Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
B2 Question.....  
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2865 times:

True or false, I've heard that the B2 has the same landing gear that is used on the 767. True or false?

Also, I am trying to find out the maximum weight of the B2 as well. I've searched and found different numbers like 336,000 to 376,000 pounds. I'm inquiring for pavement stress reasons.

Thanks!

[Edited 2006-09-01 22:52:01]

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2863 times:

Yes it is true, its derived from the 767 landing gear.

Also for more trivia, the F-117 is one of the cheapest planes in the US Airforces fleet, at about $50mill a pop new, due to its high usage of off the shelf parts from other aircraft.


User currently offlineCF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2647 times:

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 1):
Also for more trivia, the F-117 is one of the cheapest planes in the US Airforces fleet, at about $50mill a pop new, due to its high usage of off the shelf parts from other aircraft.

The F-117 is Stealth technology. The F-117 to this day still has some of the most advanced computer systems in it ... which usually cost the $ . One the FAS website, it says the aircraft is 122,000,000 PER Unit which is much more realistic than 50 mill.

Secondly, how could the B2 have possibly derived its gear from the 767 when it was Northrop Grumman that designed the plane? The one reason why the 767 gear tilts is so it can fit int he gear bay. Obviously the B2 had the same problem . If they can design a 2 BIL dollar aircraft, I am pretty sure they can figure out their own way .... how to make the gear fit in the bay.


Now I have a question for all of you ... why are we not allowed inside the B-1B. It is not new tech, its not like out brains can read computer designs and chips and all that fancy stuff by looking through a panel. We dont have Xray vision? What is so secret about the B-1B. At the joint services airshow, i was permitted to climb up the ladder to look down the entrance route, then came back down, I could vaguely see the cockpit.... any info? thanks


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2640 times:

Quoting CF188A (Reply 2):
why are we not allowed inside the B-1B.

Just my opinion only, but an informed person can garner a whole lot of information based on a "good look around". I personally know of an instance many years ago where the captain of a quasi-NATO navy vessel (no I'm not going to identify the country but they make great ships) allowed an American admiral to have a good look around the CIC of one of their newer warships. Turned out to be quite a windfall in intel. Same thing with sitting in the B-1B cockpit. Many intelligence operatives may think they know what's there, the purpose, etc., but why give them the opportunity to confirm? Smart people can garner a whole lot of info this way.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2633 times:

Quoting CF188A (Reply 2):

The F-117 is Stealth technology. The F-117 to this day still has some of the most advanced computer systems in it ... which usually cost the $ . One the FAS website, it says the aircraft is 122,000,000 PER Unit which is much more realistic than 50 mill.

The F-117, apart from the shell, is essentially a bundle of off the shelf parts. Its flight control computer is pathetic, my mobile phone can outpace it by todays standards, and it was almost directly taken from the F-16 of its day.

Answers.com

Quote:
"Unit cost US$45 million in 1983"

Aerospaceweb

Quote:
"ESTIMATED COST:
$45 million "

Encarta

Quote:
The F-117 cost $45 million each, a B-1 bomber was over $200 million, and each B-2 exceeded $1 billion.

And if you STILL cannot accept it, lets go direct to the Air Force fact sheet at af.mil ( http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=104 ) :

Quote:

Unit Cost: $45 million

The F-117 is a cheap aircraft.

Quoting CF188A (Reply 2):
Secondly, how could the B2 have possibly derived its gear from the 767 when it was Northrop Grumman that designed the plane? The one reason why the 767 gear tilts is so it can fit int he gear bay. Obviously the B2 had the same problem . If they can design a 2 BIL dollar aircraft, I am pretty sure they can figure out their own way .... how to make the gear fit in the bay.

Ever heard of SUBCONTRACTORS? Northrop Grumman didnt do everything, it subcontracted out significant portions of the work. If someone else with experience can do it cheaper than you can working it out on your own, then why not take that path?

The B-2 was never meant to cost what it did, one of the main reasons Northrop didnt get the YF-23 contract.

Quoting CF188A (Reply 2):
Now I have a question for all of you ... why are we not allowed inside the B-1B. It is not new tech, its not like out brains can read computer designs and chips and all that fancy stuff by looking through a panel. We dont have Xray vision? What is so secret about the B-1B. At the joint services airshow, i was permitted to climb up the ladder to look down the entrance route, then came back down, I could vaguely see the cockpit.... any info? thanks

Because its still possible to get a good idea of what capability the aircraft has by the layout, design and quantity of its MFDs and systems within the aircraft.

The 'interesting' stuff is not in the cockpit, its behind it at the AEW position.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2539 times:

Thanks for everyone's great comments on the B-2 and F-117.

I was wondering whether, since the F-117's flight control computer may be dated, the Air Force might simply swap it out for a newer version. Would there be too much rewiring involved?

Thanks in advance.


User currently offlineF4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2536 times:

Quoting CF188A (Reply 2):
Now I have a question for all of you ... why are we not allowed inside the B-1B.

It may be something as simple as it is confined space and the crew doesn't want to take the responsibility of having visitors around the ejection seats, even if they are pinned. Up until a tragic accident at an east coast airshow in the mid-1980s, (I think it was an S-3 at the Willow Grove Open House), visitors were regularly allowed to sit in the cockpits. I spent many an afternoon hoisting kids in and out of the F-4 at airshows. The accident involved a child ejecting out of the airplane. I don't remember if the the seat wasn't pinned or someone had taken the pin as a souvenir. In any case, it is a lot of wear and tear on delicate switches to have a stream of folks flipping and twisting.

Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA



Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

On the B-1B...simply that there is almost no room up there. Many things to be broken. I've sat in the front seat...your not missing much...esp. by way of avionics.

-Check


User currently offlineCF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2487 times:

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 14):
On the B-1B...simply that there is almost no room up there. Many things to be broken. I've sat in the front seat...your not missing much...esp. by way of avionics.

-Check

'


thanks for the info  Smile


User currently offlineJ.mo From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2328 times:

I also got into the cockpit of a B-1. They were at Hill AFB for Mission Commander training and flying against "threats" in the UTTR. Of the things I remember from the visit, the one that stands out is the GPS they had onboard.

It was a GPS enabled laptop computer hotwired into the onboard coffee pot. It was placed in-between the offensive and defensive systems officers.From what I remember, you had to duck beneath it to get into the the cockpit. I think it was on there for the training they were doing.

Still one of my favorite aircraft.

JM



What is the difference between Fighter pilots and God? God never thought he was a fighter pilot.
User currently offlineJayinKitsap From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 769 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Quoting J.mo (Reply 20):
It was a GPS enabled laptop computer hotwired into the onboard coffee pot. It was placed in-between the offensive and defensive systems officers

The Trident submarines use a small yacht radar that is C-clamped to the top of the sail with the wires running down the hatch to the display. It is used every time they are on the surface. Why would they do that, you say.

Two big reasons - it works well and the built in radar uses special frequencies so every other radar in the area knows that that blip is a sub. With the portable, the sub is just one of many boats in the bay.

The Trident II missile uses a standard design hose clamp (with one heck of a paper trail). Many of the newer combat systems on board are using standard mfg blade servers instead of custom equipment. Why not.

Reusing much of the components of landing gear makes tremendous sense. If the gear was designed for the same or larger force envelope, all of the existing parts are already tested, designed, and with common spares.

I don't always agree with Richard Price, but he usually has good facts and information. On the F-117 his information jives well with what I recall, it was initially a low cost short run plane to see how to introduce stealth tech into the Air Force. I recall as it came out from being in the black programs, the cost was discussed often, and it was in the $45 to $50m range then.


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2303 times:

According to the National Museum of the Air Force aircraft brochure the cost of a F-117 is $42,600,000. An interesting note they don't ever have a price for the B-1.

User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2296 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 22):
An interesting note they don't ever have a price for the B-1.

The af.mil factsheet has the B1-B at $283.1 million unit cost.

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 21):
I don't always agree with Richard Price, but he usually has good facts and information

Why thank you  Wink I do try hard.


User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2218 times:

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 21):
Quoting J.mo (Reply 20):It was a GPS enabled laptop computer hotwired into the onboard coffee pot. It was placed in-between the offensive and defensive systems officers
The Trident submarines use a small yacht radar that is C-clamped to the top of the sail with the wires running down the hatch to the display. It is used every time they are on the surface. Why would they do that, you say.

Back before GPS was cheap, our ship had a $3000 Magellan handheld unit. Once before leaving on patrol, the boarding team officer asked if he could use it to launch a small boat to send it over the horizon and catch fishing vessels that were poaching in US waters. I said h*ll no, one bad wave and there goes 3 grand. A week later one of the boarding team members (junior enlisted, in fact) asked my "why don't we just go buy a hand-held loran C receiver at the local boat supply store - it only costs 200." Which is what we did, and it worked fabulously - we busted three vessels the first week of our next patrol.

I think civilians would be surprised at how much off the shelf gear is adapted for military use.


User currently offlineDeltaDC9 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 2844 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 23):
The af.mil factsheet has the B1-B at $283.1 million unit cost.


Quarter billion a copy was the reason they stopped buying them, cold war or not. If they were more reasonable, we would have more.

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 7):
I could have sworn I read somewhere the mains were off the 767 and the nose was a modified 757 nosegear. Any knowledge if this is true?

I believe the landing gear for the F-117 was reused F-15 gear if I am not mistaken.

Pretty common practice. I mean really, what is there that needs to be so advanced about landing gear anyway?

[Edited 2006-09-05 16:06:47]


Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
User currently offlineCF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2047 times:

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 26):
what is there that needs to be so advanced about landing gear anyway?

where it will fit in the plane is always a problem and something that needs leniency. I believe when the 767 landed for the first time, its gear did not tilt. So pre-planning is imperative ... when it comes to the gear.


User currently offlineTexfly101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2022 times:

Quoting Boeing nut (Thread starter):
Also, I am trying to find out the maximum weight of the B2 as well. I've searched and found different numbers like 336,000 to 376,000 pounds. I'm inquiring for pavement stress reasons.

The last time I looked, the weight of the B-2 was still classified...estimates like you have seen are out there but the official weight was classified for a long time...it has to do with range, payload, etc. ..anyone know if it has ever been unclassified? I haven't looked in quite a while but had the same basic problem a decade or so ago.


User currently offlineCTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

Quoting Boeing nut (Thread starter):
True or false, I've heard that the B2 has the same landing gear that is used on the 767. True or false?

As stated by others, the B-2 landing gear is "derived from" the 767 landing gear. Why other the obvious cost reason should a highly classified aircraft like the B-2 use parts derived from existing aircraft versus designing new from scratch? Two reasons: Security and Schedule.

There are many other near COTS and GOTS (Commercial Off The Shelf and Goverment OTS) on the B-2. The landing gear is a very good example of why using COTS parts makes very good sense.

A Northrup B-2 program manager calls Goodrich on the phone and says

Northrup -"We need a landing gear for a new top secret aircraft".

Goodrich - "Great, we can use the business, and so can our suppliers".

Northrup "About your suppliers, for security reasons you cannot tell them anything about the aircraft or even who it is for. Also we need delivery of the first set of gear in 16 months"

Goodrich - "But the forging supplier needs at least one year lead time! We could pay them triple their normal price and get forgings in 6 months, but that is going to draw a lot of attention and questions"

Northrup - "You want the contract?, You figure out how!


Note: I have been involved in similar meetings for other Black programs. But not the B-2.

Have fun,

CTR



Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic B2 Question.....
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
F-15 Engine Question? posted Thu Nov 16 2006 08:08:08 by Venus6971
Buff Picture OTD Question posted Mon Nov 13 2006 06:37:12 by TedTAce
U.S.A.F Squadron/Wing Question posted Tue Nov 7 2006 23:03:55 by Tiger119
Fighter Jet Fly-by Question posted Mon Nov 6 2006 05:37:12 by Chi-town
'Stupid' Carrier Ops Question: Soaking The Jets. posted Sun Oct 22 2006 23:21:53 by TedTAce
Old Jet RAF Aeroplanes Question posted Wed Oct 11 2006 00:17:54 by Gary2880
Coast Guard Question posted Tue Oct 3 2006 03:12:49 by United767
U-2 Flight Profile Question posted Mon Oct 2 2006 02:03:38 by Bhill
Blue Angles Fleet Week (SFO) Question posted Sun Oct 1 2006 08:55:37 by Nonfirm
Thrust Reduction After Launch, A Question posted Mon Aug 21 2006 20:25:20 by CURLYHEADBOY

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format