International Aerospace Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1083
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Kailash »

Space janitor: Satellite to get rid of orbiting debris

How much effective will it be in its lifetime, considering fuel that would be available for orbit-deorbit cycles, re-orienting and chasing debris etc?

IMHO, this looks like a futile attempt at worst, and provocative at best. If they can make a big enough "Janitor" they can de-orbit entire satellite, and no one would take kindly to the idea!
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Seems like CAS is taken seriously by RuAF , follow on to Su-25 under works

Russian Air Force to Receive New Attack Aircraft by 2020
“The Air Force units will start receiving this aircraft by 2020,” Drik said on Monday. “It will gradually replace highly-reliable Su-25SM Frogfoot attack planes.”

According to Drik, the new aircraft will meet the demands of modern warfare and feature elements of “stealth” technology, the whole range of tactical weaponry, modern radar and navigation equipment.

Meanwhile, Russia will continue to upgrade its outdated Su-25 attack aircraft to Su-25SM version, which has a significantly better survivability and combat effectiveness.

The Russian Air Force currently has over 30 Su-25SM planes in service and plans to modernize about 80 Su-25s by 2020, Drik said.
SKrishna
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 21 Jan 2008 19:18
Location: Bombay
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by SKrishna »

The F-35 Shows Its Missile Teeth for the First Time Ever

America's F-35 may not be very useful, :lol: :lol: but it's still, on paper, one hell of an aerial destruction machine.......

Well—the kind of punch it'll pack if it's ever used for anything more than tests and photographs. :rotfl: :rotfl:
6 hard points + 4 internal bays

IIRC Katrina and Taffy both have 12 hard points???
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5722
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Kartik »

South Korea gives contract to Volvo Aero's ACAB to develop the stealthy radome for the KF-X.

Volvo Aero to develop KF-X fighter radome
The Volvo Aero owned company, Applied Composites AB – ACAB – has been appointed by LIG Nex1, a LIG Group company in South Korea, for the development of a prototype stealth radome for the KFX aircraft programme.

ACAB is recognized as one of the leading European suppliers of advanced composite components for military applications. Among other things, ACAB is specialized in advanced radome technology, including the latest generation stealth and low-observable technology. ACAB has supported and supplied Saab for over half a century with radome technology for the Saab fighter programmes. ACAB is the supplier of the Gripen fighter radomes.

LIG Nex1 is South Korea’s number one company on military products. LIG Nex1 is working in close collaboration with advanced global companies. LIG Nex1 is developing state-of-the-art weapon systems, including radar and surveillance systems.

The radome (radar dome) is the streamlined structural part in the nose of the aircraft which protects the radar antenna from wind and weather. It is carefully designed to withstand the mechanical loads without compromising the radar performance. In addition, it increases the survivability of the aircraft due to its sophisticated stealth features.
...
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

if the JSF can carry 6 amraams internally would still be a potent force imo. and stealth conformal bays could perhaps add 4 x AIM9X.
Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Brando »

Kailash wrote:Space janitor: Satellite to get rid of orbiting debris

How much effective will it be in its lifetime, considering fuel that would be available for orbit-deorbit cycles, re-orienting and chasing debris etc?

IMHO, this looks like a futile attempt at worst, and provocative at best. If they can make a big enough "Janitor" they can de-orbit entire satellite, and no one would take kindly to the idea!
Actually this is a really brilliant idea. The Americans already have micro-sats that latch on the "enemy" satellites and intercept communications and data, this kind technology would just be taking it a step further. Plus, this is a far more elegant Anti-Satellite weapon than the Chinese anti-satellite weapon and with advanced unmaned robotic drones taking over in all spheres, it's only a matter of time when unmanned robotic vehicles are sabotaging satellites, intercepting communications and even de-orbiting satellites to make LEO safer !

ISRO should be working on something similar.
Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1083
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Kailash »

Brando, what US micro-sats do is very different to what the Janitor should/could do in theory. But practically speaking, there are plenty if risks involved. Debris or enemy sats would come in different shapes, sizes, travelling in different orbits and varied velocities. To be able to track and home in on one itself is a herculean task. Holding on an object as big as a satellite and moving it out of orbit against its momentum is impossible and wasteful.

What is the fuel/effort required for pushing something (unknown dimensions and momentum) out of orbit (unknown again)? How many times can they do it? The enemy sat might fire its thrusters, hurling away both itself and the janitor in an undesirable vector. It is a theory whose time has not come. Best use of the Janitor would be to keep swallowing small debris and de-orbit safely after a few years of service.

Purpose wise, if you are designing an a-sat weapon, the Janitor concept is useless. A simpler, more elegant approach would be to fry the electronics/fuel tanks from a distance - high power lasers, projectiles, powerful AESA which can toast some chips etc. All the weapon should do is track, come within "firing" range, re-orient and shoot.
Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Ravi Karumanchiri »

X-POSTED NOTICE RE: STRATFOR “Strategic Forecasting” // “Global Intelligence”

Rakshaks,

I’m not sure how much “play” this story got – I’ve had my head down for a few weeks now – but perhaps this event provides an opportunity you’ll want to avail yourself of:

It recently made the news that one of America’s “thought-leader” think tanks “STRATFOR” was badly hacked, probably by the Chinese, and a list of all their subscribers was revealed, including a virtual “who’s who” in the US Government’s Departments of State and Defense. Indeed, STRATFOR stuff has been required reading for this lot since forever.

Well, in response to this enormous security breach, STRATFOR has removed the (completely compromised) password/login rigmarole and is now offering all of its web content for free.

Go to http://www.stratfor.com/ where the top line reads “Temporarily offering all content for free”. The “Geopolitical Diary” and “Analysis” sections are particularly interesting.

There are literally hundreds of articles on all sorts of (security/defense/geopolitical) topics, many of which will greatly interest Rakshaks.

Certainly, it is interesting to read what those folks are reading – it provides a window on their world, which after all, we all share.

Enjoy!
ManjaM
BRFite
Posts: 1217
Joined: 15 May 2010 02:52
Location: Padvaralli

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by ManjaM »

this link has the list and pictures of all aircrafts used by USAAF to date. Lots of good pictures and some good information about other USAAF stuff.

http://bobshermanspage.com/USAFPlanes.html
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by VinodTK »

USA: New Bomber Program 'Underway' But Cloaked in Secrecy
:
:
Even presuming that the $4 billion for the bomber in the 2013 budget submission spread over five years is supplemented by a few billion more in the black budget that is not much money to build 80 to 100 planes that will cost at least $550 million each. Even if that is flyaway cost -- which excludes research and development costs -- building a bomber able to penetrate denied airspace and fly thousands of miles to do it without refueling has never been cheap.

And then there are the arcane details about just what we're talking about when it comes to the Long Range Strike Bomber, as the Air Force's head of Global Strike, Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, calls it. On the one hand, Kowalksi told reporters today that there is a family comprising: the long-range standoff missile (nuclear warhead for striking targets deep inside a country); conventional Prompt Global Strike, designed to strike any target in the world within one hour; and the ground-based successor to the Minuteman ICBM, which he called the ground-based strategic deterrent..
:
:
Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Brando »

Kailash wrote:But practically speaking, there are plenty if risks involved. Debris or enemy sats would come in different shapes, sizes, travelling in different orbits and varied velocities. To be able to track and home in on one itself is a herculean task.
Satellite only track their position relative to the Earth, enemy satellites are tracked based on ground based radars and their orbits can be predicted fairly easily. Each "janitor" would receive instructions on its "target" and its targets orbital profile from the ground.
Kailash wrote: Holding on an object as big as a satellite and moving it out of orbit against its momentum is impossible and wasteful.
Not really, Space shuttles have "removed" numerous objects from their orbits. Plus, you don't need to go "against" its momentum, you just need to change its rotational vector. A few ion thrusters would be able to do the job by firing intermittently and if at its perigee enough force was applied, orbit would decay radically sending it into a decaying orbit.

The main benefit of this against other methods is that other methods would still leave a "dead" satellite in orbit while this method would "evacuate" that orbit and make it safe to use again.
PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by PratikDas »

NASA Reader's Room
Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight
Fall 2010 – Rev. A (1.04 Mb PDF)
Fall 2010 – Rev. A Poster (8.2 Mb JPG)
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by JTull »

US ditches contract to buy Brazilian attack aircraft
The US Air Force has abruptly cancelled an order for counterinsurgency aircraft from Brazil in a setback for military relations between the western hemisphere’s two most important powers.

The US Air Force said it was not satisfied with documentation supporting the decision to award the contract to US technology company Serra Nevada Corp and its partner Embraer, Brazil’s flagship aircraft producer.

It said it would investigate the decision to award the contract but did not give further details, including which party was allegedly at fault.

“While we pursue perfection, we sometimes fall short, and when we do we will take corrective action,” Michael Donley, air force secretary, said in a statement.

The contract for 20 Super Tucano light attack aircraft for use mainly in Afghanistan, while small by military standards with a value of $355m, was Embraer’s first major order with the US military.

The cancellation comes ahead of a planned visit by Dilma Rousseff, Brazil’s president, to Washington in April and amid fierce competition between Boeing of the US, France’s Dassault and Sweden’s Saab over a multibillion fighter jet contract to refurbish Brazil’s air force.

“This is not good news for the Brazilian defence industry and it could sour talks on this front between [Barack] Obama and Dilma,” said João Augusto de Castro Neves, an analyst with Eurasia Group.

The US Air Force’s decision follows a bitter fight between the Sierra Nevada-Embraer partnership and rival Hawker Beechcraft over the contract, which had escalated into a public row over which programme would generate more jobs in the US.

Sierra Nevada and Embraer had promised to build the aircraft in Florida, pledging to use more than 70 US suppliers and create more than 1,200 US jobs.

But Hawker Beechcraft, which is 49 per cent owned by Goldman Sachs, sued the US military, claiming that it was unfairly eliminated from the competition.

The company greeted Tuesday’s decision. “We commend the Air Force for this decision and we believe strongly it is the right thing for the Air Force, the taxpayers and the people of Hawker Beechcraft,” said Bill Boisture, chairman. “We look forward to competing for this contract as this important initiative moves forward.”

Kansas-based Hawker Beechcraft’s claims over the contract were championed by a local Republican, Mike Pompeo.

Hawker Beechcraft is struggling with a 47 per cent fall in the value of direct contracts with the Pentagon over the past two years, according to Bloomberg data. It fired 300 workers in November, citing difficult markets.

US diplomats in Brazil will be keen to reassure the Brazilian government the decision was based on technical issues to avoid clouding Boeing’s bid for the Brazilian fighter jet programme.

The Brazilian military has traditionally distrusted the US while Brazil’s leftwing politicians, including Ms Rousseff’s Workers’ party, have been known for their anti-US rhetoric.

But relations had been improving following a visit to Brazil last year by President Obama.

Brasília is also keen to court US support for Brazil’s bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

“This Embraer deal could have changed this attitude of benign indifference between the two sides. But now it looks like it might be back to square one,” said Mr Castro Neves.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

perfection and probity is only reserved for makers of foreign gear attempting (on very favourable terms to US) to sell it some goods.

boeing and LM can screw up anytime and still be well fed Munnas
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4635
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by hnair »

if they dont have a domestic product (however small) and there is no war-footing, the great khan prods domestics, foot-drags allies' proposals, "get inspiration" from antagonistics etc. And their wrinkly senators put up a barf-worthy burlusque to cover these happenings behind scenes. At that point, all talk about "globalization", no "state pampering" etc goes out of window. SOP tuned to perfection

We follow the other way - crap is ok, as long as it is not local. 8)
rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 855
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by rajsunder »

not sure where to post this one

New TOP-GUN-II Movie in pipeline Flight global link

This time it is going to be F-35 instead of F-14 Tomcat
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4163
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by pgbhat »

comment.
Working title: "TOP GUN 2: Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
:lol:
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Russian Defense Ministry to Buy 92 Su-34 Fighters
The Russian Defense Ministry has signed a deal for 92 Su-34 Fullback fighter-bombers from the Sukhoi aircraft maker, the ministry said on Thursday.

The deal under which the warplanes are to be delivered by 2020 was signed by Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov and Sukhoi General Director Igor Ozar.

This is one of the largest warplane contracts under the government arms procurement program and it will help replace all of the Su-24 bombers currently in service with the “4+ generation” aircraft, Serdyukov said.

The Ministry will take delivery of 10 Su-34s in 2012, all of them to be deployed in the Western Military District. Last year six fighter-bombers were delivered to the Air Force. These come under an initial contract for 32 Su-34s.

At present the Air Force has 12 Su-34s.

Factoring in the new contract, the Air Force will have a total of 124 Su-34s.

The ministry previously said a total of 70 Su-34s will be delivered by 2015.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

F-22 redesign considered as oxygen system concerns linger
US Air Force leaders are considering a redesign of the Lockheed Martin F-22 but still have no answers for the oxygen system breakdowns responsible for another operational disruption.

F-22s based in Alaska were grounded for one day in mid-February after three separate pilots reported hypoxia symptoms, the Air Combat Command confirmed to Flightglobal.

It was at least the third temporary stand-down for the F-22 since the USAF deactivated the entire fleet for four months until last September.

But air force officials are no closer to identifying the cause of the string of incidents, including one fatal crash in November 2010 that was preceded by a failure of the pilot's oxygen supply.

USAF officials hoped an expert panel led by retired Gen Gregory Martin might yield the answer. The team has now reported its findings, but found no "smoking gun", said Lt Gen Herbert Carlisle, deputy chief of staff for operations, plans and requirements.

The USAF is considering a broad range of options, including redesigning the F-22 to include a back-up oxygen supply, Carlisle said. This would automatically detect an oxygen system malfunction and activate, he added.

The F-22 already is equipped with an emergency oxygen system, but it must be manually activated by the pilot after the onboard oxygen generation system (OBOGS) stops working.

Capt Jeff Haney was killed on 16 November 2010 when his F-22 crashed in Alaska. Haney inadvertently steered the aircraft into the ground while trying to reach a handle to activate his emergency oxygen system.

The OBOGS had already stopped functioning during the incident. An unexplained oxygen leak in the engine compartment prompted an automatic fire protection system to shut down the supply of bleed air to the OBOGS.

While Haney's supply of breathing air was cut off, other F-22 pilots have reported symptoms suggesting their air supply was not filtered properly.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Russian Helicopters a conglomerate of all Russian chopper business has released this chart of future platforms development.

Note worthy are 2015-2020 development period , 3 new chopper are under development Mi-383 to replace Mi-8/17 , New Universal Strike Chopper to replace the Ka-52/Mi-28 and Ka-65 to replace the Ka-28/29/31 Naval ASW.

May be we can work with them on one of the program if it meets our needs like PAK-FA program , Most certainly we will be replacing the Mi-17 and Ka-28 in future

Image
member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by member_20067 »

co-pilot view from an F-15 in Alaska... !! full HD ..headphone advised

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

here is a better player at the lo-lo-lo game - luftwaffe tornadoes in goose bay canada
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52l1_WK7U8k
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

March 2, 2012 :: Upgraded Il-76 Plane to Make Maiden Flight in Summer
NIZHNY NOVGOROD, March 2 (RIA Novosti)
Tags: An-124, Il-76, Sergei Dementyev, Russia

Russia’s modernized Ilyushin Il-76MD-90A aircraft, also known as the Il-476, will conduct its maiden flight by the end of June, Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar aircraft maker said on Friday.

The Il-476 is an extensively modified variant of the Il-76 freighter, with new engines, reinforced wing, modernized cockpit, and heavier payload. The aircraft will be primarily built for the Russian Armed Forces and Emergencies Ministry.

“Project 476 is our future,” Aviastar General Director Sergei Dementyev said.

Aviastar, which also manufactures super-heavy Antonov An-124 transport planes, expects to build up to ten of the Il-476 aircraft per year and is in talks with export customers including India and China as well as commercial customers.

China canceled a contract agreed earlier with Russia for delivery of around 38 Il-76 transport and Il-78 tanker aircraft, after TAPO, the Uzbekistan-based Il-76 airframe producer said it could no longer deliver the airframes as production had slowed.

Russia then had to move production to Aviastar in order to complete the Il-476 modification programs for the Russian Air Force.

The Russian Defense Ministry wants to buy up to 100 of the aircraft over ten years to replace existing Il-76s.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by chackojoseph »

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Russia, Ukraine close to rolling out new Antonov plane
Russia and Ukraine are close to rolling out a new Antonov transport plane. They will start test-flying it this year and continue work to organize series production.

Defence Ministers Anatoli Serdiukov and Dmitry Salamatin announced this to the press Wednesday after emerging from Moscow talks.

The Antonov-70 jet will come in two versions, one for military and the other for civilian use. It will cost $67mn a piece and will be capable of carrying 47 tons of cargo. The A400M jet being developed by Europe’s EADS company will cost $188mn and will be capable of carrying 37 tons.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

US offers Israel military means to destroy Iran's nuclear plants
Adrian Blomfield / The Daily TelegraphMarch 9, 6:00 IST
The United States has offered to supply Israel with the military means of destroying Iran's nuclear facilities, but only if it agrees to delay an attack until next year, an Israeli newspaper has claimed.

Under the terms of the deal, Israel would be provided with "the latest bunker busting bombs developed by the US army" and air-to-air refuelling planes, the Maariv newspaper quoted diplomatic sources and Western intelligence officials as saying.

The newspaper did not specify the type of bomb allegedly being offered. The United States has already supplied Israel with 5,000-lb GBU-28 and GBU-27 "bunker-busting" bombs capable of destroying virtually all Iranian nuclear facilities with the exception of the Fordow enrichment plant, buried up to 280 feet under ground.

Iran has begun moving its material into Fordow, leading to claims in Israel that a unilateral attack would be ineffective once a period of six to nine months has elapsed, an assessment that has led to fears in Washington that the Jewish state is preparing to launch military action.

Israel's "window of opportunity" would be extended, however, if it were to take possession of the US military's new 30,000-lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator GBU 57-A/B, which would be capable of breaching Fordow's defences.

Israel's air force, however, has no B-2 bombers, making it unclear how it would carry the new bunker-buster. It is possible that the offer, allegedly made in a meeting this week between President Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, only involved expanding Israel's existing GBU-28 arsenal.
kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by kmkraoind »

Gurulog, I have a noob question. Is it possible to dampen the effects of GBU's with explosive armor plates as used in tanks, like carefully sandwiching high energy explosive armor plates in upper stages of concrete to nullify or lessening the impact of GBU's.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

given enough volume and materials you can stop anything. cheap bags packed with sand and kept together using mesh nets have proved in afghanistan to stop big car bombs.

I think best is find a good layer of thick rock like 50-100m thick and locate your facility below that...with a thick layer of soil and sand over it. I doubt these GBU things will have much impact on such well chosen places. hills made of nearly solid rock like Shravanabelagola will also do. even better might be construct a large deep pond of water above it...that should have a good cushioning and slowing impact on anything dropped. a 25m deep pond, 1m thick steel sheet and 50m of rock would likely easily survive anything non nuclear.

WW2 battleship 16" AP shells weighing nearly a ton and travelling supersonic were defended using 1m thick armour belt and sloping armour. the head of the shell used to melt on impact forming a gluey plug inside the armour.
aniket
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 17:34
Location: On the top of the world

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by aniket »

What will happen when one of These strike it
Massive Ordnance Penetrator
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

that will mean manned airstrike by B-2 and precursor to open war. the aftereffects might be worse than the disease.
it can reportedly break through 65m thick concrete. its unknown how it will behave vs steel or composite sheets and indeed thick gels or water in my chankian krocokil pond over the facility. being fat, it might experience drag and deflection as it goes down into the water.
Locked