Boeing B-52J / B-52 Re-Engining

Scott Kenny said:
Rewriting the -1 alone is likely a year-long process. Maybe a year and a half to two years to include verification.
Click to expand...
Kind off, all the system description stuff will be in the draft version before testing starts, as will draft procedures. All that gets redlined as test proceeds. Expected performance charts likely exist, so they likely use some fancy DOE to verify the simulations. Systems stuff, that's the unsexy bane of every tester's existence that will dominate the efforts...
 
NMaude said:
AMI, CFT?



What is the -1?
Click to expand...
AMI - Avionics Mid-life Improvement. CFT was a typo for CTF - Combined Test Force

And as @Scott Kenny pointed out the -1 pronounced "dash one" is the TO 1B-52H-1 which is the Good Book also known as the flight manual supplemented by a lot of other documents, the -1-1 being one of the more interesting as it is the performance annex with all of the nice to see charts...
 
mkellytx said:
Kind off, all the system description stuff will be in the draft version before testing starts, as will draft procedures. All that gets redlined as test proceeds. Expected performance charts likely exist, so they likely use some fancy DOE to verify the simulations. Systems stuff, that's the unsexy bane of every tester's existence that will dominate the efforts...
Click to expand...
Right, but the poor technical writers cranked out the draft with all the expected stuff in it over the course of roughly 6-12 months. Then it gets fed to the flight test guys who proceed to poop out a bunch of changes over the next year or two and they never get a whole section done at once for the tech writers to just one and done. It's always "Oh, we found a bunch of stuff in section 2-B-17, and found we missed a spot in 1-A-12, and another in 2-A-5, and ..."
 
Scott Kenny said:
Right, but the poor technical writers cranked out the draft with all the expected stuff in it over the course of roughly 6-12 months. Then it gets fed to the flight test guys who proceed to poop out a bunch of changes over the next year or two and they never get a whole section done at once for the tech writers to just one and done. It's always "Oh, we found a bunch of stuff in section 2-B-17, and found we missed a spot in 1-A-12, and another in 2-A-5, and ..."
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's the nature of the beast. If computers and simulation could accurately predict/model reality, then us (formerly) bronzed sun gods in flight suits wouldn't be needed. But. alas, the perfect computer doesn't yet exist so we continue to fly the jets and show what they really can do (and sometimes nearly get ourselves killed doing it). After we finish the cards and flight report it's on to the next flight...
 
mkellytx said:
Yes, but that's the nature of the beast. If computers and simulation could accurately predict/model reality, then us (formerly) bronzed sun gods in flight suits wouldn't be needed. But. alas, the perfect computer doesn't yet exist so we continue to fly the jets and show what they really can do (and sometimes nearly get ourselves killed doing it). After we finish the cards and flight report it's on to the next flight...
Click to expand...

Plus, I do not think any AI has yet simulated the ego of a zoomie…

Not sure if it is a lack of processing power or just way too much…

:)
 
Josh_TN said:
Plus, I do not think any AI has yet simulated the ego of a zoomie…

Not sure if it is a lack of processing power or just way too much…

:)
Click to expand...
AI doesn't have to believe that it's bullet proof, the cat's @$$ and God's gift to aviation all while being a golden hand. Old joke, what's the difference between God and a fighter pilot? God knows that he's not a fighter pilot.

All jokes aside, the ego follows the ability to do something very few other humans on this planet can do. Even with the new engines the BUFF still has all kinds of nasty P&FQ.
 
mkellytx said:
New engines and new avionics is a 2-3 yearlong DT/OT effort.
Click to expand...

XB-52 first flight October 1952
B-52A entered service April 1955

Or for a combo of new engines, avionics, airframe and systems how about:

777 first flight April 1994
777 entered service June 1995

Remarkable how we've regressed despite all the project management tools and frameworks developed in the past seven decades.
 
Last edited:
Kiltonge said:
XB-52 first flight October 1952
B-52A entered service April 1955

Or for a combo of new engines, avionics, airframe and systems how about:

777 first flight April 1994
777 entered service June 1995

Remarkable how we've regressed despite all the project management tools and frameworks developed in the past seven decades.
Click to expand...
More systems to make sure are all working together.
 
mkellytx said:
AI doesn't have to believe that it's bullet proof, the cat's @$$ and God's gift to aviation all while being a golden hand. Old joke, what's the difference between God and a fighter pilot? God knows that he's not a fighter pilot.

All jokes aside, the ego follows the ability to do something very few other humans on this planet can do. Even with the new engines the BUFF still has all kinds of nasty P&FQ.
Click to expand...

Oh no doubt. On top of talent, that job filters for self confidence. No body wants anyone with doubt behind a stick or yoke. Just having a little fun.
 
Kiltonge said:
XB-52 first flight October 1952
B-52A entered service April 1955

Or for a combo of new engines, avionics, airframe and systems how about:

777 first flight April 1994
777 entered service June 1995

Remarkable how we've regressed despite all the project management tools and frameworks developed in the past seven decades.
Click to expand...
The 777 never had to deal with nuclear surety or certification. Oh, and how's the X doing? When I left Everett a year ago they still had a bunch with concrete weights for engines...

Edit:
Also, with how few bomber pilots there are and how many bomber test programs the personnel types are having to plan for how to get extra bodies through TPS, 12-month school only two classes a year, to man all of those programs
 
Last edited:
mkellytx said:
Also, with how few bomber pilots there are and how many bomber test programs the personnel types are having to plan for how to get extra bodies through TPS, 12-month school only two classes a year, to man all of those programs
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if they started running some tanker/transport pilots through TPS and then training them on bombers. Because a tanker/transport TP is still useful even if they don't grok bombers.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I wouldn't be surprised if they started running some tanker/transport pilots through TPS and then training them on bombers. Because a tanker/transport TP is still useful even if they don't grok bombers.
Click to expand...
Never, fighter/bomber pilots all go the T-38 route, tanker/transport go T-1's never the twain shall mix. The 418th has plenty of work on its plate with C-17, KC-46, C-130 and VC-25B. They'll send a Mud Hen pilot to the Bomber CTF before they send a tanker/transport pilot, I've seen that firsthand while I was there.
 
When they start converting the B-52H to the B-52J would they start with the inactive B-52Hs in the Boneyard to ensure that the current B-52Hs flying are readily available for combat missions?
 
NMaude said:
When they start converting the B-52H to the B-52J would they start with the inactive B-52Hs in the Boneyard to ensure that the current B-52Hs flying are readily available for combat missions?
Click to expand...
No, they may use a boneyard aircraft to do flight testing however.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom