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
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

F-18E/F offered would be basic version since the 20% cost premium that Boeing has mentioned in the past brings it closer to the 2020's F-35A cost and therefore makes it less competitive on acquisition price. Boeing would have liked the new Canadian government to kept its promise where they said they'll have a fair competition but won't allow the F-35A to compete in it :). They have since gone back on those words (amazing how that works :) ). Boeing will probably offer a path to upgrade over its life-time however. The only REAL competition is between Boeing and LMA as it is one thing to threaten to remove one US design from even competing, but another to go back on a program-partnership and then snub the US by not picking another design which by all accounts will be the most affordable on offer (SAAB had previously said they may not compete) especially at a time when you have majority support in the Congress for the key stone pipeline.
The Conservatives had committed to Lockheed Martin’s F-35 joint strike fighter but the project was heavily criticized for rigging the requirements so that only the F-35 could qualify. Defence officials had written the requirements to call for a plane with stealth capability, advanced radar and integrated avionics.
Heavily criticized, because like many other air-forces around the world the Canadians actually wanted 5th generation aircraft with unique requirements that come with it. I guess the US also rigged the JSF competition by not allowing the F-16 and F-18 to compete :). India rigged the FGFA by not allowing the Su-30, F-15 to compete etc.


Meanwhile, an update on the multi-nation training for the F-35A:

F-35 training at Luke AFB gathers pace with 34 jets
The multinational pilot training centre at Luke AFB in Arizona has grown exponentially since receiving its first Lockheed Martin F-35 in March 2014, and that pace won’t let up in 2016 as the 56th Fighter Wing zips past 3,000 Lightning II sorties.

As the world’s premier conventional F-35 training base, Luke is currently training pilots and instructors for the USA, Australia, Norway, Italy – and soon F-35 foreign military sales customers Japan and Israel. Other programme partners – the Netherlands, Turkey and possibly Denmark and Canada – will also join the pooling arrangement, where they share aircraft and instructors.

Luke will grow to six F-35 training squadrons, and will soon reactivate its third unit – the 63rd Fighter Squadron, which trained F-16C/D pilots until it disbanded in 2009.

As its former commander, Pleus is looking forward to the 63rd's return, and he expects one squadron to covert to F-35 each year after that. Eventually, Luke will house 144 jets and 12 full-mission simulators. Singapore and Taiwan also have F-16 training squadrons at the base.
Pleus flew the base’s first F-35 sortie on March 18, 2015, and by the end of the month, it had clocked 1,000 sorties. Luke recently surpassed 3,000 sorties.

Luke’s training programme will grow rapidly through 2024 as F-35 nations work towards initial operational capability. Lockheed is scaling up aircraft production at its main site in Fort Worth, Texas as well as in Italy and Japan, with a planned run of 2,322 A-models.

“Throughout this year, I’ll get two more Norwegian F-35s, our very first two Italian F-35s, and six more F-35s with US flags on the tail,” explains Pleus. “We’ll be sitting somewhere around 44 jets by the end of 2016. We’re also going to start training Israel with some ground-based training, and Japan will come in later as our [foreign military sales customer].”

FMS customers including South Korea will fly their own jets, and have instructors assigned to their units. The first Israeli F-35I “Adir” is in final assembly, but flight training is being done in Israel.

“Right now, Israel is just doing academic and simulator training only. Japan will bring their own aircraft here, and will go through the academics, the simulators and we will have instructor pilots assigned to them.”

One of the lingering curses of concurrent development and fielding of the F-35 is that the 34 aircraft based at Luke are in various stages of upgrade, and will be continuously improved as new hardware and software modifications become available. That means maintainers are working overtime to bring the aircraft and simulators up the latest configuration.

That should smooth out as Lockheed enters full-rate production in the standardised Block 3F and Block 4 configurations in 2017 and beyond.

Until recently, Luke has been growing its pilot instructor base, but in April students will adopt a new syllabus focused on full combat training, and eventually weapons employment.

That new focus comes as Hill AFB in Utah stands up its first combat-coded F-35 squadron for IOC in August, and as Luke prepares to receive its first undergraduate pilots in November.

Those basic course, or “B-course,” pilots will have limited exposure to combat jets, having operated the T-6, T-38 and AT-38 prior to taking control of a $100 million F-35. Until then, pilots have come across from older airframes like the A-10, F-16 and F-15.

“We are on the cutting edge in November of getting that first group of students started, so they can go right to Hill AFB upon their graduation and become the new pilots, instructors and leaders for the F-35 as it continues to grow,” says Pleus.


TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Interesting news in America's space program..........

http://spacenews.com/orbital-sierra-nev ... contracts/

apparently Dream Chaser has been awarded a commercial resupply contract phase 2 to commence in 2019 along with Space X and Orbital.

Boeing CT-100 was *not* chosen. No explanation given.

Dream Chaser plans on landing at KSC upon return from the ISS. A launch rocket for Dream Chaser was not mentioned either.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Russia successfully performed first tests of ionic jet engine — space corporation

http://tass.ru/en/science/849640
MOSCOW, January 14. /TASS/. Voronezh KBKhA company completed the series of first firing trials of the high frequency ionic electric jet engine, Russian state-owned corporation Roscosmos said on Thursday. "A series of new firing trials is planned to increase run life and check stability of confirmed characteristics during the long-term engine operation," Roscosmos said.

The engine was developed by KBKhA in cooperation with the Moscow Aviation Institute. Trials were implemented at a special vacuum test bench and evidenced conformity of engine parameters to characteristics in the terms of reference. Such engines can be used for various tasks, from correction and stabilization of operational orbits of satellites to deep space flights.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

In 2015, France signed a new arms export contracts worth 16 billion euros

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1682937.html[quote]

As said French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, the new volume contraction of the French arms producers in 2015 amounted to 16 billion euros. According to him, it is twice more than in 2014 (8.2 billion euros). In view of the euro-dollar contracting volume reached about 17.5 billion dollars

Recall that 2015 was marked by really large success: the contracts were signed for the supply of two amphibious assault ships of Mistral (originally built for Russia), the frigate project FREMM (originally built for the French Navy) and 24 fighters Dassault Rafale in Egypt, 24 (with an option for a further 12) Rafale fighter jets to Qatar, 24 helicopters Airbus Helicopters EC725 Caracal Kuwait.

In this regard, interest calculation method in 2015. As you know, last year, France was forced to return to Russia means for undelivered UDC in the amount of about 900 million euros and 56 million euros for the training of sailors. This contract with Egypt amounted to 950 million euros, and with Russia - 1.2 billion euros. There is the issue of recognition of 250 million euros in the portfolio.[/quote]
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

F135 production to jump 110% as DOD and P&W reach agreement
The US defense department and Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II engine supplier Pratt & Whitney have reached a “handshake agreement” in contract negotiations for production of 167 F135 turbofan engines, according to a joint statement released today.

The ninth and 10th low-rate initial production contracts buy 66 and 101 engines respectively, up from 36 and 48 in the previous two contracts.

That 110% jump from Lot 8 to 10 is being felt at P&W’s two F135 assembly sites in Middletown, Connecticut and West Palm Beach, Florida.

The government is also in negotiations with Lockheed for 157 more Lightning IIs as the manufacturer begins scaling up production at the final assembly plants in Texas, Italy and Japan To date, P&W has delivered 262 F135s for all three aircraft variants. Lot 9 engines are already in production, with deliveries beginning this year followed by Lot 10 units in 2017.

The exact value of the engine contracts has not been disclosed, but Lot 7 was valued at $943 million for 36 engines and Lot 8 hit $1.052 billion for 48.

The contractor and the joint programme office were keen to show the cost per unit has declined, since there are strong concerns among customers about the fifth-generation fighter’s affordability.

The unit price of 140 conventional engines for the F-35A and carrier-based F-35C declined 3.4% from Lot 8 to Lot 10, according to the statement. The unit price of 27 F-35B engines, which includes the Rolls-Royce lift fan for short takeoffs and vertical landings, has been trimmed 6.4% compared to Lot 8.

“This agreement for the next two lots of F135 engines continues to drive down costs and that’s critical to making the F-35 more affordable for the US military and our allies,” says F-35 programme chief Lt Gen Chris Bogdan. “We are ramping up production and witnessing tangible results.”

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Orbital to develop new heavy rocket. The first stage will be entirely solid fuel. The second stage will be Blue Origin....launch date sometime in 2019. Will compete with Space X and ULA.....

http://spacenews.com/orbital-developing ... pacex-ula/

This kind of development in rocketry is unprecedented. Space X, ULA and Orbital all competing,,,,,,,then add into the mix various space capsules Blue Origin, Space X, Boeing, Dream Chaser......this is an exciting time indeed.

Also add in new space telescopes coming up, the massive SLS rocket by NASA and a return to CIS Lunar space, and on going ISS operations, more planetary rovers, etc.....it's almost beyond imagination....truly a golden age that I thought I would never see again after the moon landings.

a side note: ESA has increased its budget 18% and now has a manned mission component.

Plus India is developing its capabilities quite nicely also....

Something for everybody..... :)
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

^ Orbital ATK Unveils Plan For ‘Next-Gen’ EELV Competitor
LOS ANGELES – Orbital ATK plans to start ground tests next year of first elements for an all-new, next-generation launch vehicle to compete for the U.S. Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program.
The company disclosed details of the plan on Jan. 14 following revelations from the Air Force that awards made to the company the previous day for work on new boosters and a modified upper-stage engine were destined for an “Orbital ATK next generation launch vehicle.”

The contracts, issued by the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center Launch Systems Directorate, are valued at $46.9 million and cover development of the Common Booster Segment main stage, the Graphite Epoxy Motor (GEM) 63XL strap-on booster, and an extendable nozzle for Blue Origin’s BE-3U/EN upper stage engine. A second contract, valued at $33.6 million, was awarded to SpaceX for further development of the company’s liquid oxygen/methane staged-combustion Raptor upper stage engine.

Orbital ATK hatched a plan to develop the as yet unnamed new launch vehicle following a 2014 congressional directive to the Defense Department to develop a U.S.-produced rocket propulsion system which will enable the Air Force to transition off the Russian-supplied RD-180 propulsion system used on the Atlas V rocket. The move will bring Orbital ATK into direct competition with Boeing-Lockheed Martin’s United Launch Alliance and SpaceX, both of which are already contesting for launch national security payloads.

“When the Air Force said it was looking for a solution to replace the RD-180 engine, Orbital and ATK were separate companies,” says Mark Pieczynski, vice president of business development for Orbital ATK’s flight systems group. “ATK was looking at solid (rocket motor) solutions for the RD-180 replacement, as was Orbital and, since we had a supplier relationship with ATK, we talked about ATK as the propulsion provider and Orbital as the launch vehicle provider.”

Speaking to Aviation Week, Pieczynski says that, following the Orbital ATK merger last year, “we had something to offer the Air Force. So we submitted a response to the Air Force’s ‘Step 2’ request for proposals and we are honored that the Air Force likes what we put forward.”


Scott Lehr, president of the Flight System Group, says the Orbital and ATK merger “created a new level of technical capabilities and cost synergies that have strengthened our propulsion system solution to the Air Force. This funding, together with our own research and development investments, will lead to an operational launch capability in 2019.”

The Orbital ATK concept would incorporate a Common Booster Segment main stage made up of solid motor cores delivering the “liftoff thrust of the RD-180,” Pieczynski says. “To get heavy lift we add one or two more solid cores to the booster and we could strap them on, like the Atlas V,” he adds. The upper-stage would be powered by the BE-3U/EN, a modified version of Blue Origin’s baseline 110,000-lb. thrust liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen engine.

“We have been in dialogue with Blue Origin for more than a year, so we have been working with them on taking the basic BE-3 engine and converting it to an upper stage engine. The engine has a really high technology readiness level and flew recently on the New Shepard suborbital vehicle. So it has hardware that has flown and now has flight testing behind it,” he adds. The modification involves adding an extended nozzle to optimize the expansion ratio for operation in a vacuum. Although Orbital ATK has not specified the capability of the upper stage derivative, Blue Origin has previously described the BE-3U as a 155,000-lb. vacuum thrust engine. Orbital ATK does not foresee any issues with the development as it already provides extendible nozzles for solid motors to enable denser packaging.

Similarly, Pieczynski says development of the GEM 63XL is also underway and accelerating. The strap-on booster was selected by ULA last September for future flights of the Atlas V and the forthcoming Vulcan launch system. The GEM 63 will replace Aerojet Rocketdyne’s AJ-60A boosters on upcoming flights of the Atlas V, and the longer XL version of the booster has been selected for heavier Vulcan launches. “It could also be used for the Orbital ATK vehicle if it needed a little additional performance boost,” he adds.

Although the Air Force requirement calls for launch capability by 2019, Pieczynski says “we can meet the timescale. We do have a lot of recent history of solid rocket motor development, and we understand the complexity involved in developing new rocket motors. The plan right now is to have the solid core booster through critical design review, and to start tests in the second quarter of 2017. About a year later, or maybe less, we hope to have the first static fire. That would lead to launch capability in 2019,” he adds. “This schedule is realistic.”

Orbital ATK has already filed a letter of intent to the Air Force to begin the certification process for launching national security payloads and says work on a detailed certification plan is expected to begin over the next few months. The manufacturer says work on the Air Force launcher program will take place at its facilities in Magna, Utah; Iuka, Mississippi; and Chandler, Arizona; from 2016 to 2019.
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by TSJones »

^^^ the US military's space budget is far larger than NASA's. It is about time they started sponsoring relatively usable civilian world tech to advance space exploration. DARPA does ok but it is not directly space related.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

GE is definitely one of the crown jewels and 'spear' of the khanate - its depth and width of r&d is impressive.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by shiv »

Bahrain airshow ticket cheaper than aero India ticket
http://www.bahraininternationalairshow. ... rmID=2/t=m
Zynda
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2313
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Zynda »

Has Chinese displayed/flown their aircraft/hardware on any air shows outside of China (or Russia)? I think the Chinese have a J-10 aerobatic team...considering that J-10 is supposedly mature enough, just wondering if they have had a flying display of it at any air show outside China.

Edit: I've answered my own question. It seems like J-10 aerobatic team have performed at MAKS-2013. Here is a good quality video of the same. Not very exciting except for a few tight loops.



Also, the J-10 has performed at LIMA (Malaysian Air Show). There is a video of the same on Youtube. Apparently, J-10s have also performed in the recent Thailand Air Show but couldn't find a video of it on Youtube except for a news clip.
Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Nick_S »

SpaceX Falcon 9 v1.1 Jason-3 Barge Landing Attempt - Failure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jshk8ZVIgdI

Falcon lands on droneship, but the lockout collet doesn't latch on one the four legs, causing it to tip over post landing. Root cause may have been ice buildup due to condensation from heavy fog at liftoff.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

^ They'll need to get this right over the next few launches as they cannot get rid of the barge in the future as certain launches only have enough residual fuel left to complete a barge landing as opposed to a concrete landing. Its definitly harder to do but nothing that is insurmountable. Next attempt at a barge landing is on Feb. 06.

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 18 Jan 2016 19:41, edited 1 time in total.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

John wrote:As for SM-2 it was offered back in around 09 along with SPY-1 i suppose even if production had stopped there is more than enough stockpiles to fullfill any further customers, i doubt SM-6 would be opened up for export soon may be to close Allies.
SM2 and ESSM Block I would have been more expensive, and would have not involved and engaged Indian industry at the same level. SM6 should be exported to AEGIS countries and particularly to AEGIS ashore if Japan decides to go in for that option. Its also a very heavy weapon coming in at well over 3000 pounds driven by both the range requirement, as well as the ability to intercept ballistic missiles in the terminal phase. However, Raytheon will almost have to be using SM6 front end and the RIM-174 unique processing and software (that does the trick for that missile imho) on a new interceptor particularly with an eye out to replace the PAC-2 GEM-T system. While many consider the SM3 Block IIA as the jewel in the AEGIS system (and that has some merit) I consider the SM6 to be that since it gets extremely long range anti-air capability, and also gets you endoatmospheric ATBM capability at an extremely affordable cost. Raytheon has lost big on the Patriot system which now for all practical - domestic purposes (US Army) has essentially become a Northrop Grumman system with some components supplies (for now) by Raytheon and Lockheed. There is a long term requirement for a 150-200 km (air-breathing targets) interceptor by the US Army and both the US-A and the USN have moved to a concept of " Any-shooter/Any-sensor" which would basically eliminate the PAC-2 from its future plans leaving room for a new long range interceptor since the PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE's are high saturation (anti ballistic missile - raid) weapons as opposed to long range systems. By early to mid 2020's an F-35C (or A or B ) would be able to cue an SM6, as would the Sentinal, and other NIFC-CA, and IAMDIBCS assets (JLENS etc). Both the NIFC-CA IBCS handshake, and the F-35C NIFC-CA capability with block 4 will increase SM6 intercept range against air-breathing threats. That is a big big capability to have, and something not possible in older systems that use TVM, SAG and SARH (or a combination) which slaves them to their engagement radars for all practical purposes (for high PK anyhow). The new notional missile is being called internally at Raytheon as the advanced threat interceptor, and they had a data sheet projected at one of the recent army conferences showing off some suggested timelines (essentially in time for the next PAC-2 GEM/T missile life-extension so that it can be skipped in favor of new missiles) so raytheon intends on offering a system based on the SM6 but obviously in a smaller package as no one wants a 3000+ pound, large interceptor with 350-400 km range being lugged around by army convoys.

The S-400 system does provide many benefits however it also kind of overlaps other capabilities and presents unique integration challenges since most of the weapons there are TVM systems reliant on the organic engagement radar while the extra-long range missile is so far no-where to be spotted in the wild. If the need is to protect the National Capital Region from incoming ballistic missile salvos then its not the best way to go about it (imho). A more dedicated ABM system (I believe the Russians had a version of the S300 that was more ABM focused) would have been better and importing one would have been an option if the domestic systems would have taken a long time to field and mature. THAAD could also potentially be looked at since it has the range and divert capability to protect a city the size of Delhi and has a dedicated ABM, AESA sensor that provides X band discrimination at extremely long ranges (practically the horizon for 100-150 km altitudes) with its mega watt class power consumption . If the solution was for a long range air and missile defense problem, then adding a Barak 8-ER to the existing system and pairing that up with the Magic Wand/Stunner would have been a better option in my opinion since that would have given both air and missile defense capability and could have leveraged existing command and control/ battle management elements and perhaps even things like sensors and data-links - with a more robust ABM system coming through domestic AAD efforts. That option could essentially eliminate the need for a totally new system altogether while ensuring steady funding of the desi BMD shield.
suppose even if production had stopped there is more than enough stockpiles to fullfill any further customers
I wouldnt be so sure of that. US Missile interceptor production programs have been significantly scaled back as part of the budget control act / Sequestration. All programs including PAC-3, THAAD, SM3, and SM6 have suffered production ramp up roll-backs or have been pushed to the right. While SM6 is slowly entering the fleet, SM2 is still the primary fleet weapon.
Last edited by brar_w on 18 Jan 2016 22:29, edited 6 times in total.
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by TSJones »

apparently landing a rocket on a ship is way harder than on land.....
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

^ Had they had the fuel and a landing pad on concrete they could have failed to land since the snag was with the leg lockout. The water was choppy but it appears they did very well to get to the center of the PAD. I think they'll have quite a good chance to nail it if they get the leg locks to work on Feb. 6th. All Cali missions would have to use the barge for now, and even after a landing pad is built they would still need the two barges for missions that require higher speeds.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by John »

brar_w wrote:By early to mid 2020's an F-35C (or A or B ) would be able to cue an SM6, as would the Sentinal, and other NIFC-CA, and IAMDIBCS assets (JLENS etc). Both the NIFC-CA IBCS handshake, and the F-35C NIFC-CA capability with block 4 will increase SM6 intercept range against air-breathing threats. That is a big big capability to have, and something not possible in older systems that use TVM, SAG and SARH
Will F-35 or other airborne be able to provide mid course guidance update for SM-6?

As for S-400 big problem is that currently there are no other operators for it other than Russia so it is really hard to separate fact from fiction. Russia IMO needs to do some more "open" tests to demonstrate the systems BMD capability. On paper the system is pretty exceptional and ability to field wild array of different missiles' makes it quite challenging to defeat for any adversary.

Barak-8 has some limited BMD capability, Israelis are very tight lipped about it but recent news report on Barak-8 indicates a terminal speed at around Mach 4-5 (at higher altitude it is bound to be much higher) which gives rough idea of what it will be capable of intercepting.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Will F-35 or other airborne be able to provide mid course guidance update for SM-6?
Navy to Integrate F-35 With Beyond-the-Horizon Technology


Baseline NIFC-CA has been deployed very recently. The F-35 will be getting it as part of the block 4 contracts leading to capability the 2020-2025 time-frame that adds TTNT waveform capability to the CNI system onboard so that it can communicate using that waveform with the E-2D.. First USN Block 4 development contracts went out last year. The concept works with the main AEGIS sensor (SPY-1 or SPY-6) feeding an S-band data link to the interceptor and the NIFFCA setup allows the forward deployed sensor to share targeting information with the ship through the NIFCCA node deployed on an E-2D (for now) and possibly on an EA-18G later on.

More - http://news.usni.org/2014/01/23/navys-next-air-war

Plus the basic setup-

Image


The current range limitation is with the quality of the lower frequency radar on the E-2D (with the kinematic capability used for divert) . With an X-band AN/APG-79 and AN/APG-81 providing the mid-course update the range of the missile should improve even further due to better quality of the update and track.

EDIT : To add to that, the SM6 and NIFC-CA are only now operational and the missile tests are happening at a gradual pace to enhance the baseline SM6 capability. DI-1 already added Anti BM capability to the SM6 and further blocks will add higher and more complex threats. NIFC-CA, launch on remote, and off board sensor curing has already been demonstrated using the currently deployed version of SM6 -

Navy Network Helps SM-6 Find, Kill Supersonic Target It Can’t See



NIFC-CA is one side of the equation. The Any Sensor / Any Shooter concept is as much a part of the US Army's current and future doctrine as it is the Navy's, its just that the Navy has had a very steady investment into AEGIS so they are a few years (not many) ahead of the Army. The Army has decided to follow a three phase part to Patriot replacement. Phase I is almost complete. It is called IAMD-IBCS (Integrated air and missile defense - Integrated Battle Command sensor - Essentially the brains of the Patriot have totally been replaced. The second phase is to replace the Patriot radar with one or two radars, and the third phase is to replace or add additional interceptors and add new launchers (perhaps move to MEADS style 70 degree launchers). The goal is again to acheive Any Sensor-any shooter concept and they have already managed to do this with the PAC-3 and the Sentinel radars and have just carried out the first test. Next phase would be to add JLENS X-Band AESA, and a couple of other forward deployed USAF and USMC radars. Once this is complete the goal will shift to having a formal handshake between NIFC-CA and IBCS which use a common data-link architecture but software defined capabilities to aid different systems (TTNT and the IBCS systems). IBCS should hit IOC in the next 2-3 years and a handshake with NIFC-CA should follow in the early 2020's. Advanced interceptors would be required to replace the PAC-2 medium-long range system since it is a TVM based system and therefore doesn't fit with the sort of networking the they are aiming for.

Here is the video of the first IBCS intercept using a PAC-3 interceptor cued by a forward deployed sentinel radar not associated with the Patriot missile defense system -


As for S-400 big problem is that currently there are no other operators for it other than Russia so it is really hard to separate fact from fiction. Russia IMO needs to do some more "open" tests to demonstrate the systems BMD capability. On paper the system is pretty exceptional and ability to field wild array of different missiles' makes it quite challenging to defeat for any adversary.
The problem isn't with the capability. Most missiles that are active are TVM missiles thereby relying heavily on the engagement radars. The largest 40N6 is nowhere to be seen. I haven't see a TEL deployed of it in any open source picture of any locally or internationally deployed (syria) system. There are other missiles available but not yet deployed by the Russians. If you want to provide BMD to a city the THAAD, or the ABM version of the S300 are better bets since they come with dedicated long range ABM sensors. The sensors also directly impact the divert requirements. An X-band sensor will always prove less divert strain on any interceptor irrespective of who makes it..thats just physics...Less divert requirement will mean longer ranges for your interceptor etc. Both the BMD systems (Russian and American) are more than enough to provide defense for the NCR. But why think of that..Why not build up the Barak-8 and 8ER and look to incorporate the Magic Wand/Stunner into the same Battle management element?

My point is that if you want to protect the national capital region from a threat from ballistic missiles, you develop and deploy a ballistic missile defense system. That is the AAD followed by a more comprehensive exoatmospheric system. If you want to buy something rather quickly because you think that a desi setup will take some time to mature than you go shopping for a BMD system and not an AMD system like the S400 or even Patriot that was earlier considered. A BMD radar will always work as the best solution for BMD missions since they are significantly more powerful, and are tasked with detecting, discriminating and cuing interceptors against very large number of ballistic missile targets from long ranges. With an optimal long range sensor you reduce your PIP errors and therefore increase effective interceptor range which could mean a follow on shot if you miss the first one. A high PIP error not only reduces your PK of the first shot but also significantly lowers your chances of having a second shot at the incoming ballistic missile. The point with Ballistic Missile Defense that has been realized by all nations that are now being threatened by it is the opponent's ability to send huge salvos of BM's of different types (cheaper scud types mixed with more complex MRBM's launched from farther away) to overwhelm both the sensors and the shooters. This is best tackled through dedicated BMD systems. That is why I feel the S400, primarily being an AMD system with some unknown status's for some of its interceptors being an inferior choice compared to a dedicated BMD system based on the S300 family (iirc) or something like the THAAD which is the only system in the world that has a very high quality high frequency sensor with mega watt class power supply, and a Gallium Nitride AESA antenna array. What you want for such a mission is a very large sensor, and an interceptor capable of providing wide area ABM capability. The S400 covers this altitude but the 40N6 is an unknown entity with its existence pretty much unknown and it not having been deployed by the Russians. Not even final guidance for its unique Endo-exoatmospheric envelope has been confirmed (iirc). There are other high rate of fire (anti salvo) weapons in the system that have also not yet seen frontline Russian deployment. This then leaves us with TVM weapons that were upgrades of the S300 system and because of the way they work they would be a challenge to integrate with India's AMD system that itself includes a lot of indigenous and possibly the Israeli weapons. If I were to do this, I'd up-gun the Barak-8 based system to include the Barak-8ER and Stunner interceptors if I wanted a more comprehensive AMD capability that include some very usefull BMD protection. If I wanted to import a BMD shield for the NCR I'd look to build one using the S300 / S400 system or buy the THAAD.
Barak-8 has some limited BMD capability, Israelis are very tight lipped about it but recent news report on Barak-8 indicates a terminal speed at around Mach 4-5 (at higher altitude it is bound to be much higher) which gives rough idea of what it will be capable of intercepting
The IDF is investing in the Stunner as the main BMD weapon for tactical deployments (Arrow being larger systems)..Not sure if there will be a TBM demonstration phase but without a dedicated demonstration program your capability is as good as non-existent. Some one has to go out and develop that capability if the physical interceptor allows for it. The MW/Stunner is a joint Israeli-US project with a unique arrangement with Raytheon where they can swap prime-contractor positions depending upon the customer (probably thinking of a Middle East market where it would have been politically difficult to acquire an Israeli weapon).
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

New metal for lighter, fuel-efficient aircraft developed
Scientists including those of Indian-origin have developed a new super-strong structural metal which could be used to make lighter, fuel-efficient airplanes, cars and spacecraft.

The new metal with extremely high specific strength and modulus, or stiffness-to-weight ratio, is composed of magnesium infused with a dense and even dispersal of ceramic silicon carbide nanoparticles.

It could be used to make lighter airplanes, spacecraft, and cars, helping to improve fuel efficie ..
Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Nick_S »

Germany's Tornado reconnaissance jets 'can't fly at night'
German Tornado jets deployed to Syria for reconnaissance missions can't fly at night, Bild daily reported Tuesday in a new embarrassment for the defence ministry which has been battling equipment problems.

A defence ministry spokesman admitted that there is "a small technical problem that has to do with the cockpit lighting".

"It is possible that the night goggles worn by pilots result in reflections," he said, adding that the ministry was looking at resolving the problem within the next two weeks.

He added that there was "currently no need to fly at night in Syria" and that the deployment was performing at "100 percent".

...

Der Spiegel magazine had also reported last year that only four of the military's 39 NH90 helicopters were currently useable.

Most recently, the army said the external fuel tank of one of its Eurofighter combat planes fell off as it was preparing for takeoff.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Singha »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ining.html
By Justin Huggler, Berlin3:56PM GMT 18 Feb 2015

German soldiers used broomsticks painted black instead of guns during a joint Nato exercise last year due to severe equipment shortages, it has emerged.

The incident took place during exercises for Nato's rapid response force, formed in reaction to the Ukraine crisis, which is supposed to be ready to deploy anywhere it is needed at very short notice.
Soldiers in the Panzergrenadierbataillon 371 took part in the exercises last September in Norway.

The troops were missing 31 per cent of their MG3 general-purpose machine guns, 41 per cent of their P8 handguns, and more than three-quarters of their Lucie night-vision devices.

Soldiers resorted to painting broomsticks black and attaching them to Boxer armoured vehicles to simulate gun barrels.
....
It emerged in a parliamentary report last year that only 42 of Germany's 109 Typhoon fighters are available for immediate use because of maintenance issues.

Only 38 of its 89 Tornado bombers are operational, alongside only 280 of the army's 406 Marten tanks.

Another parliamentary report last month told how members of Germany's KSK special forces had to pull out of a Nato joint exercise because there was no operational helicopter available for them
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

JSC "IL" develop civilian version of the military-transport aircraft IL-76TD-90A

Two have been handed over to RuAF. This is a civilian version.
Aviation Complex. SV Ilyushin begins to develop a modernized transport aircraft for the Emergency Situations Ministry, civil and commercial aviation, according to Interfax-Military News Agency, citing a source in the aircraft industry.


"Work begins on creating deeply modernized transport aircraft IL-76TD-90A," - a spokesman said.


He noted that the main developer of the aircraft is the Ilyushin Aviation Complex and there are already preliminary bids for the purchase of these aircraft.


"The avionics will be installed upgraded, similar to the avionics on the Il-76MD-90A. The engines are the same - PS-90A-76 on take-off thrust of up to 14.5 m. Capacity IL-76TD-90A will be increased from 47 tons to 52 tons as well as on the military modifications Il-76MD-90A, "- said the agency interlocutor.


He recalled that in November 2015 the head of the Ministry of Emergency Situations Vladimir Puchkov has signed with JSC "IL" agreement on the delivery of six new aircraft in the period from 2016 to 2022.


"JSC" IL "proposed to maintain IL-76TD-90A version for MOE opportunity parachute and landing landing of goods, which have IL-76MD-90A, but have no IL-76TD, now operated by Aviation Ministry of Emergency Situations," - he said .


Earlier it was reported that in addition to MOE interest in the civil version of the aircraft exhibits a number of other potential customers. For example, the Belarusian company "Transaviaexport" airlines from a number of Middle Eastern countries, operating today IL-76TD and considering upgrade its fleet aircraft IL-76TD-90A.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by abhik »

Nick_S wrote:Germany's Tornado reconnaissance jets 'can't fly at night'
German Tornado jets deployed to Syria for reconnaissance missions can't fly at night, Bild daily reported Tuesday in a new embarrassment for the defence ministry which has been battling equipment problems.
...
Der Spiegel magazine had also reported last year that only four of the military's 39 NH90 helicopters were currently useable.

Most recently, the army said the external fuel tank of one of its Eurofighter combat planes fell off as it was preparing for takeoff.
Singha wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ining.html
By Justin Huggler, Berlin3:56PM GMT 18 Feb 2015

German soldiers used broomsticks painted black instead of guns during a joint Nato exercise last year due to severe equipment shortages, it has emerged.
...
The troops were missing 31 per cent of their MG3 general-purpose machine guns, 41 per cent of their P8 handguns, and more than three-quarters of their Lucie night-vision devices.
...
It emerged in a parliamentary report last year that only 42 of Germany's 109 Typhoon fighters are available for immediate use because of maintenance issues.

Only 38 of its 89 Tornado bombers are operational, alongside only 280 of the army's 406 Marten tanks.
...
I think a "International Military and Defence Equipment - Positive News" thread in the mil form is much required.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

Lockheed Martin Nabs $5.3B Deal for C-130Js

From the US DoD.
Lockheed Martin has nabbed a multiyear contract worth $5.3 billion to deliver 78 C-130J Super Hercules aircraft to the US armed forces.

Just before the New Year, the Pentagon announced the award of more than $1 billion for the first 32 aircraft of the second multiyear contract, according to a Dec. 31 company statement.

The overall contract, valued at $5.3 billion, provides funding for 30 MC-130Js, 13 HC-130Js and 29 C-130J-30s for the Air Force, as well as six KC-130Js for the US Marine Corps. The contract also includes an option for five HC-130Js for the Coast Guard.

The aircraft will be delivered between 2016 and 2020, according to the statement.

The announcement is a major victory for Lockheed Martin, particularly after concern late last year that spending cuts due to sequestration or a long-term continuing resolution would force the Air Force to back out of the deal. The agreement is also an achievement for the Pentagon — multiyear procurements provide significant savings as compared to annual buys.

DEFENSE NEWS

USAF, Lockheed Reach Verbal Deal on C-130 Multiyear Sale

“We are proud to partner with the U.S. government to continue to deliver to the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Coast Guard the world’s most proven, versatile and advanced airlifter,” said George Shultz, vice president and general manager, Air Mobility & Maritime Missions at Lockheed Martin, according to the statement. “This multiyear contract provides true value to our U.S. operators as they recapitalize and expand their much-relied-upon Hercules aircraft, which has the distinction of being the world’s largest and most tasked C-130 fleet.”

Lockheed built 60 C-130Js for the Air Force and Marine Corps through the first multiyear contract, which ran from 2003 to 2008.

In a separate deal, French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian recently confirmed that Paris will buy four C-130Js, estimated at $650 million
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Russia ready to ship Soyuz upper stage, payload to Vostochny - See more at: http://spacenews.com/russia-ready-to-sh ... -vostochny

evidently corruption issues have been solved at the new space port and launch is scheduled for April......good news for space exploration....
Zynda
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2313
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Zynda »

Watching the live feed of Bahrain Air Show. Currently streaming display Al Fursan aerobatic team from UAE flying Aermacchi MB-339 aircraft. Have to say that they are pretty impressive. A lot of unique manoeuvres including a tail slide in an Aermachhi!!!

Anybody know if the new Suryakiran team will retain 9 aircrafts?
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

The Shape of Wings to Come
Future aircraft wings will ripple with adaptive, shape-shifting, quiet moving parts rather than noisy hinged flaps
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

Could this detachable plane cabin really save lives?


Now, Ukrainian inventor Vladimir Tatarenko has added a new concept plane to the pile: This one has a cabin that detaches from the cockpit when the flight goes belly-up.

The idea is that in the event of an emergency, the pilots could push a button that would allow the cabin -- complete with passengers and cargo -- to separate from the rest of the plane and float down to safety with the help of attached parachutes.

The pilots themselves, it seems, are out of luck.

What if the cabin lands on water, you ask? Inflatable tubes would be at the ready to keep it afloat.

According to a YouTube video Tatarenko released last month, he is looking for investors for this new project.

Before you break out your wallet, there are some in the aviation community that find the concept more than a little farfetched.

For starters, the cost of building and testing this new aircraft would be, undoubtedly, extravagant.

Airlines already spend between $100 million and $350 million per aircraft as is -- and that's without the yearly maintenance costs.

They would have little motivation to replace a trustworthy fleet with an untested concept, especially as plane crash fatalities are exceedingly rare.

According to airline association IATA, in 2014 (a tragic year for air flight), out of the 3.3 billion passengers that traveled, there were a total 641 fatalities.

This is actually an astoundingly high safety rate. Perhaps the money would be better spent addressing heart disease, which is responsible for over 610,000 deaths yearly in the U.S. alone?

Where will it land?

Economics aside, the mechanics seem, well, a bit dubious. As one commenter on Tatarenko's YouTube page points out:

"This whole concept dramatically weakens the airframe because now you have joints and fittings to connect a fuselage and a body together where once you had a whole fuselage to reinforce the airframe."

Also, what if the ejected cabin doesn't land -- as depicted in the video -- on a conveniently flat piece of land? What if it hits mountains, or buildings?

Without pilots (or, indeed, wings) to direct it, who's to say where it would land?
Last edited by NRao on 23 Jan 2016 21:18, edited 1 time in total.
member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by member_28108 »

^That is a claim but my simple question - what is the size of the parachutes and airbags etc needed to achieve a safe landing in a fully loaded plane. ?
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Austin »

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5729
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Kartik »

Israel- long range fashion catches on in Israeli Air Force

Article talks about the development of the 54 NM range I-Derby-ER missile from the existing Derby BVR missile
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

F-22's Deployed to Yokota AFB Japan


Image
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

The Antipode: Flying from New York to London in 11 minutes
Remember the Skreemr, a concept for a supersonic plane that could travel at Mach 10?

Scratch that, there's now a design for a plane that could cruise from London to New York in 11 minutes, traveling at Mach 24 -- that's 12 times faster than the Concorde!

Charles Bombardier, the industrial designer who came up with both designs, has dubbed this newest concept the Antipode, which he conceived in collaboration with Lunatic Koncepts founder Abhishek Roy.

In theory, it could carry up to ten passengers up to 12,430 miles in under an hour.

How it would work

"I wanted to create an aircraft concept capable of reaching its antipode -- or diametrical opposite -- as fast as possible," Bombardier told Forbes.

Did you just daze out? Bear with us a little while longer while we explain the tech that would get this craft flying.

The Antipode's wings would be fitted with rocket boosters that would propel the aircraft to 40,000 feet, and enable it to reach Mach 5.

Like the Skreemr, the plane would be powered by a scramjet engine.

Unlike conventional jet engines, scramjet engines have virtually no moving parts.

And unlike rockets, scramjet engines would burn oxygen from the atmosphere instead of having to carry heavy tanks full of oxygen.

But is it feasible?

Now, the Skreemr concept got some flack for the challenges presented using some of the same technology.

One big problem was heat.

Objects traveling past Mach 5 can reach upwards of 980 C (1800 F), and there is a limit to the type of materials that can withstand those kinds of temperatures.

The sonic boom is also all but guaranteed when an object breaks the sound barrier, and is a menace in urban areas.

However, Bombardier believes he may have found a solution to both issues.

After the Skreemr concept made the rounds, Bombardier was contacted by Joseph Hazeltine, an engineer at Wyle, which provides technical support to both NASA and the U.S. Department of Defence.

Hazeltine suggested using an aerodynamic technique called long penetration mode, or LPM, which would use a nozzle on the aircraft's nose to suck in air and cool down the surface temperature, while muffling the noise made from breaking the sound barrier.

Yes, it's above our heads too. Still, impressive though these techniques all sound, most of the technology in this design is still decades away from seeing the light of day.

Even NASA hasn't created a stable scramjet yet. The Pentagon came closest, launching a small, unmanned scramjet aircraft in 2013 that hit Mach 5.

Note: There's been nothing commercial, and nothing approaching anything near the speed Bombardier is suggesting with the Antipode.

The designer himself doesn't seem too worried that his concept is still decades away.

As he explains in a video on his website:

"It's all about innovation. Share your idea, and it opens up a door for other designers to build on it."
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19274
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by NRao »

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Perhaps this was posted earlier but its an amazing accomplishment for amateurs that have to not only solve technical and engineering challenges but also have to raise money to support their ideas...
The GoFast 2014 rocket officially set a new world record on July 14, 2014 at 7:32am as the highest and fastest amateur rocket ever launched into space.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by Neshant »

China's C919 aircraft - an attempt to challenge Boeing, Airbus and Bombardier in the mid tier market.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Post by shiv »

Tale of two cultures.

Indian pilot loses his eyesight in mid flight and is talked down with the help of his wingman. Imaginary scenario?

Why the eff was this Indian pilot on even allowed to fly with an eye infection? No wonder Indian aircraft keep crashing out of the sky. On the other hand this is how it is done in the west.

http://alert5.com/2016/02/01/wingman-sa ... um=twitter
“The impaired pilot flew in formation back to RAF Leeming with the other aircraft where the pilot landed the aircraft uneventfully. Flying in formation, and conducting an approach to land as a formation, is a skill practised daily by RAF fast jet pilots.”
Locked