Posted on 04/28/2006 4:58:14 AM PDT by snowrip
Only about seven of the U.S. Air Force's 21 B-2 bombers are ready to go at any time, and now, a combination of robots, sprayers and quality control are trying to double the readiness rate. But for a long time, the B-2 has been known as a "Hanger Queen" (an aircraft that spends too much time in the hanger for maintenance or repairs).
Two years ago, the U.S. Air Force introduced the use of robots to reduce the maintenance efforts required to keep their B-2 bombers flying. The B-2 uses a stealth (anti-radar) system that depends a lot on a smooth outer skin. That, in turn, requires that the usual access panels and such on the B-2 must be covered with tape and special paste to make it all smooth. And after every flight, a lot of this tape and paste has to be touched up, either because of the result of flying, or because access panels had to be opened. All this takes at lot of time, being one of the main reasons the B-2 required 25 man hours of maintenance for each hour in the air. Since most B-2 missions have been 30 or more hours each, well, do the math. The readiness rate of the B-2 fleet (of 21 aircraft) has been about 35 percent, which is less than half the rate of most other aircraft. This means, that whenever there is a crises that requires the attention of B-2s, there are not many of these bombers ready to fly.
The main base for B-2s is in Missouri, and over a thousand maintenance personnel are assigned to take care of 21 aircraft there. A team of four robots were installed, to liquid coating to B-2s, thus cutting maintenance hours in half. But there were quality control problems with the liquid coating, often forcing maintenance crews to go back to tape and paste. Now the quality control problems are thought to be solved, and, if that is the case, the readiness rate of B-2s may go up to 70 percent. Maybe, if everything works out.
B-2s still requires a special, climate controlled hangars. There are some portable B-2 hangers, that can be flown to distant bases, thus keeping the bombers in the air less, and reducing the amount of maintenance needed. B-2 quality hangers have been built at Guam, in the Pacific, and Diego Garcia in the Indian ocean Still, the cost to operate the B-2 is over three times that of the B-52. If stealth is not an issue (not much enemy opposition), than it's a lot cheaper to send a B-52. This is exactly what the air force does most of the time. But in a war with a nation possessing modern (or even semi-modern) air defenses, the B-2s can be very valuable. Costing over two billion dollars each to buy, and very expensive to operate, the B-2s provide that extra edge. No other nation has anything like the B-2s, although many are working on ways to defeat it's stealth and knock them down. Still, when equipped with over a hundred of the new SDB (250 pound, GPS guided Small Diameter Bomb), the B-2 would be a formidable one-plane air force.
hangar
The term "hangar queen" reminds me of the late 70's, when you had to keep an aircraft in the hangar to scavange for parts to fix the rest, compliments of Mr. Jimmah carter........
Technically, those were 'can birds' (short for cannibalization), although hangar queens usually were the major donors. And let's not forget that the 'hollow force' of the late 70s existed with the (usual) complicity of the top brass, who had gotten where they were by being enthusiastic about the program -- whatever the program might be.
Simple...I was on their assembly line. Next question?
"I had the chance to see one of these in the sky, once. They can only be described as "eerie"."
True! Saw one at an airshow and even at low altitude you could almost not hear it! It seemed impossible that that big of a machine could just hang in the air like that with such little engine noise. My first thought was thats "spooky"
Wanna play, got to pay! High tech gadgets don't come cheap. If they did everyone would have'em, right?
yeah........I remember only being able to fly 2 weeks out of the month, because you ran out of money to buy fuel for the aircraft...........
I'm thinking that if I paid $2 billion for a single aircraft, I would spend as much time as possible making sure everything was 100% operational. This ain't like parking your old Buick and turning over the engine once a month.
LMFAO
It truly is leading-edge technology, even more impressive when you consider how long ago it was designed. 'Course, that was when we were painting the Rooskis as being 10 ft tall, when in reality they were only 5'6".
Paint robots ?
Like these ?
http://www.durr.com/en/presse/bilder.php?term=ecorp
Bizzaro-world.
;^)
That's why they call it the B-2 "Spirit". But "Spooky Black Flying Ghost" would be more appropriate. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.