Powered JDAM

[Scott Kenny]

@NMaude see my reply to jsport below.

will repeat the USG owns the IP in the form of an digital twin so the craft can be upgraded modernized and built from scratch...this is getting old. Any LSI could be jobbed.

Tell me, what did it take to make the wing box originally? An electron beam welder that can hold ~50ft long parts in an argon bath. Who owns those today?

What does it take to remove the hinge pin from the wing? As far as I know, the hinge pin cannot be removed without destroying the wing spar. They were assembled via interference fit, the wing was mounted on a giant air hockey table so it could be easily bumped into perfect alignment and then the hinge pin was pulled out of a liquid nitrogen bath and dropped into the hole in the wing pin and wing box. Hinge pin warms up and is several thousandths of an inch bigger in diameter than the hole in the wing spar. Only one chance to drop those in place and they never come out afterwards.

So, in order to replace the wing box and hinge pins, you also have to make new wings. As if making a new wing box wasn't expensive enough...

 

[jsport]

@NMaude see my reply to jsport below.


Tell me, what did it take to make the wing box originally? An electron beam welder that can hold ~50ft long parts in an argon bath. Who owns those today?

What does it take to remove the hinge pin from the wing? As far as I know, the hinge pin cannot be removed without destroying the wing spar. They were assembled via interference fit, the wing was mounted on a giant air hockey table so it could be easily bumped into perfect alignment and then the hinge pin was pulled out of a liquid nitrogen bath and dropped into the hole in the wing pin and wing box. Hinge pin warms up and is several thousandths of an inch bigger in diameter than the hole in the wing spar. Only one chance to drop those in place and they never come out afterwards.

So, in order to replace the wing box and hinge pins, you also have to make new wings. As if making a new wing box wasn't expensive enough...

now returning to the subject..

The USG paid for a digital B-1 twin and a digital Uh-60 twin, now they can job whomever to produce these craft.

 

[Shoes31]

@NMaude see my reply to jsport below.


Tell me, what did it take to make the wing box originally? An electron beam welder that can hold ~50ft long parts in an argon bath. Who owns those today?

What does it take to remove the hinge pin from the wing? As far as I know, the hinge pin cannot be removed without destroying the wing spar. They were assembled via interference fit, the wing was mounted on a giant air hockey table so it could be easily bumped into perfect alignment and then the hinge pin was pulled out of a liquid nitrogen bath and dropped into the hole in the wing pin and wing box. Hinge pin warms up and is several thousandths of an inch bigger in diameter than the hole in the wing spar. Only one chance to drop those in place and they never come out afterwards.

So, in order to replace the wing box and hinge pins, you also have to make new wings. As if making a new wing box wasn't expensive enough...

I never knew how those wings and pins were installed, in hindsight the cooling and interference fit makes a ton of sense. Very cool!

IF you really wanted to I suppose you could drill out the center of the pin with diamond bits, try to cool the pin and heat the wing box separately at the same time and press it out. IF you could do that I don't see it being a cheap enterprise and such stresses may mean you have to replace the wing box and wings anyways.

 

[kqcke for you]

If its an AUR of 500Ib then its even lighter than a Marte (ER) missile. If its a 500Ib class then it could be around 500Ibs maybe a little more tought even then P-JSOW and P-JADM are around twice as mutch (maybe for P-JDAM a little less but not mtuch).

Edit: its just about twice as heavy as an SEA Venom missile which replaces SEA skua.

 

[TomS]

If its an AUR of 500Ib then its even lighter than a Marte (ER) missile. If its a 500Ib class then it could be around 500Ibs maybe a little more tought even then P-JSOW and P-JADM are around twice as mutch (maybe for P-JDAM a little less but not mtuch).

Edit: its just about twice as heavy as an SEA Venom missile which replaces SEA skua.View attachment 734498

Roughly the size of the Joint Fire Support Missile (JFS-M) (on the large end) or the Israeli Delilah (on the smaller end).

 

[kqcke for you]

Roughly the size of the Joint Fire Support Missile (JFS-M) (on the large end) or the Israeli Delilah (on the smaller end).

Or 1 W85 nuclear warhead...

 

[Scott Kenny]

now returning to the subject..

The USG paid for a digital B-1 twin and a digital Uh-60 twin, now they can job whomever to produce these craft.

And whoever tries to do the job needs a very specific set of tools (that are NOT part of the digital twin).

And in the process of doing the work whoever got screwed into doing it will have to replace the wings as well as the wing box and hinge pins.

Which means that the cost of making the repairs is now about the same as just buying more B-21s.

 

[aim9xray]

What does it take to remove the hinge pin from the wing? As far as I know, the hinge pin cannot be removed without destroying the wing spar. They were assembled via interference fit, the wing was mounted on a giant air hockey table so it could be easily bumped into perfect alignment and then the hinge pin was pulled out of a liquid nitrogen bath and dropped into the hole in the wing pin and wing box. Hinge pin warms up and is several thousandths of an inch bigger in diameter than the hole in the wing spar. Only one chance to drop those in place and they never come out afterwards.

So, in order to replace the wing box and hinge pins, you also have to make new wings. As if making a new wing box wasn't expensive enough...

This is not true regarding B-1 wing pivot pin R&R. Removal requires the same LN2 cooling (for pivot pin shrinkage) as does installation. All three B-1As removed from Edwards AFB for museum display had the wing pivot pins removed and replaced after transportation to their respective display sites; one (ship 4, 76-0174) having this done twice.

Pivotal Success for B-1 Lancer team installing wing pins

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, Okla. --
Published May 21, 2009
By Howdy Stout
Tinker Public Affairs

A B-1B Lancer arrived at Tinker this week for unique inspections of the pivot pins that allow movement for the aircraft's swing wings. This is the second aircraft to undergo the prototype inspection to the pivot pins. Engineers from the AFMC 553rd ACSS/GFLB Aircraft Management Squadron developed the inspection technique, the first of its kind since the B-1 entered service more than 20 years ago. Aircraft Mechanics from the 565th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron accomplish the task.

"It is a prototype process," explained Melvin Godwin, supervisor at the 565th.

As the aging fleet faces higher demands for use, there were concerns over how the pivot pins were holding up. As a result, two hightime B-1s scheduled for normal depot maintenance would also have their pivot pins removed - along with surrounding bearings - and inspected for wear and possible replacement.

The 565th took up the challenge, having already accomplished the removal and replacement of a B-1's wing, which involved removing the pivot pin. Engineers from the 553rd ACSS/GFLB and Mechanics from 565th travelled to Guam to remove and repair a burned-out wing on a B-1. The entire wing removal was accomplished in the field and in the open without benefit of depot-level facilities. "That was the first time we've ever removed a wing from an aircraft," Mr. Godwin said. "And it arrived here after a 23 hour flight with minimal defects."

Inspecting the pivot pins involves removing the three-and-a-half-foot long, approximately 250-pound pin and surrounding shear
bearings. Both pins and bearings are inspected for wear and are measured against original manufacturing specifications. If worn
beyond safe limits, the pin, which can withstand 100,000 pounds of torque, will be replaced. So far, however, the first aircraft inspected showed no need for replacement.

"The wear was nominal," Mr. Godwin explained. "All the dimensions were within allowable limits." Mr. Godwin says Tinker may incorporate the pin inspections on high-time aircraft as part of the normal depot-level maintenance. It is expected to extend the time the B-1 spends in maintenance at Tinker, but only selected, high-flight time aircraft will initially be inspected. "We'll get two this year and two next year," Mr. Godwin said. If significant wear is found on the pins of other aircraft, it may become a mandatory inspection for aircraft undergoing depot-level maintenance. With 66 aircraft in the fleet, each B-1 arrives at Tinker once every five years. "It just depends on what they find," Mr. Godwin said. "We haven't had to change one out yet."

 

[jsport]

And whoever tries to do the job needs a very specific set of tools (that are NOT part of the digital twin).

And in the process of doing the work whoever got screwed into doing it will have to replace the wings as well as the wing box and hinge pins.

Which means that the cost of making the repairs is now about the same as just buying more B-21s.

this is simply unknown & the B-1R concept included AAMs. In an emerging world of airborne ABM + long rg AAMs, one doesnt need stealth one needs payload and payload space. B-21 will always be a niche craft IMHO as it is smaller than the already too small B-2. Stealth is always being chipped away at and a real replacement of the B-52 should in works but will likely never be. There are simply too few DMPIs likely to bombstopped serviced to stop a adversary in their tracks...ie real deterrence to a conflict in the first place.

 

[Scott Kenny]

This is not true regarding B-1 wing pivot pin R&R. Removal requires the same LN2 cooling (for pivot pin shrinkage) as does installation. All three B-1As removed from Edwards AFB for museum display had the wing pivot pins removed and replaced after transportation to their respective display sites; one (ship 4, 76-0174) having this done twice.

Pivotal Success for B-1 Lancer team installing wing pins

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, Okla. --
Published May 21, 2009
By Howdy Stout
Tinker Public Affairs

A B-1B Lancer arrived at Tinker this week for unique inspections of the pivot pins that allow movement for the aircraft's swing wings. This is the second aircraft to undergo the prototype inspection to the pivot pins. Engineers from the AFMC 553rd ACSS/GFLB Aircraft Management Squadron developed the inspection technique, the first of its kind since the B-1 entered service more than 20 years ago. Aircraft Mechanics from the 565th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron accomplish the task.

"It is a prototype process," explained Melvin Godwin, supervisor at the 565th.

As the aging fleet faces higher demands for use, there were concerns over how the pivot pins were holding up. As a result, two hightime B-1s scheduled for normal depot maintenance would also have their pivot pins removed - along with surrounding bearings - and inspected for wear and possible replacement.

The 565th took up the challenge, having already accomplished the removal and replacement of a B-1's wing, which involved removing the pivot pin. Engineers from the 553rd ACSS/GFLB and Mechanics from 565th travelled to Guam to remove and repair a burned-out wing on a B-1. The entire wing removal was accomplished in the field and in the open without benefit of depot-level facilities. "That was the first time we've ever removed a wing from an aircraft," Mr. Godwin said. "And it arrived here after a 23 hour flight with minimal defects."

Inspecting the pivot pins involves removing the three-and-a-half-foot long, approximately 250-pound pin and surrounding shear
bearings. Both pins and bearings are inspected for wear and are measured against original manufacturing specifications. If worn
beyond safe limits, the pin, which can withstand 100,000 pounds of torque, will be replaced. So far, however, the first aircraft inspected showed no need for replacement.

"The wear was nominal," Mr. Godwin explained. "All the dimensions were within allowable limits." Mr. Godwin says Tinker may incorporate the pin inspections on high-time aircraft as part of the normal depot-level maintenance. It is expected to extend the time the B-1 spends in maintenance at Tinker, but only selected, high-flight time aircraft will initially be inspected. "We'll get two this year and two next year," Mr. Godwin said. If significant wear is found on the pins of other aircraft, it may become a mandatory inspection for aircraft undergoing depot-level maintenance. With 66 aircraft in the fleet, each B-1 arrives at Tinker once every five years. "It just depends on what they find," Mr. Godwin said. "We haven't had to change one out yet."

Then the people at Hill AFB who explained that process to me were wrong.

 

[HaveVoid]

C’mon guys, this is a Powered JDAM thread, not a B-1R or UH-60 digital twin thread.

It’s cool discussion, but perhaps better located in the relevant topic.

 

[NMaude]

In regards to the 500Lb class ERAM Defense Updates has put out this video:

The U.S. Air Force has announced that it plans to develop a new, relatively low-cost precision-guided air-launched stand-off munition, the Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM), with Ukraine as the intended recipient

.ERAM, which could have a range of up to 250 miles, would provide the Ukrainian Air Force with the capability to strike targets beyond the reach of many weapons currently in its arsenal, including Western-supplied precision-guided bombs.

This project also presents an ideal opportunity to conduct an immediate real-world evaluation of evolving concepts for rapidly developing and scaling up the production of relatively complex weapon systems.

In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how the US Air Force’s new Extended Range Attack Munition could help Ukraine ?

#defenseupdates #ExtendedRangeAttackMunition #ukrainerussiawar

Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
01:48 RFP
04:50 ERAM
07:02 ANALYSIS

 

[Ronny]

why don't they just reuse JSOW-ER?
it fit all the technical specs

 

[NMaude]

why don't they just reuse JSOW-ER?
it fit all the technical specs

It probably costs more.

 

[Forest Green]

It probably costs more.

And they probably want something they can retrofit to existing Mk-82s.

 

[NMaude]

And they probably want something they can retrofit to existing Mk-82s.

That too, the specifications after all make an explicit reference to the Mk-82 form-factor.

 

[kqcke for you]

why don't they just reuse JSOW-ER?
it fit all the technical specs

It doesn't? Jsow er ist over 1000Ib heavy

 

[TomS]

And they probably want something they can retrofit to existing Mk-82s.

No. Once again, ERAM total weight is supposed to be c.500 lbs. It will not be an add-on kit to a 500-lb bomb.

 

[Ronny]

It doesn't? Jsow er ist over 1000Ib heavy

ah yeah, you are right, so maybe MALD with warhead fit the bill?, Mach 0.85, range about 925 km, now just need to remove the jammer and add warhead

 

[kqcke for you]

ah yeah, you are right, so maybe MALD with warhead fit the bill?

Well yeah but your just using half of your weight Budget (maybe a little more based on the warhead size)

 

[NMaude]

It will not be an add-on kit to a 500-lb bomb.

What about a Mk-81?

 

[kqcke for you]

What about a Mk-81?

Maybe if the rest is also around ~250Ibs.

 

[TomS]

What about a Mk-81?

Not in inventory (probably since Vietnam) and very inefficient (250 lb of warhead, less than 100 lb of explosive). You can do so much better with modern warheads.

 

[kqcke for you]

Not in inventory (probably since Vietnam) and very inefficient (250 lb of warhead, less than 100 lb of explosive). You can do so much better with modern warheads.

At that point one could also Just Put the engine in SDB and increase the warhead size If possible

 

[NMaude]

At that point one could also Just Put the engine in SDB and increase the warhead size If possible

A turbojet powered SDB-ER is an interesting idea, I think the UK is doing something similar with the SPEAR 3 IIRC.

 

[kqcke for you]

A turbojet powered SDB-ER is an interesting idea, I think the UK is doing something similar with the SPEAR 3 IIRC.

Yes but with an Terminal guidance and around ⅒ or more of the warhead size.

 

[Scott Kenny]

No. Once again, ERAM total weight is supposed to be c.500 lbs. It will not be an add-on kit to a 500-lb bomb.

So where are the comments about a Mk82 form factor coming from in reference to the warhead?

 

[kqcke for you]

So where are the comments about a Mk82 form factor coming from in reference to the warhead?

That the whole missile is close to be the same size as an MK.82 or probaly length.

 

[Scott Kenny]

So where are the comments about a Mk82 form factor coming from in reference to the warhead?

Looks like Air Power 2.0 was confusing "500lb class" from the RFP with the Powered JDAM's being able to carry a Mk82.

 

[Forest Green]

No. Once again, ERAM total weight is supposed to be c.500 lbs. It will not be an add-on kit to a 500-lb bomb.

My bad, I was just going by Air Power 2.0's tweet. A whole new bomb is probably going to cost more. Looking back, I'm not sure whether he was conflating two different projects maybe. This definitely says a 500lb payload but it also says 300+nm not 250nm.

 

[TomS]

My bad, I was just going by Air Power 2.0's tweet. A whole new bomb is probably going to cost more. Looking back, I'm not sure whether he was conflating two different projects maybe. This definitely says a 500lb payload but it also says 300+nm not 250nm.

View attachment 734592

Yeah, there was a lot of that going around. People keep assuming that the ERAM requirement is written around Powered JDAM but it definitely is not.

ERAM calls for a total weapon weight of c. 500 lbs.

PJDAM is built around a 500-lb Mk82-shaped warhead, but that means the total weapon weight has to be closer to 1000 lb.

 

[timmymagic]

Yes but with an Terminal guidance and around ⅒ or more of the warhead size.

Spear has a warhead around 50lb's. SDB I has a warhead of 206lbs (SDB II is 105lb's). So its around 1/4.

ERAM calls for a total weapon weight of c. 500 lbs.

For a total all up weight that means the warhead can't be more than c120lb's to get that range.

Oddly enough, not that it would be this, if you took the new Spear based Land Precision Strike missile (essentially Spear but longer with more fuel, and likely a larger warhead) and air launched it you'd have ERAM....

 

[kqcke for you]

Spear has a warhead around 50lb's. SDB I has a warhead of 206lbs (SDB II is 105lb's). So its around 1/4.

The only thing i ever heard was 6-10kg around 1/13- 1/10 but i was guessing it may be on the larger side with 10kg which is around ⅒ or to be more specific 1/9,36.

Oddly enough, not that it would be this, if you took the new Spear based Land Precision Strike missile (essentially Spear but longer with more fuel, and likely a larger warhead) and air launched it you'd have ERAM....

Would be very interresting to be honest.

 

[Forest Green]

Yeah, there was a lot of that going around. People keep assuming that the ERAM requirement is written around Powered JDAM but it definitely is not.

ERAM calls for a total weapon weight of c. 500 lbs.

PJDAM is built around a 500-lb Mk82-shaped warhead, but that means the total weapon weight has to be closer to 1000 lb.

If that's the case it precludes both powered-JDAM and JSOW. Powered SDB is really the only thing that could achieve that, possibly with an engine like the one on SPEAR.

For a total all up weight that means the warhead can't be more than c120lb's to get that range.

Oddly enough, not that it would be this, if you took the new Spear based Land Precision Strike missile (essentially Spear but longer with more fuel, and likely a larger warhead) and air launched it you'd have ERAM....

Maybe not. If this is to be a glide weapon coming in from high altitude, the fuel requirement would be quite low. You've basically only got to do 200nm at high altitude (equivalent to about 67nm at low altitude) and then glide the rest of the way.

 

[Josh_TN]

If that's the case it precludes both powered-JDAM and JSOW. Powered SDB is really the only thing that could achieve that, possibly with an engine like the one on SPEAR.


Maybe not. If this is to be a glide weapon coming in from high altitude, the fuel requirement would be quite low. You've basically only got to do 200nm at high altitude (equivalent to about 67nm at low altitude) and then glide the rest of the way.

I think the USAF is looking for a brand new weapon, not something off the shelf. There are a lot of mid sized companies doing work with advanced automation and commercial OTS parts to bring costs down.