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.
Barath
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 55
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Barath » 22 Jun 2019 13:02

brar_w wrote:Here's Air Force magazine's coverage on the AIM-260 JATM -

Air Force Developing AMRAAM Replacement to Counter China




Some folks believe that this is different/distinct from another long range weapon that came out of shadows during development..

LREW

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... et-442816/

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thread ... ost-353945

LREW appears to be 2 stage missile.

The US had also been working for a long time on the shadowy T3 missile testing, whose concept seems to be ramjet to combine aim120D and anti radiation missile. It may have been canceled

https://www.popsci.com/chinas-new-ramje ... -missiles/

Perhaps more clarity will.emerge with time

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 22 Jun 2019 13:29

Barath wrote:The Navy fought tooth and nail to get their own stealth attack fighter A-12/flying dorito and rejected the naval atf f22-n. And the F18 E/f was the hurried replacement for that disaster.


That's not the point. The Navy had a strike bomber it wanted but that had nothing to do with the N-ATF. The US Navy's interest in the Naval ATF was something that was not US Navy driven but rather congressional and DOD driven. Towards the end of the cold war, the US Navy reluctantly agreed to come on board but the dying days of the cold-war and the state of the threat gave them a fairly easy out. Of course they finally drove the nail in the coffin after promising to upgrade the F-14 through the middle of the current decade which was supposed to be good enough for them because the threat that the CVN faced was projected to considerably reduce with the melting away of the Soviet Union. They never wanted the N-ATF because they have for a long time wanted to divest themselves of any need to support hte joint forces OCA mission, choosing to use its air-power for strike and at most carrier and fleet defense. N-ATF would have been an expensive option for and put OCA demands back on their plate something the Admirals probably feared would eat into their shipbuilding budgets. This mindset is still prevalent in the USN and one of the main reasons most doubt that an F-14 like capability will be fielded by the USN. No CNO was ever measured on the quality or quantity of the Air - Air roles it was willing to share or lead over the USAF. OCA is a very expensive mission which the USN prefers to leave to the USAF. Post cold-war base lining saw these competencies being farmed out. USAF controls Air Dominance (OCA/DCA) while US Navy controls tactical AEA via the VAQ squadrons. This was done to avoid duplicate capabilities which had previously existed with distinction AEA and Air Superiority program offices in both the services.

The F/A-18E/F replaced F-14 squadrons as they retired. Later deliveries replace early F/A-18 squadrons but those were just because the F-35C was 4-5 years late to the game. Though the F/A-18E/F was made a POR after the A-12 was shut down for good its need was rather to replace the F-14 Tomcat squadrons for the most part. The mission profile of those early Rhino's was also quite similar. Essentially the US Navy retired the F-14 and the A-6 without any formal direct capability for capability replacement. The F/A-18 lacked the legs of the A-6 in the strike profile, and lacked the speed, range and firepower of the F-14 in the fleet defense role. Within the sweet spot however it did what it had to do really well. It was a modern platform, carried a whole host of PGM's, had really capable advanced sensors and most importantly low airframe hours and a lower CPFH compared to the Tomcat. It was half a generation ahead of the Hornet and solves one of its most important shortcomings - combat radius. Yet, it still remained a medium ranged strike fighter at best and it won't be till the F-35C that the USN will get a 500-600 nm strike fighter back without resorting to buddy tanking or using USAF's deployed assets.

For the reasons listed above, USN loved it and bought hundreds more than it had originally envisioned..and continues to buy it today with its block III iteration in many ways as modern as any 4.5 gen fighter out there presently. But that aside, the proper way to look at it is that it works for the USN as the missions it has to serve now. It doesn't work if one looks through the lens of using it as a replacement for the F-14, or the A-6 or even the A-12 which was a survivable A-6 replacement about 2 decades ahead of its time. It probably also doesn't work that great for them in the coming decades, something they've realized hence they've initiated their FA-XX program which will likely field a family of long range manned or unmanned capability to start things off.

Aircraft do replace others on flight decks and in hangars, and to varied extent in missions.


Physically they may do but that is most definitely not how fleet recapitalization decisions are made. You don't build a better previous gen. aircraft. You look at future requirements and design and build accordingly. And as I said quite clearly in my previous post, if you measure the Super Hornet through the lens of it being an F-14 Tomcat replacement, then it is subpar at best. That is obviously not the lens the operator looks at it because they need the SH for different roles and missions than what the previous generation of pilots needed the Tomcat for. Even though some squadrons and units may have physically transitioned from the Tomcat to the Rhino. In fact many voices calling for a 800-1000 nm strike figther in the US navy are some of the same voices that wanted the A-12 axed. It would fit into the current USN CVN and post 2030 air wing need perfectly. Of course now they wouldn't really have to make it manned but that is the type of aircraft or combined capability that is likely to replace USN Rhinos and Growlers.

The F14 had a bombcat variation see action


Yes a band aid solution, though one that could have been promising if properly backed with new tails, which in itself was an unsustainable given the limitations of the platform, its reliability and just the expense of operating that fleet. This was no F-15C to F-15E transition which proved out to be a more robust, better performing, more reliable and highly sought after strike fighter in US Air Force inventory and in fact was new built. The Bombcat on the other hand was something patched together because there was a need and there was no replacement. It was most certainly not the only primarily single role figther getting multi-role capability as mid to late 90s saw beefing up of strike capability on a number of platforms around the world. There were other higher end Tomcat based next gen. proposals which were never pursued but for all intents and purposes this was not the role the Rhino filled. As I said, until the arrival of the F-35C the US Navy won't really get a 600 nm combat radius strike figther without an insane number of compromises like EFT's, tanking etc etc.

But back again to the point, the F-18E/F would have made a very lousy F-14 replacement had those missions remained relevant to the US Navy. They went away with the collapse of the SU and other capability enhancement the way some of the others were performed. This allowed the USN to divest its Carrier Air Wing and make it much less diverse. In fact, as of now its all a Hornet/Super Hornet wing which with its short to medium ranged strike capability is a fraction of the capability the USN fielded back in the cold war though it is more than plenty to meet its current obligations especially with support.

The f14 was growing long in the tooth and swing wing was always a maintenance issue. But if the F18 E/f were inadequate, you would have seen new build F14-d and later variants continue.


I think I made it quite clear in my previous post** when I said that the F-18 is completely inadequate as an F-14 tomcat replacement. I mean I don't think that is even up for debate and one will be hard pressed to find someone familiar with both the aircraft that will doubt that. The point that I have been trying to make in my last two posts is that the US Navy divested itself of the missions for which it needed the Tomcat allowing them to replace a long range Air to Air interceptor, and patched up strike aircraft with a medium range fighter with very different flying characteristics and capabilities.

Of course the F-18 E/F is not inadequate for now. There is no significant threat to the CVN from the air that it when combined with the Hornet, E-2D, and EA-18G cannot handle and this will only get better with the arrival of the F-35C and the MQ-25. But that was not the point, the point was that looked at through the lens of the F-14 mission set, the Rhino is a super lousy replacement. But clearly they did not need to look through that lens as the world and requirements had moved on and demanded a different type of aircraft to fill the USN carrier decks.

**The original point was -

Barath wrote:As a newish multi-role it was good enough to replace the F14 of Top Gun fame and a couple of others.


As I said then and again in this post, this is not how the decision to field the Super Hornet was made. It was not evaluated against the F-14. After promising to upgrade the F-14 so that it was viable through 2015ish and using that excuse to get out of the NATF, the US Navy then finally killed the aircraft in the mid 2000s after systematically culling requirements that were farmed out to the F-14 community so that they got to a point where they could get the SH to fit into those squadrons. Same with the A-6. The A-6 to F/A-18E transition was again shedding a fair bit of strike radius. These were conscious decisions to better allign the modern US Navy CAW with the prevalent threat. The Super Hornet is a good medium range multi-role fighter and works for the USN. The block III in particular offers tremendous capability and is going to be very capable (I'll leave the EA-18G out because the platform has literally nothing to do with the capability of that aircraft) in its multi-role mission. But there should be no need to sugar coat and bend facts to somehow compare it to the F-14 because no comparison is possible given such large differences in roles. The fact that many tomcat squadrons transitioned doesn't in any way prove that the USN thinks they were comparable or equal for one to replace the latter. It merely states progression and change of mission type for those units.

Barath wrote:
Some folks believe that this is different/distinct from another long range weapon that came out of shadows during development..

LREW

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... et-442816/



Based on what is publicly known, the LREW was a trade/R&D study not a POR. AIM-260 is a POR which was competed and won by Lockheed Martin a couple of years ago. There are literally scores of USAF or USN funded long range weapon programs related S&T and R&D work funded to keep the design teams busy. Not all of it makes into a POR until the right time.

Could the LREW be a distinct POR that they just don't want to talk about. It is possible though quite unlikely because if it were classified then so would have been its trade studies. Between JATM, SACM, MSDM, and ErWN they probably have their plates full.

Barath wrote:The US had also been working for a long time on the shadowy T3 missile testing, whose concept seems to be ramjet to combine aim120D and anti radiation missile.


The US is not still working on the T3. The T3 program has long since concluded after conducting its flight test phase. It was a DARPA run program to demonstrate a common missile for Air to Air, Air to Ground (ARM) and Anti Cruise Missile (CMD) mission. I think those flight tests happened back in 2014 or maybe 2015. Boeing even did a big press PR thing (see below) with their concepts though Raytheon was quiet about theirs though all one needed to go and do was check out Aerojet's website and their annual report to see that their variant with the VFDR flew successfully to support that program. I've provided most of that info here over the years. DARPA's job is to demonstrate tactical capability (T3 came out of their TT Office) that can rapidly transition into operational use but they transition these programs to an appropriate service. Clearly the USAF (ACC is the decision authority on the JATM) felt that they had better proposals then to field the T3 tech. Lockheed has been working on some pretty neat and innovative missile solutions on the ballistic and cruise missile defense role and has been presenting concepts, and even test flying some, that leverage some of the direct work on these programs. It isn't surprising that they managed to best out both Boeing and Raytheon to win this program given that the AIM-260 is unlikely to share the T-3's mission requirement (three targets) instead probably focusing on the technologies and target sets highlighted in the slide posted in my previous post.

Boeing Phantom Works May Unveil New Projects


Davis also disclosed that the Phantoms had conducted four flight tests under the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Triple Target Terminator (T3) program. The test vehicles, about the size of an AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile, flew "faster and farther" than an Amraam, Davis said, but he did not provide any other details.


Barath wrote: It may have been canceled


T3 was a completely open and transparent program with all of its materials published in DARPA"s official unclassified budgets. The only thing they did not do was release photos of videos which would have generated media buzz had that happened. Yet, as I said companies were free to disclose their participation, the contract awards were all out in the open, and the companies were also allowed to share their successful completion of these milestones. The program concluded with its flight test phase in 2014/15 IIRC, as I said earlier. These are technology related programs that act as a proof of concept and allow a potential service to validate before committing to a POR. In this case, the AIM-260 awards probably logically flow from the T-3 and describes a shift in direction from a more conventional long range multi-role BVRAAM to a hyper-agile, BVRAAM with a different target set..At least that is the currently stated end goal...As I opined earlier in my prior post to Indraanil, it seems the 5th gen operator community seems to have won out..This seems to be a change in direction towards a more optimized missile for 5th and 6th gen fighters assuming it incorporates some of the characteristics of an Air Dominance weapon the USAF has been wanting for nearly half a decade now (which it should given its their next AD weapon). This is logical given the USAF and USN would probably field 1000+ 5th gen aircraft by the time the JATM enters full rate production and it is also quite likely that TD's for the next gen. airframes would also have flown. The T3 in contrast was basically a putting together of all the stuff and capability (longer range, Ramjet propulsion, new seeker) that the missile design teams had been promoting since the 1990s when the USAF began funding demonstrations on ARC's VFDR motors and Raytheon proposing a whole host of missiles for the UK etc.
Last edited by brar_w on 22 Jun 2019 21:18, edited 3 times in total.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 22 Jun 2019 16:31

Turkey reveals the TFX 5th Gen Stealth Fighter in Paris! Obviously a full-sized mockup.

Looks similar to the AMCA renderings.

Image
Image
Image
Image

Mollick.R
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 10:26

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Mollick.R » 23 Jun 2019 22:29

Airbus product line formation flight: 50-year anniversary

Nice Video

https://youtu.be/hUF_QxuRz7c

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21052
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Prem » 25 Jun 2019 02:30

https://www.airlive.net/breaking-two-eu ... ot-killed/
Two Eurofighter fighter jets collided collided midair over Germany
Footage shows one of two Eurofighter jets involved in a mid-air crash hurtling to earth in northern Germany.Lewis Hipperson works as a greenkeeper at Fleesensee Golf & Country Club in the Muritz region and filmed the disaster unfolding in the sky nearby.
One pilot was killed and another managed to parachute to safety after two unarmed German Eurofighter jets collided.Lewis told Mirror Online the collision had left him 'shocked'.He said: "Most of the jets fly around this area everyday and I don’t think anyone would expect an accident like this was on the cards.The mid-air collision happened as three Eurofighter Typhoons were taking part in an air combat exercise shortly after 14:00 (12:00 GMT). The third pilot witnessed the collision over the Fleesensee and reported seeing two parachutes."

mridulmm
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 27 Feb 2017 03:13

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby mridulmm » 26 Jun 2019 08:25


MeshaVishwas
BRFite
Posts: 292
Joined: 16 Feb 2019 17:20

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby MeshaVishwas » 27 Jun 2019 08:07


Informative report.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 02 Jul 2019 19:32

40% additional fuel should give it 20-25% additional range. The current CTOL/A variant has a combat radius (2 x 2000 lb bombs and 2 AIM-120's with full internal fuel) of 669 nautical miles according to the official 2019 SAR. A 25% increase in combat radius would give it a combat radius in excess of 1500 km in the strike mission (and probably closer to 2000 km with a lighter load / A2A configuration).

Lockheed Martin Proposes 40% Fuel Capacity Upgrade for F-35A


Lockheed confirms that it is now engaged in a study about the option for a 600-gal. fuel tank and a wing pylon that can be jettisoned. The tank is designed to be integrated on the inboard stations—3 and 9—on each wing, the company says. Although the pilot can restore the F-35A’s stealth signature to radar by jettisoning the tank and pylon, it is not clear how the radar cross-section is affected with the equipment attached to the wing.
Given that the 18,500-lb. internal fuel capacity of the F-35A is equivalent to 3,000 gal., adding two 600-gal. external tanks on an F-35A would raise overall fuel volume onboard to 4,200 gal., or 25,700 lb. That still falls short of the 35,500-lb. capacity for an F-15E configured for a ferry flight, but should dramatically increase the single-engine fighter’s endurance.
“While exact ranges depend on mission profiles, our studies show a significant increase in both range and loiter time—or mission persistence,” a Lockheed spokesman says.
So far, the company has completed feasibility studies and conducted initial analysis, as well as early design of the range-extension upgrades. The industry-funded work was done in advance of an approved customer requirement, but Lockheed plans to present the range extension as a candidate upgrade through the Continuous Capability, Development and Delivery framework for the F-35’s follow-on modernization program, also known as Block 4.
The remaining work required includes detailed design and qualification of the fuel tank and pylon, as well as software integration, flight testing and airworthiness certification, Lockheed says.


Image

It also appears, that the AIM-260 could be coming to the F-35, much sooner than expected. New facilities at Hill Air Force Base Utah to house the semi-classified weapon are expected to be completed by March 2022. Hill houses the F-35A's and will have more than 70 permanently based there. While the 2022 IOC candidates for the AIM-260 are the F-22A and F/A-18E/F the F-35 may just be a year or two behind especially since its a
strong possibility, if not a guarantee, that the AIM-260 will be the first UAI compliant AIM missile making integration much easier into the block 4 F-35 (which gains UAI compatibility). Also another tidbit from Steve Trimble over at Aviation Week that points to the test range requirements for the AIM-260 to be about double those of the AMRAAM, the D version of which probably goes a good 50% farther than the pre plug C variants and prior versions. Interesting to see how apart the AIM-120D, Meteor and AIM-260 introduction into the F-35 are. Right now it is slated to get the AIM-120D around 2021, Meteor around 2023-2024, and possibly the AIM-260 around 2023-2024 or perhaps a little earlier. Unless the AIM-260 JATM is export controlled I see it severely undercutting the Meteor prospects with F-35 customers given its advantages in compressed carriage and the AMRAAM like form factor allowing 6 to be carried in an F-35 with expanded carriage.

New AIM-260 Missiles Are So Secretive They Will Require A Custom Storage Bunker At Hill AFB


Because of the highly sensitive nature of this new weapon, which will have far greater range than the latest AIM-120D variant of the AMRAAM and could feature advanced capabilities, like a dual-mode seeker, it may remain more heavily classified than its predecessor even after it enters operational service. With this in mind, storing full-up live rounds in highly secure and purpose-built vault-like facilities at a handful of key bases may make some sense as opposed to dispersing them to fighter wings all over the U.S., and the planet, for that matter.

Also of importance is the timeline stated in this document. This large storage facility is slated to be under construction now and finished by March of 2022. This fits perfectly with the present official timeline for fielding the weapon. The Air Force has stated that it hopes the missile will reach initial operational capability that year after beginning flight testing no later than 2021. Air Force F-22 Raptors and Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornets are set to be the first to carry the missiles, with all variants of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, as well as potentially other platforms, following thereafter. In addition to likely testing at Hill AFB, there are also reports that JATM flight and potentially live-fire testing will also occur at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. This is not surprising given that Eglin is home to Air Force's main Armament Directorate, the service's central manager for the development of new aerial weapons, as well as the Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate. Details about the testing requirements also give a general sense about the AIM-260's capabilities over the AMRAAM.

"We've seen charts for the Air Force range requirements for Eglin Air Force Base showing circles for the test area for AMRAAM and the test area for the JATM," Steve Trimble, Aviation Week's Defense Editor and good friend of the War Zone, said on the Check 6 Podcast on June 27, 2019. "The AIM-260 missile has a range circle that's roughly double the size of the AMRAAM circle."

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 03 Jul 2019 19:26

Boeing begins EMD flight trials for T-X trainer


Boeing has begun engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) flight trials of the T-X trainer aircraft it has developed with partner Saab for the US Air Force (USAF).

The first EMD sortie, which was announced by the company on 1 July, involved Boeing T-X (BTX) aircraft N381TX flying out of the company’s St Louis facility in Missouri.

No details were disclosed as to the nature or duration of the flight test, although Boeing’s Chief T-X Test Pilot, Steve ‘Bull’ Schmidt, noted, “[It] went extremely well. She flew just superb [during the] first flight [of the] EMD test programme. [The] first test points went off without a hitch.”
With two EMD aircraft so far built (Boeing has been keen to stress that these are not prototypes, in the traditional sense of the word, but fully configured platforms), 71 test flights were flown between December 2016 and December 2018. Since then, Boeing and Saab have been analysing the data ahead of the commencement of EMD flight trials.

The BTX features a single General Electric Aviation GE 404 engine, a large-area display (LAD) cockpit, and open-architecture system. The USAF is due to receive 350 aircraft to replace the Northrop T-38 Talon that has been in service since the 1960s.

With the first aircraft set to be delivered to Randolph Air Force Base, Texas, in 2023, initial operational capability (IOC) is scheduled for 2024. Production at the newly established facility in Indiana will be set at approximately 60 aircraft per year.

Speaking to Jane’s and other defence media in June, Boeing explained that the BTX has been built specifically for the USAF requirement, with Ted Torgerson, programme head for the T-X Advanced Pilot Training Program (ATP), noting; “It is a flexible open-architecture system that will do the things it needs to do as the air force determines its future pilot training requirements. It is a fighter – it flies like a fighter and is manoeuvrable like a fighter. It provides the air force with something different from the T-38, which was designed for the Century-series aircraft [of the 1960s]. It is more than just an aircraft, it is a fully integrated training system through which we can tie all of our training together via LVC [live, virtual, and constructive].”

Further to its fighter-like performance, Torgerson highlighted the BTX’s efficiency and the reliability that is to be built into the aircraft to enable the USAF to fly it as and when it wants to. “It has a low cost per flying hour, is easy to maintain, and can be turned around many times a day like an airliner,” he said.

While developed as a trainer aircraft, the BTX is already being marked out for a potential future career as a potential Aggressor and light attack fighter.

“There is certainly growth for light attack and Aggressor development, with all the power and cooling requirements already designed into the airframe,” Torgerson recently told Jane’s and other defence media, adding that locations for underwing hardpoints have been identified and that the necessary structures are already in place (although the wiring and plumbing is not).

Torgerson did not name potential future customers for the BTX, but he did note that it will be the combination of low cost and high capability that will draw them in. “Other light attack and trainer aircraft won’t be able to touch us on cost – either procurement or through-life support. We will have all of the capability, but without the expense,” he said, adding, “A lot of countries need an inexpensive [light attack] aircraft, and now the United States has one to offer.”

Boeing and Saab envision a global market of up to 2,600 BTX aircraft over the coming years, including the 350 aircraft earmarked for the USAF. Although the potential for light attack and Aggressor sales is there, Torgerson said, Boeing will not begin serious development in this direction until a customer requests it, noting, “We don’t know when light attack development will begin. We have studied it, but we are not going to commit to it without a [customer] requirement to do so first.”



brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 04 Jul 2019 20:10

While there are plenty of positives to come out of it, but having sunk >$50 Billion on the Rafale with a sub-200/250 aircraft production run (they've been at it since the late 90's as far as production is concerned) has had other consequences and one of this has been a complete absence in the UAV/UCAV market for most of Europe including French firms. There appears to be some trouble with the Euro-MALE (arguably tackling the cheaper end of the MALE/HALE - survivability matrix), a program that will at best field a Mk1 aircraft in the late 2020's a cool couple of decades behind their competition that now has a growing portfolio of products in this space. If they don't sort this out then the future of Euro HALE, or Euro LO/UCAV looks sketchy as well...speaking nothing of more ambitious and technically challenging (and more expensive) programs like the SCAF.

‘Obese’ EuroMALE Prompts French Export Concerns


The future of the pan-European EuroMALE (medium altitude, long-endurance) unmanned air system has become hazy after French government officials described the platform as “obese” because of German requirements.

Giving evidence in a French senate hearing about Franco-German defense cooperation on June 26, Christian Cambon, president of the French committee on foreign affairs, defense and the armed forces, said: “With two engines and a weight of 10 tons, this drone will be too heavy, too expensive and therefore difficult to export.”

He blamed the weight issues on German requirements for a twin-engine configuration so it can operate in nonsegregated airspace over German cities.

Cambon said the French asked for a review of the requirements, despite the nations agreeing on the configuration in 2017.

Cambon’s comments come as more details have emerged about the specifications for the EuroMALE platform, which is being developed jointly by Airbus, Dassault Aviation and Leonardo with support from the governments of France, Germany, Italy and Spain. European armaments agency OCCAR released a picture showing some of the basic specifications for the platform—a maximum takeoff weight of around 11 metric tons, a payload capability of 2,300 kg and a maximum speed of 270 kt. The specifications put the EuroMALE at twice the weight of the U.S. General Atomics Reaper and Israel Aerospace Industries’ Heron TP platforms, but with only a marginally higher payload.

Disagreements between the partner nations at this stage could interrupt plans for them to sign a global contract for the development and production of the platform by year’s end. Airbus, the prime contractor, submitted a formal offer for the global contract at the end of May on behalf of its partners. The aim is to bring the first platforms to frontline service in 2025.

“We need this drone in Mali ... the Germans want to do urban surveillance over their territory,” Cambon told the hearing. “They want two engines for safety reasons so the drone cannot crash into a city,” he said.

The EuroMALE was born out of European industry’s growing frustration about not being able to get a foothold in the MALE UAV market being dominated by U.S. and Israeli products. In 2014 Airbus, Dassault and Leonardo joined to put pressure on their domestic governments, securing a two-year definition study in 2015. They have since completed a series of system requirements and design reviews.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 23 Jul 2019 19:32

Interesting set of upgrades. While they aren't upgrading fully to USAF standard (DEWS instead of EPAWSS as well as a different MC than ADCP II (though related), this is probably going to significantly enhance the capability of the F-15J's into the 2020's. Also interesting t note that they are now going for the more multi-mission of the two AESA radars available on the family and committing to fielding the JASSM on the type.

APG-82 Key Feature In Japanese F-15 Upgrade

BEIJING—The Raytheon APG-82 radar will be the centerpiece of an upgrade of Japanese Boeing F-15 Eagles, which also look almost certain to carry air-to-air missiles from Raytheon.

Countering cruise missile attacks by Chinese bombers from the eastern side of Japan is a key role for the modernized aircraft. Standoff air-to-surface capability will also be added.

The first upgraded F-15 will be delivered by July 2023, the defense ministry announced in June; work on it and another has been due to begin in the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2019. Modification work in that year is budgeted at ¥10.8 billion and development at ¥41.2 billion, the ministry said.
These are among 20 Eagles due for modernization during the five years of the current Medium-Term Defense Plan, fiscal 2019-23, the ministry said, adding that all will be F-15Js. Japan also has F-15DJ two-seaters. The program will apply to F-15s that have already been modernized, the ministry said; 92 have been. But it said in February that 102 Japanese Eagles are suitable for the program.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) built most of Japan’s F-15s and presumably is the leading candidate for the forthcoming program.
The APG-82, which is fitted to modernized U.S. Air Force F-15Es and has an active electronically scanned array (AESA), will replace the Raytheon APG-63(V)1 in upgraded Japanese Eagles, the ministry said in answer to queries from Aerospace DAILY. It pointed to the new sensor’s superior capabilities in detecting and reacting to multiple targets and in electronic counter-countermeasures.

Another part of the upgrade will be fitting equipment for the Link 16 datalink in its most advanced available form, bringing “significantly increased number of linkable assets and stronger confidentiality in communication,” the ministry said.

As is common in fighter radar replacement programs, the F-15s will also get new central computers. Further, electronic warfare equipment with high capability in defensive jamming and protection will be added. A ministry document published in December 2018 identifies this as the BAE Systems DEWS equipment. Such systems need to be closely integrated with the radar, to avoid mutual interference.

The ministry has previously mentioned that the modernized fighters will carry more air-to-air missiles. This will be done to counter saturation attacks, such as those using cruise missiles, it said in describing the program to Aerospace DAILY.

The sensitivity and multi-target capability of the AESA radar is clearly relevant to that mission. The utility of its air-to-surface modes, used for the F-15E’s primary mission of strike, is less clear in the case of the upgraded F-15Js.

The intended surface-attack weapon is the Lockheed Martin AGM-158 Jassm, for which a software update and other integration work will be needed.
In explaining the program, the ministry’s first point is that it will address a demand in the mid-term plan “for the comprehensive enhancement of air defense capability in vast airspace on the Pacific side in order to obtain and maintain air superiority.”

Planned adaptation of the helicopter carriers Izumo and Kaga to operate Lockheed MartinF-35B Lightnings has a similar justification. A ministry diagram showed a carrier and its F-35Bs, east of Japan, dealing with fighters from an aircraft carrier, presumably Chinese, and with Avic Xian H-6 bombers. The forthcoming H-20 must also be a consideration.

The 102 F-15s that the ministry said in February were upgradable were built to a standard called MSIP from 1985 to 1998. Of those, 92 were modified from 2004 to 2018 to fire the Mitsubishi Electric AAM-4B and MHI AAM-5 air-to-air missiles. Another 99 Eagles, of pre-MSIP standard, will be replaced by F-35s and retired, Japanese media have said.

Former air force officer Takashi Uto told parliament on June 18 that capability to fire Japanese missiles will be excluded from the modernization because upgrades done with U.S. equipment are very sensitive. He did not elaborate, but an obvious area of sensitivity for Washington would be supplying information on a U.S. radar to integrate it with Japanese weapons. Also, industry officials have said, the U.S. often is reluctant for economic reasons to help customers integrate foreign weapons on U.S. aircraft; it would prefer they bought from a U.S. supplier.
In this case that supplier at first only could be Raytheon, maker of the AIM-120 Amraam and AIM-9 Sidewinder, though Japan could hope to buy the forthcoming and recently revealed Lockheed Martin AIM-260 one day.

The Meteor version, the Joint New Air-to-Air Missile (JNAAM) evidently is not to be used, at least at first, because Uto, a member of parliament, presumably would not be concerned about losing the AAM-4B if its replacement were partly Japanese and evidently regarded by the ministry as a superior weapon.
Japan is working on its own new fighter radar, with an AESA. When the F-15 upgrade was first announced, that sensor seemed to be a likely candidate. But its state of development is unclear, and the choice of the APG-82 obviously promised a faster, simpler and cheaper development effort.


Image

Image

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 24 Jul 2019 19:43

Canadian MRCA RFP has been released. They call for a 2020 final submission of proposal, 2022 down-select and for the aircraft to be in service by 2025. This appears to be a three way race between the Block 4 F-35A, Eurofighter Typhoon Tranch 3 and the Block III Super Hornet (Gripen stands little chance).

Would be interesting to see how they count offsets and investments. There are over 2 dozen Canadian companies involved in the F-35 program since its inception with the peak involvement being well above 30. They've already secured > $1.5 Billion in contracts ( that's >10% of contract value without Canada having placed even a single order) but the program (JPO will submit guaranteed bids as they do for all F-35 contracts) cannot guarantee contracts because the program rules (to which Canada is a signatory) mandate a competition and decisions to be made on best performance and cost-performance on prior contracts... With F-35 production fluctuating between 150-200 over the next 5 years it wouldn't be surprising if Canada would have already secured a fourth of the desired offsets by the time they make a down-select..even if they chose some other aircraft.

I think Lockheed will probably have to offer a separate set of guaranteed offsets outside of JSF production contracts to make up for that though that will probably not go down well with the GOTUS given Canada is a signatory and a program partner and via this it may just open up the door for others to re-negotiate partnership agreements and squeeze in additional offsets via a backdoor. The reason partners agreed to "competed contracts" and not work farmed off irrespective of contractor performance or quality (like the Eurofighter consortium chose to do) was because in return they were able to negotiate the fact that they did not need to place firm/contractually binding orders and any increase or decrease in their procurement would not significantly impact their industrial benefits.

Canada releases fighter RFP


Canada has issued a request for proposals (RFP) for 88 new combat aircraft to replace its ageing fleet of Boeing F/A-18 (CF-18/CF-188 in national service) Hornets.

The RFP, released by Public Services and Procurement Canada on 23 July, has been sent to Sweden for the Saab Gripen E; to the United Kingdom for the Eurofighter Typhoon (the bid is being led by Airbus rather than BAE Systems, because of the company's stake in Canadian-based Bombardier); and to the United States for both the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

The companies will submit a 'security offer' by the third quarter (Q3) of 2019 and, following feedback from the government, they may then revise and resubmit their offer as part of the initial proposal in Q2 2020.

"All bidders will be subject to the same evaluation criteria, and proposals will be rigorously assessed on elements of technical merit (60%), cost (20%) and economic benefits (20%). This procurement attributes one of the highest weightings to economic benefits for Canada in its history. All suppliers will be required to provide a plan for economic benefits equal to the value of their proposed contract, with maximum points only being awarded to suppliers who provide contractual guarantees," Public Services and Procurement Canada said.

The planned procurement, which the government notes is the most significant investment in the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) since it acquired its original Hornets more than 30 years ago, includes a new combat aircraft to be contracted in 2022 and enter service from 2025.



NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 28 Jul 2019 08:33

SpaceX's massive Starship prototype lifts off

New York (CNN Business)A prototype of SpaceX's Mars rocket roared to life Thursday night, lifting the vehicle into the air for a landmark test.

It was the first time the experimental craft, nicknamed "Starhopper," flew free without being tethered to the ground.

SpaceX's goal was to lift the spacecraft about 65 feet into the air before gently landing it nearby — what's SpaceX called a "hop test." It's not clear exactly how high the craft flew. Footage captured by reporters present at the South Texas launch site show fire and smoke erupting from Starhopper's massive Raptor rocket engine, obscuring the vehicle from view.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said the flight was a success.

"Water towers *can* fly," he joked in a tweet, referencing Starhopper's likeness to a cylindrical water tank. He also shared views of the launch that were captured by a nearby drone and a camera near the Raptor engine.

Musk tweeted that SpaceX will next attempt a 200 meter, or 650 foot, hop test "in a week or two."Starhopper's successful run came one day after a hop attempt was aborted three seconds after the Raptor engine fired up. The craft never left the ground, and stray flames appeared to shoot out from the top of the vehicle, but no serious damage was done. Musk said the hop test was called off because the fuel was "colder than expected," causing an issue with pressure levels inside the vehicle.

Starhopper is designed to be an early precursor to a deep-space exploration rocket called Starship, and Musk has said rapid development of the technology is a top priority for SpaceX.

The latest design for Starship, which was earlier referred to as BFR, show it riding into orbit atop the most powerful rocket booster ever built. SpaceX hopes to use the launch system to deliver massive loads of satellites into orbit, and eventually to shuttle humans out into the solar system to explore and colonize Mars.

Yusaku Maezawa, the Japanese billionaire who landed a deal with SpaceX to one day use a Starship spacecraft to circle the moon, tweeted praised to Musk.

"Congrats!!! Moon is right there!" he wrote.






brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 28 Jul 2019 21:33

Arrow 3 exo test out at Alaska. Interestingly, this was the first time the Arrow-3 also used data from the AN/TPY-2 X-band AESA. This is going to be critical interoperability piece given the A3 lacks a high end discrimination sensor and something that will come in handy as Iran's ballistic missile program advances. Should lead to both higher PK and allow for better shot optimization (adjusting the shot doctrine). The first GaN upgraded TPY-2 is expected to be handed over to the US Army this October. I wouldn't be surprised if its first deployment location is in Israel given the recent THAAD rapid deployments there and the heightened alertness there..

https://twitter.com/inbarspace/status/1 ... 9090725888

Image

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 29 Jul 2019 01:20

File this under "Fun Stuff":

July 2019 Oshkosh.



Test flight:


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 30 Jul 2019 06:46

Interesting ramifications from the Turkish exit from the JSF program. The Netherlands wants 8-9 additional aircraft. Their plans to buy additional aircraft were doing the rounds in the media a year or two ago but they would now probably wants to use that to pick up some of the additional work that will be shed by Turkish firms. Japan likely wanting the same also wants to now join as an official program partner following its plans to buy 100 or so more F-35's than its initial contract as an FMS customer. I would not be surprised if a ME customer (UAE) formally requests F-35's soon knowing the current administrations willingness to approve FMS cases quickly.

Japan wants to be an official F-35 partner. The Pentagon plans to say no.


Netherlands stepping up F-35 purchase after Turkey’s ejection from programme – Kokpit

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7310
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Prasad » 30 Jul 2019 08:33

Wonder how the 100 F35 buy affects Japan's own fighter program. Can't be cheap!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 30 Jul 2019 09:50

The F-3 is, realistically, a 15-20 year undertaking so a 2035-2040 capability for them. Low internal demand, coupled by a fairly rigid export policy when it comes to export of offensive weapons means that any decision to pursue it would be purely on strategic grounds and so far they seem to want to go ahead and make that strategic investment. Over the next two decades, their air-force needs to replace its ageing aircraft just to maintain its current strength, let alone add to keep up with their National security needs amidst Chinese modernization etc. Regardless there should be a gap of 5-10 years between when their F-35 acquisition funding ceases and when their F-3 procurement funding kicks in as that program gets closer to production. Till then it will be a strategic investment in Research and Development which as I said would have to be a stategic decision since I seriously doubt their Air Force would be willing to push back its modernization by a decade or two given the regional balance and demands. Also, the F-35A for them is probably the most cost-effective option unless they buy vanilla versions of 4th gen aircraft. It is equal to or better than most advanced 4.5 generation western fighters without even entering full rate production.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 30 Jul 2019 11:17

https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/25/ispace-becomes-the-first-private-chinese-company-to-launch-satellites-to-orbit/amp/

ispace becomes the first private Chinese company to launch satellites to orbit
Darrell Etherington
@etherington / 5 days ago

With a successful launch from the Gobi Desert blasting off at around 1:10 PM Beijing time (1:10 AM ET), Chinese space launch startup ispace (which, awesomely, is also called StarCraft Glory Space Technology Co.) became the first private Chinese commercial space launch provider. The company’s SQX-1 Y1 rocket delivered two commercial satellites to an orbit of about 300 km (about 186 miles) above Earth.

The launch is the first successful commercial mission for the SQX-1 Y1 solid-propellant rocket developed by ispace, which is a four-stage design that can carry up to 260 kg (around 575 lbs) and weights around 68,000 lbs.

This is a major milestone for the Chinese space industry, and ispace beats out a healthy crop of competitors, including LandSpace and OneSpace, both of which did not succeed in earlier attempts to be the first in China to the private launch market.

Founded in October 2016, ispace secured a Series A funding round of an undisclosed amount in June, including investment from CDH Investment, Matrix Partners China and Shunwei Capital . The company completed sub-orbital flights in 2018 as precursors to the SQX-1 Y1 rocket.


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 03 Aug 2019 02:17

Airbus is testing a plane with flapping wingtips inspired by the albatross

Since the dawn of aviation, birds have been an inspiration for visionaries of flight. And now, engineers are once again looking to feathered friends to inspire the next generation of aircraft wings.

European manufacturer Airbus has developed a small-scale aircraft with flapping wing tips -- a concept drawn from the flight of the albatross.

Airbus' newest addition the "AlbatrossOne", a model based on the A321, is constructed from carbon-fiber and glass-fiber-reinforced polymers and has "semi-aeroelastic" hinged wing-tips.

The freely flapping wingtips react and flex to wind gusts, reducing drag and combating the effects of turbulence.

The aircraft was inspired by the albatross, a sea bird able to stay in the air for hours in windy weather with little wing exertion.

"The concept of hinged wingtips is not new," Airbus engineer Tom Wilson said in a statement.

"Military jets employ them to allow greater storage capacity on aircraft carriers. However, AlbatrossOne is the first aircraft to trial in-flight, freely flapping wing tips—which account for up to a third of the length of the wing," he added.

For now, the "AlbatrossOne" is still being tested -- after a 20-month development programme, the first flight tests were concluded in February, Airbus said.

The airplane manufacturer will continue to conduct more test flights that combine the two flight modes, examining the transition as the wingtips unlock during flight.

The "AlbatrossOne" is the latest Airbus design to be inspired by birds. In July, Airbus unveiled the "Bird of Prey" -- a concept aircraft inspired by the natural features of eagles, hawks and other aerial predators.

Airbus has also turned to other parts of the natural world to for aircraft design solutions. For the past two years, the manufacturer has been fitting certain jetliners with small "riblet" patches -- textured surfaces applied to the fuselages and wings that mimic the effect of sharkskin in an attempt to reduce drag during high-speed cruise flight.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1885
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Manish_P » 05 Aug 2019 14:59

A fascinating read... full of interesting nuggets!

Foxhound Vs Blackbird: Former MiG-31 Pilot explains how to Intercept and Shoot Down an SR-71 Mach 3 Spy Plane

Each fighter regiment executed an intercept in its own sector. For the 174th GvIAP, this was the sector of the Soviet border from Kharlovka to Cape Svyatoy Nos. For the unit’s MiG-31 crews, 16 minutes elapsed from the moment the alert was sounded to the take-off command being given. Of this time, two minutes were used to put on the VKK-3 (vysotnyy kompensiruyushchiy kostyum, or altitude-compensating suit), two minutes to run 50 to 60m (55 to 66 yards) in the VKK and get strapped into the aircraft, and the remainder of the time to check out the systems, start engines, and taxi. After 16 minutes the fighter would be parked at the end of the runway, with its engines running, fully prepared for take-off.

When the SR-71 alert was first given, the technical personnel ran to the aircraft and initially removed its R-60 (AA-8 Aphid’) short-range missiles because they would be disabled at velocities above Mach 1.75 (the standard MiG-31 ordnance load included four R-60s and four long-range R-33s (AA-9 ‘Amos’)). Before the aircraft was launched, its inertial navigation system (INS) had to be activated in minimum time. As soon as the green lights confirming that the INS was aligned came on (after approximately 3 minutes), the engines could be fired up.

The two crews of the ready flight prepared immediately. Everything was accomplished in a somewhat tense environment: since these aircraft were from first production series, there were occasions of system failure, particularly during the turning off of ground power. If the ground power plug was pulled out too abruptly, the INS system malfunctioned. The crew that managed to reach full readiness first was the crew that launched. :)


Information about the Blackbird normally arrived at the command post when the spyplane was three hours out (this information coming from a radio intercept station). As the SR-71s flew out of Mildenhall, conversations between their crews and those of their supporting tankers were `captured’ during inflight refuelling, so if tankers showed up, the IA-PV0 waited for the SR-71.. The SR-71 was intercepted using only a thermal channel (infrared, IR). The massive IR emissions of its engines permitted it to be detected at a distance of 100-120km (62-75 miles). The MiG-31’s thermal detection system was called OMB (or optical multifunctional apparatus) and was mounted in the lower nose of the aircraft. The device was lowered and turned on by the WSO. The MiG’s radar was not turned on. On combat alert the radar was set on a combat frequency, and in order not to expose this frequency to a ‘probable enemy’, the radar was not turned on. A passive system (the thermal apparatus) was adequate for a reliable intercept.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 07 Aug 2019 19:44

Very important capability building on what the aircraft is already capable of doing with Naval systems/vessels using CES and NIFC-CA (via MADL).

An important distinction from just data-sharing with platforms over standard Link-16 is that it is just not sending updates via a common SA data-link (like a link-16 track/overlay). Utilizing onboard MADL, and a MADL terminal on the IBCS (or equivalent surface vessel) it is capable of both sending and receiving "Raw sensor tracks" instead, which can then be fused with organic and/or third-party data for detection, CID, and targeting. This is what enables "any-sensor-any-shooter" because there is true fire-control level connectivity instead of just a common operating picture and/or track overlays which have existed for years.

If/when the F-35 gets the TTNT capability it will expand the number of platforms it can pipe raw data to and at much longer ranges (MADL is LPI and short-medium range system as it operates in Ku band, as opposed to much lower frequency (more efficient) that TTNT operates in).

F-35 Track Data Fed To Army Missile Defense System


The U.S. Army and Air Force successfully demonstrated using Lockheed Martin F-35 track data with the Army Integrated Air and Missile Defense (AIAMD) Battle Command System (IBCS) during the Orange Flag exercise in Palmdale, California, and Ft. Bliss, Texas.
This was the first-time live F-35 track data was sent to the IBCS using both the F-35 ground station and the F-35 IBCS adaptation kit, which were both developed by Lockheed Martin, according to a company statement.

“This demonstration represents significant growth in capability for the Army IAMD program and Army for multi-domain operations,” Scott Arnold, vice president and deputy of integrated air and missile defense at Lockheed Martin said in a statement.

This new capability demonstrates AIAMD can gather sensor data from multiple platforms. In 2016, the F-35 and Aegis Combat System demonstrated integration of the F-35 supporting Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air. The F-35 ground station resides at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico to support AIAMD follow-on developmental testing.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 08 Aug 2019 21:36

Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation has published footage of the first flight of the latest unmanned aerial vehicle «Okhotnik»


Video:

https://twitter.com/mod_russia/status/1 ... 0464912385

Russia has released footage of its new 'Hunter' stealth attack drone

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 09 Aug 2019 21:29

JASDF - 5th generation, 4th generation and 3rd generation fighters all in one shot. [ Or as someone here will say - 2nd gen, 3rd. gen, and 4th gen. in one shot :wink: ]

Image

Image

Chinmay
BRFite
Posts: 195
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Chinmay » 09 Aug 2019 22:09

Some of these Japanese Phantoms have gorgeous paint schemes



brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 10 Aug 2019 10:52

The beauty of the NGJ system at play. Stand-Off mission requires distinct jammers with adequate power to handle threats at stand-off range and multiple threats at a time. Quite a contrast to the multi-role/frequency systems that attempt to jam a much wider radar frequency range and are really optimized for self protection or escort and not all-aspect stand off SEAD and DEAD like the NGJ system is. Standard Growler missions will involve 2 NGJ MB systems and 1 centrally mounted (using the aircraft body and systems) LB jammer. HB will be used as is for escort duties as required likely replacing the LB pods on the center line..

Next Generation Jammer Mid Band (Raytheon)- Operational Capability by Late 2021/Early 2022 with focus on 2 GHz to 6 GHz
Next Generation Jammer Low Band (Likely Northrop Grumman) - Operational Capability by 2024 with focus on 100 MHz- to 2 GHz-waveband
Next Generation Jammer High Band (Yet to be selected) - Operational Around 2026-2028 with focus on 6 GHz to 18 GHz waveband

Last edited by brar_w on 11 Aug 2019 06:37, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 11 Aug 2019 06:08

14 minutes




44 minutes


Sandrokottos
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 19 Feb 2019 01:34

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Sandrokottos » 11 Aug 2019 08:24

Chinmay wrote:Some of these Japanese Phantoms have gorgeous paint schemes


Thank you for the eyegasm :D . I live for the day a video like this is made of IAF fighters.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 16 Aug 2019 13:19


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 17 Aug 2019 05:57

Japan to purchase 42 F-35B fighter jets from US


Completing a selection process that began in March, the defense ministry announced on Friday its decision to buy 42 of Lockheed Martin's F-35B fighter jets at cost of about 130 million dollars for each aircraft.

The ministry said the aircraft has all of the necessary capabilities, including flight performance.

The ministry plans to upgrade the Maritime Defense-Force destroyer Izumo and use it as an aircraft carrier for the F-35B aircraft.

The Japanese government said in its latest defense guidelines and mid-term defense program that it will introduce fighter jets that can perform short-distance take-offs and vertical landings.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 19 Aug 2019 16:00

This is a pretty profound development that has mostly happened under the radar.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/China-tech/China-s-version-of-GPS-now-has-more-satellites-than-US-original

China's version of GPS now has more satellites than US original

Growing global coverage of BeiDou positioning system raises security fears

KAZUHIRO KIDA, SHINICHI HASHIMOTO, Nikkei staff writers
AUGUST 19, 2019 18:03 JST

TOKYO -- China's BeiDou satellite positioning system has overtaken its U.S. rival in size, a shift with potentially huge implications for both high-tech industry and national security.

...

A Nikkei analysis of satellite orbit data from leading U.S. receiver maker Trimble highlighted BeiDou's rapid growth. China launched 18 satellites for the system in 2018 alone. As of the end of June, there were 35 BeiDou satellites in operation, compared with 31 for GPS.

The EU, meanwhile, has 22 positioning satellites and Russia 24. Japan operates four "quasi-zenith" satellites, which are limited to regional use, while India has six.

As of June 28, Chinese satellites were observed more frequently than GPS satellites in 130 of 195 countries (U.N. member states plus the Vatican and Palestine). More than 20 BeiDou satellites were observed over mainland China.

...

The Pakistani military relies on BeiDou for positioning data, and in April there was a test run of self-driving tractors in Tunisia using the system. More than 30 countries in the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere use the Chinese navigation system. If it becomes the standard in these countries, China will have an advantage in introducing new technologies and products.

Image

...

BeiDou is also making inroads in Japan, the U.S. and Europe. About 10 Chinese satellites were seen over New York and London, fewer than in Asia. But there were almost as many Chinese satellites overhead in the two cities as American and European ones during certain hours. Japan's four quasi-zenith satellites usually operate in conjunction with around 10 GPS satellites. But more than 20 BeiDou satellites could be observed daily over Japan.

A report by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a U.S. congressional panel, estimates that Beijing will invest up to $10.6 billion on its satellite positioning system between 1994 and 2020. The country plans to launch about 10 satellites by 2020. The bigger the constellation of satellites, the more accurate the positioning. Nobuaki Kubo, a professor at Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, believes BeiDou will be as accurate as the satellite systems of advanced economies within a few years.

The growth of China's satellite data positioning industry has profound implications. Chinese smartphones and car navigation systems are BeiDou-compatible by default; foreign manufacturers are following suit because products and services that use BeiDou are available in many other countries.

...

The rise of BeiDou has raised alarms in the U.S. national security establishment. Unlike GPS, which only sends signals, and cannot identify the location of receivers, BeiDou's communications with the ground are two-way.

When using BeiDou for car navigation, the receiver could theoretically transmit the car's location to a satellite in orbit, said Dean Cheng, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. He also believes Chinese satellites can jam signals in specific areas. The U.S. government is worried that such capabilities could be used in cyberattacks.


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby brar_w » 21 Aug 2019 20:04

USMC To Fly First F-35B From Japan’s Izumo-Class Aircraft Carriers


U.S. Marine Corps' F-35B STOVL fighters will be the first fixed wing aircraft to fly from Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) Izumo-class "helicopter destroyers", following the conversion of both JS Izumo and JS Kaga into aircraft carriers.

According to Japanese newspaper The Asahi Shimbun which revealed the information today, the Japanese government made this request back in March.

According to the newspaper, during their meeting, Abe told General Neller about plans to convert the two vessels, the largest and flagships of the JMSDF, into aircraft carrier for F-35B during their regularly scheduled overhaul periods which take place every five years.

JS Izumo, which was commissioned in March 2015, is scheduled for a refit and overhaul period in 2020, while JS Kaga, which was commissioned at the in March 2017, is expected to conduct its technical stop in 2022. Work on the ships will include a new heat resistant coating on the deck as well as overall maintenance of the platform and propulsion system.

It will take about 5 years (from budgeting to deployment) for the F-35B to be fully inducted with the Japan Air Self Defense Force (JASDF). As we reported recently, the “air force” and not the “navy” will be flying the aircraft.

With these factors in mind, the Japanese government made an official request to the USMC. It specifically asked during the meeting “for cooperation and advice on how to operate the fighter on the deck of the modified ships” to which General Neller said he would “help as much as possible”.

In addition, The Asahi Shinbum quoted Japan’s Defense Minister Takeshi Iwaya as saying “The Izumo-class aircraft carrier role is to strengthen the air defense in the Pacific Ocean and to ensure the safety of the Self-Defense Force pilots”. Regarding the possibility of the arrival and departure of US military aircraft, “There may be no runway available for the US aircraft in an emergency. I cannot say that the US F35B should never be placed on an [JMSDF] escort vessel.”


gaurav.p
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 04 May 2018 23:02

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby gaurav.p » 24 Aug 2019 01:59

https://akashsystems.com
https://akashsystems.com/technology/

Stumbled across this interesting startup, that is building GaN-on-Diamond. Raised $14.5mn in series A.
Not an electronics expert, but this image gives the huge potential of this tech. Experts might refer the above links for in depth info...

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4363
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby Kartik » 24 Aug 2019 02:17

Taiwan anticipates new F-16 Block 70 will bost ROCAF operations

Image

Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) announced in a 21 August statement that it is “grateful” for the US government’s decision to approve the sale of new-build Lockheed Martin F-16C/D Block 70 multirole combat aircraft, noting that the new jets will enhance the Republic of China Air Force’s (RoCAF’s) ability to secure the country’s airspace over the Taiwan Strait.

..

The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 20 August that the State Department has approved Taiwan’s request – worth an estimated USD8 billion – via the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) mechanism and has notified Congress of its decision. Congress is widely expected to approve the proposed deal, given widespread bipartisan support.

According to the DSCA, the proposed FMS package includes 66 F-16C/D Block 70 aircraft and associated equipment with spares and support services. This includes 75 General Electric F110 fighter engines, 75 Northrop Grumman AN/APG-83 SABR active electronically scanned array (AESA) fire-control radars, 75 Link 16 datalink systems, as well as aircraft self-defence systems including 75 L3Harris AN/ALQ-211 A(V)4 Airborne Integrated Defense Electronic Warfare Suite (AIDEWS), 75 BAE Systems AN/ALE-47 countermeasure dispensers, and 120 Raytheon ALE-50 towed decoys.

Other equipment included in the sale include 75 General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GDOTS) M61 20 mm Vulcan cannons, precision-guidance kits and fuzes for air-to-ground munitions, mission computers, missile rail launchers, helmet mounted displays, and other ancillary systems and expendables.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby NRao » 28 Aug 2019 21:51


ldev
BRFite
Posts: 1650
Joined: 06 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby ldev » 31 Aug 2019 04:45

Amazingly high resolution satellite image tweeted by Trump on Friday afternoon showing details of the aftermath of the launch vehicle explosion at Iran's Khomeini launch site which ended Iran's latest effort to launch a satellite. Such resolution has never been seen in the public domain before Trump's tweet, probably less than 20 cms. The lower image is the highest commercially available resolution for the same site.

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
The United States of America was not involved in the catastrophic accident during final launch preparations for the Safir SLV Launch at Semnan Launch Site One in Iran. I wish Iran best wishes and good luck in determining what happened at Site One.


Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 11 Sep 2019 07:09

Cheen selling murder drones to your friendly muzzie nations that Khan won't.

https://mobile.twitter.com/putut_reza/status/1170612010603569153

Putut Reza
@putut_reza
Close up two unit CH 4B Rainbow Indonesia Air Force

Image

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3694
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: International Aerospace Discussion - Jan 2018

Postby chola » 11 Sep 2019 08:01

Cheen also sells them to a nation with a history of murdering muzzies. Anything for a yuan. lol

https://www.stripes.com/news/europe/in-a-first-for-beijing-in-europe-serbia-to-receive-chinese-armed-drones-1.598166

By SLOBODAN LEKIC | STARS AND STRIPES
Published: September 10, 2019

Serbia’s military will receive Chinese-built armed drones in the coming months, marking the first time Chinese remotely piloted aircraft have been sold to a European country, officials said Tuesday.

Serbia will take delivery of nine Chengdu Pterodactyl-1 drones within six months, with a possible follow-on order of 15 more, media reports in Belgrade said.

...

The Pterodactyls, also known in China as the Wing Loong, have been ordered by or are in service in a number of Asian and African countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Nigeria, Pakistan, Indonesia Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan and Egypt. They have been used in airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Libya and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, and one was recently shot down over Yemen by Houthi rebels.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: anupamd, Ashok Sarraff, ravikr, saip and 70 guests