Second B-21 Raider test aircraft breaks cover

To be brutally honest, do we need an aircraft that can penetrate deeply through an enemy’s air defences? Or is there a cheaper way to lob stand-off missiles at long distance targets, where the weapons do most of the work? In essence, I feel if the UK requires a strategic bomber, then an aircraft which has a large payload and has reduced a radar and thermal signature, would be good enough, especially as it would be significantly cheaper.

The B21 is smaller than the B2. It has been speculated that it can carry about half the payload of the B2. The B2 has been reported to be capable of carrying between 40,000 and 60,000lbs (18,000kg to 27,000kg) of ordinance. But if the B2 can carry two GBU-57 (MOPs), which are classed as 30,000-pound (14,000 kg), 20.5 ft (6.2 m) long weapons, perhaps the higher figure is the correct one. The B21 is said to be only capable of carrying one.

Could a platform be built for the UK, that could carry long range stand-off weapons such as MBDA’s TP-15 and RJ10 (Stratus-LO and Stratus-RS)? Yes, fairly easily I believe, which also included a large internal weapons bay or two. You could build off the Vulcan’s design, where it was modified to incorporate new engines, engine intake fences/screens, a thermal exhaust shield, a V-tail and other changes to reduce the radar cross section (RCS) and thermal signature, but a newer design would be much more efficient. Especially if it was based on a blended wing body (BWB) shape. An example could be based on the Airbus Maverick, which Airbus say should have a 20% better fuel efficiency over a conventional bodied aircraft.

A BWB shape has a naturally low RCS. It can be improved on by making sure there are no right angled joints or structures, such as tail fins. Having the current model’s tail fins incorporated into the wing tips would help massively. Further measures such as using radar absorbent material (RAM) on the skin, would further reduce it. But also replacing the twin “fans” with a strip of smaller engines, as shown with their Maverick ZEROe concept. Would hide the engine faces from ground based radar, but also hide the exhaust thermal signature to a degree as well. The deep and wide body, would be ideal for a weapons bay or two. Where if the bay was at least 7.7m long, then there would be size compatibility with weapons that fit the strike length Mk41 VLS. Which is a rough guesstimate on the limits of how long TP15 and RJ10 will need to be. The depth of the weapons bay, would allow it to hold a good number of long range weapons, perhaps similar to the B2, e.g. 16 x JASSMs.

The BWB “bomber” would be a strategic asset, as it does not need to attack a location directly, plus the BWB shape will allow it to carry a lot of fuel, so its unrefuelled range will be comparable to the B2. The design would allow it to approach an enemy’s air defences and get reasonably close, without fear of being targeted. Thereby helping to extend the reach of the weapons. But by using long range stand-off weapons, it can attack from a unexpected direction. Additionally this design of aircraft would make a great air-tanker. I think this aircraft would complement the B21 in much the same way that the USAF is expecting the B52 to do. But it could also be something other “friendly” countries would like, who’d bulk at the cost of a B21!