April 23, 2025 - No. 17 In This Issue : Boeing 787 Radio Issues Persist Despite Fix, FAA Drafting New AD : Lockheed Martin to convert three F-35s into flight science aircraft : Australia unveils jam-proof quantum tech that’s 50 times more accurate than GPS : Boeing Tackles 737 MAX Nuts-and-Bolts Shortage Amid Tariff Strain : Breakthrough NASA battery looks to electrify the aviation industry : The Flying Wings of Jack Northrop that Led to the B-2 Spirit – Part One : Why The B-2 Spirit Can't Handle The Rain : Batch of A320neos Set for Scrapyard : FAA Faces Another 737 MAX Audit : https://www.aol.com/passengers-bathroom-nightmare-turning-another-144213532.html : Obstructed fuel filters lead to fuel starvation Boeing 787 Radio Issues Persist Despite Fix, FAA Drafting New AD The problem causes radio frequencies to switch unexpectedly between active and standby modes without pilot input. By Kevin Derby April 9, 2025 WASHINGTON- Boeing is facing ongoing challenges with its 787 Dreamliner as airlines report persistent radio communication problems even after attempted software fixes. The issue affects critical communications systems that pilots rely on for air traffic control instructions. Despite resolving many earlier challenges, the FAA now plans to issue a new Airworthiness Directive (AD) for these aircraft. The mandate will require airlines to upgrade the operational software in their tuning control panels to ensure the safe functioning of all systems. Boeing 787 Dreamliner Concerns While the Boeing 787 Dreamliner has revolutionized commercial aviation with its efficiency, passenger capacity, and range, its development and service entry have not been smooth. Early versions faced serious delays and concerns, and though many of these issues were eventually resolved, new problems continue to emerge. The aircraft has become a major commercial success despite these challenges, with airlines worldwide placing extensive orders. The current radio communication issue represents yet another hurdle for Boeing as it works to maintain the safety and reliability of its flagship widebody aircraft. Critical Safety Issue In February, the US Department of Transportation issued an advisory highlighting a dangerous flaw in the Boeing 787’s VHF radio systems. The problem causes radio frequencies to switch unexpectedly between active and standby modes without pilot input. The issue affects all variants of the aircraft, including the 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 models. “The flight crew may not be aware of uncommanded frequency changes and could fail to receive air traffic control communications. This condition, if not addressed, could result in missed communications such as amended clearances and critical instructions for changes to flight path and consequent loss of safe separation between aircraft, collision, or runway incursion.” Statement from the US Department of Transportation Boeing responded by issuing a free software patch designed to stop the unwanted mode changes. According to US authorities, the update requires about 90 minutes to install, with an estimated labor cost of $127.50 per aircraft. Approximately 157 US airplanes were identified as vulnerable to this problem. Airlines Express Concerns Qatar Airways (QR), a major operator of the 787 Dreamliner, reported that it has already modified all its affected aircraft with new Loadable Software Aircraft Parts (LSAPS) on all tuning control panels as recommended. Despite these changes, the Doha-based airline continues to experience the issue, suggesting the proposed fix may be inadequate. The airline is asking the FAA to reconsider its approach to better address the reported problem. American Airlines (AA), another large 787 customer, also commented on the proposed Airworthiness Directive (AD). The Dallas-based carrier requested changes to the wording in the mandate, which could potentially alter which aircraft require inspection and what modifications are needed. FAA Prepares New Directive The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is now working to finalize a formal Airworthiness Directive for the affected Boeing 787 models. An Airworthiness Directive (AD) is issued when aircraft or parts already in service are discovered to have a flaw, error, or safety concern. The directive would require operators to update the operational software used by the Tuning Control Panel (TCP) and perform additional software configuration checks. The FAA has asked for airline feedback on the situation by April 14. Next Steps As the FAA moves toward issuing its formal directive, it will likely consider input from airlines and other industry stakeholders. The agency must determine whether Boeing’s current approach adequately addresses the safety risk or if more comprehensive measures are needed. For now, flight crews operating 787 Dreamliners must remain vigilant, constantly checking their radio settings to ensure they receive all communications from air traffic control—a workaround that adds to pilot workload during already demanding flight operations. Stay tuned with us. Further, follow us on social media for the latest updates. Lockheed Martin to convert three F-35s into flight science aircraft The contract expansion will encompass the procurement of materials, parts, and components. April 22, 2025 The newly designated flight science aircraft is expected to bridge the gap in testing capabilities. Credit: kumanomi/Shutterstock. Lockheed Martin has received a contract modification worth $180m from the US Department of Defense (DoD) to convert three F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter (JSF) aircraft into flight science test platforms. This contract modification, which was not subject to competitive bidding, will encompass the procurement of materials, parts, and components necessary for the transformation. The newly designated flight science aircraft is expected to bridge the gap in testing capabilities, facilitating future flight science evaluations of block four capabilities. These tests will benefit the Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, as well as non-US DoD programme partners and US Foreign Military Sales customers. The conversion work, which will take place across various locations including Fort Worth, Texas, and Warton, UK, is anticipated to be completed by 31 December 2028. The F-35 JSF features an enhanced electro-optical targeting system (EOTS). This system provides precise targeting for both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations and is noted for its high performance and cost-effectiveness. The EOTS, with a low-drag design, is integrated into the aircraft’s fus elage and features a durable sapphire window. It is connected to the jet’s central computer through a high-speed fibre-optic interface, enhancing the aircraft’s combat capabilities. The funding for this contract comprises $3.6m from US Air Force research, development, test, and evaluation funds, an equivalent amount from US Navy funds, and $8.8m from non-US DoD programme partners. These funds were fully obligated at the time of the award, said the DoD. The Naval Air Systems Command, located in Patuxent River, Maryland, is responsible for overseeing the contract. Last month, Lockheed Martin, in partnership with the F-35 Pax River Integrated Test Force (ITF), completed an initial flight. It integrated the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) system onto an F-35B Lightning II aircraft. This follows a similar successful integration flight test conducted on an F-35C in September 2024. Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at accelerating the acquisition of defence equipment. However, programmes such as the F-35 Lightning II software upgrades remain outside the scope of the fast-track directive. Australia unveils jam-proof quantum tech that’s 50 times more accurate than GPS The system was found to be 50 times more accurate than traditional GPS. Updated: Apr 15, 2025 08:24 AM EST Christopher McFadden Australia’s Q-CTRL has announced the first real-world demonstration of its commercially viable quantum navigation system. The system works without Global Positioning Systems (GPS), cannot be jammed, and is already proving to be drastically more accurate than anything else. This is a big deal as many vehicles worldwide (including planes and cars) rely heavily on GPS for navigation. However, GPS can be jammed, spoofed, or even denied, especially during military conflicts or cyberattacks. This is a growing concern for national security and autonomous vehicles, which need constant, accurate location data. In fact, according to a press release by Q-CTRL, GPS jamming has been shown to disrupt around 1,000 flights every day. An outage on this scale is estimated to cost the global economy around $1 billion daily. Therefore, finding a reliable backup to GPS is critical, especially for defense and autonomous systems. Navigation without GPS To this end, Q-CTRL developed a new system called “Ironstone Opal,” which uses quantum sensors to navigate without GPS. It’s passive (meaning it doesn’t emit signals that could be detected or jammed) and highly accurate. Instead of relying on satellites, Q-CTRL’s system can read the Earth’s magnetic field, which varies slightly depending on location (like a magnetic fingerprint or map). The system can determine where you are by measuring these variations using magnetometers. This is made possible using the company’s proprietary quantum sensors, which are incredibly sensitive and stable. The system also comes with special AI-based software, which filters out interference like vibrations or electromagnetic noise (what they call “software ruggedization”). The system is small and compact and could, in theory, be installed in drones or cars and, of course, aircraft. Q-CTRL ran some live tests on the ground and in the air to validate the technology. As anticipated, they found that it could operate completely independently of GPS. Moreover, the company reports that its quantum GPS was 50 times more accurate than traditional GPS backup systems (like Inertial Navigation Systems or INS). The systems also delivered navigation precision on par with hitting a bullseye from 1,000 yards. Technology now proven Even when the equipment was mounted inside a plane, where interference is much worse, it outperformed existing systems by at least 11x. This is the first time quantum technology has been shown to outperform existing tech in a real-world commercial or military application, a milestone referred to as achieving “quantum advantage.” Because of its stealthy, jam-proof, and high-precision nature, this tech is highly attractive to military forces, notably Australia, the UK, and the US. However, it could also prove valuable to commercial aviation companies, autonomous vehicles, and drones. It could be a game-changer for navigation in hostile environments, GPS-denied zones, or deep-sea/mountainous regions where GPS doesn’t work well. “At Q-CTRL, we’re thrilled to be the global pioneer in taking quantum sensing from research to the field, being the first to enable real capabilities that have previously been little more than a dream,” said Biercuk from Q-CTRL. “This is our first major system release, and we’re excited that there will be much more to come as we introduce new quantum-assured navigation technologies tailored to other commercial and defense platforms,” he added. Boeing Tackles 737 MAX Nuts-and-Bolts Shortage Amid Tariff Strain Despite running low on some fasteners, Boeing managed to secure additional inventory, albeit at higher costs. American aircraft manufacturer Boeing has managed to secure a new supply of essential fasteners used in the production of its 737 MAX aircraft, reported Reuters. With this move, the aircraft manufacturer narrowly averted a potential disruption to one of its most important manufacturing lines, as per sources familiar with the situation. The aircraft maker, which competes with Airbus globally, had been facing a shortage of specific bolts and nuts used to attach landing gear assemblies on its bestselling jets, according to Reuters. Incidentally, A Chinese airline named Xiamen Airlines returned a brand-new Boeing 737 MAX aircraft to the United States due to high tariffs on all imports from the United States amid an escalating global trade war. What Caused shortage issues? The shortage stemmed from a fire in February at a key supplier’s facility — SPS Technologies, located near Philadelphia — which manufactures a number of proprietary components for Boeing. It is pertinent to note that SPS has historically been the sole provider for as many as 40 critical parts. Despite running low on some fasteners, Boeing managed to secure additional inventory, albeit at higher costs. One source noted that prices for these specialized components, some of which already cost hundreds of dollars, could increase further due to raw material and labour expenses. A Boeing spokesperson acknowledged the issue, stating that the company is “actively managing” fastener supply but doesn’t expect any immediate effect on output. However, had the shortage persisted, it could have impacted the assembly of the 737 MAX, which is currently under tight regulatory oversight and is expected to ramp up production in the coming months. Boeing has been working toward increasing monthly output of the 737 MAX from 38 to 42 units by the end of the year. The fire at SPS has intensified concerns across the aerospace sector, with other manufacturers also facing difficulties sourcing specific parts. It was recently reported that Boeing Co. is based in the United States and is one of the world's largest defence and passenger aircraft manufacturers. Breakthrough NASA battery looks to electrify the aviation industry The Environmental Protection Agency reports that in the U.S., air travel makes up 10% of transportation emissions. Joseph Shavit Published Apr 21, 2025 4:51 AM PDT NASA has revealed a powerful new battery that could change the future of flight. (CREDIT: CC BY-SA 4.0) NASA has revealed a powerful new battery that could change the future of flight. Their solid-state sulfur selenium battery is designed to replace gas-powered engines with electric ones. This leap in technology aims to make air travel cleaner and more efficient, marking a key moment in the shift toward sustainable aviation. The promise of this battery goes beyond cutting emissions. It could lead to faster, more streamlined electric airplanes with better performance and fewer moving parts. The impact on fuel costs, maintenance, and aircraft design could be huge. “This is a major step toward clean aviation,” said one NASA engineer involved in the project. Airplanes today burn fossil fuels that harm the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency reports that in the U.S., air travel makes up 10% of transportation emissions. It also accounts for 3% of the country’s total greenhouse gases. Jet engines release carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and fine particles high in the sky—where their effects linger longer. This illustration depicts the inside of a cell used in SABERS’s solid-state battery, which is made primarily from sulfur and selenium. Unlike lithium-ion batteries, these cells can be stacked on top of one another without encasings to separate them. (CREDIT: NASA) Facing these environmental concerns, researchers have been racing to develop cleaner ways to power aircraft. The new battery shows how far electric flight has come, but challenges remain. Scaling up for long flights, safety testing, and adapting current aircraft designs are hurdles that still need to be cleared. Electric airplanes offer a promising solution to mitigate the environmental impact of aviation. Unlike their fossil-fueled counterparts, electric planes produce zero emissions during flight, making them a cleaner and more sustainable option. However, the adoption of electric aircraft has been hindered by several challenges, including limitations in battery technology. The Energy Density Challenge Electric airplanes require powerful batteries to generate the energy needed for takeoff and sustained flight. To achieve this, a battery must have a high energy density, meaning it can store a significant amount of energy per unit of weight. Related Stories • Fast-charging lithium-sulfur battery revolutionizes EVs and eVTOL aircraft • World’s most powerful battery paves way for light, energy-efficient vehicles • Game-changing battery technology: Safer, non-flammable, and 10x more efficient than lithium Traditional lithium-ion batteries, commonly used in electric vehicles and consumer electronics, have a respectable power-to-weight ratio but fall short when it comes to meeting the demands of larger aircraft. To put it in perspective, a battery for an electric plane would need an energy density of approximately 800 watt-hours per kilogram (about 363 watt-hours per pound) to make flight feasible. Historically, the best lithium-ion batteries could only achieve an energy density of around 250 watt-hours per kilogram (about 113 watt-hours per pound), leaving a substantial gap in performance. Another significant challenge associated with lithium-ion batteries is safety. These batteries contain flammable materials, posing a potential risk to aircraft in the event of a malfunction or fire. Ensuring the safety of passengers and crew is paramount in aviation, making the search for safer battery alternatives a top priority. The SABERS activity is developing a solid-state battery for use in aviation applications. In this image, NASA researchers John Connell and Yi Lin (seated) are using a cyclic voltameter to check the performance level of a brand-new cathode the SABERS team created for their solid-state battery. (CREDIT: NASA) NASA's Solid-State Solution In response to these challenges, NASA has been diligently working on its Solid-state Architecture Batteries for Enhanced Rechargability and Safety (SABERS) project. The aim is to develop a battery technology that not only provides the required energy density for aviation but also enhances safety. The sulfur selenium battery prototype developed by NASA's SABERS project represents a significant step forward. This solid-state battery maintains its structural integrity even when damaged, eliminating the risk of fire, which is a critical safety feature for aircraft. Moreover, the prototype boasts an impressive energy density of 500 watt-hours per kilogram (about 227 watt-hours per pound), effectively doubling the energy density of traditional lithium-ion batteries. Thanks in part to this novel design, SABERS has demonstrated solid-state batteries can power objects at the huge capacity of 500 watt-hours per kilogram – double that of an electric car. (CREDIT: NASA) One of the key challenges in aviation is the rapid discharge of energy required for takeoff. NASA's sulfur selenium battery excels in this regard, discharging energy ten times faster than other solid-state batteries. While this rapid release of energy can lead to increased temperatures, the researchers found that the sulfur selenium battery could withstand temperatures twice as hot as those tolerated by lithium-ion batteries. In addition to its safety and energy density improvements, NASA's research team managed to reduce the weight of their batteries by an impressive 40%. Lighter batteries can lead to more efficient aircraft, as they allow for increased fuel capacity. This, in turn, can extend the range and capabilities of electric airplanes, making them more competitive with their traditional counterparts. While NASA's sulfur selenium battery represents a remarkable breakthrough in battery technology, it will be some time before we see these batteries powering commercial airplanes. The production of solid-state batteries remains costly, and any new aviation component must undergo rigorous testing and meet stringent safety standards before receiving approval for use in commercial flights. By addressing the challenges of energy density and safety associated with traditional lithium-ion batteries, this innovative technology could pave the way for cleaner, more efficient, and environmentally friendly aviation. While there are still obstacles to overcome, the possibilities presented by this battery technology are nothing short of incredible, offering hope for a more sustainable future in air travel. The Flying Wings of Jack Northrop that Led to the B-2 Spirit – Part One Published on: April 18, 2025 at 7:57 PM Darrick Leiker Note: See the photos in the original article. Jack Northrop’s all-yellow N-1M proving the all-wing design was controllable and, although lacking performance, data collected during these test flights was used in the design of future flying wings, such as the N-9M and the XB-35 bomber. Note the wingtips are adjusted downward, the angle was manually adjustable on the ground to test the airframe’s stability. (Image credit: United States Air Force) From his youth, Jack Northrop imagined efficient all-wing aircraft so advanced that technology and power plants needed to support them efficiently were not yet available. Jack Northrop John “Jack” Northrop was born in 1895 in Newark, New Jersey, and grew up in Santa Barbara, California. Jack lived in the area where, in their infancy, aircraft companies were beginning to form. In his youth, at age 16, Jack witnessed a pilot on his lawn assemble a home-made aircraft, resulting in Jack deciding he could design an aircraft better than what he had watched his neighbor assemble. Jack had experience working for his father in his construction business, worked as an architectural draftsman, and had experience working as a garage mechanic while in school. At this early age, he had impressive mathematic and drafting skills for someone without a college education. He sketched many ideas of his own aircraft designs. From his youth, Jack Northrop imagined efficient all-wing aircraft so advanced that technology and power plants needed to support them efficiently were not yet available. Jack Northrop Northrop Aircraft Inc. and the N-1M Additional Flying Wing Concepts Jack learned of an aircraft project near the garage he was working in and often visited the Loughead brothers of Allan and Malcolm who were building the plane. He offered his services providing engineering drawings as well as computations to assist the brothers with their construction process. Eventually Northrop was hired on as a draftsman with Loughead’s Aircraft Manufacturing Company. Jack worked there until he was drafted during World War One but he was later assigned back to Loughead due to his skills in aviation design. However, Loughead Aircraft would close in 1920. Malcolm Loughead formed the Lockheed Hydraulic Brake Company in 1919, a four-wheeled braking system installed by Walter P. Chrysler on the Chrysler car in 1924. Malcolm used the phonetic spelling of his last name to avoid confusion. The Lockheed Hydraulic Brake Company was sold to Bendix in 1932. In 1926 Allan Loughead, along with Fred Keeler, Kenneth Jay, and Jack Northrop, founded the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. The “Lockheed” spelling was used in order to associate the company with the successful brake company Malcolm had established. Jack Northrop would be the chief engineer of the company. Allan Loughead would legally change his last name to “Lockheed” in 1934. Northrop would design the famous high-wing monoplane known as the Vega while working at Lockheed. Northrop became frustrated at the lack of support for his flying wing ideas while at Lockheed, and left the company in 1928. He and accountant Ken Jay formed Avion Corporation to pursue Northrop’s concepts of flying wings and advanced all-metal construction. Avion’s Model 1 was developed in 1929. The Model 1 was a smooth airframe devoid of rigging and biplane wings that were standard on aircraft of the day. The Model 1 consisted of a stressed-skin metal wing with an open cockpit. Power came from 90 horsepower Cirrus inline engine that drove a pusher propeller via a shaft. Retaining tail booms and fins with a tailplane, the design eventually became knowns as the “Northrop Flying Wing.” The aircraft first flew in 1929. Refinements to the design included replacing the pusher engine with a front-mounted Menasco A-4 power plant, rudder extensions, and modifications to the landing gear. The aircraft had impressive performance and maneuverability compared to contemporary designs and test flights continued until Sept. 22, 1930. Avion was purchased in 1929 by United Aircraft and Transport Corporation and renamed Northrop Aircraft Corporation, later to be absorbed by Boeing. In 1932 Jack formed the Northrop Corporation in a partnership with Douglas. Labor issues led to the end of the Douglas relationship in 1937, and the plant Northrop had used in California became the El Segundo Division of Douglas Aircraft. The Avion Model 1 in flight in the Cirrus pusher engine configuration. Later the pusher was replaced with a tractor engine by Menasco. (Image credit: San Diego Air and Space Museum) Northrop Aircraft Inc. and the N-1M After spending years working for others, founding and selling companies, and after obtaining the funding and talent, Jack Northrop founded Northrop Aircraft Incorporated, opening it in 1939. The humble beginnings of the company were in a bright yellow building that was a former hotel/brothel and infested with black widow spiders. Yellow would be the chosen color for Northrop’s test aircraft, and the successful P-61 night fighter the company produced during World War Two would be known as the “Black Widow”. The company’s first flying wing design, designated the N-1, was also the first company-financed research project. The aircraft completed in the summer of 1940, would be a sub-scale mockup of a medium bomber used as a proof-of-concept demonstration aircraft, leading to the designation of N-1M (mock-up). The N-1M had a wingspan of 38 ft, overall length of 17 ft and weighed 4,000 lbs. The wingtips drooped and could be manually adjusted on the ground at different angles for airframe stability testing. Wing dihedral, sweepback, and twist were also all adjustable for testing purposes. Power came from two engines that were upgraded to Franklin 6AC264F2 models generating 117 HP each, from the initial Lycoming 65 HP engines. Two twin-bladed pusher props were driven by 10 ft shafts from the engines buried in the aircraft. The engine upgrade improved flight and altitude performance during tests at Baker Dry Lake. Test flights continued into 1943, the N-1M making approximately 100 test flights. Northrop’s concept of a flying wing had been proven. The aircraft earned the nickname “Jeep” due to the all-yellow paintjob mimicking the yellow “Eugene the Jeep” of the popular Popeye comics of the time. The N-1M is on display, restored, at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia. The Northrop N-1M on display at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center of the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. To the right and partially visible is the P-61 Black Widow, Northrop’s most successful contribution to World War Two. (Image credit: Wikimedia Commons) A pilotless offshoot of the N-1M project was the JB-1 and JB-10 (Jet Bomb) concepts similar to the German V-1 buzz bombs powered by pulse jet engines. Intended range was around 200 miles and the weapons demonstrated good flight characteristics, in spite of numerous control issues and the lack of suitable and reliable power plants. While somewhat of a departure from the initial flying wing design, the weapons developed so much ground effect lift it was sometimes very difficult to land. This would become a familiar trait of some of Northrop’s later and larger designs. Artist’s concept of the Northrop JB-10 pulsejet-powered bomb. (Image credit: Wikimedia Commons) Additional Flying Wing Concepts Other flying wing concepts from Northrop included the N-2B/XP-56 Black Bullet, which would be the first aircraft to utilize pusher contra-rotating propellers. Powered by a single engine, the bullet-shaped design housed an air-cooled engine buried deep in the fuselage. The aircraft featured vertical fins below and above the tail, along with turned-down wingtips. Being propelled by pusher-type props, in the event of pilot bail-out, an explosive charge would jettison the propellers and gearbox in order to provide pilot safety. The aircraft was constructed using a magnesium alloy due to the scarcity of aluminum during wartime. Northrop’s team developed a welding technique in which magnesium could be welded without bursting into flames, using an environment of helium, called heliarc. Designed with the intent to reach speeds of over 500 mph with a piston engine-powered aircraft, the XP-56 would have been heavily armed but suffered stability issues and was never placed in production. Two experimental prototypes were built, the first one crashing in 1943; the second aircraft is in storage with the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum. The second experimental prototype of the Northrop XP-56 Black Bullet, painted in standard Army colors of the day. Note the wingtip droop, contra-rotating pusher propellers, and the wing intakes supplying air to the air-cooled radial engine placed behind the pilot in the fuselage. (Image credit: Wikimedia Commons) Jack Northrop was also responsible for America’s first rocket-powered aircraft when a flying wing glider, the MX-324, fitted with an Aerojet General 2,000 lb thrust rocket motor, was air-towed by a P-38 twin-engine fighter and released. The engines were fired and test pilot Harry Crosby and the “Rocket Wing” made the United States’ first rocket-powered aircraft flight on July 5, 1944. Previously, Harry had made a memorable flight in the unpowered glider version, the MX-334, when upon release from the P-38 the yellow glider caught the fighter’s propeller wash and began to spiral earthward inverted. Crosby was able to escape the cockpit from his prone position, and seated himself on the underside of the inverted glider as it fell earthward, eventually sliding off and parachuting down, the glider continuing to circle inverted in its descent. The Northrop MX-324 definitely had an interesting side profile. Note the large transparent nose area and the aerodynamic “boots” surrounding the landing gear. The rudderless vertical stabilizer had six bracing wires. (Image credit: Wikimedia Commons) Building off the experience and lessons of the MX-324, Northrop designed the XP-79 (NS-140) as a rocket-powered interceptor. Again the pilot was placed in the prone position, with a chin-rest supporting him as he looked forward out the transparent nose section from a cramped cockpit. Controls that were foot operated included rudder and airbrakes, with pitch and roll controlled by a handheld crossbar. The rocket engines proved troublesome and the fuels dangerous, resulting in the XP-79B, which would instead be powered by two Westinghouse 19B (J30) turbojets. This also saved about 5,000 lb in weight. Two vertical stabilizers were also added by the builder of the aircraft, Avion (a coincidence of the same name of Northrop’s former company). Steel plates had been added to the leading edges of the wings of magnesium construction to protect the volatile fuel tanks of the rocket-powered version, and were said to be reinforcements to allow the jet-powered version to ram and cut enemy aircraft. Armament was to be four .50 caliber machine guns outboard of the wing intakes. Speed was estimated to be in excess of 545 mph, with a range of almost 1,000 miles and a ceiling of 40,000 ft. The XP-79B may have made an effective bomber escort and interceptor had World War Two continued into 1946. The aircraft made its first and only test flight on September 12, 1945. Harry Crosby was at the controls when the aircraft went into a slow roll and never recovered. Crosby attempted to bail out but was struck by the aircraft and killed. The first and only test flight of the XP-79B lasted 15 minutes, and the program was ended. The sole XP-79B, a futuristic looking aircraft in which the pilot was placed in the prone position. The quadricycle undercarriage is partially visible, replacing the original retractable landing skids. The sole XP-79B, a futuristic looking aircraft in which the pilot was placed in the prone position. The quadricycle undercarriage is partially visible, replacing the original retractable landing skids. (Image credit: Wikimedia Commons) Stay tuned for the second part of this article coming soon online, when we will take a look at the big wings: the XB-35, YB-49, and of course, the B-2 Spirit. Why The B-2 Spirit Can't Handle The Rain By Luke Diaz Photo: Walter Ritchey | Shutterstock Note: See photos in the original article. The B-2 Spirit is the crowning achievement of Northrop Grumman and the United States Air Force ’s most precious platform. The incredible stealth flying wing is one of the most instantly recognizable aircraft ever made. Not only is its distinct silhouette an icon of air power and technology, but it is also an infamous symbol for the excess that poorly executed procurement programs can lead to in the defense industry. Although the B-2 Spirit is a marvel of technology, it remains vulnerable to the same issues that all machines and aircraft experience. The more sophisticated a plane becomes, the more complex it is to make it a rugged and durable machine like the military demands. Unfortunately, one of the few B-2s in existence succumbed to the forces of nature and caused a mishap of devastating proportions. The incident I am referring to is one that happened at Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) in the US territory of Guam. A flight of B-2s were in transit back to the continental United States (CONUS) when they were forced to make an overnight stop due to weather factors. On February 22nd, 2008, “Spirit of Kansas” was parked overnight outside on the tarmac at Andersen AFB. That night, the island of Guam experienced a torrential downpour of rain. The next day, on February 23rd, “Spirit of Kansas” lifted off and immediately came crashing back to earth due to an avionics malfunction. Thankfully, both pilots survived, but the mighty machine that is the B-2 was completely destroyed by the crash and resulting fire. One pilot did suffer a major spinal injury, despite the successful ejection, making a full recovery after extended medical care. An ejection itself is a violent and dangerous event. Later, the mishap investigation determined that water ingress caused the failure of a crucial sensor. However, that is not to say that it was negligence or an easily avoided problem, as the NASA accident summary stated: “The board had to consult aircraft design engineers who had not been associated with the B-2 program for over 10 years to find a level of understanding in the systems that raised concerns…” Owing to the B-2s unique design as a flying wing, it is not aerodynamically stable enough to be flown manually. The computer-aided, fly-by-wire avionics provide assistance that is required to safely fly the mighty stealth bomber, and when they failed, the result was catastrophic. The flying wing The embodiment of Jack Northrop’s dream, the B-2 made manifest his vision for an entirely new kind of airplane. His pursuit of the tailless, flying wing design led to many prototypes and concepts over the years but never realizing a production plane. The B-2 program began under intense secrecy in the late 1970s. The goal of the project was to produce a stealth bomber able to slip past the Soviet Union ’s radar defenses. Northrop's unique design became the foundation of a new stealth design that the world had never seen before. The extremely low-profile shape of the flying wing, other stealth elements, and radar-absorbent material (RAM) would combine to produce its final form. The project was incredibly ambitious; despite the F-117 Nighthawk being another pioneer of stealth technology, the B-2 went further—much further. The B-2 Spirit leveraged a combination of groundbreaking technology with revolutionary ideas to become a true miracle of aviation technology - as well as striking air power. Unfortunately, development costs soared, and Congress eventually curtailed the total production to just 21 aircraft from an original plan of 132. While this change did reduce the overall program spending, the contractual obligations to Northrop Grumman to cover the research and development costs inflated the unit price to a whopping (estimated) $2 billion USD. The straw that broke the Spirits back So how could one of the most powerful and precious pieces of American military hardware fall victim to something as mundane as water? Well, with great technology comes great complexity. In the unlucky case of the “Spirit of Kansas,” the torrential downpour of Guam ’s monsoon rain was simply too powerful for the mighty jet’s skin. The RAM coating, composite fuselage material, and unique shape of the B-2 mean its design is full of compromise between low observability and reliability. Ultimately, it remains one of the most combat-effective and stealthiest planes to ever take to the sky, but only thanks to enormous efforts and investment. Statements from the 1997 Report to Congressional Committees on “B-2 Bomber Cost and Operational Issues” outlined the issue as: • “Testing indicated that B-2s are also sensitive to extreme climates, water, and humidity—exposure to water or moisture can damage some of the low-observable enhancing surfaces on the aircraft.” • “Further, exposure to water or moisture that causes water to accumulate in aircraft compartments, ducts, and valves can cause systems to malfunction. If accumulated water freezes, it can take up to 24 hours to thaw and drain.” • “Air Force officials said it is unlikely that the aircraft’s sensitivity to moisture and climates or the need for controlled environments to fix low-observability problems will ever be fully resolved, even with improved materials and repair processes.” That same report goes on to describe how the USAF leadership viewed the future of the B-2 program, over ten years before the crash of “Spirit of Kansas.” “Air Force test officials stated that maintenance of low-observable features is an issue that requires significant further study and that the percentage of maintenance hours required to repair low-observable materials would increase even more before there are reductions.” “They said technological improvements in materials and repair processes will be required. Air Combat Command considers low-observable maintainability to be its number one supportability issue…” Batch of A320neos Set for Scrapyard These aircraft will be the first A320neos disassembled for parts. April 17, 2025 6:30 am ET By Ryan Ewing Note: See photos in the original article. This marks the first time an A320neo aircraft has been disassembled. The company’s subsidiary, Ecube, will conduct the teardowns, it said in a news release. The aircraft type first flew in 2014, with nearly 4,000 in service worldwide. Unical did not provide a specific number of A320neos planned for teardown but told FlightGlobal the number was in the “double digits.” Another company called AerFin is also slated to part out four A320neo aircraft. “Unical is accelerating the availability of next-gen components to the market and helping reduce turnaround times for critical maintenance,” the company stated in the release. Photos posted to Unical’s website show a Go First A320neo, an Indian airline that ceased operations in 2023. Around 50 aircraft previously belonged to the carrier and are now in storage, per Cirium Fleet Analyzer data. FAA Faces Another 737 MAX Audit Probe comes after two different recommendations from FAA branches on addressing LEAP-1B engine smoke. April 18, 2025 6:30 am ET By Caleb Revill Note: See photos in the original article. The Department of Transportation’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) has announced an audit of the Federal Aviation Administration’s actions in response to recent incidents of toxic fumes entering aircraft cockpits or cabins after bird strikes. According to an audit announcement published by the OIG on Wednesday, the audit comes after conflicting decisions by the FAA’s Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention and Aircraft Certification Service related to toxic fume incidents in 2023. In March and December 2023, birds flew into and damaged the CFM LEAP-1B engines of Boeing 737 MAX airplanes, causing smoke and toxic fumes to enter the aircraft. The incidents occurred on a Boeing 737 MAX 8 during takeoff from Havana to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and another 737 MAX 8 flight from New Orleans to Tampa, Florida. “These bird strikes fractured the planes’ engine fan blades, which activated an engine safety feature called the load reduction device (LRD),” the audit announcement stated. “When the LRDs activated on the two airplanes, a large amount of engine oil flowed into the hot section of the engine causing toxic smoke and fumes to enter the cockpit or cabin via the environmental and aircraft pressurization systems.” After the incidents, the FAA’s Office of Accident Investigation and Prevention gave emergency recommendations to avoid the negative effects of LRD activation, including changing take-off procedures The FAA’s Aircraft Certification Service, however, analyzed the LRD issue and proposed mandating an update to the engine software instead of changing take-off procedures. The OIG stated that opting to update the software was “a lengthy process.” OIG’s audit – which begins this month – will assess the FAA’s decision-making at agency offices relevant to the LRD issue. The OIG has audited the 737 MAX several times in recent years, including investigations into Boeing’s production process and safety standards when manufacturing the aircraft. How one passenger's bathroom break turned into a $3.4 million problem for Boeing Pete Syme Updated April 15, 2025 The FAA may order bathroom door latches to be replaced on thousands of Boeing 737s. • The FAA is proposing an airworthiness directive for thousands of Boeing 737s. • The cost of replacing latches on bathroom doors could reach $3.4 million. • The move comes after a passenger was trapped in a bathroom, leading to a flight diversion. Thousands of Boeing 737 planes may need modification after a flight was diverted when a passenger got stuck in a bathroom. The Federal Aviation Administration published a notice on Friday proposing an airworthiness directive for 2,612 Boeing aircraft registered in the US. The FAA said it received a report that a passenger was trapped in a bathroom during a flight because the door had a broken latch and they couldn't open the door. Flight attendants also couldn't open the bifold door, so the pilots had to make an "unscheduled landing," the FAA said. If a passenger is trapped in a bathroom, the FAA said they could be at risk of serious injury in an "otherwise survivable emergency event" such as severe turbulence or a medical emergency. The agency identified door latches with four different part numbers that it said should be replaced. The FAA estimated that could cost airlines and other operators up to $3.4 million — including labor and new latches worth up to $481 each. Some or all of the costs could be covered under warranty. Boeing did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The FAA's notice applies to certain 737-700, 737-800, 737-900, 737-900ER, 737 Max 8, and 737 Max 9 aircraft. Boeing's website says that 3,461 of those planes have been delivered to US customers. The FAA's directive suggests that up to three-quarters of those planes have potentially problematic latches. The FAA has given stakeholders until May 27 to respond to the proposed directive. While the agency didn't provide details about the flight that prompted the notice, it wouldn't be the first time that bathroom issues have caused a diversion. Last month, Air India passengers endured a nine-hour flight to nowhere. The New Delhi-bound plane turned back to Chicago because most of its toilets stopped working after a passenger tried to flush bags, rags, and clothes. And in February 2024, eight of the nine bathrooms on a KLM flight from Amsterdam to Los Angeles stopped working — forcing the plane to make a U-turn over the Atlantic Ocean. Read the original article on Business Insider. Obstructed fuel filters lead to fuel starvation By General Aviation News Staff April 16, 2025 The pilot reported that during a local pleasure flight in the Protech PT2, a light-sport aircraft, the engine lost all power while in cruise flight about 1,000 feet above ground level (AGL). He attempted to restart the engine by checking the throttle, mixture, carburetor heat, and switching on the other fuel tank. He also attempted to use the engine primer to restart the engine. All attempts were not successful, and he prepared for an off-airport landing near Columbia, Mississippi. He told investigators that while there was a clearing farther along his flight path, he did not have enough altitude to reach it and elected to land on a gravel road. During the landing approach he saw a powerline and maneuvered to avoid it, but then hit a pine tree. The airplane came to rest in a nose-down attitude among the trees and sustained substantial damage to both wings and the fuselage. The pilot was not injured in the crash. A post-accident examination was conducted of the engine and fuel system. The engine examination revealed no anomalies. The airplane’s fuel system consisted of one fuel tank in each wing connected by rubber hoses to a fuel selector, which led to a gascolator, and finally to the engine. At the time of the examination the wings had been removed from the airplane and were not available for examination, however the fuel system plumbing was present in the fuselage. The rubber fuel hoses from the wing tanks had automotive fuel filters installed. Removal of the filters revealed significant restriction of the fuel filters when attempting to blow through them. The most recent maintenance record entry for the required condition inspection made no mention of replacement or checking of the fuel filters. The pilot/owner reported that he did not know when the fuel filters were last checked or changed and that they may have been on the airplane for about 20 years. The recorded temperature and dew point at the time of the accident were in the range for serious carburetor icing at glide power. Probable Cause: The pilot’s lack of proper maintenance, which allowed the fuel filters to become obstructed, leading to fuel starvation and a subsequent engine power loss. NTSB Identification: 107150 To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device. This April 2023 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others. Curt Lewis