|
Nebakenezzer posted:Dumb question on a similar stubby, adorable jetliner: do the Lycoming ALF 502s on the Avro RJ make ~19,000 hp each? Are you looking at the High Pressure Turbine RPM?
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:43 |
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I dunno. I've never thought of the 737 as an Ugly plane, like, say, the Super Connie or the Nimrod or the A380. It's just extremely generic. Like the store-brand "airplane" you'd buy in a twelve-pack at the discount grocery. The 737 is Dr Pepper, the A320 is Dr. Thunder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:The 737 is Dr Pepper, the A320 is Dr. Thunder. I can tell you’re a fan of Dr Pepper because you correctly omitted the period.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Generally, horsepower rating on jet/rocket engines isn't quoted since it's not really relevant. I do find myself wishing for propeller thrust numbers for armchair-warrioring ww2 planes vs modern fighters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Dumb question on a similar stubby, adorable jetliner: do the Lycoming ALF 502s on the Avro RJ make ~19,000 hp each? No. Combined, maybe, but not each.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
I’ve been reading about a lot of accidents where pilots are reluctant to make use of perfectly good engine power. TransAsia 235 had a bird strike and shut down the wrong engine. AT685 had a damaged left engine, shut it down, then repeatedly retarded the fully functional right engine. VH‐CNZ mistakes fuel spray for smoke (to be fair, ATC claimed smoke), shuts down a good engine, and mishandles the turn. VP‐BGE misdiagnoses vibration and shuts down two good engines. What are examples of the opposite scenario, where delay in shutting down a malfunctioning engine doomed the plane? Platystemon fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Sep 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Don't forget "Guys, I'm concerned"
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:Are you looking at the High Pressure Turbine RPM? Possibly? MrChips posted:No. Combined, maybe, but not each. Fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:September 11th cosplayers are taking poo poo just a little too far. Hey, it works for recovering UAVs...
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:Hey, it works for recovering UAVs... I knew that looked eerily familiar! Platystemon posted:What are examples of the opposite scenario, where delay is shutting down a malfunctioning engine doomed the plane? I don't have a specific case to point to, but there's a failure mode in the engines on the E-2 (and probably other models of the T-56 turboprop) where delaying shutdown in the event of a loss of propeller hydraulic fluid can prevent the prop from feathering, rendering the aircraft uncontrollable or unrecoverable. The emergency procedures dealing with anything related to that system are very expedient about getting the engine shut down and feathered ASAP prior to a loss of fluid.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 05:30
|
|
|
been playing around in flight sims a lot lately and wow it is incredible what the FMC in the 737/747/777 is capable of http://www.b737.org.uk/fmc.htm
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
standard.deviant posted:No team working with one bid is allowed to communicate with a team working on another bid Ah, the old Soviet method of developing new hardware. Wherein Mikoyan-Gurevich knows more about what Lockheed is doing two continents away than what Sukhoi is doing three blocks away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
standard.deviant posted:I have a buddy who is working on the radar part of that for one of the vendors. Apparently due to the way the bid works each radar vendor has to submit a bit in cooperation with each aircraft vendor. No team working with one bid is allowed to communicate with a team working on another bid, so it is a total clusterfuck in trying to field enough competent teams for each bid. Which is at least a little hilarious since NG:MS is making a radar and NG:AS is one of the biz jet contenders so NG will see both Raytheon's and NG:MS' numbers. Doesnt matter though since when finding that link I also found theyre going into their 5th or 6th AoA so maybe cancelling and definitely delaying contract award.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Which is at least a little hilarious since NG:MS is making a radar and NG:AS is one of the biz jet contenders so NG will see both Raytheon's and NG:MS' numbers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
standard.deviant posted:Yeah he's at Raytheon and he's not allowed to talk to people working Raytheon's integration with the other airframes. Apparently asking for bids before determining requirements is not necessarily better for schedule than changing the requirements after the planes are being built. We'll see how it compares for cost. From reading news articles it seems like the basic plan is (or certainly should be) a bunch of COTS and MOTS on a biz jet. What could the AoA possibly reveal? They already tried and failed miserably with the E-10 to do an all in one system. Take a bunch of COTS, hand it to an integrator and have them go make and test it. EDIT: Calling it MOTS since the radar is separate and there's probably radio/comms related development programs that arent done today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
standard.deviant posted:Yeah he's at Raytheon and he's not allowed to talk to people working Raytheon's integration with the other airframes. Apparently asking for bids before determining requirements is not necessarily better for schedule than changing the requirements after the planes are being built. We'll see how it compares for cost. We just finished a similar evolution in that we were partnered with two of three competitors for a project bid. However, instead of having two fire-walled design teams we were allowed to have one design team and two fire-walled project management teams. There may have been engineering elements that were fire-walled (i.e interfaces to the primes hardware) but the general concept design were the same solution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Murgos posted:We just finished a similar evolution in that we were partnered with two of three competitors for a project bid. However, instead of having two fire-walled design teams we were allowed to have one design team and two fire-walled project management teams. There may have been engineering elements that were fire-walled (i.e interfaces to the primes hardware) but the general concept design were the same solution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I can tell you’re a fan of Dr Pepper because you correctly omitted the period. Call me a Brand Respecter but never call me a soda drinker.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Possibly? If you were looking at code:Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Sep 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:From reading news articles it seems like the basic plan is (or certainly should be) a bunch of COTS and MOTS on a biz jet. What could the AoA possibly reveal? They already tried and failed miserably with the E-10 to do an all in one system. Take a bunch of COTS, hand it to an integrator and have them go make and test it. You'd be surprised on the comms bit, and how expensive it actually is. It was a sizable portion of the E-3G aka Block 40/45 upgrade, until every loving dime started getting diverted from everything but payroll to finish the F-35.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You'd be surprised on the comms bit, and how expensive it actually is. It was a sizable portion of the E-3G aka Block 40/45 upgrade, until every loving dime started getting diverted from everything but payroll to finish the F-35.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
That was actually for the Army because they didn't get the O&M funds on time for no-poo poo combat ops. Edit: I didn't expect anyone to catch that reference, nice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:September 11th cosplayers are taking poo poo just a little too far. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You'd be surprised on the comms bit, and how expensive it actually is. It was a sizable portion of the E-3G aka Block 40/45 upgrade, until every loving dime started getting diverted from everything but payroll to finish the F-35. Yea Rockwell/ViaSat sure are proud of those MIDS boxes and the associated kit. You can put internet/"broadband" SATCOM on a commercial plane for ~100K in equipment (boxes, wiring, antenna, filter) and quite a bit more than that in engineering, but overall not too bad. One of the new MIDS boxes? LOL that wont buy the terminal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
But commercial satcom "broadband" won't talk link-16 unless you jack in a military encryption unit then pump JREAP-C, assuming someone's set up to accept that connection type, at which point, gently caress just use a MIDS already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:But commercial satcom "broadband" won't talk link-16 unless you jack in a military encryption unit then pump JREAP-C, assuming someone's set up to accept that connection type, at which point, gently caress just use a MIDS already. MIDS JTRS is the way to go anyways, I thought it was backwards compatible with Link-16? Re: the spec sheet: Yup, I was recalling correctly. http://www3.rockwellcollins.com/dls/MIDS%20JTRS%20data%20sheet.pdf
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea Rockwell/ViaSat sure are proud of those MIDS boxes and the associated kit. You can put internet/"broadband" SATCOM on a commercial plane for ~100K in equipment (boxes, wiring, antenna, filter) and quite a bit more than that in engineering, but overall not too bad. One of the new MIDS boxes? LOL that wont buy the terminal. Commercial Broadband SATCOM is missing some critical features of MIDS. Like say, jam resistance. Also, I assume you could have multiple 'virtual' nets with a broadband SATCOM link MIDS actually provides for a high number of frequency independent nets. CommieGIR posted:MIDS JTRS is the way to go anyways, I thought it was backwards compatible with Link-16? MIDS is a system that uses Link 16 as the data link. Murgos fucked around with this message at 13:55 on Sep 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Yea I get what MIDS JTRS CMN-4 TTNT XYZPDQ BACRONYM does, just talking about cost. poo poo is expensive. Back to the original discussion, Put a MIDS and SATCOM and the radar on a biz jet or 737 and call it a day, Airforce. Why all the AoAs for a jet that we already have? Count down to "I bet Global Hawk can do this, too"
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea I get what MIDS JTRS CMN-4 TTNT XYZPDQ BACRONYM does, just talking about cost. poo poo is expensive. Who would win in a fight, a quadcopter carrying a fist full of ball bearings or a Global Hawk with all the jam hot Bose (no HIGHS no LOWs only MIDS) SATCOM™ By Raytheon®?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea I get what MIDS JTRS CMN-4 TTNT XYZPDQ BACRONYM does, just talking about cost. poo poo is expensive. Then they do all the upfront engineering, then they can finally start bending metal on airplanes, which is another multi-year process after contract award. After all that, there is quite a lot of testing before delivery, then a process to train aircrew on the new airframe and iron out differences in tactics between the new one and the old one. This poo poo is long and complicated and subject to disruption by Congress every time they decide that funding the government three months at a time is a good idea instead of actually passing a budget. (The last time we had a full budget was FY14.) This is how the Navy ended up with drat near 20 years of SLEP on P-3s before finally fielding the P-8, which is basically mission systems bolted onto a 737.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
standard.deviant posted:That is pretty much what they're doing for JSTARS already, and it's a multi-year process before they can decide who gets the contract. This is important because no matter how good your process for selecting the winning platform is (and let's face it, the process is probably not great), you're guaranteed to go through a round of protests and possibly also lawsuits from everyone who was not selected. Procurement is the real aeronautical insanity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
Murgos posted:MIDS is a system that uses Link 16 as the data link.  Yes, I know, I maintained it on the JSTARS.standard.deviant posted:That is pretty much what they're doing for JSTARS already, and it's a multi-year process before they can decide who gets the contract. This is important because no matter how good your process for selecting the winning platform is (and let's face it, the process is probably not great), you're guaranteed to go through a round of protests and possibly also lawsuits from everyone who was not selected. Yup, They still haven't finalized the new JSTARS replacement, as it is, it looks like they might use the portion of the fleet they retire to maintain the remainder of the JSTARS fleet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea Rockwell/ViaSat sure are proud of those MIDS boxes and the associated kit. You can put internet/"broadband" SATCOM on a commercial plane for ~100K in equipment (boxes, wiring, antenna, filter) and quite a bit more than that in engineering, but overall not too bad. One of the new MIDS boxes? LOL that wont buy the terminal. Hell, I wasn't even talking datalinks, I just meant actual HF/UHF/VHF radios. There are 20+ on an E-3, and I expect they were planning to integrate the boxes into the existing "everything else" (technician and operator consoles, etc). E-3s use a washing machine-sized JTIDS terminal, not MIDS. I'm not sure if that was going to change, or if there's a MIDS terminal that has offers the same benefits of the current hardware over fighter-sized terminals. There are some good reasons you want AWACS to be NTR, and they're inside that box. I just don't know the tech well enough to really compare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Hell, I wasn't even talking datalinks, I just meant actual HF/UHF/VHF radios. There are 20+ on an E-3, and I expect they were planning to integrate the boxes into the existing "everything else" (technician and operator consoles, etc). Wait, they are not integrated into the consoles? JSTARS are, any mission crew members (including the Nav) at their console can control any of the radios or tune them from their station.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
Yea thats what I was getting at, latest rumor is another AoA: https://www.dodbuzz.com/2017/09/13/air-force-may-scrap-e-8-jstars/
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea thats what I was getting at, latest rumor is another AoA: https://www.dodbuzz.com/2017/09/13/air-force-may-scrap-e-8-jstars/ They may not have any choice soon: Multiple airframes are suffering from metal fatigue, as these jets are 1970s era Boeing 707s converted for the role. Right before I left the service this year, one had been pulled in for Isochrononal and the backbone of the plane had cracks. That's before you get to the engines, which are the same models used on the B-52 so JSTARS has to compete with the Bomber groups for engines, and while there are talks about restarting the production lines for the engines, they are not being produced and all the ones currently in inventory are considered out of spec, but are getting waivers to keep them in inventory until a replacement is found.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:They may not have any choice soon: Multiple airframes are suffering from metal fatigue, as these jets are 1970s era Boeing 707s converted for the role. Yea I've been surprised they're able to keep depot-ing the 707 and B-52 fleet. I bet if you look at that wing center section its patch on top of patch. I've gone on rants in a few threads about type certificates but one of the big reasons the military at large should keep doing CDA projects, like new JSTARS, that keeps the FAA TC/STCs is to participate in engine rotation and take advantage of part 145 repair stations and ADs that are found by the commercial guys before they are problems for the military. E.g. As of 2016 according to wikipedia there are 30,000 CFM56s. This wasnt the case with old JSTARS and its sorta screwed them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:This wasnt the case with old JSTARS and its sorta screwed them. The big fuckup was they HAD a planned engine upgrade planned, but the engine mounts were too low and got in the way of the radar, but the RC-135 DID get the engine upgrade, so now its running a newer high bypass turbofan. RC-135 with new engines that were also proposed for the JSTARS  RC-135 with same engines as the JSTARS prior to upgrade.  There's also this article from 2008 which shows a different engine upgrade that was also dumped: http://www.afmc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/154622/joint-stars-new-engine-program-takes-off/ https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/908390377757057024 CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Sep 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:They may not have any choice soon: Multiple airframes are suffering from metal fatigue, as these jets are 1970s era Boeing 707s converted for the role. Two of them were previously air tankers for Canada, fer christsake
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:43 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Two of them were previously air tankers for Canada, fer christsake Jaysus I thought we only Bought clapped out used poo poo from other countries!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2017 22:56
|
|