I was 6 yrs. old when the B-52 entered service. I am now 77 yrs. old and the B-52 is still going strong and will outlive me by many years. That, my friends, is one very cost effective weapons system.
More like "haha... nice". And I agree with you - I always considered that it's B-21 as in 2.1 - "derived" from B2 bomber or rather replacing it as if the B2 bomber was designed for today level of technology and the way that near-peer conflict (like against USSR - which was far more "near" if not equal or better in some regards then Russia or China) would need today. Which is overly fancy IMO - hopefully it will be changed in time and we will find out that B-21 designation was a PR stunt/disinformation. Changing designations on a whim, when it is not used to conceal nature or true missions that are planned to be carried out by the weapon is very sketchy. Codes are there for a reason - to make subject that is already complicated and full of nuances some structure to make it easier to learn and classify by regular soldier and administration.
they're talking about new, efficient, low maintenance engines for the b-52 fleet. supposedly, new engines would pay for themselves by 2040. they're quoting 32Bn USD for 608 engines on the current fleet of 76 planes. well, IMHO, they're using inflated figures and expecting to be given half of that since, the fleet has steadily shrunk and will continue to shrink. it's quite possible they'll re-engine 50 planes and scrap the rest. That fleet of 50 could halve over 15 years to provide spare parts and only a handful would remain operational by 2045. the B-52 is an icon of american might, but it's already in a slow process of retirement.
They're stretching it into the 2050s-2060s at this point, and they actually just grabbed a B-52H out of the boneyard to restore it and add it to the fleet to replace one that had an accident. I believe it's going to an ANG wing. They have plenty of them sitting around and Boeing is still supporting upgrades. What an amazing platform!
@mandellorian Well the S-400 might be The SAM but AsMs will always have altitude and kinetic advantage compared to surface missile defenses of the same size, and the B-52 sure is bigger than S-400 launching platforms.
We didnt even know about the sr-71 until it was retired and its STILL the most advanced plane ever built in many ways. No doubt in my mind they have stuff way better that nobody has seen.
The US-Army will be always the number one on this planet because America has the best technologies and a lot of top scientists! The B - 21 Raider will be the best weapon system the world has ever seen! The videos of this channel are very good!
Every one: WOW! The B2 sounds so tactical, I bet the pilots must be very smart The Pilots: I wonder If we can get the B2 and the B21 to fit together like Tetris blocks.
China and Russia haven't even developed operating stealth bombers, the B-2 bomber is still the stealthiest aircraft ever made, and the US military still wants to create a new one EDIT: apparently people have misinterpreted this comment. Frankly I think it's awesome and shows just how much ahead the US is against it's peers.
tbf the concept of a dedicated stealth bomber is pretty retarded an only an indisputable economic powerhouse like the US has (marginally) the capacity for such luxury for the sole purpose of geopolitical dick-waving (cough cough... a dozen supercarriers... cough). I am willing to bet that multiple Tu-95s and B-52s of the equivalent cost of a single B-2 have a higher chance to survive penetration of military peers and deliver potentially higher payload on target. Also in the case B-2 would have to deliver nukes in a hot exchange then that would operationally equivalent to a suicide mission given that after a M.A.D. scenario there's no chance in hell that enough of the nation's industry would have survived to provide a maintenance supply chain for a hangar-whore of that magnitude.
@@nickkorkodylas5005 the objective of a stealth platform (both a jet or a bomber) in a war scenario is to penetrate deep into the enemy territory to weaken their air defenses and basically open a path for heavier but less sthealtier platforms to do thier job without having to content against the full assault of a nations SAM capabilities Yeah you can create hundreds of b-52s and send them on basically suicide misions to bomb áreas of interest, but why, thats only throwing lives into the meat grinder when you can instead turn down the grinder and then send the people (seriously, the problem with your approach is that a lot of your own people will die, thats not a good solution, your objective needs to be less deaths in your side not more)
@@carso1500 _"when you can instead turn down the grinder and then send the people"_ Human life is cheap, this isn't WW2 when pilot training was more expensive than the plane itself. Logistically it makes perfect sense to use non-stealths. "seriously, the problem with your approach is that a lot of your own people will die" Yeah that happens in actual war, it's not a place for sentimentality.
@@nickkorkodylas5005 well using your "real politik" it's a bad idea because you arent just sending numbers of replasable grunts to die, those people have a family and a work back home if they are death they can't be productive to the country, also their familiars can get angry and start revolts thats how the usa "lose" the Vietnam war, the public lose confidence on the war due to the rising death count, also as you said modern airplanes are expensive, so sending 100 of them and losing 95 to SAM bateries is more expensive than sending a stealth bomber to weaken the air defenses and then one regular bomber behind On a more serious and realistic note, no, human life isnt cheap, that is people you are sending, your people, you definetly want the most of them to return home, real life isnt like one of your edgy stories were "hard men do hard decisions while hard"
It is the gas-dynamic maneuvering system firing just before the missile is launched. There's a small motor that is fired just prior to ignition that keeps the missile from pitching, then after the missile is away the dynamo inside fires small bursts to maintain flight guidance.
I don't think the argument of "stealth coatings=bad for maintainablility" really applies any more, the F-35's coating is extremely durable already, and that tech is likely to make it on the B-21.
That's the idea, anyways. So... why not re-coat the B-2 with this new material? Was the airframe specifically designed to be coated on one material and nothing more? I mean, if they have the money to design an untested new airframe, they probably have the money to upgrade the B-2 in any way they can.
I like that idea. Surface to air missile systems fascinate me. The way they work, types of guidance, search and engagement radars, etc. I might just do that. There was a forum for SamSim that had a bunch of extremely knowledgeable people on, talking about super technical details of SAMS. I'll see if I can find a link to it and post it
@@grubbybum3614 AA guns will definetly make a comeback, since shooting mass drone attacks down using missiles would be too expensive in comparison to gun ammo.
80-100 units at $650 million each. Yeah right - we've seen this story before, dozens and dozens of times. My call - 21 units by 2035 (replaces the B-1 fleet), unit price $1.8 billion each
The only reason our planes cost so much is because Democrats get into power and cancel our defense procurements before they've managed to get economies of scale working. The F-22 was on the verge of being actually rather cheap right before it got canceled, cheaper than the F-35. Same happened with the B-2. F-35 is a special case because it's really just a money laundering operation for Lockheed Martin's drone swarm black project which can't be on the normal budget.
The basic design for the B-21 was already done in the 1980s. Congress mandated that the B-2 be redesigned for low level bombing because the did not believe in stealth so they had to compromise the design. All that plus decades of R&D from the F22 and F35, most of the R&D for it is already done. So the cheaper price of $640 million is very believable
"the B-2 has only gone head 2 head against cold war era tech" Ya think? It kinda makes sense since it was developed during this period of time, specifically to counter soviet ( our cold war adversaries) air defense's. I'm fairly certain that the Iraqi airspace was what some would consider "heavily defended" I'm also certain that we both know which well-known military arms manufacturer had been supplying Iraq with complete air defense networks, worth what I assume to be billions. So remind me again, how Iraq's AA capabilities were significantly inferior to that of the communist's?
What people need to realise is that just because a radar system detects a a B-21, it does not automatically mean that all the enemy has to do is launch a missile and bye bye bomber. Stealth is not the B-21s only defense: be aware that with an extremely low radar return, it then requires comparatively little power for an aircraft to jam/decoy/confuse a missile radar. With a limited radar signature, you have a huge range of options to make sure just because an enemy knows you are there, doesn't mean they will be able to prevent you from doing what needs to be done and making an escape.
That is true. No mention yet if it will have ability to jam radars. And like you said, just because an enemy detects it on radar, it doesnt mean it's enough to fire a missile at it. I forgot to mention this in the video (but I've mentioned it in previous videos), lower frequency radars can detect objects with a lower RCS (stealth) at further ranges, but it's not as precise. Not precise enough to guide a missile to it. But it is enough to send up interceptor aircraft into the general location to engage it. Jamming would be risky, as the enemy would know someone is there.
@@CovertCabal One of the supposed advances of the B-21 is its greater stealth against L and UHF radars, as well as X and K. Exactly how they are doing that is anyone's guess, but I would suspect it's a combination of technologies, and I would guess crowned with a AESA radar suite that can act as a jammer, one which can trick radars into thinking the plane is dozens of miles away from its actual location if it comes to that - and jamming done in a certain way will not betray the planes location. My money is on the B-21 being able to get in and get out when used the right way with intelligent planning. Oh, there is also a whisper that the designers did pay very careful attention to the few seconds when the B-21 could be truly vulnerable - when the bomb bay doors are opened for weapon release. Will be fascinating to guess how they worked around that one.
@@MorganBrown Probably a flatspot, from every time the nosewheel first hits the tarmac. I don't even think they need treads because there are grooves to expel water on runways
Something interesting that happened with the B-21 at first the aircraft only had 3 points on the trailing edge, then the US Air Force said it needed to have 5 so it could preform better at low altitude attacks, so Lockheed Martin spent tons of money switching it to have 5 corners, and then the us Air Force said nope never mind we don’t need it to that, then Lockheed Martin basically replied saying “screw that! We aren’t spending more money switching the design again!”
@Cicada A friend of my parent works for Lockheed, he‘s been working on the B-21 project for a while. His job has been getting weapons to function off of certain aircraft, like for example trying to get an ATGM to function off of an F-18.
This video is so much better then the crap I just watched. It was voiced over by an obnoxious computer voice and the content was worthless. Thanks for uploading quality videos Covert Cabal
i heard a guy that once lived was able to feel the coming stealh farts and thus avede the devestating destruction but this might just be old folk legend
@@BorntoYeet wrong. ballistic, hypersonic and long range aerodymanic (aircraft). Unlike shitty US AD, Russian systems have multiple rocket varients and are multirole. And they work
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 s-400 and s-300 haven't seen a day of actual combat and you say they work? Lol, okay RT watcher number 3094744. In fact, our (ahem) "shitty American ad systems blyat" have been in more real world combat situations than you precious s-400. Cope harder, buddy.
It's rumored a couple of these are already flying. Just prototypes of course, but considering how soon they should be entering service, it would make sense.
It does seem that with the flaws in the two stealth fighters China has produced. China cannot reproduce manufacturing technics just like the fact China has not been able to reverse engineer Russian jet engines.
I know details are scarce, but I wish you'd gone into more detail, namely things like the fact the B-21 is going to have a long range escort optionally-manned fighter to help it penetrate hostile airspace, and that the B-21 is really intended to counter China, specifically (and gone into details about why it's good for that role and where the likely targets are in western China). There's also speculation about a few planes already flying which you could've discussed. Oh well. Still a good video. Not everyone is as obsessive about learning all they can about this plane as I am, I guess.
@@mntalateyya US stealth tech is not stolen, it was developed from a paper from a Soviet/Russian physician called Pyotr Ufimtsev, at the time, the soviets deemed the knowledge useless and allowed it to be published worldwide. Lockheed engineers discovered that and applied it to the first stealth bomber, the F-117
@@lucastekkan That russian either didn’t have his ideas used by russia because they thought it was ridiculous at the time, or he doesn’t like russia very much.
@@Karl-Benny US couldn't care less about Venezuela. US has been energy independent for a while now, and exporting a lot of energy. We're also in the process of rapidly expanding our nuclear energy with small modular reactors. There is literally no reason at all to fight a war with Venezuela, especially since it's a great talking point about yet another inevitable failure of socialism.
I am seriously looking forward to seeing the B-21, it's an exciting prospect. I wonder if the sophisticated new avionics will be retrofitted to the B-2 to make it more stealthy and more lethal. Did you know that R&U videos has stolen your music??
Just as an aside; when I was in grammar school in the 1950s my home was located under the glide path for the #1 runway at what was then a SAC base in Warner Robins Georgia. I have seen every strategic bomber in the SAC inventory fly very low over my house including the B-29, B-36, B-47, B-52 and I can confirm that the B-36 is the loudest bomber ever made in the U.S.. With six turning and four burning the sound of that thing close up was almost unbearable.
I fully expect the B-21 to deploy stealthy drones to replicate its radar signature and swamp defending radar systems. These drones will force the enemy to light up its tracking/targeting radars and make them vulnerable to attack by accompanying F-22 and F-35 ground attack aircraft. This is where the battle management systems of the F-35 will shine by directing munitions onto the enemy's radars. Once these radars are disabled the B-21 will deliver its payload untracked and unmolested.
I think future Bombers will rely less on bombs and more on (cruise) Missiles. I also think that air dropped UAV drones that are aimed to mislead the enemy on Radar Location AND provide active target aquisition could be used. So Bombers will fly close to target, deploy air dropped drones (there were some used in Vietnam war from B-52s) link up with those decoy/target aquisition drones and then follow them and be the less visible target that will fire Missiles when close enough. AA stations firing on drones will also give their positions away for ALARM Missiles.
@@Chuck_Hooks Good keep up that arrogance it's helped USA lose every war but 1 since ww2 And so glad you think A.I. isnt important, it'll probably amount to nothing, USA should totally spend its money on another 20years getting its asked kick by the poorest country on Earth
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 Not worried about China. Even after DECADES of copying and reverse engineering Russian jet engines, Chinese jet engines still suck.
The new B-21 Raider will be the greatest in the world at hitting their targets with state of the art missiles and bombs and won't be detected as long as the aircraft isn't detected due to bomb bay being open or refueling. The B-2 has done a great job of performing perfectly and the government has gotten it's money's worth out of them.
One of my aunts is a computer scientist and she works for northrop grumman. She doesn’t talk much about work because she cant but from the tiny hints she’s given I’m almost certain she is working on this plane
Unmanned Predator drones. Game is already over. You can strafe a village and deliver a payload of whatever you choose on the other side of the world from a control room in Omaha, NE before your lunch break.
Stealth get's a bomber in closer. Easily close enough for long range weapons. Also in the case of a must insert and strike, the bomber will be seen, but it'll look like a bird on radar. So by the time the radar knows what it's looking at, the bombs will be dropped. So yes, you shoot down the bomber perhaps, but the damage is done.
how many drone pilots do you think you could fit on a b-21? low latency, can maintain line of sight. You eliminate both of the primary problems with pulling the pilot out of a fighter jet by putting the pilots in something like this.
Sweden sold them parts of the stealth fighter after the serbs shot it down in 1999. This is why both the Chinese and Swedish embassy was bombed in Belgrade in 1999. To take out the wreckage of the stealth fighter but it was allready on it's way to China,
@@fuqupal Also don't forget they had a spy give them troves of data about our stealth jets. I think he only got paid a million dollars to sell out America. He's rotting in jail now.
80-100 B-21 Raiders is a good goal. As I see it, 100 should be the cap in order to contain operational costs but 80 is a reasonable minimum amount to meet objectives. There still remains a need for a cost effective and flexible supersonic bomber to replace the capabilities of the B-1B. B-1B is especially well suited for large scale conventional bombing, short response time missions, cruise missile strikes, naval strikes, multiple target precision strikes, and showing the flag as a deterrence. B-2 and B-21 are less suited for these missions due to slow speed, more limited payload, extreme costs, long standard maintenance times, and basing restrictions to protect the aircraft and their secrets. B-21 is rumored to focus on mid to high altitude operations and deep penetration missions using maximum stealth. B-1B is capable at extremely low and extremely high altitudes and everywhere in between. A supersonic replacement for B-1B could have Mach 2 performance and cost effective, low maintenance amount of stealth, strong air frame for low level flight and high g maneuvers, and a very large mission bay for flexibility and firepower. This B-1B replacement could also be designed to be exportable to close allies - an option for some of those that have already been approved for F-35. If we call this replacement "B-11" then a future bomber force could consist of 100 B-21 and 200 B-11 with all B-52, B-1B, and B-2 retired. USAF gets 300 bombers, which is close to their preferred total bomber force size. Two thirds of that force would be cost effective work horses for the vast majority of missions and one third would be ideal for deep penetration strategic missions but spend a lot of time in the hangar on standby ready for WW3.
Well the good news is that the B-1B isn't really going away any time soon. The plan is for the B-1B to be slowly phased out by the B-21, but I fully expect we'll keep a bunch of them around regardless for a rather long time. I also wonder how much of the B-1B's capabilities are going to be replaced by the stealthy drone swarm that almost certainly exists out in the Nevada desert somewhere. There's numerous indications that Lockheed Martin built a pocket force of these drones some years ago, with the ability to rapidly scale up the force, and while individually they wouldn't have the sort of bomb load capacity of a B-1B, a whole lot of them might have the speed and range to carry out some serious strike missions as a swarm. When you absolutely must drop 80+ bombs on a single target, what are the odds that you can't wait for a B-21 to be overhead? In all likelihood, we'll probably have B-21s loitering over combat areas constantly and they won't be too far away. We'll certainly have many stealth drones loitering all around, able to act as a swarm to smash through air defenses en masse and drop a great many bombs. With modern precision capability, the emphasis seems to be moving more and more towards smaller smart bombs, rather than more-and-larger dumb bombs saturating an area with explosions to kill a target. I'm reminded of the B-2 raid on a pair of ISIS camps in Libya a few years back, where we dropped 100+ bombs but they were mostly pretty small bombs, each just big enough to get the job done. After the initial pass by the two B-2s on the raid, the drones watching above launched hellfire missiles at anything still moving. Maybe the B-1R upgrade project will be resurrected once the B-21 starts operating. That was going to be a Mach 2.2 plane with some air-to-air capability as well. The planes wouldn't have as much range, but there would be very fast and still maintain a lot of capacity.
Also the F-117 only got shot down because it’s bomber doors had a malfunction in which they didn’t close which ruined its stealthy profile. It was able to fly over the radar 100+ times undetected.
I suspect lasers are going to be used to spot stealth planes. Sweeping lasers across the sky will show gaps in the sweep, and that’s where the stealth aircraft is. Computers can make this process very rapid, and once a gap in a beam is found, the sweep can narrow to track the aircraft.
That's an interesting idea. I try to do a bit larger topics though, not often on single aircraft or weapons. Matsimus does that really well. Then Binkov does grand scale/strategy videos really well, so I feel I fit somewhere in the middle haha
What about how 4 or 4.5 gen aircraft surviving in the 21st century. Obviously the Air Force feels the need to have the f-15x for the homeland defense but also the air superiority mission. But is it still useful? You could do something very similar to this video and call it the future of non stealthy aircraft? Include the f-16, b52, a-10 and f15x?
@@CovertCabal This article might give you some insight into the future possibilities with the F-15: warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/
F-15X will be useful for supporting firepower that stealth aircraft lack due to limited internal stores. They will also be particularly useful for cost effective long range patrols with less reliance on aerial refueling. USAF conducts about 1000 interceptions in US air space every year, most of which are visual range interception and guidance of civilian aircraft. F-15X would be ideal for such interceptions due to high maximum speed and low operating costs. Stealth aircraft completely lose their primary advantage when using external stores but remain expensive to operate since that stealth still requires extensive maintenance even if unused. F-15X has numerous upgrades compared to earlier F-15s with significant overall capability improvements but minimal retraining required. For example, F-15X uses the same radar back end as FA-18 but with a much larger antenna for greater performance, has an entirely new advanced radar warning system, and an expanded flight envelope with better maneuverability to name a few improvements. The avionics and sensors upgrades also makes it an ideal candidate for use as an electronic warfare platform, with greater performance than EA-18 Growlers and could restore EW capability lost in the USAF with the retirement of EF-111 Raven. Such EW capability could be integrated relatively easily because of the particular hardware chosen for F-15X. F-15X is not only useful, it could be a force multiplier and should be acquired in large numbers by both the USAF and allies. USAF could use 400 F-15CX and 400 F-15EX. Design improvements, a large USAF order, and large allied orders would keep the unit costs and operational costs relatively low. I could see 200 units for Japan, 200 for Israel, 150 for South Korea, and 150 for Canada.
In mentioning the F-35 within the context of EW and what this bomber will likely have, you miss the F-35's significant ability to jam on its own without dedicated assets. That's the real and largely unspoken value in the F-35. It can absolutely survive a highly contested airspace on its own while jamming many individual 21st century enemy air defense assets. It's the real defining capability of the F-35 and a reason why most of NATO will eventually operate at least one squadron. The electronic warfare capability is massive and will only increase. So if this bomber includes that advanced capability, which it absolutely should, that changes the game back to the early 90s where the B-2 and defensive flying tactics made it something an advesary couldn't reasonably touch.
Another super expensive waste of time effort and money in the making in all likelihood. It's use is literally for attacks on 3rd world nations incapable of fighting back.
@Dalton Black _> the technology can potentially make its way to civilian applications_ _>technology that makes airliner-sized aircraft invisible to radars_ I bet Malaysian Airlines would buy our entire stock!
Low frequency radar is what is used to detect stealth aircraft. It was used against the F 117 that was shot down over Yugoslavia...uh, the remnants thereof. Allegedly the B-2 is much less detectable and possibly could penetrate Russian air space un-traced. The new stand-off delivery system only has a range of 300 miles, so it's not likely to be useful against a developed enemy.
Sorry about that. No reason in particular, just dont get around to it. I use Discord and talk to people on there regularly. So if you want to get ahold of me, you can do so there. It's just easier to get notifications and have conversations. discord.gg/npJbfZX
@@Billy_Darley Nowadays it's essentially a hub for communities, if you have a hobby or interest, there is a server for that hobby or interest. You can join any of those servers and talk to other people interested in it, or just new people in general. It doubles as a place for group chats to organize stuff with irl people and whatnot and in this context, you can just join his discord server to talk to him as well as other fans of his videos, or debate about your own views and theories about stuff
I guess this "bomber" will eventualy morph into "6th gen fighter" as in manned hub in the center of an unmanned swarm probably never even opening its weapon bays, instead commanding the ammunition that was already in the air...
I thought about that while writing the script, thinking of ways to describe all 3 with one word. First I was going to say countries, but that wasnt accurate. Then I thought to say states, but worried some American listeners could get confused. I thought I changed it to say "places like...", but maybe when i read it, I said nations.
I would think bomber pilots would probably disagree with you about the Norden bomb sight allowing them to fly at altitudes above the flak being sent up...and, while the Norden bomb sight was definitely a great improvement, it was far from accurate. But, that's what we had to roll with and our boys made em work.
No matter how good your radar is if you can have the cross section of a hummingbird it gives you a heck of an advantage. Sooner or later stealth will be defeated and they will use nano tech to create armadas of tiny supersonic drones the size of a suitcase to use swarm and kamikaze techniques via remote.
They might be test flying this aircraft right now in Nevada and it might be code-named "Romeo" for manned flights and "Solar" for unmanned flights, but I wouldn't know anything about that.
I kinda saw the B-21 a little bit different. Think of B-2 as version 2.0 and the B-21 as version 2.1. So more like a logical evolution. For example, cheaper yet improved coating. Improved electronics and computers. Perhaps longer range and more bomb space.
Im expecting the b21 to be a flying wing with geometric paneling similar to the f117. This is likely why the true shape of the aircraft is not being revealed. The f117 still has the smallest R.C.S. of any modern bomber. The only plane beating it (that we know of) is the boeing "bird of prey" research vehicle.
Hey cabal, can you do some research onto how the F-117 was shot over Serbia? And mention in a larger video or make it it's own video, including a sort of biography on the F-117.
The F-117 Was shot down by pure luck. Yugoslav Air Defense took a radar snapshot (Turning it on and off quickly to avoid getting blown up by a Wild Weasel (anti-air-defense) strike) from a range of about 14 miles away, which for a SAM Site is practically flying over the top of it while the bomb bay doors were open, making it just visible enough for a SAM to hit it with a proximity fuse detonation. The pilot ejected safely and was recovered by USAF Pararescuemen unharmed. Google "1999 F-117 Shootdown".
Wish the UK would acquire a batch of these, even a small squadron of like 10 of them would massively enhance the RAF’s bombing capabilities. Could even base a few forward at say Cyprus. Though it seems like the RAF will do with upgraded Typhoons, stealth F-35s and Reaper/Predator drones instead.
@@rodgermurphy5721 Is that confirmed though? I'v heard in a few different places that the US was open to selling the F-22 raptor to the UK, Canada and Australia if they wanted it. Possibly also Israel and Japan as well.
@@tanyard I don't think so. F-22 production line has been shut down after 187 were built for the airforce. I would say the chances of selling B-21 are even less due to the individual price and the shroud of secrecy surrounding its development and capabilities. Some US congressmen have even complained the airforce will even give them little to no details
You touched on it a little bit in this video, but could you make an entire video on the upcoming Advanced Battle Management System. I’ve found all the info I could on it, but I’m sure you have more knowledge on where to gather more intel. It’d be much appreciated!
B-2 is likely to remain apex of military engineering and aircraft design, especially considering era when it was designed. Once, there was idea to pull data from Lacrosse radar sattelites in search of mobile ICBM launchers inside Soviet Union! B-2 simply could use total redesign (newer engines, like those GEs for YF-23), new coating, avionics, Variable Camber Compliant Wing and still remain formidable system, or be converted for tanker role for B-21. Anyway, stealth, especially for larger aircraft in this day and age of optoelectronics is slowing becoming thing of the past. Consider British ADAD from 90s! Also: regarding pricing. Northrop once proposed 130 B-2 Bombers with 300-400 mln unit cost and now Burke class, once production schedule has been screwed and Flight III designed, costs almost 3 bln / a piece.
Does anyone know of any new developments in the rumor that the B-21 will carry at least some air-to-air missiles for self-defense? Personally, I thought that was an extremely important nugget that got leaked. I'm imagining an AIM-260 that could take out something along the lines of a MiG-31 and keep interceptors at bay long enough to carry out the strike mission.
I could have swore Tyler Rogoway mentioned something about that when we had him on our podcast. I'll have to search through it in the morning, but here is the link if you are interested - ua-cam.com/video/nYQLxpy8C44/v-deo.html
My understanding is the B-21 will have a "penetrating counter-air" escort fighter, that is long range and will carry things like air-to-air missiles and some SEAD/DEAD goodies for enemy SAM sites and radar. We know almost nothing about it, though, except the USAF stated that as one of its requirements. I think an escort drone that has those capabilities makes a lot more sense than the B-21 carrying a bunch of air-to-air missiles itself. A drone or drones could fly ahead of this beast, clearing a path, and be entirely expendable.
@@fakecubed - Penetrating counter-air would be a sixth-gen platform. Some argue it's interchangeable with the US Navy's F/A-XX program and others believe the USAF and USN will chart different courses on it (no pun intended). Right now, as it currently stands, the F-35 can't even carry the HARM missile internally and the Raptor can't carry it at all. So any SEAD missions would have to be completed by the new F-15EX, F/A-18, the Growler, the Eurofighter or the F-16. In theory, a modern SEAD mission might resemble the Israeli raid on the Osirak reactor - a combo of F-15s and F-16s, all these decades later.
I was 6 yrs. old when the B-52 entered service. I am now 77 yrs. old and the B-52 is still going strong and will outlive me by many years. That, my friends, is one very cost effective weapons system.
I'm sure You're still going strong and going to outlive that airframe
The 1911 of the sky
Amen!
Crazy thing is it had TONS of problems at first but they got ironed out and it is the backbone of the fleet.
@@Obsidian-Nebula From your keyboard to God's monitor. Thanks!
"It can be sent in to attack targets."
*Shows Humanitarian Convoy*
Lmao
Based
"b-21 because it's a 21st century bomber"
I'm in pain. We have codes for a reason. Next one better be B69 because "haha funny"
it's also designed to replace b-2 and b-1
@@rooooooby
So 2+1=21?
@@Menaceblue3 9+10=21
More like "haha... nice".
And I agree with you - I always considered that it's B-21 as in 2.1 - "derived" from B2 bomber or rather replacing it as if the B2 bomber was designed for today level of technology and the way that near-peer conflict (like against USSR - which was far more "near" if not equal or better in some regards then Russia or China) would need today.
Which is overly fancy IMO - hopefully it will be changed in time and we will find out that B-21 designation was a PR stunt/disinformation. Changing designations on a whim, when it is not used to conceal nature or true missions that are planned to be carried out by the weapon is very sketchy. Codes are there for a reason - to make subject that is already complicated and full of nuances some structure to make it easier to learn and classify by regular soldier and administration.
B-52 will see it come and watch it go...
The B-52 will still be in service when we fight aliens.
@@sargesacker2599 On other planets.
they're talking about new, efficient, low maintenance engines for the b-52 fleet. supposedly, new engines would pay for themselves by 2040. they're quoting 32Bn USD for 608 engines on the current fleet of 76 planes.
well, IMHO, they're using inflated figures and expecting to be given half of that since, the fleet has steadily shrunk and will continue to shrink. it's quite possible they'll re-engine 50 planes and scrap the rest. That fleet of 50 could halve over 15 years to provide spare parts and only a handful would remain operational by 2045. the B-52 is an icon of american might, but it's already in a slow process of retirement.
@@sargesacker2599 B52 bombers in SPACE?!
@@DenGuleBalje Who said all the fighting would be in space?
I flew in a B52 in the 80s, it's still in use, indefinitely.
They're stretching it into the 2050s-2060s at this point, and they actually just grabbed a B-52H out of the boneyard to restore it and add it to the fleet to replace one that had an accident. I believe it's going to an ANG wing. They have plenty of them sitting around and Boeing is still supporting upgrades. What an amazing platform!
isnt the B52 projected to still be in service past its 100th year?
@mandellorian We flew at ground level to beat the radar as well as high level.
@@thedyslexicorangutan8049 It first flew in the late 50s. It will survive over 100 years.
@mandellorian Well the S-400 might be The SAM but AsMs will always have altitude and kinetic advantage compared to surface missile defenses of the same size, and the B-52 sure is bigger than S-400 launching platforms.
Military tech in the US is ten years ahead before going public.
No because it is like not tested properly or it costs a shit ton to develop on a large enough scale.
More like 20-25
We didnt even know about the sr-71 until it was retired and its STILL the most advanced plane ever built in many ways.
No doubt in my mind they have stuff way better that nobody has seen.
I hope so
JL j20 have no stealth feature........ you are funny man.
Always a good day when cabal uploads
wrr, any s good nmw
The US-Army will be always the number one on this planet because America has the best technologies and a lot of top scientists! The B - 21 Raider will be the best weapon system the world has ever seen! The videos of this channel are very good!
I watch them at work (I do shipping and receiving for a powersports dealership) everyone looks at me like I'm a fucking psycho lol
@@frankmueller6522 Can't wait to test a nuclear bomb on Beijing using this aircraft, directly over Xi's head
Cabal?
Every one: WOW! The B2 sounds so tactical, I bet the pilots must be very smart
The Pilots: I wonder If we can get the B2 and the B21 to fit together like Tetris blocks.
lol
Yeah I wondered that too.
9:55 at least we know they’re getting the most of out tires on them, to save on costs.
run ‘em down to the cords and then some!
Those tires don't cost much lol
Inverted V12 Powerhouse exactly my point...
Inverted V12 Powerhouse aircraft grade tires are fucking expensive
B-21: I'm the stealthiest aircraft ever built!
Malaysia Airlines 370: Oh please...
Longest hide and seek champion! Other than Amelia Earhart....
Too soon? 😁
China and Russia haven't even developed operating stealth bombers, the B-2 bomber is still the stealthiest aircraft ever made, and the US military still wants to create a new one
EDIT: apparently people have misinterpreted this comment. Frankly I think it's awesome and shows just how much ahead the US is against it's peers.
tbf the concept of a dedicated stealth bomber is pretty retarded an only an indisputable economic powerhouse like the US has (marginally) the capacity for such luxury for the sole purpose of geopolitical dick-waving (cough cough... a dozen supercarriers... cough). I am willing to bet that multiple Tu-95s and B-52s of the equivalent cost of a single B-2 have a higher chance to survive penetration of military peers and deliver potentially higher payload on target. Also in the case B-2 would have to deliver nukes in a hot exchange then that would operationally equivalent to a suicide mission given that after a M.A.D. scenario there's no chance in hell that enough of the nation's industry would have survived to provide a maintenance supply chain for a hangar-whore of that magnitude.
@@nickkorkodylas5005 the objective of a stealth platform (both a jet or a bomber) in a war scenario is to penetrate deep into the enemy territory to weaken their air defenses and basically open a path for heavier but less sthealtier platforms to do thier job without having to content against the full assault of a nations SAM capabilities
Yeah you can create hundreds of b-52s and send them on basically suicide misions to bomb áreas of interest, but why, thats only throwing lives into the meat grinder when you can instead turn down the grinder and then send the people (seriously, the problem with your approach is that a lot of your own people will die, thats not a good solution, your objective needs to be less deaths in your side not more)
@@carso1500 _"when you can instead turn down the grinder and then send the people"_
Human life is cheap, this isn't WW2 when pilot training was more expensive than the plane itself. Logistically it makes perfect sense to use non-stealths.
"seriously, the problem with your approach is that a lot of your own people will die"
Yeah that happens in actual war, it's not a place for sentimentality.
@@nickkorkodylas5005 well using your "real politik" it's a bad idea because you arent just sending numbers of replasable grunts to die, those people have a family and a work back home if they are death they can't be productive to the country, also their familiars can get angry and start revolts thats how the usa "lose" the Vietnam war, the public lose confidence on the war due to the rising death count, also as you said modern airplanes are expensive, so sending 100 of them and losing 95 to SAM bateries is more expensive than sending a stealth bomber to weaken the air defenses and then one regular bomber behind
On a more serious and realistic note, no, human life isnt cheap, that is people you are sending, your people, you definetly want the most of them to return home, real life isnt like one of your edgy stories were "hard men do hard decisions while hard"
@@carso1500 This kind of weakness is why communists are winning without having to fire a bullet (well they do... just not on enemy combatants).
6:20 Interesting little puff to the right off the nose cone of the left missile before the main engine ignites.
Perhaps ignition of the thermal battery?
It is the gas-dynamic maneuvering system firing just before the missile is launched.
There's a small motor that is fired just prior to ignition that keeps the missile from pitching, then after the missile is away the dynamo inside fires small bursts to maintain flight guidance.
Another informative yet entertaining video. Been here since the beginning and the channel just gets better and better.
Thanks! That's awesome!
Hang on.. "for every hour the B21 flies, it requires an average of SIXTY HOURS of maintenance" ... For real?? .. oh that's for the B2, but still!
Usually those figure refer to man hours. For instance, if you had 6 people working on it at the same time, it would take 10 hours.
@mandellorian way to tell the world about LO.
mandellorian If this is from personal experience, NOT cool, dude!
@mandellorian why disclose this
That is archaic stealth. New coatings are not nearly as hard to maintain.
I don't think the argument of "stealth coatings=bad for maintainablility" really applies any more, the F-35's coating is extremely durable already, and that tech is likely to make it on the B-21.
That's the idea, anyways.
So... why not re-coat the B-2 with this new material? Was the airframe specifically designed to be coated on one material and nothing more?
I mean, if they have the money to design an untested new airframe, they probably have the money to upgrade the B-2 in any way they can.
Video suggestion. Old anti air weapons vs modern equipment how deadly are they. Example zu23 ks19 s60 cannons sa 4 and sa5
I like that idea. Surface to air missile systems fascinate me. The way they work, types of guidance, search and engagement radars, etc. I might just do that.
There was a forum for SamSim that had a bunch of extremely knowledgeable people on, talking about super technical details of SAMS. I'll see if I can find a link to it and post it
simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/forums/339/1/sam-simulator
Good idea. I've never been able to a find consistent opinion on the capabilities of anti-aircraft guns, especially.
@@grubbybum3614 AA guns will definetly make a comeback, since shooting mass drone attacks down using missiles would be too expensive in comparison to gun ammo.
@@utzius8003 good point
And yet the good old B-52 still soldiers on!
A most informative video. Going to be interesting to see more about the B-21 as time goes by.
80-100 units at $650 million each. Yeah right - we've seen this story before, dozens and dozens of times. My call - 21 units by 2035 (replaces the B-1 fleet), unit price $1.8 billion each
The only reason our planes cost so much is because Democrats get into power and cancel our defense procurements before they've managed to get economies of scale working. The F-22 was on the verge of being actually rather cheap right before it got canceled, cheaper than the F-35. Same happened with the B-2. F-35 is a special case because it's really just a money laundering operation for Lockheed Martin's drone swarm black project which can't be on the normal budget.
@@fakecubed - It was also extremely poor planning to cancel the AH-66 Comanche armed scout/attack helicopter.
@@VisibilityFoggy Yeah that one kinda bothered me too. I think we're finally getting back on track, though.
@@fakecubed Yeah, that must be it :rolleyes:
The basic design for the B-21 was already done in the 1980s. Congress mandated that the B-2 be redesigned for low level bombing because the did not believe in stealth so they had to compromise the design.
All that plus decades of R&D from the F22 and F35, most of the R&D for it is already done. So the cheaper price of $640 million is very believable
"the B-2 has only gone head 2 head against cold war era tech" Ya think? It kinda makes sense since it was developed during this period of time, specifically to counter soviet ( our cold war adversaries) air defense's. I'm fairly certain that the Iraqi airspace was what some would consider "heavily defended" I'm also certain that we both know which well-known military arms manufacturer had been supplying Iraq with complete air defense networks, worth what I assume to be billions. So remind me again, how Iraq's AA capabilities were significantly inferior to that of the communist's?
This is exactly what I was thinking
I think the B-21 will go over budget like most US (or EU for that matter) defense projects.
ㅣ love this opening sound.
Suggestion: get together with the Caspian Report guy and do hypothetical wars
What people need to realise is that just because a radar system detects a a B-21, it does not automatically mean that all the enemy has to do is launch a missile and bye bye bomber. Stealth is not the B-21s only defense: be aware that with an extremely low radar return, it then requires comparatively little power for an aircraft to jam/decoy/confuse a missile radar. With a limited radar signature, you have a huge range of options to make sure just because an enemy knows you are there, doesn't mean they will be able to prevent you from doing what needs to be done and making an escape.
That is true. No mention yet if it will have ability to jam radars. And like you said, just because an enemy detects it on radar, it doesnt mean it's enough to fire a missile at it. I forgot to mention this in the video (but I've mentioned it in previous videos), lower frequency radars can detect objects with a lower RCS (stealth) at further ranges, but it's not as precise. Not precise enough to guide a missile to it. But it is enough to send up interceptor aircraft into the general location to engage it. Jamming would be risky, as the enemy would know someone is there.
@@CovertCabal One of the supposed advances of the B-21 is its greater stealth against L and UHF radars, as well as X and K. Exactly how they are doing that is anyone's guess, but I would suspect it's a combination of technologies, and I would guess crowned with a AESA radar suite that can act as a jammer, one which can trick radars into thinking the plane is dozens of miles away from its actual location if it comes to that - and jamming done in a certain way will not betray the planes location. My money is on the B-21 being able to get in and get out when used the right way with intelligent planning. Oh, there is also a whisper that the designers did pay very careful attention to the few seconds when the B-21 could be truly vulnerable - when the bomb bay doors are opened for weapon release. Will be fascinating to guess how they worked around that one.
Operating as UCAV . Skynet just smiled.
9:54 are these $4.5B tires?!
hahaha I was looking for this exact comment
@@mpls_link In all seriousness, I wonder what that stuff is on the tires?
@@MorganBrown The missing gold from the federal reserve.
Each B2 is 2 billion dollars a piece. Given this is not a stealth component, I'm estimating the same as any other tire in a bomber.
@@MorganBrown Probably a flatspot, from every time the nosewheel first hits the tarmac. I don't even think they need treads because there are grooves to expel water on runways
Something interesting that happened with the B-21 at first the aircraft only had 3 points on the trailing edge, then the US Air Force said it needed to have 5 so it could preform better at low altitude attacks, so Lockheed Martin spent tons of money switching it to have 5 corners, and then the us Air Force said nope never mind we don’t need it to that, then Lockheed Martin basically replied saying “screw that! We aren’t spending more money switching the design again!”
Where is your source for this? It is quite interesting if their goal was to actually make the B-21 completely triangular like the supposed Tr3-b.
@Cicada A friend of my parent works for Lockheed, he‘s been working on the B-21 project for a while. His job has been getting weapons to function off of certain aircraft, like for example trying to get an ATGM to function off of an F-18.
@@jamesonaudette528 the B21 is not built by lockheed...
This video is so much better then the crap I just watched. It was voiced over by an obnoxious computer voice and the content was worthless. Thanks for uploading quality videos Covert Cabal
All this technology and stealth farts still possess maximum lethality and unchallenged destruction.
i heard a guy that once lived was able to feel the coming stealh farts and thus avede the devestating destruction but this might just be old folk legend
Yes, but just like nuclear weapons they have no use because deploying them _anywhere_ makes that location permanently unusable.
11:53 That aircraft looks evil!
I like it.
B-21: the s-400 raider.
It won't get past the S-500 to get near the S-400
You wish.
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 s-500 is for ballistic missiles, try again.
@@BorntoYeet wrong. ballistic, hypersonic and long range aerodymanic (aircraft). Unlike shitty US AD, Russian systems have multiple rocket varients and are multirole.
And they work
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 s-400 and s-300 haven't seen a day of actual combat and you say they work? Lol, okay RT watcher number 3094744. In fact, our (ahem) "shitty American ad systems blyat" have been in more real world combat situations than you precious s-400. Cope harder, buddy.
Will be keeping more eye on the sky now, they could be loitering around somewhere..
It's rumored a couple of these are already flying. Just prototypes of course, but considering how soon they should be entering service, it would make sense.
@@fakecubed yup, probably that...
Amazing work as usual!
Thank you for not filling half of your video with filler stock video and ads like Warthog Defense.
Great content as always!
China has made huge leaps in stealth technology = China has lifted huge slabs of tech from others.
It does seem that with the flaws in the two stealth fighters China has produced. China cannot reproduce manufacturing technics just like the fact China has not been able to reverse engineer Russian jet engines.
They should call it «Steal Technology» or the Steal Fighter.
yeah, but its like the viral video of the sea gull stealing a cell phone, its still just a sea gull, it can't play Angry Birds.
"B-21" 2+1=3 lol
Beautiful!
_quik maffs_
Did you watch the video? B-21 = 21st Century bomber.
You have _no_ sense of humor.
@@Allmotorzl1 Whooooosh
Thank you for putting up the sources in the ending screen 😘
I know details are scarce, but I wish you'd gone into more detail, namely things like the fact the B-21 is going to have a long range escort optionally-manned fighter to help it penetrate hostile airspace, and that the B-21 is really intended to counter China, specifically (and gone into details about why it's good for that role and where the likely targets are in western China). There's also speculation about a few planes already flying which you could've discussed. Oh well. Still a good video. Not everyone is as obsessive about learning all they can about this plane as I am, I guess.
“China has made huge leaps in stealth tech..” yeah everyone know how. 🤨
US did the same with Germany
mntchannel Yeah, after their military was defeated and we were in the country. We didn’t have people bum-rushing blueprints in Germany.
@@mntalateyya US stealth tech is not stolen, it was developed from a paper from a Soviet/Russian physician called Pyotr Ufimtsev, at the time, the soviets deemed the knowledge useless and allowed it to be published worldwide. Lockheed engineers discovered that and applied it to the first stealth bomber, the F-117
@@lucastekkan That russian either didn’t have his ideas used by russia because they thought it was ridiculous at the time, or he doesn’t like russia very much.
Awesome! The B-2 is beautiful! I cannot wait to see the B-21!
You're not going to be able to see it, it's a stealth plane.
And the US needs this to bomb Venezuela ???? to get the oil
@@Karl-Benny US couldn't care less about Venezuela. US has been energy independent for a while now, and exporting a lot of energy. We're also in the process of rapidly expanding our nuclear energy with small modular reactors. There is literally no reason at all to fight a war with Venezuela, especially since it's a great talking point about yet another inevitable failure of socialism.
@@Karl-Benny All the US needs is a Cesna 172 to bomb Venezuela.
@@knight0334 Venezuela is doing a good enough job destroying itself. Save the Cesna fuel.
I am seriously looking forward to seeing the B-21, it's an exciting prospect. I wonder if the sophisticated new avionics will be retrofitted to the B-2 to make it more stealthy and more lethal.
Did you know that R&U videos has stolen your music??
Just as an aside; when I was in grammar school in the 1950s my home was located under the glide path for the #1 runway at what was then a SAC base in Warner Robins Georgia. I have seen every strategic bomber in the SAC inventory fly very low over my house including the B-29, B-36, B-47, B-52 and I can confirm that the B-36 is the loudest bomber ever made in the U.S.. With six turning and four burning the sound of that thing close up was almost unbearable.
“Targeted procurement cost: $650 million each”
LOL. RIP federal budget
At that price, the cost to buy all 100 planned units is about 1 year of the DoD's base budget
650 million a piece Ain’t shit compared to the two billion per b-2
when the music first hits at the beginning I GET HYPE
If Mike Bloomberg disarms his security detail
Mabey I will think about disarming myself
thank you. your report on stealth bombers covered the most of aspects.
I fully expect the B-21 to deploy stealthy drones to replicate its radar signature and swamp defending radar systems. These drones will force the enemy to light up its tracking/targeting radars and make them vulnerable to attack by accompanying F-22 and F-35 ground attack aircraft. This is where the battle management systems of the F-35 will shine by directing munitions onto the enemy's radars. Once these radars are disabled the B-21 will deliver its payload untracked and unmolested.
With nearly global forward airbases and mid-air refueling, I think you're right. "Wild Weasel" doesn't carry such a wild risk anymore.
Is this what's called... spoofing?
i like how you made comparison in prices for bomber vs destroyer. not inflammatory in the least.
no way we're buying anywhere near 100 of these things
I think future Bombers will rely less on bombs and more on (cruise) Missiles. I also think that air dropped UAV drones that are aimed to mislead the enemy on Radar Location AND provide active target aquisition could be used. So Bombers will fly close to target, deploy air dropped drones (there were some used in Vietnam war from B-52s) link up with those decoy/target aquisition drones and then follow them and be the less visible target that will fire Missiles when close enough. AA stations firing on drones will also give their positions away for ALARM Missiles.
you know - you don't have to run faster than a bear, just faster than those around you...
China is stealing the blueprints right now.
What do you think the main job of NSA, NRO And CIA is?
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 Nothing in China is worth stealing.
@@Chuck_Hooks Good keep up that arrogance it's helped USA lose every war but 1 since ww2
And so glad you think A.I. isnt important, it'll probably amount to nothing, USA should totally spend its money on another 20years getting its asked kick by the poorest country on Earth
@@sisyphusvasilias3943 Not worried about China. Even after DECADES of copying and reverse engineering Russian jet engines, Chinese jet engines still suck.
The new B-21 Raider will be the greatest in the world at hitting their targets with state of the art missiles and bombs and won't be detected as long as the aircraft isn't detected due to bomb bay being open or refueling. The B-2 has done a great job of performing perfectly and the government has gotten it's money's worth out of them.
we'll all know when UFO sightings increase around area 51:)
@Chris Jovy oh well there must be hundreds of pictures the3n
One of my aunts is a computer scientist and she works for northrop grumman. She doesn’t talk much about work because she cant but from the tiny hints she’s given I’m almost certain she is working on this plane
One does have to question if it's worth spending so much money on a bomber if it's only going to be used against an enemy with obsolecent technology.
MrPotates not already, he doesn’t know what he is talking about.
khwaac then why Russia China UK Japan Korea want them so bad?
C-Bomb sounds they should sell like a 99.99 dollar per each unit
@@khwaac I wouldn't call it completely obsolete just yet.
Another wonderful production.
Thank you!
The B2 is a beautiful aircraft.
This aircraft is supposed to combine unmathced stealth with unmatched EW forgot that part
the tr3-b thinks this thing is adorable.
The b21 just did it's first long range flight last week over moscow,they didn't see a thing
Lol ok they most definitely saw it and just didn’t say anything or your lying
xFrosty 91 lol it’s in development it hasn’t even been produced
@@gabenewell3955 shhh can't let them know
Do a video on chinese intellectual property theft
What do you think the core role of the CIA, NRO and NSA is?
Why do think the CIA was kicked out of France?
Really I don't know why only 200000 subscriber. This channel deserves 10 times more.
They only are going to release it because they have something better stored.
Indeed!
Unmanned Predator drones. Game is already over. You can strafe a village and deliver a payload of whatever you choose on the other side of the world from a control room in Omaha, NE before your lunch break.
So what if you disrupt the data link
1:33 OMFG HANDS REVEAL!!!
Look incredibly soft, like never physically worked in his life soft.
@@SuperGeronimo999 like a lot of very smart people 😏
@@SuperGeronimo999 so soft
@@bezahltersystemtroll5055 I'm a smart guy but yeah I still like to work on stuff
Stealth get's a bomber in closer. Easily close enough for long range weapons. Also in the case of a must insert and strike, the bomber will be seen, but it'll look like a bird on radar. So by the time the radar knows what it's looking at, the bombs will be dropped. So yes, you shoot down the bomber perhaps, but the damage is done.
The next stealth money pit......
how many drone pilots do you think you could fit on a b-21?
low latency, can maintain line of sight.
You eliminate both of the primary problems with pulling the pilot out of a fighter jet by putting the pilots in something like this.
The video has been up for 20 minutes and the trolls have already taken over the comment section
The Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit will always be a legend
Let's all remember how china got so advanced....
Communism
Intellectual property theft
Sweden sold them parts of the stealth fighter after the serbs shot it down in 1999.
This is why both the Chinese and Swedish embassy was bombed in Belgrade in 1999.
To take out the wreckage of the stealth fighter but it was allready on it's way to China,
@@fuqupal Also don't forget they had a spy give them troves of data about our stealth jets. I think he only got paid a million dollars to sell out America. He's rotting in jail now.
The Clintons selling our secrets in exchange for campaign cash.
80-100 B-21 Raiders is a good goal. As I see it, 100 should be the cap in order to contain operational costs but 80 is a reasonable minimum amount to meet objectives. There still remains a need for a cost effective and flexible supersonic bomber to replace the capabilities of the B-1B. B-1B is especially well suited for large scale conventional bombing, short response time missions, cruise missile strikes, naval strikes, multiple target precision strikes, and showing the flag as a deterrence. B-2 and B-21 are less suited for these missions due to slow speed, more limited payload, extreme costs, long standard maintenance times, and basing restrictions to protect the aircraft and their secrets. B-21 is rumored to focus on mid to high altitude operations and deep penetration missions using maximum stealth. B-1B is capable at extremely low and extremely high altitudes and everywhere in between.
A supersonic replacement for B-1B could have Mach 2 performance and cost effective, low maintenance amount of stealth, strong air frame for low level flight and high g maneuvers, and a very large mission bay for flexibility and firepower. This B-1B replacement could also be designed to be exportable to close allies - an option for some of those that have already been approved for F-35. If we call this replacement "B-11" then a future bomber force could consist of 100 B-21 and 200 B-11 with all B-52, B-1B, and B-2 retired. USAF gets 300 bombers, which is close to their preferred total bomber force size. Two thirds of that force would be cost effective work horses for the vast majority of missions and one third would be ideal for deep penetration strategic missions but spend a lot of time in the hangar on standby ready for WW3.
Well the good news is that the B-1B isn't really going away any time soon. The plan is for the B-1B to be slowly phased out by the B-21, but I fully expect we'll keep a bunch of them around regardless for a rather long time.
I also wonder how much of the B-1B's capabilities are going to be replaced by the stealthy drone swarm that almost certainly exists out in the Nevada desert somewhere. There's numerous indications that Lockheed Martin built a pocket force of these drones some years ago, with the ability to rapidly scale up the force, and while individually they wouldn't have the sort of bomb load capacity of a B-1B, a whole lot of them might have the speed and range to carry out some serious strike missions as a swarm.
When you absolutely must drop 80+ bombs on a single target, what are the odds that you can't wait for a B-21 to be overhead? In all likelihood, we'll probably have B-21s loitering over combat areas constantly and they won't be too far away. We'll certainly have many stealth drones loitering all around, able to act as a swarm to smash through air defenses en masse and drop a great many bombs. With modern precision capability, the emphasis seems to be moving more and more towards smaller smart bombs, rather than more-and-larger dumb bombs saturating an area with explosions to kill a target.
I'm reminded of the B-2 raid on a pair of ISIS camps in Libya a few years back, where we dropped 100+ bombs but they were mostly pretty small bombs, each just big enough to get the job done. After the initial pass by the two B-2s on the raid, the drones watching above launched hellfire missiles at anything still moving.
Maybe the B-1R upgrade project will be resurrected once the B-21 starts operating. That was going to be a Mach 2.2 plane with some air-to-air capability as well. The planes wouldn't have as much range, but there would be very fast and still maintain a lot of capacity.
I hope Serbia doesn't accidentally shoot this one down too
The Serbian ADS shoot down a F-117 nighthawk, that was the 1st generation of stealth aircraft. This will be the 3rd generation of stealth aircraft.
@@quisqueyanguy120 yes that's correct
Also the F-117 only got shot down because it’s bomber doors had a malfunction in which they didn’t close which ruined its stealthy profile. It was able to fly over the radar 100+ times undetected.
@@patelivid1637 pretty easy to remain undetected when you're bombing civilians and refugee camps
I suspect lasers are going to be used to spot stealth planes. Sweeping lasers across the sky will show gaps in the sweep, and that’s where the stealth aircraft is. Computers can make this process very rapid, and once a gap in a beam is found, the sweep can narrow to track the aircraft.
F-15x Video?
That's an interesting idea. I try to do a bit larger topics though, not often on single aircraft or weapons. Matsimus does that really well.
Then Binkov does grand scale/strategy videos really well, so I feel I fit somewhere in the middle haha
What about how 4 or 4.5 gen aircraft surviving in the 21st century. Obviously the Air Force feels the need to have the f-15x for the homeland defense but also the air superiority mission. But is it still useful? You could do something very similar to this video and call it the future of non stealthy aircraft? Include the f-16, b52, a-10 and f15x?
@@CovertCabal This article might give you some insight into the future possibilities with the F-15: warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/
@@wk7337 warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/
F-15X will be useful for supporting firepower that stealth aircraft lack due to limited internal stores. They will also be particularly useful for cost effective long range patrols with less reliance on aerial refueling. USAF conducts about 1000 interceptions in US air space every year, most of which are visual range interception and guidance of civilian aircraft. F-15X would be ideal for such interceptions due to high maximum speed and low operating costs. Stealth aircraft completely lose their primary advantage when using external stores but remain expensive to operate since that stealth still requires extensive maintenance even if unused.
F-15X has numerous upgrades compared to earlier F-15s with significant overall capability improvements but minimal retraining required. For example, F-15X uses the same radar back end as FA-18 but with a much larger antenna for greater performance, has an entirely new advanced radar warning system, and an expanded flight envelope with better maneuverability to name a few improvements.
The avionics and sensors upgrades also makes it an ideal candidate for use as an electronic warfare platform, with greater performance than EA-18 Growlers and could restore EW capability lost in the USAF with the retirement of EF-111 Raven. Such EW capability could be integrated relatively easily because of the particular hardware chosen for F-15X.
F-15X is not only useful, it could be a force multiplier and should be acquired in large numbers by both the USAF and allies. USAF could use 400 F-15CX and 400 F-15EX. Design improvements, a large USAF order, and large allied orders would keep the unit costs and operational costs relatively low. I could see 200 units for Japan, 200 for Israel, 150 for South Korea, and 150 for Canada.
In mentioning the F-35 within the context of EW and what this bomber will likely have, you miss the F-35's significant ability to jam on its own without dedicated assets. That's the real and largely unspoken value in the F-35. It can absolutely survive a highly contested airspace on its own while jamming many individual 21st century enemy air defense assets. It's the real defining capability of the F-35 and a reason why most of NATO will eventually operate at least one squadron. The electronic warfare capability is massive and will only increase. So if this bomber includes that advanced capability, which it absolutely should, that changes the game back to the early 90s where the B-2 and defensive flying tactics made it something an advesary couldn't reasonably touch.
Another super expensive waste of time effort and money in the making in all likelihood.
It's use is literally for attacks on 3rd world nations incapable of fighting back.
@Dalton Black 😂
@Dalton Black
_> the technology can potentially make its way to civilian applications_
_>technology that makes airliner-sized aircraft invisible to radars_
I bet Malaysian Airlines would buy our entire stock!
Low frequency radar is what is used to detect stealth aircraft. It was used against the F 117 that was shot down over Yugoslavia...uh, the remnants thereof. Allegedly the B-2 is much less detectable and possibly could penetrate Russian air space un-traced. The new stand-off delivery system only has a range of 300 miles, so it's not likely to be useful against a developed enemy.
.why do you never respond to comments or anythibng
Sorry about that. No reason in particular, just dont get around to it.
I use Discord and talk to people on there regularly. So if you want to get ahold of me, you can do so there. It's just easier to get notifications and have conversations.
discord.gg/npJbfZX
@@CovertCabal i dont get discord. went there signed up looked around and i dont get what its supposed to be.
@@Billy_Darley Nowadays it's essentially a hub for communities, if you have a hobby or interest, there is a server for that hobby or interest. You can join any of those servers and talk to other people interested in it, or just new people in general. It doubles as a place for group chats to organize stuff with irl people and whatnot and in this context, you can just join his discord server to talk to him as well as other fans of his videos, or debate about your own views and theories about stuff
Great work as always! Regarding bombers long stand-off attack is the best approach...
I guess this "bomber" will eventualy morph into "6th gen fighter" as in manned hub in the center of an unmanned swarm probably never even opening its weapon bays, instead commanding the ammunition that was already in the air...
@@DominikPinkas Damn, imagine that. Just directing swarms of bee like, subsonic drones carrying JDAMs.
Kosovo is not a nation. It is a province in Serbia.
Was. Not is.
Critical update needed! 😄
I thought about that while writing the script, thinking of ways to describe all 3 with one word. First I was going to say countries, but that wasnt accurate. Then I thought to say states, but worried some American listeners could get confused. I thought I changed it to say "places like...", but maybe when i read it, I said nations.
@@CovertCabal I'd say that best option would be to mention the names of wars. For example "NATO intervention in Yugoslavia".
@@PATTHECATMCD Unitl it gets recognised by Serbia, it is not.
man i love this channel. strong work
I would think bomber pilots would probably disagree with you about the Norden bomb sight allowing them to fly at altitudes above the flak being sent up...and, while the Norden bomb sight was definitely a great improvement, it was far from accurate. But, that's what we had to roll with and our boys made em work.
Boy what a dream job that would be. Being able to work on those planes
No matter how good your radar is if you can have the cross section of a hummingbird it gives you a heck of an advantage. Sooner or later stealth will be defeated and they will use nano tech to create armadas of tiny supersonic drones the size of a suitcase to use swarm and kamikaze techniques via remote.
0:53 my objective for all star weekend
They might be test flying this aircraft right now in Nevada and it might be code-named "Romeo" for manned flights and "Solar" for unmanned flights, but I wouldn't know anything about that.
Nope you don't lol
I'm going to subscribe to your channel because you don't go begging like many channels do at the end, and you produce great quality
NowTHIS video is informative. Thank you.
I kinda saw the B-21 a little bit different. Think of B-2 as version 2.0 and the B-21 as version 2.1. So more like a logical evolution. For example, cheaper yet improved coating. Improved electronics and computers. Perhaps longer range and more bomb space.
Im expecting the b21 to be a flying wing with geometric paneling similar to the f117. This is likely why the true shape of the aircraft is not being revealed. The f117 still has the smallest R.C.S. of any modern bomber.
The only plane beating it (that we know of) is the boeing "bird of prey" research vehicle.
Outstanding work as usual C.C! Thank you!
The 88mm and 128mm AA guns in use in Germany during ww2 could lob a shell to about 35,000 ft, easily above a b17s ceiling.
This is why I love covert , logical analysis which many blind sympathisers hate.
From what I understand the key difference between the B-2 and B-21...
the B-21 will have cup holders!
Hey cabal, can you do some research onto how the F-117 was shot over Serbia? And mention in a larger video or make it it's own video, including a sort of biography on the F-117.
The F-117 Was shot down by pure luck. Yugoslav Air Defense took a radar snapshot (Turning it on and off quickly to avoid getting blown up by a Wild Weasel (anti-air-defense) strike) from a range of about 14 miles away, which for a SAM Site is practically flying over the top of it while the bomb bay doors were open, making it just visible enough for a SAM to hit it with a proximity fuse detonation. The pilot ejected safely and was recovered by USAF Pararescuemen unharmed. Google "1999 F-117 Shootdown".
Same route over and over
Wish the UK would acquire a batch of these, even a small squadron of like 10 of them would massively enhance the RAF’s bombing capabilities. Could even base a few forward at say Cyprus. Though it seems like the RAF will do with upgraded Typhoons, stealth F-35s and Reaper/Predator drones instead.
This plane will not be sold to any other country. F-35 yes...but not this plane
@@rodgermurphy5721 Is that confirmed though? I'v heard in a few different places that the US was open to selling the F-22 raptor to the UK, Canada and Australia if they wanted it. Possibly also Israel and Japan as well.
@@tanyard I don't think so. F-22 production line has been shut down after 187 were built for the airforce. I would say the chances of selling B-21 are even less due to the individual price and the shroud of secrecy surrounding its development and capabilities. Some US congressmen have even complained the airforce will even give them little to no details
You touched on it a little bit in this video, but could you make an entire video on the upcoming Advanced Battle Management System. I’ve found all the info I could on it, but I’m sure you have more knowledge on where to gather more intel. It’d be much appreciated!
B-2 is likely to remain apex of military engineering and aircraft design, especially considering era when it was designed. Once, there was idea to pull data from Lacrosse radar sattelites in search of mobile ICBM launchers inside Soviet Union! B-2 simply could use total redesign (newer engines, like those GEs for YF-23), new coating, avionics, Variable Camber Compliant Wing
and still remain formidable system, or be converted for tanker role for B-21. Anyway, stealth, especially for larger aircraft in this day and age of optoelectronics is slowing becoming thing of the past. Consider British ADAD from 90s! Also: regarding pricing. Northrop once proposed 130 B-2 Bombers with 300-400 mln unit cost and now Burke class, once production schedule has been screwed and Flight III designed, costs almost 3 bln / a piece.
Does anyone know of any new developments in the rumor that the B-21 will carry at least some air-to-air missiles for self-defense? Personally, I thought that was an extremely important nugget that got leaked. I'm imagining an AIM-260 that could take out something along the lines of a MiG-31 and keep interceptors at bay long enough to carry out the strike mission.
I could have swore Tyler Rogoway mentioned something about that when we had him on our podcast. I'll have to search through it in the morning, but here is the link if you are interested -
ua-cam.com/video/nYQLxpy8C44/v-deo.html
My understanding is the B-21 will have a "penetrating counter-air" escort fighter, that is long range and will carry things like air-to-air missiles and some SEAD/DEAD goodies for enemy SAM sites and radar. We know almost nothing about it, though, except the USAF stated that as one of its requirements.
I think an escort drone that has those capabilities makes a lot more sense than the B-21 carrying a bunch of air-to-air missiles itself. A drone or drones could fly ahead of this beast, clearing a path, and be entirely expendable.
@@fakecubed - Penetrating counter-air would be a sixth-gen platform. Some argue it's interchangeable with the US Navy's F/A-XX program and others believe the USAF and USN will chart different courses on it (no pun intended). Right now, as it currently stands, the F-35 can't even carry the HARM missile internally and the Raptor can't carry it at all. So any SEAD missions would have to be completed by the new F-15EX, F/A-18, the Growler, the Eurofighter or the F-16.
In theory, a modern SEAD mission might resemble the Israeli raid on the Osirak reactor - a combo of F-15s and F-16s, all these decades later.