradition of the American military business to immediately shock congressmen and senators with sky-high figures. And then the price will rise smoothly and continuously for an acceptable level for all chopping cabbage sides.
  35. Alex69
    Alex69 27 February 2016 19: 28
    0
    Let’s better show a super saw which will cut the loot laid down in this project. And a plane that looks like a cleaver, with dubious characteristics and a crazy price, which will undoubtedly increase as this project is implemented ... As they say, we will see what comes of it. I think for our air defense it will not be something not confused.
  36. Prisoner
    Prisoner 27 February 2016 20: 21
    0
    laughing It will be able to strike ..., swim under water, cook hot dogs and even to hell with what. The point is small, build and make this ax fly. No.
  37. ilya_oz
    ilya_oz 27 February 2016 20: 37
    0
    Hmm. I will make such a "project" in half an hour in 3ds max.
  38. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 27 February 2016 21: 54
    -1
    Quote: Izotovp
    And they obviously succeed and will succeed for a long time! So far, the alternative, unfortunately, has not even been identified.

    There is no alternative yet, because our "effective managers", no less effectively than their foreign colleagues, are engaged in cutting the military budget of the Russian Federation. An example is the suite of Sienko at UVZ with the Armata project. a lot of money was literally buried in the ground (a new building was built for the assembly of the Armata, but during the construction it seems that the building codes were violated (they saved on building materials) - the foundation is leading and the assembly cannot be carried out with high quality. as in the case of the new cosmodrome, it seems that everywhere in the production of complex equipment, where "effective managers" begin to command, similar problems appear - a bloated administrative apparatus with high salaries, etc. sad
    And after the news: “This batch includes more than 20 cars, this is an experimental batch designed to complete the tests of a prototype, to eliminate malfunctions. Then we send them (cars) to the troops to see how they feel there in different climatic conditions. This is about 16-17 years, ”Khalitov said on the air of the RSN radio station.
    More details: http://www.vpk-news.ru/news/29429
    and that’s all they can do in 15-17 years !? am
  39. dakty
    dakty 27 February 2016 22: 25
    0
    Well, V-2 was originally planned to build 132pcs, and overpowered 20+. Apparently the B-21 will master even less !?
  40. Yugra
    Yugra 27 February 2016 22: 46
    0
    You won’t run away from the S-400 and S-500. We’ll reach and destroy ...
  41. Sergey-8848
    Sergey-8848 27 February 2016 23: 03
    0
    Money per picture is a good divorce. In the thimbles at the station - there are much more chances to get rich.
  42. pvv113
    pvv113 28 February 2016 01: 48
    +1
    Quote: oleg-gr
    And McCain gave a voice

    McCain is like a plug in all holes - everywhere he sticks his nose, having obvious problems with the brain. Although the authorities in the United States have the majority
  43. Ros 56
    Ros 56 28 February 2016 09: 03
    0
    Sooner than in 15 years it will not appear, but what during this time our people will come up with only God knows. And what happens in the world, too, no one knows.
  44. shinobi
    shinobi 28 February 2016 11: 41
    0
    They support their defense, no more. And the more expensive and useless the project, the better. So it works for them. The funny thing is that the same parameters are not noticeable as their slels, our defense reaches a special primer before painting. Adds base metal primers nano-balls, different in diameter and chemical composition. Multiple re-reflection between them scatters the reflected signal. Cheap and cheerful.
  45. cokol-xnumx
    cokol-xnumx 28 February 2016 12: 31
    0
    S-400 with a grin will bring down NATO invisibility, the S-125 was shot down by supposedly invisible stealth in Yugoslavia ...
  46. cedar
    cedar 28 February 2016 14: 03
    +1
    Quote: saturn.mmm
    It seems to be so, but the question is, where do the fantastic amounts of development come from, which are sometimes an order of magnitude higher than Russian ones?


    In the USA, there is a private stanza of a private Fed banker’s shop that prints world money - dollars! Their main consumer is the United States, primarily the Pentagon!
    Until 1973, the dollar was secured by gold, now no. Then why is it still used and what is this world currency provided for today?
    In the first place, the military power of the United States, for this reason, and take! Whoever doesn’t want to give his goods for this painted paper is a terrorist and an enemy of democracy, which the Pentagon and Co. deal with, respectively, and the fattest pieces of the budget.
    Of course you cannot hold a dollar on bayonets. The media controlled by the Fed creates an image of the most stable and reliable world currency, and therefore expensive, to the dollar, and this is to the detriment of the “own” (in quotation marks because the Fed is a private banking shop, the cartel does not have a direct relationship to the state) economy.
    As a result, the surplus value of products produced in the states, both intellectual and material, is 10 more than ours!
    While the United States was in a state of cold war with the USSR, such a state of affairs in which states dressed up as a showcase of the free world and a defender of freedom and democracy was beneficial for the Fed.
    With a victory over the USSR, this showcase, having made its own advertising business, collapses ...
  47. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 28 February 2016 15: 35
    0
    Interestingly, although B-2 is an old project, it has been since
    many different developments in "stealth" technologies, shape
    B-2 is actually recognized as optimal.
    Of course, the materials will be changed. Since the time of B-2 there are many
    new. And radar, electronics, software.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 28 February 2016 17: 35
      0
      And most importantly, new engines will be installed.
  48. Mentat
    Mentat 28 February 2016 18: 56
    0
    Quote: 0255
    Not tired of slogans about US foreign debt? The collapse of the United States due to debt from the 1970s is promised to us, and where is it?

    USA as Koschey the Immortal, who has power in the needle. The United States has power in the dollar needle that the global economy sits on. You do not read the news? Not even China and Russia are trying this needle, but countries with a geopolitical caliber are much smaller, gradually converting calculations into local currencies. It was impossible to think about this in the 70s and 80s. The cracking of the dollar hegemony system is gradually and inevitably occurring because it is not economically profitable for anyone (except the United States, of course). The war in Syria, by the way, to a large extent exists as one of the components of the attempt to stabilize the petrodollar.