Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

Best. Bomber. Ever.

This may just be my favorite Aviation Week article of all time. It explores, in depth, just how influential the B-2 bomber has been; a quarter-century later, plane-makers are still leveraging lessons they learned from building the thing.

Best of all -- and most unusually, for AvWeek -- the article is actually written (for the most part) in English, not in Pentagonese or aeronautical engineer patois. So we can all appreciate how freakin' cool the B-2 really is.

b2_flight.jpgBy almost any measure, the bomber's development was one of the largest, most technically complex, expensive and demanding programs in aerospace history. But the final product dramatically changed air combat forever. The B-2's "stealth" or low observability (LO) enables unprecedented penetration of enemy territory, essentially neutralizing very costly air defense systems. Precision weapon delivery in all weather conditions, day or night, changed an air warfare tenet from "sorties per target" to "numbers of targets per sortie." In the B-2's case, a single bomber carrying 16 conventional weapons can destroy 16 targets. The same mission once would have required dozens of aircraft dropping hundreds of bombs...

[The B-2 relied on] all-composite skins and structures--the first aircraft to use composites so extensively. This challenge was considered so risky that, for a while, a second team was set up to design an aluminum wing in parallel. A metal structure would have been much heavier, greatly reducing the B-2's range-payload capability. Thus, a considerable effort was devoted to developing a composite version, and it paid off; the aluminum-wing option was dropped before the first Preliminary Design Review took place. "Today, [developing a composite wing] seems straightforward, because the world's used to composite vehicles. But it was a big deal then," Myers notes.

The bomber would have to be designed as an integral system, then manufactured to extremely tight tolerances, to meet LO requirements. Consequently, the B-2 became the first aircraft designed completely via computers, ensuring design and fabrication phases were tightly coordinated, Myers says. However, the analytical models and computer-aided-design/manufacturing (CAD/CAM) tools to accomplish this weren't available in the early 1980s.

In particular, the active flight control system dictated that the entire aircraft be modeled precisely. "I could easily count on one hand the number of people in the [U.S.] who had tried to go through the analytical process for an [active] flight control system," says Myers, who headed that critical risk-closure area at the time...

During the Cold War, weapon system performance was given top priority, trumping cost considerations. Whatever resources were deemed necessary to meet national security goals, they were made available, despite the cost.

"We kept a top-10 list of [B-2 concerns] on the briefing-room wall," Myers recalls. "We were seven years into the program before 'cost' made that list." But those days are gone. "I'm not sure we'll ever see another program like that again," he adds.

Latest Comments

well, nice posts guys but russian stealth technology based on cold fusion is way better/cheaper/more kick ass than b2/f-117 stealth, so dream on about unbeatable b2s and enjoy in it's really nice design.


nice greetz from da crew that took stealth planes back in 1999. down.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/f117down.htm

Posted by: SeRbZm4dn3ss at August 21, 2006 11:31 AM


To the detractors: we don't need more than 24 of them. Maintainance isn't an issue. The B2s are a first-strike weapon. B2s don't have to deliver every bomb that falls on an enemy. B2s are the invisible first strike.

With 24 B2s, we can destroy virtually any opponent's eyes and ears before they even know they've been attacked. After they're deaf and dumb, send in the B52s. We won't need stealth at that point, anyway. And then the B2s can spend hundreds of hours getting maintainance done. Who cares? They've done their job.

B2s are fragile. They're expensive. They're high-maintainance. So is Jennifer Aniston. Both are worth every bit of trouble.

The bomber fleet has proven far more useful than a mere redundancy. Of course, redundancy is good. I have a smoke alarm in my house, in case my first, second, and third detection systems (eyes, ears, and nose) don't pick up on a fire. You guys sound like Homer Simpson here. "We bought all those smoke alarms and we haven't had one single fire."

The design ain't 60 years old. The concept of the flying wing is 60 years old. Just because they look kinda sorta the same doesn't mean it's the same design. My DVD player looks a whole lot like an 8 track tape deck. It doesn't mean they're the same thing.

Posted by: Brian at March 31, 2006 7:30 PM


I would have to agree, that was one of the best articles i have read from Aviation Week. The B-2 is definitly the best bomber ever period. It has reshapped the way America conducts its offenseive operations and it represents the future of Strategic Strike.

Posted by: john at March 31, 2006 9:46 AM


Let's see. I would like to agree that the aircraft is a little expensive but on the other hand if it wasn't for these high-end projects we wouldn't be enjoying the technologies we live with everyday, especially when it comes to computer technology. In the end I think it will pay itself off. Let me know the next time we lose a war because we can't afford it.

Posted by: Mike at March 31, 2006 9:41 AM


hello Chuck

nice to read about B-2. Kudos for a job well done.

my take?....I followed with eyeball as two B-2s' passed over Utah heading towards Iraq. One evidently had problems and dropped out. I think they are: to expensive, to highmaintenance, and limited to their own special use, however well they perform it.

Next step, as you know, is airships. Forego speeds in excess of 400mph, keep stealth, add in the ability to carry many times more payload, and add in the ability to VTOL from any spot on Earth, including mid ocean if they are made amphibious....these are the answer to next generation deep penetrating craft with ability to linger (land!)over theater.

Posted by: campbell at March 30, 2006 10:06 PM


» View All 18 Comments

» Post a Comment