Among the reasons that barred the four-engine solution there are the limited takeoff clearance they would have provided and the need for a more radical redesign of the engine/wing/pylon interface, resulting in a more complex and riskier conversion.
Air Force did not choose to use four larger turbo fans instead of eight smaller ones. The new F130 engines will increase the range of the BUFF (Big Ugly Fat Fellow), enhance field performance, improve fuel economy, and reduce maintenance and logistics costs and burdens. The new nacelles are positioned higher and farther forward than the current ones used for the Pratt & Whitney TF-33 engines with which the B-52 has been flying since 1962. One of the first features that is quickly noticeable is the larger diameter of the Rolls-Royce F130’s fan and the new engine nacelles, which we already saw in the video released by Boeing for the completion of the wind tunnel testing of the scale model. The image was rendered from a digital prototyping model and is likely to closely resemble the final version.
New images, released by Boeing to Air & Space Forces Magazine, show how the upgraded bomber will look like after the radar and engine replacements, both on the exterior and in the cockpit. That should be enough to keep it cruising onward, punching through the sky for maybe the next three decades, perhaps with the occasional part out of place.Even if the first flight of the upgraded bomber is still years away, we now know how it will look like after the largest modification program in its history.Īs we extensively reported, the B-52 Stratofortress is about to undergo the largest modification program in its history. It’s not perfect, but it’s pretty good, and it gets a lot done. In fact, after that five-hour flight, another team quickly hopped into the same B-52 and took off again with the landing gear issue still unresolved, its crew said. And sometimes the switches that control the wheels just “get out of rig,” an Air Force spokesperson wrote via email. Those landing gear legs can’t fold up into the belly, though, unless the switches say they’re centered. The issue with the stubborn stay-down wheels stemmed from a fascinating design feature on the aircraft that allows the plane to pivot its main landing gear, so that if it’s landing in a cross wind, the nose of the beast can face into the wind while its wheels line up with the runway.
#B 52 COCKPIT FULL#
Ultimately, the BUFF has its quirks-one of which was on full display during that March training mission out of Louisiana. A crew member enters the aircraft through the hatch in its belly. But no matter how you slice it, bombers don’t come cheap. Part of the reason for the difference is that because the Air Force has so many B-52s compared to the others, the operational costs per aircraft are much lower. The B-1, meanwhile, clocks in at $23 million per plane each year, and the B-2 a whopping $43 million. The BUFF fleet costs the Air Force $1.4 billion per year, according to Harrison, which translates to around $18 million for a single aircraft annually. On a per-plane basis, the B-52 is less expensive for the Air Force to own and fly than the other bombers.
“This is real,” Ray says, “whereas the B-21 is in parts getting put together right now.” What’s more, the B-52 is a metal bird that’s already in the hand, which is another reason to keep it running. The new B-21 Raider will be even pricier to buy, which is why the fleet of tomorrow would be a mix of vintage and new. Giving each B-52 eight new engines and other upgrades requires a budget of about $130 million per plane, Ray says. The costs involved with aircraft like these are astronomical.
0 kommentar(er)
