From a cost standpoint, I don't get this. Doesn't the B-2 already do this?

Air Force unveils first image of B-21 long-range bomber - Washington Times

B-21 is way more advanced than the B-2.

And who is going to pay for it???

I would think so........it looks so much different.

It is... It's the new fancy wrap used on high end cars to give that dull finish.

Top 5% and Wall Street... Haven't you heard Hillary and Bernie yet?

When are they going to ramp up the A-10 production. Let's get back to serious kick butt aircraft.........

Not satisfied that the F-35 will bankrupt the US and military, the Air Force ups the ante with a program projected to cost $60 Billion.

Wait for it; next will be the selection of the T-50 to replace the T-38 instead of a cheaper and more practical airplane for UPT (like the L-159).

B-52: bomb-truck; lots of bombs and loiter.

B-1: conventional-only; not a bad bomb-truck, but fewer bombs, less loiter, more expense.

B-2: in theory both conv and nuke. Limited conventional bombs; rumored to cost more than $100,000 an hour.

Yup....B-21 makes perfect sense....

Guess the AF is looking for a name for the aircraft, any suggestions?

Bernie Bomber