B-21 Raider: Former USAF Engineer Discusses Air Force's Newest Bomber
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
- Rick Abell joins Mover and Gonky to discuss and break down the Air Force's B-21 Raider. From his entry into the USAF as a Civil Servant in 1964 till his retirement in 1997, Mr. Eric "Rick" Abell worked on or led the development and fielding on almost every aircraft and related system in the USAF including the A-7, A-10, F-15, F-16, YF-17, F-117, YF-22, YF-23, F-22, B-1, B-2, and several classified programs. He has also worked extensively with the US Navy and US Army.
ABSOLUTE VENGEANCE eBook by C.W. Lemoine is only $0.99 for the month of October! books2read.com...
Check out The Mover and Gonky Show Mondays at 8PM ET LIVE. • The Mover and Gonky Show
Buy one of C.W. Lemoine's books: www.cwlemoine.com
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components.
Improvements to the B-21 over the B-2:
Optionally manned
RAM is no longer parasitic rather integrated into the skin greatly reducing maintenance costs
Intakes are much better hidden without producing inlet distortions
Fixed a maintenance headache related to the exhaust area
Fixed the wing planform shape back to the proposed B-2 shape - more range and better RCS
It's a smaller aircraft - we still buy aircraft by the pound
Thanks for providing the change log. Can't wait to be done with the exhaust maintenance thing once I upgrade my B-2 to the newest version
Also, there’s some weird looking panels near the bottom side of the center of the aircraft. My guess is sensors, maybe dual use AESA modules for ELINT/jamming.
And don’t even get started on the decades of improvement in electronic capabilities…
Love having these experts where we all learn something new in aviation! You go boys!
Airforce: we need better signature reduction, broadband stealth, thermal management, emissions control
Fighter pilots: put an afterburner on, more boom boom go fast.
Great stuff. I love listening to Rick's level of experience and insight
"I think I'm talking to some Fighter Pilots."
I believe one key difference as far as stealth goes is the trailing edge. The B-2 was optimized for low level penetration which is why it has that saw tooth pattern which helped it handle the turbulence of high speed low altitude flight better. The B-21 is optimized for medium level and is basically a diamond with wings on it which as it turns out is more stealthy, but not so good with turbulence low and fast.
I think the largest differences between the B2 and B21 are going to be beneath the skin. They almost certainly have new shapes/structures for absorbing radar, likely 3d printed. And of course there's the RAM. Stealth is very much like that defense onion, you want to reflect what you can away, then absorb what you can with RAM, and then dissipate what gets through using the internal structures. And I guarantee there's some funky stuff going on in the back to cool down the exhaust, we'll probably never know though
The biggest difference is we'll be able to fly it everyday without annihilating our budget.
Tacit Blue, aka the Whale, is on display at the Air Force Museum.
Gonky laughing about an AB on a bomber says it all! Hilarious!
The B-1 would like a word.
Keeping costs down is a major driver of the B-21 and thus I expect we'll see a lot of evolutionary improvements vs revolutionary ones that always take more time and money to make happen. Northrup has 40+ years of B-2 data to make this happen as well. Thus the exterior is only going to have modest visible changes. The avionics Comm, Nav, intercom is likely going to be nearly the same as current B-2 CNI. Flight controls & auto pilot could be the same boxes with modest improvements for the reported unmanned drone flights. The EW and Radar Warning systems may also be upgraded B-2 systems as well.
A big change will be the reported addition of advanced ISR capabilities. This could be comparable to the ISR package carried by the RQ-4 at some 1000 to 2000 pounds it shouldn't be too hard to fit it in the B-21. It'll need a higher capacity satellite antenna of which Starlink has shown can be fairly compact.
The biggest changes are likely the engines by going from the F-18 modified engines to one based on the F-35's engine. This will save a huge amount in logistics and support overhead by having a common engine for the biggest fighter and bomber fleets in the USAF.
It's going to be fun watching the first flights of this beast and it can't come soon enough to replace our aging B-1s and B-2s.
I love bombers and crop dusters.
Ill listen to any engineer speak. Though working in large scale commercial construction, i know not to trust them fully. A degree doesnt mean you understand real life loads. Trust me my life was put at risk by several engineers.
I think putting a afterburner on a B-21 would be a great idea 😂, make it go faster😂
Fighter pilot gets promoted to product engineer of a passenger-jet program:
Lead engineer: The engine-thrust will be adequate through all flight regimes.....
Product Engineer: ...... Yeah, but can we get more smash out of this?????
In thrust we trust!
The B-21 has more in common with the RQ-170 & RQ-180 than it does with the B-2.
It's called Twix now.
Northrop claimed the B21 is 1-2 generations ahead of the B2 in stealth capabilities. It’s probably going to be decades until we know how, but pretty crazy if that’s an accurate claim.
They're saying THIS is the beginning of the 6th generation.
We will see when the B-21 goes up against an actual modern military and not a few guys hiding in a cave.
Mover - Some time _real soon now_ chat about future fo A-10 and possible replacement for F-22?
^5
Rick speaks with great authority, and makes great sense.
Great authority?
You sound like a bot
Let's elect Rick president in a write-in campaign.
He'll save us tons of money.
😁
Reduction in purchase price and operational costs may have been drivers to evolve the design from the B2.
Where can we find this whole interview with Rick?
ua-cam.com/users/livebPPOG1vjbeE or spotify, amazon music, apple podcasts, etc. It's on my main page.
F-117 was literally the low-poly model for potato computers.
I would think the B-21 has the same advantage over a B-2 that the F-35 has over the F-22, electronic sensor and information integration as well as electronic upgradeability.
F35 and F22 are totally different! Different mission requirements required different design capability
@@toddie4usa1 Look at the reasons they're planning to retire the F-22, the re-read my comment.
You've done a derp there, toddie.
1:13 lol "looks exactly the same" knowledge of aircrafts is outstanding
“Aircrafts” knowledge of the English language is outstanding.
@@CWLemoine Thats what i said "aircrafts" i just didnt use a capital A but ya dont need to little fella
@@discovolante6624 aircrafts is not a word. The plural of aircraft is aircraft. As for knowledge being outstanding, does the B-2 not look like the B-21? What’s the issue?
@@CWLemoine yeah fair point, and speaking of points the B2 has more pointy bits on the arse end compared to the B21, that kind of stands out, but I'm only mucking around, i really like your channel, keep up the good work
You gotta go faster!!! Yep. Fighter pilot.
I will say though, the next real innovation for a Stealth aircraft, will be to go supersonic (X-59 testing) without a sonic boom.
Do some research on the Windecker Eagle 1969 the first Composite FAA licensed aircraft The GGGfather of modern stealth .
Given how crucial the B-21 would be in a conflict with China over Taiwan, I don't understand why the USAF hasn't asked Northrop to accelerate its development. Why not offer Northrop enough money to hire so many people and pay so much over-time that people are working feverishly on the B-21 perhaps up to seven days a week, 24 hours a day? Doing that would of course increase costs dramatically but deterring China seems to justify it. I feel like the military should recognize that for right now funds should be shifted from spending on the Army to spending more on the USAF and Navy. Then later, once the USAF and Navy are in a strong enough to clearly beat China if not deter it, the military can spend more on the Army to make up for the lesser spending now.
Still think it should’ve been named the B-3
Whatever you do, DON’T talk about the interesting things like the electrogravity features of this aircraft just like it’s predecessor the B2.
#Sarcasm
B-21 budget raider.
TLDW; B2 B21 same same
In aviation currant plane made public currently is old tech 😉even though it's new to the public.
We defiantly have better tech that is still not being disclosed to the public.
Agreed.
They also don’t care about what it looks like from the outside because it’s what’s on the inside that counts. Leaps and bounds above the B-2. Completely outclassed by magnitudes
When you fellas gonna talk about adaptive engines vs the same ole same ole fixed ratio traditional styles that everything jet powered has had since forever ?
Why does the B-21 have a designation that comes before the F-22? Where is the F-21? Shouldn't the Raider be designated the B-3x?
They're different aircraft and numbered in different series
But the logic of sequential numbering is thrown out the window
Unless there's a LOT of even darker projects ...
that's not how that works
Pretty sure the 21 was used cuz it’s a bomber for the 21st century
There really is no actual logic in the numbering, at least not in the modern era. We went from the F/A -18 to the F-22 to the F-35.
The F-117 was way outside the numbering “system” and in fact wasn’t even a fighter (F designation) but was actually an attack plane and should have had an A designator. This was done intentionally for the purposes of disinformation.
Although, if you think about the B-2 and the this new plane (B-21) as the B-2.1 you might think there is something there.
@@kevint1911Well, the Northrup improved F-5 was the F-20 and the borrowed Israeli Kfirs were the F-21. The F-35 should have been F-24 I believe but a general screwed up and got confused by the X-35 designation.
The economic version of B2 LOL
I'm no scientist but you are definitely losing 20,000 feet doing a 180 turn.
I find it funny how all those "cool" fighter pilots have no clue about technological and strategic principles of other types of aircraft other than fighters. I am not saying that I do have clue but I expected at least some insight from the "cool" pilots...
Half the size, double the cost
Other way around the b-21 is way cheaper then the b-2
Same as my new wife.
The b-2 was 2 billion I think the B-21 is less than half that
@@godhimself478 And that doesn't even account for the massive inflation since 2008.
@@jamesmcgee1566 ONLY if they buy more than 21. The original B-2 cost estimate for 132 aircraft was ~4-500 million each. They 'saved' money by buying 21 for 1.2 billion each. The current plan is almost the same, buy 100 for 690 million each. We'll see if they 'save' us money again.
Can’t wait this to fly over Palestine
Looks more of a gimmick
Northrop wasn’t shy about showing you how many years advanced Jack’s mind was ahead of the industry. When you walked through the doors into the main hallway in the design center in Pico Rivera, the line drawings of the YB-49 and the B-2 overlayed one another. Dimensionally they were identical. The Tacit Blue mods for control surfaces and RCS reduction were the differences most obvious to a casual observer. Basically, Jack Northrop built the B-2 prototype in the late 1940’s. Consider that for a moment.
I read somwhere that the flight charateristics were almost the same.