DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4177 posts, RR: 30 Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3938 times:
"The engine was started using the F-35’s Honeywell-developed integrated power package (IPP), a combined starter/generator, electrical power supply and environmental control system that saves space and weight."
That's pretty cool that they've been able to integrate all those bulky systems into one.
40,000lbs of thrust is pretty impressive too, too bad it's only single engine though.
DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
EBJ1248650 From United States, joined Jun 2005, 1537 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3267 times:
Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 3): Yeah, pretty amazing. P&W must be guaranteeing reliability for the USN to opt for single engine. BTW, P&W has upped the rating to 43k! Amazing.
How does that engine compare in size to the F110 or the F100 engine; both used in the F-16? Could the F-16 employ it? Would the F-15E be able to accommodate it?
MCIGuy From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3239 times:
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 7): How does that engine compare in size to the F110 or the F100 engine; both used in the F-16? Could the F-16 employ it? Would the F-15E be able to accommodate it?
Nope, the fan diameter on the 135 is too big. Even if it would fit, the plumbing and wiring modifications would make it prohibitively expensive.
Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2978 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 9): A turbofan afterburner that can actually (and finally) generate more thrust than each of Concorde's engines. I'm curious of the specific stats for it.
There are others out there that came around much before this. The most impressive, I think, is the Russian NK-321... it puts out 55000lbs of thrust in afterburner. (Its found on the Tu-160 long range supersonic bomber)
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2747 times:
If they ever decide to build an uprated B-1B (what would they call it? B-1C? B-1B2? B-3?), I would imagine they could use F135's to power it, at four per aircraft.
UH60FtRucker From Afghanistan, joined Mar 2005, 2880 posts, RR: 67 Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2743 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 14): If they ever decide to build an uprated B-1B (what would they call it? B-1C? B-1B2? B-3?), I would imagine they could use F135's to power it, at four per aircraft.
They're never going to "build" an uprated version... they might make rolling improvements through the aircraft's service life, but not any brand new airframes.
The truth is, we're more likely to see the next major bomber be an unmanned platform, than something along the lines of an upgraded B-1B. It's the "way of the future."
Anyway, out of curiosity, why do you think the 135s are a good choice for upgrading the B-1B?
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2742 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 15): Anyway, out of curiosity, why do you think the 135s are a good choice for upgrading the B-1B?
Greater thrust and the most advanced engine of its type.
The B-1B's engines are around 30,000 lbs. of thrust each.
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 15): They're never going to "build" an uprated version... they might make rolling improvements through the aircraft's service life, but not any brand new airframes.
That's why I said "if". I don't disagree with you that it'll probably never actually happen.
UH60FtRucker From Afghanistan, joined Mar 2005, 2880 posts, RR: 67 Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2740 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 16): That's why I said "if". I don't disagree with you that it'll probably never actually happen.
What can I say. We're being slowly kicked out of the cockpit.
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 16): Greater thrust and the most advanced engine of its type.
The B-1B's engines are around 30,000 lbs. of thrust each.
But I think it would be the same case as the F-16. As mentioned above, the two airframes are simply not compatible and would take such a high level of reworking the plumbing/airframe/etc... it wouldn't be worth the trouble.
I'd venture to say we're more likely to see the re-engining of the B-52 than the re-engining of the B-1B. And we all know how long we've been asking, "When are those B52s gonna get re-engined?"
N844AA From United States, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2731 times:
Quote: The first F-35, aircraft AA-1, has been returned to the hangar at Fort Worth in Texas for installation of the final flight-qualified components, with a first flight now expected between mid-November and mid-December. “We think we will this year, but the real answer is we will fly when the aircraft is ready,” says Pearson.
Does this mean this engine test took place in Fort Worth? Is that where final assembly of the F-35 will take place? I should know these things, but unfortunately, I do not.
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
Boeing4ever From United States, joined Apr 2001, 4866 posts, RR: 50 Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2647 times:
Quoting N844AA (Reply 18): Does this mean this engine test took place in Fort Worth? Is that where final assembly of the F-35 will take place? I should know these things, but unfortunately, I do not.
You are correct, Ft. Worth is the final assembly point for the F-35.
B4e-Forever New Frontiers
Eagles may soar, but weasels are never sucked into jet engines!
MCIGuy From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1779 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2606 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 14): If they ever decide to build an uprated B-1B (what would they call it? B-1C? B-1B2? B-3?), I would imagine they could use F135's to power it, at four per aircraft.
The concept is "B-1R" and it calls for using the Raptors F119 engines. As to whether or not it will ever get done...
Quote: The B-1R is a proposed replacement for the B-1B fleet.[3] Boeing's director of global strike integration, Rich Parke, was first quoted about the "B-1R" bomber in Air Force Magazine. Parke said the B-1R (R stands for "regional") would be a Lancer with advanced radars, air-to-air missiles, and F-22 engines. Its new top speed — Mach 2.2 — would be purchased at the price of a 20% reduction of the B-1B's combat range. This proposal would involve modifying existing aircraft. The FB-22 and YF-23 are alternative proposals.
Additional enhancements would include network-centric capabilities, air-to-air engagement, active electronically-scanned array radar, improved defensive systems, and opening up existing external hard points for conventional weapons.
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 3174 posts, RR: 2 Reply 25, posted (3 years 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1933 times:
Quoting TSV (Reply 24): Interesting that Australian committment isn't mentioned. Does this mean the door is slowly coming ajar for a Raptor purchase? One can only hope.
I think your hope may start fading away. DID reports that Defense Minister Nelson had announced that the Australian Government had given "First Pass" for the JSF program. It says the minister plans to sign the production phase MoU in December 2006 once administrative arrangements are in place.....
26 MCIGuy: " target=_blank>http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/ Not to mention the Senate reinstated the foreign sales ban on the Raptor a couple of months ago.
27 TSV: Hope always exists with projects like these as there are intrinsically many ways they can fail.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1779 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 3174 posts, 
From Afghanistan, joined Mar 2005, 2880 posts, 
B4e-Forever New Frontiers 
From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 1641 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
