Northrop B-21 Raider

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

B-21 je zvanicna oznaka

Citat:USAF wants 100 B-21s, but Deptula believes the true requirement should be 174.

“We need 174 of them,” he tells Flightglobal after the announcement. “We need a minimum of one squadron for 12 air expeditionary forces to establish the rotational base requirement during peace time to be able to shape and maintain peace and stability around the world.

“We need that number to maintain the ability to support our national security strategy to engage in two major regional conflicts if, in fact, it’s necessary to go to war, particularly in the advanced threat environment that has been growing.”

Northrop’s bomber team was characteristically coy in its response to the unveiling: “Northrop Grumman is proud to serve as the prime contractor for the B-21 Bomber in partnership with the US Air Force, to deliver a capability that is vital to our national security. Any further questions should be directed to the air force.”

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-re.....be-422459/

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Citat:However, the Air Force still has not decided on a name for the new B-21, James said. She called on airmen to send in suggestions.

"So we have an image, we have a designation, but what we don't yet have, we don't yet have a name," James said, "and this is where I'm challenging and I'm calling on every airman today ... to give us your best suggestions for a name for the B-21, America's newest bomber."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/201...../80976160/

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Bombarder za 21vek jedino to zvuci logicno za oznaku B-21.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

mean_machine ::Bombarder za 21vek jedino to zvuci logicno za oznaku B-21.

To je njihovo objasnjenje zasto 21 a ne B-3 ali oni traze ime za bombarder. A to ne moze biti ime.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

USAF Global Strike chief seeks beefed-up bomber force

Citat:“I believe we need to throw out the word ‘80 to 100’ (new bombers),” Rand said during a panel at the Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, Florida on 26 February. “I prefer to use the term ‘minimum of 100’, and we’ll continue to refine that. I’m going to bring to you and the major command commanders some proposals later next month, but we will need a combination of bombers that will be somewhere in the 175-200 range.”

Citat:“It will be somewhere inside 175 to 200,” he confirms. “How much of that will be LRS-B? I said we’ve got to stop using ‘80 to 100’ and I want to go with a minimum of 100 LRS-Bs.”

The air force would need 16 to 41 extra bombers, depending on the final requirement, to meet that new force size, or about three to four additional squadrons.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-gl.....rc-422469/

• 3Ovo se svidja korisnicima: Toni, Leonardo, nemezisx
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Napisano: 27 Feb 2016 18:42

Citat:I can just picture things at the Northrop-Grumman boardroom.

-"The USAF wants a new bomber. What do we do?"

-"It's Friday! Can't we just take the plans for the B-2 and gussy it up a bit?"

-"Good idea, Johnson!"

(The night before the deadline)

-"JOHNSON! This is clearly a photocopy of the original B-2 blueprints!"

*Johnson takes out his Sharpie and adds a "1"*

-"No sir! It's the all new Bee... Twenty-one! We got 'er done on time and only $2 million over budget."

-"Great work Johnson!"



Dopuna: 27 Feb 2016 18:47

Toni ::https://twitter.com/SecAF23/status/703220450088751104



Lici na prve NG predloge za ATB:



Samo sto su mlaznice motora ispod.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

A jbg nemas puno opcija kada je dizajn u pitanju, letece krilo = stelt, dolet i nosivost kakvu drugi nemaju i nemas tu sta da izmisljas toplu vodu, posebno jer je u pitanju bombarder, tako da nema manevarbilnosti u jednacini. A i preteruju sa poredjenjem sa B-2 jer ce B-21 biti verovatno bar duplo manji.

Sta mislis za motore ? F-135 i F-119 ? Spominjali su zapravo PW-9000 i derivat F-136 koji nije prosao na tenderu za F-35. Zahtev nije da B-21 bude nadzvucan.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Da sam im nadređeni, šutao bi ih u glave da nije modifikovani, umanjeni i modernizovani B-2. Ali iskreno, to je ono što im treba. Ekonomična verzija B-2.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Toni ::https://twitter.com/SecAF23/status/703220450088751104

Mozda je i to,to....

Citat:In particular, the aircraft seems to be designed around a standard flying wing: neither a “cranked kite” nor a kite like those seemingly spotted over the Wichita and Amarillo back in 2014.
As you probably remember, on Mar. 10, 2014 Steve Douglass and Dean Muskett took the photographs of three mysterious planes flying at very high altitude over Amarillo, Texas.
The three unknown planes looked like boomerang-shaped plane.
About one month later (on Apr. 15), Jeff Templin shot a triangular plane over Wichita Kansas.

http://theaviationist.com/?p=37212

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: mean_machine
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

mean_machine ::Napisano: 27 Feb 2016 18:42


Samo sto su mlaznice motora ispod.

Tesko da ce mlaznice biti ispod. Umjetnicki prikaz pod direktivom usafa nikako ne moze i nece biti 100% vjeran. U nekom generalnom dizajnu je vjerojatno tocan, ali detalji mogu namjerno biti izostavljeni. Uzmimo primjer slicno umjetnickog prikaza pod direktivom usafa za B-2 iz 1989.


I na njoj ispuh motora izgleda kao da je nepostojeci na gornjoj strani aviona.

Zbog radarskog odraza mlaznice gotovo sigurno ne idu ispod. Idu ili iznad (vjerojatnije) ili ce biti dio izlazne ivice (manje vjerojatno) krila/trupa.