Boeing's plan to Re-engine the B-52

The tax payers will love it!

Awww yesss! that would be a spectacular sight to see and hear :)

1 Like

Fuel efficiency doesn’t just mean less $$, it also increases range without midair refueling, longer loitering at target areas, etc.

Nope, the proposal is to use 8 smaller sized jets that are currently used on regional airliners…ones that closely match the weight and thrust of the current jets so no major structural changes have to be made to the aircraft.

1 Like

Good! I think someone said it up above but it’s just our way of saving money for example Cecil Field in my city (Jacksonville, Fl) is being used by Boeing and US Navy to transform retired Air Force and Marine F/A-18 hornets into both F/A- 18 Superhornets and E/A-18 hornets (the little brother of the F-18) for them! I got to tour it just recently and it’s amazing to see it!

But because two of those engines are probably about the same weight as a CF6 or GeNX it wouldn’t be illogical to put 4 CF6s or 4 GeNXs instead of 8 TF33s

Putting on fewer, heavier high thrust engines sounds sensible, but the wing would have to be reengineered to deal with the bigger loads and twisting forces. Big $$$.

The CF34-10E from the Embraer E195 has been rumoured before, and would be an ideal replacement.

2 Likes

Lol put 8 GE90s on it and the veritcal speed on takeoff will be 25,000ft/m

Let’s not encourage the government to become any more inept with money, lol.

1 Like

Most of the militarys budget goes to golfcourses anyway.

1 Like

God bless America ;-) On topic I would love to see the B-52 continue on longer than the current forecast.

1 Like

To be honest, I would like to see a new aircraft, but it seems very unlikely.

1 Like

The most interesting part of this effort is how Boeing is going to manage this transition between a low-bypass engine and most likely a high-bypass engine. I believe re-engining to a high-bypass engine is the only viable option due to a lack of low-bypass engines of the market today. Significant re-engineering of the existing engine pylons is almost a certainty if Boeing does proceed with a high-bypass option.

2 Likes

Personally, I feel that getting new aircraft is better than putting new engines on an aircraft that they’ve already used for over 50 years. If these do fly until 2050, that means that the majority of the US bomber fleet will be almost 90 years old by the time they are retired. Putting new engines on an old aircraft doesn’t completely revive it, there are still many mechanical things that can and will go wrong with such an old aircraft.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.