Showing posts with label B-2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label B-2. Show all posts

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Top 10 Most Expensive Military Planes

 Taken from the Times 
As the Senate votes to cut military spending on the
$350 million F-22 fighter, here's a look at the military aircraft with the biggest price tags
 
 The summary uses the wrong baseline.  As F-35 observers know and as the table shows, the cost documentation of the F-35 program started in 2001, not 2007.  There has been a lot more cost growth than the “$117.2 billion (42 percent)” stated.
Set in 2001, the total acquisition cost of the F-35 was to be $233.0 billion. Compare that to the current estimate of $395.7 billion: cost growth has been $162.7 billion, or 70%: a lot more than what GAO stated in its summary.
However, the original $233 billion was supposed to buy 2,866 aircraft, not the 2,457 currently planned: making it $162 billion, or 70%, more for 409, or 14%, fewer aircraft. Adjusting for the shrinkage in the fleet, I calculate the cost growth for a fleet of 2,457 aircraft to be $190.8 billion, or 93%.
The cost of the program has almost doubled over the original baseline; it is not an increase of 42%.
Now, you know why DOD loves the rubber baseline. Reset the baseline, and you can pretend a catastrophe is half its actual size.

F-35 Lightning II: $122 million

Lockheed Martin's 2001 deal to build these stealth, supersonic fighter jets was at the time the largest military contract ever. The F-35s, intended to replace an aging aircraft arsenal, were developed as part of a Joint Strike Fighter program between the U.S. and its allies and were criticized as under-powered and overweight — and therefore easy targets. Making matters worse, from 2007 to 2008, cyber-spies infiltrated the 7.5 million lines of computer code that powered the Joint Strike Fighter, raising concerns that enemies could copy the F-35's design and exploit its weaknesses. In April 2009, Lockheed Martin said it did not believe the program had been compromised.


F/A-18 Hornet: $94 million
First entering service in the 1980s, the twin-engine fighter plane was the U.S.'s first strike fighter — an aircraft capable of attacking both ground and aerial targets. It has seen action in Operation Desert Storm and as the aircraft of the Navy's Blue Angels Flight Demonstration Squadron. The F/A-18 is also used by Canada, Australia, Finland, Kuwait, Malaysia, Spain and Switzerland.
F-22 Raptor: $350 million
First conceived during the Cold War as an airframe to vie with Soviet aircraft that was never built, the F-22 is touted by manufacturer Lockheed Martin as the best overall combat plane in the world — not to mention the most expensive. It can shoot down enemy cruise missiles, fly long distances at supersonic speeds and avoid nearly all types of radar detection. But the Senate debate over whether to build seven more — at a taxpayer cost of $1.67 billion — eventually came down to the plane's job-creating abilities. The axed project would have employed 25,000 Americans.


F-22 Raptor: $350 million
First conceived during the Cold War as an airframe to vie with Soviet aircraft that was never built, the F-22 is touted by manufacturer Lockheed Martin as the best overall combat plane in the world — not to mention the most expensive. It can shoot down enemy cruise missiles, fly long distances at supersonic speeds and avoid nearly all types of radar detection. But the Senate debate over whether to build seven more — at a taxpayer cost of $1.67 billion — eventually came down to the plane's job-creating abilities. The axed project would have employed 25,000 Americans.

 EA-18G Growler: $102 million
Hot off the presses, the Growler is a lightly armed version of the F/A-18 fighter that has been updated for electronic warfare (it is currently being delivered to the Navy). Growlers are capable of not only finding and disrupting anti-aircraft radar, but also jamming enemy communications.

B-2 Spirit: $2.4 billion
The B-2 bomber was so costly that Congress cut its initial 1987 purchase order from 132 to 21. (A 2008 crash leaves the current number at 20.) The B-2 is hard to detect via infrared, acoustic, electromagnetic, visual or radar signals. This stealth capability makes it able to attack enemy targets with less fear of retaliation. In use since 1993, the B-2 has been deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan.
 E-2D Advanced Hawkeye: $232 million

A major step forward for surveillance and reconnaissance, the Advanced Hawkeye's powerful new radar system will increase the range of territory an aircraft can monitor by 300%. "It can probably watch the pistachios pop in Iran," an analyst for the think tank Lexington Institute told National Defense in July. Though development of the plane is on track and two test versions have been delivered to the Navy, budget cuts may keep the planes grounded for at least a year longer than planned.

C17A Globemaster III: $328 million
The Air Force military-transport plane is used to move troops into war zones, perform medical evacuations and conduct airdrop missions. There are 190 C17As in service; the aircraft is propelled by four turbofan engines (of the same type used on the twin-engine Boeing 757) and can drop 102 paratroopers at once. In operation since 1993, it has been used to deliver troops and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan and Iraq
.

V-22 Osprey: $118 million
This tiltrotor aircraft, which takes off and lands like a helicopter but can fly faster and farther like a fixed-wing plane, was first used in combat in Iraq in 2007. The Osprey's production has been bedeviled by design and construction problems: the craft claimed the lives of at least 30 Marines and civilians during its development alone (former Vice President Dick Cheney tried repeatedly to ground the plane). Still, because of its range and versatility, the Marine Corps plans to deploy a squadron of V-22s to Afghanistan by the end of the year.

 VH-71 Kestrel: $241 million
This high-tech helicopter project, intended to replace the President's aging chopper fleet, was running more than 50% over budget by the time Barack Obama took office. Soon after his Inauguration, the President announced plans to scrap the helicopters because of cost overruns. On July 22, however, the House Appropriations Committee unanimously approved restoring $485 million to fund the Kestrels.

P-8A Poseidon: $290 million
Boeing's spruced-up military version of its 737 jet will be used by the Navy to conduct anti-submarine warfare and gather intelligence. It can carry torpedoes, missiles, depth charges and other weapons. The P-8A is expected to go into service in 2013.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Burnelli or Northrop Flying Wing

Artistic drawing of Northrop B-49


Northrop B-49 and a contemporary Burnelli clearly reveal the distinction between the 2 approaches to the flying wing. Burnelli concentrates 60% of the structural weight around the passenger cabin to which is attached the landing gear and engines, the fuel tanks being isolated in the outer wings.




 Because of longer load paths, Northrop distributes the structure throughout the span and places the passengers, engines and fuel tanks all virtually in the same container, the landing gear being attached to fuel tank supporting structure. When the Burnelli UB-14 crashed, the fuselage remained intact; there was no fire and the crew survived without injury. In the Northrop B-49 crash, the entire airplane broke into fragments and 5 crew were killed. There is little change in the payload weight capability of the two designs, but when examined from the standpoint of floor area and internal volume, the difference is enormous. Because of this, Burnelli design lends itself to both military and commercial applications without restrictions, but Northrop could only be viable for specific military use.



USAF reports said the B-49 was extremely unreliable and very difficult to fly on a bombing mission because of continual yawing and pitching caused by control arrangements.







"The maximum trimmed lift coefficient of 1.31 for the twin boom airplane and 1.03 for the all-wing plane gave stalling speeds at sea level of 82 and 92 mph respectively. The investigation indicated both planes will have essentially the same performance in range and climb rate, but reduction in drag for the twin-boom plane at high-lift coefficients represented increased performance over the all-wing plane in take-off. The elevator of the twin-boom plane ranged from -0.0055 to -0.0072 per degree for all conditions tested and was about twice that of the all wing configuration. The twin-boom plane will have about a 7% shorter take-off run and requires about 9% less distance to clear a 50ft obstacle than the all-wing plane. If both planes are designed to meet the same stall speed, the total wing area required will be reduced over 20%, or 1/5th, thereby permitting the outboard wing panels to be of reduced chord and thickness, with corresponding reduction of drag and weight of wing structure. Also, flaps of higher lift qualities can be employed on the air-foil body and wings with the twin boom design because of the greater longitudinal stability and control."


Finally, the fact that Northrop misappropriated Burnelli's 1940s technology in constructing the B-2 again shows that Burnelli was always right and proves that the Northrop flying wing was wrong.








Probably the most glowing Wright-Field report on an airplane design by U.S. Army Air Corps - U.S.A.F. was reflected in General Arnold's September 19, 1939 letter to Secretary of War.
----start of General Arnold's letter to Secretary of War Woodring---
September 19, 1939
The basic principle of the lifting fuselage as developed by V. J. Burnelli since 1919 is now in such an advanced stage that it is extremely important for the Air Corps to experiment further with it with a view to reducing it to military practice.
From studies of the research made by the Burnelli Co., the NACA and the Air Corps the military adaptability of the basic design has the following advantage over the orthodox streamlined deadweight fuselage.


  1. The coefficient of drag is the lowest known for any useful airplane today.
  2. The coefficient of lift is greater.
  3. The lifting fuselage has distinct advantages for the installation of power plants, bombs, armament and all other accessories over the streamlined fuselage.
  4. From wind tunnel tests already conducted by the NACA and NYU the performance is exceptionally' good in every phase.
  5. The design embodies extremely good factors of safety--considerably higher than the streamlined fuselage type.
  6. The design is simple of construction and in the opinion of the Air Corps lends itself to high speed production better than any design and therefore the valuable time element involved in all production contracts can be taken advantage of to its fullest extent.
  7. It is apparently a cheaper airplane to build because of the time element referred to in 6 above.
It is to be remembered that Mr. Burnelli was the first to reduce to practice the use of smooth skin surface on airplanes in cooperation with the Material Division under Maj. Carl Green's supervision.
We understand that the present company has no affiliation with the British Company manufacturing under the Burnelli patents. We are informed by the company that the British have built one commercial article under the designs of a ship built by Mr. Burnelli in 1929, and that this design only resembles the designs submitted to the Air Corps in basic principles. We also understand that this airplane was tested at Farnsborough by the RFC with excellent results, substantiated by a cable from the British manufacturer, a copy of which we have.
We have also seen articles in various British technical magazines that are extremely flattering to the basic design involved and the report of the test pilot, Mr. Clyde Pangborn, would indicate that the design embodies extremely good flying qualities under all conditions of a very severe flight test required by the RFC.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the Air Corps that this project should be carried through to its fullest experimental possibilities and probably to the ultimate conclusion for the purchase of a prototype.
I am informed by the Burnelli Company that in an effort to cooperate with the Air Corps they have proceeded with the required work and at this moment it is seventy percent completed.
In my opinion it is essential, in the interest of the national defense, that this procurement be authorized.
----end of General Arnold's letter to
Secretary of War Woodring---




"The Committee recommends that the Air Corps inform both the Central Aircraft Corporation and V.J. Burnelli Airplanes, Inc., and any other concern which may later possible become interested in the Burnelli 'lifting fuselage', that this design is of no interest to the Air Corps and that for this reason, no further correspondence, consultations, or reviewing of data embodying this design will ever again be considered by the Air Corps or the Materiel Division."