B-52 re-engine competition to start early 2019

[Ghost from above]

The contract for re-engining the USAF’s 76 Boeing B-52H bombers would likely be granted some four to six months after final proposals are submitted, according to the document from the air force.They are looking for 608 engines.Pratt & Whitney, Rolls-Royce and GE Aviation are possible bidders

[Mavke]

Rolls-Royce could wel be the best one, same engine as the Global Express or Gulfstream, at minimum cost fuel efficient and more power , no major changes to the plane itself ...

[tm74sqn]

Do you mean the Rolls-Royce BR410 engine? If so,it would appear that the R-R BR410 has less thrust than the current TF-33 engines on the B-52H - 14,750 lb v 17,000 lb. BR725 has 16,100 lb, but still not enough. Guess that R-R has other engine(s) that would be suitable . . . . lets hope!
Cheers, TM74

[NickC]

The BR700 series of engines have a thrust range from around 15000lbf to well over 20000lbf, so they do match the TF-33s on the B-52H. RR have been working on offering it for the re-engine programme for a while. Good luck to them (although it will be a shame to lose all that smoke and noise).

[dinger]

Integrating a modern power plant into the B52 May be more difficult than some appreciate. As well as redesigning the existing pylons to accommodate the new engines, the tricky task of integrating the digital aspects (re-wiring, integrating the EEC interface with the autopilot etc) could be interesting. I suspect once the competition has been awarded to which ever company, the losers will protest, thus adding a delay to the programme. Additionally, the test phase could very well be protracted which will have a knock on effect. Time will tell as always.

Dinger.

[rh226]

What, no spares!! 608 required = 76 aircraft x 8 engines - no more, no less.

In view of the "America First" policy, I would think that it is rather unlikely that RR will gain the contract.......but time will tell.

[filmman]

Remember the previous competitions before Trump and his America First policy, Presidential Helicopter/Air Tanker. RR might not want to waste money competing if they believe they can't win however better their engine is. Long term DOD will find completion restricted to USA firms will push up tender prices and foreign governments might do likewise.
Filmman

[Thunder]

[quote="rh226"]What, no spares!! 608 required = 76 aircraft x 8 engines - no more, no less.[quote]

I thought that they were looking at a four engine configuration instead of the current eight?

[Mavke]

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... rt-441161/

[bentwaters81tfw]

What, no spares!! 608 required = 76 aircraft x 8 engines - no more, no less.

I thought that they were looking at a four engine configuration instead of the current eight?

Can't be done. Lack of rudder authority. At present a 7 engine approach is classed as an emergency due to the asymmetric thrust problem.

[toom317]

There was a very good post on Pprune a while back, that went into some easily understood technical detail, explaining why you couldn't just strap on 4 big engines, even down to the redesign of the engine mounting pylons and the stresses they would put on the wing. .

[Ghost from above]

Jane’s says Pratt & Whitney is likely to offer its PW815 engine for the B-52 re-engine program.
The turbofan is rated at 16,011 lbf and currently powers the Gulfstream G600 business jet.

[gamecock]

What, no spares!! 608 required = 76 aircraft x 8 engines - no more, no less.

You don't need 8 engines installed in aircraft undergoing depth maintenance, and reliability of engines like the BR710 is phenomenal.

[Ghost from above]

Rolls-Royce has announced it will Build F130 engine in Indianapolis If It Wins B-52 Re-Engining.
The engine is currently fitted on USAF’s E-11 BACN and C-37.
They have invested $600 million in its Indianapolis plant with upgrades specific to this size of engine.
Full article here
http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... ining.aspx