Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

International Aerospace Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 904
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Zynda » 09 Mar 2017 20:06

Really good & detailed presentation on A-10C upgrade

http://media.jrn.com/documents/A-10C_Capes_Nov_13.pdf

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 10 Mar 2017 06:31

Singha wrote:On a related note the jsf finally fired its guns in flight this week.

Has the tejas fully qualified its guns? Due to smoke and vibration this should be one of early than late items



The F-35A has been flight testing its gun most of the second half of 2016. What you are likely referring to is the B variant firing its podded cannon which occurred for the first time on Feb. 21st. of this year.

Here is the 2016 ITF (Integrated Test Force) year in review with plenty of footage of the F-35A gun testing and envelope expansion [6:15].


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 12 Mar 2017 21:53

Australia cuts deal with US Navy for Next Generation Jammer

AVALON, Australia — Australian Defence Minister Marise Payne announced Tuesday that Australia has entered into an agreement with the U.S. Navy to develop the Next Generation Jammer for the Boeing EA-18G Growler, an airborne electronic attack aircraft.

Payne announced the AUD $250 million (U.S. $192 million) investment during the opening day of the 2017 Australian International Airshow at Avalon, south of Melbourne.

“This is a $250 million investment by the Turnbull government that will [serve as] future proof [of[ the Growler’s capability,” she said. “As this is a rapidly evolving area, we will work in partnership with the United States Navy to develop the next-generation jamming capability, which will ensure that these aircraft remain at the technological forefront throughout their service life.”

The Next Generation Jammer will form a key component of Project Air 5439 Phase 6, a future phase of Australia’s Growler acquisition program, which will upgrade the EA-18G to what is known as the Advanced Growler configuration. The program will ensure commonality with U.S. Navy aircraft is maintained into the future and will develop a replacement for the Growler’s current ALQ-99 jamming pods. Payne, who is also a senator for New South Wales, was speaking in front of a Royal Australian Air Force EA-18G, one of two that had flown into the show earlier, landing on the tarmac at Avalon.

Australia is acquiring 12 Growlers; the first batch of four had been delivered to RAAF Base Amberley, southwest of Brisbane, a few days earlier. The aircraft at Avalon represented the first public display of the aircraft in Australia.

“The EA-18G Growler will operate as part of our networked and integrated force, capable of sharing electronic intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance data with other aircraft, as well as with the Army and Navy,” said Chief of Air Force Air Marshal Leo Davies. “The Growler is powerful and flexible. It can undertake a range of non-kinetic tasks, ranging from jamming to blocking radar displays and suppressing an adversary’s air defense system.”

The Growler will provide the Australian Defence Force with a tactical jamming capability, which is only matched by the U.S. Navy.

All 12 aircraft will have been delivered to Australia by the middle of 2017, and initial operational capability is due to be achieved in mid-2018. Final operational capability is set to follow in mid-2022.


Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18095
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 14 Mar 2017 13:03

Russia to start Su-34 strike fighter modernization program in 2018

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php ... -2018.html
"The modernization program of Su-34 is planned for 2018. We discussed with the leadership of the enterprise and the United Aircraft Corporation the plans for the aircraft in the framework of future state armaments program for 2018-2025," he said.

"I believe the aircraft has not yet exposed all of its possibilities. It is mostly because we are currently completing R&D to adapt new weapons to it," he explained.

"I believe Su-34 has enormous export potential. Many countries are displaying genuine interest in the aircraft and I think it has good export future," Borisov said.

It has been reported that in the framework of Su-34 modernization to Su-34M level it is planned to equip the aircraft with onboard radar with improved characteristics, as well as suspended containers. The first stage of the Su-34 upgrade to Su-34M includes a small number of improvements mostly related to the drawbacks of the onboard radio-electronic equipment. The R&D to create Su-34M was to be completed by the end of 2016. The serial production of the upgraded aircraft can be launched after 2020. The Su-34M will have an expanded range of weapons, including new guided air-to-air and air-to-surface missile.

The Russian Aerospace Forces will receive 16 new tactical bombers Su-34 this year and the total portfolio of orders is 92 aircraft, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said during a visit to the Chkalov Aircraft Works in Novosibirsk.

"The Novosibirsk enterprise has a long contract with the defense ministry for 92 Su-34 aircraft and is fulfilling it nearly one year ahead of schedule. This year we expect above-plan delivery of four aircraft and a total of 16 aircraft were ordered this year," he said.

"There are nine aircraft in the final assembly shop of the enterprise. It means this year commitments of the enterprise will be definitely fulfilled. The schedule of aircraft delivery from the enterprise has been agreed with the defense ministry and we do not expect any surprises," Borisov said.

The enterprise operates sustainably and has good plans for the future, he added.

Borisov said Su-34 has high characteristics. "It showed itself from the best side in the Syrian conflict and has an enormous modernization potential. It is practically a fifth-generation aircraft," the deputy minister said.

It has been reported that the Sukhoi Company of the United Aircraft Corporation completely fulfilled the 2016 state defense order for Su-34 tactical bombers. The ministry had to receive in 2016 a total of 18 Su-34 (with two above plan). The Russian Aerospace Forces will receive a total of 150-200 Su-34. The first contract for 32 aircraft was signed in 2008 and in 2012 was followed by a new agreement for 92 bombers.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15847
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Philip » 14 Mar 2017 13:08

A couple of sqds. of SU-34s would dramatically increase the strike capability of the IAF esp. in dealing with the PRC.

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 14 Mar 2017 13:22

i think more than that we need a spiral model of development into a Su30Growler program. we do not have any dedicated offensive EW program. the su30 airframe has enough size and power to carry a wide variety of EW but so far we only have developed basic kit mostly self protection.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 14 Mar 2017 17:49

Given a digital architecture (the jammer and the radars it is trying to jam), an offensive stand of Electronic Attack payload requires an organic power source. Escort and self protection jammers that get a lot closer can probably do without organic power (or with low (er) power RATs supporting much smaller, and narrower band pods). The Growler only supplies power to the AESA radar (a yet untapped but surely a future additional jamming source), mission systems, aircraft sensors and the two wingtip mounted receivers. The three EA pods generate their own power, and so will the NGJ (Increment 1 and 2) where the source selection created the two most powerful RAT systems ever developed for this application in the US.

http://atgi.us/products-and-services/ra ... Mfd2LGZPzI

Although HiRAT was not part of Raytheon's bid (that eventually won), they managed to demonstrate 90 kW power generation at 25,000 feet altitude at low air speeds (220kt). Raytheon grew its jammer pods when it switched to GaN so much so that the size of the current NGJ prototype pod practically eats into any margin that existed on the Growler (Size, weight and radiation effects on adjacent weapons). Needless to say that as that has happened power requirement has probably gone up even more. So it would not be surprising if their supplier ended up in the similar range as the HiRAT which demonstrated 50% higher power generation than what was demanded by the US Navy.

If I were to guess, a single Increment 1 pod, of which a pair will generally be carried for the offensive SO mission will require 2x the power of a single Increment 2 pod (of which only one will be carried on the centerline) so if you do the math there is no way, short of an airliner that you can provide that much power organically...regardless the size of the fighter in question.

Also, some of the challenges associated with a Growler are integration related and have to do with the nature of the frequencies you are trying to cover, the sensitivities of your receivers and how they along with other organic mission systems function in the presence of very high radiating power pods, and the effects of the radiation on the seekers of weapons that you may be carrying. Usually you need to design these things together. The highly sensitive AN/ALQ-218 on the Growler (the most sophisticated systems currently on the aircraft) can function in the presence of jamming allowing the aircraft to constantly surveil and provide information to an AARGM concurrent to active suppression (i.e. do uninterrupted concurrent DEAD and SEAD). Same thing with Communications which also have to take place concurrent to high power low frequency jamming.

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1603
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby JayS » 15 Mar 2017 12:17

Addition to already problematic GTF engines in service. I posted it here to underline the approach taken in the Aerospace industry on development of new technology. Everyone understands it will have issues in the starting and everyone supports each other, even the customers, rather than saying "Customer is king" and washing their hands off. Back home we treat Aerospace tech development as some Chaddi Baniyan manufacturing and expect it to work flawlessly from day one. In reality even Chaddi Baniyan don't work from Day one flawlessly.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/engine-maker-struggles-to-fix-reliability-issues-on-airbus-neo-jets/

SAN DIEGO, Calif. — Pratt & Whitney’s revolutionary new commercial jet engine, the Geared Turbofan (GTF), is delivering terrific fuel efficiency in early airline service but stumbles in the reliability of those initial engines have hit production of Airbus’ newest A320neo single-aisle jets.

Aengus Kelly, chief executive of Ireland-based AerCap, the world’s largest lessor, said Tuesday one of his airline customers reported that an A320neo powered by the GTF reported fuel savings on a six-hour flight of 17 percent compared to the former A320 classic model on the same route — 2 percent better than promised.



“The good news is, the engine’s fuel-burn reduction is exceeding all targets,” Kelly said. “The bad news is, it’s not staying on the wing as long as we want it.”



Airlines have found that multiple GTF engines had to be removed after a short time in service because a bearing has failed or the combustion chamber has degraded.

Pratt, the jet-engine division of aerospace giant United Technologies, has acknowledged the problems and has designed fixes.

The bearing compartment has been redesigned, and retrofits to all engines begin next month. Improved combustion chambers are being tested and are to be delivered in the fall.

At the annual Americas conference of the International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading (ISTAT) in San Diego, Pratt senior vice president Rick Deurloo insisted that the main gearbox that is the revolutionary part of the GTF’s architecture has performed flawlessly and that solutions for all the problems that have arisen are in process.

The gearbox — a constellation of toothed gears arranged in a ring-shaped chamber — sits at the front of the engine just behind the fan and slows the speed of the fan to make the engine more efficient.

The GTF represents a make-or-break moment for Pratt, which needs the engine to work so it can get back into a commercial jet-engine business long dominated by rivals General Electric and Rolls-Royce.
Though Boeing doesn’t use the GTF engine, it powers half of the Airbus A320neos as well as Russia’s MS-21 and is the exclusive engine on Bombardier’s new CSeries jet, Embraer’s E2 regional jet family and Japan’s Mitsubishi Regional Jet.


“United Technologies is one of the biggest industrials in the world. It’s going to throw whatever resources are required to fix it,” Kelly said. “We believe they will. People will have forgotten about this in a year’s time.”


The biggest players in airplane buying at ISTAT agreed, though John Plueger — chief executive of major lessor Air Lease Corp. — said he wouldn’t be surprised if it takes until next year to get all the problems sorted out, the backlog of engines retrofitted and the stream of engines flowing at the level expected.

Airbus sales chief John Leahy said that in the meantime the European jet maker is switching around production and giving airlines more classic A320s until the new engines are ready.

He recalled that last year many early A320neos sat on the ramp at Toulouse waiting for engines at one stage, as Pratt struggled to fix earlier issues.


“It’s very frustrating for us,” Leahy said. “We had close to 30 gliders last year. We’ve whittled that down a bit now, and we don’t want to see that situation again.”

But he too expressed confidence in Pratt’s ability to fix the issues and said he’s relieved there are no problems with the gearbox.



Bertrand Grabowski, a consultant to various aviation finance entities in the United States, Europe and the Middle East, said that with complex new technology like the GTF, “teething problems are absolutely normal.”

In his ISTAT presentation, Pratt’s Deurloo said the engine maker remains confident enough of the technology that all its future engines of all sizes will be geared.

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Mar 2017 13:07

There was an article in ET today that our govt has launched a enquiry into the v2500 engines on a320 neo which are giving lot of problems in india. Mallyaji has chimed in on twitter that kf was partly sunk by these engines and has a lawsuit against pw for it

Must be these gtf engines

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Mar 2017 13:16

Bangalore aviation

DGCA brief details issues with the PW1100 GTF engine on the A320neo
Devesh Agarwal March 9, 2017 Analysis & Features, GoAir, IndiGo 2 Comments

A brief submitted to aviation regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) confirms Bangalore Aviation’s earlier analysis on the ongoing challenges with the Pratt & Whitney PW1100 G-JM Geared Turbo Fan (GTF) engines which power the Airbus A320NEOs of Lufthansa, IndiGo and Go Airlines.

Problems with PW1000G GTF engine
The brief, which was reviewed by Bangalore Aviation, traces problems to three root causes:

Combustion chamber failures, 25% degradation in coastal environments
Number 3 bearing failures
Main Gear Box (MGB) failures
Premature engine removals

The brief confirms our report that both Indigo and Go Air have carried out premature engine removals. As of February 24, 2017 :

13 premature removals due to combustion chamber distress
28 premature removals due to number 3 bearing distress
One premature removal due to main gear box failure
IndiGo’s President and Whole Time Director, Aditya Ghosh confirmed the engine removals in his January response to our queries, saying “…..yes, the engine removals have been higher than our expectations. But I must say that Pratt & Whitney is doing a spectacular job of supporting us. And of course the fuel burn continues to hit the target fuel savings”.

Current status

The brief further confirms that all three issues are in the knowledge of, and are being actively addressed by the engine manufacturer, including:

improved combustion chambers currently under test, expected to be delivered by September 2017
re-design of the bearing compartment and retrofits expected by April 2017
a re-working of the Trouble Shooting Manual (TSM) and Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) which would need approvals from the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
DGCA crackdown
Increased engine inspection

The DGCA has required airlines to conduct boroscopic examinations of the engine at 1,000 hours, down from the earlier 1,500 hours, and every 500 hours thereafter.

Mandatory diversion

For warning messages traced to the main gear box, the DGCA has revoked the earlier allowed ten extra hours of flight given to airlines to recover the airplane .

Now, once the engine gives out a warning message via the electronic centralised aircraft monitor (ECAM), the airline has to divert the aircraft to the nearest airport. All airlines have major maintenance bases only in limited locations, and diversions to cities without the needed maintenance and engineer centre will result in network disruption for IndiGo and Go Air along with posing challenges involving logistics costs.

This revocation has and will require both IndiGo and Go Air to deploy their A320NEOs on routes where they have engineering bases, typically the major metro cities.

Market reaction
It is learnt that Pratt & Whitney representatives have met both with the regulator and airlines to help ease challenges. The increased premature engine removals would cause airlines to demand for additional spare engines, but given the ongoing delivery challenges, it remains to be seen how well will Pratt & Whitney respond to these requests.

Having said this, both IndiGo and Go Air are reportedly satisfied with the support being received from Pratt & Whitney and have confidence the vendor will resolve the issues by the end of this year.

The Tata-Singapore Airlines joint venture, Vistara, has selected the CFM LEAP engines to power their A320NEOs. National carrier Air India has also opted for CFM and taken delivery of its first A320NEO. Presumably, CFM will likely see a spike in interest with other carriers as well.

Analysis
As the capacity wars in the Indian market heat up and with rising fuel prices, the PW1100 GTF powered A320NEO poses a unique dilemma for operators. The GTF engine problems will increase with the rising temperatures of India’s summer.

Airlines have already obtained precious landing and departure slots at the congested airports in India, and have pre-sold inventory for the traditional summer holiday season. Delayed deliveries and aircraft on ground (AOG) will challenge IndiGo and Go Air to hold on to the slots and meet commitments to passengers.

Bangalore Aviation analysis suggests the market for the A320 classics is also quite hot with operators wanting to bring in these aircraft to cater to their expansion needs. However, leasing aircraft to fill the gap, which was easier during the winter season, will be a challenge as summer demand picks up in the rest of the world.

On one side is the 15%+ improvement in fuel efficiency (the CFM engines are lower), but the cost benefits will be traded-off with reduced capacity induction due to delivery issues, despatch reliability and network performance due to the engine issues.

Airlines will have their hands full in the near term as they try to optimise the fleet mix and work around the challenges.

Bangalore Aviation will report updates as and when available. Stay tuned.

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 15 Mar 2017 16:00

From flight global..not for nothing is engines one of the pinnacle of engineering
.......

P&W fix will cut PW1100G start-up delay in half

18 APRIL, 2016 SOURCE: FLIGHTGLOBAL PRO BY: JON HEMMERDINGER WASHINGTON DC
Pratt & Whitney is rolling out software and hardware fixes this summer that will reduce PW1100G start-up delays to between 90s and 100s, down from about 3min, the company tells Flightglobal.

The modifications come after some customers expressed dissatisfaction with a thermal issue that can cause the geared-turbofan engines to have much longer start-up delays than the industry standard of less than 1min.

The PW1100G’s start delay can be 3min, or 6min for a dual-engine start, P&W says. By comparison, CFM International has said its Leap-1A needs around 50s to cool before starting-up.

Both engines are both offered as power for Airbus A320neo-family aircraft.

P&W president of the aftermarket division Matthew Bromberg calls the required cooling cycle “a very common engine behavior”.

After the engines are shut down, rising heat causes a “temperature differential” between the top and bottom of the engine, which can cause a “slight bowing of the rotor” as the engine’s metal expands at different rates, he says.

The degree of bowing depends on factors including ambient air temperature and is only the “thickness of a hair”, Bromberg says.

Still, if the engine is started when the bowing is at its worst, a “harmonic vibration” can develop, he says.

”The engine will bounce a little… to the point where it can eat into the seals that are surrounding the blades,” according to Bromberg.

The problem does not occur if the engine is re-started shortly after it was shut down – when it is still warm – or after it has completely cooled, Bromberg says.

A software fix already incorporated into the engines measures how long the engine has cooled, and, if needed, causes the engine to initially spin slowly during a start, allowing the “temperature to even our across the motor”, says Bromberg.

Hence the 3min start.

P&W is further addressing the problem by applying a coating to some engine blades and strengthening the engine's third and fourth shaft bearings to prevent the harmonic vibration, Bromberg says.

"Then ultimately we are going to put coating on some of the blades that will improve the sealing function in the compressor," Bromberg says.

New PW1100Gs with the fix will ship this month and be installed on Airbus A320neos delivered this summer, while the handful of PW1100Gs already in service will be likewise be upgraded this summer, P&W says.

Only 10 PW1100Gs are currently in service on two A320neos operated by Lufthansa and three aircraft operated by IndiGo, though those carriers also have received several spare PW1100Gs, says Bromberg.

The start-up time requirement had led Qatar Airways, which was initially the Airbus A320neo launch customer, to delay initial aircraft deliveries. Qatar has orders for 34 A320neos and 16 A321neos, according to Flightglobal’s Fleets Analyzer database.

As a result, Lufthansa took the first A320neo.

Qatar chief executive Akbar al Baker had even threatened to cancel PW1100G orders in favour of Leap-1A powerplants, though earlier this month Al Baker expressed confidence P&W has addressed his concerns.

Bromberg says the geared turbofans have a 99% dispatch reliability rate and are meeting thrust, fuel burn and noise expectations.

P&W delivered 20 geared turbofans in 2015 and expects to deliver at least 200 in 2016, 400 in 2017 and 600 in 2018, the company tells Flightglobal.

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1603
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby JayS » 15 Mar 2017 17:34

Singha wrote:There was an article in ET today that our govt has launched a enquiry into the v2500 engines on a320 neo which are giving lot of problems in india. Mallyaji has chimed in on twitter that kf was partly sunk by these engines and has a lawsuit against pw for it

Must be these gtf engines


V2500 is older generation (compared to GTF) of engines owned by International Aero Engines (UTC now owns ~50% of the JV), same as CF6 generation.

I doubt that any airline could be drown by engine issues. The OEMs generally guarantee performance and if they cannot fulfil that, pay heavy penalties to the airlines. There might be some catch in the contract that KF had for these engines. If these engines were so bad IAE could not have sold it in 6000+ numbers. They are in top three all time successful civil airliner engines of their class.

P&W is having lot of issues with GTFs. Similarly GE is having trouble with the LEAP engines which are the direct competitors of some of the GTF engines e.g. on A320 NEO.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 15 Mar 2017 17:52

It will probably take some time to match or exceed high reliability, and on times of legacy engines as with most new stuff introduced..

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 17 Mar 2017 15:54

Image

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 17 Mar 2017 17:38

^ No hangar queens these.. but then the air base doesn't seem to be in the tropics..

And when shall we be able to see some good videos of intercepts of half competent non-red flag opponents.. so far only sparse videos claiming to be over airspace of non-powers like libya

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 17 Mar 2017 17:52

Manish_P wrote:^ No hangar queens these.. but then the air base doesn't seem to be in the tropics..

And when shall we be able to see some good videos of intercepts of half competent non-red flag opponents.. so far only sparse videos claiming to be over airspace of non-powers like libya


This was a divert for Hurricane Mathew..

https://theaviationist.com/2016/10/08/3 ... e-matthew/

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 17 Mar 2017 18:41

Thanks for the info. Not a US resident myself, Wiki seems to indicate fine (AC type) temperatures for Ohio..

Storms do have awesome power.

The wispy shrub in the background looks fine and fresh but the mighty cat has been uprooted by a storm :cry:

Image
Last edited by Manish_P on 18 Mar 2017 09:46, edited 1 time in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18095
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Mar 2017 00:22

IL-76 Test Platform with PD-14 Engine

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 18 Mar 2017 05:30

Air Force's Mysterious X-37B Space Plane Nears Orbital Record
The U.S. Air Force's X-37B space plane is just eight days away from setting a record on its current clandestine mission.
If the robotic vehicle stays aloft until March 25, it will break the X-37B mission-duration mark of 674 days, which was established back in October 2014.

It's unclear whether that will actually happen, however; the Air Force is tight-lipped about most X-37B payloads and activities, including touchdown plans. "The landing date will be determined based on the completion of the program's on-orbit demonstrations and objectives for this mission," Capt. AnnMarie Annicelli, an Air Force spokeswoman, told Space.com via email when asked when the current mission might end.The uncrewed X-37B (also known as the Orbital Test Vehicle, or OTV) looks a lot like NASA's now-retired space shuttle, only much smaller. The X-37B is just 29 feet (8.8 meters) long and 9.6 feet (2.9 m) tall, with a wingspan of about 15 feet (4.6 m). Two of the vehicles could fit inside a space shuttle's payload bay.

The Air Force is known to have two X-37Bs, both of which were built by Boeing. These twin craft have flown four missions to date. OTV-1 launched on April 22, 2010, and landed on Dec. 3 of that year, spending 224 days in orbit. OTV-2 started on March 5, 2011, and wrapped up on June 16, 2012, after 468 days in space. OTV-3 launched on Dec. 11, 2012, and landed on Oct. 17, 2014, after circling the Earth for more than 674 days.

The current mission, OTV-4, lifted off on May 20, 2015.


All four X-37B flights have launched from Florida's Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, and the first three landed at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. But the Air Force has been working to consolidate X-37B launch and landing activities on Florida's Space Coast, and that vision includes bringing the vehicles down at the Shuttle Landing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center (KSC), which is next door to Cape Canaveral. [The X-37B Space Plane: 6 Surprising Facts]

Rumors have swirled that OTV-4 will land at KSC, but that's all they are at the moment — rumors. Capt. Annicelli declined to confirm or refute such speculation.

"While the program has the capability to land at either KSC or Vandenberg, the landing location is determined by a variety of factors," she said.

Because of the secrecy surrounding the X-37B program, some people have speculated that the vehicle is a space weapon. But the Air Force has always vigorously contested such claims, saying that the space plane is simply testing technologies and helping researchers conduct in-space experiments.

"Technologies being tested in the program include advanced guidance, navigation and control, thermal-protection systems, avionics, high-temperature structures and seals, conformal reusable insulation, lightweight electromechanical flight systems, advanced propulsion systems and autonomous orbital flight, re-entry, and landing," the Air Force's X-37B fact sheet states.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3927
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Neshant » 18 Mar 2017 07:24

The payload is not unlike Argus except on a larger scale.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 18 Mar 2017 09:57

Neshant wrote:The payload is not unlike Argus except on a larger scale.


You know this how?

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3927
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Neshant » 18 Mar 2017 10:00

I don't, I'm guessing.
But it would make sense as the next step.
Take the visuals up higher and survey a wider continent wide area.. as opposed to a city wide area.

Prithwiraj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 21 Dec 2016 18:48

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Prithwiraj » 18 Mar 2017 18:17

Manish_P wrote:Thanks for the info. Not a US resident myself, Wiki seems to indicate fine (AC type) temperatures for Ohio..

Storms do have awesome power.

The wispy shrub in the background looks fine and fresh but the mighty cat has been uprooted by a storm :cry:

Image


Is that an IAF Jaguar? What is the story behind this pic?

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Mar 2017 20:27

is PD14 the engine the russians want to use on the new "MTA" ? it looks huge for a smaller 2 engine bird...

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 904
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Zynda » 18 Mar 2017 22:10

This is from Wiki page of PD-14.

Aviadvigatel indicates that the PD-14 will not only be used for the MC-21 family, but also for upgraded derivatives of the Tupolev Tu-204, or the UAC/HAL Il-214/IndoRussian MTA multirole aircraft.


Some body needs to go and edit the above page and remove Indo from MTA :)

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 18095
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 19 Mar 2017 11:58

Singha wrote:is PD14 the engine the russians want to use on the new "MTA" ? it looks huge for a smaller 2 engine bird...


Yes thats the PD-14 undergoing trials on IL-76 , The thrust is the same as PS-90A but it is 15 % more fuel efficient ,longer life/lower maintenance and certifed for ETOPS-180.

It is first build from scratch engine for Russian in past 25 years , if you leave aside the PS-90 variants and has developed many new technogies for it ,check the link for the key technologies developed.

Seven facts about the PD-14

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 19 Mar 2017 13:36

Prithwiraj wrote:Is that an IAF Jaguar? What is the story behind this pic?


French bird at Saint-Dizier – Robinson Air Base in France. Apparently toppled over in a storm in 2009.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 19 Mar 2017 21:33


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 20 Mar 2017 19:39


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 20 Mar 2017 19:42


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 20 Mar 2017 19:50


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31263
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby shiv » 20 Mar 2017 19:55

Singha wrote:Bangalore aviation

DGCA brief details issues with the PW1100 GTF engine on the A320neo
Devesh Agarwal March 9, 2017 Analysis & Features, GoAir, IndiGo 2 Comments

Could I have a link please. OT for this thread. Devesh Agarwal used to run one of Bangalore's two BBSes in the mid 90s before the first internet lines were established by VSNL. He was also an avid planespotter. The first BBS in India was also in Bangalore - started by Atul Chitnis who is no more. But the second Indian BBS was started in Delhi by Gp Capt Kapil Bhargava's son.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31263
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby shiv » 20 Mar 2017 19:57

Singha wrote:is PD14 the engine the russians want to use on the new "MTA" ? it looks huge for a smaller 2 engine bird...
Large diameter onlee - probably high bypass

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31263
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby shiv » 20 Mar 2017 20:13

http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2017/0 ... 20neo.html
Thanks nrao - though you seem to have deleted your reply.

That is a very interesting item that contrasts two different hight tech routes taken by GE/Safran versus P&W

PW chose a geared turbofan because having a co-axial turbofan did not allow the bypass fan to spin at the most optimum RPM

CFM went for composites in the bypass section.

Geraboxes are another "deadly headache" of high tech

Singha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55620
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: I stood eye to eye with The Beast and he told me everything...

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 20 Mar 2017 20:33

NRao wrote:


has the JSF flight envelope been opened or this is the best it can do ? any older fighter even a Jag perhaps will be on its 6 in about 3 seconds if this is the best it can do. there were no moves in the vertical plane either. it has a fairly obese barrel fuselage and small wings(high loading) kept airborne by a massive engine. f22 is where the real sleekness and meat is.

the JSF looks like a small brother of the J20 - which should really please the chinese - since they love being "like the usa" :mrgreen: - albeit the small bro is a JEE kamandu and big bro is high school as yet.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 20 Mar 2017 20:44

The full 3F capability is currently scheduled to be provided to the fleet after the completion of Developmental testing on it around the October-November, 2017 time frame (Australia aircraft will likely get them closer to their trip back home). Until then it is envelope limited. The full envelope display of an F-35A would probably look like that of a clean or lightly loaded Super Hornet with the exception that the F-35A would be able to pull higher g.


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4761
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby brar_w » 20 Mar 2017 22:08

DARPA awards Phase 2 contracts for Gremlins programme

Teams led by Dynetics and General Atomics have been downselected for the second phase of the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA's) Gremlins swarming, recoverable unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) programme.

Two other Phase 1 contractors - Lockheed Martin and Kratos Defense & Security - missed out on Phase 2 awards. However, Kratos retains an interest in the project through the participation of its Composite Engineering Inc (CEi) subsidiary in the Dynetics team.

First announced by DARPA in 2015, the Gremlins programme is seeking to demonstrate the safe and reliable aerial launch and recovery of a swarm of UASs capable of employing and recovering diverse distributed payloads in 'volley' quantities. The concept envisages the launch of a 20-strong UAS 'swarm' from a C-130 aircraft, with the unmanned aircraft capable of a 300 n mile (556 km) transit to the area of operations, one hour on station, a return transit of up to 300 n miles, and mid-air recovery into the C-130.

The estimated price target for a Gremlin UAS is about USD700,000 per air vehicle, excluding payloads, for 1,000-unit order quantities once in production. The current intention is to reuse each air vehicle about 20 times.

Lockheed Martin, General Atomics, Kratos, and Dynetics received Phase 1 award contracts in late March 2016. Under these contracts, all four have undertaken system architecture and design studies to develop a conceptual Gremlins system design, analyse aerial launch and aerial recovery methods, refine operational concepts, and perform demonstration system design and plan for potential future phases.

"The Phase 1 programme showed the feasibility of airborne UAS launch and recovery systems that would require minimal modification to the host aircraft," said Scott Wierzbanowski, DARPA programme manager in a statement. "We're aiming in Phase 2 to mature two system concepts to enable 'aircraft carriers in the sky' using air-recoverable UASs that could carry various payloads."

Gremlins Phase 2 is a planned 12-month effort worth up to USD21 million to each company for research and is intended to complete preliminary designs for full-scale technology demonstration systems, as well as develop and perform risk-reduction tests of individual system components. General Atomics was awarded an initial USD1.5 million Phase 2 contract on 8 March, with Dynetics receiving its initial USD500,000 Phase 2 contract on 13 March.

Dynetics' team includes Kratos/CEi, Sierra Nevada Corporation, Applied Systems Engineering, Williams International, Systima Technologies, Airborne Systems, Moog, and International Air Response. In a statement, Dynetics said that its Phase 1 activity had "successfully designed flight demonstration concepts for launch and recovery techniques, low-cost limited airframe designs and high-fidelity analysis, precision digital flight control, relative navigation, and station keeping".

General Atomics has yet to make any public statement on its Gremlins team. However, the company did display a scale model of its proposed Gremlins air vehicle design at the Air Force Association 2016 symposium. It is understood that General Atomics has pursued development of two different recovery mechanisms: a mechanical arm device; and a cable and drogue system.

Following preliminary design reviews scheduled for the second quarter of 2018, DARPA plans to downselect to one team to receive a USD35 million Phase 3 contract covering the development of a full-scale technology demonstration system and flight demonstrations involving airborne launch and recovery of multiple UASs. This will culminate with flight testing in the 2019-20 timeframe.

The ability to send large numbers of small UASs with co-ordinated, distributed capabilities could provide US forces with improved operational flexibility at much lower cost, especially if those unmanned systems could be retrieved for reuse while airborne. At present, the primary role envisaged for the Gremlins aircraft is to act as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets, extending reach and removing manned assets, or higher value UASs, from high threat environments. The UASs will be capable of working in a network to provide an enhanced capability, and ultimately Gremlins could be available for deployment from a range of manned platforms.


Image

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1603
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Mar 2017 22:44

shiv wrote:http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2017/03/dgca-brief-details-issues-pw1100-gtf-engine-a320neo.html
Thanks nrao - though you seem to have deleted your reply.

That is a very interesting item that contrasts two different hight tech routes taken by GE/Safran versus P&W

PW chose a geared turbofan because having a co-axial turbofan did not allow the bypass fan to spin at the most optimum RPM

CFM went for composites in the bypass section.

Geraboxes are another "deadly headache" of high tech


Both GE and RR are working on their GTF engines. I think at least GE will offer its GTF for Boieng's much awaited MoM aircraft as a competition to PW's GTF. At that thrust rating 2-spool Leap engine in all probability won't be able to compete with PW1000G GTF.

Perhaps the key reason why PW had to take the gamble on GTF was that it ran out of its depth in 2-spool design in competition to GE and RR has 3-spool design already to compete. Hereon all three will switch to GTF/open rotor in next generation most probably.

Reliability of Gear boxes was the key reason we didn;t see GTF since 1990's (the GE90 generation). Both GE and PW have had studies the concepts very seriously since 1960s and had knowns about the efficiency benefits, but the reliability was not good enough and would have more than compensated by the increased expenses to maintain the engine. PW had one key innovation for gear box which led them to eliminate this reliability issue, the floating gearbox mounted on a flexible shaft. But it took them 27yrs to perfect the tech in all.

Imagine similar issues popping up for Kaveri in its early deployment. DRDO/GTRE would be flayed in public day in day out.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 21 Mar 2017 14:31

Nice, simple facilities. Looks like the F-35 has a large trunk, for luggage, too.



NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15238
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby NRao » 22 Mar 2017 03:25



Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests