B-21 Raider: Next step, First flight!

The EMD contract was awarded/started in 2015. It's already been three years. The program hasn't even had an FCA.

I want what you guys are taking. Does it require a prescription?

a reply to: RadioRobert

I think that no one believes that.

originally posted by: intelgurl
The new B-21 Raider is getting ready for its first flight according to USAF Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch. The Lt Gen. said this before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, April 9, 2019. He also said that the program has met all of it's development milestones and is on schedule.

The Air Force's stealthy new bomber is getting ready to take its first flight.

link

(Rumor) Rumor has it that the first model is nearing completion. Once flight tests begin of the final iteration an unveiling will soon follow.(/Rumor)

It outstanding to read your contributions again.
First there was Intelgurl.
Then, there came some guy wearing a skull and cross bone on a helmet. Just kidding about the latter

With Boeing stepping out of the GBSD bidding, if Northrop wins the contract, that's going to be a solid win for the company between that and the B-21.

a reply to: RadioRobert

When was the last time you saw an EMD aircraft go from first flight to IOC in 3 years?

a reply to: anzha

EMD began in 2015? IOC is still slated for "mid-2020's" no? That's about a decade. My reading of your comments led me to believe you (plural) are still on the "first flight is 'immanent'"-train...

Didnt they use a lot off the shelf parts and have a pretty advanced demonstrator to begin with?

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: RadioRobert

When was the last time you saw an EMD aircraft go from first flight to IOC in 3 years?

F-117?

Elements of the program may go back as far as the 90s. If they are sitting on an actually advanced demonstrator its not impossible.
The question is mute though, they'll run into funding issues which will delay IOC no matter what.

a reply to: mightmight

really makes you wonder what else the contractors have on offer.


these companies have so much money and computer power they should always be on the razor's edge of what's possible.

a reply to: RadioRobert

If you take USAF statements at face value, the first EMD aircraft is being built now.

The first B-21 flight will be in 2021.

The IOC is supposed to be 2024.

Have you ever known an aircraft to go from first flight to IOC in 3 years?

a reply to: mightmight

About right, but the avionics on that were the exact same as the electric bug, iirc. In fact, the airframe was about the only new piece in that aircraft.

The F/A-18E required 4. That's a 4th gen aicraft.

I doubt - but could be wrong! - that would be the case for the B-21.

a reply to: anzha

P-8 took four years, I think. It was not (and still is not) actually fully operational, but they fudged IOC to avoid penalizing Boeing.

Global Hawk entered LRIP before EMD was even over and the prototypes were turned over for operational use because of need.

B-2 went from first flight 89 to first production aircraft to first production aircraft in 93 to IOC in three years. The rollout was an unfinished almost bare airframe to meet a timeline requirement, first flight was almost a year later. Depending on how comfortable Northrop is with the technology from the "family of systems" and whatever demonstrators, you could push the timeline and meet an 2024 IOC. If you piggyback on system EMD done or being done on other programs, you're saving a lot of time and money. Another benefit is that so many of the systems being used by everyone else (and most probably this platform, see MP-RTIP with only one "known" current user) from PESA's, EW, battle-management systems, EODS , etc are Northrop systems. It's Mission Systems division is essentially inhouse, making collaboration a lot smoother.



I'm pretty skeptical about the IOC for 2024, but it probably depends on how much money they throw at it, and how badly they believe they need the capabilities and so are willing to fudge what IOC means to get it into service even if limited. The B-2 was out dropping bombs before "full operational capability", F-35 has followed that pattern. Those programs represent bleeding edge efforts; presumably, the risk-reduction effort on ghis program is hoping to avoid some of the classic pitfalls. We shall see.


I guess I'm just surprised that the "unofficially" " already flying ", "almost complete" , "rollout in 2017" crowd has finally shifted gears to meet my conservatism .

a reply to: anzha
So what are you thinking, EMD began earlier than advertised or the Air Force is just presenting a hyperoptimistic timetable?

I dont think its impossible. It's not inconceivable to assume that a hell of a lot more work has been done on the program already and thus the development progress is not really comparable to white world fighter projects.

But as said, it wont happen anyway, even if the Republicans remain in power and can get a Democratic House to commit to a budget without much politcally motivated delay. The next recession is already on the horizon if you look at what is happening in the Euro Zone and as always, a economic downturn will result budgets getting cut all over the place.

Late 2020s IOC is a more resonable estimate. And could get much worse easily.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: anzha
I guess I'm just surprised that the "unofficially" " already flying ", "almost complete" , "rollout in 2017" crowd has finally shifted gears to meet my conservatism .

They still could play it like Russia or China and fly the prototype out of Edwards tomorrow if they wanted to. And i'm sure they'd even be able to use if operationally if they felt like it. Doesnt mean they have a vehicle ready to go into mass production.

a reply to: mightmight

There isn't a prototype in existence to rollout. At least not in the sense you're using.

a reply to: RadioRobert
i *believe* there is something comparable to say what the YF-17 was to the F/A-18. More than one vehicle and for of a lot longer than this program exists. If they wanted to they could fly it out tomorrow, call it YB-21 and noone would be the wiser.

Hell, it was even reported a couple of years back that Lockheed refurbished an older platform for the program. Thats a fun rabbithole.

a reply to: mightmight

I think there are a variety of things flying that are relevant to the program, but there are giant differences between demonstrators and prototypes. And most everything flying in support of the program is as different from the offering as the Whale was from the ATB offering, CATBird is from the F-35, VISTA and Catfish were from the the F-22 (and YF-22, significantly different from the production model), etc.

Once China rolls out their B-2 twin and the Anti-China rhetoric picks up, I don't think they'll have any funding issues for this program. The benefit is that there is a perceived threat where this kind of platform is viable and necessary.

a reply to: RadioRobert

Not saying similar vehicles dont exist for LRSB but you dont have a flyoff with Catbirds and Catfishs.
Does Amarillo look like a Tacit Blue?
You think they threw billions on NGLRS-D to put fancy avionics on 737s?
You believe NGB and everything that came before was limited to paper studies?
You think Gates agreed to a policy reversal based on them showing them nothing more than the 180?

There are flying wings outthere that compare the B-21 like the YF-17 compares to the F/A-18.
Yes they are a far cry from the eventual Block 5 B-21. But could you pass them off as one like China and Russia do with their evolving fighter developments? Absolutely.

Whether you call those prototypes or demonstrators is besides the point IMO.

a reply to: RadioRobert

I guess I'm just surprised that the "unofficially" " already flying ", "almost complete" , "rollout in 2017" crowd has finally shifted gears to meet my conservatism .

There are two ways to interpret what I wrote.

a. The USAF is being overoptimistic on its dates.

b. the USAF is BSing us and there are several somethings flying, the real EMD aircraft. What's being assembled is the final post YB aircraft design then.

It is interesting to see what your interpretation of what I wrote is. Quite telling, actually.

a reply to: mightmight

A lot closer to X-35/X-32 to JSF or Have Blue to F-117. And indeed closer to Tacit Blue to ATB.
YF-17 was not a demonstrator, but rather a prototype for a production aircraft (program). It was later modified for another program. The difference is not semantic.

Plus you have all the flying wing experience already. The competition was more about technique (including industrial) than airframe/planform.