USAF News and Discussion

[Sandhi Yudha]

LIFT Aircraft Hexa is an amphibious 18-rotor electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft for one person.
It looks very practical, if its powerful enough to carry one fully equipped soldier. Sadly the technical specifications are not available yet.

US Air Force pilots could fly Agility Prime aircraft in 2021

US Air Force (USAF) pilots could fly as early as April or May the electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft that are being offered for the service’s...

www.janes.com

hexa by LIFT aircraft is a 18-rotor electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft

www.designboom.com

AIRCRAFT | LIFT Aircraft

Introducing Hexa from LIFT Aircraft - an electric, vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft anyone can fly.

www.liftaircraft.com

 

[John Fedup]

There seems to be no limit wrt innovation regarding electric vertical lift. Although this Liftcraft is likely expensive and only saleable to military clients at present, any revolutionary battery technology would create a consumer market with resulting lower pricing. I want one!

 

[ngatimozart]

There seems to be no limit wrt innovation regarding electric vertical lift. Although this Liftcraft is likely expensive and only saleable to military clients at present, any revolutionary battery technology would create a consumer market with resulting lower pricing. I want one!

John you would be a danger unto yourself and others. I have heard that you have been falling off your broom multiple times and the Witches Licensing Authority are investigating the possibility of taking your broom flying licence off you permanently this time for continual dangerous flying.

 

[John Fedup]

More grief for Boeing wrt the KC-46. One interesting comment in the article, “ some higher cost due to production slowdowns on the 767 production line (fewer airline orders). I didn’t think many airlines would be interested in this older design now.

Boeing’s cost overruns on KC-46 now exceed initial contract with US Air Force

Pressures on Boeing's commercial business during the pandemic have permeated the KC-46 program.

www.defensenews.com

 

[OldTex]

Defense News has also reported that US Air Force has a fix for two major KC-46 problems. The USAF announced it closed one of the Boeing-made aircraft’s six category 1 deficiencies (problems that impact operations or pose a safety risk) and downgraded another to the lesser category 2 status. The two issues resolved involve components for the KC-46′s APU. The first deficiency was APU duct clamps, which are located inside the tail of the aircraft, becoming loose or cracking. The second problem involves the APU drain mast, described as “a small metal piece that’s outside of the back of the airplane” that was not properly welded and would come loose during flight.

The four remaining category 1 deficiencies for the KC-46 are:
- two involving the Remote Vision System that are expected to be resolved when a new version of the system is rolled out in 2023
- a problem with the stiffness of the air refueling boom that keeps it from being able to refuel some of the planes in the USAF inventory
- an issue with fuel leaks.
These last 4 deficiencies would seem, to an uneducated person like myself, to be far more serious limitations to the use of the KC-46 in its intended role.

Boeing is locked into paying for all technical problems that cause it to exceed the $4.9 billion ceiling on the firm, fixed-price contract it signed in 2011. So the company is responsible for fixing all deficiencies (except for the boom issue, which was a USAF initiated change the requirements). So far, Boeing has racked up more than $5 billion in charges. So Boeing is to some degree caught between a rock and a hard place. It needs sales at higher prices to claw back the defect charges but it needs to offer bigger discounts to make sales.

 

[Terran]

More grief for Boeing wrt the KC-46. One interesting comment in the article, “ some higher cost due to production slowdowns on the 767 production line (fewer airline orders). I didn’t think many airlines would be interested in this older design now.

Boeing’s cost overruns on KC-46 now exceed initial contract with US Air Force

Pressures on Boeing's commercial business during the pandemic have permeated the KC-46 program.

www.defensenews.com

767 orders are also suffering due to the Corona lockdowns. Generally right now air travel is favoring smaller regionals. 767 and it’s long range large volume types are on the mothballs.

 

[aviation_enthus]

767 orders are also suffering due to the Corona lockdowns. Generally right now air travel is favoring smaller regionals. 767 and it’s long range large volume types are on the mothballs.

The 767 is now produced exclusively as a freighter aircraft (for commercial customers). The current COVID downturn has actually increased demand for cargo services, so this aircraft is in high demand (like all other pure cargo aircraft).

Although Boeing haven’t received significant orders for the 767 in the last 12 months, the aircraft remains surprisingly popular (as a freighter). Boeing actually increased production to 3 per month in 2019.

Boeing boosts 767 production rate to 3 units per month

Boeing is close to rolling out of its Everett factory the first 767 to be produced at the increased rate of three per month. The aircraft is the 1,201st 767 and will be a 767-300F for FedEx Express. Wing spars for this frame were loaded into the assembly line in July. After final assembly of

www.google.com.au

Yearly orders since 2004:

Boeing 767 - orders 2004-2020 | Statista

This statistic represents the gross number of orders for Boeing's 767 aircraft from 2004 through 2020.

www.statista.com

Still logging orders in May 2020:

Boeing logs new 767F orders in May though aircraft cancellations continue

Boeing received new orders for six 767 Freighters in May, though the company's aircraft backlog declined by 90 jets in the month due largely to order cancellations and other negative adjustments.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[ngatimozart]

Boeing video of the F-15EX first flight.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356715092558110731

 

[John Fedup]

Another article on re-engining B-52s. I agree the platform can be relevant for years to come in a stand-off role with long range missiles. Perhaps the biggest lesson about the B-52 is the need to keep manufacturing information detailed enough to actually allow an efficient pathway to return an asset to production in an enhanced version. Recent examples include the C-17 and the F-22. Perhaps a F-22 hybrid with F-35 technology might be a better pathway towards a 6 th Gen jet had the DoD insisted on a better preservation plan for F-22 manufacturing.

General Electric Wants To Keep America's B-52s In The Air Until 2097 (At Least)

The B-52 Stratofortress ain’t new. The first one flew nearly seventy years ago in 1952. The last ones were built ten years later. But just because it’s already been around for decades doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a lot more fight left in it. At least General Electric seems to think so.

foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com

 

[ngatimozart]

Well the way that it's going I wouldn't be surprised if ...

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

So from which i understand the first out of 17 B-1s is already retired. Does this mean that all of these bombers will be send (except 4) to Davis-Monthan AFB in Arizona to be scrapped? 45 will stay in operation.

It looks like a dumb decision because the B-21 is still under development, and it is for sure that IOC will be reached far after 2027, but it seems that the B-1 are quite worn out because of America's adventures abroad the last decades.

USAF begins B-1B retirements

The US Air Force (USAF) has begun divesting itself of the Rockwell B-1B Lancer strategic bomber aircraft as it prepares for the introduction into service of the Northrop...

www.janes.com

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

The USAF is studying/considers to add a brand new “four-and-a half or fifth-gen minus” fighter with capabilities that fall somewhere in between the 1970s era F-16 and stealthy fifth-generation fighters.

The Air Force has not officially deviated from plans to buy 1,763 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing jets from Lockheed over its program of record, although internal documents from the Air Force’s future warfighting cell have indicated a plan to curb orders at 1,050 jets, Aviation Week reported in December.

Having a fleet of current F-16-versions, F-15, F-22 and F-35 should be enough, specially if the airforce add the 144 F-15EX they plan to order. And if its really not enough, why not just new-built F-16Vs?

US Air Force eyes budget-conscious, clean-sheet fighter jet to replace the F-16

An ongoing study will help the Air Force decide whether to add more types of tactical aircraft to its inventory.

www.defensenews.com

 

[OPSSG]

The USAF is studying/considers to add a brand new “four-and-a half or fifth-gen minus” fighter with capabilities that fall somewhere in between the 1970s era F-16 and stealthy fifth-generation fighters...

Having a fleet of current F-16-versions, F-15, F-22 and F-35 should be enough, specially if the airforce add the 144 F-15EX they plan to order. And if its really not enough, why not just new-built F-16Vs?

It’s a non-issue as it’s just a USAF paper study at this time.

IMO, to be threat relevant in the late 2040s to early 2050s, the F-16V platform lacks sufficient room for growth in cooling and space, hence a clean sheet review of the design.

• Just take a look at the Japanese F-2 to get an idea of an evolved design using composites), which is complimentary to the capabilities of the JASDF’s inventory of 98 refurbished F-15Js and 147 F-35A/Bs in maritime strike.
• In terms of capability, a USAF buy (if it occurs and it may not due to an upcoming analysis of alternatives) in this new aircraft type (think of F-18E block 3 level of avionics, radar signature management, missile carriage ability and range, as a reference guide) will result in a cost conscious product that is sellable to Taiwan, Indonesia and so on. This new aircraft type is also likely to have improved internal cooling to provide for self protection jamming and its AESA radar.
• I have a longer reply in another thread, here.

 

[Terran]

Mostly it seems like they are thinking about a updatable systems architecture.

 

[OPSSG]

Mostly it seems like they are thinking about a updatable systems architecture.

Are you saying that an armed version of the Red Hawk, developed by Boeing in partnership with Saab, is on the cards and in the running to augment the F-16 fleet?

 

[ngatimozart]

Are you saying that an armed version of the Red Hawk, developed by Boeing in partnership with Saab, is on the cards and in the running to augment the F-16 fleet?

I don't think it's that. The way I have been reading it is that instead of costly MLUs, systems can be easily upgradable by basically a plug and play hardware option and incremental software upgrades. The airframes will have 20,000 hour lives, so it is just systems that will need to be easily upgradable. Engines can easily be changed anyway so that's no real problem if you wanted to use a newer engine, with the only constraints being the physical and thermal dimensions.

WRT the eT-7A Red Hawk, there would be a market for a light fighter variant and it would not be a silly idea for SAAB Boeing to market it to the USAF if they can meet the requirements for its new fighter. One consideration is cost and it is already an existing design that could be adapted. The fact that they have a digital aircraft, means that they can derisk it significantly before they build the first physical aircraft. That in itself cuts down the cost significantly because they are not having to build 3 plus prototypes before they start on the first production aircraft. The first build can be production aircraft #1 if they so desire.

 

[OldTex]

Are you saying that an armed version of the Red Hawk, developed by Boeing in partnership with Saab, is on the cards and in the running to augment the F-16 fleet?

If it did happen then it would be a case of history repeating itself just like the T-38 and F-5. Although the US Air Force Chief of Staff would probably be expecting more capability than an F-5 type aircraft could provide. While it is just a paper study at this stage that doesn't preclude the cart being put before the horse down the track politically.

 

[swerve]

I don't think it's that. The way I have been reading it is that instead of costly MLUs, systems can be easily upgradable by basically a plug and play hardware option and incremental software upgrades.

SAAB claims to be doing pretty much that with Gripen already. Perhaps that may have influenced Boeing in deciding to go into partnership with SAAB on the T-7.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Boeing intends to offer an armed light-attack version of the T-7 as replacement for aging jet trainers and light-attack aircraft like the F-5 and Alpha Jet. I actually doubt that at the moment the T-7 is suitable to become a multirole fighter. But with some extensive redesign it can become a heavy concurent for the BAe Hawk Mk 200 and KAI FA-50.

Boeing sees T-7 as combat replacement for Northrop F-5 and Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet

Boeing has long touted the "growth potential" of the T-7, noting that the jet trainer could be retrofitted with weapons, such as missiles or bombs, to serve as a light attack aircraft.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[the concerned]

To be honest the only suitable options for a 4.5 generation fighter is either a increased order of f-15ex's or perhaps Lockheed could offer a US version of the Korean kfx.