4 ms·
I’m going to go with this isn’t an actual flying article. It’s just too smooth, even the high-rez pic. No cutouts/markings for ejection seats. No air sensors, n
by hindsightbias 4y ago
I’m going to go with this isn’t an actual flying article. It’s just too smooth, even the high-rez pic. No cutouts/markings for ejection seats. No air sensors, no hatches, access panels. Possible it’s so fresh out of paint booth they’re not marked, but doubt it.
Probably a structural/ground test victim. That NG said “you won’t see it again until it flies” says we won’t see much more.
Lots of wing washout, more than the B-2. It’s porky, so they didn’t go with two or three engines (unless there’s a top inlet) so four P&Ws, draggy, lots of fuel needed. But I bet the payload is more than 2/3 the B-2.
It makes the B-2 look svelte.
- torginus 4y agoAfaik even the B-2 didn't have pitot tubes for airspeed sensors. If I remember correctly, it used lasers to measure the change in the refractive index of air, which changes based on density, and used that to calculate dynamic and static air pressure.
- hindsightbias 4y agoYes, and there are none of those on this B-21
- baybal2 4y ago
- LargoLasskhyfv 4y agoLack of ejection seats, or visible provisions for them have come to my mind, too.