The Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) is a development and acquisition program to develop a long-range strategic bomber for the United States Air Force, intended to be a heavy-payload stealth aircraft that can deliver thermonuclear weapons. Initial capability is planned for the mid-2020s. A request for proposal to develop the aircraft was issued in July 2014. The Air Force plans to procure at least 100 and potentially up to 200 of the LRS-B aircraft for an estimated $550 million each (2010 dollars). A development contract was awarded to Northrop Grumman for its B-21 Raider in October 2015. Much about the project is highly classified and little information is available to the public. It is known that construction of the aircraft had begun by July 2019, and on December 2, 2022, it was unveiled to the public.
Origins
Conception The LRS-B was the follow-on to the Next Generation Bomber (NGB) effort, whose spiraling costs due to numerous mission additions and requirements creep caused Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to cancel the program in 2009. On 19 May, Air Force Chief of Staff general Norton Schwartz said that the USAF's focus in the 2010 budget was on "Long-range strike, not next-generation bomber" and will push for this in the Quadrennial Defense Review. In June 2009, the two teams working on NGB proposals were told to "close up shop".RL34406, "Air Force Next-Generation Bomber: Background and Issues for Congress" . Congressional Research Service, 18 September 2009 However, long range strike was a critical requirement for the USAF and a new bomber was still determined as a required delivery method. In order to make a follow-on bomber program for long-range strike politically viable, Schwartz and Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley worked to ensure that it would exercise discipline in requirements definition and make greater use of proven systems and technology as well as off-board enablers to rein in costs; according to Schwartz, they also relented to Gates' insistence on ending production of the F-22 fighter aircraft to further persuade him.
On 16 September 2009, Gates endorsed the concept of a new bomber but insisted that it must be affordable,"Gates endorses new U.S. bomber project" . Reuters stating: "What we must not do is repeat what happened with our last manned bomber. By the time the research, development, and requirements processes ran their course, the aircraft, despite its great capability, turned out to be so expensive – $2 billion each in the case of the B-2 Spirit—that less than one-sixth of the planned fleet of 132 was ever built." On 5 October 2009, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Ashton Carter said that the DoD was still deciding if the USAF needed a new bomber and that, if approved, the aircraft would need to handle reconnaissance as well as strike missions."Carter: DoD, White House Crafting New Presidential Helo Specs". Defense News In July 2010, Carter said he intended to "make affordability a requirement" for the next-generation intelligence and strike platform. Alt URL On 11 December 2009, Gates said that the Quadrennial Defense Review had shown the need for both manned and unmanned long range strike and that the 2011 budget would likely include funding for the future bomber. The USAF plans for the new bomber to be multi-role with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities.Fulghum, David A. "New Bomber To Focus Heavily On ISR". Aviation Week, 17 December 2009. As a bomber, the LRS-B will be under Air Force Global Strike Command, while ISR assets are managed by Air Combat Command's 25th Air Force.
In 2010, Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, questioned a reliance on short range aircraft like the F-35 to manage China in a future conflict and promoted reducing the F-35 buy in favor of a longer range platform like the Next-Generation Bomber; then-secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne had rejected this plan in 2007.Clark, Colin. "Strategy, What Strategy?" dodbuzz.com, 29 June 2010. Retrieved: 3 July 2010.Kosiak, Steve and Barry Watts. "US Fighter Modernization Plans: Near-term Choices." Csbaonline.org Retrieved: 3 July 2010.Wolf, Jim. "Air Force chief links F-35 fighter jet to China." Reuters, 19 September 2007. Retrieved: 3 July 2010. During debate on the New START treaty in December 2010, several senators raised the LRS-B as a reason to oppose or delay ratification.
Funding On 6 January 2011, Gates made a speech on the U.S. defense budget for FY 2012, which announced major investment in developing a long-range, nuclear-capable bomber, also to be optionally remotely piloted. He also said the aircraft "will be designed and developed using proven technologies, an approach that should make it possible to deliver this capability on schedule and in quantity. It is important that we begin this project now to ensure that a new bomber can be ready before the current aging fleet goes out of service. The follow on bomber represents a key component of a joint portfolio of conventional deep-strike capabilities—an area that should be a high priority for future defense investment given the anti-access challenges our military faces." In July 2011, Joint Chief Vice Chairman James Cartwright called for a large UAV instead of a manned aircraft, including for the nuclear mission. Retired Air Force colonel and Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments analyst Mark Gunzinger has called for an optionally manned bomber, stating that purely unmanned bombers would be at a disadvantage without direct human pilot awareness and vulnerable to communication disruption.
In March 2011, the USAF decided to purchase 80 to 100 aircraft.Reed, John. "Air Force Hopes to Buy 80 to 100 Next Gen Bombers." DoD Buzz, 30 March 2011.Erwin, Sandra. "Air Force Chief: We Will Not 'Overdesign' the New Stealth Bomber." National Defense Industrial Association. 9 February 2012. Air Force Global Strike Command indicated that one requirement for the bomber is to carry a weapon of similar effect to the Massive Ordnance Penetrator.Trimble, Stephen. "Penetrate faster, harder with new AFRL weapon." Flight Global, 20 February 2011. In addition to the strategic bombing, tactical bombing, and prompt global strike roles typical for a bomber, the aircraft is to be part of a family of systems responsible for ground surveillance and electronic attack. The Obama Administration in its 2012 budget request asked for $197 million and a total of $3.7 billion over five years to develop the bomber, including modular payloads for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), electronic attack (EA), and communications.Majumdar, Dave. "Budget shrinks; acquisition programs outlined" AirForce Times, 15 February 2011.Shane, Leo. "Budget breakdown: Air Force." Stars and Stripes, 14 February 2011. It shall be nuclear-capable, but shall not be certified as such until older bombers are set to retire.Majumdar, Dave. Defense News, 2 November 2011.
In 2011, the House Armed Services Committee added language that would require two engine programs for the bomber; Carter objected that the addition would interfere with plans to reuse an existing engine.Bedard, Paul. "Pentagon, Obama Bomb House Bid To Revive Jet Engine." US News, 24 May 2011. Reportedly, the two most likely engines are the Pratt & Whitney PW9000 engine, which uses a combination of Pratt & Whitney F135 and commercial turbofan technology, and a derivative of the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136. In May 2011, Air Force Undersecretary Erin Conaton announced that a program office was being set up for the bomber. The USAF asked for $292 million for the program in its 2013 budget request.Munoz, Carlo. "DoD Fast Tracks New Bomber; 'Planning Number' is $550 Million Per Plane." AOL Defense. 15 February 2012. The program has also been referred to as "Long-Range Strike-B" (LRS-B).Butler, Amy. "Amid Cuts USAF Cautiously Funds F-35, Bomber." Aviation Week. 13 February 2012. In 2012, former Pentagon weapons tester Thomas P. Christie speculated that the bomber program had been initiated so that the Air Force would have a sacrificial program to offer during anticipated defense budget shortfalls.Axe, David. "Why Can't the Air Force Build an Affordable Plane?" The Atlantic. 26 March 2012. The USAF seems committed to the program, given a lack of other non-nuclear options to deal with "deeply buried and/or hardened targets," and committed two percent of their investment budget to the project, compared to three percent to sustain existing bombers.
As of August 2013, the USAF believed that the LRS-B could reach Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in 2025. Reportedly, the main risk is funding, in light of the F-35 Lightning II's acquisition difficulties and a lack of an "urgent threat". Prior bomber programs were hindered by a lack of funding, only 21 B-2 Spirits were produced out of 132 planned and fewer B-1 Lancers were built than were envisioned; both programs were scaled down due to spiraling per aircraft costs. Research funding was allocated, as stealthy technologies to counter anti-access/area-denial threats were spared from budget cuts. The USAF stated the LRS-B is a top priority as it was believed that China will overcome the B-2's low-observable features by the 2020s. Where possible, existing technologies and proven subsystems will be used in order to keep it within budget, instead of developing new and riskier ones. Components such as engines and radars may be off-the-shelf or adaptions of existing models, such as derivative technologies of the F-35. The LRS-B is intended to perform any long range mission, rather than one specialized mission, which drove up the cost of the B-2. The USAF expects it to cost $1 billion each with development costs factored in, and aims for a per-aircraft cost of $550 million, considered reasonable for a limited production run military aircraft. September 2013.
Production proposals, timeframe On 25 October 2013, Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced their teaming up for the LRS-B. Boeing will be the prime contractor. The two companies previously joined for the program in 2008, but the partnership ended in 2010 when requirements shifted. Boeing believes that as the program had evolved, they can readdress their partnership to specifically address requirements. The team has Boeing's bomber experience and Lockheed Martin's stealth experience. At the time of the announcement, official details about the LRS-B were that it will likely be optionally manned and use stealth technology. – Defensenews.com, 25 October 2013 On 30 January 2014, Northrop Grumman stated their intention to invest in developing needed technology for the bomber, such as stealth designs, mission management systems, and autonomous controls.Northrop to ‘position’ for future bomber work as LRS-B progresses – FlightGlobal, 4 February 2014
In January 2014, General Schwartz said that the Pentagon should abandon plans to outfit the F-35 with nuclear weapons in favor of the LRS-B. A 2010 Nuclear Posture Review stated that replacing the F-16 with the F-35 retains dual conventional and nuclear delivery capabilities for USAF fighters. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) determined that upgrading the F-35 for nuclear deployment would cost $350 million over the next decade. Schwartz said that without financial support from NATO, where some nuclear-capable F-35s would be deployed, those funds should be transferred to the LRS-B. At the same time, Congress cut funding for the B61 nuclear bomb, stripping $10 million from F-35 integration and $34.8 million for life extension; Schwartz stated that B61's life extension must proceed.