See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/370924474

Performance Analysis of B-2 Spirit

Presentation · May 2023

CITATIONS READS

0 5,506

1 author:

Nabeel Arif
National University of Sciences and Technology
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nabeel Arif on 22 October 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Performance Analysis of B-2 Spirit

Nabeel Arif
College of Aeronautical Engineering
National University of Sciences and
Technology
Risalpur, Pakistan
[email protected]

Abstract— Aircraft performance analysis is an important United States Air Force, are closely guarded due to their
aspect of aircraft design. The purpose of such performance confidential nature.
analysis is to observe aircraft behavior in different flight
conditions. In this research paper, performance of the B-2 Spirit Twenty B-2s are currently in active service of the United
Stealth Bomber is analyzed under cruise conditions. Analytical States Air Force, each equipped 16 Mk 84 based JDAMs, 16
calculations are performed to predict the aircraft's performance JSOWs, or 8 EGBU-28. Though originally designed in the
in terms of its aerodynamic characteristics. The results of these 1980s for Cold War operations scenarios, B-2 has seen action
calculations are then validated using low-fidelity software in Serbia during the Kosovo - Serbia Conflict in the late 1990s,
simulations in straight and level flight condition. The analysis and in the Gulf war in Iraq and Afghanistan [9].
includes a detailed examination of the B-2 Spirit's performance
at various altitudes and speeds. Despite its advanced design and
capabilities, there is limited data available on its actual
performance in real-world operational scenarios. The analysis
is conducted based on B-2 Spirit's publicly available data. The
results of this study provide valuable insight into the
performance of the B-2 Spirit and highlight the strengths and
limitations of the B-2 Spirit.

Keywords— B-2 Spirit, performance analysis, OpenVSP, low-

fidelity

I. INTRODUCTION
The idea of flying wing dates to pre - World War I era. Fig. 1. Three view of Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit[1]
William Dunne's flying wing design was presented to the
world prior to the war but was still in the experimental stage.
II. METHODOLOGY
In 1915, Hugo Junkers' company was able to develop a more
advanced flying wing design, which made significant progress A. Data Collection
during the war. After the war, the flying wing concept was The goal is to assess the aircraft performance of the B-2
considered for use in commercial airliners due to its low drag, Spirit. While most of the data on B-2 Spirit is classified, key
making it ideal for carrying large numbers of passengers. performance parameters were determined based on extensive
However, its eventual use got restricted military purposes [1]. data validation from various sources. Very limited data was
The B-2 Spirit strategic bomber, produced by Northrop acquired from the official Northrop Grumman website [5], so
Grumman Corporation is among the most effective flying most of data on the B-2 was acquired from Jane’s Issue of
wing design. It was produced in 1987 and entered service in manned aircrafts [4].
April 1997, after success of Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk, Drag plays an important role in aircraft performance,
further bolstering the stealth strike capabilities for the United making it a pre-requisite for performance calculations. With
States Air Force. The B-2 Spirit is a subsonic, long-range no drag data on B-2 Spirit available in literature, drag was
bomber with enhanced stealth capabilities giving it a unique determined by decomposing it into zero lift drag coefficient
ability to penetrate an enemy's most sophisticated defenses and drag due to lift. Skin friction drag coefficient is evaluated
and threaten its most valued and heavily defended targets [4]. with equivalent skin friction drag methodology from aircraft
The blending of low-observable technologies with high design [3].
aerodynamic efficiency and large payload gave the B-2
𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
important advantages over existing bombers. Its low 𝐶𝐷,𝑜 = 𝐶𝑓𝑒 ∗ ()
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓
observability provides freedom of action at high altitudes, thus
increasing its range [3]. Four General Electric F118-GE-100
non-afterburning turbofan engines, each delivering Where 𝐶𝑓𝑒 is the equivalent skin friction drag coefficient and
𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
approximately 19,000 lbs of thrust drive the airplane to a is the ratio of areas. Using values listed in literature for
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓
maximum speed described as "high subsonic," and to altitudes 𝑆𝑤𝑒𝑡
near 50,000 ft. They also provide an unrefueled range of B-2 spirit, 𝐶𝑓𝑒 = 0.003 [1] and = 2.16 [3]. Resulting
𝑆𝑟𝑒𝑓
approximately 6,000 nautical miles. A single aerial refueling
extends this to some 10,000 miles and multiple visits to air 𝐶𝐷,𝑜 = 0.0065 from (1).
tankers stretches the range indefinitely [5]. The design
philosophies of the B-2 Spirit, still in active service with the As for the lift induced drag coefficient, wave drag is ignored
as the aircraft operates at subsonic speeds. Induced lift drag
is modelled as
 𝐶𝐷,𝑖 = 𝐾𝐶𝐿2 ()

𝐾 = 𝑘1 + 𝑘3 ()

The proportionality constant 𝑘3 is estimated from Oswald

Span Efficiency Method [1]. As per this method,
1
𝑘3 = ()
𝜋𝑒𝐴𝑅

𝑒 = 4.61(1 − 0.045 𝐴𝑅0.68 )(cos ΛLE )0.15 − 3.1 ()

Where (ΛLE > 30o )

B. Analytical Calculations
With assumption of straight and level flight at cruise
conditions, analytical relations from Anderson’s Performance
textbook [3] are employed to assess analytical performance of
the B-2 Spirit. MATLAB is utilized for analytical
performance calculations and obtaining relevant performance
plots and charts. Basic calculations are carried out at cruise Fig. 2. Geometric Parameters for B-2 Spirit from Google Maps
conditions with maximum takeoff weight for the B-2 Spirit.
However, some parameters are varied such as weight and
altitude to establish their effect on aircraft’s performance.
C. Low-Fidelity Software Analysis
To validate the analytical calculations, a software based
low-fidelity aerodynamic analysis of B-2 Spirit is carried out
on OpenVSP. Developed by NASA, OpenVSP is a parametric
geometric tool used to model three-dimensional geometry of
aircraft by simple parametric inputs. The geometry is then
analyzed with VSPAero, a potential flow solver developed by
Dave Kinney at NASA Ames. VSPAero has two methods of
analysis namely Panel method and Vortex Lattice method, the
latter being adopted for B-2 Spirit analysis. Vortex Lattice
method extends the use of Prandtl’s lifting line theory for
swept and low aspect ratio wings, replacing surface with
infinite vortices and solving numerically for aerodynamic
parameters. Fig. 3. Low-fidelity 3-D model for Northrop Grumman in OpenVSP

Due to non-availability of most geometry parameters

required for modelling B-2 Spirit on OpenVSP, a rather III. ASSUMPTIONS
eccentric approach was adopted for their determination. From
satellite image of B-2 Spirit (obtained on Google Maps) It is necessary to highlight important assumptions that
parked on Hickam Airforce Base in Hickam USA, Google have been implemented to analyze the performance for B-2. It
Maps distance measuring tool was used on the satellite image is assumed that the aircraft is in straight and level, steady (non-
to determine geometric parameters. To validate the accuracy accelerating) flight. In case of climbing or gliding flight, it is
of the method, wingspan and planform area were estimated also assumed steady. Aircraft is flying at cruise conditions and
beforehand, both exhibiting great accuracy. weight of aircraft is assumed to remain constant during flight.
Thrust Available from the engine remains constant with
velocity. For lift induced drag, ignore wave drag since flight
is subsonic and assume that increase in parasite drag due to lift
𝑘
𝑘1 = 3 from Anderson [3]. For climbing flight, climb angle
3
is assumed to be very small. Airfoil for the B-2 Spirit is
assumed to be NASA SC-27014 supercritical airfoil based on
𝐿
theoretical ( ) and lift curve slope from literature.
𝐷 𝑚𝑎𝑥

In the OpenVSP model of B-2 Spirit, contributions from

fuselage, control surfaces have been neglected. It is assumed
there is no spanwise twist and no airfoil variation from root to
tip.
 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Climb is the horizontal tangent to the plot. Decrease in
maximum climb rate with increase in altitude is evident from
A. Analytical Results the plot. Maximum climb angle corresponds to the maximum
1) Service Ceiling, Absolute Ceiling and Minimum Time slope (tangent) from the origin to the curve. It is clear from the
to Climb plot that maximum climb angle decreases with increase in
Absolute and service ceiling of the B-2 Spirit is obtained altitude.
by plotting the altitude against maximum rate of climb in
3) Lift to Drag Ratio (L/D) vs Angle of Attack
MATLAB. Using curve fitting on MATLAB, absolute ceiling
and service ceiling are calculated. From Anderson [3],
minimum time to climb is calculated by area under the
altitude-inverse of maximum climb rate plot using trapezoidal
rule in MATLAB.

Fig. 6. Lift to Drag (L/D) Ratio vs Angle of Attack

The plot for Lift to Drag Ratio vs attack angle is

represented in figure (7). Lift curve slope was obtained from
Fig. 4. Altitude vs Maximum Rate of Climb
literature, hence lift co-efficient was determined. It was
established that altitude has no effect on L/D ratio, because
density term drops out.
Analytically determined absolute ceiling and service
ceiling are 42070 ft and 41625 ft respectively. Minimum time 4) Glide Performance
to climb comes out to be 8.1 minutes. Theoretical service Glide performance of the B-2 Spirit is studied at three
ceiling for B-2 Spirit is 50000 ft. As evident, analytical value different wing loadings. Effect of wing loading on minimum
deviates from theoretical one. There are many reasons for this glide angle 𝜃min and equilibrium glide velocity is realized by
deviation, such assuming standard atmosphere properties and plotting them against altitude. Following plots are obtained.
other assumptions to simplify analysis. No data is available on
minimum time to climb for B-2 Spirit in literature.
2) Hodograph
Hodograph is a vital performance plot giving information
on climb characteristics of an aircraft.
ertical elocity ft s

Fig. 7. Altitude vs Equilibrium Glide Velocity

ori ontal elocity ft s

Fig. 5. Hodograph

Hodograph is plotted at three different altitudes to

visualize the trend at various altitudes. Maximum Rate of
 Fig. 8. Altitude vs Minimum Climb Angle Fig. 10. Drag vs Velocity at various altitudes

Figure (9) implies that minimum glide angle is Figure (10) shows that zero lift drag (parasite drag) and
independent of wing loading hence a straight line is observed. drag due to lift against velocity for different weights. The plot
However, from figure (8) it is concluded that high wing reveals that parasite drag increases with velocity but is
loading results in high equilibrium glide velocity. independent of weight. Drag due to lift decreases with velocity
for a given weight and increases with increasing weight.
5) Aerodynamic Drag Figure (11) shows drag vs velocity plot for different altitudes.
Drag force is determined from drag coefficient by From the plot, it is inferred that zero lift drag increases with
employing fundamental relationship. Drag force is dependent increasing velocity for a given altitude and higher the altitude,
on density. It is indirectly dependent on weight because of lower the drag. Similarly lift induced drag decreases with
straight and level assumption (equating lift with weight). velocity at a given altitude but higher the altitude, higher is the
Individual contributions to drag force are plotted against drag.
velocity for different altitudes and weights.
6) Thrust Required
Thrust required for flight is simply the net drag force
(straight and level flight). Thrust required is plotted against
velocity for different altitudes and different weights.

Fig. 9. Drag vs Velocity at various weights

Fig. 11. Thrust vs Velocity for various weights

 Fig. 12. Thrust vs Velocity at various altitudes

It is implied from figure (12) that thrust required decreases

with velocity at a given weight and with higher weight higher Fig. 14. L/D vs alpha plot from OpenVSP
thrust is required, which is quite intuitive. In a similar fashion,
figure (13) reveals that thrust required decreases with velocity 𝐿
for a given altitude, however at higher altitudes thrust required The plot for from VSPAero indicates a maximum value
𝐷
is higher. This is again quite intuitive. of approximately 22.5 whereas analytically the value was
determined to be 19.33. This deviation is because of assumed
B. VSPAero Results from OpenVSP use of NASA SC-27014 supercritical airfoil due to lack of data
While not all of the performance data could be validated on B-2 Spirit airfoil.
by VSPAero, only some crucial parameters were validated.
3) Lift Coefficient
1) Parasite Drag Lift Curve Slope is validated by plotting Lift Coefficient
Parasite drag was estimated using elaborate methodology against Attack Angle.
mentioned before [1]. Following is the plot for parasite drag
and lift coefficient from VSPAero.

Fig. 15. CL vs alpha plot from OpenVSP

Fig. 13. CD,o vs alpha plot from OpenVSP

Lift curve slope from VSPAero is calculated to be 0.0636
per degree which is in good agreement with theoretical lift
From the plot, parasite drag at zero lift is approximately
curve slope of 0.06975 per degree. Lift coefficient at zero
0.007, which is in good agreement with the parasite drag
angle of attack was assumed to be zero whereas VSPAero plot
obtained earlier from equivalent skin friction method.
suggests a value of 0.3.
2) Lift to Drag Ratio (L/D)
𝐿
Lift to Drag ratio is validated by plotting against attack
𝐷
angle in VSPAero.
 V. CONCLUSION REFERENCES
In conclusion, analytical and low-fidelity performance [1] D. P. Raymer, Aircraft design: A conceptual approach. Reston:
analysis of the B-2 Spirit has revealed significant deviations American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2021.
in the results obtained as compared to the actual performance [2] S. A. Brandt, Introduction to aeronautics: A design perspective. Reston,
VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc, 2015.
of the B-2. These deviations can be attributed to the limitations
[3] A. J. J. D. Anderson, Aircraft Performance and Design. Boston, Mass:
and assumptions made during the analysis, including steady McGraw-Hill Higher education, 2012.
flight, drag estimation, airfoil selection etc. One major
[4] T. Holmes, Jane's US Military Aircraft Recognition Guide: From 1909
shortcoming of the analysis is the lack of public data on B-2 to present. London: Collins, 2007.
Spirit. [5] “B-2 Stealth bomber,” Northrop Grumman, 19-Jan-2023. [Online].
Available: https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/air/b-2-
It is evident that the analytical results generated by stealth-bomber/. [Accessed: 25-Jan-2023].
OpenVSP, while useful, are not necessarily a comprehensive
[6] UIUC airfoil data site. [Online]. Available: https://m-
representation of B-2’s performance. Most importantly, the selig.ae.illinois.edu/ads/coord_database.html. [Accessed: 25-Jan-
software is only useful for validating only a few parameters, it 2023].
does not directly validate aircraft’s performance. This [7] B. N. Pamadi, Performance, stability, dynamics, and control of
highlights the importance of critically evaluating the airplanes. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and
assumptions and limitations of any software before using it to Astronautics, Inc, 2015.
make design and performance decisions. [8] “Aircraft Museum - B-2 Spirit,” B. [Online]. Available:
https://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/bomber/b2/. [Accessed: 02-Feb-
To address these deviations, it is recommended that future 2023].
performance analyses of the B-2 Spirit utilize higher-fidelity [9] J. Pike, “Weapons of mass destruction WMD ,” B. [Online].
models and simulations and incorporate actual data from the Available: https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-2.html.
manufacturer for accuracy. However, the low-fidelity analysis [Accessed: 25-Jan-2023].
can serve as a basis for initial design consideration stages. [10] W. D. T. Fernando, “‘Northrop Grumman B2 Spirit’ ,” 2016. [Online].
Available: http://ir.kdu.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/345/1144/ENG-
031.pdf?sequence=1. [Accessed: 01-Feb-2023].

View publication stats