International Aerospace Discussion

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Apr 2017 11:00

The F-35 Is a $1.4 Trillion Dollar National Disaster

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Apr 2017 14:53

In POGO land they are yet to find military hardware they like.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Apr 2017 20:14

Russia developing unmanned Forpost-M[/b

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -m-435419/

Russia is to develop a new unmanned air vehicle based on the Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) Searcher 2 that was built under licence by a local company.

Dubbed Forpost-M, the design will carry some Russian-developed payloads and datalinks. Russian sources say that some local companies have already received work orders to supply the required systems, and indicate that the United Instrument Making Corporation Rostek will be the lead contractor.

Sources say the improved UAV will be able to communicate not only with a ground control station, but directly with other aircraft, including helicopters, enabling their crews to assess information gathered using its sensors and relay real-time data to ground or airborne forces.

In April 2009, Moscow bought its first batch of UAVs from IAI, via a $54 million package including BirdEye 400s and Searcher 2s. Late the same year, it ordered a further 36 aircraft worth $100 million. A third deal, valued at $400 million, was signed in October 2010 with the Israeli company, with UAVs having been assembled in Russia since early 2012 and deliveries to the Russian military starting in 2014.

Russian sources say another deal was signed in late 2015, covering an army order totalling $320 million.

Moscow has made several attempts to buy more advanced UAVs from Israel, but its efforts have been blocked by Washington. The incursion of an Israeli-made UAV into Israeli airspace from inside Syria on 17 July 2016 – believed to have been a Russian-operated Searcher 2 – has provided the US authorities with another reason to block future sales of such equipment to Moscow.

Two Raytheon Patriot surface-to-air missiles were launched at the UAV immediately after it was detected, but both missed their target. A third attempt to shoot it down, this time using an air-to-air missile, also failed.

Tel Aviv has attempted to overturn US opposition to further UAV sales following its improved relations with Moscow, but Washington argues that the war in Syria could result in advanced technologies falling into the hands of so-called Islamic State militants.

IAI says it is "not commenting on contracts and customers".

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Apr 2017 20:15

Any reason why the 2 Patriot SAM and A2A missile failed to hit the target

The incursion of an Israeli-made UAV into Israeli airspace from inside Syria on 17 July 2016 – believed to have been a Russian-operated Searcher 2 – has provided the US authorities with another reason to block future sales of such equipment to Moscow.

Two Raytheon Patriot surface-to-air missiles were launched at the UAV immediately after it was detected, but both missed their target. A third attempt to shoot it down, this time using an air-to-air missile, also failed.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Apr 2017 20:39

PAC-2s are ill suited for this type of mission unless the UAV happens to be at a extremely favorable and constant position. For small UAV's and even subsonic and supersonic cruise missiles you really need active missiles either solo or those that can tap in to more dispersed sensor net. The PAC-2 can also do it better but only through IBCS and forward pass which isn't operational yet and which Israel doesnt have/ isn't getting. Israel for now is going to be tapping into its David's sling and inserting a spiral block in to the Stunner for the anti-UAV and cruise missile mission from the big systems and I guess they'll be using spyder types that are more dispersed.

The US is going to maximize the PAC-2s ability through IBCS and forward pass with dispersed Sentinel sensors and through the PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE Active Missiles. This is also something that will be dealt with lower cost interceptors much like the Stunner, AMRAAM etc with low altitude stuff being either jammed or defeated via directed energy. UAV's and cruise missiles can find seams and gaps in air defenses so you either need to have a highly dispersed air defense network or network every sensor with every shooter as the US Army is doing via IBCS.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Apr 2017 22:54

Searcher-2 is not a stealthy UAV by any yardstick so it should have been easy for Patriot or even A2A missile to take it out , I suspect some kind of jamming were used and likely Searcher was a bait. Since Searcher was operated by Russians and not Syrians as they dont have this UAV

IIRC even Pakistani F-16 shot a Searcher-2 via AIM-9L missile when it went inside Pakistan.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 04 Apr 2017 23:00

Austin wrote:Searcher-2 is not a stealthy UAV by any yardstick so it should have been easy for Patriot or even A2A missile to take it out , I suspect some kind of jamming were used and likely Searcher was a bait. Since Searcher was operated by Russians and not Syrians as they dont have this UAV

IIRC even Pakistani F-16 shot a Searcher-2 via AIM-9L missile when it went inside Pakistan.

You don't need to be stealthy as a UAV to stress an air defense system reliant on LOS link between the target and the radar and between the radar and the interceptor. That small unmanned systems and low flying cruise missiles stress this arrangement has been known for many many years hence the move towards distributed and highly networked defenses and active end game missiles. They unlike a ballistic target do not follow a predictable path and can slip in and out of coverage and envelope depending upon your sensor density. Specifically on the Patriot this was a major drawback identified in the system in its 1980s or 1990s architecture. Hence the shift to configuration 3 (++), PAC-3 and IBCS enabled forward pass. Also note additional layers through R&D programs like JLENS etc.

An Aim9 is a better interceptor against this threat compared to the legacy PAC-2 but such missiles have small envelopes so you need lots of coverage. Depending upon the altitude a Stinger, Aim-9x or SLAMRAAM based air defense systems are going to be a lot better against this type of threat compared to the legacy patriot radar and TVM interceptor w/o help from things like forward pass and launch on remote. UAV's and cruise missiles can fly challenging profiles and use terrain to their advantage essentially reducing the radar coverage of the sensor to a fraction of what it would normally have for a higher altitude target. This extends to targeting when the missile requires that the target information be constantly provided to it.

This is a well understood problem and the reason for the investment in new OTH enabling architectures and "any sensor any shooter concepts" have been invested in. I have been saying for a few years now that small UAV's and more sophisticated cruise missiles are to the air-defense headache what ballsitic missiels were 10 or maybe 15 years ago. Architectures would be required to be opened up and networking strategies pursued. Here is an IBCS test using a similar legacy patriot - challenging setup but with an upgraded command and control and IBCS. Patriot radar does not see a target, Forward positioned Sentinel does, passes information on through IBCS, Patriot radar updates the PAC-3 and it acquires the target -

http://www.waaytv.com/redstone_alabama/ ... 54302.html

What you've done here is basically kept your "big lower tier sensor" as a command and control, uplink (where you need high power jam resistant missile uplink advantages) and high stress ballistic missile targeting sensor. For the rest of the task you've essentially broken the radar up and distributed tens of miles apart and feed targeting_grade composite tracks back to the primary air-defense system. The legacy patriot such as the architecture the IDF uses would have been very helpless under such stressing scenarios unless the surrogate target happened to fly right through its coverage...This is very similar to how USN does OTH under NIFC-CA and CEC using E-2D, or F-35 and SPY series radar and SM6. But unlike naval vessels you really ought to be using your SHORAADs to take threats such as the Searcher UAV's leaving bigger missile OTH targeting for more challenging cruise missiles, aircraft and most importantly ballistic missiles.

The USN puts this on steroids when it deploys the AN/TPY-2 as a forward pass sensor and launches an SM3 based on its supplied composite track even before the ballistic missile has come into the field of view of the SPY-1. It is harder in such a scenario because you need a high quality track since PIP errors can totally ruin an intercept in space and the fact that the size of your KKV absolutely depends upon how much it has to correct in the end game.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Apr 2017 15:23

Orbital ATK showcasing its 220+ km ranged Anti Radiation Missile proposal (ARH+Active MMW+GPS/INS, SATCOM and LOS data-link) designed for internal carriage on the F-35A and C variants. Essentially repackaging the AARGM into a new larger diameter missile section and a new motor. Contract will include new builds but also repackaging existing AARGM stock.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 06 Apr 2017 19:14

Some smart and sensible upgrades offered by Boeing instead of their earlier efforts to claim that they had managed to stealthify the Super Hornet. While the USN expansion of the Super Hornet POR was always on the cards I see them moving over to the Block III for the remaining 40-50 aircraft they are likely to top off the program with. Possibly a similar number of Super Growlers.

Boeing Unveils F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block III with New Capabilities

At the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space 2017 exposition currently held near Washington D.C., Boeing unveiled the new Block III variant of its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

The Block III Super Hornet consists in a series of upgrades for the existing Block II aircraft. These upgrades (a Boeing representative at the show identified five of them) would bring more capabilities to the affordable and combat proven Super Hornet (as well as to the EA-18G Growler).

1 - Conformal fuel tanks:

The most visible upgrade is the conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) which would bring more range, more percistance and less drag to the aircraft. CFTs are additional fuel tanks fitted closely to the profile of an aircraft that extend either the range or "time on station" of the aircraft. CFTs have a reduced aerodynamic penalty compared to external drop tanks and they do not occupy ordnance hardpoints like drop tanks, allowing the aircraft to carry more payload. The combat range increase for the Block III is estimated to be about more or less 150 nautical mile compared to the use of legacy drop tanks.

2 - Block II IRST

The IRST system consists of Lockheed Martin’s IRST21™ sensor, the GE Aviation FPU-13 Fuel Tank Assembly and the Meggitt Defense Industry Environmental Control unit. The system demonstrated its production readiness through a series of extensive assessments and reviews, including flight tests. Block I IRST is expected to deploy on the F/A-18 Super Hornet in 2017. In addition to detecting airborne threats, IRST significantly enhances multiple target resolution compared to radar, providing greater discrimination of threat formations at longer ranges. Data from the IRST21 sensor is fused with other on-board F/A-18 sensor data to provide maximum situational awareness to the warfighter.

3 - New computers and datalink

They would allow Block III Super Hornet to exchange large quantity of data with Growlers and E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes through the TTNT (Tactical Targeting Network Technology) network and fuze real time information.

4 - Radar Cross Section (RCS) improvements

Minor treatments to improve the low RCS levels of the aircraft. The mostly consist in a redesigned muzzle (in the nose of the aircraft) as well as improved angle of attack sensors (located on the sides of the nose).

5 - All glass advanced cockpit system

Designed by Elbit Systems USA, the ACS includes mission processors, a low-profile head-up display, and a large 10X19 inch HD display with touch screen and picture-in-picture capabilities, optimizing tactical situation displays, processing advanced applications, and providing high-definition formats for advanced sensor video presentations.

Talking to Navy Recognition at the show, a Boeing representative explained that Block III Super Hornet would become a smart node on the network fuzing a lot of information and bringing more range and firepower.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 07 Apr 2017 06:42

Boeing Smells Blood in the Water and is coming for Lockheed Martin's F-35 Business

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Apr 2017 13:13

Breaking news:
It appears to be accurate and will augur well for Indo-BDesh relations,where BD just bought two ancient Chinese subs.We aren't wasting time to get our foot firmly into the BD def. establishment's front door,and this tri-partite Indo-Russia-BDesh agreement was earlier seen in Afghanistan reg. Ru attack helos,supplied by Russia and paid for by India.

https://in.rbth.com/defence/2017/04/06/ ... res_736061

India to finance Bangladeshi purchase of Russian arms and spares
6 April 2017 ALEXANDER KORABLINOV
India is expected to roll out a $500 million line of credit for Bangladesh when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina visits New Delhi on April 7. Dhaka will use the money to buy spares for its MiG-29S fighters, and explore purchasing MiG-35 aircraft.

Russia to award 20 nuclear engineering scholarships to Bangladeshi students
MiG-35 is frontrunner in Bangladesh Air Force tender: CAWAT
How Russia plans to secure its place in Bangladesh’s rising economy
TAGS
BANGLADESH, DEFENCE, MIG-35

Sheikh Hasina, Bangladeshi Prime Minister. Source: Global Look Press
In a sign of growing cooperation between New Delhi, Dhaka and Moscow, India will finance Bangladesh’s purchase of Russian weapons and spare parts, sources close to the situation told RIR on April 6.

India will extend a line of credit of $500 million to Bangladesh for the purchases of military equipment including spare parts for Dhaka’s MiG-29S fighters.

Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina will arrive in New Delhi on a three-day visit on April 7. She has rejected a proposal from India to sign a 25-year defence cooperation pact, the sources said. “Some opposition elements already accuse her of being a puppet of India and such an agreement would have been used to mobilise the opposition,” a source said. “The offer for finance is similar to an arrangement that India and Russia have with Afghanistan.” India finances Russian arms sales to Afghanistan under a tripartite agreement.

Tender for Mig-35s
The sources said, India’s line of credit could also be used for the purchase of Russian MiG-35 fighters.

MiG-35 warms up engines for new India sortie
In March 2017, the Centre for Analysis of World Arms Trade (CAWAT) said the MiG-35 was the favourite to win the recently announced tender for 8 multi-role fighters for the Bangladesh Air Force.

“Bangladesh has a defence budget of just $2.8 billion and the MiG-35 is something the country can afford,” a source said.

Dhaka’s main supplier of weapons purchase is China, although the country heavilies relies on Russian weapons. It uses Russian-made BTR tanks, MiG aircraft and Mi-17 helicopters. Bangladesh is also pondering over the purchase of coastal missile defence system manufactured by Morinformsystem-Agat.

Given the fact that Bangladesh enjoys a good relationship with both its neighbours, India and Myanmar, it is unlikely to hike up its defence budget. “The biggest concern at the moment is the security threat posed by pirates and Rohingya refugees, some of whom could be Islamist radicals sponsored by Pakistan,” a source added.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 07 Apr 2017 16:03

^^

Wasn't it enough that we were bankrolling Ruskis through our own weapons purchase that now we do that through BD..??

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Apr 2017 16:10

You gotta keep these neighbouring states as clients on handouts. This is what china does...donations and lines of credit on soft terms.

Btw has anyone tried making all composite cft for low weight penalty? Composites are used in civilian ac wings and 1st stage of icbms so plenty strong enough.

F15e style composite cft on our flankers woukd be great to extend deep strike range and patrol orbits

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 07 Apr 2017 16:15

Philip wrote:Breaking news:
It appears to be accurate and will augur well for Indo-BDesh relations,where BD just bought two ancient Chinese subs.

and

“The biggest concern at the moment is the security threat posed by pirates and Rohingya refugees, some of whom could be Islamist radicals sponsored by Pakistan,” a source added.

That's just like the Pakis begging for AMRAAMs equipped F-16s to fight the Taliban Air Force

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 07 Apr 2017 16:26

<OT>

Singha wrote:You gotta keep these neighbouring states as clients on handouts. This is what china does...donations and lines of credit on soft terms.

With all due respect Sir, not if the neighbouring states are Islamic by nature. Then it is not taken as handouts but as a matter of right

Not very far in the future i forsee the bangladeshis doing a paki on us, what the pakis do to the world - hold a gun against their own head and extort one concession after another from us.
</OT>

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 07 Apr 2017 16:49

Singha wrote:You gotta keep these neighbouring states as clients on handouts. This is what china does...donations and lines of credit on soft terms.

Obviously Singha saar. But does any country give credit line to buy weapons from a third nation..?? That's funny.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 07 Apr 2017 21:44

Neshant wrote:Boeing Smells Blood in the Water and is coming for Lockheed Martin's F-35 Business

This silly video report aside the leaked US Navy proposal forwarded to Secretary Mattis adds both Super Hornets and F-35s across the Five year aviation procurement plan. How many? 130 F-18E/Fs and 89 F-35B's and Cs.

Precisely:

- 78 F-18 E's instead of 16 planned earlier
- 68 F-18Fs instead of 0 planned earlier ( he E to F ratio is a pretty clear sign of Mid Life Growler conversions)
- 190 F-35B's instead of 139 planned earlier
- 150 F-35Cs instead of 112 planned earlier

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 08 Apr 2017 04:52

Vietnam Air Force looks for new trainer jet

The Vietnam People’s Air Force (VPAF) needs a new jet for training. Local media report that the service is close to selecting the Russian Yak-130, but the Czech-built Aero Vodochody L-39NG may also be in contention.

“We have been equipping ourselves with state-of-the-art fighters in recent years, but our training system still consists of the old Yak-52 and L-39,” said VPAF Commander Lieutenant General Lê Huy Vịnh at a pilot training conference held in Hanoi. “The operational conversion of pilots after their graduation therefore places a challenge on the combat units,” he continued. Vietnam operates 22 Yak-52 and 34 L-39C/Z. After the conference, the VPAF announced its intention to set up a new division dedicated to supersonic fighter training.

VPAF acquired 36 Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighters between 2004 and 2016.

Before this year, the VPAF sent its prospective Su-30 pilots to Russia for training. But it has now turned to the Indian Air Force for this task, after the two countries signed a new defense agreement in December 2016.

Viktor Chernov, United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) deputy director general for marketing and sales, said the company is now offering packaged training solutions to potential customers. These include the new piston-engine Yak-152 trainer with diesel or petrol options, as well as the Yak-130. “Countries that operate Russian-origin fighters will find it easy for their pilots to transition from the Yak-130,” he added.

The Yak-130 has a glass cockpit and a fly-by-wire system from Avionica that can simulate the flying characteristics of Russian and Western bloc aircraft, including the MiG-29, Su-27, Su-30, F-15 and F-16. It is also able to simulate the handling conditions of aircraft in supersonic speeds, despite having of top speed of only Mach 0.85.

Sixteen Yak-130s are already in service with the Bangladesh air force and three were delivered to Myanmar air force in late 2016.

India should step in and offer its HTT-40 and the Hawk-i trainer to the Vietnamese.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 08 Apr 2017 05:02

Myanmar MiG-29 upgrade revealed- will Malaysia follow?

Ten MiG-29 fighters belonging to the Myanmar air force have been upgraded at RAC MiG facilities near Moscow, a source in the Russian delegation at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) 2017 show in Malaysia last week told AIN. Moscow is now offering similar upgrades to Malaysia, which acquired 18 in 1994, and to Bangladesh, which procured 10 MiG-29s at the turn of the century.

The upgrade solution for Myanmar is referred to as MiG-29SM (mod.). It is believed to be a low-cost version compared to the more expensive MiG-29UPG that India has been doing, and which is broadly similar to the Russian air force MiG-29SMT. Details about the MiG-29SM (mod.) are yet to emerge, but it apparently keeps the original N-019E radar, albeit with some technology insertions and part replacements.

Among other things, a cross-fleet upgrade would bring the Myanmar aircraft to a single standard. In 2001 that country signed for 10 MiG-29 single-seat fighters and two MiG-29UB operational trainers. In December 2009, Myanmar awarded RAC MiG a follow-on order for 10 more MiG-29s (“Fulcrum-B”) plus six more advanced MiG-29SEs and four operational trainers. Shipments under the second order took place in late 2011-early 2012, with the last pair of two-seaters arriving in March 2013. This brought the Myanmar Fulcrum fleet to 32 aircraft. RAC MiG’s offer was to upgrade the whole fleet of single-seaters to a common standard.

The Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) ordered 16 MiG-29N and two MiG-29UB-N aircraft in 1994 and received them in 1995-1996. The “N” version was a customized RMAF variant, with mid-air refueling capability (taking fuel from specially converted C-130 Hercules transports), and the ability to fire two RVV-AE radar-guided missiles (export version of the Vympel R-77) at two aerial targets simultaneously. After the loss of two MiGs in incidents in 1998 and 2004, the RMAF possesses 14 airframes, of which 10 are believed to remain operational with No. 17 Squadron at Kuantan AFB. Since 2010, the RMAF has said several times that it would withdraw the MiG-29s from service, but they continue flying.

At LIMA2015, RAC MiG and its local partner ATSC proposed to the Malaysian Ministry of Defence an upgrade to the MiG-29NM standard. This would have been similar to the Indian air force MiG-29UPG, involving the replacement of the N-019E radar with more advanced Zhuk-ME (model FGM-229). The upgrade would also have enabled the MiGs to carry the same guided and unguided munitions as the RMAF’s Su-30MKMs.

But members of the Russian delegation at LIMA told AIN that Malaysia refused this rather costly modernization, forcing RAC MiG to come up with a less expensive option modeled on the Myanmar upgrade. Earlier this year, RAC MiG brought in a MiG-29SM (mod.) full-flight simulator to a base in Malaysia for technology demonstration purposes.

RAC MiG continues working with local companies involved in MiG-29N maintenance and support. As such, ATSC has gained access to the RMAF airframes and produced a fleet report. It describes the surviving hardware as remaining in good condition, making lifetime extensions and upgrade options viable. Few airframes have exceeded 2,000 flight hours, and their maker has offered a lifetime extension to 6,000 hours and 40 calendar years.

Speaking to AIN at LIMA2017, RMAF chief Gen. Affendi bin Buang said that although the MiGs are still operational, their age causes “a gap in capability.” Advancements in technologies, especially sensor fusion and weaponry, force RMAF to consider options available for future MiG-29 operations. The basic aircraft is sturdy and robust, he said, “but there are certain systems in the MiG-29 that we wish to replace or upgrade in order to enhance the aircraft’s operational capacity.”

“At the moment we are still awaiting a government decision whether to continue the operation of the MiG-29 or to stop it,” Affendi continued. He has been briefed by his counterparts from India and Myanmar on what they have done to their MiGs. “In my view, the additional capability that [RAC MiG] is putting into these aircraft during their update is quite impressive. This make me feel confident that these aging but still maintainable aircraft have some life in the future.”

So its basically 14 airframes that the IAF could possibly acquire from Malaysia- if the offer is priced right, unlike the botched Qatari Mirage-2000-5 deal. But the Malaysians don't seem to be very interested in a MiG-29N upgrade, so the chances of an Indian purchase are good.

Low airframe hours on those MiG-29Ns means that they should be good for another 15 years or so without even needing structural upgrades for life extension.

Malaysian company proposes MiG-29 upgrade, very similar to the MiG-29UPG

...

The current airframe life of the MiG-29N is pegged at 4,000 flight hours, although the highest-time aircraft in service has accrued only around 1,800 hours in 20 years of service. Fadzar said that a concurrent structural upgrade will increase the life of the airframe to 6,000 hours.

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 08 Apr 2017 11:03

The planning that's required for a long range B-2 mission. Khan is truly in a league of his own..

http://www.kansascity.com/news/state/mi ... 91469.html

For this run, the Air Force rallied squads of tankers, hulking KC-135 and KC-10s that work as in-air fuel delivery depots.

While just two jets made the trip over Libya, three left Whiteman. The third tagged along most of the trip as insurance against problems with the first two. It peeled off shortly before the target area.

That meant the tankers made mid-air rendezvous with the bombers 15 times on the back-and-forth route, five times per B-2. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein told a House committee this month that 13 tankers pitched in on the mission.

Those tankers came from the East Coast, from Europe and the Middle East, although planners are coy about exactly which bases they flew from. At some stages, tankers refueled other tankers so they could then top off the B-2s.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 08 Apr 2017 20:25

This scenario is coming from the Deterrence thread where a large number of PGMs have to be delivered inspite of air defence and still have good target hit rate

To do so the plan is to use small UAVs as escorts to PGMs, for example, the Gremlins or their close cousins, the Harpy UAVs are reusable, they can facilitate the PGMs to their targets by flying just below the air launched PGMs so any ground based air defence is seeing the UAV first.

The UAV can have its RCS enhanced with the Luneberg lens as well as have a CMDS (Chaff and Flare dispenser) for way laying the air defence missile, if the UAV survives it returns.

Because of S-400, enemy aircraft are not expected to be as effective.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Apr 2017 08:57

Russia's New PAK-FA Stealth Fighter Has A Big Problem

March, 2017.

Russia’s Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA stealth fighter program has suffered another delay. Testing of the of the powerful new jet’s second stage engine, which was supposed to start later this year, has been pushed back to 2018.

"At the moment, works are being carried out within the framework of contacts with the Russian Defense Ministry,” United Aircraft Corporation, Sergei Korotkov told the TASS news agency. “Flight tests are underway. We plan to enter the second stage of trials next year."

The new engine was expected to make its first flight installed onboard the PAK-FA in the fourth quarter of 2017. "The first flight of the aircraft with the new engine is expected in the fourth quarter of 2017," a United Engine Corporation spokesman told TASS earlier in the year.

The next-generation Saturn izdeliye 30—sometime referred to as the izdeliye 129—are the engines for the T-50. There are few details available about the izdeliye 30 engines, but the new powerplant is expected to deliver 24,054lbs dry thrust and 39,566lbs of afterburning thrust.

With the new engine installed, the PAK-FA should be able to offer kinematic performance comparable to the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor—cruising without afterburner at speeds exceeding Mach 1.5 with a maximum speed greater than Mach 2.0 at altitudes of around 60,000ft. “Performance-wise it certainly looks to compete with the Raptor,” one senior military official with extensive experience on U.S. fifth-generation fighters told me some time ago.

Overall, while the Russians place less emphasis on stealth while focusing more on maneuverability and raw kinematic performance, the new Sukhoi-built jet appears to have a comprehensive suite of avionics. “The analysis that I have seen on the PAK-FA indicates a pretty sophisticated design that is at least equal to, and some have said even superior to U.S. fifth-generation aircraft,” former U.S. Air Force intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula told me a few years ago. “It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35.”

But while the Russians have developed active electronically scanned array(AESA) radars, infrared sensors and excellent electronic warfare systems, one of the big questions that remain is how well the Russians have integrated the jets’ avionics. It took the United States decades of effort and billions of dollars to develop the complex integrated avionics suite and sophisticated pilot vehicle interfaces that make the Raptor the fearsome weapon that it is.

Ultimately, the Russians will probably be able to resolve technical glitches with the PAK-FA and field a capable operational aircraft. There is little doubt about that. The real question is when that will happen and how many jets the Kremlin can afford to buy

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Apr 2017 14:55

National Interest. Enough said.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 15:23

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 11 Apr 2017 18:16

brar_w wrote:Some smart and sensible upgrades offered by Boeing instead of their earlier efforts to claim that they had managed to stealthify the Super Hornet. While the USN expansion of the Super Hornet POR was always on the cards I see them moving over to the Block III for the remaining 40-50 aircraft they are likely to top off the program with. Possibly a similar number of Super Growlers.

Boeing Unveils F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block III with New Capabilities

At the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space 2017 exposition currently held near Washington D.C., Boeing unveiled the new Block III variant of its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

The Block III Super Hornet consists in a series of upgrades for the existing Block II aircraft. These upgrades (a Boeing representative at the show identified five of them) would bring more capabilities to the affordable and combat proven Super Hornet (as well as to the EA-18G Growler).

1 - Conformal fuel tanks:

The most visible upgrade is the conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) which would bring more range, more percistance and less drag to the aircraft. CFTs are additional fuel tanks fitted closely to the profile of an aircraft that extend either the range or "time on station" of the aircraft. CFTs have a reduced aerodynamic penalty compared to external drop tanks and they do not occupy ordnance hardpoints like drop tanks, allowing the aircraft to carry more payload. The combat range increase for the Block III is estimated to be about more or less 150 nautical mile compared to the use of legacy drop tanks.

2 - Block II IRST

The IRST system consists of Lockheed Martin’s IRST21™ sensor, the GE Aviation FPU-13 Fuel Tank Assembly and the Meggitt Defense Industry Environmental Control unit. The system demonstrated its production readiness through a series of extensive assessments and reviews, including flight tests. Block I IRST is expected to deploy on the F/A-18 Super Hornet in 2017. In addition to detecting airborne threats, IRST significantly enhances multiple target resolution compared to radar, providing greater discrimination of threat formations at longer ranges. Data from the IRST21 sensor is fused with other on-board F/A-18 sensor data to provide maximum situational awareness to the warfighter.

3 - New computers and datalink

They would allow Block III Super Hornet to exchange large quantity of data with Growlers and E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes through the TTNT (Tactical Targeting Network Technology) network and fuze real time information.

4 - Radar Cross Section (RCS) improvements

Minor treatments to improve the low RCS levels of the aircraft. The mostly consist in a redesigned muzzle (in the nose of the aircraft) as well as improved angle of attack sensors (located on the sides of the nose).

5 - All glass advanced cockpit system

Designed by Elbit Systems USA, the ACS includes mission processors, a low-profile head-up display, and a large 10X19 inch HD display with touch screen and picture-in-picture capabilities, optimizing tactical situation displays, processing advanced applications, and providing high-definition formats for advanced sensor video presentations.

Talking to Navy Recognition at the show, a Boeing representative explained that Block III Super Hornet would become a smart node on the network fuzing a lot of information and bringing more range and firepower.

From the photos above, it looks like Apple has taken over Super hornet project.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Apr 2017 18:48

Nah just some stuff Boeing had been working on. TTNT and SATCOM is a project they already implemented on the Growler so it was just a matter of porting it to the Super Hornet..the very modest RCS suppression were a part of the slightly larger RCS suppression effort they modeled for the Advanced Super Hornet, and Northrop Grumman designed and Boeing test flew the composite CFT's so that is relatively safe. IRST is already a part of Block II upgrade and is a program of record so nothing new there either. Elta has been pushing this particular cockpit configuration on any project wiling to take them up on the offer (Gripen already did) for years as well.

Boeing doesnt really need to offer a great deal to get extra orders with the US Navy. They are looking to move carriers from a 5 year build cycle down to 3.5 and are looking to buy their way to higher readiness so another 75-100 Super Hornets are guaranteed along with an increase of Growlers and faster ramp up of F-35 B and C production.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 11 Apr 2017 19:54

From the photos above, it looks like Apple has taken over Super hornet project.

expect the AMCA to follow similar lines.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Apr 2017 01:57

USAF, LM Demo Manned/Unmanned Teaming

Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) Skunk Works®, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School and Calspan Corporation successfully demonstrated manned/unmanned teaming to improve combat efficiency and effectiveness for the warfighter.

"This demonstration is an important milestone in AFRL's maturation of technologies needed to integrate manned and unmanned aircraft in a strike package," said Capt. Andrew Petry , AFRL autonomous flight operations engineer. "We've not only shown how an Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle can perform its mission when things go as planned, but also how it will react and adapt to unforeseen obstacles along the way."

During the flight demonstration, an experimental F-16 aircraft acted as a surrogate Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) autonomously reacting to a dynamic threat environment during an air-to-ground strike mission. The demonstration success included three key objectives:

The ability to dynamically react to a changing threat environment during an air-to-ground strike mission while automatically managing contingencies for capability failures, route deviations, and loss of communication

The two-week demonstration at the Test Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base, California , is the second in a series of manned/unmanned teaming exercises to prove enabling technologies.

"The Have Raider II demonstration team pushed the boundaries of autonomous technology and put a fully combat-capable F-16 in increasingly complex situations to test the system's ability to adapt to a rapidly changing operational environment," said Shawn Whitcomb , Lockheed Martin Skunk Works Loyal Wingman program manager. "This is a critical step to enabling future Loyal Wingman technology development and operational transition programs."

The first demonstration, Have Raider I, focused on advanced vehicle control. The experimental F-16 autonomously flew in formation with a lead aircraft and conducted a ground-attack mission, then automatically rejoined the lead aircraft after the mission was completed. These capabilities were linked with Lockheed Martin automatic collision avoidance systems to ensure safe, coordinated teaming between the F-16 and surrogate UCAV.

Effective manned/unmanned teaming reduces the high cognitive workload, allowing the warfighter to focus on creative and complex planning and management. Autonomous systems also have the ability to access hazardous mission environments, react more quickly, and provide persistent capabilities without fatigue.

"The OMS architecture used in Have Raider II made it possible to rapidly insert new software components into the system," said Michael Coy , AFRL computer engineer. "OMS will allow the Air Force maximum flexibility in the development and fielding of cutting edge autonomous capabilities."

Skunk Works' expertise in OMS, battle management and manned/unmanned teaming enable integrated and collaborative operations between manned and unmanned aircraft to project power in the face of an increased anti-access and area denial environment.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Apr 2017 07:34

An interesting QA session on the B-21 Raider.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Apr 2017 20:05

Maybe brar_w could keep us informed on the outcome of Red Flag.

F-35A to Face Eurofighter, Rafale in Combat Exercise for First Time
"U.S. Air Force Airmen will partner with the Royal Air Force and the French Air Force for a second trilateral exercise beginning April 12 through April 28, 2017, at Joint Base Langley-Eustis."

http://www.defencetalk.com/f-35a-to-fac ... ime-69724/

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Apr 2017 21:13

The Typhoons Raptors Rafales and F-35s will jointly face aggressors on the ground and in the air not each other. This isn't red-flag but a counter A2AD exercise that the three nations had started doing last year to develop interoperability against the higher end air and ground fight.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Apr 2017 21:24

Relative performance?

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 15 Apr 2017 21:33

http://www.defencenews.in/article/US-Ac ... %99-251565

The air force wants to begin testing a low-power laser on a Lockheed C-130 Hercules military transport aircraft as a proof of concept to show the effectiveness of airborne lasers.

In July 2016, the air force said a Lockheed AC-130W Stinger II gunship belonging to the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) will test its first solid state laser mounted aboard a combat aircraft.

AFSOC wants to either install a 60 kW or a 120 kW solid state laser to be used for knocking-out stationary vehicles, aircraft and fixed communications sites such as radio towers.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 16 Apr 2017 01:17

^^^
Sooner or later we they are going to use it zap people on the ground like ants under a lense, sensor to shooter loop closed at the speed of light. WIth Trump in charge the US mil will get a lot freer hand, the first use of MOAB was just the start.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Apr 2017 05:33

NASA’s Green Thumb for Green Aviation

The New Horizon Aviation Program’s charter is to strengthen the aviation industry over the next 20 years by introducing new technologies, as well as find ways to improve on efficiency and reduce pollution.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Apr 2017 05:38

Temperature-Sensitive Paint Enhances Cryogenic Wind Tunnel Testing

arun · Post by **arun** » 16 Apr 2017 09:01

X Posted from the “International Military Discussion” thread.

Uniformed Jihadi’s of the Punjabi dominated military of the Mohammadden Terrorism fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan should note the following in relation to their North Korean sourced ballistic missile inventory ……..

North Korea conducts failed missle launch today i.e. Sunday April 16, 2017.

The Test Missile “blew up almost immediately”. Missle type is not known:

North Korea missile test: Latest launch 'blew up almost immediately'

A North Korean missile fired from the east coast of the country Sunday “blew up almost immediately,” officials said.

The U.S. Pacific Command said the missile, which came near the city of Sinpo, “blew up almost immediately,” but the type of missile was still being assessed.

The failure came one day after Pyongyang celebrated one of the biggest propaganda events of the year – the 105th birthday of the late North Korea founder Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Un’s grandfather. ……………………..

This is not the only missile test failure Nort Korea has faced in the recent past. Missile test conducted just before US President Donald Trump's first meeting with Peoples Republic of China’s leader Xi Jinping i.e. Wednesday April 5, 2017, was also a failure. There however was some confusion on what missile was tested with initial claims of it being a KN-15 medium-range ballistic missile changing to it being an extended range Scud:

North Korea fires ballistic missile as Trump, Xi prepare to meet

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Apr 2017 15:51

F-35As Arrive At RAF Lakenheath For First Overseas Deployment ~ AvWeek

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Apr 2017 18:37

brar your analysis is very superficial in fact the examples which you give point towards the contrary. First things first YF-17 lost the lightweight fighter program to F-16 for the very reasons being talked about in thread on top i.e. F-16 was more agile and lighter ; later YF-17 did form the basis for F-18 again why ? Coming to the Mig-29K yes it has technically made that transition however IN knows it better than everyone that it has a very limited capability as a carrier borne fighter versus it's land based version , it has a very very poor bring back load capability. F-4 phantom was a USN project from the start so in case of the Phantom it is a reverse transition hence not a valid comparison.

The YF-17 was designed around the USAF's LWF requirements and that it performed second to the YF16 does not take away from that. The Navy took it because they wanted a similar twin engined aircraft.

First things first YF-17 lost the lightweight fighter program to F-16 for the very reasons being talked about in thread on top i.e. F-16 was more agile and lighter ; later YF-17 did form the basis for F-18 again why ?

On the LWF, Northrop had 2 designs that they had internally short-listed. One was the Cobra configuration (N-321-4) and another that was more similar in configuration to the Boeing and General Dynamics single engine designs (Northrop N-322). At the end they rolled the dice and took a gamble that the daytime, light weight dogfighter meme wasn't going to stick for too long with the USAF and NATO and that eventually a larger variant with more capability (mission systems), payload and range would form the bulk of the orders going forward. T

This then led them towards the 321-400 configuration which became the YF-17 and was entered into the competition. Out went the lightest at all cost doctrine and also out went the engine commonality with the F-15 that would have been the case had they pursued a single engine option they held on to right till the end. They lost because General Dynamics was more in tune with Boyd's golden single engine day time dogfighting requirements but as we all know that meme really didn't last and the "REAL" F-16's configuration was that of a multi role, all weather fighter that was produced in the maximum quantity (off of the factory or subsequent upgrades). So in a way Northrop was ahead of the curve but lost due to not removing anything and everything from their aircraft that did not serve the LWF mission.

Mission systems at the time were heavy, all weather, day-night multi-role aircraft cost a fair bit of weight and size, power and cooling etc. Both General Dynamics and Northrop had a Navy program for their LWF proposals..GD with Vought as the Naval variant partner and Northrop with McD. Navy did not have engine commonality issues and preferred a twin aircraft given the reliability issues with engines
at the time. The Navy wanted an F/A configuration from the start and Northrop's AOA led them to this for the USAF and NATO future needs anyways so they had a leg up.

So agile and lighter is not a unique Air-Force requirement. It was simply a flavor of the time and does not reflect poorly on Northrop's design or the fact that somehow their aircraft was compromised from an air-force fighter perspective. Had the USAF at the time valued growth in mission and capability they would have valued it more. None of its attributes made it poor as an air-force fighter.

Because the very attributes that made it unsuitable for LWF program of the USAF actually became favorable when it came to USN's needs it had 2 engines , larger and hence could form the basis for a carrier based fighter now it's a different matter that since YF-17 was originally conceived for LFW it gave birth to a compromise i.e. F-18 it wasn't until the arrival of SHs that gap left by tomcat could be filled (this is exactly what I am alluding to all such 'one size fits all' experiments yield half baked results).

That is a twisted logic. The YF-17 or F-18 is a lot different than the F-14 and they were never required to have similar and comparable performance. The Super Hornet is simply a larger F/A-18 as that mission has evolved and the USN after repeated failures to convince the US Congress for dedicated investment in advanced aircraft looked at an earlier Northrop and subsequent McD proposal to go for a larger Hornet. It too no way comes even remotely close to the F-14 mission or performance but it has merely replaced the Tomcat squadrons numerically as that mission area diluted post cold-war allowing for such a trade to be made.

The size and performance of an aircraft is mission and requirement dependent and the fact that the original F/A-18 is based off of the USAF LWF requirements doesn't make it a compromise..since this was the performance the USN was seeking as well. They had the heavier F-14's and multiple longer ranged attack aircaaft and required the F/A-18 to fill the swing role mission which it did very well for them. Later, as they consolidated types and retired the expensive Tomcat they were able to upsize to the Super Hornet as an attempt to close to the capability gap that would have emerged in the absence of both the N-ATF and A-12.

The MiG-29 is front and center now with the RuAF and IN and is based on a land based fighter. The F-4 served the USN, USAF and USMC well, and the Rafale is doing the same for the French.

There are very few Navies around the world that have enough of a volume requirement to demand a completely new clean sheet naval fighter that is not a derivative of something else yet they are more than capable of serving the mission requirements that demand an aircraft in the first place.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 17 Apr 2017 01:37

Simply spraying the surface of any object with optically reflective material will scatter any laser shot and greatly dissipate its energy.