USAF News and Discussion

swerve said:
The Valiant was the technologically & aerodynamically conservative, low risk, option, able to be delivered earlier than the more advanced Victor or Vulcan.

It also turned out to be the shortest-lived, developing major fatigue problems very soon after being switched to low-level flying which led to inspection of the entire fleet & the discovery of greater than expected fatigue across the fleet, & was retired early.
Click to expand...
I would love to have seen a Vulcan going full noise (max throttle) through the Mach Loop. That would've been awesome.
 
Lockheed-Airbus LMXT team drop out of tanker bid
Reporting suggests 75 aircraft build program made US build facilities problematic. 110 builds would have been needed to justify expense.
Though Airbus did not rule out independent bid

Personally I still find the A330-MRTT lack of upper deck cargo door and pallet loading ability a drawback

https://twitter.com/x/status/1716911187906998631
 
FormerDirtDart said:
Though Airbus did not rule out independent bid
Click to expand...
I had heard that Airbus was going it alone.

There can sometimes be benefits even if it isn't selected to go through the entire process and I think the A330MRTT is still a competitive offer and is likely to do well and may be the superior pick for allies. Also I think there is still interest in keeping some sort of competition in it other than Boeing.

How important palette cargo loading is to the US on a tanker I am not sure its a deal breaker.
 
StingrayOZ said:
I had heard that Airbus was going it alone.

There can sometimes be benefits even if it isn't selected to go through the entire process and I think the A330MRTT is still a competitive offer and is likely to do well and may be the superior pick for allies. Also I think there is still interest in keeping some sort of competition in it other than Boeing.

How important palette cargo loading is to the US on a tanker I am not sure its a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

The longer a potential competitor is in the game means increased pressure on Boeing to get the KC-46 right. Frankly the USAF’s continued acceptance (and Congress perhaps more so) of the never ending performance deficiency is worthy of comparison to Canada’s dysfunctional military procurement deficiency ….well pretty close at least.
 
John Fedup said:
The longer a potential competitor is in the game means increased pressure on Boeing to get the KC-46 right. Frankly the USAF’s continued acceptance (and Congress perhaps more so) of the never ending performance deficiency is worthy of comparison to Canada’s dysfunctional military procurement deficiency ….well pretty close at least.
Click to expand...
First KC45 is not what we are talking about. That program is long gone that contract closed. The LMXT was a bid to try and pitch a whole other tanker that would have been alongside the KC46. Supplementing it.
Second it’s not really even close to getting a shot. LMXT was trying to pitch as being more a fuel hauler than a cargo bird. But the issue of cost and size of fleet don’t really make sense.
The momentum of the USAF and DOD is to favor an existing supply chain and particularly one with a strong U.S. centralized base. LMXT and KC45 were both based on an assumption of an U.S. assembly and outfitting. However it’s a lot easier for the Pentagon to just order more improved KC46. Particularly if the numbers of KC-Y are smaller. The smaller the potential order the harder to justify such a scheme.
Well you can feel free to ridicule the process fixes are taking place and the issues will be resolved. The key difference between a comparison between the Canadian system and the U.S. here is the numbers game. The USAF has already has more KC46 in its fleet that Airbus has delivered globally of A330MRTT.
 
Boeing expects to deliver the USAF's next F-15EX Eagle II fighter by the end of November, nearly a year after the company originally planned and four months behind its revised estimate.

Boeing’s director of F-15 business development, said in a Thursday interview with Defense News that production for the fourth F-15EX is complete, and its delivery will follow shortly after the third.

He also acknowledged that Boeing’s F-15EX production has not been as quick as the company wanted, and that the Air Force has expressed its displeasure with the pace and production problems. So any potential export customer should expect many years of waiting until their first F-15EXs will be delivered.

www.defensenews.com

‘We missed our mark’: Next Boeing F-15EX delivery coming in November

Boeing's new timeline to deliver the next F-15EX comes nearly a year after the firm originally planned, and four months behind its revised estimate.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
In other news, I came across this story here. I had been personally wondering whether or not it would be viable for the US and/or others in the Pacific to work on refurbishing and reactivating island bases and/or airfields built in WWII during the Pacific island-hopping campaign. At time I was specifically thinking of whether the fields at Midway and Johnston Atolls could be reactivated. It does seem then that the USAF has also been looking at refurbishing facilities so that they could be utilized as 'bare bases' in the event of strikes upon permanent USAF bases in the Pacific.

This in turn makes me wonder about what airfields were built by other Allies during WWII. Trolling through satellite imagery of portions of Australia, I do recall coming across a number of remote coastal settlements in the North which seemed to have former runways nearby. Perhaps some of these could similarly get refurbished, just in case.
 
Some serious cash being offered to experienced USAF pilots. As long as commercial aviation stays healthy, retention will be difficult for other AFs as well. Canada's RCAF will be very challenged keeping what pilots they currently have given new fast jets won't see significant number until the 2030s. Finding the cash for similar incentives in Canada with a government running multi-billion dollar deficits for the last 8 years....need bigger deficits or better still a new PM!

Air Force offers pilots bonuses up to $600,000 to keep flying in the service | Stars and Stripes
 
Interesting article about the B-52 modernization program. Although new stuff is being added to extend the B-52’s capabilities to 2060, there are concerns about the parts supply. Many vendors are long gone (last B-52 rolled off the assembly line in the early 1960s. Many parts come from the B-52s in the bone yard (over 700 bombers were built) but there seems to be concerns about how long this can go on for. In any event, there is merit in large build numbers, both from a quantity price POV and for spares assuming a need for extended service. This is a good reason for at least 200 B-21s.

www.stripes.com

Air Force audit says B-52 modernization undercut by failure to track spare parts needs

The Air Force risks undermining its $48.6 billion B-52 Stratofortress modernization plan by failing to track what spare parts are available for the aged bomber and where they continue to be manufactured.
www.stripes.com www.stripes.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top