[Llarry]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

I don't think anyone's ever really called a trash hauler a "sexy beast".

Good point -- utility over beauty.

Now fighters are traditionally "sexy beasts" but I find the F-35 placing not too high in the swimsuit category. Then again, stuffing a monster engine with 42,000 pounds of thrust in A/B, internal weapons bays and a bunch of fuel capacity, etc., in a fighter tends to make it a tad porky.

[Llarry]

The return of the Catalina amphibious seaplane of the 1930-40s?

Catalina Aircraft of Florida has announced that they intend to relaunch production of a modernized version of the Catalina of World War II fame. They call it the Next Generation Amphibious Aircraft Catalina II and plan to market it in two versions, both powered by modern turboprop engines:
-- The 'special use' version will be sold to military and government users. It will have an endurance of up to 19 hours and be able to carry up to 30 soldiers or 16,000 pounds of cargo.
-- The civilian Catalina II will be able to carry up to 34 passengers or 12,000 pounds of cargo.

The photo depicts a firefighting version (CL-415 competitor?)

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

It's such a pretty drive, the miles go by in no time.

Edit: Wink added

Little known fact:

The longest aircraft flight in the US is from Houston to San Diego.

You fly over West Texas FOREVER.

Seriously. It's something like three days.... maybe four. NOTHING to look at except oil wells as far as the eye can see.

R.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

Little known fact:

The longest aircraft flight in the US is from Houston to San Diego.

You fly over West Texas FOREVER.

Someone needs a faster airplane!

[Llarry]

The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress -- then and now.

Vietnam-era B-52D: J57 turbojet engines (pouring out black smoke at high power settings), four .50 caliber machine guns in a tail turret, black undersides and camouflage uppers, tall tail and large exterior fuel tanks under the wings. Long-since retired from service.

Current-era B-52H: 76 remain in service. Powered by TF33 turbofan engines, with plans to refit them with new, more modern engines and redesignate them as B-52J. Smaller underwing fuel tanks. Originally fitted with 20 mm rotating-barrel Vulcan tail cannon, now removed. Electro-optical equipment fitted in fairings under the nose and updated extensive electronic warfare systems. In service for over sixty years, with many more years to go.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The photo depicts a firefighting version (CL-415 competitor?)

It would be expensive to compete with the CL-415 in this arena with this new design. The CL-415 has a long legacy and still being produced.

However a civilian version used as an island hopper to replace the very old Goose, Albatross and other float planes that are falling apart from rust would be a welcome addition.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

It would be expensive to compete with the CL-415 in this arena with this new design. The CL-415 has a long legacy and still being produced.

However a civilian version used as an island hopper to replace the very old Goose, Albatross and other float planes that are falling apart from rust would be a welcome addition.

I think at this point the Catalina II is still vaporware.

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

Someone needs a faster airplane!

The Guppy (737) will do about 0.805M in a pinch, but it's *terrifyingly* noisy. I usually keep it below 0.795M-- that gives me a little pad if you hit mountain wave turbulence and it's a *lot* quieter.

Basically? It's a speed bump with wings when compared to some of the widebodies out there.

R.

[Artemis]

Northern Italy: hail storm on July 24, 2023 required Delta Airlines flight DL185 (Milan (MXP) to NY (JFK)) to divert to Rome (FCO).

Squawk code 7700 (emergency) after hail had pierced the radome of the Boeing 767, as well as an engine.

[Llarry]

The future NASA-Boeing X-66A Transonic Truss-braced Wing demonstrator is promised to have better fuel efficiency (decreased fuel burn) than present airliners.

I want a window seat to watch those skinny wings flex.

[Llarry]

A now-retired B-1B from Dyess AFB landing with everything down.

They're going fast, but what a gorgeous airplane! Then again, the Spitfire and the P-51 were gorgeous, too, but their time has passed.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress -- then and now.

Vietnam-era B-52D

Current-era B-52H

And to take it all the way back, here is the first B-52A on its maiden flight on August 5, 1954.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Llarry

I want a window seat to watch those skinny wings flex.

...and I want an aisle seat, so that I don't stare out the window for the entire flight wondering about composite fatigue and lifetime flex cycles causing the wings to snap off.....

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by Llarry

A now-retired B-1B from Dyess AFB landing with everything down.

So the question now becomes, what is the difference between a B-1A and B-1B?

No cheating by Googling.

Oh-- the B-1? It's nickname is the "Bone Bomber", i.e. B-ONE.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

So the question now becomes, what is the difference between a B-1A and B-1B?

No cheating by Googling.

Oh-- the B-1? It's nickname is the "Bone Bomber", i.e. B-ONE.

Well, if that is directed at me, the B-1A was supersonic and cancelled by Jimmy Carter, if memory serves. Ronald Reagan, as with so many defense projects, resurrected it as a subsonic B-1B with some stealth features (engine intake baffles) and the Bone was off to the races. (No Google involved.)

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by Llarry

Well, if that is directed at me, the B-1A was supersonic and cancelled by Jimmy Carter, if memory serves. Ronald Reagan, as with so many defense projects, resurrected it as a subsonic B-1B with some stealth features (engine intake baffles) and the Bone was off to the races. (No Google involved.)

Pretty good!
The -A was designed as a Mach 2+ jet, mostly due to the variable position engine intakes (which were terrifyingly expensive and very maintenance intensive). It had a pretty large RCS, as well as a crew escape pod instead of ejection seats and was nuclear capable.

The -B is supersonic, but barely (Mach 1.2ish iirc?) due to fixed engine intakes (lower cost and maintenance requirements). It's got a much smaller RCS, can carry ~80k more fuel/payload, and has individual ejection seats. It started out with a nuclear mission, but that capability was removed due to START/SALT treaties.

The three remaining -A's that I've seen are at the AF Museum in Dayton, Wings Over the Rockies in Denver, and the SAC Museum near Omaha. I believe the only other one crashed during testing.

R.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

Pretty good!

Thank you, but I will give myself no more than a C-; my memory was that the A was Mach 1+ and the B subsonic.

I was fortunately enough to visit the NMUSAF some 25 years ago. Most impressive. My most vivid memory is of that humongous (B53?) bomb next to the B-36 -- the thing was as big as a city bus!

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Llarry

I was fortunately enough to visit the NMUSAF some 25 years ago. Most impressive.

Still an open item on my bucket list to visit this museum and see the XB-70 in person.....

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

Little known fact:

The longest aircraft flight in the US is from Houston to San Diego.

You fly over West Texas FOREVER.

Seriously. It's something like three days.... maybe four. NOTHING to look at except oil wells as far as the eye can see.

R.

Plus McGregor Range and Ft. Bliss TX, next to El Paso. Marched and crawled across McGregor Range for 8 weeks and still didn't reach the borders.

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

Still an open item on my bucket list to visit this museum and see the XB-70 in person.....

I'm biased as I spent 27 years driving jets in the Air Force, but two of the very best aviation museums anywhere are the Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio and the Pima Air Museum in Tucson, Arizona.

Both are epic and well worth more than a single day.

R.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

I'm biased as I spent 27 years driving jets in the Air Force, but two of the very best aviation museums anywhere are the Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio and the Pima Air Museum in Tucson, Arizona.

Both are epic and well worth more than a single day.

R.

For me, as a naval aviation geek, the National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida was almost a religious experience. Incredible.

The Big One is the Udvar Hazy Museum outside Washington D.C. I left the DC-Baltimore area in late 2003 and have not been back since, just missing the museum's opening. That one is #1 on my list but I don't think I'll make it there. I visited the Smithsonian's Air and Space on the national mall many times and that one was great; I suppose it still is.

Maybe I've got a better chance of making it to Pima. Thanks for the recommendation.

The other one I'd recommend is Planes of Fame in Chino, California. I believe they are building an upscale exhibition building. When I visited it was beastly hot in metal buildings and outside. Of course, Planes of Fame is regularly flying quite a few of their aircraft, too.

[Llarry]

The Canadian decision to buy the Airbus A330 Multi-role Tanker Transport is not new, but further details have been revealed.

The RCAF will get nine A330 MRTTs: Four new build and five used aircraft converted to the same standard. The big news is that the aircraft will be equipped with Airbus' advanced refueling boom in addition to the wing-mounted drogue refueling units.

The advantage of the boom is a high rate of fuel transfer: 4,550 liters (1,200 gallons) per minute from tanker to receiver. The drogue transfer rate is somewhere around one-sixth of that rate.

The photo is of an Australian aircraft; the RCAF airplanes should be similar.