International Aerospace Discussion

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Jun 2014 19:50

More from Cope Taufan 2014

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjDidH_SW-M[/youtube]

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Jun 2014 22:02

From the Su-30 thread

owever, there is noise for "competition" for the F-135 9due to potential cost escalations

No there won't be any competition, The F-135 won the competition and for the program spending money on something else is better (avionics, more aircraft, software etc)

Finally, I thought GE was involved in the "6th Gen" engine program. And that the F-136 was contributing to that effort. No?

From what has appeared in the media, there is no indication that GE has chosen to advance the F-136 in the various 6th gen aircraft projects. From what is available it seems that GE has basically continued its research through the ADVENT program using the same basic engine but upping the capability. That engine was not the F-136 ( it was based on the LEAP core if I recall correctly). The Variable cycle development calls for the construction of a new core altogether, and these efforts are not there to result in an engine but to advance the capability and technology (de-risk it) so that when a formal engine is launched for 6th gen capability its pretty much a call to the industry that takes a few years to deliver a working variable cycle engine. Basically come 2019, the Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology program would have delivered technologies and rendered them mature enough that from a development stand point a 6th gen engine would carry the same risk (DOD's risk assessment - cost and failure risk) as a new 5th gen engine. The first half of the Variable cycle effort concentrated on maturing technology, materials and capabilities that would need to be enabled to bring about the capability. GE used what they had developed on their own and in their various commercial programs. Pratt and whitney spent their own money to develop a core outside of the program, which they presented when they were selected for the 2nd half of the program in place of Rolls Royce. Its highly unlikely that GE would concentrate on the F-136 going forward. It makes sense to concentrate internal resources on the F414 given the sheer amount of Super Hornets, Gripens and LCA's projected and to concentrate fully on the various 6th gen engine technologies which may be applied back to the F-35 or the F-22 program.

Here's more from a few years ago

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/02/17/ges-p ... ine-plans/

What has to be kept in mind that whatever research and development Rolls Royce and GE have done with the ADVENT program (Pratt and whitney was not included for this program because they had both the core teams busy with delivering the F-119 program and developing the F-135) is fully owned by the USAF. Therefore any advantage these technologies come up with which can be retrofit don to 5th gen fighter engines can be put on the F-135. This is a similar structuring to the US navy's J-UCAS program where the X-47 developed capabilities are shared with Boeing, Lockheed and General atomics because the IP has been paid for and owned by the USN.

One of the main arguments that GE advanced for the dual sourcing F-135 (PW) / F-136 (GE/RR) was that otherwise, it would have to exit the military jet engine field altogether. Agree the program is now dead but a wild idea was advanced that perhaps as a condition of say Indian funding, the tech and the production could be moved to India.

That was in the heady days of anything is possible. Today, it's more realistic to get the MK2 and the AMCA dual sourced GE => Kaveri 2.0 etc.

Karan_M, your OT point is well taken. Last post on this

GE is not going out of the military jet engine market. They have many areas where they are competing and/or in full development mode. The Variable cycle program is one of them in which the no of years and the R&D money they have received is much more than Pratt and Whitney. Then comes the F-114 program that has resulted in huge volume business for them from the USN and international customers (SAAB, India). Then there are other competitions in which they can compete such as the USN's UCLASS program and the B-3 bomber. 6th gen engine technology is also not far far away given that the USN would need to begin replacing early built F-18 Super Hornets by 2032 or so, which would mean that prototypes would need to be in the air by 2022 or so.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 01:43

Sikorsky S-97 Raider could revolutionize next-gen military aviation

New Delhi. Imagine a next-generation attack helicopter platform so advanced that it can reach speeds more than 220 knots, flying as high as 10,000 feet in 95° of heat. The Raider seems to be all set to realize this vision and to revolutionize next-generation military aviation.

“Sikorsky has selected 35 companies to join its team for assembling two prototype S-97 Raiders for light recce helicopters. The flying prototype is expected to be ready by 2015.
Self-funded by Sikorsky and its team members, the Raider program will demonstrate the military applications of Sikorsky’s breakthrough X2 rotorcraft design, which proved its capability to double the cruise speed of conventional helicopters,” Stephen B. Estill, Vice President, Strategic Partnerships informed India Strategic.
“We will develop, negotiate and implement strategic partnerships globally for this futuristic state-of-the-art helicopter that will help sustain and extend Sikorsky’s footprint in the increasingly expanding international marketplace,” he added.
Like the X2 Technology Demonstrator aircraft that unofficially broke the helicopter speed record on Sept. 15, 2010, the S-97 Raider helicopter prototypes will feature twin coaxial counter-rotating main rotors (in place of one main rotor and a tail rotor) and a pusher propeller. For the armed reconnaissance mission, the S-97 Raider helicopter will have space in the cockpit for armament and auxiliary fuel.
In an assault configuration, the cabin will afford space to accommodate up to six troops.
“In addition to flying at nearly twice the speed of a conventional helicopter, the S-97 Raider prototype aircraft will incorporate other key performance parameters critical to combat operations — increased maneuverability, greater endurance, and the ability to operate at high altitudes.
Compared with other light military helicopters, the Raider prototypes are expected to significantly reduce turning radius and acoustic noise signature, while significantly increasing the aircraft’s payload, flight endurance and hot and high hover capability,” Estill said adding that the new innovative machine should be right for the desert as well as the Himalayan heights that pose a challenge to IAF and Indian Army fliers in their operational area.
Steve added that unlike the X2, the S-97 will incorporate a gearbox on the propeller to allow the pilot to disengage or engage the propulsor in flight and a cockpit with the options to fly with two pilots, one pilot or autonomously.
Sikorsky has reserved space in the S-97 to install a targeting sensor with a forward-looking infrared camera, but it will not be included in the demonstration programme.
GE will provide its YT706-GE-700R engines and engineering support for the Raider program.
“The aircraft’s multi-mission capabilities will meet both conventional U.S. Army and Special Operations future requirements in a variety of combat roles. We are also reviewing potential applications for USAF, US Navy, and US Marine Corp services,” Steve said.
One prototype is expected to be used for flight testing, while the second is planned for use as a demonstrator.

http://www.gxonline.com/sites/default/f ... Raider.jpg

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 17:28

Cope taufan 2014 contd.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBUyQsSq9mw[/youtube]

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jun 2014 18:55

an exactly how will this skyraider be superior to a upg A-10 with a lighter GSH23-6 type cannon with more EPE engine ?
enriching the OEM by $100b does not count as a good reason

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2014 19:22

brar_w wrote:Cope taufan 2014 contd.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBUyQsSq9mw[/youtube]

brar_w,

When you post a youtube source please cut the "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=" part of the URL.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jun 2014 19:28

upg A-10

I thought they are de-funding the A-10. No?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 17 Jun 2014 20:22

an exactly how will this skyraider be superior to a upg A-10 with a lighter GSH23-6 type cannon with more EPE engine ?

The Raider is not a replacement for the A-10. Its a replacement for the Kiowa warrior under the US army's Armed Aerial Scout program. . The A-10 is operated by the USAF, this is an army or perhaps a joint army and marine core program for the future. Actually the Raider is a 200+ Million dollar effort by Sikorsky and co. to develop an aircraft that fill out a number of Missions and have the basic design validated for the same. The basic technology is the next step from the X2 demonstrator and calls for
very high speed helicopter forward flight and as such can be applied to a number of applications. So for the companies concerned its as much a technology validation program as it is a program that builds a prototype for the aircraft its replacing (Kiowa warrior and others). In fact the Boeing-Sikorsky co developed "Defiant" relies much on the same technology. It is a submission for the Joint Multi role helicopter program. The Defiant prototype should be in the air by 2017.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrk9yvkWyEo

When you post a youtube source please cut the "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=" part of the URL.

I have been posting the link, in a similar manner as I have done in this post (just the link).

As far as the A-10 canceling, the latest appears to be so but there is some room to either mothball the A-10 or to keep it alive. Definitely no upgrade is going to be funded.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 17 Jun 2014 22:21

Unfortunately, the A-10 is obsolete. The designers did not give the plane an all weather, night time configuration. During the Gulf War, th A-10 had to use the AGM-65 Maverick air to ground missile camera system during inclimate and night time conditions in order to spot targets! The pilot got used to flying using the missiles camera but needless to say this was not an optimum situation. The other thing was that the 30mm cannon was not articulated. In order to position the gun's site on the target the pilot had to use the planes flaps and rudders to adjust aim of impact. That is really not optimum either if you are trying to knock out a tank on the run. Or any vehicle for that matter. The plane is incrediblely tough. One plane took a direct hit on its rear end during the gulf war from an Iraqi manpad and the pilot made it back to base! Tough and loveable? You bet. But sadly way obsolete. The new helicopters in development are showing some exciting possiblities with speeds approaching what a good prop airplane will do AND they will have the latest all weather nightime gear avaibale with articulated 25MM gun attached and hell fire missiles. Sadly, they won't be near as tough as the ugly but endearing A-10.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 18 Jun 2014 14:36

More pictures from Cope Taufan 2014

Two U.S. Air Force F-15 Eagles from the 131st Fighter Squadron, 104th Fighter Wing, Barnes Air National Guard Base, Mass., participate in a dog fighting exercise against a U.S. Air Force F-22

A U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor from the 154th Wing, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, deploys counter measure flares while participate in a dog fighting exercise against two U.S. Air Force F-15 Eagles from the 131st Fighter Squadron, 104th Fighter Wing

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jun 2014 14:48

a leaf from the mighty AH56 Cheyenne - the conventional tail rotor is now replaced by the dual main rotors...but rest of config and look is about same.

finally Cthulhu arises from the deep sleep...his time has come.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 18 Jun 2014 14:59

Singha wrote:a leaf from the mighty AH56 Cheyenne - the conventional tail rotor is now replaced by the dual main rotors...but rest of config and look is about same.

finally Cthulhu arises from the deep sleep...his time has come.

You did notice that

Lockheed is a partner on this project and I believe was also a partner in the X-2 program which validated the design at the very early stage. The entire S97 project is industry funded.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLKyuwLZnbE

The expertise on composites, blades etc and high speed probably was work in progress starting with the Comanche where Sikorsky had a lot of R&D and performance data, not to mention the experience of working on the S-69.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Jun 2014 10:46

Finally some decent shots of the mighty Su-30MKM and the F-22.

Higher resolution (and more pics) versions can be found - http://www.malaysiandefence.com/?p=4538 ... aufan-2014

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Jun 2014 13:26

deleted

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Jun 2014 13:27

Royal Air Force Typhoons Intercept Russian Aircraft

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 19 Jun 2014 17:43

4 R-27 and 2 R-73 is what i can make out from the belly of the flanker beast, anyone can say anything on EF loadout?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Jun 2014 18:19

K Mehta wrote:4 R-27 and 2 R-73 is what i can make out from the belly of the flanker beast, anyone can say anything on EF loadout?

I can definitely make out the ASRAAM from the picture. The typhoon also carries its BVR missiles semi recessed so its tough to judge whether it is carrying the amraam or not in the fuselage stations.

BTW the link on the article is not working so here it is again

http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/balt ... g-18062014

Edit: This is a video of baltic policing by the typhoon, seems the standard load is just 2 ASRAAM's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9WGuEtt01E

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 19 Jun 2014 22:39

The Joint Threat Emitter Can Be Any SAM Site You Want It To Be

America's air arms are increasingly under the threat of a wide array of surface-to-air missile systems, search radars and electro-optical tracking devices, yet it would take an air armada to move all these separate systems to training locations around the globe. The Joint Threat Emitter takes care of this problem.

It is well known that America and NATO countries have enemy sensor and SAM systems to train against in real-world like exercises such as Red Flag. Mobile Roland SAM systems, SA-2 and even S300 surface-to-air missile systems can be spotted throughout the Nellis Range Complex. Yet these are rare, hard to maintain, and not necessarily mobile systems that also carry some political risk, as some were most likely acquired under less than legitimate circumstances. With this in mind, they are not exactly something you want seen being rolled off of a C-5 at an international airport in Europe before a big NATO air combat exercise. Aside from the more sensitive actual enemy radars and SAM systems in American hands, other threat simulators have existed for many years of various complexities and scales, but they often replicated one or just a couple of types of known enemy systems, which was far less than ideal. As a result of these limitations Northrop Grumman and the DoD came up with a novel idea, build one unit that could be easily transportable via a large cargo aircraft, that could replicate numerous types of threats that allied aircraft may face. Thus the Joint Threat Emitter (JTE) was born. The JTE concept is especially useful for America's fighter, bomber, and especially its "Wild Weasel" F-16CJ Block 50/52 squadrons that are based abroad, as in the past they only had a small selection of enemy radars to train against if any at all. The same can be said for America's electronic attack and jamming force of EA-18G Growlers, located at NAS Whidbey Island in upstate Washington. Now, with the JTE, these "customers" have a full menu of different simulated enemy radar systems to train against, not to the mention having to elude highly trained operators that run the JTEs who can throw different tricks at aircrews just as the enemy would in combat.

What also makes the Joint Threat Emitter very cool is that it can be networked into a greater simulated integrated air defense system (IADS), and it can change the threat it simulates within that larger network based on what country or general capabilities American and allied crews are virtually fighting against. It can also be tied directly into the Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation (ACMI) system for cuing, so that long-range search radars can be virtually simulated along with the unit's shorter-ranged acquisition and engagement radars normally associated with SAM sites. The JTE also is built to add to a user's high-fidelity debriefing system so that aircrews can gauge with great accuracy how well their tactics worked in relation to the threat JTE was presenting. These tactics may include avoiding, engaging, jamming, suppressing (firing a simulated AGM-88 HARM) or destroying the simulated enemy radar and/or SAM site being replicated. JTE's data can be seamlessly integrated with a rangeless or range enabled ACMI system so that the effects of the simulated SAM site can be reviewed in relation to an overall "big picture" of the simulated air war. In the end, the Joint Threat Emitter, and similar systems such as the less complex Joint Deployable Electronic Warfare Range, allows for American and allied pilots to get much more training value out of each flying hour, which in the case of an F-16CJ is about $20,000. Additionally, if the JTE is forward-deployed it means that these aircraft don't have to spend millions of dollars flying to where the training asset is, as it can come to them much more cheaply, or be based locally in a permanent fashion.

By leaving little to the aircrews' imagination while providing a clear evaluation of the effectiveness of their attacks and countermeasures, joint training between closely related aircraft, such as the F-16CJ and the EA-18G Growler, can be of much higher quality and of much greater value.

It is hard to argue that these systems are not worth every penny they cost, plus they are a nice piece of kit to load onto a C-5 and take over multi-national training exercises to see how our friends, even questionable ones like Pakistan, do when faced with different surface-to-air missile threats. The Joint Threat Emitter is known to have been deployed or stationed at Alaska, Guam, Louisiana, Washington State, Nevada and the Middle East, and most likely dozens of other locations that remain undisclosed. The project has been so successful that a follow on contract has been awarded to Northrop Grumman worth hundreds of millions of dollars and includes the sale of the Joint Threat Emitter to some of America's allies. The next stage of the JTE will include modular upgrades including new plug-and-play threat emitters and software, which will allow for the JTE to be even more re-configurable and adaptable than it already is today.

All this is a good thing, seeing as if you are going to spend tens, or even hundreds of billions of dollars on combat aircraft, then you might as well spend a few hundred million dollars on the best training tools available so that they have the best chance of coming back to be used again should they have to be employed in anger against a capable foe.

Videos included in the link

Here is Sean O Connor's (Janes contributor) analysis of the ranges concerned and their equipment from image and open source satellite analysis.

TONOPAH ELECTRONIC COMBAT RANGE

Located near Tonopah Test Range, the former home of the then-classified SENIOR TREND fleet, is an expansive complex housing what may be some of the most secretive items in the United States. A vast electronic combat range containing numerous radar systems is home to more than a few examples of Soviet and Russian radar systems. While their presence may be an open secret, as it has been stated in the past that the OXCART was tested against Soviet radar systems, the means of their acquisition is understandably highly classified. One can speculate that some systems may have been sourced from cash-strapped former Soviet republics, in the same manner that Moldova's MiG-29 fleet was acquired.

Not all of the radar systems present at the Tonopah site can be identified, due to the resolution of the imagery, and some of them may not even be radar systems at all. However, some of the radars are readily identifiable due to their large size. Situated around what appears to be the primary facility are four raised berms, each appearing to house a radar system. The northern and eastern berms are home to Soviet-era P-35 (BAR LOCK) E/F band EW radars. Just south of the main facility is another pad which appears to house an RSN-125 (LOW BLOW) engagement radar associated with the S-125 (SA-3 GOA) SAM system.

TOLICHA PEAK ELECTRONIC COMBAT RANGE

The radar range near Tonopah is not the only electronic combat facility in the Nevada desert. At 37°18'58.48"N 116°46'50.93"W the Tolicha Peak Electronic Combat Range can be found.

The mainstream belief is that the Tolicha Peak facility houses numerous radar systems to support RED FLAG operations, given its proximity to two mock airfields. A more detailed examination provides an alternative, that of foreign SAM system exploitation and testing. Elements of S-125 (SA-3 GOA), S-200 (SA-5 GAMMON), and S-300PS (SA-10B GRUMBLE) SAM systems can be found on the grounds of Tolicha Peak.

The following annotated image depicts what is likely an S-125 facility at Tolicha Peak. The object to the west of the RSN-125 (LOW BLOW) radar system would appear to be some sort of three-round launcher, or an unusual radar system, and does not resemble the 5P71 or 5P73 launchers found at operational S-125 sites around the globe, and as such may be some sort of dedicated test equipment.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_0HCJq6B1wZA/R39 ... /TPSA3.jpg

The following annotated image depicts an S-200 launch site at Tolicha Peak. There would appear to be a second missile, albeit with the control surfaces removed, nearby. The 5N62 (SQUARE PAIR) engagement radar is not colocated with the launch facility and was not readily identified, but the facility 0.47 kilometers to the southwest is a candidate.

http://bp2.blogger.com/_0HCJq6B1wZA/R39 ... /TPSA5.jpg

The most interesting facility found at Tolicha Peak is the S-300P launch site. It would appear that a nearly complete collection of radars is present, as well as two TELs and a 40V6 mast assembly. The 40V6 is used to mount either the 5N63S (FLAP LID) engagement radar or the 76N6 (CLAM SHELL) low altitude detection radar on a 23.8 meter mast to provide better performance in areas with varied terrain or vegetation. The shadow cast by the southern 5P85 TEL seems to indicate that it is a 5P85S, complete with the control compartment for controlling the adjacent 5P85D TEL. The vehicle which is most likely the 5N63S engagement radar vehicle appears to have the radar array lowered in the travel configuration. Given the presence of the mobile TELs and the mobile 5N63S radar, the system present here is likely either an S-300PS or export-standard S-300PMU.

The following annotated image depicts the Tolicha Peak S-300PS facility:

http://bp3.blogger.com/_0HCJq6B1wZA/R39 ... PSA10B.jpg

Close examination of the terrain in the vicinity of the Tolicha Peak Electronic Combat Range would seem to display impact craters, providing further evidence that actual SAM firings may be taking place here. As the United States does not actively list any of the aforementioned SAM systems in its operational inventory, it is likely that some sort of test work does take place here. It is also possible that the associated radar systems are in fact also used against aircraft flying on the Nellis AFB Range to provide more realistic electronic combat training.

http://geimint.blogspot.in/2007/08/us-r ... sites.html

srai · Post by **srai** » 20 Jun 2014 06:12

Cleaning up Red Flag Alaska F-22 vs Typhoon debate

srai · Post by **srai** » 20 Jun 2014 06:31

Is the F-22 really superior to all other fighter aircraft

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 20 Jun 2014 09:03

srai wrote:Is the F-22 really superior to all other fighter aircraft

Sprey also thinks the Su-30MK is the less agile version of the original Su-27, and it (Su-30MK) is way behind the F-16 in capability

.
The F-22 is one of the best air to air machines in existence today with the drawback of not having HMS and HOBS missile, without which WVR combat in modern times is foolish. That may soon change as the program recently evaluated the JHMCS II and Scorpion helmet sight. The Aim-9x is already scheduled for the next software block (currently the raptor uses it but not its full capability).

Cleaning up Red Flag Alaska F-22 vs Typhoon debate

Just goes to show that BFM can have different results even when the two aircraft are kitted differently. The F-22 has better low speed maneuvering and high AOA performance yet the Typhoon managed to get significant kills. This is the point I have been painstakingly making in the JSF thread, that BFM comes down to tactics, and weapons and not brute performance. Things like HMD and EODAS also help although were not relevant in these exercises. They did not do BVR where the F-22 has an overwhelming advantage due to its higher super cruise, speed and larger detection envelopes.

This is what an RAF pilot (RAF has the typhoon) had to say on the f-22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aXYS0cmkQ0

Edit: Some more pics from Cope Taufan 2014

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Jul 2014 08:58

Here's a conversation piece for Mil aviation enthusiasts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqjjHDGWm4Q

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 02 Jul 2014 09:10

I think this is the third thread this video has ended up in

, Sprey will also think that the Su-30 is nothing compared to the Mig-21. His opinion on the Su-30 was that it is much inferior to the F-16, and he wanted air forces around the world to buy the Su-30 so that the F-16 can live on for decades to come

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 02 Jul 2014 12:21

F-18C/D AESA upgrade

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Jul 2014 13:25

The F-35 Flies Amid Europe’s Mature Aeronautics Market

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 02 Jul 2014 13:29

^^ Why would one pixilate the helmet of one of the crew members and plane ID?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Jul 2014 13:35

Russian UAV/UCAV Program ( via Air International July /Piotr Butowski )

http://i39.servimg.com/u/f39/15/54/62/79/russia11.png

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Jul 2014 15:05

Lights in Norway's sky were spy planes

Norway in the 1950s was gripped by sensational reports of UFOs, with pilots seeing mysterious craft hurtling ahead of them at incredible speeds.

These reports were matched by people on the ground who said they had seen flashing objects implausibly high in the sky.

Now the mystery is over, Aftenposten newspaper reports. What Norwegians were seeing were test flights of top secret U2 spy planes, according to a recent tweet from the CIA's Twitter account, which says: "Do you remember the reports of unusual activity in the sky in the 50's? That was us."

U2s flew at altitudes above 60,000ft (18,000m) at a time when most passenger planes cruised at 10-20,000ft, and military aircraft rarely exceeded 40,000ft. When the Sun set below the horizon the U2s were still high enough to reflect its rays, and other pilots saw them as bright, silvery objects in the night sky, the CIA said.

The US Air Force's Project Blue Book investigation into unexplained aerial phenomena concluded that Norwegian sightings tallied with U2 flights. The information was kept classified to shield the spy programme from the Soviets at the height of the Cold War, Aftenposten says.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Jul 2014 10:59

Photos: First Serial Production IL-476 Painted

http://sdelanounas.ru/i/d/3/d/f_d3d3LmF ... wOTg5.jpeg
http://sdelanounas.ru/i/d/3/d/f_d3d3LmF ... wOTg5.jpeg
http://sdelanounas.ru/i/d/3/d/f_d3d3LmF ... wOTg5.jpeg

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 Jul 2014 09:05

Swedish Gripen First for Meteor Missile

Saab has completed integration of the MBDA Meteor BVRAAM on the Gripen. Next year the Swedish air force fighter will be the first to go operational with the new missile, according to Saab. The Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon will also carry the Meteor. The Gripen previously conducted the first eight developmental test firings of the ramjet-boosted missile.

The final two missile integration firings were conducted on the Vidsel test range in northern Sweden last March. One was from low altitude and one from high altitude, and both occurred while the launch aircraft was maneuvering. The firings demonstrated a long engagement range; engagement of maneuvering targets; aircraft/missile datalink functionality; and missile seeker performance, Saab reported. “Sweden now has a head start in developing strategies to use this capability in air combat,” said Tobias Andersson, the company’s project manager for the Meteor integration.

Meteor integration forms part of the MS20 upgrade to the Gripen C/D, now undergoing operational test and evalaution, which is entering service with the Swedish air force next year.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jul 2014 15:18

USAF bomber contest under way

Key Points

The USAF released an RfP to industry but said it is keeping all technical details quiet due to competitive sensitivities.
The Pentagon has said it is planning a systems-of-systems approach to developing LRS-B, but details of the programme continue to be kept secret.

The Pentagon released a Request for Proposal (RfP) to industry on 9 July outlining details of a new US Air Force (USAF) Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) aircraft, the USAF announced in a press statement.

"The RfP will lead to a competitive selection of the bomber's development in the spring 2015 timeframe," the USAF said. Service spokesman Ed Gulick said that technical details would not be released during the "competitive phase" of the programme.

Northrop Grumman and a Lockheed Martin-Boeing team have announced their intentions to bid for the project.

The chief of the USAF's Global Strike Command, the organisation responsible for maintaining and deploying US intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear-capable bombers, recently emphasised the urgency with which the USAF wants to replace the Northrop Grumman B-2A Spirit stealth bomber.

The service earlier this year ramped up its funding request for developing the aircraft, which is to be part of a 'system of systems' and capped at USD550 million per production aircraft, officials have said. In its fiscal year 2015 (FY 2015) budget proposal the USAF requested USD914 million in research and development funding for the LRS-B. USD359 million was allocated for the programme in FY 2014.

While the USAF has divulged that it is planning a systems-of-systems approach to developing and employing an LRS-B, which would join other kit for its long-range stealth bombing mission, details of the programme have been kept secret.

Northrop Grumman is reportedly developing a new stealth unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for the air force to conduct penetrating intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions in contested airspace, and such an aircraft could prove complementary to an LRS-B. Northrop Grumman is also expected to seek work on the LRS-B programme itself given its experience with the B-2.

"Northrop Grumman's design, production and sustainment of the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, the bomber most recently produced for the US Air Force, positions the company well for the LRS-B program," said company spokesman Randy Belote. "We are very interested in working with the Air Force to provide this critical capability for the nation."

Boeing and Lockheed Martin announced last year that they would partner to compete for the project as well but have not released any details of their efforts.

COMMENT

LRS-B is among the air force's top three acquisition priorities because the B-2A Spirit strategic stealth bomber fleet has only 20 aircraft and the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress long-range bomber is ageing, so operations in a contested environment could prove difficult.

The Pentagon has said that the FY 2015 LRS-B funding request would support continued development "of an affordable, long-range, penetrating aircraft that incorporates proven technologies" to allow the LRS-B "to penetrate the increasingly dense A2/AD [anti-access/area-denial] environments developing around the world". Officials have said that proliferation of such air defences will be a challenge to even advanced legacy fleets.

Still, the USAF is also seeking funds for a new standoff missile because a combination of standoff attack and penetration are still seen as crucial, officials have said. To that end, the USAF has yet to budget for an AGM-86B replacement, which could prove as costly as a new bomber aircraft.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 11 Jul 2014 18:31

From Twitter

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 12 Jul 2014 14:44

very informative article about su-25 in Iraq.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/irans- ... bb3bff64ce

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Jul 2014 11:16

Japan’s new stealth jet fighter has been officially unveiled

Mitsubishi ATD-X Shinshin stealth fighter has rolled out.

Last month, a leaked, blurry image provided an interesting preview of the first prototype of the Advanced Technology Demonstrator-X (ATD-X), the indigenous war plane that Japan Air Self-Defense Force will operate in the air defense role, replacing the ageing Mitsubishi F-2.

On Jul. 12, the first official photos of the ATD-X (serialled 51-0001) were released by the Japanese Ministry of Defense Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI), the Ministry of Defense’s agency that has developed the Shinshin (“spirit of the heart”, an early codename within the Japan Self Defense Force) for research purposes.

Indeed, the ATD-X will be used for the development of the F-3, Japan’s next generation stealth jet.

Noteworthy, the “new” images were taken on May 8, 2014, when the painting of the canted vertical tails radar-evading air superiority fighter with enhanced maneuverability ended.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 13 Jul 2014 18:00

^^^^^^It appears the Japanese really dig the F-18 profile. I don't blame them, the F-18 looks good and it does have a smaller RCS than most jet airplanes. Whatever floats their boat I guess.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jul 2014 20:11

That is a tech demo.

And, I think it has some semblence to the last AMCA. Though the AMCA could be smaller.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Jul 2014 21:06

TSJones wrote:^^^^^^It appears the Japanese really dig the F-18 profile. I don't blame them, the F-18 looks good and it does have a smaller RCS than most jet airplanes. Whatever floats their boat I guess.

Sir, you've spoken for me too here. I could swear, I saw the F-18 there. But the Japs didn't paint theirs black or grey! Someone did not tell them what stealth colour coding is?

admin note - do not use that term

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jul 2014 21:20

Dated, but, especially under the current circumstances, worth a read:

AWST :: 2012 :: Japan Aims To Launch F-3 Development In 2016-17

I think the above article has a few topic of interest for India.

And, a more recent article:

Apr, 2014 :: Japan's indigenous stealth jet prototype 'to fly this year'

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 13 Jul 2014 22:49

deejay wrote:But the Japs didn't paint theirs black or grey! Someone did not tell them what stealth colour coding is?

Is this kind of language and ridicule really necessary? By this logic, if it can be called that, someone forgot to tell the Americans what stealth "colour coding" is.

The Japanese, not "Japs", have built a prototype and it looks, if looks matter, good.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 14 Jul 2014 03:42

Is this kind of language and ridicule really necessary? By this logic, if it can be called that, someone forgot to tell the Americans what stealth "colour coding" is

That F-35 is before it has gone into the Paint shop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwvZLqtAZWY

Anyway, Since the Japanese fighter is a test bed, they can paint it whichever color they want, or none at all