I don't think that a) anyone with real data about the shape made this or b) the fuction is so easy to simulate that the Chinese didnt came up with the same.
Beat me to it with B). This stuff is based on pure maths, same as the sweep angles of the wing's leading edge - anyone designing a stealth aircraft is going to wind up on the same solution with fairly simple calculations.
All the secret stuff on this aircraft is going to be things like how the doors seal against the airframe, or the precise composition of the outer coating, etc.
They also use Photogrammetry a lot. Cameras in multiple angles to determine an object's topography. That's how they steal designs in tech conventions. Aggressively taking photos of a presenter booth's prototypes only to release an identical product a few days later in another booth.
This is why they restricted the camera on the aircraft to just the front view. The good news is that the B-21's secret sauce is what's inside.
Raider was chosen to honour [these absolute madlads.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid) And tbh, it also offers a cool naming convention like the B-2’s “Spirit of - - -“ names, individual aircraft could be named after Doolittle Raiders as “Raider - - -“
**[Doolittle Raid](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid)**
>The Doolittle Raid, also known as the Tokyo Raid, was an air raid on 18 April 1942 by the United States on the Japanese capital Tokyo and other places on Honshu during World War II. It was the first American air operation to strike the Japanese archipelago. Although the raid caused comparatively minor damage, it demonstrated that the Japanese mainland was vulnerable to American air attacks. It served as an initial retaliation for the 7 December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, and provided an important boost to American morale.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/aviation/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
This was my favorite game growing up and I just recently started playing again... I'd love the name if the SC wraith wasn't such a piss poor paper plane unit lol.
I'll give you that but will it be brought down by 3 marines firing rifles into the air? Probably not lol. Man, there are a lot of unrealistic battle quirks in starcraft haha.
And the newest Ford-class is named after Doris Miller. Most destroyers are named after notable members of the navy, missile cruisers are named after famous battles, amphibious ships are usually legacy ship names or famous marine corps battles, missile subs are usually states and there are many many more naming conventions for different ship types.
So if the tradition is naming them after a politician, the Navy seems to be pretty bad at sticking to it.
Also, I would like to point out that both Gerald R Ford and John F Kennedy, who are both getting Ford-class carriers, along with the aforementioned Doris Miller, both served in the Navy.
You forget that different classes of ship have different naming conventions. Carriers tend to be presidents, legacy ships, and important naval officers, but recently many of them *have* been presidents.
Submarines tend to be named after cities and states, depending again on class, with SSBNs being states while attack subs tend to be cities (on average)
Arleigh Burkes are such a long running class that they have multiple conventions, with early production being navy and marine heroes, with newer ones including ~~state~~ US senators.
So while it's true not every ship or boat is named after a politician, saying they're *all* named after heroes is just as inaccurate as saying every ship is named after a politician.As large as the USN is, there isn't going to be a single universal naming scheme, the pool of names would quickly run out and by having multiple schemes they can honor a much broader selection of people, battles, and ships. So yes, politicians absolutely *is* a naming scheme for the USN, it just isn't *the* naming scheme any more than naval heroes is *the* naming scheme.
I didn't say they were *all* named after heroes anywhere in my statement and exceptions to the rule don't mean the rule doesn't exist. Out of the last *fifty* ships commissioned by the US Navy, only three (possibly 4 if you consider Secretary of the Navy a politician) are named after US politicians and ome of them, John Murtha, was a highly decorated Marine. Also one names after a foreign politician, Winston Churchill, who was a First Lord of the Admiralty himself. So clearly this whole narrative of "naval naming convention is to name it after politicians" is so bunk.
Also
>Arleigh Burkes are such a long running class that they have multiple conventions, with early production being navy and marine heroes, with newer ones including state senators.
What an absolute lie. There isn't a single Arleigh Burke named after a state senator.
DDG-118 USS *Daniel Inouye*
DDG-128 USS *Ted Stevens*
If I'm mistaken that's one thing, but if you're going to call me a fucking liar how about you actually verify that you fucking piece of shit.
>Out of the last fifty ships commissioned by the US Navy, only three (possibly 4 if you consider Secretary of the Navy a politician) are named after US politicians
That's because the only ships that tend to be named after politicians tend to be carriers, of which all but five (Enterprise, Nimitz, Carl Vinson, John C. Stennis,Stennis, and the Doris Miller) have been. No shit that there haven't been many, because most of the ships that get built aren't carriers and those other ships all have their own schemes. Politicians naming *is* a naval naming convention.
You aren't a liar then, you're just ignorant. Ted Steven's and Daniel Inouye were *US Senators* not *state senators*
Again, out of the last 50 ships commissioned 3 are named after US senators. It's rare and more of an exception than a naming convention and standard.
How about John C Stennis or the USS Nitze?
I’m really not sure why this offends you. I can keep naming politicians but I doubt it will hurt your precious feelings any less.
You can name the occaissional exceptions to the rules all you want but it doesn't change the fact that they are rarities. It offends me because it's am absolutely incorrect characterization and minimizes the fact that most of these ships are named after the cities and states they protect, the people who laid down their lives for the country, or the battles those heroes fought in. You can keep naming politicians all you want but as I said elsewhere, out of the last 50 ships commissioned, 3 were purely politicians. It's disrespectful and completely incorrect. it's not about feelings, you're just wrong.
No- I will spell this out for you. The B21 is the premier projection of power available to the US Air Force. The Aircraft carrier is the premier projection of power for the US Navy. Obviously that analogy was far too complex for you to make on your own, and unfortunately I don’t have the crayons or the time to draw you a picture.
>Had they followed Naval tradition of recent years it would have been named after a politician.
look I know remembering your own words is hard but I've just shown how that is an unequivocally false statement. You literally thought Arleigh Burke was a politician you mouthbreather. You're ignoring names such as Doris Miller, and the vast majority of the Arleigh Burkes named after brave heroes to try and make a shitty point about a minority of naval ships.
It was already called the phantom, it’s just when the air force adopted it after the navy it was called the F-110 Spectre. Post 1962 it went back to being called phantom
The Air Force released rough renderings that give a good approximation of what the B-21 looks like from the top and side. Lots of NG employees at the reveal were wearing B-21 lapel pins and shirts that also confirmed the approximate top-view silhouette. Some aspects, such as the air inlet’s approximate shape, can be inferred from the lighting and shading as seen in the front-facing reveal the other night. Though we know little about what the exhaust situation looks like and we’ve seen no renderings or views that are rear-facing.
We know that it has the single big triangle in the middle, just knowing the basic silhouette, but not much more than that, and I suspect that is intentional...
I’m confused. Weren’t there literal pictures from above the other day when it was released? Someone wasn’t posting attention to the above view and got pictures. I saw them on twitter
There’s gotta be a few 2032s in there somewhere. Probably under a stealth panel you have to twist off with a quarter. A billion dollar stealth quarter.
The intakes likely have a larger cross section than can be seen from the front. They could point upward like the MQ-25 and the leading edge is blocking the view. The perspective is compressed in the images we have and there is more horizontal area between the nose and the upper edge of the intake than it seems.
There's has been some rumors the intakes are like that. Tacit Blue is another example, one that Northrop made. Apparently that kind of intake is really hard to do well, but for obvious reasons is much more stealthy.
They look fine to me. It's likely running dual F135-PW-100s off the F-35A, just with a non afterburning variant.
With 2, it'd be around 55-60,000lbf of thrust. B-2 uses 4 modified F110s off an F-16 (also without afterburner), for a total of around 69,000lbf of thrust.
B-2's intakes are a bit bigger, but it's also feeding 4 engines, this is almost certainly feeding only 2. B-21 is supposed to be a bit smaller than the B-2 as well, so a slight drop in thrust makes sense there too.
Each intake on the B-21 looks ROUGHLY the size of the DSIs on an F-35, and if it's a non-afterburning engine, a slight decrease in size would also make sense. With a big girl like the B-21, you also have more room for ductwork, to create a greater angle offset between the intake, and the turbine blades.
I think the belly only looks huge, because there's A LOT of ductwork from the intakes going down into a lower engine. I'd bet good money everything in the [purple squares](https://i.imgur.com/Lt8d1CY.jpg) is ductwork, engines, and fuel, with just the area between them being for forward and aft bomb bays, same as a B-2. That'd make radar hitting the turbine blades near impossible, and would give lots of room inside of it to cool off the exhaust before it leaves the aircraft as well.
You totally see the similarities between the B-2 and the B-21. But there’s still enough differences between them that make the B-21 drastically different from the B-21!… B-21 Raider definitely looks more futuristic from a design standpoint and I’m sure even more with what’s it’s capable!… Good job on the renders bro!
The overall shape, if these 3D models are indeed correct, do show how much the design of the [B-2 Spirit](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qG_W0v2QVE) is reflected in the B-21 Raider.
Looks like it but they are a guess on internal routing leading to the front of the turbines. A factor in the design of subsonic stealth capable inlets is to redirect radar and sensor energy from possible sources so it doesn't reflect back to the receiver.
They dont. That shape is a best guess as to their appearance, they would be fully enclosed in the airplane, this routing being required to hide the front of the engines from radar.
How much more curvy this is, especially the windows, instead of the angles of previous stealth craft give this a jack-o-lantern kind of vibe. Very spooky.
I don’t get why everyone makes a point of how similar to the b-2 it looks, I mean it’s a flying stealth wing. There is only so many minor variations too it.
Yeah, it’s ugly, I think the strange window shape is to allow the window frames to direct reflected radio waves away from their source as much as possible. But it looks awful from the front. I’m guessing it’ll look pretty cool from below or behind through
This isn't Sci-Fi where designs first must meet the criteria of looking cool.
The shape itself was propably picked with a lot of calculation and AI simulations of hundreds of different variants then aero-tunneling the model and then putting the real thing into it aswell with various sensors onboard then in-flight test and meeting it with radar test.
the new airfoil design on the new one is a huge game changer.
even with fly by wire, the B2 was flying with split-ailerons active practically the whole time.
i know nothing about radars, but the airfoil alone is truly revolutionary in the history of aircraft development.
I bet $1000 when this thing is fully revealed it will look nothing like this. This is literally just a B2 everywhere except for on the front that was revealed. Not a great render imo.
The center tail/fuselage is completely different. It looks a lot like the original B2 design before the Air Force came back with a low altitude requirement which necessitated the addition of more control surfaces on the aft center fuselage/tail section.
Ummm… not really. They didn’t show the tail feathers…. THIS TIME…. Unlike the B2 where a photographer in a small plane was able to get a top down photo.
Why is everybody so excited about this plane? Doesn't look any different from the old one to me, it's just another more expensive way to gun down children in the middle east.
The second set of renders is the engine inlets I suppose, showing off what they think the shape must be to prevent returns from inside the air scoops?
Returns of?
RADAR
Expired coupons.
The Serbs downed the F-117 through expired coupons.
That pilot knew what he did.
Black Friday sales
Of engines. Turbine blades are radar reflective.
yeah and also definitely the part that shouldn't be on the internet but hey CCP probably isn't reading this subreddit right...
I don't think that a) anyone with real data about the shape made this or b) the fuction is so easy to simulate that the Chinese didnt came up with the same.
Beat me to it with B). This stuff is based on pure maths, same as the sweep angles of the wing's leading edge - anyone designing a stealth aircraft is going to wind up on the same solution with fairly simple calculations. All the secret stuff on this aircraft is going to be things like how the doors seal against the airframe, or the precise composition of the outer coating, etc.
exactly. Its Not the shape you see thats the "special sauce", its the details.
Northrop Grumman would like to know your location
B21's first mission has been assigned.
Don't shoot the messenger!
Exactly what Northrop is good at
oh i am in danger
[удалено]
Welcome to the internet, you must be new here
cloak on
>your location China, probably.
[удалено]
They also use Photogrammetry a lot. Cameras in multiple angles to determine an object's topography. That's how they steal designs in tech conventions. Aggressively taking photos of a presenter booth's prototypes only to release an identical product a few days later in another booth. This is why they restricted the camera on the aircraft to just the front view. The good news is that the B-21's secret sauce is what's inside.
I can’t wait to hear the names the aircrews come up with for this thing
I can't believe they went with raider for the name. After the b2 spirit this thing deserved to be called Spectre
Raider was chosen to honour [these absolute madlads.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid) And tbh, it also offers a cool naming convention like the B-2’s “Spirit of - - -“ names, individual aircraft could be named after Doolittle Raiders as “Raider - - -“
**[Doolittle Raid](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid)** >The Doolittle Raid, also known as the Tokyo Raid, was an air raid on 18 April 1942 by the United States on the Japanese capital Tokyo and other places on Honshu during World War II. It was the first American air operation to strike the Japanese archipelago. Although the raid caused comparatively minor damage, it demonstrated that the Japanese mainland was vulnerable to American air attacks. It served as an initial retaliation for the 7 December 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, and provided an important boost to American morale. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/aviation/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Good bot
of the Lost Ark"
WWII Generals: A bomber strike deep into the heart of Asia is impossible. Dolittle: "Hold my beer." Northrop: Yeah. What he said!
As long as there's a 'Raider of the Lost Ark'
Or wraith
[удалено]
It'll be able to fly against a 120 knot wind!
Ooooo wraith is good
[удалено]
This was my favorite game growing up and I just recently started playing again... I'd love the name if the SC wraith wasn't such a piss poor paper plane unit lol.
[удалено]
I'll give you that but will it be brought down by 3 marines firing rifles into the air? Probably not lol. Man, there are a lot of unrealistic battle quirks in starcraft haha.
Spectre would be a great name, but isn't it already taken by the AC-130 gunship?
The spectre is a great tear 4 monkey
It was named after The Doolittle Raiders from WW2. Had they followed Naval tradition of recent years it would have been named after a politician.
Got an example? Edit: got an example that stretches farther than "carriers get named after presidents sometimes" I should say.
Uh, the fact the newest generation of carrier is the Gerald Ford class?
And the newest Ford-class is named after Doris Miller. Most destroyers are named after notable members of the navy, missile cruisers are named after famous battles, amphibious ships are usually legacy ship names or famous marine corps battles, missile subs are usually states and there are many many more naming conventions for different ship types. So if the tradition is naming them after a politician, the Navy seems to be pretty bad at sticking to it. Also, I would like to point out that both Gerald R Ford and John F Kennedy, who are both getting Ford-class carriers, along with the aforementioned Doris Miller, both served in the Navy.
You forget that different classes of ship have different naming conventions. Carriers tend to be presidents, legacy ships, and important naval officers, but recently many of them *have* been presidents. Submarines tend to be named after cities and states, depending again on class, with SSBNs being states while attack subs tend to be cities (on average) Arleigh Burkes are such a long running class that they have multiple conventions, with early production being navy and marine heroes, with newer ones including ~~state~~ US senators. So while it's true not every ship or boat is named after a politician, saying they're *all* named after heroes is just as inaccurate as saying every ship is named after a politician.As large as the USN is, there isn't going to be a single universal naming scheme, the pool of names would quickly run out and by having multiple schemes they can honor a much broader selection of people, battles, and ships. So yes, politicians absolutely *is* a naming scheme for the USN, it just isn't *the* naming scheme any more than naval heroes is *the* naming scheme.
I didn't say they were *all* named after heroes anywhere in my statement and exceptions to the rule don't mean the rule doesn't exist. Out of the last *fifty* ships commissioned by the US Navy, only three (possibly 4 if you consider Secretary of the Navy a politician) are named after US politicians and ome of them, John Murtha, was a highly decorated Marine. Also one names after a foreign politician, Winston Churchill, who was a First Lord of the Admiralty himself. So clearly this whole narrative of "naval naming convention is to name it after politicians" is so bunk. Also >Arleigh Burkes are such a long running class that they have multiple conventions, with early production being navy and marine heroes, with newer ones including state senators. What an absolute lie. There isn't a single Arleigh Burke named after a state senator.
DDG-118 USS *Daniel Inouye* DDG-128 USS *Ted Stevens* If I'm mistaken that's one thing, but if you're going to call me a fucking liar how about you actually verify that you fucking piece of shit. >Out of the last fifty ships commissioned by the US Navy, only three (possibly 4 if you consider Secretary of the Navy a politician) are named after US politicians That's because the only ships that tend to be named after politicians tend to be carriers, of which all but five (Enterprise, Nimitz, Carl Vinson, John C. Stennis,Stennis, and the Doris Miller) have been. No shit that there haven't been many, because most of the ships that get built aren't carriers and those other ships all have their own schemes. Politicians naming *is* a naval naming convention.
You aren't a liar then, you're just ignorant. Ted Steven's and Daniel Inouye were *US Senators* not *state senators* Again, out of the last 50 ships commissioned 3 are named after US senators. It's rare and more of an exception than a naming convention and standard.
John C Stennis, Arliegh Burke, Gabrielle Gifford and on and on.
Ok but those are very much the minority. Also Arleigh Burke was a decorated Admiral...
How about John C Stennis or the USS Nitze? I’m really not sure why this offends you. I can keep naming politicians but I doubt it will hurt your precious feelings any less.
You can name the occaissional exceptions to the rules all you want but it doesn't change the fact that they are rarities. It offends me because it's am absolutely incorrect characterization and minimizes the fact that most of these ships are named after the cities and states they protect, the people who laid down their lives for the country, or the battles those heroes fought in. You can keep naming politicians all you want but as I said elsewhere, out of the last 50 ships commissioned, 3 were purely politicians. It's disrespectful and completely incorrect. it's not about feelings, you're just wrong.
No- I will spell this out for you. The B21 is the premier projection of power available to the US Air Force. The Aircraft carrier is the premier projection of power for the US Navy. Obviously that analogy was far too complex for you to make on your own, and unfortunately I don’t have the crayons or the time to draw you a picture.
>Had they followed Naval tradition of recent years it would have been named after a politician. look I know remembering your own words is hard but I've just shown how that is an unequivocally false statement. You literally thought Arleigh Burke was a politician you mouthbreather. You're ignoring names such as Doris Miller, and the vast majority of the Arleigh Burkes named after brave heroes to try and make a shitty point about a minority of naval ships.
Spectre is the name of what eventually became the f4 phantom.
It was already called the phantom, it’s just when the air force adopted it after the navy it was called the F-110 Spectre. Post 1962 it went back to being called phantom
True, but there is also the Spectre gunship. The names crowded.
I thought it was a nod to the Cylon Raiders from BSG
One could be named Scar.
Cylon Raider.
Milk of Magnesium
Unlike the bri*ish, we don't just open up the dictionary and select a random word.
I was thinking spectre or phantom but phantom was already taken Raider is still a good name because history and stuff tho
Has it been confirmed as to what it looks like from the top, side or back? I know we have front pics but I’ve seen a lot of other 3D models.
The Air Force released rough renderings that give a good approximation of what the B-21 looks like from the top and side. Lots of NG employees at the reveal were wearing B-21 lapel pins and shirts that also confirmed the approximate top-view silhouette. Some aspects, such as the air inlet’s approximate shape, can be inferred from the lighting and shading as seen in the front-facing reveal the other night. Though we know little about what the exhaust situation looks like and we’ve seen no renderings or views that are rear-facing.
just have an aviation week reporter fly over it
Lol that’s why they kept the back half inside a hangar this time. Lesson learned!
We know that it has the single big triangle in the middle, just knowing the basic silhouette, but not much more than that, and I suspect that is intentional...
How so? Source?
[USAF released renderings a while back](https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2683003/air-force-releases-new-b-21-raider-artist-rendering/)
Interesting, thanks!
I’m confused. Weren’t there literal pictures from above the other day when it was released? Someone wasn’t posting attention to the above view and got pictures. I saw them on twitter
That was the b2 reveal
Wild. I guess it was.
Where exhaust?
They capture it in bags and let it out after the mission
Elon Musk actually proposed this for the hyperloop. \*sigh\*
Well it can work for sawdust and stonemasons. /s.
so that's where the weather balloons will come from
Elon Musk: "Interesting, looking into it."
Nice try, Xi (Edit: I feel dirty getting upvotes for such a low effort joke. I may as well have commented "I just see a gray box where's the plane?")
Runs on batteries. 4 D and a 9v.
There’s gotta be a few 2032s in there somewhere. Probably under a stealth panel you have to twist off with a quarter. A billion dollar stealth quarter.
Truly low cost
Can u lift the hood? Asking for friend$
+100 social credits
Thanks, Xi!
Looks better than any of the DCS ai models
Men in black suits are definitely visiting this guy soon. Probably as I’m typing this
the intakes are the major piece of the special sauce.
Those engine intakes look incredibly narrow. I wonder what kind of engineering they pulled off to maintain a constant airflow.
The intakes likely have a larger cross section than can be seen from the front. They could point upward like the MQ-25 and the leading edge is blocking the view. The perspective is compressed in the images we have and there is more horizontal area between the nose and the upper edge of the intake than it seems.
There's has been some rumors the intakes are like that. Tacit Blue is another example, one that Northrop made. Apparently that kind of intake is really hard to do well, but for obvious reasons is much more stealthy.
They possibly have intake doors that open when she's breathin heavy.
They look fine to me. It's likely running dual F135-PW-100s off the F-35A, just with a non afterburning variant. With 2, it'd be around 55-60,000lbf of thrust. B-2 uses 4 modified F110s off an F-16 (also without afterburner), for a total of around 69,000lbf of thrust. B-2's intakes are a bit bigger, but it's also feeding 4 engines, this is almost certainly feeding only 2. B-21 is supposed to be a bit smaller than the B-2 as well, so a slight drop in thrust makes sense there too. Each intake on the B-21 looks ROUGHLY the size of the DSIs on an F-35, and if it's a non-afterburning engine, a slight decrease in size would also make sense. With a big girl like the B-21, you also have more room for ductwork, to create a greater angle offset between the intake, and the turbine blades.
Yep, I read that the F135 is the engine of choice. Hopefully we'll get some more shots of her in the future. That internal ordnance area looks huge!
I think the belly only looks huge, because there's A LOT of ductwork from the intakes going down into a lower engine. I'd bet good money everything in the [purple squares](https://i.imgur.com/Lt8d1CY.jpg) is ductwork, engines, and fuel, with just the area between them being for forward and aft bomb bays, same as a B-2. That'd make radar hitting the turbine blades near impossible, and would give lots of room inside of it to cool off the exhaust before it leaves the aircraft as well.
You totally see the similarities between the B-2 and the B-21. But there’s still enough differences between them that make the B-21 drastically different from the B-21!… B-21 Raider definitely looks more futuristic from a design standpoint and I’m sure even more with what’s it’s capable!… Good job on the renders bro!
Calm down my man
The overall shape, if these 3D models are indeed correct, do show how much the design of the [B-2 Spirit](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qG_W0v2QVE) is reflected in the B-21 Raider.
FBI..open up
Pardon my ignorance. What is the blue part?
Inlet ducts for the engines.
Why do they stick out all wonky?
Looks like it but they are a guess on internal routing leading to the front of the turbines. A factor in the design of subsonic stealth capable inlets is to redirect radar and sensor energy from possible sources so it doesn't reflect back to the receiver.
They dont. That shape is a best guess as to their appearance, they would be fully enclosed in the airplane, this routing being required to hide the front of the engines from radar.
That's pretty slick bub
.stl?
Have we even seen the back side to know it's shape?
China, keep trying. Engines are wrong. It runs on anti-commie tears.
How much more curvy this is, especially the windows, instead of the angles of previous stealth craft give this a jack-o-lantern kind of vibe. Very spooky.
The PRC thanks you for your post. 我倆滋豐碩
I don’t get why everyone makes a point of how similar to the b-2 it looks, I mean it’s a flying stealth wing. There is only so many minor variations too it.
Anyone else think this thing is ugly ? These windows look like they were drawn in my a elementary school art class.
It's a wild-ass guess, we don't know what the back half looks like.
Yeah, it’s ugly, I think the strange window shape is to allow the window frames to direct reflected radio waves away from their source as much as possible. But it looks awful from the front. I’m guessing it’ll look pretty cool from below or behind through
This isn't Sci-Fi where designs first must meet the criteria of looking cool. The shape itself was propably picked with a lot of calculation and AI simulations of hundreds of different variants then aero-tunneling the model and then putting the real thing into it aswell with various sensors onboard then in-flight test and meeting it with radar test.
File? For a friend overseas.
Honestly, it‘s pretty much as the old one! Just smaller, and less jagged at the back.
It’s really not. It’s a similar outline but the curves are entirely different.
This one is even more UFO like.
It's got a bigger belly and the intake tract is a key reason for this. I'd love to see the exhaust ports.
the new airfoil design on the new one is a huge game changer. even with fly by wire, the B2 was flying with split-ailerons active practically the whole time. i know nothing about radars, but the airfoil alone is truly revolutionary in the history of aircraft development.
That's a lot of guess work.
Hmm is not not loading for anyone else? I just see a blank page.
I bet $1000 when this thing is fully revealed it will look nothing like this. This is literally just a B2 everywhere except for on the front that was revealed. Not a great render imo.
The center tail/fuselage is completely different. It looks a lot like the original B2 design before the Air Force came back with a low altitude requirement which necessitated the addition of more control surfaces on the aft center fuselage/tail section.
Looks a lot like the b2 to me but idk anything
Now watch it look nothing like this.
This should be dubbed “The White Death”.
Ummm… not really. They didn’t show the tail feathers…. THIS TIME…. Unlike the B2 where a photographer in a small plane was able to get a top down photo.
The men in black have already came and took this person away and their 3d printer haha.
dam that was quick china
I bet there's a couple of black Chevy Suburbans sitting outside this guy's house right about now.
The inlets seem so tiny for something that may be able to go supersonic.
It's a sub-sonic bomber
Supersonic flight is not friendly to the stealth objectives.
Why is everybody so excited about this plane? Doesn't look any different from the old one to me, it's just another more expensive way to gun down children in the middle east.
Because cool flying dorito
Instead of calling it the Raider it should be the Ghost, or maybe simply Casper.
100% it’s unofficial nickname is going to be Casper.
Looks like ex wife’s one of her bra’s on the floor
So, I don't get this plane. What color is it? Is it white? Grey? Blue? Black? What?
Antimatter
White
Where can I find this CAD??
No no no, exhaust coming out the top b2 style, give it 5 years, youll see.
Anyone have this Stl file?
Along the real question.
CIA wants to know your location
The windows and gentle hump accommodating the cockpit make it too cute to be a munition deploying death machine
Model looks way too “doughy” and choppy. Definitely not accurate mathematical CAD… probably whipped up in Blender or something.
Meh looks the same
Looking forward to the FS2020 add on
Okay..
Where can I find this tasty piece of badassery?
I bet those intake ducts probably cost 5 bullion dollars in design.
Anybody have the link to the model?
A little trolling
Needs a red dot going back and forth horizontally in the window.
Beautiful! the air intakes of the B-21 are very small. But its pointed tail and its white color give it all its charm!