All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
South Korea is developing a supersonic cruise missile that can be used to attack aircraft carriers, Aegis ships and up-to-date destroyers.
"Think tanks like the Agency for Defense Development have been developing a supersonic anti-ship cruise missile for some years now. They're expected to complete development in three to four years at the earliest," a government source said Tuesday.
The missile under development is modeled after Russia's powerful Yakhont missile, which is 8.9 m long and weighs 3 tons, but will be smaller, the source added. It will be able to reach speeds of up to Mach 2.5, with a range of 250-300 km.
Currently, the Navy has homegrown Haesung ship-to-ship missiles with a range of 150 km and the American-made Harpoon anti-ship missiles with the same range. But they can be intercepted by short-range anti-aircraft missiles or machine guns, as they fly slower than the speed of sound.
But supersonic missiles are harder to intercept as they fly fast a few meters above the surface. Russia has been developing various models to respond to American aircraft carriers. China and Japan already have such missiles or are developing them.
The missile South Korea is developing will also be capable of hitting targets on the ground, including North Korean coastal artillery batteries and long-range artillery.
But a military source said, "We're developing a supersonic cruise missile to cope with the threat from the navies of neighboring big powers rather than from North Korea."
Russian outsize freight specialist Volga-Dnepr has reached another development agreement to modernise the Antonov An-124, this time into a version designated the An-124-111VD.
It will have a maximum take-off weight of 402 tonnes and a payload capability of 150 tonnes, with a range of 5,000km with a 120-tonne load.
The upgrade will include powerplant modification to the Ivchenko-Progress D-18T 3M series engine, with full authority digital engine control.
Antonov, which disclosed the agreement during the MAKS Moscow air show, said the engine would have a life of 50,000h and 11,111 cycles.
"This will significantly improve the fuel efficiency of the aircraft, to increase its reliability, as well as reduce noise and maintenance costs," it added.
The heavy transport would have a crew of three and its cockpit would be modernised with digital avionics.
Upgrade of the type has been a long-running effort. Antonov Airlines operates a modernised variant known as the An-124-100M-150, which needs a four-person crew.
Volga-Dnepr, which has 10 An-124s, said the lifetime of the new type would eventually be lengthened to 60,000h and 12,000 cycles, potentially taking service life to 50 years.
The aircraft would be able to comply with requirements for ICAO Category IIIa landing performance, it added.
Volga-Dnepr said the modernisation of the carrier's first aircraft would lay a platform for production launch of a new-build version known as the An-124-300.
Antonov chief Dmitry Kiva said the agreement set out design specifications for Volga-Dnepr's aircraft and added: "The An-124 is undergoing yet another landmark moment in its history. The demand for these unique aircraft has exceeded supply."
Volga-Dnepr Group president Alexey Isaikin added that the modernisation, ready by 2013, would be an "important practical step" towards resumption of An-124 production. He said the company was committed to the type and was prepared to order 40.
One of the BAE Systems Hawk aircraft from the Royal Air Force's Red Arrows aerobatic display team has crashed while performing a routine in the southern UK.
The team was displaying at the Bournemouth Air Festival when the incident occurred.
Nine Hawks are normally used during the Red Arrows display. It is unclear which of the aircraft was involved, although an unconfirmed report indicated that the incident involved Red 4.
There is no information as to the condition of the pilot.
"We can confirm that we are aware of an incident involving one of the Red Arrows and we are investigating," said the UK defence ministry in a statement.
bmallick wrote:
Yes definitely shows, how important engine technology is. No matter what you making, aircraft, vehicle, train, ships, satellite, missile, UAV, etc. if you do not know how to make the heart that beats, well you have a dead dodo. This is where we are lacking. We need to develop engines for our cars, trucks, vehicles, tanks, trains, helicopters, plane etc. We need a national effort with a fixed deadline for this and massive investment.
Also shows, how important it is to be realistic. It clearly shows that the panda aircraft designing establishment were not banking on an yet to designed new engine which would be available by the time the aircraft prototype is ready. They were far more pragmatic and decoupled the two. What this has done is that they try to make the best possible airframe they can around a less powerful engine. As and when more powerful engine comes, start integrating that on later versions. Thus even if you have a less powerful engine you design around that less power.
Something we too can learn. It would be better to already design the AMCA around some already available engine, like the present Kaveri, with its lesser thurst, or some other engine. When the higher power Kaveri comes around, put it in a later version. This is what we did for Tejas and we should learn from this.
Correct. France also seems to have gone for a similar approach when they used M88 which is not as advanced as EJ200 or F119/135 in their design but their plane can still perform at par.
seems Spicejet ordered around 40 bombardier ac and the first lot of 4 will be delivered soon in Ottawa.
in keeping with western marketing style, some indian media are being flown there to cover the event.
here one would notice the HAL publicity dept is scrapped and even the museum has remained unchanged and trailing edge for 5 yrs. open days or exhibitions are tuned to employees and their families onlee - preaching to the choir.
The US Navy has awarded Boeing a $135 million contract to develop an infrared search and tracker (IRST) to integrate in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fleet.
The four-year development programme will adapt the Lockheed Martin AAS-42 IRST to mount in the forward section of the F/A-18E/F's centreline fuel tank. The AAS-42 was last operated on board the Grumman F-14D Tomcat.
Immune from most kinds of electromagnetic interference, including jamming, IRST sensors are popular especially onboard non-American fighter designs. The Sukhoi T50 prototypes boast forward and rear-facing IRST sensors integrally attached to the fuselage.
But US operators have preferred to integrate IRST sensors into external pods, and the Super Hornet's new system will be no exception.
The forward section of the centreline tank is empty, so integrating the sensor will not reduce its 330gal fuel capacity. That location also allows the IRST sensor to have a nearly unrestricted field of regard in the forward hemisphere except for directly above the nose and canopy.
The US Navy plans to buy at least 150 IRST pods for the F/A-18E/F, according to Lockheed's marketing materials.
Boeing also has proposed an integrally-mounted IRST sensor for international customers. The "international roadmap" variant of the F/A-18E/F includes a low-observable, faceted window under the nose.
Wednesday's accident has raised concerns over the reserves of the six crew members on board the station and clouded the future of an ISS program that relies almost exclusively on Russia following the retirement of US shuttles.
But some in the Russian media said the fifth launch failure in the past nine months showed that the once-proud industry was entering a period of crisis.
"The series of launch accidents points to a deep crisis," the respected Kommersant business daily said on its front page.
"More and more of Russia's craft fail to reach orbit," it said.
Within just a few days after the space shuttle Atlantis conducted the last landing of the shuttle era, Russia made the comment that this was now the “Soyuz Epoch.” If that is the case – today’s loss of the Progress cargo freighter atop a Soyuz Rocket is slightly disconcerting. The vessel and all of its cargo was lost when the spacecraft apparently failed to separate from the rocket’s upper stage at about five minutes and 50 seconds into flight.
Mission controllers in Russia informed the six-person Expedition 28 crew that Progress 44 was lost. Russia’s Mission Control, located in Korolev, Russia desperately tried to regain contact with the doomed spacecraft to no avail. Russia promised to try and figure out what had gone wrong.
Progress 44 was launched to the International Space Station (ISS) at 9 a.m. EDT on a resupply run. The spacecraft carried approximately three tons of water, food, fuel, oxygen and other supplies to the orbiting laboratory. It was supposed to dock with the ISS on Friday morning.
This is the first launch of a Soyuz since the end of the shuttle program last month, which saw space shuttle Atlantis successfully deliver some 9,000 pounds of supplies and equipment to the ISS. In the intervening period, Russia has touted the reliability of the Soyuz while making statements that it will dump the ISS into the Pacific by 2020. NASA did not immediately comment about its plans to include one of their astronauts, Dan Burbank, atop a similarly designed Soyuz Rocket next month on Sept. 21.
An investigation will work to determine what caused the failure of the Soyuz upper stage to separate. This will undoubtedly mean that any crewed missions will be delayed until the investigation is completed and needed changes are implemented. NASA currently lacks the capacity to launch astronauts.
Russia on Saturday successfully test launched its Bulava inter-continental ballistic missile to its maximum range of 8,000 km, in a boost to the country's defence capabilities.
The U.S. Department of Defense is testing its futuristic, unmanned hypersonic aircraft, the HTV-2.
The craft can travel at a speed of Mach 20 - that's 13,000 miles per hour, or twenty times the speed of sound.
In a recent test over the Pacific Ocean, the HTV-2 and its launch rocket were recorded as they re-entered the earth's atmosphere.
The HTV remained airborne at top speed for three minutes before developing a "flight anomaly" which triggered its automated systems to commence a controlled crash into the ocean.
^^^ Is not it idiotic to have a scram jet for weapons delivery when a Raakit can do the same at high speeds? Besides what about cost per unit ? I mean its OK for a brahmos range . But having an ICBM range scramjet? (I suppose thats what it means by anywhere in the world strike?)
gakakkad wrote:^^^ Is not it idiotic to have a scram jet for weapons delivery when a Raakit can do the same at high speeds? Besides what about cost per unit ? I mean its OK for a brahmos range . But having an ICBM range scramjet? (I suppose thats what it means by anywhere in the world strike?)
No way in hell. You can try to bend the laws of physics but you can't break them. At Mach 20, the vehicle is exposed to tremendous forces of shear, drag, and friction. Its structural integrity would be compromised after one trip. Definitely not reusable if you factor in the cost of repairing the vehicle after each flight.
The DARPA Falcon Project (Force Application and Launch from Continental United States) is a two-part joint project between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the United States Air Force (USAF) and is part of Prompt Global Strike.[1] One part of the program aims to develop a reusable, rapid-strike Hypersonic Weapon System (HWS), now retitled the Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle (HCV), and the other is for the development of a launch system capable of accelerating a HCV to cruise speeds, as well as launching small satellites into earth orbit....
^^^ I am sceptical . I don't think we should believe every thing Khanland says.. This defy's logic. Even my friends in aerospace indjineering can't digest all of it.
Perhaps the concept of Shaurya seemed to SDRE to them -- first stage raakit , followed by 2nd stage cruise mijjile. Would have been an any day better dedjign than an aircraft lauched , ramjet first stage , scramjet 2nd stage la-whori concept.
gakakkad wrote:^^^ I am sceptical . I don't think we should believe every thing Khanland says.. This defy's logic. Even my friends in aerospace indjineering can't digest all of it.
You are in good company: ""Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
—Lord ("zero degrees") Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.
A small request: Could you ask your friends in AE to explain why they think this cannot possibly be done? Also, (and no offense intended), could you please respond in English (versus pinglish) ? Ever since N3 started this pinglish stuff in 1999, it has become an obstacle to enjoying BRF. Thanks.
.Well, for a hydrocarbon based fuel the theoretical speed limit is Mach 8-Mach 10 . For hydrogen fuel theoretical speed limit is Mach 15. In a nutshell jet engines are air breathing. So at speeds higher than the ones mentioned above the air temperature due to friction exceeds the combustions temperature of the fuel .
The theoretical limit using a hypothetical "ideal fuel" is mach 25. That is because as the scramjet moves faster it gains altitude . At MACH 20+ the theoretical altitute expected is 86 km which increases steeply with subsequent increase in speed. So it would be in exosphere. (For practical purposes out of earths atmosphere). But since it is an airbreathing engine it cannot operate in space.
But the theoretical limit is never likely due to material problems. The reentry velocity of space shuttle is close to mach 20. Look at the heat it generates. It needs advanced ceramics to protect itself. How do u expect engines to be coated with ceramics ?
Actually ceramic coatings are already being used in engines, (not the moving parts though but in the exhaust manifolds?Shrouds etc ) This allows higher exhaust temperatures. A SCRAM jet will not have moving parts so the tecnology exists. The temperatures that this arrangement handles is in the 600 + deg c range
These coatings are applied on high performance engines They are expensive and have a niche market.
The limiting factor on fuel injection in high power IC engines is usually exhaust temperatures.
Even bearings are now being produced with ceramic coatings. Though for lower power applications.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
1- Inlet Body
2- Fuel injection
3- Nozzle
4- Supersonic compression
5- combustion
6- supersonic exhaust--
Red high temperature
blue low temperature
Even if you somehow solve the material problem , You cannot bend 2 law of thermodynamics. For a hydrogen fuel engine , at speed greater than mach 15, temperature of the air in the inlet body (blue zone) exceeds the combustion temperature (combustion zone). So how do you expect plane to fly?
Gakakkad ji, sorry for what is most likely an ignorant analogy, but in afterburners jet fuel is injected into super hot exhaust too and it provides extra thrust. So even if the inlet temperature is beyond the ignition temperature of the fuel, would you please explain how that creates problems?
Wouldn't injecting fuel into an aerospike-like arrangement provide additional thrust at high speeds?
AEL was one of the suppliers of systems for the turboprop Tucano basic trainer and the subsonic fighter AMX, aircraft manufactured by Embraer in the 1980s and 1990s. Currently, AEL provides the avionics for the turboprop light attack and advanced training Super Tucano, as well as the avionics of the F-5M fighter, modernized by Embraer for the Brazilian Air Force.
Earlier this week, Elbit's U.S. subsidiary, Elbit Systems of America, has been awarded a contract to supply Boeing with the CV-22 Color Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) for the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC). Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas. According to Elbit, coupling Helmet Display and Tracking System (HDTS) technology with new color symbology for day and night vision goggle night missions will allow a greater level of situational awareness.
No way in hell. You can try to bend the laws of physics but you can't break them. At Mach 20, the vehicle is exposed to tremendous forces of shear, drag, and friction. Its structural integrity would be compromised after one trip. Definitely not reusable if you factor in the cost of repairing the vehicle after each flight.
What about its internals? By which i don't mean its physical body or even engine parts but rather electronics, optical systems and other recon payloads it may carry..etc. That's the heart of the beast.
I'm sure stuff is reusable after replacing the physical body (no big deal) and engine.
completely beats me why a medium airlifter needs stealth (surely nobody is flying these unprotected across hostile airspace), why super-STOL is needed when heavy helis, osprey and c130j is there and how those exposed engines will give frontal stealth.
Singha wrote:completely beats me why a medium airlifter needs stealth (surely nobody is flying these unprotected across hostile airspace), why super-STOL is needed when heavy helis, osprey and c130j is there and how those exposed engines will give frontal stealth.
To conduct operations like the one on abottabad on Sargodha, Funny now you that mention Turboprop fan blades, wonder how Comanche and Blackhawk made their Blades less visible- coatings ?
Purely speculating here. Maybe Jet engine blades have to be hidden because you cannot use composites or use coatings whereas this restriction may not be there with turboprops Fan blades.
