International Aerospace Discussion

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 02 Feb 2016 21:02

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-b ... RW?rpc=401

Boeing would receive well over $1 billion in new aircraft orders as it seeks to extend production at the company's St. Louis facility.

2 SH FY17
12 SH FY17 'unfunded priority list'
14 SH FY18

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 06 Feb 2016 10:33

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/che ... 5-program/

All the ways the F-35 is screwed up, according to the Pentagon’s top weapons tester

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Feb 2016 03:22

Could Russia's Frigate Ecojet take on Airbus and Boeing?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 11 Feb 2016 10:24

Globally aviation is becoming more complex, more technologically driven and the cost of development leaves little room for innovation. Yet, the free thinkers are innovating. Here are two stories (both sourced from RT but reported elsewhere first) of free thinking.

The first from Assam,India. A humble mechanic and his effort to make a Helicopter named Pawan Putra. Pls check the video of the ground run:
https://www.rt.com/news/332052-homemade ... diy-india/

The other is from NASA, USA

https://www.rt.com/usa/332091-nasa-expe ... ller-wing/

There are more images on the link.

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 11 Feb 2016 14:14

Mitsubishi X-2 Stealth experimental technology demonstrator for JASDF finally out from Mitsubishi factory and maiden taxi today morning in Nagoya

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 24 Feb 2016 10:09

Saab's MPA/anti-sub platform Swordfish goes global

As well as launching the GlobalEye AEW/multi-int platform, Saab has unveiled two new platforms for its Swordfish maritime patrol/anti-submarine offering. Bombardier’s Global 6000 offers a business jet platform for customers seeking a high-performance aircraft that can spend 8.5 hours on station at a radius of 1,000 nm. Alternatively, Swordfish has been packaged for the Bombardier Q400, which can spend eight hours on patrol at 200-nm radius. The initial Saab 2000 turboprop platform is also available.

Swordfish draws on the new command-and-control mission systems developed for the GlobalEye, many of which are in a state of advanced development, or even in production. Indeed, more than 60 percent of the system is common. A typical Swordfish configuration has four operator consoles, although up to six can be fitted if required. “Dry” sensors include a Finmeccanica-Selex ES Seaspray 7500E spinning AESA (active electronically scanned array) multi-mode radar and FLIR Systems Star SAFIRE electro-optical turret. Comprehensive electronic support measures and self-protection systems are fitted, as is AIS (automatic identification system), the maritime equivalent of IFF (identification friend or foe).

For anti-submarine duties the “wet” system comprises 100 sonobuoys dispensed through a rotary launcher in the unpressurized section of the rear fuselage, and two manually-loaded tubes within the pressurized cabin. The combined weight of the buoys is around 3,750 lb. Typically, four hardpoints are provided under the wings, although six are possible on the Global 6000, which can be loaded with weapons such as anti-ship missiles or torpedoes, or with other stores such as search-and-rescue emergency drop-pods. Saab is undertaking all of the integration and test work associated with the new systems, with assistance from Bombardier.

Saab sees the Swordfish in its Global 6000 form as “the smart man’s P-8,” offering similar performance to the Poseidon but at lower acquisition and operating costs. The Swordfish has considerable applications in this region, where demand for anti-submarine warfare is expected to grow. Forecasts suggest that there will be around 200 submarines operating in regional waters within the next five years.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 24 Feb 2016 10:12

Su-35 fighter boosted by China and Indonesia deals

Russia’s recent breakthrough sales of the Sukhoi Su-35 fighter to both China and Indonesia have provided crucial export sales momentum for United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), and a very welcome production backlog. In November, China signed for 24 or the so-called “4++” generation combat aircraft to be deployed with the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF). Around the same time, Indonesia agreed to buy 12 of the jets. Russia’s air force is already due to get 24 units.

The Su-35s are all produced at UAC’s Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aviation Production Association plant (Knaapo) in Khabarovsk province. The governor of the province, Vyacheslav Shport, himself a former senior manager at Knaapo, told the Russian media that the orders should keep the factory busy for close to 10 years.

The sale to Indonesia was confirmed by chief marshal of aviation Agus Supriatna, who stated that between now and 2019 the country intends to spend $3.1 billion on modernization of its air force. The 12 Su-35s will replace 17 older-generation Northrop F-5s that are currently in service with the air force.

Part of the rationale for procuring the Su-35s was that they are being touted as comparable in capability to the F-16V, the latest, modernized version of the Lockheed Martin fighter, but that they are also a good fit with the older model Su-30MK2 aircraft already in Indonesian service.

China Deal

Negotiations over the $2 billion deal with China had dragged on since at least 2011. A preliminary agreement was reached the following year, but contractual work on financial and technical issues proceeded slowly. Russia suspected that if China bought only a small quantity it would reverse-engineer the Su-35 and produce its own domestic version, as it did with the Su-27SK. For its part, China pushed to have Chinese avionics and mission equipment introduced into a customized version of the warplane. Back in 2004, the Chinese naval air arm took delivery of 24 Su-30MK2 multi-role fighters.

Among other advantages over the older model, the Su-35S has longer range compared to the Su-30MKK/MK2, which is important to the PLAAF in its efforts to exert control over disputed islands in the South China Sea and other contested areas. With a gross weight of 34.5 metric tons (76,060 pounds), the Su-35S can carry 11.5 metric tons of fuel (25,353 pounds) internally for a 3,600-km (1,943 nm) range. With two 2,000-liter drop tanks under its wings, the range rises to 4,500 km (2,428 nm).

The Su-35S has a limited supercruise capability, since it is able to fly supersonically (Mach 1.1) on the “military power” setting (maximum non-reheated thrust) of the NPO Saturn 117S turbofan engines. These each develop 14,500 kg (32,000 pounds) of thrust at full afterburner and 8,800 kg (19,400 pounds) at military power. This feature sets it apart from all other Sukhoi “Flanker” family fighters.

Another important feature is the powerful multimode radar, the N-035 Irbis from Tikhomirov’s NIIP subsidiary. According to NIIP general director Yuri Belyi, the mean emitting power for the N-035 averages at 5 kW, while the maximum emitting power is 20 kW, which results in a detection range of “about 400 kilometers” (216 nm).

Unlike the latest U.S. and European airborne fire control radars with active electronically scanned arrays (AESAs), the N-035 has passive e-scan. “I believe that, despite the rapid development of active array technologies, the passive array still has a market niche. The active array is costly and not affordable for some customers,” said Belyi. In a head-on scenario, the high-power N-035 would enable the Su-35S to detect the F-22A Raptor at a greater distance and, consequently, shoot first, he believes.

Meanwhile, Russia may also provide the financing for the Indonesian Su-35 deal. The vice-chairman of the defense commission in the lower house of Indonesia’s national parliament stated in early September that there were on-going negotiations with Moscow for a $3 billion line of credit to be used for purchasing Russian-produced weapon systems.

There will also be an industrial-participation package for Indonesia’s local aerospace sector involving production of some Su-35 components and a complete line of maintenance functions for the aircraft. This arrangement will be similar to that organized for Malaysian industry after its purchase of MiG-29N and Su-30MKM fighters.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Feb 2016 03:45

https://www.f35.com/in-depth/detail/top ... 21070709=1

redefinition of stealth in pics

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/f ... tions.html
“The F-35 is going to be an incredible advancement in our capability as an Air Force, and the Full Mission Simulators present an environment to adequately challenge our pilots as they prepare for combat,” said Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron Commander.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Feb 2016 03:52

The Mitsu X2 looks pretty close to AMCA

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Feb 2016 04:34

SaiK wrote:The Mitsu X2 looks pretty close to AMCA

Deceiving.

The canopy is totally diff and obvious. But the wings are totally diff. The AMCA has the cool diamond. I am betting it will be very agile.

Both are FBL.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 27 Feb 2016 00:47

Boeing offers F-15C upgrades to USAF

Boeing is offering the US Air Force (USAF) a series of life-extension modifications to its F-15C Eagles that would allow the aircraft to better complement the service's stealthy Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

The upgrade package "will help the US Air Force maintain its air-dominance capabilities until the next generation of aircraft are developed", Mike Gibbons, Boeing's vice president of F-15 programmes, said on 18 February.

In addition to doubling the missile load to 16 munitions, Boeing is offering 'Talon HATE' to connect the F-15's communications suite with the Raptor. The package also includes the Raytheon APG-63(v)3 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and a long-range infrared search and track (IRST) sensor. The package also includes the Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS) systems, an electronic warfare suite.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 03 Mar 2016 18:37

Israel to launch one of the most advanced missile defense systems in the world, with U.S. help

TEL AVIV — A joint exercise now being conducted between thousands of Israeli forces and the U.S. European Command represents a final test before Israel begins to deploy one of the most sophisticated missile defense systems in the world.

When it is complete, Israel’s multibillion-dollar rocket and missile air defense system will be far superior to anything in the Middle East and will likely rival, and in some ways surpass, in speed and targeting, air defenses deployed by Europe and the United States, its developers say.

The United States has provided more than $3.3 billion over the past 10 years to support the defensive system, which will be able to knock down not only ballistic missiles but also orbiting satellites.

Though Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama have had a strained relationship, rubbed raw by their deep disagreement over the Iran nuclear deal, U.S. spending on Israel’s air defenses has soared in the last decade, from $133 million in 2006 to $619 million in 2015.

The Israeli defense establishment and its American partners have designed a layered system that will allow the Jewish state to respond to simultaneous attacks from multiple fronts — the relatively crude homemade rockets lobbed by Hamas from the Gaza Strip, the mid-range rockets and missiles fired by the Shiite militants of Hezbollah from Lebanon, and the long-range ballistic missiles being developed by Iran that could carry conventional or chemical warheads.

In addition, Israel’s new X-Band radar will allow its forces to detect incoming missiles 500 or 600 miles out, vs. 100 miles, the current limit of their radar tracking systems, according to summaries of the systems provided to Congress.

“I define the system as pioneering,” said Uzi Rubin, former head director of Israel’s missile defense program. “Even the United States doesn’t have anything as complex, as sophisticated.”

The system will also be able to prioritize incoming rockets and missiles by calculating their trajectories. Some missiles may not be intercepted, if their targets are fields and farms, but projectiles that would hit populated areas or important infrastructure — such as military bases, oil refineries and nuclear facilities — would be stopped.

The Israeli missile defense system is being built in partnership with U.S. defense contractors, including Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

The Israelis are planning to start deploying their coordinated system of radars, launchers and interceptors over the coming months, though there have been delays in the past, they warn.

In December, Israel and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency celebrated successful tests of two new ballistic missile defense systems — David’s Sling, which is designed to intercept short- and medium-range threats, and Arrow-3, which is intended to stop long-range attacks and knock out enemy targets in space by deploying “kamikaze satellites,” or “kill vehicles,” that track their targets.

The David's Sling and Arrow-3 will join Iron Dome and the existing Arrow-2 in coming months.

The Iron Dome batteries were responsible for intercepting 90 percent of their targets during Israel’s war with Hamas in the summer of 2014, according to Israel Defense Forces, when Hamas fired 4,000 rockets and mortars at Israel from the adjacent Gaza Strip.

[Iron Dome changes calculus of fight with Hamas]

On Tuesday, the Defense Ministry announced that major components of the David’s Sling defense system will be delivered to the Israel Air Force “over the course of several weeks.”

Israel called David’s Sling “the world’s most revolutionary innovation in the family of interceptor systems.” The system is designed primarily to handle the kinds of rockets and missiles, built by Iran and Russia, and now in the possession of the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon and the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad.

Beyond the threat posed by the splintering of Syria, Israel is worried that Syrian missiles could be transferred to Hezbollah or acquired by the Islamic State or al-Qaeda.

In a recent speech, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened that his militia’s missiles could strike ammonia storage tanks in Israel’s Haifa port in a future showdown with Israel, warning that the damage would be equivalent to an atomic bomb and could kill 800,000 people.

Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon, the Israel Defense Forces head of operations, said Hezbollah could have upward of 100,000 rockets and missiles stored in Lebanon.

In 2006, before the deployment of Iron Dome, Hezbollah fired about 4,000 projectiles at Israel’s northern cities, causing some 40 civilian deaths and significant damage.

Israel’s military leaders warn civilians that no air defense system is perfect — or even close to it.

“There is no hermetic defense or total security that will intercept everything fired at Israel. In the next real war, rockets will fall on the State of Israel,” said Brig. Gen. Zvika Haimovich, commander of the Israel’s Aerial Defense Division.

Haimovich briefed reporters last week in the middle of “Juniper Cobra,” a biennial U.S.-Israel air defense drill, scheduled to end on Thursday.

More than 1,700 U.S. soldiers and sailors, alongside American civilians and contractors, are taking part in the exercise, which is focused on computer simulations of coordinated and sustained air attacks on Israel from multiple fronts.

In such a scenario, U.S. air defense probably would come into play, and the drill is designed not only to test Israel’s soon-to-be deployed systems, but also to improve how well U.S. and Israeli assets can communicate and coordinate their response.

“The purpose of this exercise is to improve interoperability of our air defense forces and our combined ability to defend against air and missile attack,” said Lt. Gen. Timothy Ray, U.S 3rd Air Force commander.

“And just as important,” Ray said, “it signals our resolve to support Israel and strive for peace in the Middle East.”

Booth reported from Jerusalem.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Mar 2016 23:16

For those that care or are interested Uncle Bill (Sweetman) just left Aviation Week and for a position in Northrop Grumman. We will soon see him at the various trade shows defending the company's second biggest program - The F-35 and of course, defending their T-X against an offering that involves SAAB. #This_is_going_to_be_fun_to_watch. I guess its time for Aviation Week to promote the two remaining technical folks in their camp if they want to remain relevant otherwise they'll head the same path as Flight as technical talent moves away from publications to the think tanks....

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Mar 2016 23:23

interesting raptor is losing stealth by interfacing with 'talon hate' on eagles

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Mar 2016 23:29

SaiK wrote:interesting raptor is losing stealth by interfacing with 'talon hate' on eagles

Talon hate is an interim band-aid solution..The real solution will be more capable under the MAPS program. With Talon Hate you will utilize it in different ways. One way would be to directioanlly use the IFDL waveform and transfer data to the pod that then transmits it using L-16. That is fine. Longer ranges, and perhaps wider non directional use of the data link may require you to choose higher powers and that may make you less survivable. Keep in mind that LPI data-links outside of the standard Link-16's are found only on the F-22 and F-35 and The F-22 has the ability to take in as much information as is available on offer using the L-16 since it has the ability to listen to L-16 (no transmit capability). One of the sollutions for MAPS is to utilize the L-Band array in both the F-22 and F-35 and use that as a communication and data link tool..Talon Hate is a limited use Boeing program that may or may not get to compete for the broader MAPS effort as there are no doubt new waveforms that they can't currently speak about (LRS-B).

IFDL on the F-22, and MADL on the F-35 are designed differnetly to the Link16. They are designed as LPI LAN's to set up aircraft to enable them to conduct distributed ops..They are good for outside visual range because thats how stealth aircraft fly..but they arent your long range data links like the Link-16. They allow groups of F-35's or F-22's to set up a LAN, share 100% of their SA and conduct a given mission. They arent really meant to link up a wide number of platforms over a large theater..For that you will have to find new waveforms and the F-22 and F-35's CNI suite has space available for that.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 04 Mar 2016 04:30

France, Britain sign two billion euro combat drone programme deal.

France and Britain on Thursday inked a deal to invest more than two billion euros in the development of combat drones, Paris said in a statement.

Following a two-year feasibility study begun in 2014, "we hope to proceed to the next phase in 2017 to prepare for the full-fledged development of operational demonstrators of air combat drones by 2025," the statement said.

"This test programme, the most advanced in Europe, will be based on a platform of multi-purpose drones that could provide the basis for future operational capacity beyond 2030," it said. "We plan to invest more than two billion euros in this programme," it said, adding that work would be submitted to a technical review around 2020.

The British and French governments tasked BAE Systems and Dassault Aviation with the feasibility study in November 2014. The ultimate aim is to have combat drones capable of carrying out surveillance and observation missions, identifying targets and launching strikes in enemy territory, according to the British defence ministry.

Such a drone would be tasked with entering hostile territory ahead of standard manned warplanes. In addition to the two main groups, Rolls-Royce and Safran were assigned to work on propulsion systems while Selex ES and Thales was put in charge of electronics and sensors.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 04 Mar 2016 14:40

ChinaAviationDaily ‏@CNAviationDaily

China-made large amphibious flying boat AG-600 under final assembly, scheduled to make maiden flight within the year

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 19 Mar 2016 10:55

News flash. Abs they keep dropping out of the skies like flies.
FlyDubai entire to Moscow goes down. Really serious implications for Dubai economy if there's foul play. Russian tourists in Dubai are vital for the economy.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Mar 2016 11:40

Su-25 crashed in Primorye , Pilot managed to Eject

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 31 Mar 2016 20:29

Medium term AH-64D/E Apache enhancements:

The Apache PM is seeking innovative approaches to sensor and data fusion to support operations in degraded visual environments (DVE); improve target detection and recognition; decrease navigation errors due to unknown sensor biases; and decrease the pilot’s and co-pilot/gunner’s (CPG) workloads. Notionally, the system should create a virtual 3-D environment, using DTEDs data as the underlying ‘ground truth’, in which objects of interest(based on EO/IR and radar sensor data) are highlighted. Under non-DVE conditions, imagery displayed to the pilot and CPG should be based on fusion of the EO/IR and radar sensor data. For example, the video could be a blend of two imaging sensors (e.g. visible and LWIR) with targets detections indicated with overlaid symbology. When operating in DVE the pilot/CPG should be provided synthetic imagery generated from the DTEDs data and enhanced with the fused sensor data. In addition to providing ‘blended’ imagery, the system should be capable of performing feature level fusion across sensing modalities to aid in target detection and classification as well as estimate sensor biases via correlation with the DTEDs data. The goal of this RFI is to develop and demonstrate algorithms using the existing Fire Control Radar (FCR) and Modernized Target Acquisition and Designation Sight and Modernized Pilot Night Vision Sensor (M-TADS/PNVS) sensors.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 01 Apr 2016 15:23

South Korea To Build Strike UAV Mockup, Subscale Aircraft

BEIJING — South Korea is launching a technology demonstrator program for an unmanned strike aircraft, aiming to build a full-scale mockup for assessment of radar cross section while flying eight subscale aircraft to prove tailless flight control.
The budget, just 16 billion won ($13.7 million), looks low. But the military technology organization that is sponsoring the effort, the Agency for Defense Development (ADD), is leading design work. Work is due to begin this year and last until 2021.

Korean Air Lines appears to be well placed to win the program, having developed a design concept more than three years ago. During the proposed time frame, rival Korea Aerospace Industries will be busy with the KF-X manned fighter, now in full-scale development.

ADD has been working on an unmanned strike aircraft since 2010 or earlier under the project name KUS-X. The South Korean air force has shown plans to introduce such a type into service by 2030.

The 15-meter (49-ft.) wingspan of the required mockup for the unmanned type shows that ADD is aiming at a substantial aircraft, but one smaller than the X-47 technology demonstrator that Northrop Grumman developed for the U.S. Navy. The South Korean configuration looks conventional: a wing blended into a stubby body, in which the engine is buried behind a snaking duct, with a leading edge extending unbroken from the nose to wing tips.

The subscale aircraft will have wingspans of 3 meters, making them larger than a predecessor type that has been used for initial testing of tailless flight control, the Kaori-X, which ADD displayed at the Seoul Adex aerospace and defense exhibition in October.

ADD has revealed details of the next stage in the KUS-X effort in a call for tenders for a manufacturer for the hardware.

Developing a flight-control law is expected to be the most time-consuming part of the work, extending from the fourth quarter of this year to the second quarter of 2020. The likelihood of crashes while trying to control tailless aircraft probably explains why eight subscale units are needed. At least one Kaori-X crashed.

Design objectives for the program include a multi-band radar-absorbing structure, lightweight radar-absorbing paint, a weapons bay, a low-observable engine intake and nozzle, dummies to represent production equipment in radar testing, such as the engine, and low-observable and lightweight electric rotary actuators for equipment. The design also includes a stealthy radome and conformal antennas.

Of the total budget, 8.7 billion won will cover the mockup and subscale aircraft, and 7.275 billion won will pay for work on a flush air data system, the rotary actuators, flight control computer and a ground control station.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Apr 2016 17:47

GE High Resolution graphic of the 3 stream AETD/P (Adaptive Engine Technology Development / Transition Program) Engine

http://dsg.files.app.content.prod.s3.am ... engine.jpg

Background:

AETD Preliminary Design Review follows worlds first successful test of a three-stream, adaptive-cycle engine

LE BOURGET June 17, 2015 GE Aviation successfully accomplished its Adaptive Engine Technology Development (AETD) Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The successful review with leaders from the US Air Force, Navy, NASA and Lockheed Martin, followed testing of the industrys first and only adaptive-cycle, three-stream engine in 2014. GEs AETD engine extends aircraft operating range by 30%, improves fuel consumption by 25% and increases thrust by more than 10%. GEs AETD engine could be ready to power the US militarys most advanced combat jets by the mid-2020s.

Watch a 7-minute documentary on the development of the industrys first three-stream, adaptive-cycle engine: https://youtu.be/EqkgtEszJ6w

Since 2007, GE Aviation has successfully partnered with the Department of Defense to cost effectively design, manufacture and test this revolutionary combination of architectural, compression technology, cooling technology, and material technology advancements, said Dan McCormick, general manager of GE Aviations Advanced Combat Engine program. Now that weve proved our engines design and hardware can deliver the DoDs aggressive performance and cost reduction targets, were ready to integrate our adaptive design into existing and next-generation combat aircraft.

Fixed cycle engines powering todays military aircraft are limited, or fixed, to one capability: either maximum power or fuel efficiency, which restricts aircraft performance and increases sustainment costs. GEs AETD engine differs from fixed cycle engines in its ability to alter from a high-bypass, fuel-efficient engine deployed on tanker/transport aircraft to a low-bypass, high-performance engine needed for fighter jets. The adaptive feature is combined with an additional source of air, called a third stream of cooled air, that can be used to further increase thrust, improve fuel efficiency, dramatically reduce the aircraft heat load, and/or reduce heat signature.

After a joint GE/DoD investment of more than $1B in its development, GEs AETD engine is uniquely capable of meeting or exceeding DoD performance targets. It incorporates the industrys most extensive use of advanced manufacturing and heat-resistant material technologies initially developed for GEs commercial jet engines, such as ceramic matrix composites (CMC) and additive manufactured components pioneered on the best-selling LEAP and GE9X engines. These innovations which further reduce fuel consumption, lower aircraft operating weight and increase engine durability are required to deliver the militarys aggressive performance targets with field-proven, low-cost technologies.

GEs AETD engine integrates the worlds first rotating CMC parts a set of low-pressure turbine blades successfully tested for 500 cycles at AETD-level temperatures and stresses. CMCs are able to withstand temperatures hundreds of degrees higher than conventional metals, lowering maintenance costs while improving performance in the most stressful environments found in a jet engine.

The completed PDR completes the major design milestone of GEs AETD program. Today, GE is assembling hardware for its adaptive fan, compressor, combustor and turbine rigs, culminating in an AETD core engine test (combining the compressor, combustor and turbine) in 2016. GE hopes to continue to prove its adaptive cycle design through the Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP), which could set in motion an Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) leading to an engine production contract on current or next-generation military aircraft programs as soon as the mid-2020s.

With AETP contracts expected within weeks of Farnborough, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect both GE and P&W talk extensively about their AETP plans since both will be awarded contracts.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 19 Apr 2016 18:35

^Is it me, or does it look more streamlined and less messy than jet engines usually do?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 19 Apr 2016 18:55

Arun Menon wrote:^Is it me, or does it look more streamlined and less messy than jet engines usually do?

Exactly same thoughts. Maybe they took the least messy and most streamlined profile in the pic.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Apr 2016 19:01

I think the Eurojet EJ 200 is pretty non messy looking
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... J200_2.jpg

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Apr 2016 19:36

Here's the massive F135

http://media.graytvinc.com/images/Clinkenbeard3.JPG

R Nathan · Post by **R Nathan** » 19 Apr 2016 19:58

Can anyone confirm if the blades for the GE LM2500 gas turbine engine built under license by HAL, is made in India ?

Also is the engine uprated to 28 MW power ? or is it the gen 1 engine with 25 MW power?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Apr 2016 20:43

Also is the engine uprated to 28 MW power ? or is it the gen 1 engine with 25 MW power?

Apparently, the + Version (According to SP's Naval Forces): http://www.geaviation.com/marine/engine ... m2500plus/

R Nathan · Post by **R Nathan** » 20 Apr 2016 14:31

brar_w wrote:
Also is the engine uprated to 28 MW power ? or is it the gen 1 engine with 25 MW power?
Apparently, the + Version (According to SP's Naval Forces): http://www.geaviation.com/marine/engine ... m2500plus/

Thanks. It confirms my own sources.

Any idea about those blades ? I assume that we import it and assemble it in HAL ? Your reply is most appreciated.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Apr 2016 16:50

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Apr 2016 18:27

why not engage on AETP program for LCA Mk2/AMCA instead of 414s? get the latest and greatest?

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 21 Apr 2016 18:33

^What is that pic of?

Edit: Got it.

Cobalt Co50 Valkyrie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_Co50

Some fancy sports car/plane right?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Apr 2016 20:09

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 25 Apr 2016 16:05

Though could also go in the Military Flight Safety thread :

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/a ... trol-tower

A Norwegian fighter jet on a training exercise jet mistakenly machine-gunned a control tower with three officers inside, who survived unhurt, the military said Sunday.

Two F-16s were taking part in a mock attack on the uninhabited island of Tarva off Norway’s west coast when one of them opened fire with its M61 Vulcan cannon, which is capable of firing up to 100 rounds a second.

“An investigation has been opened,” Captain Brynjar Stordal, a spokesman for the Norwegian military, told AFP.

A hail of bullets hit the tower in the incident, which happened on the night of April 12, but the officers inside were not injured.

In a similar incident in 2009, F-16s fired in error on the same tower, with at least one round piercing the structure, but again no-one was injured.

It’s not the only incident of an F-16 firing on the wrong target. In 2014 a Dutch fighter jet accidentally strafed the control tower at the Vliehors range on the island of Vlieland, north of Amsterdam, during a training flight.

During the incident, several live rounds from the aircraft’s 20mm cannon caused minor damage to the tower. Two controllers who were inside the building at the moment of the attack were not injured.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 25 Apr 2016 17:41

SaiK wrote:why not engage on AETP program for LCA Mk2/AMCA instead of 414s? get the latest and greatest?

The Pentagon would not be willing to open up its most important next generation Air superiority program currently ongoing to international partnership, particularly as a co-devdlopment effort. Also, while the two competing OEMs have offered engines that can transition to EMD that phase would most likely be a 10 year, 8-10 billion effort at the minimum. Additionally, one OEM is offering a thrust class engine that India would not be interested in.

Also, no EMD requirments have or are likely to emerge by the time the AETP concludes so either they transition to an F135 follow-on or they wait for requirement to emerge which could take some time..

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Apr 2016 19:56

deejay wrote:Though could also go in the Military Flight Safety thread :

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/a ... trol-tower

A Norwegian fighter jet on a training exercise jet mistakenly machine-gunned a control tower with three officers inside, who survived unhurt, the military said Sunday.

Two F-16s were taking part in a mock attack on the uninhabited island of Tarva off Norway’s west coast when one of them opened fire with its M61 Vulcan cannon, which is capable of firing up to 100 rounds a second.

“An investigation has been opened,” Captain Brynjar Stordal, a spokesman for the Norwegian military, told AFP.

A hail of bullets hit the tower in the incident, which happened on the night of April 12, but the officers inside were not injured.

In a similar incident in 2009, F-16s fired in error on the same tower, with at least one round piercing the structure, but again no-one was injured.

It’s not the only incident of an F-16 firing on the wrong target. In 2014 a Dutch fighter jet accidentally strafed the control tower at the Vliehors range on the island of Vlieland, north of Amsterdam, during a training flight.

During the incident, several live rounds from the aircraft’s 20mm cannon caused minor damage to the tower. Two controllers who were inside the building at the moment of the attack were not injured.

Wonder if these guys - perhaps the same guy - is at Red Flag. Double

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 05 May 2016 18:02

Kratos breaking into the unmanned combat air vehicle market

Kratos Defense is gaining ground in the unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) market traditionally dominated by the world’s largest defence firms and privately-held General Atomics Aeronautical Systems in the USA, having captured at least one significant classified contract and most recently winning a place on the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) “Gremlins” project.

After purchasing Composite Engineering (CEi) of Sacramento, California – a firm that has captured the preponderance of aerial target drone contracts in the USA with its popular BMQ-167, MQM-178 and BMQ-177 products – Kratos is ready to “move up the food chain” and into the UCAV business permanently.

The company has already converted its BMQ-167A into an unmanned tactical aerial platform, or UTAP, that has been named the UTAP-22. Powered by a turbojet engine, the 6.1m (21ft) aircraft can travel at Mach 0.91 up to an altitude of 50,000ft, with a maximum range of 1,400nm with 3h of endurance. The platform has 45kg-capable hard points on each wing and a 159kg internal payload.Jeff Herro, senior vice-president of business development for Kratos’ unmanned systems division, says Kratos “invested significant money in the UTAP-22” and has completed demonstrations with the US Navy. The tactical data link-equipped UTAP-22 can be networked with other weapon systems and has even flown in formation with manned aircraft. The aircraft lands on land or at sea using a parachute system.

The company has other unmanned aircraft under development for DARPA’s Gremlins programme and the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Low-Cost Attritable Strike UAS Demonstration competition.

“You can’t go tackle tactical UAVs from the get-go, from the jump,” Herro told Flightglobal at the AUVSI Xponential conference in New Orleans, Louisiana. “That’s not going to work with the kinds of competitors you’re dealing with. We really had to sneak into this marketplace, but we wanted to differentiate ourselves by having very high-performance unmanned aircraft. We decided we’d go after this niche market first – aerial targets – and cut our teeth on very high performance equipment. That was 15 or 16 years ago, and now we’re a dominant supplier of high-performance aerial target drones around the world.”

Herro says drones are inherently survivable because they are designed to mimic enemy aircraft or missiles and use complex manoeuvres to evade enemy defences.

“We can already survive in some contested airspace environments,” he says. “We’re just now moving into the missionisation aspects and we do have some other planes that we can’t talk about.”

UTAP-22

Earlier news release on the UTAP-22

Kratos' Third UTAP-22 Flight Exceeds Objectives, Successfully Performing All Primary and Alternate Test Points

SAN DIEGO, Dec. 21, 2015 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. (Nasdaq:KTOS), a leading National Security Solutions provider, announced today that it has successfully performed the third flight demonstration of its Unmanned Tactical Aerial Platform (UTAP-22) on December 11, 2015, on the Navy test range at China Lake, CA. This mission demonstrated two UTAP-22 aircraft in continuous collaborative airborne operations through the tactical datalink while flying formation with one another, flying formation with a third UTAP (simulated) as the lead aircraft, lead-follow in semi-autonomous/autonomous modes, lead-follow in manual/autonomous modes, and multiple autonomous joins from several pre-join scenarios. Additionally, the Kratos UTAP-22 successfully coordinated semi-autonomous payload deployment, breaking formation to perform independently with a subsequent rejoin, and loyal/trusted wingman flight with one UTAP being flown as if it were a manned aircraft and the second UTAP-22 joining and sustaining autonomous formation. Throughout the mission multiple UTAP-22 were controlled by a single operator. Due to competitive and other considerations, certain other information related to the Kratos UTAP-22, including details of the Company's demonstration flights and aircraft performance characteristics are not being disclosed.

The Kratos UTAP-22 is a high performance unmanned jet aircraft designed specifically for tactical missions and tactical payload operations/delivery with key features focused on survivability in challenging and hostile environments. The results from this demonstration flight series validated the concept and technical readiness of Kratos' tactical UAVs with fighter like performance operating collaboratively with each other and collaboratively with manned aircraft. The Kratos technology is scalable, enabling multiple unmanned aircraft and manned aircraft to be deployed simultaneously without requiring an operator for each unmanned aircraft.

Jerry Beaman, President of Kratos Unmanned Systems Division, said, "The successful demonstration series is an unprecedented accomplishment and an important step towards our entry in the Tactical Unmanned Aerial Systems market. Manned/Unmanned teaming of tactical aircraft with a UAV capable of tactical speeds and maneuverability will provide the warfighter with an inexpensive force multiplier and unmanned wingman; an unprecedented capability."

Eric DeMarco, President and CEO of Kratos said, "This third successful flight of multiple Kratos UTAP-22's flying in continuous collaborative airborne operations and successfully exceeding all planned mission objectives concludes the initial development stage of Kratos tactical unmanned aerial system strategy. Over the past few years we have made a significant discretionary investment in the development of the Kratos UTAP-22 aircraft and the successful demonstration of its high performance and collaborative capabilities. Now that we have successfully demonstrated the Kratos UTAP-22 and specific key capabilities, for 2016 we will be significantly reducing the capital, IRAD, NRE, and other investments we have been making, and we will focus more on the customer and market aspects of our unmanned tactical strategy which to date related feedback has been very encouraging".

With up to 2500 km max. range, this is going to have some interesting applications particularly if they can link up with the more tactical fighter launched MALD-J's, and MALD's. If they decide to have an air launch version this could be a serious contender for the MALD-X requirements as well for the B-52/B-1. For Gremlin they would probably need something similar but those have to be air-recovered.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Jun 2016 13:55

Skunk Works Refines Quiet Supersonic Design Aviation Week & Space Technology Jun 07, 2016
Guy Norris Edwards, AFB, California

Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works is beginning a fast-paced year of preliminary design work on a low-boom demonstrator for NASA that the agency is increasingly optimistic will pave the way for environmentally acceptable supersonic business jets and airliners.
The single-engine Quiet Supersonic Technology (QueSST) aircraft is designed to test whether the shockwave signature of potential future Mach 1-plus vehicles would be acceptable to the public, clearing the way for supersonic flight over land. While the goal is targeted at validating tools and design approaches for potential 100-120-seat supersonic airliners, the principles of the demonstrator will also be directly applicable to the near-term development of business jets.

“We believe the technology is ready,” says NASA Commercial Supersonic Technologies (CST) subproject manager Dave Richwine. “We feel [as if] we have got the sonic boom now to the stage where it is not going to be bothersome to the general public.” Successfully mastering the amplitude and distribution of shockwaves that cause sonic booms presents “an opportunity for the U.S. to take the lead in a new class of aircraft manufacturing,” he adds. NASA believes the QueSST research project opens the window to a potential market of 350-500 supersonic business aircraft and more than 500 airliners from the mid-2020s onward.

Richwine was speaking at a NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center event at which the contrast in sound levels between a standard sonic boom and several progressively quieter booms was demonstrated. The initial boom, which measured 104 PNLdB (perceived noise level decibel), was generated by a NASA F/A-18 flying straight and level overhead at Mach 1.2. Four subsequent booms were generated by the aircraft performing a special low-boom dive maneuver several miles from the Edwards AFB lakebed. Of these the quietest was measured at 77.5 PNLdB, just above the 75 dB target threshold for QueSST. All were characterized by the double “boom, boom” of the classic “N wave” shockwave boom signature, though the quieter events generated more of a muted “thump-thump” sound.

The intensity of the boom was modified by varying the distance away from spectators. Each dive was begun on the same heading by the F/A-18, flown by NASA chief research pilot Nils Larson, rolling inverted at 49,000 ft. and a speed of Mach 0.95. The aircraft was pulled into a 53-54-deg. dive angle before rolling upright and accelerating to hit Mach 1.1 at 40,000 ft. After passing this point the aircraft was pulled into a 3.5g recovery above 30,000 ft.

However, it is impossible in current aircraft to prevent the formation of N-waves in supersonic cruise, so the QueSST design is tailored to prevent shockwaves from the nose, cockpit, engine inlets, wing, tail and exhausts from coalescing as they propagate through the atmosphere. By keeping the shockwaves separated all the way to the ground, developers aim to produce an S-shaped signature that sounds like a soft rumble.

The 94-ft.-long QueSST is designed to produce a sine wave-shaped sonic boom level no louder than 75 PLNdB, 20 times quieter than Concorde’s N-wave of 105 PNLdB. Lockheed Martin QueSST chief engineer Michael Buoanno says the “single engine concept is the lowest cost and the effects of its variability [spillage from the inlet] are shielded from ground observers.”

He adds, “The design also has unusual features, including a large number of lifting surfaces,” referring to canards, a miniature T-tail atop the vertical fin and conventional, all-moving horizontal tails. “They are designed to let us tailor the lift distribution and the strength of the shocks to keep them from coalescing before they impact the observer on the ground,” he says.

The shaping of the aircraft’s extended nose and forward positioning of the fixed canards mean it is “not feasible to give the pilot enough natural visibility to safely operate the airplane, so we have integrated an external vision system that uses a TV camera,” says Buoanno. The system is expected to combine a high-definition camera for “see and avoid” situational awareness and a baseline system for landing and takeoff. The imagery will be projected on a multifunction display, possibly one identical to that used on the F-35 fighter.

Lockheed began the aircraft system requirements review on June 1. “Then there are two other events, the first of which is the pre-preliminary design review (PDR) technical interchange meeting that will occur in November of this year and the actual preliminary design meeting which will occur in early June next year,” says Lockheed Martin QueSST program manager Peter Iosifidis. “We are in the process of identifying the builder of the wind-tunnel model and doing the down select. We expect the wind-tunnel testing to take place probably in the winter to the first part of next year,” he adds.

“The testing will take place at NASA Glenn Research Center in the 8 X 6-[ft.] high-speed wind tunnel,” says Richwine. “It is really the ideal scale for our model and the Mach number, and it gives us the Mach number range. Lockheed has some plans to do some low-speed testing in its own facilities,” he says.

The technical interchange meeting is designed to inform industry of the findings of the program to date. “When we competed for this contract, one of the requirements was that if we had won the contract, all the data that was developed [would be] under unlimited rights. Everything that we develop during this effort we share with industry, as NASA desires. Somebody can take this data and proceed where we left off. Certainly, our intention is to compete for the next phase, but it does not mean we are going to have the most competitive solution that NASA values in choosing that next supplier,” says Iosifidis.

In the meantime final decisions continue to be made over parts of the configuration. “Right now, our baseline engine is the General Electric F404-400. However, we are [making] trades to ensure this is the best solution for our project,” he adds. For its high-altitude operation, particularly in stratospheric testing above the tropopause where the atmosphere warms with increasing altitude, the QueSST will require an engine with slightly different operating characteristics found in other variants of the F404.

An open competition will follow next year’s PDR to design and build an X-plane to fly by late 2019. Test flights to investigate the sonic boom are expected to start in 2020 and could ultimately expand to include international research agencies. “Supersonic flight is an unfulfilled promise but this time we really believe we understand the physics to shape the aircraft for low boom. We have got to engage the international community because if this aircraft is going to be successful it has to operate around the world,” says Richwine.

Meanwhile additional community test campaigns are planned across the U.S. when the QueSST is available for flights beyond the bounds of Edwards AFB. At least four, but possibly six, test campaigns are set to take place from 2021-23 at sites yet to be determined across the country featuring different geography, climate and population densities.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 09 Jun 2016 08:37

^^^
How much noise does an aircraft flying supersonic at 40k+ feet make, is it audible on the ground?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jun 2016 08:50

NRao wrote:
Wonder if these guys - perhaps the same guy - is at Red Flag. Double

Red Flag actually had an accident this year that I did not put in the Flight Safety thread. Two F-16s collided on the ground.