Air Force unveils photos of B-21 Raider in flight as nuclear stealth bomber moves closer to deployment

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CBS News/AP

Updated on: May 27, 2024 / 10:40 AM EDT


The U.S. military has released photos of the B-21 Raider in flight as the futuristic warplane moves closer to becoming the nation's next nuclear stealth bomber.

The B-21 Raider began flight testing at Edwards Air Force Base in California, the Air Force said in a statement, as the plane "continues to make progress toward becoming the backbone of the U.S. Air Force bomber fleet."

One photograph shows the bomber soaring above the clouds while another image shows the aircraft just above the runway.


A B-21 Raider conducts ground testing, taxiing and flying operations at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. United States Air Force

The Air Force is planning to build 100 of the warplanes, which have a flying wing shape much like their predecessor the B-2 Spirit but will incorporate advanced materials, propulsion and stealth technology to make them more survivable in a future conflict. The plane is planned to be produced in variants with and without pilots.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/photos-b-21-raider-in-flight-new-nuclear-stealth-bomber-air-force/

[Docreed2003]

1. You think the design team was sitting around and someone said:

"You know what would be really AWESOME...let's make a futuristic bomber that looks like a freakin' UFO".

[captain queeg]

2. I thought of something along those lines.

Who’d of thought all those flying saucer movies weren’t too far off base?

[True Dough]

29. If you look closely enough

you can see George Jetson piloting that thing!

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon

would be impressed.

[coprolite]

6. Looks like a flying halibut to me.

[AZ8theist]

10. Could be reverse engineering...

[Polybius]

13. David Grusch might have been onto something

Ya never know...

[Irish_Dem]

18. Yes of course. It has been stored in hanger 54 at Wright-Patt.

A little something the Air Force confiscated at Roswell.

[AZ8theist]

20. I was being sarcastic.....

..but I'm sure you knew that....

[Irish_Dem]

21. I'm an old Air Force brat and we loved these stories to pieces.

We were sure they were true.

[Angleae]

11. Actually, the B-21, and it predecessor, the B-2, look like something designed by Batman.

[czarjak]

4. Lethal limits know no bounds.

[Shellback Squid]

5. welcome our SkyNet overlords

[dalton99a]

7. Trump would like to get a copy of all classified documents relating to this project

[Irish_Dem]

19. He probably got them. First thing.

Worth a lot of cash for the right buyer.

[Marcuse]

30. They were in the second row of boxes, on the floor. The one with the splash stains.

[Irish_Dem]

32. Probably one of the empty folders.

Those are the most concerning. We don't know who has the contents which were once in a folder that is now empty.

[IronLionZion]

22. Putin might pay for it in crypto if he's running low on Rubles

[erronis]

8. Next up, disguise them as lenticular clouds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenticular_cloud

[Irish_Dem]

17. I always thought clouds would be a good disguise for alien spaceships.

No one would notice a thing.

[Johnny999r]

42. Irish_Dem

It seems the majority of "Sci fi" movies over the decades the alien spaceship emerges from a foreboding looking cloud formation. Special effects have come a long way since the 50s. Add to that the scary music and you have a great introduction. "GORT, KLAATU BARADA NIKTO". These words calmed the potential earth destroying robot in the classic 1951 movie, The Day the Earth Stood Still. The plot in this movie is still relevant to this day. However, the alien spaceship didn't enter the earth's atmosphere through a cloud and it apparently flew 250 million miles from it's home planet at a snails pace of 4k mph. Back then the producers of the movie had no idea of the vastness of space.

[Irish_Dem]

43. I loved that movie.

The Day the Earth Stood Still.
Yes still relevant today, more so.

Yes we know a lot more about the universe than we did 60 years ago.

I mean a space ship that is actually built to look like a cloud.
Not hiding behind one. It would have to be half machine, half organic.
I don't know, I have not worked out the blueprint.

I didn't notice this in the old SF film, ships hiding behind clouds.

[Ponietz]

9. 32 Broken Arrow incidents since 1950 -- find the ones you lost first

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220804-the-lost-nuclear-bombs-that-no-one-can-find]

In fact, the Palomares incident is not the only time a nuclear weapon has been misplaced. There have been at least 32 so-called "broken arrow" accidents – those involving these catastrophically destructive, earth-flattening devices – since 1950. In many cases, the weapons were dropped by mistake or jettisoned during an emergency, then later recovered. But three US bombs have gone missing altogether – they're still out there to this day, lurking in swamps, fields and oceans across the planet.
"We mostly know about the American cases," says Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Non-proliferation Program at the James Martin Center for Non-proliferation Studies, California. He explains that the full list only emerged when a summary prepared by the US Department of Defense was declassified in the 1980s.
Many occurred during the Cold War, when the nation teetered on the precipice of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) with the Soviet Union – and consequently kept airplanes armed with nuclear weapons in the sky at all times from 1960 to 1968, in an operation known as Chrome Dome.
"We don't know as much about other countries. We don't really know anything about the United Kingdom or France, or Russia or China," says Lewis. "So I don't think we have anything like a full accounting."

[erronis]

12. And what we do know about military mishaps tells us that they are far from perfect.

In fact, the whole world is just an early beta test for what might happen if we start to rattle nuclear sabers at each other.

I do believe that the US programs in the 1950s-60s were pretty tightly controlled. We had just fought the "Last War" and knew that we needed to be very careful with these weapons and our own responsibility.

Once the Military Industrial Complex (or MIPC to add Political) took over Washington and money was made by hiring as many contractors and sub-contractors as possible, controls started to slip.

I don't fault the US military or all of the Govt Contracting Officers. But when they are facing off against a phalanx of $500,000/year lawyers and lobbyists and specialists, it's hard to force real quality. Especially when they may want a job on the other side of the rotating door.

[Polybius]

14. Perhaps some UAP sightings were mistaken for this

Certainly looks like it could fool someone.

[Irish_Dem]

16. Sometimes when the US Air Force is testing new planes or equipment people report

seeing a UFO. It's always funny when this happens.

[IronLionZion]

23. If a flying object is unidentified, then it must be aliens

Which is always preferable to the enemy researching ways to defeat it.

[LeftInTX]

27. .....

[electric_blue68]

41. Lol. As soon as I saw his later photos - that' s exactly where I went...

Loved that show!

[Irish_Dem]

15. Good God it looks like a flying saucer.

Very cool.

[Aussie105]

24. Tell me these things are cheap

and not funded by the taxpayer.

[Irish_Dem]

33. Pentagon is keeping the cost secret right now. Probably around $700m-$1.3b per plane.

Early estimates several years ago was around $700 million per aircraft.
However some estimates have it at $1.3 billion per unit due to cost overruns.

Which had the Pentagon steaming so they have been negotiating the price downward with
the manufacturer Northrup. Northrup may have to take a loss on the initial lot sold to the Pentagon.

So I figure at least $1 Billion per plane and we know the Pentagon ordered at least 6 of them.

Yes all paid for by you and me.

While young Americans cannot afford college or housing.

[ArkansasDemocrat1]

25. Looks like a rainrdrop with wings...which I suppose would be stealthy

"Without pilots"

?????????

Say hello to our Skynet Overlords who with aerial refueling can stay in flight infinitely barring malfunctions

[Old Crank]

26. Will it come anywhere near

The specs it wss designed for or will it be another military boondoggle that provides huge profit at lowered spec.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

28. "lowered spec", huh? It will NOT be a military boondoggle

It will be a military contractor boondoggle. The huge profit will be on the side of the industrial complex that feeds the military at the orders of the taxpaying voters who elect their representatives (more or less). The huge profits should be blamed on the commercial sphere.

Yes, it will "come anywhere near" the spec it was contracted for, but it would be foolish to expect 100% in every measure. Engineering for the edge of the envelope (a phrase originated in aviation engineering / pilot circles in WW2) is difficult and often devalued by lay people. It's not brain surgery; it's much closer to rocket science, especially for extremely advanced aircraft. Rocket science is only one of several branches of advanced aerospace engineering.

[Old Crank]

36. Just basing my questions on some other advanced designs.

Bradley fighting vehicle. Littoral combat ship, the new destroyers with their special longrange gun. F35.

Currently it has been in development for 9 years.

I know that part of the problem stems from mission/design creep which also adds to the profits and reduced numbers of equipment.

[jmowreader]

44. You know how they got the Bradley?

They first wanted to just build an armored personnel carrier that can keep up with the M1 Abrams. That's a logical goal - tanks and infantry work together, and if you've got a tank that can go 60mph cross-country and an APC that can go 25, you have a massive problem.

Then someone in the Pentagon found out about the Soviet BMP-1 and said, "let's make one of these, just without any communist parts in it." The result, in COL James Burton's words, was a troop carrier that can't carry troops.

If someone would have slipped them a picture of a Soviet MT-LB instead, we wouldn't be in this situation. The MT-LB is a REALLY good vehicle, and it doesn't have all the "combat systems" - guns, missiles, whatever you want - on it.

[Irish_Dem]

37. Looking like a boondoggle of sorts. Pentagon is fighting with Northrop Grumman

over the B 21 costs which are so high the Pentagon won't even reveal the final price tag.

Several years ago the beginning price per unit was $700 million, now could go as high as $1b.

So yes we can assume that the specs won't be there and the cost will be astronomical.
Northrop is going to have to take a loss on the first batch.

[John Shaft]

31. I thought the government was broke and couldn't afford anything

[lastlib]

35. They can ALWAYS afford new toys for the generals and admirals....

- - - - -

[Irish_Dem]

38. Planes costing $1B each are just fine. Healthcare, education, Soc Sec, etc. costs too much.

We are being conned each and every day.

Richest country in the world and we cannot enjoy the same standard of living as other modern countries.
It is a disgrace.

Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex.
Generals would scare politicians into buying very expensive toys.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

34. Cool plane

Always liked the flying wing designs.

Though I question that the USAF will actually buy 100 of these. It always seems like they cut down that number as cost over runs and new projects come up. I think over 100 B-2 bombers were originally planned and we wound up with only 21 of them. At nearly $2 billion each. Hopefully this one is a bit cheaper.

[republianmushroom]

39. ..." in variants with and without pilots."

The future of war.

[Brenda]

40. How much did that cost?

Ain't it grand that the Pentagon has unlimited use of taxpayers money to play with instead of that money actually being used for the real and immediate threats from climate chaos and having concrete plans for the coming enormous climate migration within America. Not just FEMA clean-up money, but millions of home and business buy-outs and successful relocation programs.

Squandered Resources: The 18 Most Expensive Failed Weapons in US History

With a budgetary allocation of $1.8 trillion, the Department of Defense stands as one of the most generously funded agencies within the U.S. government. However, a portion of this substantial budget inevitably encounters misallocation, not necessarily due to fraudulent activities or misuse but often in funding projects that fail to materialize.

F-35
Estimated Cost: $1.7 trillion

The F-35, a Lockheed Martin multirole combat aircraft conceived in 2001 as a cost-effective replacement for various fighter jets, faced extensive issues. With a projected lifetime cost of $1.7 trillion, the program grappled with part failures, software glitches, and operational challenges, including incidents of jets catching fire. Despite its capabilities, the F-35’s extensive problems have led to more limited use than initially anticipated.

Strategic Defense Initiative
Estimated Cost: $30.0 billion

The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), known as Star Wars, proposed a space-based laser network to protect against Soviet-launched nuclear ICBMs. Announced by President Reagan in 1983, SDI encountered insurmountable technical hurdles. Despite costing an estimated $30 billion, the program was never fully realized and was halted by President Clinton in 1993.

https://ceoworld.biz/2023/12/25/squandered-resources-the-18-most-expensive-failed-weapons-in-us-history/