User Panel
Posted: 12/24/2017 7:47:12 PM EDT
http://aviationweek.com/defense/usaf-could-start-re-engining-first-two-b-52s-2022
Requires a FREE account to read the article The U.S. Air Force says the Boeing B-52H bomber’s 1960s-vintage Pratt & Whitney TF33-103 engine is “not sustainable past 2030” and must be replaced to keep the Stratofortress flying for another two decades, and the first two test aircraft could start undergoing modification by fiscal 2022. The document notes that the Air Force is considering the potential purchase of 650 engines, enough to upgrade 76 aircraft, with another 42 units kept as spares. The service will seek 20 engines initially to modify the first two bombers for testing. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/12/22/air-force-solidifies-options-for-b-52-engine-replacement/ This one does not. While the service has not solidified whether it will move onto a program of record, it has requested “initial seed money” in the 2018 budget and has done market research that could inform a final acquisition strategy. |
|
The gggrandchildern of the first guys to fly it will be flying
Awesome |
|
Would they be able to use a current commercial engine or would it require a dedicated mil application engine?
|
|
Man...can't we find some way to replace the old B-52s with something more modern but not 'holy Mother of God' expensive?
|
|
This is getting ridiculous. The cost of keeping 76 airplanes flying has to have a breath taking high per airplane number.
The services had better speed up their Big Plans for airplane mods and life extension, when the Dims take over all that will get crushed and the money moved to social programs. B-52H production was 102 airplanes. The last airplanes were built in 1962. |
|
Quoted:
Would they be able to use a current commercial engine or would it require a dedicated mil application engine? View Quote |
|
Whoa. Am I reading that correctly? Are they talking about getting almost 70 years service out of 1960s technology jet engines?
|
|
Military planes used to be obsolete by the time they actually were in full production, this thing is heading to be in service for most of a century.
Not sure if I'm impressed or appalled. |
|
Wouldn't one of the little engines out of some type of business jet fit in the existing pod design pretty easy? There was an article about this last year that said the mx and fuel costs would pay off an engine change in 10 years.
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
No that piece of shit already got “new” engines once. This would be the third engine. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Aviation week, AF times, and the rest of the genre's pulp journalism have been promising, claiming, and predicting that the B-52 will be re-engine pretty much every year since I joined in 2001. It's not going ot happen.
|
|
So what do you figure are the best engine options? The TF-33s have 17K thrust and an engine diameter of 56 inches. The outboard engines, at least,
can't be much bigger than that unless the location of the engines is changed. Which I doubt would be even an option to consider. Uh, hang a pair of GE90s on the inboard pylon location and call it a day? Really, what are the best available engine options? |
|
Quoted:
So what do you figure are the best engine options? The TF-33s have 17K thrust and an engine diameter of 56 inches. The outboard engines, at least, can't be much bigger than that unless the location of the engines is changed. Which I doubt would be even an option to consider. Uh, hang a pair of GE90s on the inboard pylon location and call it a day? Really, what are the best available engine options? View Quote |
|
Plus there are plenty of C-141 carcasses that donated their motors to keep the B-52 flying.
Motor being "Not Sustainable" means that at best some LtCol at WPAFB in the fighter-bomber SPO is spinning his wheels by having people chase this pipe dream again so he/she/it can get some bullet point for their OPR. At its worse means Globo-Boeing is greasing congressmen to make that red tape pliable. However, as always with these articles, they'll be talk, discussion, but no program of record, so nothing gets done. |
|
Quoted:
From what I remember reading from a previous thread on this. You can’t reduce the number of engines. Each enginenpowers something diffent (hydro, charging, etc.). You would loose the redundancy that has made them last so long. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
So what do you figure are the best engine options? The TF-33s have 17K thrust and an engine diameter of 56 inches. The outboard engines, at least, can't be much bigger than that unless the location of the engines is changed. Which I doubt would be even an option to consider. Uh, hang a pair of GE90s on the inboard pylon location and call it a day? Really, what are the best available engine options? |
|
You're not getting four engines unless you get a different rudder (not going to happen) or some crazy flight control logic (not going to happen.)
Most biz jet engines are too small. If it happens it will be 8 of the baby GE's that they have on the a10, e175, e195 etc..... I think Boeing has been working on this recently with cf34s. I don't know how far it went.... If it does happen I assure you it will be GE unless they find a way to get eight JT8s and limit the drag of the inlets. |
|
If you go with four engines it will be a major over haul on the wings. You may as well build a new plane
|
|
|
|
Putting 8 biz jet engines like BR725's in the nacelles means you don't have to go thru all the aero and recert stuff and importantly, no new struts and interfaces. Lots and lots less money. All you really have to do is the electronic and plumbing integration.
|
|
|
Quoted:
Wouldn't one of the little engines out of some type of business jet fit in the existing pod design pretty easy? There was an article about this last year that said the mx and fuel costs would pay off an engine change in 10 years. View Quote |
|
Quoted: That’s a stupid and shitty reason not to go with 4 vs 8 engines. Accessory drive gearboxes can run two generators, two hydraulic pumps, etc. They do it every day on many aircraft. View Quote Stress guys say otherwise. APUs can be used for extra power All the wiring will have to be junked, so it can be routed as needed. B-52 is still dropping lots of ordnance; they’re wiping out the drug operations that ISIS uses for money. |
|
Quoted:
Putting 8 biz jet engines like BR725's in the nacelles means you don't have to go thru all the aero and recert stuff and importantly, no new struts and interfaces. Lots and lots less money. All you really have to do is the electronic and plumbing integration. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Incorrect. The H's are flying with the same type engine Boeing hung on them in 1962. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: No that piece of shit already got “new” engines once. This would be the third engine. I did the math and was like, holy shit. |
|
|
amazing
My dad worked on the project that converted the entire fleet to water injection engines |
|
Quoted:
Putting 8 biz jet engines like BR725's in the nacelles means you don't have to go thru all the aero and recert stuff and importantly, no new struts and interfaces. Lots and lots less money. All you really have to do is the electronic and plumbing integration. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Incorrect. The H's are flying with the same type engine Boeing hung on them in 1962. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Quoted:
This is getting ridiculous. The cost of keeping 76 airplanes flying has to have a breath taking high per airplane number. The services had better speed up their Big Plans for airplane mods and life extension, when the Dims take over all that will get crushed and the money moved to social programs. B-52H production was 102 airplanes. The last airplanes were built in 1962. View Quote Maybe new engines are all we can trust 'em with at the moment. |
|
Quoted:
Man...can't we find some way to replace the old B-52s with something more modern but not 'holy Mother of God' expensive? View Quote |
|
|
Quoted:
B-52 and Piece of shit shouldn't be in the same sentence! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Stop saying bizjet engines. Only the largest of bizjet engines produces the same thrust.....
Edit: I forgot this is GD, you guys all fly around in BBJs, 1000s, g600s, global express. Maybe the poorest of you guys flies around in a citation 10. |
|
Quoted: They'll use some off the shelf bizjet/regional jet engine. Stupid low hanging outer nacelles won't allow use of four actual modern engines instead of eight ridiculously small ones. View Quote Maybe they should just tow the B-52's with 747's. |
|
Those planes will still be flying when my grandchildren are senior citizens
|
|
I thought the B-21 was effectively the replacement for the B-52?
|
|
Quoted:
You're not getting four engines unless you get a different rudder (not going to happen) or some crazy flight control logic (not going to happen.) Most biz jet engines are too small. If it happens it will be 8 of the baby GE's that they have on the a10, e175, e195 etc..... I think Boeing has been working on this recently with cf34s. I don't know how far it went.... If it does happen I assure you it will be GE unless they find a way to get eight JT8s and limit the drag of the inlets. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
What assurances have we that it won't end up in a giant boondoggle like the last few AF development programs? Maybe new engines are all we can trust 'em with at the moment. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
This is getting ridiculous. The cost of keeping 76 airplanes flying has to have a breath taking high per airplane number. The services had better speed up their Big Plans for airplane mods and life extension, when the Dims take over all that will get crushed and the money moved to social programs. B-52H production was 102 airplanes. The last airplanes were built in 1962. Maybe new engines are all we can trust 'em with at the moment. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Boeing has a nifty infomercial on re-engineing the B52 View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Wouldn't one of the little engines out of some type of business jet fit in the existing pod design pretty easy? There was an article about this last year that said the mx and fuel costs would pay off an engine change in 10 years. Boeing B-52 Re-engine: The Right Choice for the Air Force |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.