|
|
Post by Vinny on Feb 20, 2023 12:33:51 GMT
And a bloody good boost for UK industry.....I can Remember when you tried to make out Rolls Royce in the USA was American owned when they won the lucrative order of supplying and building the engines for the mighty B52 fleet.....Any excuse to see the negative for this country and you and the other UK traitors are there in a flash.....We are so much better now we are free of the EUSSR's clutches......Onwards and upwards for the UK from now on despite the arseholes who want to destroy our country and see our lives controlled by a faceless unaccountable bunch of areseholes in Brussels. Spaceport Cornwall fucked up the other day.
Technical issues. New projects frequently need refinement. The first Apollo mission killed 3 astronauts. All things considered, nowhere near as bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Feb 20, 2023 12:35:12 GMT
B52 will use the F130 engine produced by the German subsidiary of Rolls Royce bought in 1995. No direct benefit to the British economy. Once again. The B52 project, whilst interesting will be of no direct benefit to British workers. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2023 12:35:54 GMT
Its you who is the liar as per usual...I could put a link to another forum where your bullshit is rife but a certain lefty leaning mod gets all uperty when the truth outs... as the link I gave absolutely proves. You seem to have this deranged belief you make up false stories about anyone and anything and get away with posting them up without it being exposed. Well loser of the day you got shown up and then were stupid enough to draw attention to your dishonesty. Well done. Don't accuse others of what you do constantly. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2023 12:37:24 GMT
B52 will use the F130 engine produced by the German subsidiary of Rolls Royce bought in 1995. No direct benefit to the British economy. Once again. The B52 project, whilst interesting will be of no direct benefit to British workers. I agree Vinny but very many UK RR engineers are still employed by the German subsidary. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Feb 20, 2023 12:37:56 GMT
You lied as the link I gave absolutely proves. You seem to have this deranged belief you make up false stories about anyone and anything and get away with posting them up without it being exposed. Well loser of the day you got shown up and then were stupid enough to draw attention to your dishonesty. Well done. Don't accuse others of what you do constantly. No one believes you Jonksy because they've seen the proof you were wrong. It'll suit some dodgy actors to pretend they agree with you but they know the truth |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2023 12:45:04 GMT
Don't accuse others of what you do constantly. No one believes you Jonksy because they've seen the proof you were wrong. It'll suit some dodgy actors to pretend they agree with you but they know the truth Sorry your lordship I am fresh outa troll food today......It may have slipped your limited atention no one is backing your constant bullshit... |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Feb 20, 2023 12:52:49 GMT
Once again. The B52 project, whilst interesting will be of no direct benefit to British workers. I agree Vinny but very many UK RR engineers are still employed by the German subsidary. Not in the UK though. Had the earlier proposal of 4 RB211-535's been adopted instead of 8 F130's, that would have been more beneficial to the UK economy. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Feb 20, 2023 12:55:02 GMT
I agree Vinny but very many UK RR engineers are still employed by the German subsidary. Not in the UK though. Had the earlier proposal of 4 RB211-535's been adopted instead of 8 F130's, that would have been more beneficial to the UK economy. Would have cost a fortune in certification costs, was never a realistic prospect |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2023 12:59:15 GMT
Not in the UK though. Had the earlier proposal of 4 RB211-535's been adopted instead of 8 F130's, that would have been more beneficial to the UK economy. , was never a realistic prospect How do you work that out?....Neither the UK or the USA have to adhere to EASA.........They would be the least of the problem of certification as military certification is a whole new ball game in comparison... |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 20, 2023 13:53:45 GMT
The stupid bastards can't get anything right. I've just been fucked about by the TV licencing due to a "mistake" today. Useless wankers. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Feb 20, 2023 14:08:52 GMT
If in the future when things are designed and built enough to carry a comms satellite into working orbit, I have to ask why the UK is spending billions reinventing the wheel. The EU already had them circling the earth and helping us get from A to B every day. Brexit got the UK booted out of the more secure European system, known as EGNOS as a result of Brexit. It is also unable to access the secure encrypted signal from the wider European Galileo system.
This is why the UK has launched its own space-based augmentation system that pinpoints locations to aircraft, ships and driverless cars after Brexit meant the UK was ejected from the European alternative...
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Feb 20, 2023 14:10:11 GMT
Would have cost a fortune in certification costs, was never a realistic prospect How do you work that out?....Neither the UK or the USA have to adhere to EASA.........They would be the least of the problem of certification as military certification is a whole new ball game in comparison... Mil certification in the USA is different in process detail from EASA and FAA certification but it shares the same basic principles. Testing a convergent sample to death is a big part of such. The four engined hy bypass B-52 would have had different aero and thrust characteristics. Update: a read on the matter: www.airandspaceforces.com/article/re-engining-the-b-52/ 'The Air Force has also considered replacing the B-52’s eight engines with four large turbofans, as is typical on commercial airliners. Engineering challenges made that approach nonviable. Potential interference with flaps and control surfaces, ground clearance issues, yaw effects, the need for extensive new flight testing and weapon separation evaluations, the need to replace large sections of the cockpit and throttles, and to redesign the rudder ruled out such a change. USAF has opted to stick with eight engines of the class that typically powers large business jets.' |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 20, 2023 14:21:15 GMT
How do you work that out?....Neither the UK or the USA have to adhere to EASA.........They would be the least of the problem of certification as military certification is a whole new ball game in comparison... Mil certification in the USA is different in process detail from EASA and FAA certification but it shares the same basic principles. Testing a convergent sample to death is a big part of such. The four engined hy bypass B-52 would have had different aero and thrust characteristics. Total rubbish. I may have left the aviation scene but I am still a qaualified certification stamp holder and I have certified AC's for both the FAA and the CAA even since leaving. Military aircraft have less restrictions than commercial Aircraft but still require a form one for certification which is a legal requirement in foriegn airspace.........They do not share the same stringent rules that are paramount for civil AC's. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 20, 2023 14:22:13 GMT
If in the future when things are designed and built enough to carry a comms satellite into working orbit, I have to ask why the UK is spending billions reinventing the wheel. The EU already had them circling the earth and helping us get from A to B every day. Brexit got the UK booted out of the more secure European system, known as EGNOS as a result of Brexit. It is also unable to access the secure encrypted signal from the wider European Galileo system.
This is why the UK has launched its own space-based augmentation system that pinpoints locations to aircraft, ships and driverless cars after Brexit meant the UK was ejected from the European alternative...
You need 5G for driverless cars and the jerks banned 5G. The West's offering is more like 4 1/2 G - it is not the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Feb 20, 2023 14:29:34 GMT
Mil certification in the USA is different in process detail from EASA and FAA certification but it shares the same basic principles. Testing a convergent sample to death is a big part of such. The four engined hy bypass B-52 would have had different aero and thrust characteristics. Total rubbish. I may have left the aviation scene but I am still a qaualified certification stamp holder and I have certified AC's for both the FAA and the CAA even since leaving. Military aircraft have less restrictions than commercial Aircraft but still require a form one for certification which is a legal requirement in foriegn airspace.........They do not share the same stringent rules that are paramount for civil AC's. I refer you to the post before yours which comprehensively disproves you ukpoliticsdebate.boards.net/post/59686/thread But then I've worked with Boeing engineers on the mil side and had them explain to me the problems of weapon/aircraft and base aircraft re-certification. The four engine idea goes back a very long time |
|
