Man, should have rebuffed Boeing and let Airbus provided the next tankers.
http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/air-force-weighs-penalties-for-boeings-tanker-delay/
>>30183234
If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going.
>>30183234
Hey, the days of building jets with slide rules and men is over.
They have to design that thing and build it with computers and diversity.
>>30183234
What I'm confused about is that apparently one of the problems they're having is that the KC-46 is having trouble refueling the A-10. Why exactly is it so hard to refuel the A-10 compared to other aircraft?
>>30183606
>Why exactly is it so hard to refuel the A-10 compared to other aircraft?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xnv79DDxRI
>>30183351
>building jets with slide rules and men is over
Actually, the KC-46 is a modded 767. So probably was slide rules. That's one of the major problems with this program. The platform is already outdated before the first KC goes into service. Boeing would have shut the line down had they not got this contract. Spares and expertise are going to become scarce and expensive as the fleet shrinks and manufacturers gotta get paid to make specialty stuff.
The 767 avionics are really old school. Hence the problems with stabilizing the platform using software. It's pulleys, cables, turnbuckles and analog computers.
>>30183650
Okay, that made me laugh. Good day good sir.
>>30183650
>tfw I found out the other day that I've had such trouble A2A refueling because after you become disconnected the fuel port defaults to closed, and you have to reopen it again to get connected
>>30183606
>hard to refuel the A-10 compared to other aircraft?
Age. Both platforms are old and its not easy to enhance their flight stability. The bet was that the boom design could be simplified from the KC-135 system, which had to handle a lot of movement. Enhanced flight control s/w would be used. But the 767 is old and the A-10 is old. So back to a more flexible boom design.
The best part is Boeing actually expected to win the B-21 selection, to the point they were hiring people, when they fucked up the KC-46 so badly after all the shit they pulled to reverse Aurbus/Northrops selection.
>>30183234
I work on this plane
>>30183234
i'm just looking forward to the day when i will never have to refuel from a ghetto-ass KC-135 with its terrible autopilot ever again.
KC-10 mustard race.
I work on this program and I'd expect another delay. Type certification isn't going well, out 9 months perhaps.
How do they recruit pilots? The whole thing is like a flying bomb.
Oh, wait, I bet there's a lot of hopeful Muslim future pilots
>>30183680
767-200 with -300 wings, updated flight deck. The electrical system is amazing but the initial engineering was incredibly bad. Everything is double and triple shielded and grounded, supposed to withstand and EMP pulse.
>>30184468
there are a few military pilots on /k/. but i'm not going to waste my time explaining if you're that flippant.
>>30184599
And do they fly giant fuel tanks? I'm guessing that they fly things with kebab removal tools
>>30184492
Double shielded? like foil wrapped pairs inside copper shield? I've built video cables with that shit.... i can't imagine wiring a whole plane like that
>>30184635
bombs don't get there if the fighter/bomber runs out of gas.
>>30184710
Multiple layers of strands and or flat strips of metal, often double jacketed, even triple.
Their models programs and inexperienced outsourced engineers failed to account for the increased cable diameters, processes to ground each shield seperately, incompatible termination methods.. list goes on.
Anyhow, Boeing management decisions now they pay the price. The program isn't going anywhere fast, years of rework.
Whatever it's a paycheck
"we're not an engineering company, were an integrator" Boeing
>kek
>More expensive and less payload than the MRTT
lmao MIC
>>30183304
lol it's "If it's Boeing, I ain't going" as boeing has a far worse safety record.
>>30185724
as a pilot (i dont fly airliners, but i understand how their systems work) i would MUCH rather fly a boeing aircraft. airbus has too many chaperone features that wont allow pilots to perform certain maneuvers in the event of an emergency. also, airbus does some really stupid shit with their GPWS and alert systems. the stall horn for instance, will cut out under a certain airspeed. so you can be in a deep stall, the horn cuts out, and then as you start correcting, it comes back on.
also, no shit boeing has a worse safety record, they've been around 55 years longer, and they helped drive the pioneering of commercial flight.
>>30185913
Setting aside that Airbus's offer was basically a 70% Northrop airplane.
>>30185593
>Whatever it's a paycheck
For now. The only program that is really doing well is the 737.
>>30185913
>airbus has too many chaperone features that wont allow pilots to perform certain maneuvers in the event of an emergency.
>Hurr, emergency situation, better stall the jet and roll inverted!
I can't believe I share the sky with retards like you.
>>30186046
if the airplane thinks you are rolled past 30 degrees, it wont let you bank anymore. so if its instruments are faulty, you're fighting the computer, which is authorized to override the pilot. seriously, i work with the guys who do the engineering for these planes. the fact is, airbus' airplanes have trouble transitioning between normal, alternate, and direct law. and often times inexperienced pilots get thrown off.
the stall horn example i gave could have been typed more clearly.
there was an airplane that crashed into the ocean a while back, they determined the reason for the crash was a lack of situational understanding. they were in a deep stall and didnt realize it. they were at full power and like 25 degrees nose up. they couldnt figure out why the airplane wouldnt climb. pitching down caused the stall horn to go off because he got back into the speed arc at which it sounds off.
Regardless of how much time and money Boeing will have to put in to fix it. They're still laughing all the way to the bank.
They managed to overturn Airbus for the USAF contract.
Even with the A330 MRTT strong export portfolio, it's nothing compared to 179 fucking planes.
>>30186092
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 is this the crash you were referring to?
>>30186630
No, Boeing is not laughing. For at least the past five plus years management has been trying to warn both corporate an union employees the we are heading the way of McDonnell Douglas. Between Airbus and all of the other competitors rising in the next 5-15 years, Boeing might not be a thing in the future.
>>30186092
>if the airplane thinks you are rolled past 30 degrees, it wont let you bank anymore.
30 degrees? Where the hell did you get that number?
The actual limit is 67 degrees.
>so if its instruments are faulty, you're fighting the computer
No, you aren't, the system has fault detection and alternate laws for invalid readings.
>seriously, i work with the guys who do the engineering for these planes.
And your dad works at Nintendo?
>and often times inexperienced pilots get thrown off.
And they DON'T in an aircraft that lacks these protections?
>there was an airplane that crashed into the ocean a while back, they determined the reason for the crash was a lack of situational understanding.
Because this shit NEVER happens on Boeings, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Airlines_Flight_6231
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroper%C3%BA_Flight_603
And besides, the "chaperone features" you're bitching about had nothing to do with the crash of AF447. In fact, if anything, they could have SAVED AF447 had they (or the AoA/stall protection, at least) not been disabled in response to a simple pitot-static error.
>>30186823
It's not just Airbus, but the increasing reliance on automation has led to a lot more accidents that could have been prevented had SOP not been to let the autopilot handle it. Like that Asiana airlines 777 or Air France 447
>>30183234
Clearly you don't know Airbus' track record
>in the event of WW3 with the Soviets, tanker crews were expected to perform their orders to the letter
>Those orders almost always were to give every last drop of fuel they could to the bombers and then ditch the plane and hope for rescue to eventually come
>tfw you have to ditch in the middle of the ocean or in the northern regions of Canada
>>30187628
Every A330 MRTT customers seems pretty satisfied.
Boeing, please. Go fix the Pegasus already.
The stories I could tell about the KC46 program, my sides
What can you do
>Obama lift arms embargo on Vietnam
>Vietnam buys 100 737s
That's how it really works.
>>30186658
This sadly. Unfortunately they just haven't executed well on new programs. They just don't have a solid engineering core.
>737 under tremendous price strain
>737 is at limits of design, no room to stretch le 757 replacement
>787 will continue to be a loss for 1500+ lines
>767 does well with FedEx, KC-46 is a mess
>747 is essentially dead
>777X hasn't sold that well, if it is a cluster like 787, 747-8, KC46...
Boeing has tons of room for subsidy and leverage so don't count them out. Terrible engineering company, terrible managers, DEFT negotiators
>>30186823
No, my dad works for steam and he'll ban you for being a haxxor faggot.
Pleasantries aside, i do work alongside boeing engineers. All they like to talk about are the shortcomings of both manufacturers.
To airbus' credit, i dont think they have issues with fairings falling off in flight like the 747 line does. Boeing doesnt want to fix it because "lol there arent many left to build"
However, both normal and alternate law on the airbus are limited at 33 degrees of bank angle, with overall maneuvering being governed by load factor protection envelopes. It isnt until direct law or mechanical law that bank angle protection shuts off, but youre still dependant on the EFCS to determine which mode to be in.
Boeing on the otherhand only has two EFCS flight modes with envelope protection being disabled in their alternate law equivalent.
>>30188386
That plane is pure sex.
>tfw no schools that I can afford offer aerospace engineering
>tfw I settled for computer science instead
It's a piece of shit but we're not going to have a fucking french jet in our Air Force.
>>30188115
>>Obama lift arms embargo on Vietnam
>>Vietnam buys 100 737s
China bought 440 and nothing pllitical happened.
Shit logic
>>30188501
Yeah, too bad nobody is buying them.
Like >>30188209 said, sales are in the toilet. The only planes that are really selling are the 737, the 777, and the 787. And to be honest, I'm actually pretty surprised anybody's still buying the 787. I predict lots of trouble for that airplane in the future, everything on it is UV sensitive
>>30188702
That's not entirely true.
>Xi Jinping visits Boeing
>Xi has White Dinner
>deals are signed
>debt is bought
>Boeing signs deal to open 737 finishing center in China
>China buys planes
>>30188715
737-900 is getting killed by neo, albeit neo has its problems.
737-900 unable to compete with larger Airbus A320 airframes.
737-""max 10"" may use LEAP1A engines that were designed for NEO in attempt to fill Boeing airframe gap 757
>however 737 would need redesigned landing gear, struts, structural enhancements etc costs several billion, several years.
777 is having a tough time filling gap until 777X rollout. Will be further production rate decreases. 777 used market is super cheap.
787 is selling great, however need to recover a 30 billion deficit before break even. Hard to do they "claim" to just now be breaking even per plane.
Literally pushed to the "max"
>>30188715
Wew
>>30188702
I remember when some high ranking South Korean military guys came through the factory to ave a look at KC46, (they declined lol).
Holy shit thosr guys were badass. All black, shades suits, on point, terminators.
>>30187212
and how many times have automated systems prevented a pilot's brain fart from crashing a plane?
>>30188702
All political anon
>>30188949
I thought the 787 was supposed to be a stopgap between the 757 and 767. The 787-900 looks like a great 757 replacement, but nobody is buying them for domestic use
>>30189094
787-8, the smallest 787 is still much larger then a 737-9. 787-8 sells really poorly for whatever reason.
787 is more inline with a 767 replacement.
I'm sure there are business cases why what you suggested isn't the case. I think the fuel savings and cost of airframe can't justify the purchase price. The lightweight highly efficient 787 strengths don't present themselves on shorter flights.
>>30189088
Its not that EFCS is a bad idea, in most cases it does prevent little oversights. The problem is that theres not really a way to manually switch flight modes, and in the case of airbus, the computer overrides the pilot in most configurations. It only becomes a problem when the airplane is in trouble, but thats when you dont want to worry about whether or not the EFCS has determined whether or not to give you full authority
>>30189124
That may very well be the case. I know the foreign carriers are using them for pretty long trips. Its probably still cheaper to buy and run the 767, especially with all of the little maintenace issues that keep popping up on the 787
>>30186653
>02:12:14 (Robert) What do you think? >What do you think? What should we do?
>[As the stall warning continues to blare, >the three pilots discuss the situation with >no hint of understanding the nature of their >problem. No one mentions the word >"stall." As the plane is buffeted by >turbulence, the captain urges Bonin to >level the wings—advice that does nothing >to address their main problem. The men >briefly discuss, incredibly, whether they are >in fact climbing or descending, before >agreeing that they are indeed descending. >As the plane approaches 10,000 feet, >Robert tries to take back the controls, and >pushes forward on the stick, but the plane >is in "dual input"mode, and so the system >averages his>inputs with those of Bonin, >who continues to pull back. The nose >remains high.
>02:13:40 (Robert) Climb... climb... >climb... climb...
>02:13:40 (Bonin)
>But I've had the stick back the whole time!
>[At last, Bonin tells the others the crucial >fact whose import he has so grievously >failed to understand himself.]
>02:13:42 (Captain) No, no, no... Don't >climb... no, no.
>02:13:43 (Robert)
>Descend, then... Give me the controls... >Give me the controls!
perhaps the warning could have been designed better, but this was pilot error through and through.
>>30189232
Yeah. A carrier can buy 2-3 A320neos for your 1 787-8 for a haul from say Seattle to San Fran and just kill you on flights and price.
So Boeing needs a 757 type plane or they lose out on the larger single aisle market. Their in a jam.
>mfw I don't even really like airplanes or manufacturing
Pays well though and I'm good at what I do, manning the dumb end of the tape measure. Back to work rewiring this cluster tanker.
>>30189285
They're, stupid phone..
Union Pride!! Hurrr
>>30189285
Yeah, i should get back to timing my mags. Its fucking hot out here today
