|
|
| Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped (574023) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (574023) | |
Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Mon Mar 8 23:49:00 2010 EADS/Northrop-Grumman abandons KC-45Northrop Grumman finally gave up the ghost on their bid to supply tankers to the USAF. With the death of Rep. Murtha and the elevation of Rep Norman Dicks from Washington's 6th District to the acting chair position of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee they stood virtually no chance of the House signing off on such an enormous payout to Boeing's competitor no matter what Shelby tries to do in the Senate. This is a victory for our servicemen who will finally stand a decent chance of getting an actual replacement for the more than 50 year old KC-135s now. I do find EADS griping about the "fixed" requirements supposedly favoring the 767 particularly amusing. The selection of the A330MRTT in the first place was not consistent with the requirements as the Air Force drew them up. The original requirements favored the 767, but because Airbus no longer has an aircraft in that class they were forced to offer the A330 despite its great shortcomings in ground handling, and survivability. Given how much money we've blown on this tug of war between the 767 and A330 we could have developed a blended wing body tanker aircraft and used that as the basis for a revolution in airliner design. The Model 367-80, which lead to the KC-135 and 707, and that one design has formed the basis of nearly every medium and large size airliner since then. The blended wing body is particularly well suited to aerial tanker and palletized airlift roles, so the USAF is an ideal anchor customer. The design would combine payload and range capabilities far beyond the A330MRTT, with the reduced radar cross section of a flying wing to make survivability better than the KC-767.   A 1000+ passenger aircraft is a distinct possibility with a blended wing body airliner, so long as you don't particularly want a window seat.  Oh well, with any luck we'll see something like this replacing the later KC-135Rs and KC-10s. |
|
|
| (574104) | |
Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Tue Mar 9 10:33:47 2010, in response to Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by WillD on Mon Mar 8 23:49:00 2010. Is Boeing's next commercial airliner, the "797" going to be a blended-wing aircraft? BTW, the 787 is selling very well and Boeing has quite a backlog of orders, at the expense of Airbus. |
|
|
| (574122) | |
Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Mar 9 11:40:49 2010, in response to Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by Dan on Tue Mar 9 10:33:47 2010. Airbus is in trouble. The A380 came out at possibly the worst time, economically, and it will be hard pressed to break even on the project. |
|
|
| (574150) | |
Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Tue Mar 9 12:44:10 2010, in response to Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Mar 9 11:40:49 2010. I think Airbus is also experiencing delays on the A-350XWB. Not sure how the orders are going. United recently ordered some A-350s and Boeing 787s, of course from what I keep reading on the airliners.net board, it's up in the air if UA will even exist to receive those planes in a few years. (if not, I will start the inevitable "UNITED AIRLINES TO BE SCRAPPED!!" thread). :) |
|
|
| (574251) | |
Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Tue Mar 9 16:08:37 2010, in response to Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by Dan on Tue Mar 9 10:33:47 2010. The 797 will likely be a development of Boeing's Yellowstone Y1 project to replace the 737. More than likely the Y1 will be a conventional three tube airliner with a body slightly wider than the 737. The 787 is a product of the Yellowstone Y2, which was created to replace the 767.A blended wing body is far more efficient with higher capacity than any design with a fuselage and wings. But unless the USAF or another governmental agency makes it a priority I don't see it being adopted. A tanker, airlift, radar, or even standoff bomber with a blended wing body could make the best use of the high lift, low drag, and great cargo capacity. But the creation of an airliner with a pressurized passenger compartment integrated into the middle of the wing presents structural problems in addition to the psychological problems of having large numbers of passengers with no external reference. Perhaps if the passengers are given more space or the entertainment system is superior to what we now have the lack of windows won't be noticed. It's possible the Yellowstone Y3, slated to replace the 747 and 777, could develop into a blended wing body aircraft. But as I said I can't see Boeing making the case for a BWB aircraft with just their own investment. The extreme age and obsolescence of the KC-135s means the USAF is unlikely to be able to wait out the development time for a BWB Tanker to fulfill the same role as the KC-45A was to occupy. A 767 tanker is the fastest way for the USAF to get some KC-135Es and Rs replaced before 2020. Thus the earliest we can expect to have a BWB aircraft would be the next round of tankers after this order. It's possible when Boeing switches to their next set of model numbers, perhaps an 808 or something, we'll see the Y3 built as a BWB airliner. I just hope by then there will be some system to display external cameras on the widescreen HD seatback entertainment system. |
|
|
| (574319) | |
Re: Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped |
|
|
Posted by busdude2 on Tue Mar 9 17:37:04 2010, in response to Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by WillD on Mon Mar 8 23:49:00 2010. Great if it crashes 1000 will die instead of 200 or so. |
|
|
| (574853) | |
Re: EU threatens "Consequences" (KC-45A scrapped) |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Mar 10 12:44:34 2010, in response to Good News RonInBayside: KC-45A scrapped, posted by WillD on Mon Mar 8 23:49:00 2010. They're saying the P-word again ("protectionism"), which is a load of hooey since they're the most protectionist of all. Our allies . . .BTW, forget about "blended-wing" passenger aircraft. That means a lot of airsick passengers . . . EUBusiness.com
|
|
|