XBradTC

By

XBradTC

·

B-52 Re-engine lobbying

For most of my life there have been proposals to replace the TF33 engines of the B-52 fleet with a more modern turbofan. For various reasons, that hasn't happened. But the idea is currently gaining steam again, and Boeing has released a short video on some of the benefits of replacing the engines. Of course,…

For most of my life there have been proposals to replace the TF33 engines of the B-52 fleet with a more modern turbofan. For various reasons, that hasn't happened. But the idea is currently gaining steam again, and Boeing has released a short video on some of the benefits of replacing the engines. Of course, the first benefit (as far as Boeing is concerned) is securing work for Boeing. 

In addition to improved range and reduced maintenance, one factor I'm surprised the Boeing add didn't mention was the option to greatly increase electrical power production. The advanced avionics and jammers on a B-52 suck up  a lot of electrons, and it will only increase in future years.  

 

 

Tags:

Responses to “B-52 Re-engine lobbying”

  1. Esli

    Makes sense. As long as they don’t hang some big, ugly engine on it like the pictures i’ve seen with an engine from a 747 installed. It must look good as well as perform well! The shortened tail was the first problem. I’m not sure they can handle a second one.

    Like

  2. LT Rusty

    Huh. I’m sold. The reductions in noise levels alone would almost make it worth it, never mind the fuel savings.
    Curious what engine they’re looking at, though…

    Like

  3. timactual

    “… it will only increase in future years”
    Funny to hear that said about an aircraft already more than a half-century old.

    Like

  4. CTII Raven

    Believe it or not the electrical load has been coming down a bit. However some possible weapons development could increase the electrical load again
    Should have been done a decade + ago.
    Increased fuel mileage, better climb performance, better range, less noise, LESS SMOKE, etc.
    Hell, if they had done it 10 years ago it would have paid for itself probably twice de by now as the BUFFs are still flying hard

    Like

  5. SFC Dunlap 173d RVN

    I never understood why this didn’t happen when the Stratotankers got re-engines. Winglets anyone??

    Like

  6. Dave

    Reengineing the BUFF would actually give a net loss of electrical generation. Unless the new engines are modified with additional generators there would be a loss of about 180 KVA.
    Dave

    Like

  7. Eric Wilner

    Huh. The vid makes it sound like they’re proposing to replace the 8 old engines with 8 new engines. I’d think they’d replace them with 4 great big (but less than Dreamliner-class) new engines – and the Wikipedia article on the B-52 says this was the plan in 1982 and again in 1996.
    …But I guess with four big engines it wouldn’t be iconic any more, and might be mistaken for an airliner…?

    Like

Leave a comment