The old BUFF that's still performing:

When they were new, I'll bet it was a big relief for old B-36 pilots with 10 fingers on each hand...

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42517/rolls-royce-will-provide-long-awaited-new-jet-engines-for-the-b-52-bomber-fleet

 

I just got my slide rule, calculator, Cray Computer, cipher books and figured that I started work on the XB-52 70 years ago. You better believe that I'm looking back over my shoulder a lot more now. Ninety six is next. Which brings to mind, I am clearing out all of my art JUNQUE and if anyone is having trouble figuring out a Christmas present , I have tons of prints to go...cheap.

 

Bob- Got my Siemens Schuckert D.III print of Udet's aircraft and it is a beauty.

Jim- Has not heard RR won the B-52 upgrade bid, thanks.

 

Rolls Royce being tapped for the contract that could be worth up to $2.6B

Buy American? Wonder if 'politics' played a roll in this. You buy F-35's ( or whatever) from us, and we'll throw you a bone.

.

 

Still pretty much "buying American," as they'll be built in Indiana & I've heard that RR-USA is almost completely different than the "parent company."

 

The F130 was the logical choice since USAF is already using them in other aircraft and already has a logistics system in place.

 

I had thought the plan was to switch them to just 4 engines each. Anyone know why they kept the 8 engine configuration?

Anyone know where they are going to do the actual re-engine?

 

Yup, because it was way cheaper to keep the same architecture and same engine pylons. Plus no clearance issues.

 

Eight engines always reminds me of this idea concept from 1973. An eight-engine E-3 (707), though the drawing is more of a 135 profile. We would probably be re-engining them now, too.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

How do keep a 60 yr old plane flying? Replace (almost) everything.
Sep 27, 2021 >>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/09/27/the-us-air-force-is-gradually-rebuilding-its-b-52-bombers-from-the-rivets-out/

.

 

The aerodynamics and structural dynamics are closely coupled on that thin flexible wing. A heavier and larger single engine would change all of that and would probably require some deep redesign in the systems as well as structures. Profile and ground clearances would be a concern too.

 

Pratt & Whitney was thought to have significant advantages going into the competition.
BUT, already having the engine contracts for the F-35 fighter, KC-46 tanker and future B-21 bomber (probable), I think they felt the need (politically) to 'spread the wealth'.

Sep 15, 2020 >>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2020/09/15/why-the-plan-to-reengine-b-52-bombers-could-cement-pratt--whitneys-status-as-the-air-forces-top-propulsion-house/

.

 

.
Pratt & Whitney PW815 engine


GE CF34-10 and Passport engines (GE offered choice of 2 engines)


Rolls-Royce F130 (BR700) engine


.

 

If my memory is still good, I recall that the B-52 wing could flex a max up and down of 43 feet at the tip. More up than down. The mass of the engines and struts had a lot of effect on that as well as damping flutter. I think that I recall that the angle of incident of the outboard nacelles alleviated some of the outer wing loads in flight.

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42703/this-is-the-most-incredible-tour-of-a-b-52-stratofortress-we-have-ever-seen

 

Interesting article from the perspective of support crew: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43043/confessions-of-a-b-52-crew-chief

 

.
We'd say, "It takes a college education to break a plane, and a high school education to fix it."

.

 

Except it takes a team of guys with a ton of years of education and experience who spend hundreds of hours to write the manuals that tell them how to fix it. And when they don't follow them... bad things happen.