Could the B-21 Raider REPLACE the NGAD Fighter?

[@PAN-km5qk]

It might well be that there will no longer be a high/low mix of tactical combat aircraft, like we are used to with the F-15/F16, and the F-22/F-35, BUT rather a stand-in/stand-off mix of C2-assets in the form of a B-21/F-15EX mix in collaboration with various (rapidly evolving) CCAs.

[@tombearclaw]

Keep the buff in the mix! The venerable heavy lifter could be a veritable cca mother ship!

[@evanfinch4987]

you mean the plane with such little rudder authority they had to make an insane bonkers landing gear system. the plane that cant be updated to modern turbofans because it HAS NO RUDDER AUTHORITY

[@ThisIsOurParadise]

@@evanfinch4987 in the era of BVR, manoeuvrability takes a back seat to stealth and speed

[@atanasvasilev3228]

@@PAN-km5qk It sounds weird - B-21 and F-15... while USA has way more modern platforms than F-15. Back to the roots?

[@generictag1050]

@@atanasvasilev3228 Because the f15EX is a missile truck that will probably serve in the stand-off role with aim 260s due to lack of stealth

[@tonysu8860]

NGAD is undergoing a crisis in purpose. When people started talking about the NGAD being an airborne mothership for autonomous drones that actually did the fighting, people probably said "Hey, can't a stealth bomber do that and is already on the verge of production?" NGAD has to return to its roots as a Frontline fighter with capabilities the B-21 doesn't have. If one day stealth technology fails NGAD has to be there as the alternative, not a secondary option but as a primary alternative pushing the tech limits that doesn't rely on stealth but it's own set of features. It might mean hypersonic speed, it might mean active invisibility instead of current passive stealth, it might mean something else. It could even mean the capability to be very unstealthy but stare the enemy in the eye and actively disarm enemy systems. Part of what makes the US military strong are all the redundant systems that are each a bit different. There is the nuclear tria and the different forces. NGAD should also be effective but different in features than the B-21.

[@Habersearle]

@@tonysu8860 you will have the new navy plane for that exact purpose, I guess

[@georgehilario3544]

@@tonysu8860 stoo capping you know nothing

[@ArizonaAstraLLC]

​@@georgehilario3544nothing he said is incorrect

[@vladpootin5973]

Exactly ! 👍🏻

[@NostalgieFreak]

@@Habersearle But the Navy fighter is a compromise for a mixed fighter-multirole-attack aircraft. The USAF still needs an agile, and perhaps hypersonic, dedicated air superiority/air dominance fighter, if future sensor systems make stealth obsolete.

[@burt2800]

Is it convievable that the Raider could also carry air-to-air missiles? It may not be fast compared to a fighter but it's extremely stealthy and has a high service ceiling. I could imagine it basically "dropping" air-to-air missiles out of nowhere.

[@NormalHatNothingWrong]

@@burt2800 I'm pretty sure it can carry the aim-9x but im not sure...

[@brionjohnson2985]

There's an episode on Airpower That talks about this. I won't spoil it for you.

[@panpiper]

Yes, its ability to carry Air-to-Air missile was kindoff the point of this video.

[@falkenlaser]

Years ago I read an article in Popular Mechanics about the B-21, and it said it would be able to carry air-to-air missiles. In fact, loading it up with the new AIM-174’s, which are SM-6’s converted to air-to-air missiles, would let it pick off enemy planes from 400 miles away.

[@burt2800]

@@falkenlaser that's fucking scary.

[@bc-guy852]

"Not a bomber... but a blueprint..." seems to accurately describe this platform. The future is promising! Great job on this! Thanks!

[@timbaskett6299]

I can see various roles filled by the Raider. CCA controller, HVA escort, Passive Scan Air control, High Energy Strike/Low Energy (LASER) targeting platform, perhaps even a reduced observability tanker.

[@imghoti]

Great job! Your content is getting better and more professional all the time. Kudos!

[@MrMrrome]

Personally, I think we should revisit the adaptive cycle engine GE was developing for the block 4 F35. With that, you could probably axe NGAD and just fund F/A-XX. Navy gets a new Tomcat, and the Air Force can adopt a SLIGHTLY different version if necessary.

[@gregewing3916]

There is still a rule for high-speed aircraft and I haven't seen anything indicating the b21 is not subsonic. I had gotten the impression that the NAGD was going to turn out like a better f/b 111. An aircraft with the speed of a fighter but longer range and greater (int ernal) payload. Maybe the alleged "SR 72". Will do that role. I wonder if part of the pause on ngad was a redesign to carry the air launched SM6 internally? That would require quite the trick, it is huge.

[@Neeboopsh]

there should be a cut down almost b21 that is unmanned, and is just basically a missile/bomb truck to fly as a wingman. would be cheaper, and with newer bvr missiles in development - that also fit internally on f35, you could fit loads in there and that's air defense ;)

[@homurseempsone154]

Check out the northrop grumman loyal windman prototype they did a manually piloted test a few months ago. Thats essentially what it is

[@lionheartx-ray4135]

I really think the B21 will fill the role of the F111.

[@prosto_potomuwto]

Not even close. F-111 is a cheap version of B-21. Same as with B-1.

[@NormalHatNothingWrong]

Wasn't the f111 a sweep wing bomber with after burners?

[@JI814]

Do you mean a medium bomber?

[@grzegorzstyrna26]

He 111

[@thefrecklepuny]

I agree. A sort of F/FB-111/B-47 hybrid with maximum stealth features.

[@crimsionCoder42]

I mean why not have the b-21 armed with as many aim-174b as it can carry? Have it fly around the battle space and send long range support to any f-22 or f-35 in the area.

[@halseyactual1732]

This is a good idea to explore, and concurred by the CSBA's vision for next generation air combat. Having a network of B-21s with powerful radars acting as drone controllers with assets like RQ-180s and X-47s, able to operate even in communications denied environments, perhaps even without any kind of pilot intervention. The Navy should probably pursue a similar concept over F/A-XX. Air combat is more than a century old, and we're likely approaching the optimal solution of how to organize our air forces. There may be many solutions, but there is only 1 best one.

[@hoghogwild]

The Navy needs something to work alongside F-35 and to replace SuperHornet all of which must be capable of carrier ops.

[@halseyactual1732]

@@hoghogwild Thing is they had that solution years ago but never adopted it: The X-47B. And their work in J-UCAS never produced anything significant aside from that lame spin off air refueling drone. It's a problem they created, what can I say.

[@davidbeattie4294]

Stealth doesn't mean absolute invisibility. If it works, it allows you to get the first shot off before you are detected. If your weapons are effective, you can substantially degrade the enemy's defenses before you are within detection range. Then you can do some real damage, or open the skies to less stealthy bomb trucks following. A truly stealthy platform with huge range and weapons capacity doesn't require a fighter's agility. It hits and runs.

[@RAF71chingachgook]

This thing has way more capability as an air dominance fighter than NGAD could possibly wish for in Pacific region. Massive range, best stealth (wave to airframe size makes NGAD unable to match b-21's stealth) and can you imagine the number of a2a missiles the thing could carry? Maneuvering a2a is out of the question and unnecessary. Anything that could get anywhere near a B21 is going to be missile'd to death long before a merge. Freaking star ship Enterprise.

[@SendingFreedomTM]

@@RAF71chingachgook I kinda agree but I do think that an NGAD like fighter should be made specific for steal fighter role. The B-21 almost certainly has Trade-Offs for air-to-air combat even in combat with a F35 stealth approach (which I agree with you that unless missile tracking and EM detection overcome stealth properties then stealth is absolute). I thought the b21 was unmanned which was a big problem. I also thought that speed could be a significant benefit to air-to-air engagements as well as decoy measures. Another issue is the type of tracking options and payload options, as the B21 might be restricted to rapid dragon type of missile loadouts. If the SR-72 has air to air options then surely that will be fill a lot of that role. Another thing has to do with air tracking and the detection systems connecting with AWACS and other systems. I bet at least a B21 type of shape would be nearly ideal, and the sr-72 could replace the other role of hypersonic missiles. One thing we know for sure is if tracking and missile hits end up overcoming most stealth systems, we will continue to see an arms race with various missiles and systems against stealth platforms and strategies. The f15EX missile truck strategy is a great example of this, and adding in a b21 style platform that can have the same features or better than the F35 in tracking would be ideal. The only other option after we see conflicting range and different style stealth platforms, drone, communications/ AWACS, and missile truck systems competing for different range/stealth/missile combat radius’ would be sheer speed. So we might end up with hypersonic intercontinental missiles, or hypersonic jets releasing hypersonic missiles. Because a modern jet, especially one with maneuverability and is manned, would almost certainly fail to avoid incoming missile systems by maneuvering. The radius of damage is often large. We know stealth and range, as well as payload capacity and range of missiles, will be key to any useful successful sorties. The only alternative we would have would be disposable drones. We will see radar compete with different spectrums like thermal and even visual light for detection and we might see different designs that utilize those features. The US military has no information about such a missile system, but I would think with computer chips being so small and the price of missiles being so expensive we would likely see missiles with multispectral detection with regular and AI developed algorithms to detect planes. If you have radar, visible light, and infrared sensors you can easily pick out the long distance and final approach by finding what matches what the missile or other system looks like on all three bands or more. It could even wait out flares and circle. I don’t see why they don’t make computer analyzed multispectral sensors that compile the data. They separate infrared and radar guided missiles even when they have their own sensors on board for final approach. Frankly they could easily afford and fit in all three sensors and a computer, because most computers come in at a few hundred dollars and a running program which could pass data would be fine. As other jets fly they could identify and keep records of those jets in all spectrums. I mean at least visual light could rule out flares as the red light would be unique and it would know to not blow up. But at this point our only final option is to make a jet that can fly high and fast again. It might not be feasible or work but that’s the next step frankly. Low and slow works too and some variance of low approach and stealth for a b21 or even a2a would work. It could scan the sky above and act as a mobile anti air system. Imagine taking the low ground on purpose and surprising them like that. I know if they designed a stealth plane properly it could optimize stealth from sensors above, meaning that you could almost certainly be invisible from all directions to most systems until something better is made. But flying high works well too and fast works even better. Missiles could have more distance and speed without needing as much booster, and the plane might be impossible to intercept. But who knows right? I’m assuming no matter the system stealth will rule and so will electromagnetic wave spectrum detection systems for the near future, and speed is the only other variable besides super low/high flight for avoiding missiles. See missiles are essentially drones anyways they are just single target specific drones optimized for kamikazi lol. So a missile unmanned will always be optimized at a certain range with no extra weight or requirements as it’s disposable. Maneuverability especially with a human pilot is nearly useless against modern missiles the US is developing or could easily develop in the future, and if stealth becomes overridden by missile tracking systems then surely maneuverability would be even more useless at that point. Active defence, jamming, and electromagnetic laser or energy types of weapons would be much more useful. A missile will almost always outmaneuver a jet as it’s got the most power to weight ratio. However maneuverability may be useful now or slightly in the future if stealth was good and stand-off range was good enough enough where the missile is low on boost. But then remember it’s the stand-off range and stealth and speed that would be game changers. The maneuverability would only help if the plane is already in an optimal position against the missile. Frankly turning around and running away on afterburner might be more useful especially using the decoy jammer and if you go fast enough you’d have it approach technically slower relative to you and a active defense system would more easily send a projectile or create an explosion like vacuum bomb or cloud of pellets to destabilize the missile following you. You’d also get more time for laser or EM warfare to work against it. Frankly I think active defence will be the future including bomb netting that will create an area of effect explosion and something like a vacuum bomb going off as the missile approaches which could destabilize the flight path enough at those speeds. But that’s all affected by the planes ability to fly fast to run away.

[@larryc1616]

A subsonic bomber can't be an effective fighter too. China's gen 6 bomber with 3 engines and is a hypersonic bomber with a middle ramjet. They have a dedicated twin engine gen 6 fighter too. You need 2 types of gen 6 for air dominance.

[@RAF71chingachgook]

@@larryc1616 I’m an NGAD fanboy for certain roles. But Indian/Pacific ocean air dominance is better handled by b21. The 6th gen Chinese planes don’t exist. That stuff is distraction tactics. Studied it. Saw the fly overs etc. Even if it does become operational the b-21 is the best platform to show up anywhere on the planet with an enormous arsenal of a2a missiles. The maneuver games are over (finally!). Chinese a2a can’t lock it up. It’s max stealth, max missile payload, max range. It’s a death star.

[@larryc1616]

@RAF71chingachgook then you already know NGAD is on hold and they're still deciding on paper what to do and how to fund it. China leapfrogged the US in gen 6 like they did to renewables and the car industry. NGAD will never be built at this point or so late in delivery that gen 7 protos will be on the way for China. NGAD ETA = Never or in 10 years with limited #'s like the B2

[@RAF71chingachgook]

@ I don’t necessarily disagree. NGAD has very limited value as I understand it. The unmanned program is going forward. Missile tech is advancing rapidly. Stealth may become less useful. Everyone seems to be trying to develop and utilize reusable hypersonics. The game is changing quickly now. Renewables (🤣). Ok. Whatever on that one. But gen6 yes, but who needs it? I don’t see all the variables, I’m not privy to enough info. But seeing the scraps of info I am seeing clarifies why things are being reassessed. We’re able to use transport planes as strategic bombers. Lots of weirdness going on.

[@田丸哲美]

The cost of a stealth aircraft is the cost of repainting. The B21 is a large aircraft, so repainting costs are also large.

[@bullpupgaming708]

I think the USAF needs to be cautious about the idea of using a bomber that can do reconnaissance and air-interdiction missions. While stealth is a very huge factor, let's not forget that the French air force tried implementing that same concept during the inter-war years and it left them completely incapable of doing anything against the Luftwaffe during the early years of WW2. There is a clear distinction between what aircraft are meant to do what missions for a reason.

[@JSFGuy]

We're checking it out.

[@Chris.Davies]

Directed Energy Weapon requires, you know, energy. And a LOT of it. So you need a large power source, and a huge bank of capacitors to accumulate enough energy for a shot. And what's the recharge time between shots? How many Megawatts is the beam? That would seem highly unlikely in a plane with a 40,000 lb payload limit. The technology may make sense on a nuclear CVN or frigate for fleet defense, but not in a stealth bomber. FYI, the MOAB bomb has a yield of 46 Gigajoules, which makes a little laser look silly.

[@AvocadoAfficionado]

Carrier has arrived.

[@evanfinch4987]

awesome

[@Doofwarrior88]

The problem with the B-21 it has little capability to out maneuver the enemy. If it gets spotted and intercepted, it's game over. We can loose a lot of pilots if the enemy figures out a way to track the Raider.

[@Fox3-Luck]

Excellent Video!

[@Aokitadamitsu]

the High Low mix is still valid, but what does the Low stack look like? target directors and payload delivery.. Stealth platforms are normally limited on payload due to internal weapons loads only, that said with a 100 mile stand off weapon a b21 could queue and direct hundreds of munitions being delivered by whatever aircraft is available.. what is key is the ability to fly high over a battle space and provide real-time ISR information to identify targets and then correlate the gps ##..

[@OrionsMako]

Seems that higher numbers of B21s and lower numbers of fighters with many different drones could find the targets while keeping adversary aircraft confused and useless in such a way as to dominate.

[@Redsson56]

The B21 might be great as a mothership for a squadron of specialized UAV providing these smaller aircraft with human C and C plus refueling in areas requiring stealth. Also B21 could support very long range and loitering reconnaissance. And of course they will excel at both tactical attack and strategic bombing missions. They are not fast enough for the fighter interceptor role and the Navy needs state of the air aircraft taking off from carriers. At $700M each, high risk missions would need to be avoided.

[@vladpootin5973]

Nothing will replace the NGAD

[@vladpootin5973]

That is, until its eventual successor ascends and joins the USAF Fleet 😏

[@leogarcia3602]

Please do a video on the rah-66 comanche stealth helicopter

[@DarylIrwinAyo]

raider will be the strike bomber similar to the f111 but with stealth and better munitions, electronics, coms, and ai that is data linked with many more assets

[@peterboy209]

Hm, the swarm of "drones" must launch from inside the raider to keep up (range). Cruise missiles and long range air2air ammo seems more feasible.

[@KernowekTim]

Amazing! Thank you.

[@navypowertv]

Yes! Switching to a B-21/F-15EX and C2-centric approach could revolutionize our air strategy. What challenges do you think the military will face with this new mix?

[@brenthegarty3922]

Yes, the B21 seems like it can fill the role of any of the USAF strike aircraft. Being small and less expensive per unit than like the B2, it van be utilized more and not held back as much as the B2 as such an expensive capital asset. It should be able to do SEED missions as well as strike in contested airspace. Really its al. You need to do most thinks other than shoot down enemy fighters....but sounds like itll be able to efen do that on same level. It reall throws the traditional doctrine of needing fights, strike fighters, and bombers into question. Why not just "strike bombers" with some air superiority fighters to complement?

[@jyy9624]

Another wave of innovation sweeping through defense capabilities, like with previous wave of computerization

[@hsangli5893]

The idea makes lot of sense. But if enemies find ways to defeat stealth technology, could hypersonic aircraft like the Lockheed Martin SR-72 be another way to penetrate enemy defense?

[@gerardigoe9765]

I don't see why you just drop more power for engines for faster speeds if you do give it a more fighter like roll in the future. For say certain squadrons

[@tomz6594]

It may not be a "fighter" but if the stealth is advanced enough it should still have first kill opportunity if it can use air to air missiles against enemy fighters.

[@3d1e00]

They are just making a case for that delta navy plane they thought up a while back. Can't remember the name, the ground attack one.

[@JohnFlett-g2f]

Only $650,000,000 each! A steal!

[@alfredneuman6488]

The 'razor' gang will sort that price gouging out when Trump is sworn in.

[@bobo-cc1xw]

@@JohnFlett-g2f yes true low end affordability

[@sarkaranish]

It's less than 1/3 the price of the B-2 Spirit while also being produced in much more numbers and can even be used as a drone and a drone mothership. It's a good deal.

[@bobo-cc1xw]

@sarkaranish or 2 777s or maybe 8 f15s. F15s may have higher total mass throwing capability

[@sarkaranish]

@@bobo-cc1xw F-15s are a completely different capability. they aren't stealthy and can't carry nuclear weapons. The B-21 is a lower cost, high volume stealthy bomber that can deliver a nuclear payload and other munitions without being detected.

[@theelf152]

Unfortunately we don't know about All the B-21's capabilities as they are classified. But I think 2 areas America need to improve on are Long Range Radar detection / Countermeasures and speed. Perhaps the B21 can be updated/Changed in future to attend to these because the Chinese and Russian long range radars (infra Red in particular0 and missiles are at least as good or better than anything the USA has. I just think if stealth detection improves you're going to need something else...and I think Speed will come back. At the same time I think Orbital Weapons will become more prominent...I think space crafts with energy directed weapons and jamming will be the next 20 years. Chinese/American Space crafts like X57-B have been testing heaps of late.

[@lantinian]

I see the B-21 being the next B-52 in terms of longevity. This aircraft combines high flying efficiency with extremely survivability and weapons payment versatility. Its also is a beautiful testimony to Jack Northrop legacy. I am suspect it played huge role in Northrop's decision to. pull out of the NGAD.

[@Habersearle]

Mainly range, in the Pacific !!!!! Essential. Big plane, big range, big payload. Specifications for the NGAD where just pointing towards an already existing thing: B21

[@Kenneth_James]

Have we seen it at high altitudes? Or was that the RQ-180?

[@djjohnpiazza7043]

I wonder how Lockheed Martin feels about the B21.

[@EternalPhoenix2183]

As an aside, what programs do you use to make your animations for your video? Blender?

[@TheJoeSwanon]

Question… Why the hell do we need this? Certainly not Russia I don’t see China being an issue so who the hell are we going to fight

[@phoenix-sound]

Trillions of dollars in debt won’t keep growing all on its own

[@looseygoosey1349]

so because we are ahead you think that its okay to stop? Fuck no. We are ahead so we must continue to push forward that way we never have to fight. We dont want the enemy to think that they have a chance at winning against us. Our dominance keeps them docile.

[@RAF71chingachgook]

Ultimate "show up anywhere on the globe" a2a missile truck.

[@grimmlinn]

Modern fighters are mostly bomb trucks, not dog fighters. Use drones to scout and fire your missile from far away.

[@AjaykumarMaurya-s1q]

You not ,mention, If any advanced Fighter jet come in high speed, Like MIG 41 ... 600 Million bombers, how to save itself.

[@PsyckoSama]

My guess is the B21 and FA-XX are going to split the NGAD role.

[@mikeyvee27]

the more i see it the more i love its lines...

[@henrikerdland578]

I don’t know. When we are thinking of B-21 being used as a multirole powerhouse that ca do it all. We are also thinking of our enemy as an opponents that are driving T-90 tanks and flying SU-27 fighter jets. We have to think our enemy as an opponent that are flying J-35 and using AI drone technology. I am not sure that this tactic will work.

[@nimbusnation9584]

Badass 21 Raider

[@RAF71chingachgook]

This could have the equivalent effect on China as to what star wars was to the Soviets. It's got to break their morale. They can't defend against it and it can act as an air dominance fighter el grande.

[@roryvilla7370]

Bombers haven't been made to be launched at the frequency required of fighters. Is the B-21 capable of the quick turn arounds and readiness of a fighter? Time will tell.

[@DarkRendition]

I think it is pretty clear that for the finances of the United States military budget that maybe 21 should be the next air superiority fighter. Dictated but not read.

[@StereoSpace]

Considering one of the prime requirements of the NGAD was that it needed to be stealthy and have extremely long range, those are two things the B-21 already has. Load up the weapons bays with long range AAM's, and it's doing exactly what the NGAD was supposed to do. And it still retains its ability to be a bomber.

[@PapaOscarNovember]

B-21 could be the first flying missile frigate.

[@JSFGuy]

The plot thickens yet again.

[@tm-ym2ye]

I don't see why we can't retro fit any aircraft to be a UAV.. just put a robot in the cockpit

[@Verminator4]

I think it’s a stupid idea. Disregarding how fit the B21 is to fulfil the air superiority fighter role (fwiw I think it would be a poor fit at best, there’s a reason why fighters are small and fast rather than large and slow) if you’re using your strategic bomber for air superiority shit then you’re not using it for, you know, strategic bombing. I doubt the US ends up building more than 100 or so of these planes, so there likely isn’t going to be capacity to take a bunch of them out of their intended role of strategic bombing and anti-surface interdiction to larp as F-22s - in the case of war with China the few that they have will be sortieing and carrying out strikes around the clock, and I highly doubt there will be enough to spare to also cover the even more demanding requirements of round the clock combat air patrols even with the help of drone wingmen. If they need more stealthy fighters and don’t want to commit to NGAD then the air force should just adopt the Navy’s new sixth gen or buy more F35s.

[@spidennis]

Has the bomber mafia of ww2 finally come of age? Are fighters obsolete? Did I just say that?!?!

[@VankyOfLagos]

These is just a few things you know B-21 RADAR.

[@skyserf]

5:08 What are those? Stabilizers?

[@panpiper]

Those are artistic license, likely put there by the AI that rendered the image because it is utterly ignorant of what is needed for stealth.

[@VIKRAM_SINGH_01]

Awesome👍👍👍👍

[@Kitt_the_Katt]

You can tell that we got the stealth right on the B2, simply because the B21 doesn't look too different. Can you make something as close to perfect as you can at the time you're only going to be able to see incremental changes going forward. Much like the f-117 was pretty detectable and that's the B2 looked radically different

[@kameronjones7139]

B21 had a ton of differences noticeably in the engine inlets and control surfaces

[@alfredneuman6488]

Yeah, they got the stealth so right you can pictures of it way up high in this very video.

[@atanasvasilev3228]

When invisible entity flies over your territory, an Mig PAK DP teleports itself with mach 4 and finds the pray...

[@michaeledwards2526]

The B2 Bomber should be rebuilt as an stelthy refueler. The F22 should serve as a multirole escort for B2. NGAD should be built in a limied number 200 aircraft. 1000.00 cohabitation air craft.😊

[@DAT240Z72]

That’s the numbest idea ever! Do you know how much the B-21 costs?

[@ReluctantCriticDude]

It lacks the speed. In air warfare speed has always meant life. This plane would not survive a dog fight. It’s only hope is evasion.

[@aquilesca5tr0]

The c-130 is the true ngad replacement

[@slavsquatsuperstar]

You mean the BC-130 Rapid Dragon

[@dissaid]

Cerberus 👍

[@randallchan2001]

No requirements are different in war.💙👍

[@Milvus_In_Excelsis]

The B21 raider does not build on the B2 legacy. The B21 Raider was the original B2. The people in charge of the Airforce didn't have faith in stealth so they demanded that the B21 design would be changed into a bomber that can penetrate below radar, low flying penetration. That's how we ended up with the B2.

[@hoghogwild]

Of course it does, technology has moved on over the last 40 years. It's true that the B-2 was originally a high alt bomber solely and bringing in the terrain following mission brought about big expense(around $1 billion) and delayed delivery(2 years). But saying the Raider is actually the original B-2 is false IMO.

[@TheWizardGamez]

if we build the B-21 in the 80s, it wouldve cost more than the entire defense budget. Respectfully a lot has changed

[@leaftye]

Supposedly flying wings lose a lot of speed in hard turns. That's not a problem if it can shoot down enemies before they fire, otherwise it's a big problem in the merge. At least they're not manned.

[@panpiper]

The B-21 will be SO much more stealthy than anything else out there that it WILL detect enemies long before they are detected, so they WILL be able to fire first.

[@leaftye]

@@panpiper It's too bad you don't read as well as you capitalize.

[@area51z63]

No, not that a senseless question deserves an answer. However I like being entertained by rocket scientist who know everything

[@realdreamerschangetheworld7470]

Why not? I don’t think it should, but why do you think it couldn’t?

[@panpiper]

That senseless question is being asked by a heck of a lot of people clearly smarter than you,.

[@area51z63]

@@panpiper Does the B21 have an afterburner? NO, is the B21 a budget jet? NO. is the B21 supersonic? NO. Can the B21 replace a fighter that is not yet is service? NO Now please go back to your crayons

[@area51z63]

@@realdreamerschangetheworld7470 Does the B21 have an afterburner? NO, is the B21 a budget jet? NO. is the B21 supersonic? NO. Can the B21 replace a fighter that is not yet in service? NO

[@benjaminroussey5710]

How much do the drones cost?

[@skyhorseprice6591]

When Northrop Grumman rolled out the B-21 for public display, this thought kept buzzing around in my head: _"What is it about this aircraft that makes me think it might be good as an omnirole fighter/bomber?"_ Well, for one thing ut is smaller than the B-2, which means less overall weight, which is always great in case some kinematic performance is required. This is theoretically possible because the design of the thing is all lifting surfaces. If you look at the shape, although it has a very similar planform to the B2, it looks to be a bit thicker through the middle, but the outer wing structure looks quite thin, almost like an oversized Hornet with those thin wings. What is the advantage of that for a bomber? The only thing i can think of is less drag therefore greater range. But what about a bomber/fighter multirole aircraft? Now you have less drag & less weight for better acceleration AND greater range. The slightly fatter middle section allows for a very large internal loadout, like 15 of the new, smaller framed but longer ranged AIM 260 (Did i get the designation right) LMRAAM (Long Medium Range Air-Air Missile) & maybe 6 to 10 Sidewinders. Then you have your bombs & Air-Ground missiles, however many you need. All of it is internally stored so the only performance drawback would be the overall weight. And even that could be considerably offset if the new adaptive cycle engines can be installed in the B-21. This almost certainly will enrich the B-21's acceleration, range, and even top speed. If you really *really* wanna have next level stealth, put 3D TVC on the B-21’s that are gonna be used as fighter/bombers and designate it the F/B 21. You fly most of the way to your target(s) with the TVC disengaged. Once you come within BVR firing range, the conventional control surfaces are locked down so they cannot move and the TVC is engaged. Now, if you have to maneuver for any reason at all while within enemy sensor/radar range, you use the TVC, tucked into the rear of the aircraft. This avoids any compromise to stealth every time a control surface is moved. ..which would be a *Huuuge* benefit to the mission and 'F/B-21' survivability. 😊

[@evanfinch4987]

No.

[@AstroTrain100]

How many are built and when will it enter service?

[@panpiper]

There are 'at least' six currently flying in test mode, however they have been built in such a way that they could be rapidly pressed into operational service. Meanwhile it is in 'low rate production' likely around ten a year, right now.

[@AstroTrain100]

@@panpiper thank you,

[@hoghogwild]

It'll be years before Initial Operational Capability, a decade plus before Full OC.

[@r.s.w.k4569]

Shut down f35 production at 1100 units instead of currently planned 2400. Transfer all savings to build 220 b21s instead of 100, and purchase tons more drones and missiles to replenish our cruise missile inventory.

[@140theguy]

Is it supersonic? There's your answer.

[@DerekJones1081962]

Heck yeah, put a gun in one wing, the laser in the other. And, with the next gen adaptive cycle engines. A three ship formation with 15 CCA'S they'd be a self protecting wing that could punch a hole in enemy defenses in ways our greatest generation war fighters would have considered magic. This is Clark Tech straight out of Star Gate! Then, with a second wave of B-52 and 4++ and fifth gen air power, air dominance superior to the Gulf War era, we and our allies could bring even peers into line with peace accords that give overmatch new meaning. The end of tyranny and socialism as we have never seen in the last 4 generations. WWIII could actually be the war to end all others!

[@SoulAir]

Bring back the B-One R

[@ApurvKadu]

I wanted to say BOOM SOLD ! and walk away with it. But people here are very sophisticated and are giving valuable info. So I felt stupid saying anything. But I did anyways 😁

[@BP26P]

KC/RQ/E/F/A/B-21

[@pat8988]

I am very skeptical about the “modular design”. That was the design feature of the failed littoral combat ships. That hasn’t gone well.

[@StanLeeStanley]

the only options are yea or yes

[@johnsilver9338]

F-35 Block IV can also challenge F-22 for air superiority.

[@maximmorrison5867]

It's still disappoints me as an Australian that our government decide to pass up on the procurement of the B21 when America was willing to sell it to us bureaucracy and all that😢

[@g54b95]

Looks very Area 51'ish.

[@crazymilitaryaircraft-q9e]

great video. but i find b-21 too expensive, is it really suitable for uav warfare now? 😐😐😐😐😐

[@AngryBird000]

@@crazymilitaryaircraft-q9e I can interject with my own opinion. Imagine the B21 raider as the flagship of the drone fighter swarms. They can serve as the human supervisor of the drone AI network and are very capable as stealth bombers themselves. So the smaller drones will escort and take down surrounding enemy assets without human involvement to ensure the new bomber to execute it's usual precision bombing mission with less hiccups and more devastation with the firepower multiplier from the drones.

[@crazymilitaryaircraft-q9e]

@@AngryBird000 thank you, i would like to hear your opinion on china as they push AI research more than the US at times?🤔🤔🤔

[@umeshutan6959]

It is Asian Pacific.... NOT INDO Pacific...

[@GaryKennedy-g7p]

apparently that large 20 ton Sukhoi UAV S-70 uses 1x the same 4.4m long weapons bay from the big stealth Su-57. That means it can fit the same weapons which include those 4m long R-37 AA missiles with up to 400km range .... and can hit Mach 6. It is entirely possible that they have already shot down a Ukrainian fighter or 2 .... one was hit from 213 kms away recently .... and nobody knows where it came from - so it must have been either an Su-57 or perhaps an S-70 UAV ? so yeah B-21 as a big .... S-70 .... why not .... the concept may well have been already proven in combat ? makes total sense over an ocean to me ..... over land ? good luck .... you will be toast

[@baxtermullins1842]

NO! Different mission, not as maneuverable!

[@keitha.9788]

A bomber is not a fighter, and a fighter is not a bomber....

[@josephjohnson9237]

if the Airforce uses the Raiderfor a fighteri ti will need a gun or cannon!

[@lwiimbokasweshi]

It's not like a gaming PC

[@oscarcharliezulu]

Does not seem cheap at all.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

No because even if the USAF can't figure out how to make NGAD turn at all the B-21 raider is still to big and to slow to replace ngad which should also be the stealthiest thing in the sky taking that crwon from the F-117.. But it begs the question why is the F-117 back in service if NGHAD is nearly ready? So it's likely NNGAD is delaywed or the F-117 is still the stealthiest thing... atleast to public knolegde as the Arotha and UAPs are much stealthier heck even those "ballon" UAPs only were noticed by the public when it was a few days from excaping over the alantic... And all you had to do is look up at the right place and right time or finding it randomly online... But anyway Why would the USAF even start the NGADF project if tthe B-21 raider was better then it in every way? Which the Raider project 100% outdates the NGAD project it just shockly finished faster and under budget with seemly no issues while NHGAD is much more normal for a US defnce peace time project...

[@lewiemotorsports3616]

F117 is back in service to assist with training US and Allied pilots how to survive a fight/train with stealth aircraft.

[@hoghogwild]

F-117 is not the stealthiest thing in the sky. It is flying, as a test aircraft. they make great cruise missile targets as well.

[@tonywhite8162]

IDGAF how you justify it. Just build enough of this thing to make a difference. Please?

[@TheThetruthmaster1]

Sr72 will replace ngad

[@djibicisse]

True A combination of b21 on high numbers and sr72 plus upgraded 187 f22 should be enough Let the navy work on fa xx

[@djibicisse]

True A combination of b21 on high numbers and sr72 plus upgraded 187 f22 should be enough Let the navy work on fa xx