If, When, or But code Confounds F-35

In computer science 101 class you learn about firmware, software and the likes. Firmware drives the device and software drives the program. The F-35 is driven by pilots, "sort of". However, the US Air Force and Lockheed have entered into the age of Block III F-35, subtitled, "software glitches". The pilot gives a command or input, the software gives a command and the device firmware gives a command as the F-35 responds accordingly in a milliseconds. Read your Computer Science 101 text book it's all in there on page 225 chapter 8.

The pilot is interviewed after the ejection seat (a device) is loaded on a truck from deep in the desert test range. Other devices are unrecognizable in the desert rubble, the mystery solving phase is conducted back in the shop in some subcontractor's ivory tower. Having no device when the Pilot isn't talking code, and because analysis is in the software data stored in the computer lab, it becomes the story for the F-35, I'm sticking with it! 

The command language logic code isn't logical in some instances. During Computer Science Class 315, (101,201 is a prerequisite) and as a junior student who is tasked with deciphering software code as a homework assignment, we all say good luck over coffee at the campus study spots. In the Lockheed Conundrum Halls of Technology, they have real PhD’s computer types thinking about what went wrong with its software computer code. The difference between freshman year and the PhD level work is comparing one line of code as a freshman exercise compared with millions of lines of code at the PhD level. This is where the "if", "when", or "but" code commands come into play for the F-35. The code may be read in machine language from the command language as, "If" condition A exists go to line 1325, otherwise go to line 75. "But" or "when" condition B is valid, adjust flap control to 45 degrees." The pilot is looking at the horizon intently when in a millisecond, the software gets its "if" "and" or its "buts" in a knot leaving the "when" floating free from the program dichotomy.

At this time, the pilot has lights, buzzers and horns going off in is helmet. "But" He looks at the ejection sequence stickered to the cockpit hull and ejects. "When" the ejection seat is loaded onto a truck from the desert basin, the F-35 block III will be ready. "If" and "When" the Software Glitching Team of PhD’s, finds the miscoded lines before block IV starts, some say the F-35 Advanced Strike Fighter will be ready, "When" pigs fly.

Related Article:

DoD Weapons Tester Concerned about F-35 Software Development

The Capital Heavy A380 Stalls Orders Under Its Own Weight (Extra Included)

The A380 double decker is a "Heavy's-Heavy" in Airline parlance. Orders are stuck at three in the last year. BA looks for used A380's out of its affordability factor. They can't afford a new A380 for its business model. Return on Capital investment is a high risk. Singapore Airlines is interested in trimming its fleet of A380's through selling some inventory, others are not far behind. New purchasing schemes are for used A380 purchases, and not for new A380's. Leasing used equipment from a lessor is the new mechanism for airline profitability.

Aviation is entering into the Jurassic Period for These Two Dinosaurs 

 

It is not so dismal as it sounds, but it makes the case. Airbus made a corporate mistake building the A380 program. It brought the 747 program to its finality, but its freight program lives on! The A380 canceled its freight version, as it was engineered for carrying mass number of passengers, and is not an efficient freight hauler for its heavy empty weight or high price. The 747-8F does an optimal job for its frame configuration that an A380 can't provide.

A dismal outlook for the A380 purchasing is coming into view. The heady days of those initial first A380 orders have passed. In fact the backlog sits at about 179 A380's out of 317 ordered. The handwriting is on the Boeing wall as the 747-8 has dropped to six aircraft per year from a build rate of about 12, 747's built during last year. 

Without orders soon the A380 will also go the way of the 747-8. Freight orders will keep the 747 on life support. The A380 has no freight answers. Airlines have enough A380's in service, which is now creating a used market, as airlines shape its fleet size for actual operational efficiency and need. Thus, a used A380 market emerges from these fleet trimmings, as airlines seek a used but new to its fleet expansion program. 

The A380 is too expensive for most operations when considering a new order for Airbus. The 179 yet to be delivered A380's creates a market glut when the real market has matured, and a used A380's market emerges coming from fleet adjustments as it provides the supply side, and other top tier airlines provide the demand like the late arriving BA A380 need. The Heavy's-Heavy is sorting out its market on passenger traffic alone.

The news this week is about the 747 losing ground on production output as its backlog shrinks to a worrisome level. The passenger niche for the 747 is too small, and its freight version has filled the world’s leading freight purveyors with the 747-8F. Boeing would like to keep the program building until the next 747-8F round of orders can be amassed. Albeit, in a small niche, it is very profitable for Boeing nursing its 747-8F program along. 

However, Airbus will never recoup its capital investment with the A380 program.

The fate of both the 747 and A380 points towards doom. The shelf-life for Airbus will be a lot shorter than Boeing's 747 build period. Boeing has built the 747 since 1971, a forty-five year period. The A380 will be lucky to make twenty years for building its A380 until it will shut it down by 2028. Airbus is only a five years away from a Boeing like production rate for its heaviest of heavies, by making only an even dozen a year.

Extra: Comments to "Randy's Journal" from Winging It, as posted:

"Randy, the freight market is bracketed by various aircraft types all seeking efficiency that will make freight operations profits. There are several defaults with the market that has emerged. The 767 for the parcel industry. The 777 for a broader range of product addressing both parcel and pallet handling with a bulk capability. The 747-8F however, stands alone. As you alluded to it there is not a competition.

It covers the spectrum from parcel, pallet and large bulk transporting. The convertibility for freight shipments is off the charts for the Boeing 747-8F. There is no match. The used market will exhaust the inventory in the next four years. The Russian, European and older US made freight products become less available to the industry. Boeing has positioned itself to capitalize on the freight industry superbly. Your readers should buy stock on the 747-8F family function as it will become a great compliment to the "serious" air freight airlines, having the 767,777 and 747 inventory for its freight business.

Congratulations on having a great family of long-haul Freight aircraft. It will make our world a better place. The 747-8 has a very much needed place going forward."

Air War Heats Up with "Who are Those Guys?" (Breaking News/Updated)

Boeing announced simultaneously as Airbus touts its Bahrain order at the latest Gulf Air Show.

Rueters: "The loss-making state carrier placed an order for 17 Airbus A321neo and two Airbus A320neo aircraft, building on an existing order of 10 A320neos planes, worth a combined $3.4 billion."

However, the "not so fast my friend", response comes bubbling forth from "The Street":

"United said Thursday it will buy 40 new Boeing 737-700 aircraft, which will replace a portion of the capacity operated by its regional partners. Deliveries will begin in mid-2017. "

Breaking News 33 SWA 737-800  Inked

"Separately, Southwest Airlines says it has finalized terms on a purchase of 33 slightly larger Boeing 737-800 aircraft -- a deal first struck in December, but only made public last week. Reporting earnings on Thursday, Southwest noted that it's "accelerating" the retirement of its older Boeing 737-300 and 737-500 aircraft. The additional 737-800s will help to keep Southwest's all-Boeing air fleet at full strength." 

BTW: it’s about a $9.8 Billion list price book order change for Boeing at Bahrain, combing the United Airline order for the forty 737-700 Max (rumored at half that price), and now the 33 737 SWA NG's, using a list price calculation . However, using Airbus fuzzy math, I could go further with this side by side examples and say 16, 787-9's plus 40, 737-700 NG's (equaling a cool $6.9 Billion List)and the 33 ($2.9 Billion list) SWA's are all booked-in at about $9.8 billion using list price calculations, just as an Reuters/Airbus article would infer with its own obvious accounting for 17 A321Neo and 12 A320's. There is no way a "net" 19 Single aisle A-320-321 order are valued at $ 3.2 billion per Reuters. Unless it is calculated the Airbus way... Fuzzy

My counter to Airbus' claim becomes fuzzy too, add another thirty-three SWA 737-800's, list pricing for $2.9 Billion to the above mention $6.9 billion comes to an almost $10 billion sales week for Boeing. Using my "Winging It" Approved Price Cyphering and Methodology (APCM), it's going to be a Boeing Big Year (BBY) with sales. Boeing just finalized 73 single aisle 737 NG's this week and upgraded an order for 16 787's. As fuzzy as ACPM math becomes, it keeps up with the Airbus model for bragging about its sales engine. Seventy-three single aisles ordered is seventy-three booked, sixteen 787's upgraded is sixteen 787-9's sold with Airbus accounting schemes, and that's a big month, also that's "Billions BBY".

Airbus friendly report:

Boeing is often skewed by the Airbus sponsored math 

Back to Bahrain: "It also converted a previous 16-Dreamliner aircraft order from the U.S. manufacturer, Boeing, upcharging to 16 wide-body 787-9s from the previous 16 787-8s ordered. 

Gulf Air said, "it anticipates delivery to start from the second quarter of 2018." 

There is an unknown upcharge at this time for the Boeing 787-9 book change. It complicates the net change valuation going from the 16, 787-8's (a prior earlier order price) coming from Gulf Air's January 18, 2008 order, and then flipping it to 787-9's during 2016. 

The net difference becomes a mysterious special price for Gulf Air's 16 787's up charged to 787-9 values eight years later. My estimation becomes a 3.6 billion sales book change total for Boeing coming from both deals mentioned. These calculations are derived from Boeing's list prices and an unknown premium emerges from upcharging 787-8 to the 787-9 price. Winging It uses list price valuations for its estimations. So a tenuous conclusion is a part of the $3.6 billion in Boeing's order playbook.  

Billions shifted and Boeing tops the charts. Boeing wins the battle with victory number 1 at the start of BBY/2016. Even though Airbus owns the European press, all Airbus milestones become slippery and fuzzy as reported.

What this means is Boeing has not gone away for Airbus, as Boeing wins the early 2016 battle of the "Who Are Those Guys" Trophy. The catch phrase comes from the relentless pursuit of bad guys, as the Boeing posse comes storming back after the "many" bad guy/Airbus tricks. The bad guys continuously play the "obfuscation card" attempting to lose the Boeing Posse. The leader of the Airbus Gang exclaims, "Who are those guys?", out of frustration from the Boeing Marketing team selling aircraft on its heels! I do hope, I made this fuzzy for people stressed at work.

Remember for all those who Wing It, 2016 is going to be a "Big Year" (shhh). Boeing is being nonchalant and it claims it’s not going for a big year. However,It's going to spot more than 762 birds past delivery. 

The Exquisite Art Of War By DDG1000

The Zumwalt performed exquisitely.

https://bangordailynews.com/2016/01/20/news/nation/navy-stealth-destroyer-performed-exquisitely-during-sea-test/?ref=moreInstate


“We tested a very complex automated boat handling system right after clearing the sea buoy, we brought up the propulsion plant and, by afternoon of the first day, we were doing 32.8 knots and hard rudders,” Gale said. “It performed exquisitely.”

The money spent shows what a few billion dollars will do for naval attitude. The US Zumwalt Destroyer or AKA as DDG-1000, made headway with exuberant platitudes of excellence as suggested by the above quote.

"The “tumblehome” hull of the DDG 1000, which slopes inward as the ship rises out of the water, was designed to reduce detectability by radar, but some questioned the ship’s stability.

Notably, Rear Adm. James Downey said the ship accomplished full rudder swings, demonstrating less than eight degrees of list, IHS Jane’s Navy International reported."

At thirty-three knots equaling 37 miles per hour on land. The possibility of turning 15,000 tons on a dime suggests reckless behavior, but having only 8 degree list off the ocean horizontal is a remarkable feat. Just lean 8 degrees off your own vertical, as it can be done without much notice. The ship past the instability tests in remarkable fashion beating the unknown expectations that suggested it may flounder on hard turns. 

Quite the contrary, in came to life on hard turns.

Build Slot vs Purchase Price (updated)

What moves an airline towards a deal is often marked by when it could receive an airframe in time, more than what price is paid for said aircraft. Delta Airlines recently purchased the A350-900 over the 787-9 because of having a favorable build slot from Airbus over Boeing, as it admitted that an offered Airbus price too, was a winning factor. 

Airbus pushed the price-line downward so it could claim supremacy in North America's air wars. Airbus Accounting might write-off the low sales price to advertising expense rather than a reduction to the A/R account. Boeing's list price and delivery slots failed in the bid, as indicated by Delta Airlines. The right time and the right price brings me to an acquisition award process, which was a part of my former life. 

Airbus will naturally take advantage of any win, as a validation for having the superior product! When infact other considerations were in play for choosing an Airbus product over Boeing product. The Boeing sales team missed the mark over which they had no control with this bid process. Time caused the defeat and Airbus lowballed the bid.

When a complex purchase solution was required with the government, my position required that I must build an acquisition attribute table supporting an award outcome. Much research went into preparing such a table. This example is a "mock" private sector submission.

Keeping it brief, the explanation of this concept will be brief.

First a memo goes out to concerned parties, CEO, CFO and the lot of VP's. On a scale of 1-10 what is most important to the airline. The staff figures this out for each participant and reports upward reaching the exec's. 

Next important question for attribute testing and product award:

What is most important to the Airline when considering the A-350-900 or 787-9?

Please go to your staff for a statistically sound responsive ratings and report back listing in order of Importance you conclusions.

Per example: 

If price has top importance then list it as a "one".

If fleet continuity is slightly less important, then list it as a "two" and so forth.

This mock attribute chart has five components: as Listed in order from an average of fantom response calculation, and here are the fake results for Delta's A350-900 and 787-9 mock purchase competition.

Order of importance submitted from all the Delta Executive Teams before weighted values are assigned by the execs using team analysis:

Mock Results: for Delta Airline in order of importance

1. Delivery Slot 

2. Price

3. Fleet Continuity

4. Fleet Efficiency

5. Passenger Amenity

Many other attribute/priorities could be added, but simplicity is the overarching exercise for the Attribute Weighted Average Awarding System (AWAAS).

A table will be provided for a decision making tool. The table is called AWAAS. Final decision is made on purchase selection summary and will go to the board for its approval and the Q&A's before selection is made with this mock world of Delta Airlines. A press release will follow the decision for purchase.

Legend for scoring and weighted value calculations below only move two numbers into the chart, since there are only two bidders. This exercise has the potential for five bid submissions. However, only two numbers are needed for potential rating numbers.

"Chart Hint for the curious: If Airbus had been rated a "1" for all criteria it would have received the maximum possible points of 1,000 and then Boeing's values equal a "2" by a Default rating and resulting in its points for a total of 800, and losing the bid award. The points rewarded, reflect the alignment with "Airline Vision and Mission emphasis", even through attribute awarding, and weighted values. The resulting number reflects the Airline position rather than most advanced aircraft offered. In other words, "Bang for the buck", meets Corporate time expectations. This mock presentation awarded accordingly from Delta's perceived (press reports) operational position, and not the Manufacturer excellence for product."

In this mock study Delta chooses the A-350-900. Because it's the Delta Airlines analysts setting the criteria, making Airbus the logical choice over common sense reaction, market impulse, or even the venerable 787.

As you may see, an attribute selection process can be designed from what a Vision statement projects or its Mission objective has assigned by having a weight or importance aligned for the purchasing company. The ending result may cause an outcome where the conditions existing for an airline has become more important than the price or the best Airplane available in the market place. It comes down to the condition setting of an airline and its solution for that condition. Delta Airlines choose accordingly.

787-9 Acts Like A Normal Airplane During A Wind Shear In Flight

However, I will give you a Rocky Mountain High on the backside of a 787 wind shear story at 40,000 ft. The only comparison for me was on an L-1011 in the nineteen nineties coming out of Salt Lake going to Jacksonville, Fl. The ride couldn't put trays on the floor like the stage 5 drop this 787 experienced for Air New Zealand (recounted down below).

_{BA 777 Flight scene during turbulence}

My ride had too few passengers on it to matter. The seat belt light came on and the cabin crew implored adherence to the warning, by stating, "the upcoming turbulence will put passengers on the ceiling if not properly belted in. They cleared the bathrooms for thirty minutes. It was just plain fun going through the Rocky Mountain front with a twist. The L'1011 creaked and groaned. Then it shimmed and shook. The elevator ride plunged downward for the appropriate price of the amusement park ticket, we all got the shaft. The turbulence lasted near on 15 minutes, an eternity. "Drinks will be served immediately following the turbulence somewhere over Texas", a voice piped-in from the PA coming from a undisclosed flight attendant at an undisclosed part of the aircraft where passengers can't see. They had first shots at the liquids before serving passengers, but they served liberally and often. Jacksonville, Fl had such a smooth landing, don't know why, it just did.

Here's a good story, even better than my own Rocky Mountain High. The 293 787-9 Passengers and the 13 crew had no warning in this event. They had a massive food fight scattering trays, paper and debris everywhere in the cabin. No worries nine more flight-time hours remained for the clean-up. The aircraft was not harmed, it performed as expected.

Air New Zealand's Food Dump at 40,000 feet Flight NZ90

Photo: Instagram: ayastagrammmm

Otago Daily Times: Date Line Australia: 1/19/2016

“Passengers screamed as the plane dropped sharply twice without warning and starting shaking violently sending wine arcing into overhead luggage compartments and fully laid food trays littering aisles.

A passenger posted on social media site Imgur that an hour into the 10-hour flight the plane suddenly dropped and started "shaking like crazy" sending everything in the air and spraying wine on to the cabin roof.

Falsabaiana said passengers were screaming.

"It was terrifying. I thought that might be the end of me."

He said he was about to tuck in to his meal when the violent turbulence struck.

"I was just about to eat mine and then it was literally ripped from my eager fingers," said Falsabaiana.

Poster Ollieislame described the panic.

"We had a little bump-de-bump at first and then all of a sudden the plane just dropped and started shaking like crazy. Then the second drop came. Everything up in the air, wine on the roof. Quite a few screams and general terror."

According to poster hairway2steven a cabin steward was injured trying to clean up.

"One of the stewards cut his finger pretty badly, but maybe that was from picking up glass afterwards."

Passengers said the cabin crew did their best to make everyone comfortable for the rest of the flight.

Falsabaiana said: "They went through and picked up everything they could but they just weren't equipped to do much more and so many people needed help cleaning themselves up I don't think it was that high a priority."

Posted Ollieislame: "After it all calmed down, one of the attendants let us know that it was a case of severe turbulence and bad weather they didn't anticipate, that the pilots were readjusting course to get around it. Nicely finishing up the information with 'There is nothing wrong with the plane, yet'."

Air New Zealand today said Flight NZ90 encountered unexpected, strong turbulence during a meal service, which caused "some catering items to fall from service carts".

   

Airline Quid Pro Quo Starts With Economy

It all starts with economy where a cheaper price for the seat means a passenger pays for it through some kind of 10 hour torture treatment. The passenger really pays for aviation’s equivalent of "steerage". It's your kind of price, going intercontinental on an airline. The selling to everyone an economy fare, who then can assume the crash position going non-stop. Class is actually based on daily caloric intake. Price is based on lifetime caloric summary. How much you weigh is more of a determiner for what seat you must buy. If you buy a first class or business class ticket with an airline, the passenger must know its assigned cost comes from their recognized stature. 

When weighing closer to 300 lbs than two hundred, a ticket will cost a passenger according to the Quid Pro Quo of physiological configuration with your actual weight. The passenger just looks at price of first class for $1100 vs $199 economy or $500 premium economy most anywhere in the region. However, the human psychic adjust to the shoe store mentality of buying what looks nice, as in low price, even though it doesn't fit the foot.

The airline marketing website always shows prices that derange human sensibility. A passenger seeking a Hawaii fare will always go there in economy, because they can get to Hawaii for only $199. How much does a passenger weigh question goes by the wayside. The failure comes from some kind of mental dissonance. It can be overcome by  therapy where the vacation must start at the airport not at the destination. "For all that's good in the world", at least book premium economy for your own weight's sake.

A three hundred pound passengers must start at first class. An economy passenger starts at... or tops out at One-hundred and fifty lbs. Going to Hawaii, a passenger pays for it, because of one’s own caloric intake. Your vacation starts at boarding the Aircraft (therapy slogan). 

Omission: I weigh about 250 lbs. When buying an economy fare, I really pay for it as my seat mates amaze with my contortionist antics for even two hours. Booking through "Travelocity", I volunteered for shoe store street sales moment, where the $199 economy price washes out my luxuriant vacation plans. I really pay for torture, discomfort and lack of class surrounding me. The ones who are the cheapskates, are sitting next to me bringing their behaviors along for the ride. This vacation mode only “enhances” my torture experience through "the price paid” in economy. Premium economy is my only hope for my mental condition. Weighing-in before buying said fare indicated, and I conclude, I needed at least a business class fare (uh-hum).

When buying an economy ticket a passenger is not allowed to complain how crappy is the airline? It's a forgone conclusion you are sitting in economy because you are not on vacation. Don't complain because you are in the right class of nincompoops who saw $199 as the end of the rainbow, and now you have to pay for it from where you sit. If you go to Hawaii for $199 book a room at the Motel 6 five miles from the beach. It's a $199 for two for just 24 hrs. Then try and complain about Hawaii at that time. Most of the customers at the motel, are the ones you saw flying economy on the flight over. The nincompoops never seem to leave you during your vacation. They were all mesmerized by the proverbial $199 sign. 

I want to rent a car in Hawaii, and I see a $199 per day sign, as the cab drops me off and the driver smiles knowingly; "He doesn't need a car rental, he is only sucked in by the flashing $199 car rental sign. After-all, it’s Hawaii."

There are two means for travel today. Company money or your vacation money. Both suggest traveling at your best. Traveling in economy is not your best. Step up to your weight and fly big. The Quid Pro Quo of a $199 fare is too high of price to pay anywhere!

Giving The KC-46 The Bidness

Bidness.com has summarized the KC-46 program's history aptly. It is time to copy and paste its article to the blog, because it covers and encapsulates so much of the program history. It is a link worthy article, but not without some Winging It oversight first. The much disputed Tanker competition has reached a climax, before it starts matriculation into the military bases. The cost and the efficiency has finally sorted out for the KC-46. What awaits is its operational trial, coming from the ground up with military gloves. The KC-46 Pegasus is first going base-wide for ten stations to places like McConnell Air Force base.

Perhaps the fixed cost program is the way to go. However, it was constrained by the caveat, a commercial airframe was the starting point. This little nuance really affected and enhanced keeping a lid on the project costs. The F-35 and the LRB projects will not be so lucky. They need a military compliant design features from scratch paper. A daunting and costly invisible ceiling exists, which ultimately dictates how many LRB's will be built. The F-35 is too far down the road to turn back from constraining it with an F-22 limit for 179 of its type built. The F-22 has been recognized as a fighter in need, and the US Air Force needs more of its type and it will not (never) receive those extra F-22's.

Bidness Report On The KC-46 Pegasus:

Boeing Co.’s (NYSE:BA) KC-46 Pegasus tanker, the replacement for the aging KC-135 Stratotanker, is designed to aid the US Air Force as well as foreign allies during warfare. The winner of the KC-X program is expected to enter service by 2018, with the first operational aircraft poised to be delivered in 2017.

KC-X Project History

The KC-X program invited aircraft manufacturers to provide the military with 179 tankers by 2027, with the contract worth approx. $35 billion. The proposal request was issued in January 2007. Besides Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Airbus (at the time known as EADS) jointly bid for the project with their A330 Multi-role Tanker Transport (MRTT).

The Northrop Grumman offer was selected in February 2008. However, Boeing challenged the decision and lodged a protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO reversed the decision in June, leading to the Air Force reopening the bidding process a month later. By September 2009, the military was ready to accept new proposals, leading to both competitors renewing their offers.

In March 2010, Northrop pulled out of the bidding process, while EADS elected to remain in the competition. Eventually, in February next year, the Air Force named Boeing the winner.

KC-46 Development

The development of KC-46 was marred with multiple delays and cost hikes with every passing year. In 2011, development costs were calculated to be $300 million above the cost cap of $4.9 billion. By 2014, the figure had risen to $5.85 billion, and in 2015, it stood at $43.16 billion, compared to $35 billion estimated earlier.

Boeing was hit twice with pre-tax charges of $272 million and $835 million, respectively, during the aircraft’s development. The $272 million charge was over redesigning of the wiring on the tanker, as the wires were fixed in close proximity and were improperly shielded, not meeting Air Force’s specs related to redundancy. The second charge was due to redeveloping of the integrated fuel system; many of the fuel components did not meet standards of production.

Initial assembly on the first KC-46 began on June 28, 2013. On December 28, 2014 the first test plane without any military and refueling equipment underwent a successful test flight, followed by a completely equipped KC-46 undergoing its first test flight on September 25, 2015. In November, the plane began its initial tests to get certified for air-to-air refueling, which it successfully passed.

The Winging IT study guide for North America

KC-46 Features

The KC-46 is based on the KC-767-200 Long Range Freighter, with an enhanced version of the KC-10’s refueling boom as well as cockpit displays from the 787, which allow for night vision compatibility as well as plug and play consoles that can be switched around. Aspects of the 787, such as improved technologies used in manufacturing the craft as well as improved electronics, were also borrowed.

The tanker is expected to refuel all fixed-wing aircraft from domestic military services as well as foreign partners. Power will be provided by two Pratt & Whitney PW4062 turbofan engines, with 63,300 pounds of thrust each. The plane has a seating capability for 15 personnel, including the standard crew of three: the pilot, co-pilot, and boom operator.

The jet craft can carry 114 passengers if required, though 58 is the standard number. It can also serve as a flying hospital with a little reconfiguration. In an aeromedical evacuation operation, the plane can accommodate 58 patients; however, six patients may still be housed in a regular mission. The main difference between this aircraft and a KC-767 is the additional refueling and electronics technologies added to the plane at a separate facility at Boeing.

The KC-46 can carry 212,000 pounds of fuel — a 10% increase compared to the KC-135 — of which about 208,000 pounds are transferrable. It can carry 65,000 pounds of cargo in 18 different pallet positions. The maximum weight the plane is able to carry during takeoff is 415,000 pounds. Range-wise, the plane can reach any point in the globe due to aerial refueling, but on a single tank it can fly 6,385 nautical miles. The maximum height it can reach is 40,100 feet.

The jet tanker has multiple refueling systems: a probe and drogue refueling system, as well as a boom and receptacle system allowing for a variety of refueling missions to be executed in a single operation. A change from previously operated boom and receptacle systems is that, instead of utilizing a “boom pod,” which provides visual line-of-sight, the Pegasus will use a 3D video system for control.

The plane is able to refuel three different types of aircraft simultaneously due to its fuel transfer system. It is also capable of conducting limited electronic warfare, and has protection against heat-seeking missiles with a radar warning receiver as standard. The AN/ALR-69A(V) Radar Warning Receiver is provided by Raytheon, and the AN/AAQ-24(V) Directional Infrared Countermeasure system is provided by Northrop Grumman.

KC-46 Future Operations

Initial operations will begin at McConnell Air Force Base in Wichita, Kansas, where 36 tankers are expected to be based next year. As the fleet grows, the number of worldwide bases that will host the aircraft is expected to increase to 10. Training for the crew has already begun at Altus Air Force Base located in Oklahoma.

The KC-46 so far has found only one foreign customer. Japan’s military has ordered three aircraft for delivery in 2020, at a unit cost of $173 million. The plane was bid for two other contracts (Polish and Korean Air Force), but lost both times to the Airbus A330 MRTT.

Air India Hopes The 787 Flies Its Way Out Of Debt

The Boeing 787 is as critical for Air India as the bank itself. The Boeing aircraft in its fleet carries its many passengers as super-efficient cash register. Air India recently pleaded its case for another 4,270 R's Crore or 1 Rs equals a 157,000 dollars US.  A loan of about 670 million as a US Dollar value is needed for Air India. What it will do is bridge Air India debt status until it actually reaches a profit status. 

Low fuel prices, 787's and an efficient management scheme is the promise for loan payback and airline profitability. What underlies such a loan is Air India's' competence for running an airline. They must also it is capable of keeping its aircraft on schedule and on time. This would include passing complaints onto Boeing's money making product. 

Winging IT has long observed Air India propensity for a high number of mechanical mishap for its 21-787 fleet. It was quick to report another 787 problem was encountered. In spite of the reactionary posing, Air India is making money with its 787 fleet and is a key component of the "pending and final" bridge loan until profits flow.

The pending Rs Crore 4,270 loan, is a price equaling the cost of about 3.2 787's on order. The $670 million in US dollars loan, can sew up all Air India deficiencies and allows the 21 in service 787's for operating and mopping up profits and cash for purchasing the remaining 787's on the Air India order book. 

Air India is seeking this opportunity of becoming the leading player in the sub-continent as other world airlines continue circling the continent for an incursion.

Much Like A New Boeing Aircraft Type DDG1000 Has its Trials

Often the aviation crowd continuously reports the glitching on a new aircraft design such as the 787 during its tests flight. There are a myriad of issues in every new design concept during flight testing. Going from the computer to the air is a quantum leap of faith it will all work in flight. Rarely does a perfect flight occur without some notes taken about changes needed for a new airframe airborne.

The DDG-1000, Zumwalt, is no different than a new airplane testing program even like the 777X program which has not flown as of this date. The 777X still remains on the CAD machines in the design shop, awaiting first assembly and first flight. Even though a design freeze is imposed, tweaking on the blueprints continue even after first delivery. The 777X concept is frozen. However, the DDG-1000 is further along than the 777X program. 

DDG 1000 On Track For Delivery In April

The destroyer has entered its "flight testing" phase called, "Sea Trials". In Spite of all due diligence administered during its build, no one really knew what the ship will do! It may sink in rough seas as analogous with aircraft crashing during a flight testing phase.

“There were some lessons learned,” he said in a speech at the Surface Navy Association’s national symposium. “There were some things we need to go work on, but nothing that we can't overcome will prevent us from delivering that ship by 25 April of this year. We've got work to do, a lot of coordination, a lot of teamwork to get that done."

Not to worry, Captain James Kirk is at the "Helm" well at least on the operations deck.

After delivery, the Zumwalt will be turned over to Capt. James Kirk and his crew for training and qualification, Gale said. The commissioning of the ship is tentatively scheduled for October in Baltimore, Md.

The ship has its quirks no pun intended. The quirkiness is what Bath Iron Works people are straightening out before the April delivery date. Does it respond well at full speed full rudder angle? Important questions are tested as it tries having its way in heavy seas. The destroyer was tested out on ten foot swells and did well. Now on for the thirty footers, when the Zumwalt puts out to sea during a bad "Nor'easter". The Zumwalt may have to wait before that happens. If you have a multi-billion dollar ship do you really want to risk it in a gale? The answer is simple, yes they need a big storm, because it's better to know if it survives before you build ten more of its type (two more are scheduled).

"We saw eight to 10 foot seas,” he said. "The ship performed extremely well. We ran up full power and full rudder swings, 35 degree of rudder swings in each direction."

System tests are conducted much like the KC-46 tanker had just completed in 2015. The electrical component of the ship, is as massive as in small town electrical grid, but contained in a relatively small room. The ship Becomes dead in the water and a big fat un-defendable target without the "Electrical Power". The conventional thought on this matter, "the generation of power is deep in the ship and combat protected". If some weapon reaches the power plant the ship would probably sink at that point due to massive structural damage. In other words, it’s substantially protected. The real danger is the risk of critical internal system failures as the bigger weakness. Without the systems functioning, it's a battle dead ship. However, it could maintain speed without some systems not operating. 

Therefore, systems testing is imperative for successful results and made battle ready.

First "real time" unscheduled rescue operation a success:

"We steamed over there at full plant, got some good data on an unplanned two-hour power ride, and we launched our RIB,” he said. “It was 12 minutes from the launch of the RIB until they got to the vessel, got the person aboard and got back."

The Captain Speaks:

Kirk, who was present for the briefing, said the ship “handled marvelously,” comparing the difference in steering a DDG-1000 and DDG-51 as being similar to driving a smaller sedan versus a larger one.

The DDG-1000 can really fly through water, shoot, and defend like no other ship made during this period in naval history. Even since the Dreadnought revolution of over a hundred years ago, this ship needs to be in the US Navy.