KC-??

[unmanned_droid]

Originally Posted by Davef68

Boeing's Blended wing design

Boeing: Blended Wing Body Back to the Tunnel

X47B was built in the UK

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/...-090-DFRC.html

The X-48 Subscale demo's were made at Cranfield. Worked with a guy who used it for one of his studies.

There's been nothing about a BWB tanker transporter out of Boeing. Maybe it might get looked at for the farfield study but right now it's all about production aircraft.

I think there's less chance an LM/Airbus product will win this time than last.

I suggest the fuselage design of the 787 is not suited to cargo conversion beyond putting boxes on seats or limited cargo on seat rail secured pallets.

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by Imagegear

I doubt Airbus would be up for the runaround again after the last debacle.

IG

Establishing a new partnership with L-M (see this from a couple of years ago) suggests that they’d already decided they were up for it. However, Boeing was in better health back then and it might have been conceivable that Airbus could win a genuine competition. Now, with Boeing in deep **** post-737 MAX and COVID, I should imagine that Congress will be looking for any excuse to funnel state aid, ahem, I mean award them another big DoD contract. Given the changed landscape I wonder if Airbus will reconsider, or at least insist that its bid costs be covered as a precondition of entering any competition.

[treadigraph]

Service officials have said, however, that AMC is still interested in a large aircraft like the KC-10 that is headed for retirement. Bigger aircraft let fighter squadrons “self-deploy” alongside a tanker, ground crew and ground equipment in a single package, they argue.

There may well be a few A380s available... almost new, one careful owner and all that...

[Una Due Tfc]

With a potential order of this magnitude, would an A338 derived tanker have enough potential advantages over the current A332 MRTT to justify development? I mean better fuel burn, higher MTOW and range etc? Or would the extra performance be insufficient to justify the the expense? I'm guessing if the 787 composite structure rules it out, then the A350 is in the same boat.

[unmanned_droid]

The A350 fuselage is more suited to punching holes in it due to its panel style assembly. There have been a few journalists reports this year about an A350 Freighter (above and beyond the temporary ones with economy class removed). I haven't heard anything from the shop floor on it though (not that that means much, being out of it for 7 months).

[Una Due Tfc]

Sorry to hear that droid. Hope you are back in business ASAP

[kiwi grey]

A "KC-38" based on the highest gross weight A330-800 blended with the nose-gear bulge,cargo door & cabin floor from the A330-200F, and incorporating the military features of the A332 MRTT would enable Airbus to launch a 'NEO freighter generation', available in 3 versions:

• A338F straight freighter
• "KC-38" straight tanker (boom and three hoses) / freighter, with additional tanks in the belly holds, so that with an empty main deck it can be fuelled to MTOW
• "KC-38 Combi" Tanker (boom and two hoses) / transporter with fuselage windows and a fitted aft toilet+galley, plus provision for a forward toilet+galley. Can use palletised seats - including some 'business class' - etc for trooping, palletised patient care modules for medevac, a moveable barrier allowing mixed freight plus SLF

[unmanned_droid]

Originally Posted by Una Due Tfc

Sorry to hear that droid. Hope you are back in business ASAP

Thanks, appreciated.

[chopper2004]

Originally Posted by unmanned_droid

The X-48 Subscale demo's were made at Cranfield. Worked with a guy who used it for one of his studies.

There's been nothing about a BWB tanker transporter out of Boeing. Maybe it might get looked at for the farfield study but right now it's all about production aircraft.

I think there's less chance an LM/Airbus product will win this time than last.

I suggest the fuselage design of the 787 is not suited to cargo conversion beyond putting boxes on seats or limited cargo on seat rail secured pallets.

In 2005 where I worked we put together the tooling and built the composite BWB for Cranfield (UAV dept) who were sub for Boeing Phantom Works as they originally went to NASA to build and supply the bodies but could not so they went to Cranfield instead.

They were below me on the hangar floor. As i recall these drop Test bodies were used to evaluate crashworthiness and ended up flown at NASA Armstrong (Dryden / Edwards) as fsr as I recall.

cheers

[Cyberhacker]

Originally Posted by chopper2004

In 2005 where I worked we put together the tooling and built the composite BWB for Cranfield (UAV dept) who were sub for Boeing Phantom Works as they originally went to NASA to build and supply the bodies but could not so they went to Cranfield instead.

They were below me on the hangar floor. As i recall these drop Test bodies were used to evaluate crashworthiness and ended up flown at NASA Armstrong (Dryden / Edwards) as fsr as I recall.

We may know each other? Or again, maybe not...

Two air-vehicles were built... one was mostly a wind-tunnel fixture, but LSV2 flew quite a number of times, before being modified to X-48C standard (two engines and different fins)

You Tube