Skip to comments.
Rolls Set to Wing B-52 Bomber Contract
Timesonline ^
| August 18, 2003
| Elizabeth Judge
Posted on 08/19/2003 5:33:01 AM PDT by hardhead
ROLLS-ROYCE, the aeroengine manufacturer, is on course to win a £3 billion contract to refit the US fleet of B52 bombers.
The company confirmed yesterday that it has put forward two plans for updating the engines of the aircraft after being approached by Boeing and the US Air Force.
The B52s, which were used extensively in the Iraq war, are central to Americas bomber force but they are still powered by engines designed in the 1950s.
The US Air Force has 85 in its active fleet and nine in reserve, each with eight engines. Analysts said the contract could be worth £3 billion.
Rolls-Royce has proposed replacing the engines with four of its RB211 jets the engine that powers such aircraft as the Jumbo 747 or eight smaller BR700s.
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: b52; contracts; engine; ge; prattwhitney; rolls
More bad news for U.S. companies.
1
posted on
08/19/2003 5:33:02 AM PDT
by
hardhead
To: hardhead
Oh damn! Wing=Win
2
posted on
08/19/2003 5:35:59 AM PDT
by
hardhead
('Curly, don't say its a fine morning or I'll shoot you.' - John Wayne, 'McLintock' 1963)
To: hardhead
Rolls Royce North America has several plants located in the U.S. One of these plants will no doubt be making the new engines.
3
posted on
08/19/2003 5:37:49 AM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: hardhead
4
posted on
08/19/2003 5:38:15 AM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: Blood of Tyrants
I do not care which company makes it, as long as US workers get the jobs and the pay.
5
posted on
08/19/2003 5:43:23 AM PDT
by
scottlang
To: hardhead
It all depends, if Rolls makes a better engine (I don't know if they do or they don't) then isn't it good news for the Air Force?
On the other hand, if a US company made a better engine then that's something to get upset about.
6
posted on
08/19/2003 5:46:22 AM PDT
by
Dundee
To: hardhead
Its about time tax payer money is put to good use ..
OVERSEAS
7
posted on
08/19/2003 5:56:37 AM PDT
by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: hardhead
8
posted on
08/19/2003 5:59:26 AM PDT
by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: hardhead
Only 85 B52's in the active fleet and 9 in the reserve, what a shame. How many did Clinton chop in the name of arms control?
9
posted on
08/19/2003 6:07:35 AM PDT
by
MCRD
To: Blood of Tyrants
Wing Attack. Plan R.
To: MCRD
Only 85 B52's in the active fleet and 9 in the reserve, what a shame. How many did Clinton chop in the name of arms control?I bet you'll find that the USAF acquiesced in the decision to destroy the B-52's under the START Treaty. Those Buffs were probably configured to carry nukes for SAC (which is no more) and would have cost major $$$ to retrofit as conventional bombers. That puts old bombers in competition with the new, vastly more expensive B-2.
This isn't unique to the Air Force. All the services must divide their budgets between maintaining the "legacy force" and procuring the advanced weaponry. It's a never ending debate.
I think that they probably struck the right balance when you consider that the Air Force basically wasted Iraq and only committed about a Squadron to do the job. Imagine if the entire force were sent! Talk about "Shock & Awe"!
11
posted on
08/19/2003 7:00:58 AM PDT
by
Tallguy
(Just taking life with a grain of salt....oh, and a slice of lime and a shot of tequila...)
To: Eric in the Ozarks; Poohbah; Dog; section9
Well, we still have the Gs in reserve, IIRC.
There's been talk of using B-52Hs as standoff jammers. Why not use the G models instead? If they do the conversion right, the EB-52Gs would still be able to carry all sorts of weapons. ALCM, JSOW, JDAM, iron bombs...
They'll be as treaty-compliant as the Mogami-class heavy cruisers were.
:)
12
posted on
08/19/2003 7:03:41 AM PDT
by
hchutch
(The National League needs to adopt the designated hitter rule.)
To: hardhead; hchutch; Tennessee_Bob; All
13
posted on
08/19/2003 7:13:09 AM PDT
by
dighton
(NLC™)
To: hchutch
I thought everything but the last 100 or so had been chopped up for aluminum scrap.
To: Eric in the Ozarks
I think the G models are still in storage at Davis-Monthan AFB:
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b52_16.html At least according to the above article.
Real simple plan: Install standoff jamming pods, maybe a new defense-suppression missile, but "forget" to take off the stuff to carry ALCMs and ACMs.
15
posted on
08/19/2003 7:21:01 AM PDT
by
hchutch
(The National League needs to adopt the designated hitter rule.)
To: hchutch
I have a photo in a book somewhere of an early, early model with what looks to be a machine gun sticking out the tail...
To: hchutch
The only ones still operational are Hs. Anything at Davis-Monthan that hasn't been chopped and scrapped is used for parts.
To: Eric in the Ozarks
Armament: Four .50-cal. machine guns in a tail turret
18
posted on
08/19/2003 8:13:24 AM PDT
by
ASA Vet
("No Comment.")
To: ASA Vet
BTW, in the months before the Iraq War, I recall reading somewhere that this was done as a reward for Blair's support...
19
posted on
08/19/2003 10:39:49 AM PDT
by
ken5050
To: dighton
20
posted on
08/19/2003 2:04:22 PM PDT
by
Tennessee_Bob
(LORD, WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT FOR THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN?)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson