Boeing Tanker Won over EADS's Tanker

Well, I am surprise by this announcement. I thought for sure that enough lobbyists from both sides had enough congressmen and senators paid off that the final decision would be a split purchase between the two companies.

And going by what one article said, that may still be in the works for a future purchase after these first 176 KC-46As are purchased. Price tag is $30 billion plus. EADS version of its Airbus A330 plane to be converted over to a tanker would have been called the KC-45A.

Problems with the F-35 keep on taking place along with the price tag keeps on going up. The USAF is rapidly retiring many of its legacy fighter aircraft such as the F-15 and F-16. Just to try and keep the wonder plane (i.e F-35) on track.

As a smaller aircraft, the KC-46A is expected to burn less fuel in absolute terms than the KC-45 over a 30 year lifespan for the airframe.

Boeing has to deliver the first 18 KC-46As within six years of the contract award date. The production spans over 13 years for building all 179 aircraft. And Boeing has confirmed that first flight for the KC-46A is scheduled for 2015. So, we should see a KC-46A flying by February 2015. I won't hold my breath. Something ALWAYS happens to screw up the production schedule. Then Boeing has to go to Congress to get more funds, etc., etc.

Now its a race against time. The USAF has 400 really old KC-135 Stratotankers that have to be replaced. Many of them are 50+ years old.

___

Ref.

1. ELP Defens(c)e Blog. "Boeing KC-46A air-refueling tanker for the USAF. Now what? #military" by Eric Palmer. February 24, 2011. (http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/boeing-kc-46a-air-refueling-tanker-for-the-usaf-now-what-military/).

2. Flight Global.com. "USAF selects Boeing for KC-X contract" by Stephen Trimble. (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/02/24/353642/updated-usaf-selects-boeing-for-kc-x-contract.html).

FINALLY - Only ONE Engine for the F-35!

Pratt & Whitney has finally beaten out General Electric and Britain's Rolls-Royce to power the troubled F-35 fighter jet program.

And all it took was a coalition of Democrats and Tea Party Republicans to get it done. The U.S. House of Representatives finally voted down the mandate to have a backup engine design (which was a thinly disguise jobs aid program to GE for House Speaker John Boehner's southwestern Ohio and surrounding districts.

For years, going back to former President George W. Bush, and current President Barrack H. Obama; have tried to kill off the GE engine for the F-35. But the House kept on voting funds for that engine. And that added to the cost of the overall F-35 program.

For more information, check out the link below.

___

Ref.

1. CT Now.com. "Pratt Wins F-35 Engine Battle" by Mara Lee. February 16, 2011. (http://www.ctnow.com/business/hc-pratt-engine-20110216,0,4274620.story).

U.S.S. America (LHA-6) and Global Hawks in the news

Discovered the news that Northrop-Grumman won the contract to do the replacement to the Tarawa class Amphib. Did a Google search and found images of the LHA-6 U.S.S. America. Also Cdr Salamander's blog that gave more details about the ship than the corporate website (kinda odd I thought).

Any way, it appears the island on the starboard side is at least as long as the other amphibs in the U.S. Navy. From the CGI images, I'm guessing its slightly narrower than before.

The ship is designed to transport 20+ F-35s (if that program doesn't crash and burn!). Also carries V-22 and CH-53 helicopters. With this ship, the well deck is gone-so no hovercraft like the LCACs.

And like Cdr Salamander, this is basically a baby escort carrier for the 21st century. He wrote down the general characteristics of both the LHA-6 and the old Midway class aircraft carrier.

(Quote)

And yes, I could call it a small CV or CVS - it is the right size.

General Characteristics: LHA-6

Displacement:-Approximately 44,971 long tons full load

Length:-------844 feet (257.3 meters)

Beam:---------106 feet (32.3 meters)

Draft:--------23 feet

Propulsion:---Two marine gas turbines, two shafts, 70,000 total brake horsepower, two 5,000 horsepower auxiliary propulsion motors

Speed:--------20+ knots

Crew:---------1,059 (65 officers)

Load:---------1,687 troops (plus 184 surge)

Armament:-----Two RAM launchers; two NATO Sea Sparrow launchers (with Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM)); two 20mm Phalanx CIWS mounts; seven twin .50 cal. machine guns

Aircraft:-----A mix of: F-35B Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) STOVL aircraft; MV-22 Osprey VTOL tiltrotors; CH-53E Sea Stallion helicopters; UH-1Y Huey helicopters; AH-1Z Super Cobra helicopters; MH-60S Seahawk helicopters

Just to compare, remember the USS CORAL SEA (CV-43)?

General characteristics: Midway-class aircraft carrier

Displacement:-45,000 tons

Length:-------968 ft (295 m)

Beam: --------113 ft (34 m) waterline

Draft:--------35 ft (11 m)

Propulsion:---Geared steam turbines 212,000 shp

Speed:--------33 knots (61 km/h)

Crew:---------4,104 officers and men

Armament:-----Original armament:

----------------84 × Bofors 40 mm guns,

----------------68 × Oerlikon 20 mm cannon

----------------18 × 5"/54 caliber Mark 16 guns

--------------Refit armament:

----------------16 Sea Sparrow

----------------2 close-in weapons systems

Armor:--------Belt: 7.6 inch

Deck:---------3.5 inch

Aircraft carried: Up to 130 (World War II)

45-55 (1980s)

(end Quote).

He then went off on a side-note about naming the following on ships of this class. I personaly like his choices. But I'm still worried that one of the big Ford class nuclear CVNs may not be named after U.S.S. Enterprise. I'm in fact a bit worried that that name will somehow appear on one of these smaller hulls of the America class.

I have also dug into my archives for the blog postings I did on the U.S.S. Enterprise and on the Japanese Helicopter deck destroyers (i.e. Carriers). Both links are below. But I do want to quote part of that article here:

Currently, the 18,000-ton, 610 foot long, Hyuga (DDH 181) is jointed by sister ship Ise. A third ship of this class is still planned. The next carrier will be longer with a flight deck of 763 feet long. It will weigh in at about 25,000 tons. Currently these ships will operate the SH-60s of which 10 to 11 can be carried by the Hyuga class. Crew size is in the 350 personnel range.

Checking out Wikipedia, DDH-181(Hyuga) and sister DDH-182 (Ise), will be able to operate Harriers and F-35 Lightning IIs when they become operational. The ships will then be equipped with a 12 degree ski-jump.

Smaller carriers-they may be named something else to get the funding needed to get them built, but they are coming no matter what. Anyway, links below.

As an aside, also on the Northrop-Grumman website, was this little bit of news about testing of two Global Hawks doing mid-air refueling! Check out that news release as well!

___

Cdr Salamander blog (http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2008/07/uss-america-returns.html).

Northrop-Grumman website (http://www.northropgrumman.com/) & press release for LHA-6 (http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=195497).

Two Global Hawk UAVs Will Conduct mid-air refueling oepration test. (http://www.irconnect.com/noc/press/pages/news_releases.html?d=195525).

Link to my post about naming a future carrier U.S.S. Enterprise (http://aerospacedreams.blogspot.com/2009/08/there-shall-always-be-uss-enterprise.html).

This is my post about Japan's Helicopter Destroyer class Ise (http://aerospacedreams.blogspot.com/2009/09/japan-is-gettin-back-into-carriers.html).

Boeing's NGAD Jet Fighter Concept

The DEW Line got a exclusive it seems from Boeing in being allowed to use images of Boeing's NGAD (Next Generation Air Dominance) fighter concept. Boeing showed off their new proposal of a tailess 1/16th scale model and poster at the Navy League event recently.

Primary designed to be a carrier airplane, the fighter is a 40,000 pound design. If the U.S. Air Force went for this design, it would have to be almost 50% larger in size to replace the 60,000 pound F-22 type fighters. The larger engines will allow the aircraft to go into supercruise, and be low observable that has internal weapons bays and extreme agility. This will be a 9g-rated airframe and take on the old air-to-air performance once performed by the now retired F-14. Avionics between the USAF and the USN version will no doubt be the same.

Boeing really wants to get back into the fighter market. Lockheed Martin has taken a hit over the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. What is interesting is that its the same airframe, but will come in two versions - if you go by the image. The aircraft banking towards you is a unmanned vehicle and the aircraft still flying level is manned.

NGAD is planned to be a replacement for the F-22/F-35 and be operational by 2025-2030.

For the entire article, please visit the link below.

__

Ref. DEW Line. May 7, 2010. "Boeing plots return to next-generation fighter market" by Stephen Trimble.(http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/05/boeing-plots-return-to-next-ge.html). Image is from that website/Boeing.

F-35 Cost Soar - America is SO Screwed!

Discovered this article by the Star-Telegram (and use the link in the Ref section below to read the entire article) that was posted on April 6, 2010.

What a surprise!? Costs for the F-35 program, when inflation is also counted in, have gone up. Once upon a time, it was tought that a F-35 would come out with a per unit cost of $62 million (with a purchase over time of 2, 457 airframes). That estimate was given in the year 2002. Now in 2010, that cost per airframe will no doubt rise to $133.6 million when inflation is included in the figures.

The average cost of the F-35 has risen 57% before the Pentagon included inflation. And it is STILL rising!

Builder of the F-35, Lockheed Martin spokesman Chris Geisel replied in a email (to the Star-Telegram I assume) the following quote: "We can foresee no scenario in which the F-35 unit costs are even close to the projections... cited in the Inside Defense article."

Foreign countries that were thinking about getting the F-35 are now re-thinking their decision. Boeing's F-18 E/F looks better and better to them all the time. Plus this blogger thinks the re-vamping of the F-15 would be a wiser decision to make. Or even buying Typhoons from the Europeans would be better than this F-35 headache. I mean, what is Great Britain going to put on the decks of her two new aircraft carriers if this cost turkey isn't put under a cost control plan?

Mr. Geisel also said, and I'm quoting from the article, ..the actual cost of building airplanes is now trending lower than expected. "We believe the final price per aircraft will be well below the independent estimates the government has adopted."

My opionion - By allowing our defense industry to consolidate itself like it did over the past 20-30 years; our nation is now at risk of being unable to AFFORD to purchase the weapon systems it needs to protect the country.

I might also add the following.

It makes great "copy" to say that the USA has the finest weapon systems in the world. But if they COST so damn much that you cannot use them (or I might also add here, train with them) - then they are really worthless investments. We're getting 270 something F-22s! Thats it!

Over the next 30 years, lets guess that there will be some training accidents. Lets say 5 per decade. Thats 15 airframes right there. Then, if they are ACTUALLY used in combat, that loss level will no doubt go up. So after 30 years and maybe one 'warm' war that we really get some usage out of those remaining airframes.. What are you going to guess our fleet level for the F-22 will be at. 250? 245? 240? 230 working airframes maybe?

I now write this with my tongue planted in cheek, but we should really give consideration to buying a few squadrons of Mig-29s or Su-27s from the Russians!

__

Ref. Star-Telegram.com. April 6, 2010. "Cost estimate for F-35 to soar, Pentagon says" by Bob Cox. (http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/04/06/2094443/cost-estimate-for-f-35-to-soar.html).

image taken from a google search request.

F-15 Silent Eagle blog post (http://aerospacedreams.blogspot.com/2009/06/f-15-silent-eagle-movie-on-dew-line.html).