More LRS-B speculation

a reply to: Zaphod58

If this is what they posted on a public website, then im certain they have something MUCH better.

a reply to: BigTrain

Why do you think Boeing and Airbus haven't gone to all composites? There's a good reason, besides your normal ones.

more news.


USAF in Final Closing Phase of Bomber Contract

The US Air Force is in the final phase of discussion before awarding a contract for the next-generation bomber, and expects an announcement very soon.

“We’re in the final closing phase and it’s going well and you should expect to hear something pretty soon,” William LaPlante, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said during an event hosted by Defense one on Tuesday.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Composites are also rather costly. I've more than dabbled in composites and the amount of labor involved relative to metals is much higher.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BigTrain

Why do you think Boeing and Airbus haven't gone to all composites? There's a good reason, besides your normal ones.

In fact Boeing has sold off a couple of carbon weaving machines, in the last year, big ones for doing fuselage sections.
They were only a couple of years old and went for cheap

a reply to: punkinworks10

The shops in Palmdale do just that. Build one (maybe two) off prototypes. They've got everything they need there to build a complete airframe. Ground up and in house.

Incredible, I know.

But you are also right that many of the internals are coming from sub contractors, some of which are working for both teams. They are just selling units as the normally do, many of which LM already owns - sitting in warehouses.

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Zaphod58

Composites are also rather costly. I've more than dabbled in composites and the amount of labor involved relative to metals is much higher.

They are also difficult to fabricate consistently - "Battle of the X-Planes" the documentary Nova produced on the JSF selection process goes into a lot of detail on Boeing's difficulty in fabricating a composite wing for the X-32 - I believe they ended up abandoning the composite wing for the competition because of this.

a reply to: AtomicMod

They also had a number of issues with quality control on the all composite wings for the 787. They ended up having to buy the company that was making them in order to straighten them out.

Since it's pertinent to both threads I'll just leave this right here too:

Here's hoping the announcement come sooner than later:

The Air Force can proceed only after Kendall, undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, convenes a Defense Acquisition Board review to assess the service’s readiness to award a contract in the competition that pits Northrop Grumman Corp. against a team of Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. Kendall said he hopes a date for the review, which often signals to investors that a contract award is coming within days, can be decided this month.

Both competitors have been working on their bomber designs for the last 4 years through classified contracts. Plenty of time to have built and flown a full scale prototype.

www.bloomberg.com...

originally posted by: AtomicMod

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Zaphod58

Composites are also rather costly. I've more than dabbled in composites and the amount of labor involved relative to metals is much higher.

They are also difficult to fabricate consistently - "Battle of the X-Planes" the documentary Nova produced on the JSF selection process goes into a lot of detail on Boeing's difficulty in fabricating a composite wing for the X-32 - I believe they ended up abandoning the composite wing for the competition because of this.

Yes their issues were getting the fabric to take all of the binder, even using a vacuum impregnation process, they still had substantial voids, and they problems autoclaving the wing and getting all of the binder resin to fully cure.

a reply to: Zaphod58

because GLARE is such a cool material?

a reply to: Barnalby

Because maintenance is such a pain in the ass. The Ethiopia 787 rebuild was a nightmare.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I grew up repairing sailboats and crew shells, and I coulda told them that!

There's a big part of me that still fears that the 787 will become the "Comet 2: Electric Boogaloo" and will give the airline industry a jarring firsthand lesson about the perils of plastic airplanes.

originally posted by: AtomicMod

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Zaphod58

Composites are also rather costly. I've more than dabbled in composites and the amount of labor involved relative to metals is much higher.

They are also difficult to fabricate consistently - "Battle of the X-Planes" the documentary Nova produced on the JSF selection process goes into a lot of detail on Boeing's difficulty in fabricating a composite wing for the X-32 - I believe they ended up abandoning the composite wing for the competition because of this.

That documentary is also 12+ years old (first aired in 2003). When it comes to advanced composites manufacturing and methods, A LOT has changed in just the last 5 years, compared to the 12 years since the documentary first aired (probably filmed in 2002).

a reply to: weavty1

I'll also add to this with the following link, which is an excerpt from a 1998 issue of "Advanced Materials and Processes". This snippet goes over the particulars of the varying titanium and thermoset fiber composites used throughout the different sub-assemblies and sections that make up the production F22 airframes.

www.allstar.fiu.edu...

For comparison, of course

a reply to: weavty1
Thanks for posting that link weavty,.

Can't help but notice the Aermet 100 reference for the landing gear.
A steel that replaces Ti.

I reply to: punkinworks10

Oh yes, I noticed that as well. Spot on, Punkin

Word on the street says that despite his claims to the contrary, Ash Carter's Sept. 8th tour of Boeing's St. Louis plant was an inspection of the facility that would be building the B-3. NG insiders are nervous particularly because of an unnamed technical setback in the recent past. Plus it is widely regarded that the DOD does not want to see Boeing close their military aircraft wing and that's a real possibility if LockMart/Boeing fail to get the LRS-B contract. Just reporting what I've heard...

a reply to: coldstar

But it's okay to close Northrop's wing? Give Boeing the T-X is what I say. But I know I'm wrong....

a reply to: aholic

Northrop has programs if they lose the bomber. Boeing loses their fighter program after the Hornet and Eagle line end in a couple years.

Once they lose that they're left with the KC-46 and that's it.