International Aerospace Discussion

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Mar 2017 07:42

TSJones wrote:
NRao wrote:Interesting.

Tha Amazing Flying Machines of Chinese Farmers

I am always amazed at the creativity of people following their bliss,

it is wonderfully human and an essential part of the spirit of the soul.

What! Getting old and philosophical Jonesey?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Mar 2017 08:18

Nasa 'smallsats' open up new planetary frontier

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 23 Mar 2017 05:16

SaiK wrote:Guys, everything on this heaven and Earth is possible. But, we should not miss any step. we can't be in cloud 9 without being in 8. we need to see some level of parallelisms/concurrency in projects but we need clear-cut mandates. See, the khaans are enjoying their 50th JSF in the squad. Do we need to be at some level.. no?

The 50th JSF milestone was for Luke Air Force Base which received its 50th F-35 earlier this week. There are well over 200 F-35's delivered to date to US front line squadrons, training squadrons, international partners, FMS customers and the test team. Current delivery rate is 5 a month set to grow over the next 12 months.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Mar 2017 07:10

Singha 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.

No. I have to disagree.

Actually that is a good show that is being under rated. The guy does a "lazy climb" after takeoff and seems to go into a tailslide/near stall. That cannot happen without tremendous spare power. Good sharp turn in front of crowd after that . Then he gets his wheels down for a low and slow. I was fascinated by the 2-3 Hz waving of the elevators like Japanese fans as he stays stable - that appears to be the FBW deflecting those elevators to maintain stability. The climb and turn after that is spectacular - better than Gripen at Aero India 2017. One can't climb AND turn after low speed unless one has spare power like Su 30. This guy does it. Single engine.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Mar 2017 07:15

well I did mention it has a massive engine. best of breed in that. but the fuselage is like a beer barrel and wings like a F-solah. somethings gotta fall short if it tries to be a rafale or f22.

f22 fuselage is like katrina kaif and it has two huge engines, and huge wings and control surface. #like button

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 23 Mar 2017 07:23

Neither RIAT the dutch display or this one in Australia uses jets cleared fro the full flight envelope which is currently only cleared for the developmental test jets. By October or November full flight envelop as part of the block 3F will begin to be opened up for the fleet and RiAT and Farnborough next year should see its full envelope cleared routine.

So far you only have test footage to go by (full envelope high alpha regime at altitude) but the last I saw it at Andrews AFB air show (static) the AF Colonel told me to expect something very slimier to a Super Hornet display. once they have a full envelope routine..

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 23 Mar 2017 17:56

Another program supported by the F404/414 family.

Lockheed and NASA move toward design review for supersonic X-plane

Lockheed Martin should complete a preliminary design review of its quiet supersonic X-plane by June and will move onto a critical design review with NASA, a Skunk Works programme lead says.

NASA just released the initial call for proposals for the demonstrator phase for the quiet supersonic technology (QueSST) aircraft programme, says Charles Chase, who manages the revolutionary programmes group at Lockheed Skunk Works. NASA dodged President Donald Trump’s axe in the fiscal year 2018 budget, with just a slight decrease to its overall budget and specific assurances for future over-land commercial supersonic flights. The president’s proposed budget provides $624 million for NASA aeronautics research and development. Both houses of Congress have also thrown their support behind QueSST, Chase says.

Lockheed’s characterisation of the low-boom supersonic demonstrator appears lighter than NASA’s earlier descriptions, which sketch a 25,000lb prototype. Lockheed and NASA will demonstrate a 9% scale model plane, weighing about 20,000lb and 90-feet long, in a high speed wind tunnel at NASA’s Glenn Research Center. The X-plane, powered by an existing GE F414 engine, will fly at Mach 1.4 at 55,000 feet, Chase says.Lockheed will compete to build the demonstrator in the programme’s next phase.

“The idea there is to build a demonstrator we can fly around and gauge people’s annoyance by this new level of sonic boom,” he says.

Flight demonstrations will begin at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center near Edwards Air Force Base, California, but NASA is planning to test the X-plane in communities across the country to gain a representative set of data and gauge people’s reactions to the sound, he says.

Skunk Works’ design promises to reduce the size of the sonic boom by more than 1000 times, reducing the effect of a window rattling burst to something closer to a car door slamming a few houses down the block, Chase says. Conventional aircraft create a sharp change in pressure over the vehicle, but the X-plane’s long, skinny fuselage and canards control the waves across the aircraft.

“We have tailored the lift distribution and the pressure that goes over the airplane so that the shockwaves no longer coalesce into this strong wave,” he says. “I must say coming up with this design was not easy. It took thousands of optimization runs with tools that we worked with NASA to validate over the years. We have the tools now in place that enable us to develop these sort of radical configurations.”

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 24 Mar 2017 04:28

shiv wrote:
No. I have to disagree.

Actually that is a good show that is being under rated. The guy does a "lazy climb" after takeoff and seems to go into a tailslide/near stall. That cannot happen without tremendous spare power. Good sharp turn in front of crowd after that . Then he gets his wheels down for a low and slow. I was fascinated by the 2-3 Hz waving of the elevators like Japanese fans as he stays stable - that appears to be the FBW deflecting those elevators to maintain stability. The climb and turn after that is spectacular - better than Gripen at Aero India 2017. One can't climb AND turn after low speed unless one has spare power like Su 30. This guy does it. Single engine.

Singha wrote:well I did mention it has a massive engine. best of breed in that. but the fuselage is like a beer barrel and wings like a F-solah. somethings gotta fall short if it tries to be a rafale or f22.

f22 fuselage is like katrina kaif and it has two huge engines, and huge wings and control surface. #like button

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Mar 2017 11:18

Solo aerial display during LIMA 17 second day by SU-30SM (Russian Knights), Rafale (France Air Force), JAS-39C (RTAF) & SU-30MKM (RMAF).

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 25 Mar 2017 17:06

F-35 Training Update :

A solid training foundation is the bedrock for mission readiness in the 5th Generation of air power. As of March 2017, the F-35 Training System has trained more than 400 pilots and 4,000 maintainers from the U.S. services, international partners and foreign military sales customers.Currently, 364 students are in training – marking the largest group to date. In July 2015, the 200 pilot and 2,000 maintainer milestone was achieved, with an additional 100 pilots and 1,000 maintainers trained less than one year later.

“The incredible dedication of the training teams across the fleet enables the success of the F-35 training system,” said Mike Luntz, director of F-35 Training at Lockheed Martin. “This is all about readiness – the incredible partnership we have with our customers is second-to-none. We look forward to continuing working in lock-step with our military counterparts, providing premier technology and instruction to help deliver the next generation of F-35 qualified warfighters.”

The first two U.S. Marine Corps “CAT I” pilots – brand new pilots with no prior fighter experience – have completed F-35 training, and the first U.S. Air Force F-35 basic course pilots are expected to graduate in the fall.

“Contract instructor pilots provide all academic instruction and lead students in executing up to 18 full mission simulator events before live flying begins,” said Ed Waddy, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Sustainment Program Manager at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. “That demonstrates incredible confidence in our ability to prepare the next generation of F-35 pilots for training inside the aircraft with their military instructors.”

The Academic Training Center (ATC) at Eglin is the hub for F-35 maintenance training, delivering initial qualification and transition maintenance training to the F-35 enterprise. New technology has enabled more robust, immersive training to occur without tying up aircraft to do it. A variety of devices provide a truly realistic training experience, enabling students to execute tasks like maintenance on the landing gear, loading weapons on the aircraft and more.“We have a highly experienced ATC staff and the relationships we’ve built with our customer community are what’s propelling our continued success,” said Dave Bolton, Eglin’s Training Support Center Manager.

“The technology we’re using to train students really enables them to gain experience completing tasks just like they would on the aircraft. The Aircraft System Maintenance Trainer provides a realistic representation of accomplishing maintenance tasks on the jet. The younger generation of maintainers really like the computer-based, virtual reality-type training experience, and the more experienced transition students also warm to it very quickly.”Fifty F-35 training devices have been delivered to the field to date, with an additional 24 full mission simulators (FMS) to be delivered in 2017 alone. All required FMS’ for the U.S. services will have the 3i configuration by the end of the summer, mirroring the current F-35 configuration in the field and providing improved stability and training capability. Two 3i FMS were delivered to MCAS Iwakuni, Japan, in support of the U.S. Marine Corps F-35 deployment in January.

The major F-35 training hubs – Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and MCAS Beaufort, South Carolina – have trained nearly all F-35 qualified personnel including seven international partners. International training will expand significantly in the coming years, as training facilities in the U.K., Italy, Australia, Israel, Norway, South Korea and Japan begin to stand up in 2017 and 2018.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 26 Mar 2017 02:33

Air Force's Mysterious X-37B Space Plane Breaks Orbital Record

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Mar 2017 07:17

Check out the dates, program and work involved .................

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 26 Mar 2017 07:28

Incredible that the B-52 launched the X-15 in 1959, launched the X-51 in 2010 and will likely launch the HAWC in 2019.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 26 Mar 2017 16:33

x-15.......first American space fatality

Michael Adams

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J._Adams

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 26 Mar 2017 16:39

Scott Crossfield ,,,,,,,,America's first astronaut

http://www.thexhunters.com/xtras/crossfield.html

"I am an aeronautical engineer, an aerodynamicist and a designer," he told Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine in a 1988 interview. "My flying was only primarily because I felt that it was essential to designing and building better airplanes for pilots to fly."

Scott actually walked away from this explosion.......amazing

http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675 ... Joe-Walker

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 26 Mar 2017 19:14

USAF completes verification of new GPS anti-jam architecture for JASSM

The US Air Force (USAF) has finalised product upgrade verification (PUV) flight tests of GPS anti-jam software and hardware for the AGM-158A Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) and AGM-158B JASSM-Extended Range (ER) long-range, conventionally armed, precision stealth weapons in GPS-degraded and non-jammed environments.

The tests, designated PUV-16 and PUV-17, were conducted at the US Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexicoin mid- and late-2016, but only disclosed by JASSM manufacturer Lockheed Martin in March 2017.

JASSM weapons equipped with upgraded GPS anti-jam architecture were released respectively from B-2 Spirit and B-52 Stratofortress bomber aircraft at altitudes in excess of 24,000 ft, "and navigated to and destroyed their intended targets, completing all mission objectives", according to Lockheed Martin.

"Two flight tests were conducted in supporting this effort. PUV-16 took place in June 2016 and was launched from a B-2 Bomber. PUV-17 took place in November 2016 and was launched from a B-52 Bomber," a Lockheed Martin spokesperson told Jane's .

The spokesperson said the new GPS anti-jam architecture initiative - funded by the USAF and designed and implemented by Lockheed Martin - was initiated to address both technology enhancements and obsolescence issues. "The upgrade is for new missile production only, as performance of the GPS units already in inventory is equivalent to the new receiver, the spokesperson added.

Both the baseline JASSM and JASSM-ER missiles will be upgraded with the new GPS receivers in Lot 14 production (with deliveries beginning in mid-2018). The GPS receiver is designed to be form, fit, and function equivalent to the current GPS receiver, the spokesperson said.Designed to engage high-value, well-protected, fixed and re-locatable targets at stand-off range, JASSM variants are currently in the air-to-surface weapon inventories of the air forces of Australia, Finland, Poland and the United States.

JASSM is 4.267 m in length, 550 mm in width, weighs 1,020.58 kg including a 453.6 kg high-explosive penetration, blast fragmentation warhead, and has a given range of >200 n miles (>370.4 km).

JASSM-ER has a slightly heavier launch weight - (estimated) 1,200 kg versus 1,021 kg for JASSM - is equipped with the same 1,000 lb warhead and has a given range of >500 n miles. Both variants are equipped with a GPS/INS navigation and imaging infrared terminal guidance package.

The Lockheed Martin spokesperson said that the JASSM programme office is currently pursuing a block upgrade programme with the USAF "to improve in the areas of range, GPS-denied navigation, survivability and alternate payloads".

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Mar 2017 19:40

US Air Force considers retiring F-15

..................... "F-16s could replace them"

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 26 Mar 2017 19:54

NRao wrote:US Air Force considers retiring F-15

..................... "F-16s could replace them"

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&start=640#p2133596

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2017 07:48

U.S. stealth fighters carry out precision bombing drill in Korea

SEOUL, March 25 (Yonhap) -- Several F-35B stealth fighter jets conducted bombing practice on the Korean Peninsula earlier this week in support of joint training between South Korean and U.S. marines, military authorities and sources said Saturday.

The U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) F-35 Lightning II aircraft are known to have returned to Japan after the Korea Marine Exercise Program (KMEP) as part of the allies' annual joint combined defense drills.

The U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) confirmed the sortie of the aircraft here, saying it reflects Washington's commitment to a robust alliance with Seoul.

"The deployment of the most advanced aircraft the USMC has in their inventory to Korea is yet another example of how dedicated the United States is to supporting the ROK-U.S. Alliance," Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, who commands 28,000 American troops here, said in a statement. The ROK is the acronym for South Korea's official name, the Republic of Korea.

He added, "The training within the KMEP program helps ensure our readiness and is critical for our Alliance as we maintain security and stability on the Korean Peninsula."The USFK did not provide details including the exact date of the F-35's flight over Korea and the number of deployed jets.

The KMEP was held from Monday through Thursday. A defense source said six to eight F-35s participated in the training. The jets conducted a simulation-based precision bombing drill in the Pilsung Shooting Range in the eastern province of Gangwon, added the source.

The USFK said, meanwhile, in addition to its short takeoff and vertical landing capability, the F-35B's unique combination of stealth, cutting-edge radar, sensor technology, and electronic warfare systems bring all of the access and lethality capabilities of a fifth-generation fighter.

The aircraft's training in South Korea was meant to "enhance and improve the interoperability of ROK and the U.S. Marine Corps at the tactical level to build combined warfighting capabilities," the USFK said.

The latest bombing drill came amid the region's rising tension over North Korea's continued provocations. Successive media reports say another nuclear weapons test appears to be imminent in the North.

The U.S. deployed 10 F-35Bs to its Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan's Yamaguchi Prefecture in January, with six more scheduled to be positioned there within this year.

U.S. soldiers and equipment at the base will be among the first to be deployed to Korea in case of a contingency on the peninsula.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Mar 2017 11:09

brar_w wrote:
NRao wrote:US Air Force considers retiring F-15

..................... "F-16s could replace them"
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&start=640#p2133596

Fascinating development. Great data points. Thanks.

Any news on the companion topic of 6th gen engines? Bet something is cooking there too.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2017 18:26

NRao wrote:
brar_w wrote:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7088&start=640#p2133596
Fascinating development. Great data points. Thanks.

Any news on the companion topic of 6th gen engines? Bet something is cooking there too.

Next Generation propulsion, a precursor to any 6th (5+) generation fighter is by far the most mature effort in the broader Next Generation Air Dominance portfolio that is loosely managed by DARLA, AFRL, and ONR. The investment stream goes back nearly a decade if not more and prototype engine contracts were awarded last year.

While the additional $100 Million was always on the cards as part of a supplemental (supplemental requests are the norm these days given the politics in the US) this isn't exactly a Trump/Mattis increase in spending but it does exclusively pays for work outside of propulsion. Broader areas of investment have earlier been described as Low Observability, Aeronautics, Electronic Warfare, Power Generation and thermal management and weapons etc. Obama had budgeted roughly $1 Billion dollars in the FY16 through FY20 Future Year Defense Program (FYDP) to support these areas. This on top of the $2 Billion and change invested on the AETP for adaptive engines that itself fed off off a signficant investment in the AETD, and ADVENT programs that preceded it.

The way Obama folks had structured their investment (DARPA Classified budget with line items that grew 50+% yoy over the FYDP) looked a lot like an X plane or technology demonstrator program was in the works. These sort of pre program material decision R&D programs are genreally matched by significant industry investment. As a reference each of the two finalists on the ATF spent b/w $800 Million to $ 1 Billion of company money to get to the down-select. This was in the 80s mostly.

GE, Pratt & Whitney Win Contracts for Next-Generation Engine

In dual contract announcements on June 30, the Department of Defense (DOD) said GE Aviation was awarded $919.5 million and Pratt & Whitney $873 million to design, build and test “multiple complete, flight-weight centerline, 45,000-pounds thrust turbofan adaptive engines.” The contracts, overseen by the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, call for completing work by Sept. 30, 2021. When including a priced option, both contracts exceed $1 billion.

The thrust class being chosen is no coincidence. Broader F-35 possible application aside, it suggests that the PCA could well require up to 30% more thrust than the F-22A (ATF) giving some indication of its likely size.

Funding Next-Gen Air Dominance

The Air Force is adding $100 million to its Penetrating Counter-Air or Next-Generation Air Dominance spending request for 2017, but the added funds don’t signal a change in the program, the service’s top uniformed acquisition official said Wednesday. Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch said the plus-up will be divided among a number of science and technology efforts “across the spectrum” of things that have to do with air dominance, such as mission systems, electronic warfare, and weapons. The money is “an investment on multiple fronts,” he said, to try to multiply the choices available to the Air Force and help it define what the program will be all about. Some of those efforts are duplicative, Bunch said, so “if they don’t pan out, we can go to the alternative.” The Air Force wants to have a new PCA aircraft available starting in about 2030. If the money isn’t approved, USAF will try again, but it will mean “a year’s delay,” Bunch said.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2017 19:54

Pratyush wrote:It Philip so he gets a free pass. Never mind that radars loosing track and the the harrier if it's radar is on then the enemy not seeing it self getting locked up by harrier.

It pure bs based on someone's over active imagination.

I am sure that we are about to be regaled with the mirage 3 vs harrier. Without an understanding of why the harrier succeeded in that specific conflict.

It really depends upon the time frame and capability and reliability of the adversary aircraft. Its going to be considerably harder to pull something like that off against a modern opponent with very capable RF and IR sensors coupled with a very high off-boresight lock on after launch missile and a pilot properly trained to use it. Completely surrendering any and all kinematic advantage to get behind an opponent does not have the same type of pay-off as it once did given that close in with the current and future generation of IR sensors, AESA radars and Helmet mounted displays the opponent has a far better grasp of his/her surroundings and can put weapons on you from a significantly larger envelope.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Mar 2017 20:22

NRao wrote: Any news on the companion topic of 6th gen engines? Bet something is cooking there too.

brar_w has already posted stuff on this in his post above and also previously in other threads. Just to add to his post above, USN has started a program called VCAT - Variable Cycle Advanced Technology. This one is looking at the variable cycle for the hot section. This is precursor to the 6.5 gen engine tech loosely speaking i.e. upgrade to the 6th Gen engine. Because it will take a while for them to get it up to TRL6/7 and thus it should be coming up later than the existing Variable cycle/Adaptive Cycle technology for cold section based engines.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2017 20:36

VCAT is part of the same broader research portfolio (DOD) just funded through a different directorate. You have had ADVENT, AETD, ADAPT, AETP and VCAT among others (there are still more smaller programs). The alphabet soup mix can be quite confusing at times. AETD and AETP are important landmarks if one were purely following this from a TRL perspective. AETD was roughly TRL5 and AETP will get it to TRL6 by 2021 since it has flight testing option built into the full up awards. In fact, AETP is simply a TRL-5 to 6 bump for the technology developed during the AETD phase. It costs a lot of money up front to move technology through the maturity hoops but I guess it does pay off in the end.

The Air Force’s Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP) is building on several years of
rigorous adaptive engine technology maturation, including significant industry cost share, and is an
excellent example of prototyping to reduce risk prior to Engineering and Manufacturing
Development (EMD). Following the highly successful S&T efforts in the Adaptive Versatile Engine
Technology (ADVENT) and Adaptive Engine Technology Demonstration (AETD) programs, the
AETP represents a $2 billion next generation jet engine demonstration and validation program that
will advance designs through extensive ground testing for future integration and flight test

Guy Norris over at Aviation Week put together a detailed summary last year of USAF work (VCAT is a Navy program) - http://aviationweek.com/defense/usaf-de ... earch-plan

I don't expect the US Navy to be very bullish on adaptive engines. They would probably play it safe and let their sister service carry the burden of proving them out.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Mar 2017 21:02

brar_w wrote:VCAT is part of the same broader research portfolio (DOD) just funded through a different directorate. You have had ADVENT, AETD, ADAPT, AETP and VCAT among others (there are still more smaller programs). The alphabet soup mix can be quite confusing at times. AETD and AETP are important landmarks if one were purely following this from a TRL perspective. AETD was roughly TRL5 and AETP will get it to TRL6 by 2021 since it has flight testing option built into the full up awards.

Ohh. You are right. I did sit down and mapped all these programs and noted down in a notebook, but it got mixed up in my head again. Its the ADAPT (I think) I was talking about not VCAT. But I have always thought that they will first build an engine using the variable cycle tech developed so far for the LP system, while the technology for the HP system is being worked out. It will be added later, like an upgrade. With the LP adaptive cycle, they have got almost everything to cater for the key 6th Gen features.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 27 Mar 2017 21:14

That appears to be the case (from the article) -

Advent, and subsequent efforts such as the Adaptive Engine Technology Development (AETD) and follow-on transition program are focused primarily on developing this multirole capability by varying the low-pressure spool of the engine using an adaptive fan. ADAPT, on the other hand, will focus on developing adaptive features in the high-pressure spool, as well as a means of integrating the core within the overall variable cycle operation of the engine.
“ADAPT is another spiral back into the science and technology environment,” says AFRL ADAPT program manager Jason Parson. “We are going back to where Advent was, but with additional technologies and, in particular, we are going to bring adaptive features back into the core—the compressor, combustor and high-pressure turbine. We already have adaptive features in the low spool, but we want to bring those features into the core,” he adds.

In addition, ADAPT provides a pathway into a potential production adaptive engine for newer technology that was not available a few years ago. “Some of these just were not at the right maturity level to bring into AETD. There were a lot of higher-temperature and higher-strength materials that needed a few more years of maturing in the lab before they were ready to progress to a TRL [technology readiness level] 6 demonstration,” says Parson, referring to the point at which a technology is considered ready for prototype demonstration prior to full-scale development. “We have had that opportunity, and now we are going to bring those back in, so that we continue to mature technology and make it available for the next generation of engines.”

ADAPT is targeted specifically at additional fuel burn reductions on the order of 5% in cruise mode, as well as higher thrust capability for supersonic operation. It will also include technologies for ensuring support of high-power systems such as directed-energy and other weapon systems. “The ultimate goal is that you would end up with adaptive features throughout the engine that would be usable depending on the needs of whatever system the Air Force decides is appropriate,” says Parson.

The program will be challenged by the higher temperatures and pressures in the core. “There is a level of difficulty that is associated with variable features in the core, although it is not the first time we have looked at this,” says Parsons, referring obliquely to earlier variable-cycle engines such as the Pratt & Whitney J58 turbo-ramjet used in the Lockheed A-12/SR-71. “But one of the things we are benefiting from is that Advent and AETD allowed us to learn how to use the variable features in an architecture. Instead of a one-off variable feature that is constrained by the rest of the engine, we are learning to put them together smartly. That learning gives us confidence we can take that and put the same thing into the core now that we better understand how we [can] control these features.”...

General Electric and Pratt & Whitney are among the companies working on the early stages of ADAPT. Pratt expects to leverage its ongoing studies with the U.S. Navy on the Variable Cycle Advanced Technology (VCAT) program, which is designed to identify and mature adaptive-cycle turbine propulsion technology for future carrier-based tactical, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems. The VCAT program, which is aligned with AFRL’s variable-cycle work, is a partnership effort between the Office of Naval Research and the Navy’s Energy Task Force and is focused on turbine-based adaptive cycle technology.

“VCAT is working on component technologies that are a strong part of adaptive engines, so the opportunity to work that across into ADAPT is something we would like to do,” says Jimmy Kenyon, senior director of Advanced Programs and Technology at Pratt & Whitney. “We are on contract to the Air Force for some early studies and design work, but we are also in discussion with the Air Force as they plan the next phase of their science and technology enterprise. [We want] to see what the right next step is in terms of the next technology demonstrator. What role does Adapt play in that, and what should that demonstrator look like?”

I don't think these are 6 and 6+ generation engine efforts but different technology development and maturation paths that will feed into the same EMD program post 2021.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 28 Mar 2017 02:30

russian space modue for ISS further delayed and,,,,,

labor unrest shuts down space port in French Guiana.

http://spacenews.com/long-delayed-russi ... -problems/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2017 19:21

Myanmar MiG-29 Upgrade Revealed: Will Malaysia Follow?
by Vladimir Karnozov
- March 28, 2017, 9:17 AM

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... sia-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.”

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2017 19:30

Even Burmese Airforce has decent fleet size and strength for its size and economy

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Mar 2017 23:00

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 30 Mar 2017 07:27

dead stick landings are such joy.

I wonder why the pilot was breathing so hard?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Mar 2017 12:25

It looks like it isn't just the NLCA which has landing gear problems!
http://www.businessinsider.in/how-the-u ... 875527.cms

How the US Navy plans to fix the F-35's most troubling problem
ALEX LOCKIE0MAR 28, 2017, 06.30 PM

In January, a report from Inside Defense broke the news that the US Navy's F-35 variant, the most expensive in the Joint Strike Fighter family, had an issue with the nose gear that made takeoffs untenably rough, and the aircraft unsuited for carrier launches.

The Navy's F-35C has had a history of problems with its development, as it attempts to master the tricky art of catapult launches from aircraft carriers, but the nose gear issue could set back the F-35C into the 2020s, if an innovative solution is not found quickly.

Business Insider then uncovered footage that appears to show the problem:

Essentially, the takeoff in the F-35C is too rough, jostling the pilots to where they can't read flight-critical data on their $400,000 helmet-mounted display.

"This is a very stiff airplane, even though the oscillations about the same magnitude as you would see in a Super Hornet, it beats the pilot up pretty good," US Air Force Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan told reporters at the McAleese/Credit Suisse defense conference, as US Naval Institute News notes .

F-35C pilots are "hurting after doing three or four of these [launches] and in some instances even banging his half-a-million dollar helmet on the canopy. That's not good for the canopy or the helmet. So we knew we had an issue there," said Bogdan.

Luckily, testing at a land-based US Navy catapult system showed that instead of a costly and lengthy redesign of the F-35C's entire nose section, some smaller adjustments may suffice.

Jeff Babione, general manager of Lockheed Martin's F-35 program, echoed that sentiment at the company's Washington, D.C. area office, telling reporters they had worked on a few simple changes that seemed to yield results. Babione said Lockheed Martin changed the way the pilot straps in, their head and arm position, and reduced the "holdback" - or stress on the plane - in the moments before launch.

"The initial indication is some of those techniques improved" the F-35C's launches, said Babione, who conceded that the real testing would be done by the Navy aboard carriers " to see whether or not those changes were successful."

The make-or-break tests of the launch will take place at sea later this year.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 30 Mar 2017 14:58

Philip wrote:It looks like it isn't just the NLCA which has landing gear problems!
http://www.businessinsider.in/how-the-u ... 875527.cms

How the US Navy plans to fix the F-35's most troubling problem
ALEX LOCKIE0MAR 28, 2017, 06.30 PM

In January, a report from Inside Defense broke the news that the US Navy's F-35 variant, the most expensive in the Joint Strike Fighter family, had an issue with the nose gear that made takeoffs untenably rough, and the aircraft unsuited for carrier launches.

The Navy's F-35C has had a history of problems with its development, as it attempts to master the tricky art of catapult launches from aircraft carriers, but the nose gear issue could set back the F-35C into the 2020s, if an innovative solution is not found quickly.

Business Insider then uncovered footage that appears to show the problem:

Essentially, the takeoff in the F-35C is too rough, jostling the pilots to where they can't read flight-critical data on their $400,000 helmet-mounted display.

"This is a very stiff airplane, even though the oscillations about the same magnitude as you would see in a Super Hornet, it beats the pilot up pretty good," US Air Force Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan told reporters at the McAleese/Credit Suisse defense conference, as US Naval Institute News notes .

F-35C pilots are "hurting after doing three or four of these [launches] and in some instances even banging his half-a-million dollar helmet on the canopy. That's not good for the canopy or the helmet. So we knew we had an issue there," said Bogdan.

Luckily, testing at a land-based US Navy catapult system showed that instead of a costly and lengthy redesign of the F-35C's entire nose section, some smaller adjustments may suffice.

Jeff Babione, general manager of Lockheed Martin's F-35 program, echoed that sentiment at the company's Washington, D.C. area office, telling reporters they had worked on a few simple changes that seemed to yield results. Babione said Lockheed Martin changed the way the pilot straps in, their head and arm position, and reduced the "holdback" - or stress on the plane - in the moments before launch.

"The initial indication is some of those techniques improved" the F-35C's launches, said Babione, who conceded that the real testing would be done by the Navy aboard carriers " to see whether or not those changes were successful."

The make-or-break tests of the launch will take place at sea later this year.

This is LM's first Naval Jet isn't it.? Whose doing the LG design..?? LM itself or some Tier-1 supplier.?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 30 Mar 2017 15:16

As I have been posting (starting quite a few pages back) this was discovered some time ago and impacts launches with light to moderate payloads. It was part of the test discovery during the second carrier borne testing (DT2) and the program office quickly set up a red team to come up with potential fixes to fix this discovery within the Systems design and development phase itself.

Contrary to what has been reported by some reporting on the red team in the media, the team although kept the gear redesign option open but ruled it out in its analysis choosing instead to implement a series of fixes both in the short and medium term that would help alleviate the issue. Lockheed has implemented what it believes would work and they have begun testing it on dirt. The first at sea trials with the fixes would be late summer or early fall of this year.

As the Navy revealed at WEST 2017, similar issues also came up during the Hornet/Super Hornet developmental testing.

Here are two articles that go into details on the issue. I've posted both before but posting snippets again for clarity -

Pentagon establishes 'red team' to investigate F-35C nose gear issues, recommends possible redesign

The Pentagon established a "red team" last September to investigate issues with the F-35C's nose gear and the team is recommending that if initial steps to fix the problem fail, the nose gear should be redesigned, Inside Defense has learned.

Last August, Navy fleet aviators from Strike Squadron-101 (VFA-101) were able to evaluate the F-35C catapult shot for the first time during at-sea testing.

"During a catapult launch the nose landing gear strut is compressed as the catapult pulls on the nose landing gear, with the hold back bar restraining the aircraft from forward movement due to engine thrust," according to a Dec. 28 Navy information paper viewed by Inside Defense. "Upon release of the hold back bar, the nose landing gear strut unloads and vertically oscillates as the aircraft accelerates towards take-off."

The motion is not only uncomfortable but the Helmet-Mounted Display and oxygen mask push back and up and down against the pilot's jaw. The jostling in the cockpit results in unreadable HMD during and immediately after launch, the paper reads.

"The Red Team believes multiple factors are contributing to the problem, including the pilot's seat restraint and hand-hold (grab bar) locations, the mass and center-of-gravity of the F-35 helmet and display unit, the physical characteristics of the nose landing gear strut (load vs. stroke, damping), and the length and release load of the repeatable-release hold-back bar (RRHB)," according to the paper.

Red team recommendations

The red team, composed of government and industry personnel, recommends a series of short-term, medium-term and long-term actions for the F-35C.

The short-term actions are slated to begin in early 2017 and will take about two to six months to complete, according to the paper. The actions include implementing improved and standardized restraint procedures for pilots and flight testing later this month on the effects of a reduced RRHB release load. VFA-101 will evaluate both the restraint procedures and a reduced RRHB load during its next carrier qualification period in the spring, the paper reads.

In late 2017, medium-term actions ranging from six to 12 months to complete will begin. These include HMD symbology, nose landing gear modifications and pilot motion modeling. Regarding symbology, "Options are being considered that would simplify the information displayed to the pilot during and immediately after catapult launch, to make it easier for the pilot to interpret flight-critical data," the paper notes. One of the problems here is the contractor doesn't think there is enough time in the system design and development phase to demonstrate this in simulation, according to the paper....

Bogdan: Pentagon is testing F-35C nose gear fix and hopes to have results by March

The Pentagon is testing a fix to the F-35C's nose gear at the Naval Air Warfare Center in Lakehurst, NJ, and hopes to have results in March, according to the F-35 program executive officer.

Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, told reporters Feb. 16 after a House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee hearing that the fix the government is testing revolves around the aircraft's "pull back mechanism."

"We pull back really hard and that compresses the [landing gear] strut and causes oscillations" on the F-35C carrier variant when it takes off an aircraft carrier, Bogdan said.

During testing at Lakehurst, the team is determining whether some of the tension can be reduced and still have enough energy for the jet to takeoff from the flight deck, he said.

"They're doing multiple tests out there to figure what the range of the pullback capability is and [with] that we're going to figure out if that can reduce the oscillations," Bogdan said.

The fix will most likely not be tested at sea until an operational test period this summer, he added.

The F-35C is the least mature of the three variants and has the most amount of testing still left -It will be the last to finish developmental testing. The first operational carrier deployment (IOC configuration) is in the summer of 2020.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 31 Mar 2017 15:57

Success for SpaceX 're-usable rocket'

A Nandy · Post by **A Nandy** » 01 Apr 2017 01:43

Interesting information on SpaceX Reusability roadmap in this thread:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index. ... =42544.320

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Apr 2017 02:45

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 01 Apr 2017 11:03

Egyptian Mig-29M2

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 02 Apr 2017 16:18

Boeing Seeks to Corner Military Spy Aircraft Market

In the military aviation market, a single win can shake up the landscape. And this axiom is especially relevant in the upcoming selection of a new spy aircraft for the U.S. Air Force.

This fall the Air Force is expected to decide what airplane will serve as its next generation aerial surveillance platform known as JSTARS, or joint surveillance target attack radar system.

The Boeing Co. is pitching a militarized 737 airliner for the so-called JSTARS recapitalization program that is estimated at 17 aircraft. Although a relatively small order compared to commercial buys, the work is valued at around $6 billion. And Boeing sees it as only the first step in its pursuit of a much larger military airborne command-and-control market of up to 100 aircraft.

“The JSTARS decision sets a precedent,” says Fred Smith, director of global sales and marketing for Boeing’s commercial derivatives, which are airliners that are customized for military use. Smith, a former Navy P-3 pilot, says Boeing hopes to parlay its success with the U.S. Navy’s P-8 — a militarized 737 used for maritime surveillance — into the Air Force market.

The importance of the JSTARS decision cannot be underestimated, Smith says in an interview.

Boeing will pit the 737 against competitors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman whose proposed JSTARS concepts are based on business jets. Lockheed has teamed with Bombardier and Northrop has partnered with Gulfstream.

It is an interesting twist in this competition that although Boeing has the bigger aircraft, it sees itself as the underdog. The issue of whether size matters, in this case, could play in favor of the smaller business jets as there is a perception among military buyers that they may not be able to afford a larger airplane, and that business jets can do the job at less cost.

The current JSTARS platform is a Boeing 707, a line that ceased production in 1979. Boeing officials worry that Air Force leaders are being seduced by the aura and glamour of business jets.

“I believe there’s a predisposition for people to think that small luxury business jets can do everything,” Smith says. And he insists that a deeper look into the history of specialized military aircraft and the cost of operating different size platforms might change minds in favor of the larger 737.

“What is the right size aircraft?” is a central question not only in the JSTARS program but in upcoming decisions on how to replace other 50-year-old fleets in the Air Force inventory.

In addition to JSTARS, the Air Force eventually will have to replace the E-3 AWACS reconnaissance plane, also a 707 derivative that is about 35 years old. Smaller fleets that have C-135 base airframes and are more than 50 years old include the RC-135 Rivet Joint, Combat Sent and Cobra Ball, the OC-135 Open Skies and the WC-1135 Constant Phoenix. Separately, the Air Force is looking to modernize its fleet of C-130 based special mission airplanes.

Altogether this could add up to 100 airframes, Smith says.

In his talks with customers, Smith tries to make the case that the 737 is big, but not huge. It is approximately 14 feet longer than a business jet, and the most dramatic difference is in the diameter, with a 183 percent larger internal volume. This should be seen as a benefit, says Smith, because it gives the military ample room to add new equipment as missions evolve, and transport military crews that need to deploy with bulky equipment.

Many foreign militaries operate command-and-control business jets, and American officials have been impressed by the amount of electronics can be packed into them. There is a “smaller is cheaper” mantra that plays in favor of business jets, so it will be up to Boeing to persuade buyers that the Air Force may want to have additional room in the future to carry more gear and crews.

For the most part, command-and-control surveillance military airplanes have to provide enough space and weight tolerance for the electronics, as well as power and cooling. Smith says buyers tend to underestimate future demands. The P-8, for instance, was designed with a 30 percent extra allowance, “and they are already using it.”

By the same token, 737s cannot fly at altitudes as high as business jets, which might expose them to more enemy fire. That would require the military to equip the airplane with more defensive countermeasures.

Australia went for the larger choice when it bought the 737-based Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft. Including the P-8, the C-40 and Wedgetail, Boeing has sold 180 commercial derivatives of the 737 to the United States and foreign governments. When counting its entire array of airliners, it has delivered over 1,200 commercial derivatives in 21 countries.

Air Force officials have said the competition is wide open and it could be anyone’s game. One major question is how much cost will be a factor in the selection. The 737 is almost twice as expensive upfront as a business jet, but Smith has estimated the long-term operating and maintenance costs of the 737 are about half that of its competitors, in large part because of the company’s vast network of suppliers and service centers.

The Pentagon has a history of selecting platforms that cost less upfront, as the long-term expenses are viewed as someone else’s problem down the pike. “Everyone cares about price tag upfront,” Smith says. But if the government decides to take all costs into account, he says, that could play to Boeing’s advantage.

As it waits for a JSTARS decision, Boeing intends to keep the Wedgetail in the competition for the modernization of the Air Force’s Compass Call electronic warfare aircraft, which is based on an EC-130H turboprop transport.

In a surprising arrangement, the Air Force made L-3 the “systems integrator” and the company will be in charge of running a competition for the airframe. “That is unusual for a program of this magnitude that could approach a billion dollars,” Smith says. Air Force officials initially had favored a business jet for the Compass Call airframe but later decided to turn over the selection process to L-3. “We look forward to competing,” Smith says.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Apr 2017 06:58

JayS wrote:
Ohh. You are right. I did sit down and mapped all these programs and noted down in a notebook, but it got mixed up in my head again. Its the ADAPT (I think) I was talking about not VCAT. But I have always thought that they will first build an engine using the variable cycle tech developed so far for the LP system, while the technology for the HP system is being worked out. It will be added later, like an upgrade. With the LP adaptive cycle, they have got almost everything to cater for the key 6th Gen features.

Here is a pre solicitation for the follow on to the AETP (which runs through 2020-2021) so it covers the next roughly 5 years or so of research and development leading to high TRL maturity beyond for capability beyond the scope of AETP..

Advanced Turbine Technologies for Affordable Mission-Capability (ATTAM)

The Air Force Research Laboratory, Aerospace Systems Directorate (AFRL/RQ), Wright Research Site Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio will be conducting a Pre-Solicitation Meeting for the “Advanced Turbine Technologies for Affordable Mission-Capability” (ATTAM) I procurement. This procurement is focused on developing increases in fuel efficiency, propulsive capability (or thrust to weight), and power and thermal management goals. This announcement does not request any proposals at this time.

Background: The ATTAM Phase I Program is a joint DoD/NASA/DOE/FAA/Industry effort to develop revolutionary and innovative technologies by the 2026 timeframe that will provide an increase in fuel efficiency, propulsive capability and increase power and thermal management goals. To achieve this goal, AFRL/RQ has committed resources to the development of advanced components and the assessment and verification of these components in TRL 6 demonstrator engines.
The overall goals of the ATTAM Phase I program are to (each goal depends on engine class):
 Increase fuel efficiency from 10%-30%
 Increase power and thermal management goals by 2x to 20x
 Increase propulsive capability by 10%-25%

Major U.S. turbine engine and weapon system contractors have planned their future turbo- propulsion research and development consistent with the goals of the ATTAM I Program. Prospective offerors shall have a DoD-coordinated Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engine (VAATE) Advanced Turbo Propulsion Plan (ATPP) or shall have a documented working relationship with a company with a DoD-coordinated VAATE ATPP.

The purpose of the Pre-Solicitation Meeting is to familiarize potential offerors with the “ATTAM I” program and the associated research areas that support Air Force capability needs. A Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) (FA8650-17-S-2007) will most likely be released in the fall of 2017. This effort will focus on developing technologies to meet the ATTAM I goals by 2026 and identifying future capabilities and associated technologies that will be needed for future Air Force systems. The overall effort will focus on 4 Technical Grand Challenge areas that support the OSD Air Platform Capabilities: Innovative Architectures and Technologies; Integrated Propulsion, Power and Thermal Management Technologies; Sustainment and Low Cost Technologies; and Small and Medium Scale Propulsion Technologies.