International Military Discussion

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Feb 2015 04:24

Ground Collision Avoidance System ‘Saves’ First F-16 In Syria

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Feb 2015 05:38

Ground Collision Avoidance System ‘Saves’ First F-16 In Syria

(Corrected URL)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Feb 2015 05:41

Very interesting and pertinent news item:

DARPA Dan's fight to secure the Internet

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 09 Feb 2015 08:49

The crux of the auto GCAS is this,

The system protects pilots by taking temporary command of the aircraft and executing an automatic recovery maneuver when it detects that an impact with terrain is imminent. The system constantly compares the trajectory of the F-16 with a terrain profile generated from onboard digital terrain elevation data (DTED). If the system detects a threat, an evasion command is issued. If no action is immediately taken by the pilot, the system automatically assumes control (AW&ST, Aug 2, 2010, p. 50). The recovery includes an abrupt roll-to-upright followed by a 5g pull until clearance of the terrain is assured. Auto GCAS can also be overridden by the pilot at any time. The system incorporates a "Pilot Activated Recovery System" (PARS) function which provides a disoriented pilot with a way to manually engage an automated recovery.

Did they miss this feature on the C-130s? not the vertical charlie part but something more suitable to its size as a evasive maneuver

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Feb 2015 09:03

vasu raya wrote:The crux of the auto GCAS is this,

The system protects pilots by taking temporary command of the aircraft and executing an automatic recovery maneuver when it detects that an impact with terrain is imminent. The system constantly compares the trajectory of the F-16 with a terrain profile generated from onboard digital terrain elevation data (DTED). If the system detects a threat, an evasion command is issued. If no action is immediately taken by the pilot, the system automatically assumes control (AW&ST, Aug 2, 2010, p. 50). The recovery includes an abrupt roll-to-upright followed by a 5g pull until clearance of the terrain is assured. Auto GCAS can also be overridden by the pilot at any time. The system incorporates a "Pilot Activated Recovery System" (PARS) function which provides a disoriented pilot with a way to manually engage an automated recovery.
Did they miss this feature on the C-130s? not the vertical charlie part but something more suitable to its size as a evasive maneuver

[youtube]XWx6-aK8Ick#t=46[/youtube]

The aircraft identified for the roll-out were F-16, F-22 and F-35. F-22 is up next and it should have it in a couple of years. I think this is then followed by F-35 integration. It requires testing both in the sim and actually in the aircraft and also specific integration and development . It would obviously be something that every aircraft could potentially get but that is out in the future.

The next system they are testing at the moment is the Auto Air Collison avoidance system. It was test flown with an AvWeek reporter in the back seat :

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 10 Feb 2015 08:30

^^^

Really good stuff! then the matter of compressing the entire globe's digital terrain data that is usable in a single memory chip and making use of COTS hardware, nifty.

stealth platform and terrain following with such a system ...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Feb 2015 12:22

http://www.fastcompany.com/3039580/most ... nnovations

a chinese co based in shenzhen has become the worlds largest maker of consumer level drones.

the benefits of these for PLA recon assets at tactical level is clear, plus their ability to source high end drone tech from everywhere.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 15 Feb 2015 16:14

Russia's T-14 Armata Tank May Feature a Fatal Flaw

Russia is building a supertank -- if the nation can afford it.

Last month, we introduced you to Russia's new Armata main battle tank. Weighing in at 55 tons, and featuring multilayered armor, an independent crew capsule, and a fully automated 125 mm main gun firing both cannon rounds and laser-guided missiles, Armata is designed to be Russia's answer to General Dynamics' (NYSE: GD ) M1 main battle tank built for the U.S. Army and Marine Corps. We also described how Russia is using Armata ("Армата") as a core chassis upon which it will build an entire family of armored personnel carriers, anti-aircraft missile launchers, armored self-propelled artillery, flame throwers, bridge-layers, and minesweepers -- some operated as robots.

But as high-tech and powerful as all this sounds, the Armata contains one potentially fatal flaw: its cost.

Trouble in Putin's paradise
Late last year, a controversy broke out between Russia's Ministry of Defense (MinOboron) and UralVagonZavod (UVZ), the military contractor responsible for building Armata. As described on Russian-language website gazeta.ru, MinOboron blasted UVZ for offering a tank that it describes as overpriced and incomplete.

To date, Russia has invested 15 billion rubles ($239 million) in developing the Armata tank, and budgeted 39 billion ($622 million) more. But MinOboron is demanding UVZ both complete its design and lower its price. Unless UVZ complies, "MinOboron will not extend the contract for delivery of Armata to the [armed] forces, and will refuse serial purchase. ... We'd rather buy the latest version of the T-90 while they finish up the Armata," said the Defense Ministry.

To date, the Russian army has taken delivery of only 12 prototype Armata tanks, bought in 2013. A contract is in place for production through 2017. But at last report, no long-term contract had been signed.

That's just the problem. According to UVZ, mass production is key to reducing the unit price of the Armata. The tank is expected to be complete and ready for mass production this year. (Indeed, it is scheduled to make its debut at the May 9 Victory Day Parade on Red Square.)
:
:
:

Rampy · Post by **Rampy** » 16 Feb 2015 08:42

https://t.co/7y4mTryb7d

Check this before this get deleted. 12 min video on US engaging IS using drones and Satellite

Not sure on authenticity. Its awesome though

can we archive it?

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 16 Feb 2015 19:18

^^^^ Not drones. It's Apache helicopters doing God's work. I would point out that Apaches are capable of liasoning with drones and satellites but the weapons work are performed by Apaches. I would also point out the Apaches spared the women and children in the tents and the donkeys tethered in the field near the tents. Just real nice work.

RajD · Post by **RajD** » 16 Feb 2015 19:50

Sir, it looks overkill to me. Does depleted uranium rounds explode so violently, especially in the last instance in the clip where only one man is killed in explosion of a single projectile. Also, the same thing in the beginning. There, one can see a few terrorists escaping from the midst of these explosions. You can also note the caption at the bottom such as 'msl not ready'( missile not ready?) and still explosions happening. I think it is a mix of rockets, depleted U rounds and missiles in some instances(last shots of explosions in crevices, look at the angle of the shot/IR designator). But yes, as you said drones or not, missiles or not its god's work being done. Good riddance. +100 to that.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Feb 2015 19:54

This is not an IS engagement. Its 2 Ah-64's engaging the Taliban from a few years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK-Iy9290ZI

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Feb 2015 20:18

i figured it was taliban. the IS iraqis, syrians and expats are urban and not really tent dwellers that too with women and pack animals.

since even normal farmers and herders in AF have rpgs and rifles for their protection one never knows whether it was really taliban or just a bunch of armed villagers. mud walled compounds in AF villages tend to have firing positions atop the walls and gunfights over things like grazing rights and water are common between tribes and villages.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 16 Feb 2015 20:37

The US Army likes to use the M789 round for their 30 mm gun. It is an explosive round and not depleted uranium (that I have knowledge of). The apache carries 300 rounds for the gun and it expends them rather quickly. You will note from the video that they ran out of 30 mm ammo rather quickly. The M789 has about a 10 foot explosive kill radius and will penetrate up to 2 inches of armor. It will most definetly knock out a tanks engine from above. It really doesn't need depleted uranium for that. It has an effective range of 2/3 of a mile.

Rampy · Post by **Rampy** » 16 Feb 2015 20:57

brar_w wrote:This is not an IS engagement. Its 2 Ah-64's engaging the Taliban from a few years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK-Iy9290ZI

My bad did not realize it was old, but still impressive

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Feb 2015 21:06

The ultimate weapon for these sorts of missions is the AC-130..

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Feb 2015 22:21

Darpa To Focus On How Unmanned Can Help Manned

http://aviationweek.com/technology/darp ... elp-manned

Development of unmanned systems that can help manned platforms survive in high-threat environments is a key feature of programs planned by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) and previewed in its fiscal 2016 budget request.

“We have done some modeling and simulation looking at low-cost air vehicles and how you distribute those in a system-of-systems approach to compete certain missions,” says Darpa Deputy Director Steven Walker. “We’ve seen some pretty good effect in doing that and confusing the enemy.”

Advances in microsystems and precision navigation and timing technologies mean “as things get smaller and cheaper and we can synchronize things better, we can do similar missions with many, many small vehicles as you can with larger ones,” he says. “The problem we always run into is if you want to fly ranges that are relevant, you’ve got to get the small vehicles there to begin with.”

The Gremlin program, for which an initial $8 million is sought in 2016, is planned to develop small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) that can be launched in volleys from “commodity platforms,” likely transport aircraft. They would fly into contested airspace, conduct moderate-duration missions and be recovered by the launch platform.

Increasing the lethality, survivability, payload and reach of combat aircraft by teaming them with unmanned wingmen is the objective of the TEAM-US (Technology for Enriching and Augmenting Manned-Unmanned Systems) program, which would be funded at an initial $12 million in 2016.

UAS tailored to specific missions—including surveillance, electronic attack and weapons delivery—would work with “less survivable, but decision-making manned platforms” to gain access to contested airspace, with swarming UAS supporting missions against network-integrated air defenses.

Using existing manned aircraft for command, control and battle management would make “these fourth- and fifth-generation platforms viable participants in future anti-access, area-denial scenarios where they may have limited survivability,” states Darpa’s budget document.

“Whereas we see potential in high numbers of low-cost things, and we would like to explore that more with the [U.S.] Air Force potentially in a joint program, we do still believe there is a place for the high-end system and for getting to the fight when you need go long ranges,” Walker says.

Darpa is to lead the Air Force and Navy in a program dubbed the Aerospace Innovation Initiative, which would conduct an X-plane technology demonstration for the next generation of U.S. fighter, to enter service after 2030. There is no evidence of a program in Darpa’s 2016 request, but Walker says it is in the classified budget.

Offboarding sensors and weapons to unmanned “wingmen” would be valuable for a sixth-generation fighter, “if we can make it work,” acknowledges Walker. Darpa’s Collaborative Operations in a Denied Environment program is “looking at how to have multiple UAVs cooperate in a more active way . . . and get to the point where one person controls six UAVs and to where the UAVs do most of the work,” he says.

In the maritime domain, meanwhile, unmanned vessels that can deploy to significant ranges to provide offboard multispectral early warning of anti-ship cruise-missile attacks is the objective of the Multi-Axis Protection of Surface Ships program, to be funded at an initial $11 million in 2016.

The Mobility Infantry program, at $6 million in 2016, is slated to explore development of a mixed team of soldiers and semi-autonomous off-road vehicles—similar to those used by special forces—that, when unmanned, can act as mobile, extended-range fire-support platforms.

At an initial $8 million in 2016, the Strategic Mobility program is to identify sea-based platform, aerial delivery, and automated logistics and distribution technologies that could enable deployment of a brigade or division in just days.

The Multi-Domain Unmanned System (UxS) program, for which $7 million is requested in 2016, is to develop a design that can morph to cross-physical domains—ground-air, ground-sea or air-sea. The goal is to build a prototype that can operate in one domain and then be modified to deploy to another.

New space programs planned for 2016 are to develop technologies to enable small, low-cost satellites to replace today’s large, expensive spacecraft. Demonstration of a deployable antenna for a cubesat, and electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR) sensors and inter-satellite links for under-100-lb. spacecraft are among the slated projects.

Other new programs planned for 2016 include development of microelectromechanical-systems inertial sensors for GPS-free munitions guidance and low-cost EO/IR seekers for air-launched weapons able to engage fixed and moving targets with minimal external support in a GPS-denied environment.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Feb 2015 10:32

The new "Soyuz-5" will fly on natural gas

On the basis of a rocket "Soyuz-5" will be to create a series of media including heavy and superheavy modification

Rocket and Space Center "Progress" (Samara) is finalizing construction of a new carrier rocket "Soyuz-5", which will run on compressed natural gas.

According to the news agency TASS General Director Alexander Kirilin, "a new perspective on the modern rocket fuel - liquefied natural gas, its cost-effectiveness is achieved through harmonization and reduce the range of parts assembly units."In turn, the first deputy general director of the center Ravil Akhmetov explained that the liquefied natural gas - a cleaner fuel than kerosene, and has great energy capabilities.

On the basis of "Soyuz-5" will be to create a series of missiles, including heavy and superheavy. This is achieved via the use of a completely new scheme - two-stage vehicle with two side blocks.

According Kirillina, the center will offer to include the project in the Federal Space Program for the period 2016-2025 years. It is planned that the "Soyuz-5" will be created by 2021. The new missile is planned to launch from the Baikonur East in the Amur region.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Mar 2015 22:33

S-350 "Vityaz" to replace S-300 by 2016 (video)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Mar 2015 22:51

Here’s What You’ll Find on the Fighter Jet of 2030

On Monday, President Barack Obama’s budget request for the Pentagon featured more than $5 million dollars for an item tagged “Next Generation Fighter.” If you haven’t heard of it, it’s the plane of the future meant to replace the F/A-18 Super Hornet and EA-18 Growler aircraft by 2030. Much like the future itself, it’s been a source of much speculation but exists only as an idea.

Yesterday, in broad but revealing terms, top Navy leaders described some of the capabilities that they want in tomorrow’s fighter.

First, a bit of background: The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is often called the 5th Generation fighter. It also goes by F/A-XX or, more colloquially, the X Plane. The Navy first put out a requirement for the 6th Generation plane nearly seven years ago, in June 2008. The Air Force followed with its own F-X research program. In 2013, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, began a program to pull the two together. At the time, DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar said ”This is not a question about what does the next aircraft look like, this is a question about what are all the capabilities that it will take, layered together, in order to really comprehensively extend air superiority.”

Pentagon officials have been tight-lipped about what they want on the 6th Generation fighter so far. In conversation with reporters during a House Armed Services Committee Hearing in January, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall declined to detail the desired budget or attributes for a new fighter. In a memo to the Defense Science Board from October, Kendall only established a task force to study air dominance.

Companies like Boeing have already unveiled concepts for what the fighter could look like (if they built it). BAE systems has also released some interesting artistic concepts featuring planes that can 3-D print their own replacement parts in the air and fold together multiple small drones into a single craft.

This week, military leaders revealed more detail about what they actually want. In conversation with reporters at the Office of Naval Research’s Future Force Expo, in Washington, Adm. Mathias Winter, new chief of the Office of Naval Research, or ONR, named some of the key capabilities he wanted the plane to feature. They were: “full spectrum dominance, next generation advanced propulsion, and autonomous sensor payload integration.”

What does that mean?

Full Spectrum Dominance

Full Spectrum Dominance is a large component of the military’s Joint Vision 2020 plan released in May of 2000. It refers to the ability of “U.S. forces, operating unilaterally or in combination with multinational and inter agency partners, to defeat any adversary and control any situation across the full range of military operations.”

In terms of a plane, that suggests a craft that’s suitable for a wide variety of missions, perhaps not just combat, and able to work seamlessly with foreign militaries.

One component of that (probably) is dominance over a spectrum of a different sort, the electromagnetic spectrum. The feature of the F-35 that its makers are most proud of is its ability to jam enemy radar and to use advanced sensors to see, render and collect data in the battle space far beyond the conventional capabilities of a fighter.

Today’s advanced aircraft carry electro-optical/infrared and synthetic aperture radar imaging capabilities. Emerging capabilities include “cognitive” electromagnetic weapons and defenses. Cognitive electromagnetic weapons autonomously find new wave forms to use against planes, tanks, or other threats (or, defensively, find ways to detect new wave forms being used against the system). Full spectrum dominance will mean more of that. It could include intelligence gathering equipment we can’t fathom. “Today it’s radar but it might be something more in the future,” said Adm. Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations, at the expo.

Tomorrow’s innovations in radar, jamming and sensing, will emerge from a variety of research outfits but particularly the DARPA Microsystems Technology Office, MTO, designed specifically to tackle those sorts of problems. A future plane could carry a signals intelligence payload allowing the plane to collect information from devices on the ground, including (theoretically) a single target’s cell phone location.

But dominance has many aspects. Greenert touched on what air dominance means for him: in a word, loaded. “It has to have an ability to carry a payload such that it can deploy a spectrum of weapons. It has to be able to acquire access probably by suppressing enemy air defenses,” Greenert said.

Loaded with what sort of weapons? One probable answer is lasers. DARPA already has a program to develop a high-energy, 150 KW liquid-state laser to be incorporated onto jets, including fighter jets. The High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System, or HELLADS, program was expected to go into testing in 2014. In terms of broader Defense Department spending, next year’s budget request includes a big increase in spending for directed energy weapons.

The military wants to put lasers on planes for the same reason it wants to put them on ships. Shooting down swarms of cheaply produced and launched drones with conventional ammunition becomes prohibitively expensive after a certain point.

Some have speculated that Kendall’s House Armed Services Committee hearing announcement about the new plane represented a certain amount of Pentagon frustration with the F-35, its cost overruns and mounting technical problems. The 5th Generation plane is obsolete right out of the hanger, critics charge, and the Chinese have already innovated air defenses against it. The new emphasis on next-generation fighter suggested that the military was already looking beyond their most expensive weapons system ever, before it even really got off the ground.

Sam LaGrone at United States Naval Institute News, USNI, has suggested an alternative explanation in that the next generation is not so much a replacement for the F-35 as a complimentary plane.

If air dominance is like a basketball game, then the F-35 would play star forward, or rather would play an “emerging role in the carrier air wing will be—in part—as a forward sensor node for the carrier strike group to relay targeting information via the Navy’s Naval Integrated Fire Control Counter Air (NIFC-CA) concept.”

Navy Rear Adm. Mike Manazir told USNI, “We’re looking to replace the F/A-18E/F”—considered a beloved workhorse for combat missions, rather than star forward—“with an understanding already of what the F-35C has brought to the air wing.”

Next Generation Advanced Propulsion

How fast does the plane of the future go? Winter wants a better engine but not necessarily a speedier plane. “We know we need a bigger wick,” Winter told reporters. More specifically, he wants “a propulsion system that can provide… not just more power… I’m talking about being able to reduce the SWaP-C of your propulsion system,” he said, referring to the size, weight, power, performance, and cooling (SWaP-C) cost of the system.

Greenert also said that finding new ways to achieve hypersonic speed probably won’t be a big part of the effort. “I don’t think it’s going to be super-duper fast, because you can’t outrun missiles,” Greenert said. So “next generation propulsion” doesn’t necessarily mean the fastest flying object in the air. The military wants a plane efficiently designed to allow for high speed at low power cost. That, in turn, suggests a lot of power going to something more useful than an exhaust stream, like computer elements, advanced weapons or something else.

Autonomous Sensor and Payload Integration

An autonomous sensor in the context of a future plane can mean many things. Some market analysts speaking to DoDBuzz have speculated that the plane will probably include ‘“smart skins’ which connect the fuselage with computer technology.”

Payloads, in the context of the next generation fighter, could include small drones that use the fighter as a sort of mother ship.

DARPA officials told Defense One the current programs most relevant to the next-generation fighter program are the System of System Integration Technology and Experimentation, or SoSITE, program as well as Collaborative Operations in Denied Environment, or CODE. Both programs are aimed at developing technologies to allow drones to work with one another as well as with manned aircraft to swarm bomb an adversary.

A related project at DARPA seeks to develop “distributed air capabilities.” The agency describes that as “a large aircraft that, with minimal modification, could launch and recover multiple small unmanned systems from a standoff distance.” In other words: a mother ship. Whether or not the fighter will launch drones depends somewhat on how large a fighter can be, or how small a drone can become and still be useful as a weapon or intelligence tool.

Things That The Next-Generation Fighter May Not Have

Humans. The F-35 once was supposed to be the last manned fighter. Greenert didn’t rule out the prospect of designing a 6th Generation plane capable of carrying a human pilot. But he didn’t express enthusiasm for it.

“The weight that we put on an aircraft due to the pilot is kind of extraordinary. You take that off and put sensors on there instead,” he said.

If you keep a pilot in the cockpit of a plane that’s loaded with more and more advanced computational piloting features, what does the pilot do? Answer: less and less actual flying.

A Defense Department program called Aircrew Labor In-Cockpit Automation System, or ALIAS, seeks to cut down on the number of decisions that the pilot has to make by taking over some of the more mundane flying tasks. DARPA Deputy Director Steven Walker on Wednesday described the ALIAS project as “trying to build a co-pilot.”

If those capabilities can be matured and if at some point the copilot demonstrates its superiority to the fragile and expensive human in the pilot’s seat, then the decision to keep a human in the cockpit looks more like an attempt to preserve the mythos of the American fighter pilot and less like a strategic necessity. It still requires human approval to do one important thing with military weapons: kill. Given the military’s strong and surging obsession with improving autonomy and artificial intelligence—and given the rapid advance of the current state of the art—the idea of a robotic fighter pilot out-testing a human by 2030 is a safe bet.

Stealth may also be absent on the plane of tomorrow. The F-35 does have advanced stealth capabilities. In explaining why, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh has said “in the near term, the stealth technology on our 5th Generation platforms, the F-22 and F-35, is the price of admission into the fight.”

Greenert expressed a slightly different valuation of that technology. “Stealth may be overrated,” he said. “I don’t want to necessarily say that it’s over; but, let’s face it, if something moves fast through the air and disrupts molecules in the air and puts out heat—I don’t care how cool the engine can be—it’s going to be detectable.”

The problem of trying to design an aircraft for the distant future is that the future is constantly in flux. At some point, new technologies will make even the concepts above look quaint. For now, they represent the military’s grandest ambitions for a plane that’s merely an idea but that will occupy more and more time, money and resources in the years ahead

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 02 Mar 2015 00:21

^^^"DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar

We are still struggling to do basic defense research and it's not for the lack of minds. It's been the lack of a strategic vision. All tactics and procedures. The means are the end.

BTW, I am astounded at the number of Indians in the US military and in key positions at the Pentagon and other agencies.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Mar 2015 05:14

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/is-thi ... 1688388366
Is This The Shape Of Russia's Next Generation Long-Range Bomber?
( Few Good Pictures)

The PAK-DA, which literally means "prospective aviation complex for long-range aviation," is Russia's next generation long-range bomber project and it aims to one day replace the Tu-95 Bear and the Tu-160 Blackjack, and possibly the Tu-22M Backfire fleets. Much like America's next generation bomber, which has gone from a very high-end concept to one with more limited goals over the last decade, mainly due to affordability concerns, the PAK-DA has also lowered its performance and capabilities expectations, although to an even greater degree over a similar span of time.The PAK-DA, which literally means "prospective aviation complex for long-range aviation," is Russia's next generation long-range bomber project and it aims to one day replace the Tu-95 Bear and the Tu-160 Blackjack, and possibly the Tu-22M Backfire fleets. Much like America's next generation bomber, which has gone from a very high-end concept to one with more limited goals over the last decade, mainly due to affordability concerns, the PAK-DA has also lowered its performance and capabilities expectations, although to an even greater degree over a similar span of time.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Mar 2015 05:22

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 7&cid=1101
China developing a stealth bomber

hina is developing a new stealth bomber called the H-20 to firm up the PLA strategic bomber force, said Bill Sweetman, a military journalist and Richard D. Fisher, an expert in Chinese military development.Russia and China are both proceeding with bomber plans while the United States is developing its own Long-Range Strike Bomber project, said the Washington-based Aviation Week & Space Technology report. China's H-20 bomber is most likely to be developed and produced by Xi'an Aircraft Industrial Corporation. The aircraft concept will probably be a subsonic low-observable "flying wing" configuration.The development of a stealth bomber received "renewed national attention" back in Oct. 2013, according to colonel Wu Guohui, an associate professor from China's National Defense University. "In the past China has been weak regarding bombers, but in the future will develop long-range strike aircraft," he said. Even though the PLA Air Force has said virtually nothing regarding their plans, the H-20's completion is rumored to fall somewhere around 2025.By that time, China will need the stealth bomber to accomplish two important strategic ambitions. The first is denying the US from entering the First Island Chain, extending from Alaska to the Philippines. Second, China will have to soldify its leadership in the Far East with a wide force projection capability. The H-20 would allow the PLA Air Force to complement the gathering global aircraft carrier and amphibious projection capabilities of its navy.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Mar 2015 06:20

Jhujar wrote:http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/is-thi ... 1688388366
Is This The Shape Of Russia's Next Generation Long-Range Bomber?
( Few Good Pictures)
The PAK-DA, which literally means "prospective aviation complex for long-range aviation," is Russia's next generation long-range bomber project and it aims to one day replace the Tu-95 Bear and the Tu-160 Blackjack, and possibly the Tu-22M Backfire fleets. Much like America's next generation bomber, which has gone from a very high-end concept to one with more limited goals over the last decade, mainly due to affordability concerns, the PAK-DA has also lowered its performance and capabilities expectations, although to an even greater degree over a similar span of time.The PAK-DA, which literally means "prospective aviation complex for long-range aviation," is Russia's next generation long-range bomber project and it aims to one day replace the Tu-95 Bear and the Tu-160 Blackjack, and possibly the Tu-22M Backfire fleets. Much like America's next generation bomber, which has gone from a very high-end concept to one with more limited goals over the last decade, mainly due to affordability concerns, the PAK-DA has also lowered its performance and capabilities expectations, although to an even greater degree over a similar span of time.

The Cover picture is a Airliner proposal by Tsagi..Its been doing the rounds on the world wide web for some time now.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 03 Mar 2015 08:10

Cosmo_R wrote:^^^"DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar

We are still struggling to do basic defense research and it's not for the lack of minds. It's been the lack of a strategic vision. All tactics and procedures. The means are the end.

BTW, I am astounded at the number of Indians in the US military and in key positions at the Pentagon and other agencies.

Very good opportunity for us to steal technology.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 03 Mar 2015 12:58

RoyG banned for a month, for outing India's top informants by an act of basic stupidity

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Mar 2015 12:21

^^ Hardly any reason to ban any one for saying that unless there were many warning issued prior to this.

The Chinese exactly do that and have been quite successful too.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Mar 2015 12:22

International Space Station 'Lost' Without Russia - NASA Chief

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 07 Mar 2015 14:10

Austin wrote:International Space Station 'Lost' Without Russia - NASA Chief

SpaceX is already launching regular resupply missions to the ISS. And along with Boeing its vying for a contract to launch manned mission starting 2017. The ISS is partially Russian built so a pullout by them would still create a major hurdle.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Mar 2015 15:33

^^^^ They're not going to pull out unless it's war. It's the only game they got for now.

Meanwhile the US continues with its evolution in space launch and recovery systems and methodologies as well as tests and refinements of space habitats. A Bigelow inflatable habitat test module is schedule for launch to the ISS sometime this year. Expect more refinement and cost savings measures for LEO human activities as NASA contracts more of its LEO presence to corporate third parties.

NASA is thinking about BEO and what just exactly to do about it right now. The problem with BEO human space activity is a requirement for multiple US government administrations to remain consistent over the life of the program and keep their budget commitments. Not an easy task. Plus we still need break through results on robotic engineering for BEO space tugs, planetary landing and launch systems, and deep space rocket engines such as VASIMIR to decrease the amount of space travel time. This takes time to put into effect.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 07 Mar 2015 15:53

Austin, as reiterated before by other admins, there will be no more warnings for certain cases in mil-gdf fora.

Your "Chinese does it too" comment, does not mean anything in an Indian forum.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 07 Mar 2015 19:45

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:International Space Station 'Lost' Without Russia - NASA Chief
SpaceX is already launching regular resupply missions to the ISS. And along with Boeing its vying for a contract to launch manned mission starting 2017. The ISS is partially Russian built so a pullout by them would still create a major hurdle.

Without broad international partnership and cooperation the entire concept of the ISS itself diminishes. It would have insignificant impact on NASA or other space programs around the world but would/could bring an end to the great advances in space cooperation that have been made since the end of the cold war. Regardless NASA is pushing greater commercial viability in space and as SpaceX has shown industry can step and and deliver without massive hand-holding from government. Stratolaunch is up next (next year), lets see what it delivers. Meanwhile the focus for NASA is towards the eventual MARS mission with the SLS.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 08 Mar 2015 03:36

While NASA is trying to find budget commitment for human Mars missions, it continues to build on robot exploration there of. In 2016 INSIGHT will launched as a stationary lander to monitor quakes on Mars, In 2020 another Curiosity type robot will be launched to Mars. Around 2024 it is anticipated to put another satellite around Mars to perform comm/data relay from Mars to Earth. Also some sort of lander that will gather rock and soil samples for launch back to Earth is anticipated.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Mar 2015 20:31

Amazing what Iran is capable of doing

Iran unveils Soumar long-range cruise missile

Iran has unveiled a new long-range land-to-land cruise missile, named Soumar, which has been designed and manufactured by domestic experts.

The new state-of-the-art high-precision missile was unveiled during a Sunday ceremony in Tehran with senior Iranian officials, including Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan, in attendance.

During the ceremony, Deqhan (pictured below) said Soumar “enjoys different characteristics in terms of range and pinpoint accuracy in comparison with the previous products.”

Range http://i.imgur.com/UtLCqlD.jpg

More pictures
http://i.imgur.com/mGRg6bx.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/BppCtc3.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/puRWpzp.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/HkskOaa.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/wlm8Cyq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/LVW1cbC.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/E9GJ4by.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/0axUL45.jpg

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 08 Mar 2015 20:40

Isn't that just Kh-55 just like the hoot torpedo was an "iranian weapon". Russians or chinese have finally transferred the entire line (maybe except critical parts) to iran. i don't buy the bluster that Iranians usually put out. They have enough paki in them. Or rather paki have iranian boastful nature in them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-55#medi ... ent_2008_G

l

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Mar 2015 20:52

A 2010 report quoting Israel Intelligence says Iran bought Kh-55 from Ukraine in 2006

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun ... _05_06.asp

Shamir, head of Israel's largest defense contractor, identified the Iranian program as the KH-55 cruise missile. The missile, supplied to Teheran by Ukraine around 2006, was being enhanced by Iran's Defense Ministry.

In an address to Israel's first multi-national ballistic missile defense conference on May 5, Shamir said Iran sought to extend the range of the missile beyond 2,500 kilometers. He said Iran also was developing an air-launched version of KH-55.

"The pace of missile development is much faster than those of solutions," Shamir said. "The new element is that Iran is already in space."

Tal Inbar, a director at the Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies, said Iran received at least 12 K-55s from Ukraine. Inbar, who works closely with the Israel Air Force, said Iran has already displayed a cruise missile that resembled that of the U.S.-origin Tomahawk.

"It's purpose remains unclear," Inbar said.

Officials said KH-55 represents a growing Iranian capability to significantly enhance foreign missile systems. They cited Teheran's success in extending the range of the North Korean No Dong missile from 1,300 kilometers to that of at least 2,100 kilometers under the Shihab-3ER program.

"There have been significant developments on the part of Iran," said Arieh Herzog, director of the Defense Ministry's Israel Missile Defense Organization.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Mar 2015 20:57

There is also this recently -

http://www.janes.com/article/49784/iran ... ial-weapon

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Mar 2015 22:53

First production BMD-4Ms delivered to Russian Airborne Forces

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2015 13:05

Russia & US agree to build new space station after ISS, work on joint Mars project

In a landmark decision, Russian space agency Roscosmos and its US counterpart NASA have agreed to build a new space station after the current International Space Station (ISS) expires. The operation of the ISS was prolonged until 2024.

“We have agreed that Roscosmos and NASA will be working together on the program of a future space station," Roscosmos chief Igor Komarov said during a news conference on Saturday.

The talks were held at Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan.

The two agencies will be unifying their standards and systems of manned space programs, according to Komarov. “This is very important to future missions and stations.”

The ISS life cycle was to expire in 2020. “Under the ISS program the door will be open to other participants,” Komarov told reporters.

The next goal for the two agencies is a joint mission to Mars, NASA chief Charles Bolden told journalists.

Roscosmos and NASA are working with each other and other partners on a global roadmap of space exploration, Bolden said. “Our area of cooperation will be Mars. We are discussing how best to use the resources, the finance, we are setting time frames and distributing efforts in order to avoid duplication.”

NASA is currently committed to commercializing space activities. “We are consciously moving away from government financing of low-orbit missions,” Bolden said, adding that sometimes NASA “has been criticized” for that.

At the same time, he stressed that the US has not abandoned its goal of returning to the moon. In the future, NASA is planning “to attract more private developers to our joint exploration projects of the Moon and Mars,” Bolden said.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2015 13:06

US-Russian crew blasts off for record-setting one-year ISS flight