US Air Force LRS-B Bomber Thread - the B-21 Raider

[Brumby]

I was just listening to the Aviation Week Check 6 podcast, One of their commentators made a important point the LRS-B is part of the Long Range strike program "Family of Systems" which is not just a bomber but includes a wider range of platforms.
There is already a LRS program based air launched Cruise missile, The Long range standoff missile or LRS-O aimed to replace the AGM 86 ALCM fired from the B52.. Talk of some form of Electronic attack platform ( IE a jammer) perhaps taking the form of a Jammer pod for F35 or a Drone or maybe even a EB3? some form of penetrating intelligence surveillance reconnaissance platform again undefined but my bet on this is a drone.

I agree based on what you have noticed plus some other earlier comments by air force officials. Its role will not be confined to a traditional bomber but will have extended capabilities. On the subject of penetrating platform for ISR, in my view the LRSB will be tasked to fill that role because platforms like Global Hawks are just not survivable and there are no other stealthy platforms that has extended range.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

On the subject of penetrating platform for ISR, in my view the LRSB will be tasked to fill that role because platforms like Global Hawks are just not survivable and there are no other stealthy platforms that has extended range.

not sure about that one. the USAF has the Rq180. Whish is belived to be part of the LRS program.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Again though it's subject to interpretation.

 

[Brumby]

not sure about that one. the USAF has the Rq180. Whish is belived to be part of the LRS program.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Again though it's subject to interpretation.

You are right. Forgot about this one although officially it does not exist.

 

[FORBIN]

For number the request is for 100 no 80/100 good news important ! it is also mentioned in some reports possible more, 76 B-52 ( + 12 in stored ) and 63 B-1B : 139 to replace then idealy 130 LRS-B but 100 is yet a very decent number for 6 BS whose a OCU.

Accordings last reports he is 10 % less cheaper than expected 510 mill/2010 vs 560 a good price.
RAM coating now more easy to maintain much progress and it is the 5th ! stealth aircraft build by US then less expensive as B-2 coating very difficult don' t talk for F-117 a hell but F-117 had not costed a expensive price in more for the first stealth aircrafts never build

In fact in 2035/40 about with last F-15E retired about USAF get only stealth combat aircrafts.

LRS-B is normaly a UAV but also can get a crew mainly for nuclear deterence missions and have 2 mens aboard.
He need to be versatile armed all weapons LACM etc...because he replace 2 bombers types and B-52H especialy have Harpoon and Air Naval combat is very important also then need to be armed LRASM.

For IOC 2025 if the programm work very well, B-2 in full Cold War with monstruous budget ATB programm take 18 years 1979-1997 IOC say 16 without the redesign for mission profile LRS-B have begin last year but based on the B-2 with experience more easy to build and USAF don' t want too sophisticated for price more small also for it and she have right better a little less sophisticated but have a decent number. This is a good start.

Otherwise in general US Services especialy USAF less USMC, USN with Zumwalt also Ford but different want too sophisticated weapons too expensive ! to maintain in more and at the end the programm is cut and end. No need always a "Rolls Royce" the best is the enemy of the good.

I think and hope this time they have understand, sequestration and others help also... beside US services do economy now, they keep this way.

 

[strehl]

LRS-B is normaly a UAV but also can get a crew mainly for nuclear deterence missions and have 2 mens aboard.

Do you have any reference for this? I know there was talk about it but I haven't seen any reports about LRS-B being unmanned. Even optionally.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Do you have any reference for this? I know there was talk about it but I haven't seen any reports about LRS-B being unmanned. Even optionally.

yes, and at 550 million a copy, which will NO doubt end up being about 800 million a copy, it is a joke?? a bad joke.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Th Term some times attacked is "Optionally manned" meaning it could be programed to run a operation with out a crew just as easily as with one.

But to date there is no hard evedence of that yet. Because of advancements in technologies we are at the point where a Aircraft can be built with a cockpit but not need it.

In the end I would image manned or unmanned would depend on mission wants.
I Imagine The Cockpit would include the features seen in the B2 which includes a Air Toilet and bunk and Microwave.

The Question of Price depends again on numbers procured, and technologies. If Congress gets cut happy and cuts the order down to a couple dozen expect sticker shock If they allow the procurement in needed numbers it can be contained.

Now the LRS-B is meant for a different mission set then a Strike bomber like the F15E. it's meant to have a Inherently longer range and larger payload and flex across the bomber mission needs this means it can loiter in a combat zone like say Syria for a day making as they are needed strikes or run a Strategic patrol like the old cold war. Or it can operate near a varrier group with LRASMs and threaten enemy shipping.

This differs form a fighter bomber like the FB22 concept which is intended for brief close strikes behind enemy lines. the Payload here is a key. a fighter bomber like the FB22 concept can pack maybe 4 large cruise missiles. This has the potential for double if not triple.that number. the larger cockpit and or ability to fly unmanned as well as the larger airframe means that the ship has a much larger endurance factor then that of a fighter bomber.

 

[FORBIN]

The Question of Price depends again on numbers procured, and technologies. If Congress gets cut happy and cuts the order down to a couple dozen expect sticker shock If they allow the procurement in needed numbers it can be contained.

Ofc unitary price depends on the number build but the number of 100 minimum allow a reasonnable price but he is not innovative and sophisticated than the B-2 in the 1980's.

Ok the B-2 very expensive and only 21 finaly but build for escape to several thousand of Soviet fighters and SAM only PVO had end 1980's 2400 Int and 8000 SAM, launchers... ofc !
He have also a mission track mobile ICBM SS-24/25 especialy with her very sophisticated radar.

 

[kwaigonegin]

Boeing may potentially be laying off a bunch of folks because they lost this contract.
I personally know a couple guys on the bench for this.

 

[FORBIN]

100 days to wait, if it is confirmed the deal with Northrop Grumman can be signed for the spring.
But a preview according first design, can' t resist :=)

Don' t look for scale.