International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ArjunPandit » 07 Nov 2018 22:46

OT and in a lighter vein, but for long I have wondered why does canada need to have such potent AF. Assuming US is not going to attack. Russia, to take what? Even if it does, what could Canada anyways do?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Nov 2018 01:46

Canada is a US partner in NORAD and as such shares the responsibility for Air Surveillance (maintained through the North Warning System), and sovereignty to which it contributes with its fixed winged fighter fleet. Canada is also a member of NATO, and as long as it remains so, it will be invested in the collective capability of the alliance.

Because they have delayed their fighter modernization, they'll have to concurrently fund both CF-18 recap and the NWS recapitalization efforts and given that Lockheed has the latter market fairly tightly locked down it seems that the company will probably use that as a means to bundle up the two as an offering via offsets.

ArjunPandit wrote:Even if it does, what could Canada anyways do?


Invoke Article 5 of NATO. Given the capabilities of the members and the alliance, that is a pretty strong deterrent to which Canada also contributes.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 08 Nov 2018 07:41

Taiwan Receives First F-16V Upgrade


The Taiwanese Air Force, or the Republic of China Air Force (ROCAF), has taken delivery of its first upgraded Lockheed Martin F-16V Fighting Falcon. The first aircraft, serial 6626, was spotted landing at Chiayi airbase on October 19. The aircraft sports a new coat of paint, but no squadron markings were worn on the tail.

The first four F-16A/B Block 20s began refurbishment at the state-owned Aerospace Industrial Development Corporation (AIDC) facility in Taichung in January 2017, and 6626 entered flight test in August this year, flown by Lockheed Martin test pilots.

Under Project Rising Phoenix the island state is upgrading 144 F-16A/Bs with the Northrop Grumman AN/APG-83 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, new mission computer, embedded inertial navigation system/global positioning system, and the Terma ALQ-213(V) electronic warfare management units. The upgraded jets will also be certified for the AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missile, AGM-154 joint standoff weapons, and the AGM-88B anti-radiation missile.

Modifications will proceed at a rate of 20 to 23 aircraft annually and the program is expected to be completed by no later than 2023. The government also increased the budget for the program from NT$129.6 billion ($4.2 billion) to NT$140.2 billion ($4.5 billion) in September, factoring in the acquisition of new missiles and a ground proximity warning system.

The Republic of Singapore Air Force has also contracted Lockheed Martin to upgrade three squadrons of F-16C/D/D+ Block 52 to F-16V standards. The Mid Life Upgrade (MLU) program began in 2016, and it is likely that the first platform will be rolled out soon with testing and certification of the prototype aircraft averaging around two years.

Greece is the latest air arm to commence its own F-16 MLU program, which began in mid-September. The Hellenic Air Force will upgrade 85 F-16 C/D Block 52+s for around €1.1 billion ($1.33 billion) and has struck a deal with the United States to pay €110 million annually over a decade to assist the debt-ridden country.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2329
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ArjunPandit » 08 Nov 2018 09:01

brar_w wrote:
Invoke Article 5 of NATO. Given the capabilities of the members and the alliance, that is a pretty strong deterrent to which Canada also contributes.

Thanks brar while the post was in jest, your answer still made me learn about NORAD part. I was aware of NATO but not NORAD

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 16 Nov 2018 18:03

Boeing Begins Buildup Of Phantom Express Spaceplane


Image

Buildup of the first major components for Boeing’s Phantom Express reusable launch vehicle is underway at the company’s facilities in Washington, with assembly of the complete airframe on course to begin by mid-2019.

Developed for DARPA’s XSP (Experimental Spaceplane) program, the vertical-launch and horizontal-landing Phantom Express is designed to demonstrate the feasibility of boosting payloads into space with an aircraft-like operational tempo. The program is due to start flight tests in 2021 and will culminate with an intense demonstration phase in which the booster will launch and recover 10 times in 10 days.

“Boeing is building up the tanks right now,” DARPA XSP program manager Scott Wierzbanowski says. Work began first on the cryogenic carbon-composite liquid-oxygen (LOX) tank that has been constructed using advanced fiber placement techniques honed by Boeing during development of the 787 commercial airliner and during the recent Composite Cryotank Technologies and Demonstration (CCTD) project with NASA.

Nearly the size of the largest-diameter propellent tanks built during CCTD, which was aimed primarily at maturing the technology for the Space Launch System and other heavy-lift space applications, the advanced structures for Phantom Express will still benefit from being almost 40% lighter as well as cheaper than conventional aluminum-lithium cryogenic fuel tanks. “It’s been very successful. They are not seeing any of the [material] degradation they’d typically see through a traditional hand layup,” Wierzbanowski says.

Built at the Boeing Advanced Developmental Composites facility in Tukwila, Washington, the tanks will be the first of their kind to fly and are already proving durable, says Steve Johnston, launch director for Boeing Phantom Works. “We have completed the LOX tank pressure shell, and it has been through nondestructive testing without defects. That’s a pretty darn good outcome for a first article,” he adds.

Unlike the CCTD program, which focused on proof-of-concept tanks 2.4 m (7.9 ft.) and 5.5 m in diameter, the XSP pressure vessels are around 4 m in diameter and longer than either of the NASA sample structures. Boeing is currently joining the forward and aft skirts to the LOX tanks in a careful operation that is expected to take “a few months,” Johnston says. Unlike the CCTD, the skirts do not form part of the pressure vessels. However, joining the skirt to the tank is “an interesting problem,” he adds. “It’s a little bit challenging to go from the dome end of the barrel to the cylindrical section, but we think we have it licked, and we are in the process of confirming that now.”

Building on lessons learned from the LOX tank, Boeing then plans to start assembling the much larger liquid-hydrogen tank, which is almost double the size of the oxidizer vessel. Together, the two propellant tanks will constitute two-thirds of the length of the 100-ft.-long spaceplane.

The size of the tanks also played into the need for robotic laydown of the composite material. “This allows us to really accelerate getting the tapes down, which helps us keep the material within time limits,” Johnston says. “Boeing has invested quite a bit of money in composite technology, both in terms of the material itself and the robotic manufacturing technology used to fabricate the barrel sections of the 787 airliner. NASA had an interest in understanding whether that investment could be leveraged into developing large composite cryogenic tanks. So we are using technology from the 787 to develop large cryotanks for liquid hydrogen, which is not easy to do.”

The NASA program also cured the parts out of autoclave to make them more affordable. However, Boeing is not using this approach for XSP. “We did explore it, but we weren’t mass producing, so adding the structural rigor and integrity we got with the autoclave was worth it. We are trying to build a rocket plane that can be turned around every day, and so we want it to be robust,” Johnston says.

The Phantom Express is “more of an aircraft-inspired design approach,” he notes. “We have a lot of people on this program that have rocketry experience with the Delta and DC-X, but this is a collaborative effort, and we have military and commercial design experience involved as well. This is a very rugged vehicle and more so than the traditional design practices for rocketry, which are usually [to] make it as light as you can, particularly if you are throwing it away every time. That’s not the approach we took. We are really making a system with similar damage tolerance to an airplane, and that gives us confidence we will be able to turn this around quickly and affordably.”

The design of the spaceplane’s sharply swept cranked delta wing is also underway at the company’s St. Louis facility. The wingbox will receive its composite skin at Tukwila using the same robotic laydown process employed for the tanks. “The wing has very interesting contours and shapes that are hard to make in any other way. It really is enabled by the composite manufacturing process,” Johnston says.

The spaceplane will be powered by a single LOX, liquid-hydrogen-fueled Aerojet Rocketdyne AR-22 rocket engine, a derivative of the company’s reusable RS-25 space shuttle main engine. The fundamental ability of the 375,000-lb.-thrust engine to perform at the tempo required for the XSP program was demonstrated when back-to-back runs at full throttle were completed over 10 days this summer at NASA Stennis Space Center.

“Engine drying time is one of the single longest items in the turnaround flow, and proving we could do that in the time predicted gives us a lot of confidence and informs the detailed planning we have to do to turn this vehicle around,” Johnston says. “It’s going to be an orchestrated event. We will have people working the engine section while others work on the vehicle, so understanding what operations can be done in parallel versus in series has been factored into the design from the very beginning.”

Critical design reviews (CDR) for subsystems have already begun, though the program itself is taking a different approach to the traditional milestone reviews, Wierzbanowski says. “DARPA decides with them what defines a CDR, because this is not going to be a standard acquisition type CDR,” he notes. “We figure out where that maturity level needs to be and the amount of risk we are willing to accept as we go forward. We call it a tailored CDR process. We go through all the criteria and decide which ones matter to us and which we are willing to go through by analysis.”

Overall, CDRs are expected to be finished around February, clearing the way for final assembly due to get underway in mid-2019. “It will take about 18 months to build the system and go through the ground tests,” he says. “Then there will be some sort of phase of flight expansion, followed by 10 flights in 10 days—and that’s just with the booster, not the upper stage.

“The objective is to ‘gas and go’ with this vehicle, and the trajectory will be as fast and high as we can go without putting the vehicle at risk,” Wierzbanowski says. “We will go to Mach 5 before we get too much energy and can’t get back, so we will probably go to around 100,000-150,000 ft. before we turn around and come back.”

Test flights will culminate with the orbital launch of the expendable upper stage, the design of which is expected to be outlined in detail early next year. “That will end the DARPA part of the program, which should be about a nine-month period of flight test, depending on what happens during the test effort itself, and the 10 flights/10 days trial is part of that,” Wierzbanowski says.

The precise details of exactly how this will be accomplished are still being discussed, he adds. “We can fly out to Mach 5 and either just return to the launch station and land, or find two land-and-launch locations and fly back and forth between them," he says. "I’d love to go inland and use a couple of places we’ve never done before, but there’s also a business case to do that along the coast. That’s a conversation we’ll have with Boeing as we get closer.”

Wierzbanowski says these negotiations will also involve the FAA: “We have to understand the complexity of this test, which is being done on the back of an FAA launch license. We have to make sure we look at what we are overflying and see if the FAA will allow us to make these sorts of turns.”

For each flight, the spaceplane will be moved to the launch site on a mobile transporter-erector vehicle. While the aim is to make the process as aircraft-like as possible, there are some concessions. “We do need a water deluge system to deal with the acoustics of the space shuttle main engine, for instance,” he explains. Once erected into the vertical position, the spaceplane is loaded with propellants and launched.

Recovery during standard operations will involve a horizontal landing at a different facility downrange, where it will be towed to a hangar for checks and inspection. “All that processing right now is expected to be with the vehicle in a horizontal position,” Wierzbanowski says. Boeing and DARPA currently envisage a series of co-located launch and landing sites. “The best situation is to have spaceports or launch sites at both locations, or maybe three locations, so you can make sure you can get to the right [orbital] inclinations,”
he says. “Otherwise, there are ways to bring it back by barge along waterways, and we have also looked at using lighter-than-air/hybrid airships or airlifters—that’s to be determined. Inland, we would just fly it between three or four areas, whereas along the coast we’d probably use some sort of barge system.”




Image
^Boeing has completed nondestructive tests of the Phantom Express liquid-oxygen propellant composite cryotank, which is almost 40% lighter than comparable aluminum tanks. Credit: Boeing


Image

^Forward and aft skirts are now being attached to the liquid-oxygen cryotank, which was built from composites using technology developed for the Boeing 787 program and enhanced through follow-on NASA testing. Credit: Boeing

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ks_sachin » 16 Nov 2018 18:58

Brar Ji,

How is this relevant to BR?
Whis udan khatola will this tank be used in?

Regards

PS - Have great respect for your knowledge u bring to BR.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 16 Nov 2018 19:02

International Space programs are not relevant in the international aerospace thread? Please feel free to delete if this is the case.

ks_sachin wrote:Whis udan khatola will this tank be used in?


The object of the program is to demonstrate cheap (<$5 M cost for a payload of up to 2000 kg), and rapid turnaround for small Military satellite launch. The objective is to launch-recover-re-launch the vehicle 10 times in 10 days as the AvWeek article states. This will be attempted around 2021.


ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ks_sachin » 16 Nov 2018 19:37

brar_w wrote:International Space programs are not relevant in the international aerospace thread? Please feel free to delete if this is the case.

ks_sachin wrote:Whis udan khatola will this tank be used in?


The object of the program is to demonstrate cheap (<$5 M cost for a payload of up to 2000 kg), and rapid turnaround for small Military satellite launch. The objective is to launch-recover-re-launch the vehicle 10 times in 10 days as the AvWeek article states. This will be attempted around 2021.



Jawohl Mein Herr.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 18 Nov 2018 21:41

2 F-35Is enroute for delivery to Israel.

Image

https://twitter.com/RobV_Photos/status/ ... 0032310273

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3651
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby hnair » 19 Nov 2018 09:59

brar_w wrote:
Image
^Boeing has completed nondestructive tests of the Phantom Express liquid-oxygen propellant composite cryotank, which is almost 40% lighter than comparable aluminum tanks. Credit: Boeing


Image

^Forward and aft skirts are now being attached to the liquid-oxygen cryotank, which was built from composites using technology developed for the Boeing 787 program and enhanced through follow-on NASA testing. Credit: Boeing


Interesting. The death of the Venturestar was caused by cracking of the cryogenic fuel tanks. Though one wishes that linear aerospike engine was used somewhere else! Soothing to watch it in action

Got to wait till these LOX tank gets filled up, at the same time, wonder what is the status of the LOH ones on this Boeing project? Hope they got over the micro-cracking issues

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 19 Nov 2018 17:03

hnair wrote:Got to wait till these LOX tank gets filled up, at the same time, wonder what is the status of the LOH ones on this Boeing project? Hope they got over the micro-cracking issues


Here's a read up on the proof of concept work that Boeing did for NASA leading up to them adopting this approach for the DARPA program.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi ... 016807.pdf

More on where they are with the engine and other components :

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/07 ... -ten-days/

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Postby SaiK » 20 Nov 2018 02:18

Pentagon deal to buy what it called at the time "the biggest batch yet" of Lockheed Martin's joint strike fighter -- 141 fighter jets valued at $11.5 billion. To win such a big order, Lockheed lowered its average F-35 cost to $81.6 million

Lockheed's F-35B variant flyaway cost $115.5 million, its F-35C cost $107.7 million, and the F-35A ended up at $89 million.

Mammoth 255 F35 order
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/11/ ... worth.aspx

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 20 Nov 2018 02:56

36 F-35's doing the Elephant Walk with the first USAF Operational Unit located at Hill Air Force Base, Utah :

Pilots from the 388th Fighter Wing and @419fw prepare for takeoff as part of a combat power exercise today at Hill Air Force Base to prove their ability to quickly employ a large force of F-35's and demonstrate the jet’s readiness and lethality. LINK


Image

Image

Video teaser : https://twitter.com/419fw/status/1064719638376833024


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Postby brar_w » 20 Nov 2018 03:02

The current 255 aircraft order (add 200-250 USAF Aircraft to this which will be ordered annually starting in 2020 and 2021) will likely bring the unit F-35A cost down to very close to $80 Million with the engine and this will be announced when both contracts are defninitized. Right now they have only issued a $6 billion upfront payment and have agreed on a contract ceiling. Final price negotiations will run into the second half of next year.

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/f-3 ... -an-f-35a/

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MRCA (Many Rakshaks Choose Aircraft) Contest - Episode III

Postby SaiK » 21 Nov 2018 05:51

Basically, has a forward lead 360*

The F-35 stealth fighter just pulled off a massive flex that China's J-20 and Russia's Su-57 aren't anywhere close to matching
https://amp.businessinsider.com/f-35-el ... to-2018-11

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 21 Nov 2018 08:08

SaiK wrote:Basically, has a forward lead 360*

The F-35 stealth fighter just pulled off a massive flex that China's J-20 and Russia's Su-57 aren't anywhere close to matching
https://amp.businessinsider.com/f-35-el ... to-2018-11

The J-20 and the Su-57 are likely going to be silver bullet forces and exist in much smaller quantity, the J-20 likely getting there a few years before the PAKFA gets operational in decent numbers (but with quite significant ? on capability).

The F-35 on the other hand is the "bulk" fighter for the US and for NATO so those roles are different. One of its attributes is quantity so that is one advantage that neither of those programs will come anywhere close to matching. Perhaps the J-31 can do that for China but that remains to be seen. It is basically what the F-16 was at its time (from a force structure perspective). There is currently no MiG-29 on the 5th gen side at the moment from a non-US/EU perspective so it remains to be seen whether the J-31 is that and if so by what time frame.


A Nandy
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 241
Joined: 06 Sep 2009 23:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby A Nandy » 21 Nov 2018 13:23

Skylon SSTO still around it seems after funding from Boeing and Rolls Royce. Pre-cooler and full cycle tests in 2020.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech ... Royce.html

In a statement today, Oxfordshire-based REL announced a major new joint £26.5 million ($37m) investment in the technology, with contributions from Boeing and Rolls Royce.

The investment puts the aircraft's first flight on track for 2025 provided ground tests of REL's engine - set to begin in 2020 - are successful.

A Nandy
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 241
Joined: 06 Sep 2009 23:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby A Nandy » 21 Nov 2018 18:35

Small rocket and satellite business poised to take off. ISRO could support a private player to capture this market.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ace-access

While issues had delayed this launch for months, Sunday’s event went off without a hitch. Rocket Lab has now established itself in the lead position of a frenetic, worldwide competition to change the economics and speed at which people can get things into space.

“It’s game on,” said Peter Beck, the company’s founder and chief executive officer, in an interview outside of Rocket Lab’s mission control in Auckland. “This era has been coming and coming. Well, the small launch race is over. We have proven it can be done.”

The rocket dubbed “It’s Business Time” took off just before 5 p.m. local time from a spaceport in New Zealand.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 21 Nov 2018 23:10

NASA's Mars Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) lander is scheduled to touch down on the Red Planet at approximately 3 p.m. EST Nov. 26, and viewers everywhere can watch coverage of the event live on NASA Television, the agency's website and social media platforms.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa ... ere-nov-26

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4222
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 22 Nov 2018 04:22

Israeli Air Force opts to purchase 25 F-15I (Advanced) fighters

From AW&ST

The Israeli Air Force has opted to purchase 25 Boeing F-15 Israel Advanced (IA) aircraft, though formal implementation may be delayed by unrelated political turmoil.

The air force has notified Israeli Defense Force chief Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot of its choice, but final approval must wait for the appointment of a new defense minister following last week’s resignation of Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has assumed the defense minister position temporarily.

The decision to buy F-15IAs is driven by the aircraft’s ability to carry heavy weapon loads and because its open architecture allows it to run Israeli electronic systems. But a side effect of the purchase is that it could delay future Israeli F-35 buys. Israel has signed a contract for the purchase of 50 F-35s and has an option to buy an additional 25.

According to a local news report, the U.S. Air Force’s interest in an F-15IA allowed Israel to begin negotiations to buy the fourth-generation fighter. Boeing has pitched an F-15X variant, similar to its concept for upgrading U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets, featuring increased range, additional weapons, better fuel efficiency and more advanced electronics systems. But the U.S. Air Force does not have plans to buy additional F-15s.

—Arie Egozi in Tel Aviv

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4222
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 22 Nov 2018 04:24

Japan has produced its first high thrust fighter engine, in demonstrator form

from AW&ST

Image

At least in demonstrator form, Japan has produced its first high-thrust fighter engine. The demonstrator has been run to its minimum required output with no problems, a program official says, suggesting there is a good opportunity to exceed objectives.

Specifically, the XF9-1 engine, built by IHI as part of a broad Japanese fighter-technology acquisition effort, has reached its required dry rating of 11,000 kg (24,000 lb.) and afterburning output of 15,000 kg,
says the official from the defense ministry’s Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency (ATLA), which is overseeing the program.

The required thrust levels were for the engine at sea level and not installed in an airframe. ATLA has implied it hoped for more thrust, specifying afterburning thrust of “at least 15,000 kg,” for example.

No serious abnormalities turn up in data

The engine has the potential to outperform the requirement

Although sensor data from these ground tests still is being analyzed, no serious abnormalities have turned up. The turbofan has achieved its designed output before undergoing the usual tuning process to adjust a new engine to improve its performance. It is likely, therefore, that the XF9-1 should be able to achieve higher thrusts, the official says, speaking at the agency’s annual technology seminar.

The XF9-1 is capable of supersonic cruise, though it is not clear its intended airframe is shaped for such performance. The airframe and engine would constitute an indigenous candidate for the country’s Future Fighter requirement for a combat aircraft to enter service in the 2030s. The agency also is studying a thrust-vectoring nozzle for the engine.

The turbo-machinery layout of the two-shaft Japanese engine is the same as for the Pratt & Whitney F119 of the Lockheed Martin F-22, with three fan stages, six high-pressure compressor stages, and single-stage high-pressure and low-pressure turbines. The shafts counter-rotate.

The core of the engine was tested separately before assembly of the complete turbofan, which IHI put through company tests before delivering it to the government on June 28. The government’s tests also are being conducted at IHI’s facility; they are due to continue until March 31, the end of the current fiscal year. In fiscal 2019 the demonstrator is scheduled to be moved to Chitose, on the northern island of Hokkaido, for altitude testing—still on the ground. This is intended mainly to confirm the engine can be restarted in flight, but some details on performance at altitude will be acquired as well.

Full testing of an engine’s performance in the air requires mounting it on an aircraft, which is under consideration. That apparently would be an expansion of the original program scope. A Kawasaki Heavy Industries C-2 airlifter could be used for the purpose, another official suggests.

After the altitude testing at Chitose, plans call for the engine to be returned to IHI for dynamic testing, to see how it performs under rapid throttle movements, as would be expected in service. The XF9-1 is, however, only a demonstrator. Creating a production engine would need much more work—to achieve high reliability, for example.

The engine is designed to operate with a turbine inlet temperature exceeding 1,800C (3,270F); in a video played at the exhibition, the temperature is shown rising above 1,800C. Mass flow and bypass ratio have not been disclosed. According to previous statements, ceramic matrix composite, a material that can cope with higher temperatures than metals, is used in the shroud of at least one turbine. Carbon-silicon fiber reinforces the ceramic. Stator and rotor blades are made of a nickel-based single-crystal superalloy. Turbine disks, on which the rotor blades are mounted, are made with a locally developed nickel-cobalt superalloy, TMW-24.

The high temperatures are part of the effort to keep the engine slim and thereby reduce airframe drag. Diameter is 98 cm (39 in.), according to Aviation Week’s measurement of an official 1:1 drawing in 2017. Length is 4.8 m (15.7 ft.), ATLA says.

IHI’s previous combat-engine program was the XF5-1, a technology demonstrator with only a third of the designed thrust of the XF9-1. The first unit was delivered in 1998. Two powered the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) X-2, a combat-aircraft technology demonstrator that first flew in 2016.

Developing an indigenous aircraft is one of several options that Japan is considering to replace the MHI F-2 strike fighter in the 2030s. Alternatives include jointly developing a fighter with another country or directly importing.

The initial engine-demonstrator budget, covering work in fiscal 2010-15, was ¥5 billion ($44 million). A further ¥17.2 billion was provided for research into components in fiscal 2013. The current phase, described as research into a fighter engine system, is running from fiscal 2015 to fiscal 2019 at a cost of ¥14.2 billion. Unless support is coming from other budget areas, or out of IHI’s pocket, the total cost of the advanced combat engine demonstrator is therefore ¥36.4 billion.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4222
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 22 Nov 2018 04:42

Just something we need to be aware of as well, since this is something that has to be developed for the AMCA. Astonishing specs for the mechanical ejection of the missile! With the engine demonstrator successful in its first phase, and this technology being demonstrated, its a little hard to fathom why the Japanese don't want to go ahead and develop their own 5th gen fighter, rather than depending on the US or Europeans to further develop an existing fighter design or go with a JV.

Japan Tests Weapon Bay For Fast Release, Fast Flight

From AW&ST
Image

Japanese engineers have overcome the challenge of designing a weapon bay for supersonic release of stores, a feature of a fighter that the defense ministry has proposed to develop for entry into service in the 2030s. A critical design objective has been achieving high but undisclosed speed in the four-step cycle of door opening, weapon ejection, launcher retraction and door closing.


Tests have verified aerodynamic and mechanical performance of the bay, says an official of the Defense Ministry’s Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency (ATLA). As with a parallel program to design inlets, the objective is not to confirm a production design is ready but rather to show the engineers can execute such a development effort.

A full-scale system for an indigenous fighter has been tested

In pairs, it would carry six Meteor-size missiles

Wind-tunnel tests first confirmed the test equipment for the bay was fit for purpose and assessed the aerodynamics associated with the shape of the cavity. Later work used a model with doors (in the open position) and generically shaped ducted-rocket missiles, which were lifted out to confirm they would separate properly. The bay is capable of launching at supersonic flight speeds, says the official, speaking at a technology seminar organized by ATLA.

The ministry has reported release tests were conducted at Mach 1.4—a likely speed for the launch of an air-to-air missile. The faster the launch, the farther the missile will fly. Also, a pilot maneuvering supersonically does not want to slow down—losing energy—to release weapons.


In the final step to confirm they know what they are doing, Japanese engineers this year have verified the operation of the hydraulic mechanism of their design. This involved building and testing a full-scale bay, the left one of two that would go into the belly of the aircraft. The external dimensions of the bay are: length, 6.2 m (20.3 ft.); width, 2 m; and depth, 1.5 m. The cavity is smaller.

Fast operation is needed to minimize the period in which the unavoidably reflective bay is exposed to enemy radar energy. The official declined to disclose the cycle period, but the mechanical performance is likely to be extreme. During the selection phase of the Joint Strike Fighter program in 2001, Boeing said the door and ejection sequence for its design would take 1–3 sec. Achieving a 1-sec. cycle seems scarcely believable, but Raytheon has said in regard to the Lockheed Martin F-22 cycle time: “If you blinked, you missed it.” As for the ejection process between door movements, Cobham says its missile eject launcher takes no more than 0.3 sec. to throw out its store and retract.

The Japanese had to confirm the demonstrator bay’s doors would open and shut fast during high-speed flight. Having no surrounding airframe, the test item could not be evaluated in a wind tunnel. Instead, the developers applied actuators to resist door movement, simulating aerodynamic loads estimated with computational fluid dynamics. Resistance varies as bay doors move, but the evaluation used constant loads in each test; different loads were applied in different tests.


The bay is designed to carry six missiles the size of the MBDA Meteor, a version of which, with an advanced Japanese seeker, is the likely weapon for the Japanese fighter, if it is developed. Two small side bays would each carry one short-range missile.

Japanese engineers have devised a bay for subsonic release in recent years in the Kawasaki Heavy Industries P-1 maritime patroller. But supersonic release from inside an aircraft is a much more difficult technology—so much so that in the past, supersonic aircraft have generally slowed down before dropping anything from a bay.

Then-U.S. Air Force Capt. Scott Bjorge summarized the daunting problems of supersonic release from a bay in a 2004 paper. “One of the most common phenomena is the formation of self-sustaining pressure oscillations, creating cavity resonance, which can lead to structural fatigue of the aircraft and the store and extensive damage to sensitive store electronics,” he wrote.

On its way out, the store passes through an unsteady interface between the air inside the bay and the fast flow outside. It also meets a shock wave from the leading edge of the bay. The motion of the store is therefore unpredictable: It can fly back up and hit the aircraft.

Part of the solution appears to be shoving stores out faster, achieving the necessary speed within the limited depth available for a piston stroke in a combat aircraft. Details of this aspect of the Japanese design are unavailable, but the pneumatic Harris LAU-142/A ejector in the Lockheed Martin F-22 accelerates Raytheon AIM-120 Amraams at up to 40g to achieve a separation velocity of about 9 mps (30 fps). Cobham says its missile eject launcher, powered by cartridges, imparts similar velocities.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 22 Nov 2018 05:09

^^japanese engine.. first sight - quite a lot of messy wires and conduits. wow. good show though that we can really look into as well for AMCA (if they wish to join)

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4222
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 22 Nov 2018 05:17

Hope to see this capability developed for the Tejas in the future. If so, it will be the first IAF fighter to feature GCAS- unless the Rafale has this already. An Onboard Digital Terrain Elevation data unit that is required for this feature, is not there on the Tejas as of now, but is something that would be very useful for pilots flying low or nape of the earth missions, especially at night or dusk.

From AW&ST

Spurred on by the success of the Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (Auto-GCAS) in saving lives and aircraft on its F-16 fleet, the U.S. Air Force has begun flight tests of the safety system on the F-35A as part of efforts to fast-track its introduction into the Joint Strike Fighter fleet as early as mid-2019.

The initial flight-test phase, which got underway at Edwards AFB, California, on Oct. 31, will verify non interference of Auto-GCAS with other aircraft systems and evaluate overall performance of the algorithms in the safety system. Seven flights had been conducted as of Nov. 14.
Collision Avoidance

The first flight-test phase is due to be completed by the end of November and, depending on results, will be followed by a second round starting in January and running through April. “The F-35A should field with Auto-GCAS in June, so it’s really on the fast track,” says Mark Wilkins, subject-matter expert at the Office of the Secretary of Defense for the Automatic Collision Avoidance Technology (ACAT) program under which Auto-GCAS was developed.

Moves to introduce Auto-GCAS on the F-35 follow the success of the system on the Air Force F-16 fleet. Since it was first introduced on the Block 40/50 version of the F-16 in late 2014, the system has been credited with saving eight lives and seven aircraft. Developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), NASA and Lockheed Martin, the Auto-GCAS system is designed to prevent fighter/attack aircraft from crashes due to controlled-flight-into-terrain incidents.

Algorithms in the system continuously compare the aircraft’s trajectory against a terrain profile generated from an onboard digital terrain elevation data unit. If the predicted trajectory touches the terrain and the system calculates the aircraft is in imminent danger of collision, it executes a last-minute automatic recovery maneuver. The system is designed to protect against accidents caused primarily by pilot disorientation or temporary incapacity due to high G forces.


Initial flight tests have gone well, says Wilkins, and Auto-GCAS activations, in which the system was deliberately initiated to command a pull-up maneuver, were performed on the first sortie. Once the trajectory-prediction algorithm at the heart of the Auto-GCAS has been tuned to the F-35’s flight control and navigation systems, and the safety device cleared for integration, the first F-35As will be equipped starting next summer, with follow-on installations rolling into the F-35B and F-35C versions, respectively.

Testing of Auto-GCAS for the F-35 comes as the AFRL, Air Force, Lockheed Martin and the UK’s Defense Science & Technology Labs have joined forces to study development of the follow-on Automatic Integrated Collision Avoidance System (Auto-ICAS) for the Joint Strike Fighter. The effort, which will be led by Lockheed Martin, is focused initially on surveying the F-35’s standard sensor suite to “see what’s available to us for air-to-air capability,” says Wilkins.

Auto-ICAS, which was successfully tested in an F-16 in 2017, combines the ground collision avoidance system with an Automatic Air Collision Avoidance System (Auto-ACAS), which was developed to prevent midair collisions. Auto-ACAS is focused on providing extra safety in the highly dynamic Air Combat Maneuvering training environment in which it calculates future aircraft trajectories to determine if an automatic maneuver is required to avoid an imminent midair collision.


The combined Auto-ICAS prioritizes ground collision functions while making the Auto-ACAS “terrain aware.” This prevents air collision avoidance maneuvers that would then force the aircraft toward the ground which, in turn, would require Auto-GCAS to trigger a maneuver.

In the F-16, the Auto-ACAS element of the ICAS function is hosted in the ASQ-T50(V)1 P5 wingtip-mounted air combat maneuvering instrument training pod. Although at one stage Lockheed Martin studied installing a P5 pod in the weapons bay, the F-35 is expected to utilize other aspects of the aircraft’s integrated sensor and datalink suite to achieve the same overall result.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7316
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Indranil » 22 Nov 2018 12:46

I think I had said this before the trapeze launch system with LoAL is what I hoped that. We could learn from FGFA and leveraged into AMCA.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 23 Nov 2018 20:58

Germany Sees Next Step on Fighter Jet Replacement by End of Year


BERLIN (Reuters) - The German defense ministry expects to announce next steps by the end of the year in its drive to replace 85 aging Tornado fighter jets that will cost billions of euros.

"There will be a decision this year," a ministry spokesman said, citing a pledge in July by Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen to move ahead with the program in 2018. The spokesman gave no further details.

Sources familiar with the process said the ministry was likely to narrow the field of potential replacement jets from four to two -- the Eurofighter Typhoon built by Airbus, Britain's BAE Systems and Italy's Leonardo SpA and most likely, the Lockheed Martin F-35.

"It's another step in the process, not the actual procurement decision," said one of the sources, noting that funds would first have to be earmarked in the German budget.

Von der Leyen favours a European solution, but the ministry also reviewed data submitted in April by the U.S. government on the F-35, and the F-15 and F/A-18E/F jets, both built by Boeing .

No comment was immediately available from Boeing or Lockheed. An Airbus spokesman said it was important for the process to move forward to enable the German air force to begin retiring the Tornado jets in 2025.

Several options have been studied, including buying one type of jet to replace the Tornado jets, a split buy of two aircraft types, and extending the life of the Tornados.

However the ministry in August asked potential bidders if they could deliver new warplanes before the initial target date of 2025, a move sources said reflected growing concerns about the cost of keeping the Tornados flying longer.

NUCLEAR CAPABILITY

A key factor will be the ability of the new jets to carry and deliver nuclear bombs. Germany is not a nuclear power, but hosts some U.S. nuclear warheads under NATO's nuclear-sharing policy and operates a number of Tornados that can deliver them.

One proposal calls for Germany to buy 45 Lockheed F-35 jets to replace those Tornados, and about 75 new Eurofighters to replace both the other Tornados and a first batch of Eurofighters delivered between 2003 and 2008, sources said.

Buying F-35s would allow Germany to keep a mixed fleet of fighter jets, a requirement in its military strategy, while averting costly modifications to the Eurofighter.

Two of the sources said Germany had not yet commissioned a mandatory U.S. study of the certification issue, which could take 12 to 18 months to complete. Achieving certification for the Eurofighter could ultimately cost over 700 million euros and take well over seven years, they added.

Lockheed last week won a U.S. contract valued at up to $83.1 million to develop, integrate and test the needed software and hardware required for the F-35A to carry B61-12 nuclear bombs, with the work to be completed in February 2024.

Sources familiar with the process said that would allow Lockheed to offer Germany deliveries of F-35 aircraft a year or more ahead of the 2025 target, enabling pilots to begin a year or two of required training at a U.S. air base in Arizona.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21017
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Prem » 24 Nov 2018 03:15

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-copied ... 00746.html
China Copied This Russian Jet Fighter (And It Has All Sorts of Problems)
China Copied This Russian Jet Fighter (And It Has All Sorts of Problems)
"The development of the J-15 took more time and more money than expected, and the first planes proved less than reliable," said Kashin. "By spending some more time and money, the Chinese will apparently solve the problems they now have and will get a fairly reliable and powerful carrier-based fighter.[b]"Cheaters never prosper, says Russia.The J-15 is an unlicensed copy of Russia's Su-33 carrier jet, which is a 1980s derivative of the Su-27K land-based fighter. China had acquired a T-10K-3, an Su-33 prototype, from Ukraine and then reverse-engineered it./b]
With a barely disguised touch of schadenfreude, Sputnik News delved into the woes of the J-15. "Love for the fourth-generation J-15 jet is seldom shown in Chinese circles," said the Russian news site. "The Asia Times noted that Chinese media has disparaged the plane in numerous ways, including referring to it as a 'flopping fish' for its inability to operate effectively from the Chinese carriers, which launch fixed-wing aircraft under their own power from an inclined ramp on the bow of the ship. The J-15's engines and heavy weight severely limit its ability to operate effectively: at 17.5 tons empty weight, it tops the scales for carrier-based fighters. The US Navy's F-18 workhorse, by comparison, is only 14.5 tons."

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 26 Nov 2018 04:58

Israel receives its 13th and 14th F-35I :

Israeli Air Force wrote:Two “Adir” (F-35I) aircraft landed today in Nevatim AFB and joined the ranks of the 140th (“Golden Eagle”) Squadron. Soon, the two aircraft will begin taking part in the IAF’s operational activity - https://twitter.com/IAFsite/status/1066765448270753792


Image

A Nandy
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 241
Joined: 06 Sep 2009 23:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby A Nandy » 27 Nov 2018 02:13


Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10608
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Aditya_V » 27 Nov 2018 11:24

Prem wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-copied-russian-jet-fighter-125900746.html
China Copied This Russian Jet Fighter (And It Has All Sorts of Problems)
China Copied This Russian Jet Fighter (And It Has All Sorts of Problems)
"The development of the J-15 took more time and more money than expected, and the first planes proved less than reliable," said Kashin. "By spending some more time and money, the Chinese will apparently solve the problems they now have and will get a fairly reliable and powerful carrier-based fighter.[b]"Cheaters never prosper, says Russia.The J-15 is an unlicensed copy of Russia's Su-33 carrier jet, which is a 1980s derivative of the Su-27K land-based fighter. China had acquired a T-10K-3, an Su-33 prototype, from Ukraine and then reverse-engineered it./b]
With a barely disguised touch of schadenfreude, Sputnik News delved into the woes of the J-15. "Love for the fourth-generation J-15 jet is seldom shown in Chinese circles," said the Russian news site. "The Asia Times noted that Chinese media has disparaged the plane in numerous ways, including referring to it as a 'flopping fish' for its inability to operate effectively from the Chinese carriers, which launch fixed-wing aircraft under their own power from an inclined ramp on the bow of the ship. The J-15's engines and heavy weight severely limit its ability to operate effectively: at 17.5 tons empty weight, it tops the scales for carrier-based fighters. The US Navy's F-18 workhorse, by comparison, is only 14.5 tons."


This is the biggest Bullshit, reverse engineering is the Tu-4 copy of B-29. This is nothing but Russian import or best licenced production couched as "Reverse Engineering" for Chinese H&D which the Russians are playing along to keep the gravy train flowing from China. If all the news about Chinese reverse enginering were true, Russia would have got out of the Defense business 10 years ago.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 28 Nov 2018 06:57

Japan to order 100 more F-35 fighters from US


TOKYO -- Japan is preparing to order another 100 F-35 stealth fighter jets from the U.S. to replace some of its aging F-15s, according to sources.

The plan can be considered a response to China's military buildup, as well as a nod to U.S. President Donald Trump's call for Tokyo to buy more American defense equipment. Japan already intended to procure 42 of the new fighters.

A single F-35 costs more than 10 billion yen ($88.1 million), meaning the additional order would exceed 1 trillion yen.

Japan's government plans to approve the purchase when it adopts new National Defense Program Guidelines at a cabinet meeting in mid-December. It will also include the F-35 order in its medium-term defense program, which covers fiscal 2019 to fiscal 2023. The government wants to obtain 42 F-35s as successors to its F-4s by fiscal 2024.

The 42 fighters Japan originally planned to buy are all F-35As, a conventional takeoff and landing variant. The additional 100 planes would include both the F-35A and F-35B, which is capable of short takeoffs and vertical landings.

At present, Japan deploys about 200 F-15s, roughly half of which cannot be upgraded. The Defense Ministry wants to replace the planes that cannot be upgraded with the 100 F-35s, while enhancing and retaining the remaining F-15s.

To accommodate the F-35Bs, the government intends to revamp the Maritime Self-Defense Force's JS Izumo helicopter carrier to host the fighters.

Japan's neighbors are busy introducing their own advanced military aircraft. China deployed its homegrown J-20 stealth fighter in February, and by 2030 some experts expect the country to build a fleet of more than 250 fifth-generation jets -- as the latest generation of fighters like the F-35 is known.

Russia, too, is expected to introduce its fifth-generation Sukhoi Su-57 in 2019, at the earliest.

To keep up, Tokyo believes it is imperative to significantly increase its procurement of the most sophisticated stealth jets.

At the same time, Trump has repeatedly urged Japan to purchase more American hardware and reduce the trade imbalance between the countries. Buying more of the high-priced fighters is a quick way to do that.

In September, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told Trump, "Introducing high-performance equipment, including American [materiel], is important for our country to strengthen its defense capabilities."

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 28 Nov 2018 17:34

Raytheon Progresses Toward MALD-N Jammer For U.S. Navy
Aerospace Daily & Defense Report Nov 27, 2018 , p. 3



Having conducted a demonstration of additional capabilities, Raytheon hopes to be under contract with the U.S. Navy in 2019 to develop an advanced version of its Miniature Air-Launched Decoy (MALD).

The U.S. Air Force continues to buy the ADM-160C MALD-J jammer version, and has not decided its next steps.

Raytheon Missile Systems was awarded a $46.7 million contract in September for technology maturation and risk reduction on the Navy’s advanced jammer version, called MALD-N.

“We expect to be on contract in 2019 for engineering and manufacturing development,” says Jim Long, senior manager for MALD business development.

The Navy said in April it is aiming for early operational capability of the MALD-N on the BoeingF/A-18E/F in 2021, and initial operational capability in 2022. The turbojet-powered, jammer-equipped decoy is able to fly for 90 min. or 500 mi. after launch to draw fire away from the fighter and suppress air defenses.

MALD-N is expected to have some or all of the advanced capabilities demonstrated in two flights of the MALD-X conducted in August by the Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO). The flights tested an improved, modular electronic-warfare payload, data link and low-altitude flight capability.

“MALD-N will be based on MALD-X,” Long says. “The Navy has not yet determined everything they want to put into it, but everything in MALD-X could potentially be in MALD-N. We don’t know yet exactly what they are thinking, and there could be different versions of MALD-N.”

The Air Force has been procuring MALDs for 10 years, in July taking delivery of its 2,000th decoy and awarding a $96.1 million contract for 250 ADM-160C1s in the 11th production lot. The service took part in the MALD-X demo “and is looking at where to go from here,” Long says. “We hope to hear soon.”


There is “a lot of international interest” among U.S. allies in the Air Force version of MALD, and the Navy is already looking ahead to the export potential of MALD-N, he says. “It has gone beyond marketing to government-to-government discussions, as any export sales are going to be Foreign Military Sales.”

Navy procurement and export sales could help boost production of the MALD, which has been running at “barely above the minimum sustainable rate,” Long says. Cost has come down over each of the last six lots, “but we will not get significant cost reductions unless the rate goes up by 50-100%,” he says.

Raytheon, meanwhile, regards the MALD as a “truck,” now with a modular front end that can enable the 9-ft.-long, 300-lb. air vehicle to carry “any type of payload,” he says. Customers are not asking for other payloads yet, but “that modularity will be built into the MALD-N.”

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7269
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Rakesh » 30 Nov 2018 01:48

MBDA set to develop next-gen MICA
https://asianmilitaryreview.com/2018/11 ... -gen-mica/

The contract calls for the company to develop, qualify, and produce the first batch of 567 Missile d’Interception et de Combat Aérien Nouvelle Génération (MICA NG) missiles. It also includes life extension work for 300 existing MICA missiles.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 01 Dec 2018 19:00

Italian Air Force has now declared IOC for its first F-35A squadron following earlier Early OC in the Air-Intercept role. Closely following them would be the UK which plans on declaring IOC (Land) next month, and then Norway where IOC is expected in early 2019.

First in Europe, the Italian Air Force Declares IOC For Its First F-35A Squadron During TLP 18-4


Image

On Nov. 30, 2018, during the media day of TLP 18-4 currently underway at Amendola, in southeastern Italy (the first iteration of the course to integrate 4th and 5th Gen. aircraft), the Aeronautica Militare (Italian Air Force, ItAF) declared Initial Operating Capability with the F-35A Lightning II.

ItAF Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Alberto Rosso broke the news:

“Today is an important day for the Italian Air force. With the Initial Operational Capability we are the first in Europe to achieve a real operational capability with a 5th generation aircraft: it means we reached the capability with multiple aircraft, we have crews properly trained to operate the platform and a long term maintenance and logistic support”. Indeed, the IOC certifies that the first Italian unit, the 13° Gruppo (Squadron), belonging to the 32° Stormo (Wing) based at Amendola, is ready for allied operations.

n December 2016, the Italian Air Force became the very first service to take delivery of the 5th generation stealth jet outside of the U.S. Since then, totalling more 2,000 flying hours, the 13° Gruppo has taken part in the type’s first national large scale drills during Vega 2017 multinational joint exercise; has deployed to another base Italian airbase as part of “Operation Lightning“; has conducted two firing campaigns in the Sardinian ranges operating from Decimomannu; has flown over “Polygone” elecronic warfare range, in Bann, Germany; has achieved an IOC in the air-to-air role supporting the SSSA (Servizio Sorveglianza Spazio Aereo – Air Space Surveillance Service) with a Standard Conventional Load (SCL) that includes the AIM-120C5 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile) missile; has conducted joint drills with Typhoons, G550 CAEW (Conformal Airborne Early Warning) and T-346 jets.

For the moment, Rome plans to procure 90 F-35 to replace the ItAF’s ageing AMX and Tornado and the Italian Navy’s AV-8B+ Harrier jump jets: 60 F-35As and 30 F-35Bs. Currently, 10 F-35As and one F-35B (destined to the Italian Navy) have been delivered: the 13th Gruppo operates 8 F-35As that have been upgraded to the Block 3F; the other two are used for training at Luke Air Force Base, in the U.S.”

As the first European nation to declare IOC, Italy’s F-35 fleet sets the foundation for NATO’s next generation air power capability and we look forward to continuing our strong partnership with Italy to build and sustain the 5th generation F-35 today and for decades to come,” says a Lockheed Martin release.

The Italian Air Force is the fourth service to declare IOC, joining the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps and Israeli Air Force.

Italy is home to the European Final Assembly and Checkout Facility, one of three production facilities around the world, where F-35 aircraft are produced.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3427
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 01 Dec 2018 20:06

Aditya_V wrote:
Prem wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-copied-russian-jet-fighter-125900746.html
China Copied This Russian Jet Fighter (And It Has All Sorts of Problems)


This is the biggest Bullshit, reverse engineering is the Tu-4 copy of B-29. This is nothing but Russian import or best licenced production couched as "Reverse Engineering" for Chinese H&D which the Russians are playing along to keep the gravy train flowing from China. If all the news about Chinese reverse enginering were true, Russia would have got out of the Defense business 10 years ago.


No way the chinis could have landed the J-15 on a carrier without input from the Russians that’s for sure.

Per wiki: J-15 program was officially started in 2006. The first J-15 prototype made its maiden flight on 31 August 2009.Video and still images of the flight were released in July 2010, showing the same basic airframe design as the Su-33.

On 6 May 2010, the aircraft conducted its first takeoff from a simulated ski-jump.

On 25 November 2012, the aircraft successfully performed its first takeoff and landing on China's first aircraft carrier Liaoning.


You can clone a carrier fighter and safely land it on a carrier in six years?!?

It took them 30 years to clone the Black Hawk with nowhere near the safety constraints of carrier fighter.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-15

The Russians were rebuilding basically the SU-33 line in Cheen (while getting funds from us to develop the MiG-29K.)

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Dec 2018 03:06

nam wrote:Yeah, that's true. Japanese have made available a 100W X band GaN for a while now!

Given the power restriction on LCA , there isn't much point reducing the number of TRM/antenna weight by using higher powered and expensive modules.

Other than bragging rights.


The earlier ones that have been in the R&D space from Fujitsu and other US and EU OEMs were not very useful for military use or fighter radar applications where the bandwidth is a factor. Some of those high power X-band PAs were even ITAR-free because of the narrow bandwidth. They are suitable for commercial satellite and radar systems.

Some of the more recent ones are however offering better Mil grade performance and the sort of ranges that they are interested in. See HERE though keep in mind that one it comes to X-band in the US, Raytheon has a fair bit of advantage given that it was the recipient of the most significant DARPA contracts to develop capability, and more importantly capacity in this frequency range. These will be important for Electronic Warfare, and large sensor systems but for fighter applications you are probably looking at systems in the 25-30 Watt range given power and thermal limitations so efficiency is extremely important as is cost.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36292
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby SaiK » 03 Dec 2018 06:44

The F-35, though first and foremost designed and built for the U.S. military, has always had an international mission in mind. The United States partnered with eight allies to design and produce the jet, and has authorized sales to Japan and other allies.

At current prices, each F-35 frame costs at least $88 million, meaning a full 100-plane order would generate at least $8.8 billion in new sales even before support and service revenue is considered. Japan is reportedly planning to include some F-35B variants in its order -- planes capable of vertical landings and short takeoffs -- which carry a price of $115.5 million per frame.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/12/ ... l-wit.aspx

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Neshant » 03 Dec 2018 13:42



Main reason : Trump is forcing them to buy those planes.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Dec 2018 18:53

Neshant wrote:


Main reason : Trump is forcing them to buy those planes.



Of course the fact that they have an active FACO which runs dry pretty soon (if they do not place any more orders then their last aircraft order from the FACO will be in 2020 with last deliveries in late 2023/early 2024), and a need to replace dozens of legacy aircraft (with no new production on the horizon for a decade to 15 years) has nothing to do with it. :roll:

There has been speculation about Izumo fielding F-35B's prior to Trump becoming President as it was always a logical thing to do once one had committed to at least two of those vessels. Furthermore, a simple look at their force structure and the age of their aircraft would make one wonder how they could recapitalize and how a top up was almost guaranteed in the absence of fresh competition.

Having chosen the F-35 over competing Eurocanards and other US fighters and having committed to spend billions on a FACO in house it made sense for them to continue to assemble more aircraft and enjoy EOS. The second batch would be more capable (block-4) and much cheaper than the first one. The F-3 won't come into the picture until the early 2030s at best and keeping some of the oldest and worn out F-15s for another dozen or so years would have been hard (from both a cost and capability perspective). It is no coincidence that they are considering a top up order in the Medium term defense program because it is in this period that they need to finish negotiations in order to avoid gaps in their FACO production.

I am sure Trump has something to do with them increasing their defense investments, particularly form the US but he did not manufacture a need for Japan to recapitalize its fast jet fleet nor did he make them build the Izumo class vessels. Without a second order, not only would they have no fast jet capability on the Izumo they would also not have anything to replace around 100 of their oldest F-15's which they do not want to upgrade likely because the cost-benefit is just not their given remaining life.

Lastly, their home suppliers would have to shut down their FACO line around 2024 (moving some to sustainment) and wait 8-10 years post that to begin rate production on the F-3 and basically have no organic capability to deliver aircraft to the JASDF in the interim. That is not really a great position to be in when China is cranking out J-20's, developing a Low Observable Bomber and is expected to be a 3-5 carrier Navy in the medium term. I believe the last F-2 was delivered in 2011, and assuming that the F-3 becomes operational in 2034 NO NEW F-35s would have meant that the JASDF would have received just 42 new fighter aircraft over a period of 23 years which is very small given most standards, but particularly so for an economy and defense budge the size of Japan's and the pace at which China is modernizing.

From a recent Richard Scott / Jane's Navy International Article :

It has been acknowledged that space and weight margins were incorporated into the Izumo-class design with the potential future operation of the F-35B in mind.


Unless the Donald has the ability to go back in time and shape design decisions made around 2008, the JMSDF always had an interest in operating fast jets at a future date and left enough hooks in the design to have that as a reasonable option a decade or more later depending upon the geo-political situation at the time.

They planned for this!

Image

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 04 Dec 2018 02:15, edited 1 time in total.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66109
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Singha » 03 Dec 2018 21:31

can the Izumos carry some 25 JSF-B + a few asw and utility helos?
that in conjunction with the SSKs, Akizuki and Atago class capabilities, land based P3 and E2D/E3 would make a formidable combined task force in the westpac. they can also throw in land based Aegis and Thaad as defensive linebackers while the fleet goes wingbacking..and land based ballistic missiles and ASMs.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MeshaVishwas, mmasand and 50 guests