Bones at RAF Fairford
Discussion
JaseB said:
Love these but am completely ignorant about them, Wikipedia is saying that every flight hour needs needs 48.4 hours of repair, any idea what kind of repairs they are? Seems crazy but then like I said I'm ignorant...
What's more frightening is it's a lower per-hour flight cost than both a B-52 and B-2! Crazy expensive.JaseB said:
Love these but am completely ignorant about them, Wikipedia is saying that every flight hour needs needs 48.4 hours of repair, any idea what kind of repairs they are? Seems crazy but then like I said I'm ignorant...
Not repairs - this is just what happens when people don't understand words but have access to edit Wikipedia.Maintenance is a different thing, and it doesn't literally mean that the aircraft goes for a 1 hour flight, lands, then is towed into a hangar for 2 solid days' work either. It's an average figure for number of Manhours worked on the ground over a long period of time divided by the flying hours. Complex aircraft get what in car terms would be minor servicing regularly - relatively simple checks, fluid top ups, tyres and brake changes, that sort of thing. After a block of flying hours they get a major service and lots of panels are removed for scheduled replacement of some bits or detailed inspection of others, perhaps with some NDT on key bits of structure that particular type of aircraft may be prone to cracking on or what have you. After a larger block of flying hours they get a big overhaul. Keep in mind that most people drive cars until something breaks then fix it. With aircraft there's often not much left to salvage if something important breaks in flight, so instead time and money are spent actively looking for things in the process of breaking which is a concept alien to most other industries or lines of work.
All this 48.4hr figure tells you is that the B-1B is a maintenance-hungry aircraft but with variable geometry wings to keep a watchful eye on, 4 after burning jet engines and more hydraulics, electrics and instrumentation than you can shake a big stick at, it's going to be. Simple things can increase that number too such as how accessible the service items are. A stressed panel held on by 200 special screws will increase that maintenance:flying hours ratio much more than a non-stressed panel with a piano hinge and a latch will - but there are competing design requirements and sometimes service items need to be hidden by panels that work for a living rather than come along for the ride.
Edited by jamieduff1981 on Thursday 7th October 14:05
Just seen two fly in formation over our house in East Northants on the usual A45 NE routing. Not showing on ADS-B exchange though, so it’s back to the old days of plane spotting, namely engine noise and good fortune.
4.22pm update. I think they just flew back overhead but couldn’t get a sighting. Nothing on ADS-B again and plenty of lingering noise like this morning. Good 9 hour sortie.
4.22pm update. I think they just flew back overhead but couldn’t get a sighting. Nothing on ADS-B again and plenty of lingering noise like this morning. Good 9 hour sortie.
Edited by LotusOmega375D on Monday 11th October 16:24
LotusOmega375D said:
Just seen two fly in formation over our house in East Northants on the usual A45 NE routing. Not showing on ADS-B exchange though, so it’s back to the old days of plane spotting, namely engine noise and good fortune.
4.22pm update. I think they just flew back overhead but couldn’t get a sighting. Nothing on ADS-B again and plenty of lingering noise like this morning. Good 9 hour sortie.
They must be touching down about now. Just went over my house in close formation, only a dozen or so miles to the base.4.22pm update. I think they just flew back overhead but couldn’t get a sighting. Nothing on ADS-B again and plenty of lingering noise like this morning. Good 9 hour sortie.
Edited by LotusOmega375D on Monday 11th October 16:24
jamieduff1981 said:
Not repairs - this is just what happens when people don't understand words but have access to edit Wikipedia.
Maintenance is a different thing, and it doesn't literally mean that the aircraft goes for a 1 hour flight, lands, then is towed into a hangar for 2 solid days' work either. It's an average figure for number of Manhours worked on the ground over a long period of time divided by the flying hours. Complex aircraft get what in car terms would be minor servicing regularly - relatively simple checks, fluid top ups, tyres and brake changes, that sort of thing. After a block of flying hours they get a major service and lots of panels are removed for scheduled replacement of some bits or detailed inspection of others, perhaps with some NDT on key bits of structure that particular type of aircraft may be prone to cracking on or what have you. After a larger block of flying hours they get a big overhaul. Keep in mind that most people drive cars until something breaks then fix it. With aircraft there's often not much left to salvage if something important breaks in flight, so instead time and money are spent actively looking for things in the process of breaking which is a concept alien to most other industries or lines of work.
All this 48.4hr figure tells you is that the B-1B is a maintenance-hungry aircraft but with variable geometry wings to keep a watchful eye on, 4 after burning jet engines and more hydraulics, electrics and instrumentation than you can shake a big stick at, it's going to be. Simple things can increase that number too such as how accessible the service items are. A stressed panel held on by 200 special screws will increase that maintenance:flying hours ratio much more than a non-stressed panel with a piano hinge and a latch will - but there are competing design requirements and sometimes service items need to be hidden by panels that work for a living rather than come along for the ride.
How does this compare with a modern airliner? Maintenance is a different thing, and it doesn't literally mean that the aircraft goes for a 1 hour flight, lands, then is towed into a hangar for 2 solid days' work either. It's an average figure for number of Manhours worked on the ground over a long period of time divided by the flying hours. Complex aircraft get what in car terms would be minor servicing regularly - relatively simple checks, fluid top ups, tyres and brake changes, that sort of thing. After a block of flying hours they get a major service and lots of panels are removed for scheduled replacement of some bits or detailed inspection of others, perhaps with some NDT on key bits of structure that particular type of aircraft may be prone to cracking on or what have you. After a larger block of flying hours they get a big overhaul. Keep in mind that most people drive cars until something breaks then fix it. With aircraft there's often not much left to salvage if something important breaks in flight, so instead time and money are spent actively looking for things in the process of breaking which is a concept alien to most other industries or lines of work.
All this 48.4hr figure tells you is that the B-1B is a maintenance-hungry aircraft but with variable geometry wings to keep a watchful eye on, 4 after burning jet engines and more hydraulics, electrics and instrumentation than you can shake a big stick at, it's going to be. Simple things can increase that number too such as how accessible the service items are. A stressed panel held on by 200 special screws will increase that maintenance:flying hours ratio much more than a non-stressed panel with a piano hinge and a latch will - but there are competing design requirements and sometimes service items need to be hidden by panels that work for a living rather than come along for the ride.
Edited by jamieduff1981 on Thursday 7th October 14:05
I am often fascinated by how much fuel these modern warplanes use.
I am imagining, a B1 much like a Tu160 or a Tu22, is one of those planes that cannot possibly take-off without reheat.
You often see on departure days, aircraft going a longer distance like F16, 18, Typhoon, smaller stuff from Europe taking off without afterburner, no doubt saving fuel or a tanker appointment.
I rarely saw a Tonka, F4, take-off without burner, but presume it could non loaded. And obviously you are often seeing stuff at displays where they are maxed out.
I am imagining, a B1 much like a Tu160 or a Tu22, is one of those planes that cannot possibly take-off without reheat.
You often see on departure days, aircraft going a longer distance like F16, 18, Typhoon, smaller stuff from Europe taking off without afterburner, no doubt saving fuel or a tanker appointment.
I rarely saw a Tonka, F4, take-off without burner, but presume it could non loaded. And obviously you are often seeing stuff at displays where they are maxed out.
LotusOmega375D said:
OK thanks, that’s good to know. Anyone taken any photos?
I spent a couple of days there.
IMG_2723 by Andrew St Edmunds, on Flickr
IMG_2456 by Andrew St Edmunds, on Flickr
IMG_2498 by Andrew St Edmunds, on Flickr
Beautiful aircraft!
Watched this the other day, some good footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N_YEpF5CPM&lc...
Watched this the other day, some good footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N_YEpF5CPM&lc...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff