B-21 Raider

WASHINGTON: To get the highly-classified, high-priority B-21 bomber into the air as quickly and reliably as possible, airframe production is happening in parallel with software testing of avionics and other subsystems on a test-bed aircraft.

Despite some impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic on component suppliers, the B-21 Raider program is “on the right path” and Defense Secretary Mark Esper, who visited Northrop Grumman’s B-21 HQ 10 days ago in Melbourne, Fla., is “happy with the progress we’re making,” says Randy Walden, head of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO).

And important program progress is being made using agile software development tools to speed those sensors’ readiness for integration, he told the Mitchell Institute today.

“I’ve shared this in the past — we’re in production today of test jet number one, and it’s beginning to look like an airplane. The good news is all of the tough critical design, all of the hard engineering, is kind of behind us. Now it’s a matter of actually producing the airplane, and actually rolling it out, and getting on with the development of flight test activities,” Walden said.

In fact, he said, production of that first test jet is actually taking place on the actual production line that will be used to build the (first?) 100 bombers. “So, not only are we learning lessons on how to build the first B-21 and getting that behind us, we’re also getting after learning all the lessons on the production line and getting that behind us as well.”

“I know we’re not going to be immune from design flaws,” Walden added. “We’re going to have to work through those, and we’re doing some of that today. So, from my perspective, I want to find out what those design deficiencies were as fast as I can, get on with the solution, get that into the program in the development phase, and then get on with production.”

Walden explained that the goal of designing and testing the subsystems via agile software tools at the same time production of the aircraft is beginning is to fix as many flaws as possible with them upfront, before integration with the bomber airframe.

“One of the things we’re working on is we have a flight test aircraft that we’ve been hosting some of those subsystems on to buy down the risk. So the first time it’s introduced into an air environment is not on the bomber,” he said. “So we’re doing a kind of an a parallel approach, working out some of the bugs with the software as well as the subsystems.”

While Gen. Timothy Ray, head of Air Force Global Strike Command, has said that he is expecting the B-21 to enter the field in the mid-2020s, DoD has not released a specific date for initial operational capability.

In the past, Air Force leaders — for example in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program — have determined that “concurrency” between production and development has been at the heart of serious cost and schedule delays, Walden insisted that this approach is much less risky.

“I think the higher risk is not doing that and hoping that we get it installed correctly and it works day one on the flight test bed,” he said. “One thing we have learned is, when you can buy down risks with subsystems on even another platform, no matter what it is, and you get into the air and you test some of the software and work those bugs out, it goes a long way.”

Long-time aircraft analyst at Teal Group, Richard Aboulafia, agrees. “It’s certainly a promising approach,” he said. “Historically, that combination of building and testing and redesigning has badly hobbled aircraft development programs, most notably the B-1. There are still uncertainties with an agile software development approach, but there are more reasons for optimism.”

And while even the F-35’s then-program head Vice Adm. David Venlet way back in 2011 called concurrency in that program a “miscalculation,” the B-21 development program is very different from that of the F-35, said Mark Gunzinger, director of future aerospace concepts and capabilities assessments at the Mitchell Institute.

“Unlike the F-35 program, I like to say that the B-21 is more a matter of integration than invention,” he told Breaking D in an email today. “To reduce costs and time, the program is taking maximum advantage of other programs, mature technologies, and probably even subcomponents developed for other weapon systems. In other words, it is far more mature at this stage in its development compared to the F-35 and certainly the B-2 program.”

Walden said the B-21 program office is not just using “normal” DevSecOps — a software building process that combines software development, cyber security, and software operations side-by-side — on components on the ground in a lab, but is actually using those tools to iterate subsystem software while in the air. This, he said, is allowing developers to fix design flaws found every month or two, rather than the typical year or so it typically takes to fix those sorts of errors.

Further, he said the use of Kubernetes to break up “spaghetti code” into discrete modules for testing is allowing the program office to reduce the time it takes to assure that those fixes made to one function of a subsystem doesn’t negatively interact with another set of code underlying a different function.

As Breaking D readers know, Air Force acquisition czar Will Roper is a huge fan of DevSecOps, Kubernetes and other agile software tools, and has praised the B-21 program and Northrop Grumman for how they are being used on “flight-ready hardware” to speed the Raider’s development. Indeed, Roper told reporters in June, the program is pioneering a souped-up version of DevSecOps, called DevStar, that is trying to establish an autonomous testing capability.

Walden refused to be drawn into the debate about whether more than 100 B-21s would be needed, noting that while he has spoken to Ray and other senior leaders, the decision about the size of the fleet is not his to make.

“In fact, when Secretary Esper was down there, we talked about production lines and how many are needed etc., but, in general terms, my focus is the minimum of 100 and starting the production line on time, and building to the rate that I’ve guaranteed we could with that production line,” he said. “So I don’t focus on what the requirement is; I’m going to focus on how I meet that requirement. And if they want more, I believe this production line we’re doing today will help them get more.”