7/25/2019 B-21 - AWIN

1/2

Definition:The B-21 Long Range Strike - Bomber (LRS-B) is aU.S. bomber under development by Northrop Grumman that is pro-jected to reach initial operational capability (IOC) in the mid-2020s.

Program History: The LRS-B descended from an earlier pro-gram called the Next Generation Bomber (NGB), which began afterthe U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) released its 2005 Quadren-nial Defense Review in early 2006. That document canceled anearlier program, called the Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems(J-UCAS), which would have fielded stealthy strike aircraft for theU.S. Air Force (USAF) and U.S. Navy (USN). The J-UCAS program

had foundered on tension between the Navys desire to fit the systemon an aircraft carrier and the Air Forces desire for a global strikeenabler with greater range and payload.

The demise of J-UCAS led to the start of three programs:

the Navys X-47B UCAS-D; an unmanned ISR aircraft, largelysponsored by the Central Intelligence Agency, which became theNorthrop Grumman RQ-180; and the Next Generation Long-Range Strike (NGLRS) analysis of alternatives, which in 2006generated the NGB requirement.

By 2008, industry executives were expecting an NGB request forproposals (RFP) late in 2009 and a program start in FY10, with IOCin 2018. However, in April 2009, Secretary of Defense Robert Gatescanceled NGB due to concern over the programs cost and risk.Gates decision allowed the Air Force to make a case for a less riskyalternative, while considering other approaches to long-range strike.

In 2010, the Air Force shifted its approach to developing a familyof systems portfolio of ISR, communications, electronic warfare,and long-range strike platforms. LRS-B would be a penetrating, but

not highly persistent, bomber, used in conjunction with the Long-Range Stand-Off (LRSO) cruise missile, an RQ-180-type ISR assetand new electronic attack aircraft. The LRS-B program itself would Continued

focus on setting affordable, realistic and achievable requirements upfront and the use of new technology would be rigorously restricted.

The LRS-B program began when Secretary Gates issued aclassified memo in February 2011. USAF funded two competitorsthrough a preliminary design review (PDR) and manufacturing read-iness review: Northrop Grumman and a Boeing/Lockheed Martinteam. In May 2013, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council(JROC) approved the requirements for the program. On July 9,2014, USAF issued the RFP. On Oct. 27, 2015, USAF awarded theengineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract, andwith it the whole program, to Northrop.

On Nov. 5, 2015, the Boeing/Lockheed team filed a protest withthe Government Accountability Office (GAO), charging the costevaluation performed by the government did not properly rewardthe contractors proposals to break the upward-spiraling historical

cost curves of defense acquisitions, or properly evalu-ate the relative or comparative risk of the competitorsability to perform, as required by the solicitation. OnFeb. 16, 2016, GAO affirmed the services decision toaward the contract to Northrop, and Lockheed and

Boeing opted not to effectively appeal the decision bysuing USAF in federal court.

On Feb. 26, 2016, at the Air Force Associationsannual air warfare symposium in Orlando, Florida,USAF Secretary Deborah James announced theLRS-B would be designated B-21 and revealed aconcept drawing of the aircraft.

Program Details: USAF plans to buy 100 LRS-Bsto replace its B-52 and B-1 fleets, which are slated toretire in the mid-2040s. IOC is expected in the mid-2020s, with nuclear certification planned two years

after service entry. Some authorities have suggested the service willrequire a higher number of bombers. Retired USAF Lt. Gen. DavidDeptula has suggested 174 aircraft: enough for a 12-aircraft squadronfor each of USAFs 10 air expeditionary forces, 30 training and testingaircraft and enough additional aircraft for an attrition reserve. Other

reports have suggested a 200-aircraft force, allowing for 150-160operational aircraft.

The program to build 100 bombers is estimated to be worthabout $80 billion. In an attempt to restrict the cost growth that hasplagued recent combat aircraft, USAF specified cost as a key perfor-mance parameter (KPP) in the competition: an average procurementunit cost (APUC), or gross cost, of no more $550 million in FY10dollars ($607 million in FY16) for the first 100 aircraft. However, thegovernments ICE predicts the APUC will be lower $564 million

in FY16 dollars.The $21.4 billion (in FY10 dollars) engineering and

B-21

PROGRAM DOSSIER

Image Credit: U.S. Air Force

7/25/2019 B-21 - AWIN

2/2

B-21 (Continued)

PROGRAM DOSSIER

All Program data is excerpted from the AviationWeek Intelligence Network (awin.aviationweek.com).

To learn how to receive full access to updated online profiles ofmajor international defense programs, call +1 646.291.6353 oremail anne.mcmahon@aviationweek.com

manufacturing development (EMD) contract is cost-reimbursablewith incentive fees built in for reaching certain milestones. With acost-reimbursable contract, allowable cost overages will be paid forby the government. These allowable overages would be spelled outin the contract. The EMD phase will include construction of aroundfour developmental aircraft.

The Air Force plans to issue fixed-price-incentive-fee contractsfor the first five lots of low-rate, initial production (LRIP) aircraft,between 19-21 bombers total. The first four lots will be fixed price.Lot 5 will be a not-to-exceed price and the service will renegotiateterms in Lot 6 and beyond, they said. The price for those aircraft has

not been disclosed, but will be higher than the APUC.The LRS-B could fly as early as 2018. The first LRIP batch couldbe completed in 2021. If IOC is declared in the year that the finalLRIP batch is delivered, that would lead to a 2025 IOC. Full-rate pro-duction will proceed after the five LRIP lots, at a rate of seven or eightper year. That would see the 100th aircraft completed in the late 2030s.

Technical Details: Few details are known about the technicalrequirements for the LRS-B. The program is needed, officials say, to

prosecute the most highly defended targets around the globe, particu-larly highly mobile systems, such as air defenses, and hard and deeplyburied targets, such as command and control and nuclear facilities.These targets require tracking through the moment of strike orprecisely targeted penetrator weapons, thus making them unsuitablefor standoff weapons such as cruise missiles. Given the short develop-ment schedule, it is likely that LRS-B will use existing hardware andtechnology, at least in its initial version, with multiple block incre-ments in future plans.

One requirement considered obvious is broadband stealth toenable the aircraft to evade detection even by search radars operatingin the VHF band. The concept image revealed on Feb. 26 showedthe bomber would have a flying wing planform, like its B-2 predeces-sor. The aircraft will likely incorporate a new generation of stealthtechnology beyond the F-35 in terms of capability, survivability,producability and maintainability.

Range will also be a key factor. The B-2 had a range of over

6,000 nm. It was designed to achieve a 10,000 nm round trip withone outbound refueling from Whiteman AFB to Soviet missilefields and back. Such range may not be required for the LRS-B. Itis thought the LRS-B will incorporate advances to propulsion andaerodynamics that will make it a more efficient flyer than the B-2,but it may turn out to be a smaller aircraft.

Think tank reports have assessed that a 2,500 nm combat radiuswould be adequate for the system. That would allow the bomber tostrike targets 2,000 nm.inland while refueling over 500 nm away from

an adversarys coast, safe from increasingly potent anti-access/area-denial systems against which air-refueling tankers are very vulnerable.

However, the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty might

provide a reason for a slightly shorter radius. Bombers with a rangeless than 8,000 km (4,319 nm) are not considered heavy bombersby the Treaty, and thus are not subject to its limits on nuclear deliveryvehicles. So a modest reduction from the 2,500-nm number wouldleave the U.S. free to build any number of LRS-Bs, and even to buildheavy bombers within New Start limits to carry cruise missiles orfuture hypersonic weapons.

Maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) and payload are predicted tobe somewhere between the B-2 and half of it. The B-2s MTOW is336,500 lb. and it can carry 60,000 of weapons in two bomb bays either two 30,000-lb. GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators

(MOP) or larger numbers of smaller weapons such as 16 B61-12GPS-guided nuclear bombs on two rotary launchers. A capacitybased on one B-2 style bomb bay for one MOP or eight B61s isconsidered the low end of payload possibilities. However, it is notcertain the LRS-B will be required to carry the MOP.

Some observers have hypothesized that the bomber will bepowered by two off-the-shelf Pratt & Whitney F135 engines, whichwould be the right size for a half-scale B-2. However, the F135 isheavy and expensive, and a higher-bypass-ratio engine would be

more efficient and have a cooler exhaust, which would be beneficialbecause thermal, mechanical and acoustic stress on the aft deckstructure behind the exhausts has been a perennial B-2 problem.Pratt & Whitney has discussed an engine named PW9000, with amedium bypass ratio (about 4:1) and the core of the PW1000G com-mercial engine, and such a development would be low-risk. It is alsopossible that the LRS-B will have four smaller engines, although theFeb. 26 concept image appears to indicate two.

USAF spokespeople have stated the bomber will be optionallymanned. The relatively large size of a heavy bomber means thesize/weight/power penalty for a cockpit is relatively low. Unman-ning the bomber with proper command and control and softwarewould be a relatively simple addition. In the near term, however, thebomber will be manned.

Status: In October 2015, USAF disclosed it had spent $1.9 billion insecret risk-reduction work for the two competing teams. In its FY17 budget

request, USAF projected it would spend $12.1 billion on developmentof the LRS-B from FY17 to FY21, based on a new independent costestimate. IOC is projected for the mid-2020s. Nuclear certification will fol-low two years later. The aircraft is likely to be operational at least 30 years.

mailto:anne.mcmahon@aviationweek.commailto:anne.mcmahon@aviationweek.com