International Aerospace Discussion

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 02 Dec 2016 15:35

Russian resupply mission to ISS fails. doesn't make it to orbit........

http://spacenews.com/progress-launch-to ... ion-fails/

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Dec 2016 12:27

Saab Postpones Gripen E First Flight—for Good Reason

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... ason[quote]

The first flight of the Gripen E fighter has been postponed from late this year until the second quarter of 2017. Saab said that the delay is caused by its deliberate decision to fully qualify an innovative avionics and software system before getting airborne. But the Swedish company said that the test aircraft designated 39-8 has now done engine runs, only nine weeks after power-on, compared with 10to 18 months in previous Saab developments. High-speed taxi tests are due soon.

“We are handling the one million lines of code of a new fighter in a logical way,” said Lars Ydreskog, Saab’s head of operations. The company has designed a scaleable and hardware-independent software platform that it has named Distributed Integrated Modular Avionics (DIMA). It is qualifying software to the DD178C standard for commercial aircraft, even though the Gripen E will be limited to military certification. “This is our business decision; it saves time and money, and we can re-use up to 98percent of the initial qualification software in future applications, which is unprecedented,” Ydreskog claimed.

“By separating the flight-critical functions (FCF) from the mission systems, we aim to change or update tactical displays in weeks instead of years,” Ydreskog continued. “With Saab’s help, a customer can add new functionality through applications, similarly to a mobile phone.” Saab began the process of FCF separation 10 years ago, and its software engineers have been automatically compiling code to Level A standard for some years. The results since the rollout of the Gripen E last May are beating expectations, Ydreskog said.

The DIMA system has in fact already flown (in the rear cockpit of two-seat Gripen development aircraft 39-7), running parallel to that aircraft’s legacy avionics and software. Aircraft 39-7 has also test-flown the AESA radar, infrared search and track (IRST) system and new undercarriage of the Gripen E, and has now logged 350 hours. Meanwhile, a ground structural rig for the Gripen E has been testing real hardware for the past six months, achieving 150 landings, and an avionics rig has been operated for more than 500 hours.

Ydreskog expects to reduce the number of test flights for the more powerful Gripen E by one-third, compared with the previous Gripen C/D development program. Fabrication of the first three production aircraft for launch customers Sweden and Brazil has started, with deliveries scheduled for 2019.

On November 22, Saab and Embraer inaugurated the Gripen design and training facility in the latter company’s Gaviao Peixoto facilityin São Paolo, Brazil. It is connected to Saab in Sweden, and parallel development and flight test will take place there, especially of the two-seat Gripen F, as well as final assembly. “We have a long-term commitment to Brazil,” noted Hakan Buske, CEO and president of Saab. About 100 engineers from Embraer, other Brazilian aerospace companies and the Brazilian air force have already undergone training in Sweden, and Saab is now moving 20 of its engineers to the South American facility. Brazil is buying 36 Gripen Es.
[/quote]
Aircraft

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Dec 2016 02:41

Aero Vodochody Completing First New-Build L-159 in 13 years.

LONDON—Czech aerospace firm Aero Vodochody says it is close to completing its first new-build L-159 Advanced Light Combat Aircraft (ALCA) since production of the type ended 13 years ago.
The company is building a single two-seat L-159 for the Iraqi air force as part of its contract with Baghdad for the refurbishment and delivery of 10 ALCAs.

According to Aero, the aircraft has recently been fitted with its engine and assembly should be done in the next few weeks, paving the way for the aircraft to be delivered “at the turn of the year,” company officials announced Nov. 29.

The restoration is part of Aero’s new business plan, which will see the L-159 offered as a light attack aircraft to complement the company’s new L-39NG, currently under development.

Aero says it is negotiating with several potential L-159 customers and that it is ready for possible renewal of serial production of the aircraft. Aero also says it is working with Honeywell, which supplied the F124 engine for the L-159, on future cooperation and potential improvements to the powerplant for new-build aircraft.

The ALCA was developed to meet a light attack aircraft requirement for the Czech air force. But despite Prague ordering 72 jets, the air arm later decided it only needed 24. The rest were put into storage and no additional orders followed. Then in 2014 the company managed to sell 21 of the stored aircraft to live air training contractor Draken International, while Iraq is taking 14 aircraft, including four purchased from the Czech air force by Aero and then passed to the Iraqi air force.

With the sales to Draken and Iraq, there were no more stored L-159s available, forcing the company to raid its storage for the manufacturing jigs and restart limited production.

“We believe that the L-159 project has a great potential. According to our analysis, the demand for light combat aircraft will increase in the next few years and L-159 is very competitive in its category. Therefore, we are negotiating with suppliers of key aggregates to be prepared for possible launch of mass production,” says Giuseppe Giordo, president and CEO of Aero Vodochody.

Aero says interest in the L-39NG is also gathering pace, with the Czech air force saying it would likely become the first customer for the aircraft to serve at its Flight Training Center in Pardubice. The service is hoping to turn Pardubice into a Multinational Aviation Training Center to train pilots from several European countries.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Dec 2016 15:49

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-stato ... SKBN13V0QB

Oil firm Statoil (STL.OL) will not resume using Airbus' (AIR.PA) Super Puma helicopters even if Norway's Civil Aviation Authority decides to lift the ban imposed after a fatal crash off Norway in April, the company said on Tuesday.

The Super Pumas, a workhorse of the offshore oil industry, were banned from commercial traffic in Norway and Britain following the accident that killed 13 oil workers flying from a Norwegian offshore oil platform operated by Statoil.

"We have no plans to use this helicopter ever again, even if Norwegian authorities decides to lift the ban", Statoil spokesman Morten Eek told Reuters.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Dec 2016 07:45

UGH! This is UGH-ly To me it looks horrible.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Dec 2016 12:41

^^ Indeed the Good Old F-16A/C was a looker , Sleek Mean Looks and Bubble Canopy , Later model got heavier and then the CFT and other things came along , it just kept getting heavier , Perhaps it lost the single engine light fighter that it was supposed to be , Still it might be good as CAS.

Thankfully its peers the late model Mig-29 and Mirage-2K did not take the extreme route and still looks very mean and lethal specially the Mig-29

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Dec 2016 12:42

Misleading F-35 Answers Drafted by Pentagon, Testing Chief Says

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 08 Dec 2016 15:53

Austin wrote:^^ Indeed the Good Old F-16A/C was a looker , Sleek Mean Looks and Bubble Canopy , Later model got heavier and then the CFT and other things came along , it just kept getting heavier , Perhaps it lost the single engine light fighter that it was supposed to be , Still it might be good as CAS.

Thankfully its peers the late model Mig-29 and Mirage-2K did not take the extreme route and still looks very mean and lethal specially the Mig-29

Umm not really sir. well the Mirage 2k perhaps but certainly not the Mig 29

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Dec 2016 16:08

^^ I was referring to production model Mig-29K and Mig-35/29M/M2 , The 29SMT got some hump for sure looks half pregnant

SMT without hump -- http://russianplanes.net/images/to202000/201825.jpg

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Dec 2016 16:10

Decent points by Gilmore. Reporting season has just begun and the Congress is back in session. Some observations -

- The developmental phase is funding dependent. The Congress can indeed finish it in late 2018 if it funds the OTE conversion. If it does not it indeed ends up to a year late in late 2019 but they will not be developing software in 2019 the actual 'development' phase would have ended, the DOTE would be testing what was 'developed' and once the OTE is over work orders would be issued to rectify any deficiencies discovered (OTE is not a zero sum game - you can pass OTE with deficiencies as long as they are not adversely impacting mission capability in terms of your inability to execute the missions contracted for in the SDD document). if the service determines it is necessary to do so within the SDD (many times minor things are simply pushed to the next block to avoid cost and schedule challenges). As per pentagon regulations you do not need to complete OT&E to certify SDD completion, you only need to complete it to start full rate production (unless granted a waiver). At the moment the first full-rate production pre order is expected to be received in February 2019 so the Congress can do three things if it does not see OTE being completed by then -

- Fund the JPO, or ask it to move money around to shave out capability in order to pay for DT fleet conversion earlier
- Increase spending to get the fleet converted in time to provide the systems and ranges Dr. Gilmore needs to complete OT&E
- Grant the program a 6-10 month waiver, keep full rate production schedule in Feb. 2019 and let the OTE complete at its own pace (by the end of 2019).

All these options have been done before by the Congress so it remains to be seen how Mattis and his crew request things.

**Also note that OT&E does not test the safety of the aircraft. That has happened and continues to happen (as capability is rolled out in blocks) through Developmental Test efforts. Its done by the T&E community but is lead by the individual services with Gilmore only as a passive observer. Delay in OT&E does not mean that the aircraft has not been judged to be safe to fly in its envelope. OT&E test's the full capability (all the required software at full envelope) in terms of its operational effectiveness compared to what was requested in the SDD document that you have used to develop it. All these things Dr. Gilmore mentions as work-in-progress will be tested for safety outside of the OT&E that begins in 2018...Remember the F-35C is not operational and the Navy does not really have that many aircraft outside of the developmental test fleet**

- Flight testing of the Navy's Aim-9X fix is expected to begin in early January. Its running 4 or so weeks late because the JPO funded Lockheed to make concurrency changes to the Israeli and Japanese aircraft as a priority so as to deliver them before the end of the year, taking resources away from this. Japan begun it's training at Luke this week, and the Israeli F-35's (first pair) are expected to land in Israel early next week where it will get fitted with its unique Communication equipment and then begin testing and certification for the same.

Block 3F is still not mature and probably not stable enough. This is the same pattern with other blocks. They still took 3B to the boat as a test but it will probably not be stable enough for front line crew (non test aircraft) till perhaps late 2017 or early 2018 which was a pattern for 2B, 3I, and 2A as well. It takes them a year or so from release to the test-fleet to get the block stable enough as the current version released to the operational fleet.

The program's top challenges still remain production (I've been saying this for a few years now) and getting new suppliers up to speed in terms of quality control and getting timely component deliveries. They are at mid 50's per year (production rate) and going to 90 in the next few lots before going to well above 120 a few years down the road. This is the most stressing portion and you can run into QC and other issues as they have recently with a new supplier. The industrial base had not been producing at this rate for a long times and there was simply no excess capacity with their regular suppliers so new ones have to be roped in and that comes with a learning curve that would need to be managed. There is a global supply chain and Lockheed hasn't had to do this sort of supplier management since it was well..GD back in the 80's.

The SDD will end by 2018, if not then mid to late 2019 and on the whole it makes next to no difference. DOTE can continue with his tests till 6 months past that but that will be driven by the funding release of retrofitting the dozen or so development test and other aircraft and ranges required to support Operational testing and not the program development itself. Congress can fund the program at higher levels in 2018 and move it a few months ahead if that is what it wants. Gilmore certainly challenged the Navy for example with shock trials on one if its ship programs and got Congress to move tens of millions around only to be proven wrong. McCain and his gang can certainly add say $50 Million to get Lockheed to push retrofits ahead to meet schedule for the conversions. At the moment OT&E delays are associated with both taking the large development test fleet and retrofitting it to the operational fleet standard. Some of the DT aircraft aren't even on block 2b and there are hardware changes required to get there, leave aside block 3F which requires even more changes. The reason why the DT fleet has not been receiving these upgrades along with the operational fleet is because they would have slowed the whole program (and Development testing, weapons envelope expansion etc) if you took out these aircraft for weeks at a time. Most of the DT aircraft fly multiple times a week and have done so for the last many years.

And finally, keep in mind that a formal OT&E is only the culmination of the many Operational Assessments that would have happened on the aircraft over its development. It's not the only one. Each service has conducted one prior to their IOC (the Navy will do so despite of OT&E happening concurrently to its operational assessment) and highest authorities within the service chain of command have had to sign off of it. Similarly, international partners are concurrently conducting their own Operational Testing and Evaluation and not waiting for the DOT&E to his own. The Dutch for example have done 2 such assessments already on their own aircraft as per their own operational requirements, as the capability has been incrementally been released to them. They have contracted out Draken International to support their activity on occasions where the USAF red-air is not available.

http://www.drakenintl.com/images/air-banner.jpg

This is a nearly $400 Billion US-DOD program so you will have layers of bureaucracy and this is par for the course but it's at home stretch now with the formal program now less than 2 years away from completion (add 6-12 months on top of that if you take the *worst case* OTE scenario). So much so that the Congress actually considered ending the JPO since the development is soon to be completed (just one more budget before RDT&E funds in support of SDD become negligible and all the program consumes is procurement funding) and follow-on-development (Block 4 and beyond) to be begun. They've decided to keep the JPO for now but it will most likely go away by end of the decade unless all the international customers participate in the follow-on phase and request a JPO arrangement.

^^ Indeed the Good Old F-16A/C was a looker , Sleek Mean Looks and Bubble Canopy , Later model got heavier and then the CFT and other things came along , it just kept getting heavier , Perhaps it lost the single engine light fighter that it was supposed to be , Still it might be good as CAS.

Thankfully its peers the late model Mig-29 and Mirage-2K did not take the extreme route and still looks very mean and lethal specially the Mig-29

The F-16 was hamstrung by its light fighter heritage so it has become beefier and beefier and so has the Hornet/Super Hornet. But I guess that is what the users want since they all need strike fighters and compared to the heavier twins this is more attractive given the cost associated in operating it. Same with the Hornet. The Super Hornet with CFT's carries nearly 75% of the fuel of an F-15E at nearly half the operating cost. The F-16 block 50.52 is probably even more economical relatively speaking as long as you maintain commonality with the global supply chain (which UAE doesn't for example). Lockheed has of course proposed more balanced designs over the years in the F-16 XL and F-16 U but no one has taken them up, choosing instead to go for practical upgrades making it even more heavy strike fighter. You could have had a highly attractive F-16U with a new wing, higher power engines and 3D TVC but the UAE refused to buy unless the USAF bought at least one squadron.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 08 Dec 2016 17:43

Austin wrote:^^ I was referring to production model Mig-29K and Mig-35/29M/M2 , The 29SMT got some hump for sure looks half pregnant

SMT without hump -- http://russianplanes.net/images/to202000/201825.jpg

Ok. But IMVHO i think that if they have to add CFTs to the MiG-29K and the MiG-35, it will be in the same 'fatback' style like the MiG-29 SMT

For me the aircraft with the least ugly CFTs is the F-15E Strike Eagle

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 08 Dec 2016 19:31

M2K customer went for the Rafale and export customers as well pretty much. F-16 has managed to pick up customers even new ones with its newer variants and one could argue that it would not have had it not offered these capabilities and the opportunity to carry higher and higher fuel and weapon loads. Certainly the IDF would have ordred more F-15's had the SUFA not showed up with CFT's and the ability to accommodate more systems. Same for the UAE that would have most likely picked the Rafale's if not the strike-eagles. For both (particularly the IDF) the F-16 is far more economical than to buy the strike-eagle as long as the SUFA meets the range/payloads requirements (which it does) demanded for this class.

With the Soviet Union threat gone a lot if not most of the F-16 exiting customer no longer need the out and out air-defense capability but need the ability to conduct strike so CFT's along with higher payloads and more sensors and equipment (internal and external) certainly adds a ton of value to them. With the Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen and the F-35 there is really no market for a high end, re-done F-16 especially when Lockheed managed to sell existing aircraft as it developed the F-35 so that time has long come and gone. The Rafale will probably be next to adopt CFT's (after the Shornet which already has as part of the Kuwaiti order)..practical for many users but of course not the best looking solution.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Dec 2016 16:02

Israel 'Ready' to Operate F-35s Without Ever Actually Flying Them

TEL AVIV – Israel’s scheduled Dec. 12 receipt of its first pair of F-35I Adir (Awesome) fighters caps nearly a decade of planning, and that’s all before a single Israel Air Force pilot has actually taken to the skies in its new stealth weapon.

Israeli pilots have been training at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona for more than a year, but unlike F-35 compatriots from the US, Norway, Australia and other nations who are actually flying the fifth-generation fighter, Israel has elected to limit pilot training to course work and the high-fidelity simulator built by prime contractor Lockheed Martin.

“We haven’t yet flown on the plane. That was our choice,” a general officer on the Israel Air Force (IAF) headquarters staff told Defense News.

“Decades ago, when we prepared for our first F-15s and F-16s, we needed to fly in the aircraft. But today, the situation is different for two key reasons: Firstly, the simulators are so reliable and secondly, it’s a single-seater. So it doesn’t matter if we fly here or there, because there’s no instructor up there with you in the cockpit,” the senior officer said.

He added, “We’ve gone through extensive simulator training and we’ve received all the information we needed through wonderful cooperation. … From our point of view, once they land here on 12 December, we’re ready to fly.” Israel will take delivery of its first Adir fighters once two US Air Force pilots touch down at the Israel Air Force (IAF) Nevatim Base in the Negev desert in Dec. 12 ceremonies. One of the American F-35 acceptance pilots, Maj. Elijah “Animal” Supper, billed next week’s event as “historic.”

In a video released Thursday by the Israeli military, Supper congratulated the state of Israel for its imminent receipt of the fifth-generation fighter. “It’s a historic moment for you, the world, and specifically the region receiving this jet,” he said.

Col. Asaf, the deputy commander of the F-35I’s designated home base at Nevatim, told reporters here that work to stand up the new Adir Squadron started about 18 months ago. The officer, whose surname was withheld for security reasons, said the sprawling base – one of three built after the 1979 peace treaty with Egypt – would house five operational squadrons, including the new 140th Squadron of new F-35Is.

In addition to simulator-based pilot and aircrew training at Luke, ground crews have been training at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida and elsewhere in the US on maintaining and supporting the service’s newest acquisition, he said. At home, he noted that the IAF has completed construction of new facilities and underground hangars to accommodate the new fleet.

“This base is the biggest and most rapidly growing base in Israel,” the officer said. “To prepare for receipt of this new capability, we now have a lot of new buildings for ground and operational support. Some structures have been upgraded and others were built from scratch to host the airplane, its systems, its engines, avionics.”

The F-35 simulator will feature prominently in the expanded Nevatim base, officers here said.

By the end of next year, with nine F-35Is delivered into Israeli hands, the service expects to be in a position to declare Initial Operational Capability (IOC), officers here said.

Israel is under contract for 33 F-35A-model aircraft and is expected to conclude by spring a follow-on order with the US government for another 17 A-model fighters.

Future plans include acquisition of another 25 F-35Is – possibly F-35B-model short-takeoff and landing versions – which would up Israel’s stealth force to a full 75 aircraft.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Dec 2016 20:35

India, if not already done, needs to prepare for this.

Cheap off-the-shelf drones are changing how so-called Islamic State and other groups are fighting - and the world’s militaries are racing to catch up

A small drone rises into the air. The operator checks its bird’s-eye view on a screen before nudging a control and sending the drone buzzing across town.
Welcome to Future Now

We will be publishing regular stories from all over the world about technology, energy, economics, society and much more – you can find them here. We hope you will join us as we explore the changes that matter.

This could be an enthusiast anywhere in the world. The global market for small camera-carrying flying machines has gone from a few thousand a year in 2010 to many millions. But in places like Iraq, consumer drones have also become weapons of war.

Off-the-shelf drones began to be used by so-called Islamic State in 2014. At first they used them to film propaganda videos from the air. Then they became scouts. A drone video of a Syrian military base was released shortly before the base was hit by multiple suicide bombings that targeted its weak spots, suggesting that the drone had been sent in on a surveillance mission.

Other IS drones have been used to guide armoured truck bombs to their targets in real time. And according to US military sources, IS are now using drones in Mosul to watch where mortar rounds are falling so they can adjust their aim.

IS are not the only ones with drones. Several other groups in Syria and Iraq are now flying them, including Hezbollah. Even Iraqi army units have deployed consumer drones in the battle for Mosul, spotting car bombs and carrying out tactical reconnaissance.

But now such drones may be more than spies. IS have started turning cheap drones into lethal guided missiles by fitting them with explosive charges. So far there have been few casualties but the tiny, low-flying weapons are a growing problem. What’s more, the world’s militaries are struggling to keep up. To maintain their edge in the face of easily obtained commercial hardware, armies are going to have to change the way they equip themselves.
To maintain their edge, armies are going to have to change the way they equip themselves

Consumer drones are attractive because they provide a cheap tool for seeing over a ridge, or getting a close-up view of a distant building without exposing yourself to fire. The military have their own tactical drones, but these are rare and expensive. The British Army’s miniature Black Hornet cost around $100,000 (£80,000) each. Yet consumer drones like the popular DJI Phantom – which can fly for up to half-an-hour and send back crisp high-definition video from two miles away - can be bought online for less than $1,000 (£800).

Radio-controlled aircraft have posed a risk as potential weapons for many years. As long ago as 1993 the Japanese cult Aum Shinriko looked at using a radio-controlled helicopter to spray nerve gas. But until recently the tech was difficult to master. It took time and skill to build and fly radio-controlled aircraft, with many crashes on the way. The drones available today more or less fly themselves, however.

(Credit: Getty Images)
Drones are difficult to shoot down so other options such as using nets, rubber balls or trained eagles are being explored (Credit: Getty Images)

Now the tricky part is arming them. Fitting a drone with weapons still requires some technical skill but it is being made easier with cheap add-ons intended for hobbyists, such as a kit which allows any drone to drop a hundred-gram toy bomb filled with powder. In August, Hezbollah released a video showing small bombs dropped from commercial drones.

A new US Army handbook recommends that at least one soldier in a patrol should always be on the look out for drones and warning that a swarm of drones could overwhelm defences.

Consumer drones are getting more advanced all the time. The latest DJI Mavic has sensors to automatically avoid obstacles like trees and buildings, while a Precision Landing feature navigates to a precise spot by comparing video images. Similar technology could soon help drones to operate autonomously, with no need for operator control or satellite signals. This may make them impervious to electronic jamming.

Drone makers have tried to prevent the misuse of their products by building in software restrictions

Drones are also difficult to shoot down, so new weapons are being developed to tackle them. The US Army recently released a video of solders using a device like a rifle with a TV aerial attached against a drone in a training exercise. This is the Battelle Drone Defender which fires a beam of radio waves to jam both the drone’s remote control link to its operator and its GPS guidance. The video shows the baffled drone shutting down and landing automatically. Other options being explored include trained eagles, nets and rubber balls.

Drone makers have tried to prevent the misuse of their products by building in software restrictions that prevent their drones flying in forbidden areas such as airports, a technique known as geofencing. But while geofencing may stop inexperienced drone users, enthusiasts have shown it can be disabled with relative ease.

The threat posed by small consumer drones is limited by their small payload, so ambitious militant groups are aiming for something larger. In February this year, field investigators from Conflict Armament Research inspected a captured IS workshop in Ramadi where drones were being made from scratch. The investigators found unfinished airframes and wings made from wood and Styrofoam, along with flight electronics including camera controllers and gyroscopes. The electronics included basic components from Korean, Japanese and Turkish suppliers.

A dismantled Soviet-made Strela surface-to-air missile was found in the same workshop, suggesting IS was planning to fit the warhead to a drone. There are concerns that Hezbollah are planning drone attacks on helicopters. Drones cannot be detected by missile warning sensors and are unaffected by decoy flares. They would be easy to avoid if seen, but spotting a small drone from a helicopter may be difficult.

Drones cannot be detected by missile warning sensors and are unaffected by decoy flares

Drone proliferation has largely caught the military by surprise. Just as mobile phones used to coordinate attacks and set off bombs in Iraq required new tactics and technology, more devices like special detectors and jammers will be needed to counter the small drone threat.
But there is a bigger lesson. Economies of scale make consumer drones cheaper than their military counterparts. The commercial sector produces a more capable generation of drones every year or so. The military can take several years to catch up.
That may be why US Marine Corps Gen Robert Neller wants to give every Marine squad its own quadcopter in 2017. “They’re like a thousand bucks,” he told a press conference in September.

The US Defense Science Board also recently recommended changing how they go about developing their kit. Rather than using custom-built components, military drones may soon be built using off-the-shelf commercial components and open-source software – assembling drones quickly and cheaply in much the same way IS was doing in its workshop in Ramadi.

This would be a big shake-up in the defence industry, which is traditionally a closed world that operates on long timescales. But to keep up with the drones in today's conflicts, change is exactly what’s needed.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 Dec 2016 20:44

Australia looks to the US to boost EW capability

The US State Department has approved the potential sale to Australia of military electronic warfare (EW) equipment to support its Boeing E/A-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft. The Foreign Military Sale features an additional AEA-18G EW range system and related support, equipment, and training for an estimated cost of USD115 million, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) has said.

Congress was notified of the sale in early December, said DSCA, which added that prime contractors in the programme will be Leidos (hardware) and General Dynamics Mission Systems (software).

The DSCA said that the deal reflects Australia's request for additional funding to a previously implemented FMS case, valued at USD79 million, for two AEA-18G EW range systems to conduct EW and surveillance training within the borders of Australia. It added that the renewed contract covers additional costs for integration testing, tools, equipment, spare parts, technical documents, and training.

The DSCA said the proposed sale will allow continued efforts to "improve Australia's capability in current and future coalition operations". It added, "Australia will use the range to enhance EW capabilities as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defence. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these items into its armed forces."

The capability is thought to fulfil a requirement under Australia's Project Air 3021 Phase 1, which seeks to provide aircrews with the ability to train in surface-to-air threat scenarios.

Earlier in December Australia also announced a AUD232 million (USD173 million) contract to extend the support of the General Electric F414 engines that power the Royal Australian Air Force's Boeing 24 F/A-18F Super Hornet multi-role aircraft and its 12 Boeing EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft. The first Growler is set to arrive in Australia in early 2017.The DSCA announcement follows the Australian government's approval in September to invest AUD500 million to "significantly expand" the Australian Defence Force's (ADF's) EW capabilities.

The so-called EW Operations Support for Maritime and Land Forces project will provide EW equipment and infrastructure to "significantly sharpen the ability of naval ships and army units to deal with threats emerging across the electronic warfare spectrum", the Australian Department of Defence said.

In announcing the project Australia's Minister for Defence Marise Payne said the EW project will "better prepare" the ADF to conduct operations in areas where advanced threats such as missiles could threaten lives and assets. Payne added that around 75% of the AUD500 million budget for the project is expected to be spent locally to boost to the country's defence industry.

Pictures of Australia's first EA-18Gs -

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 11 Dec 2016 11:42

A small drone or a group of 2-3 small drones could also be brought into position in the glide slope of taking off or landing airliners/military aircraft to cause significant damage or even crashes

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 12 Dec 2016 04:05

First two Israeli F-35I's in Italy prior to their flight and delivery to Israel expected tomorrow

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Dec 2016 07:37

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Dec 2016 23:35

Boeing-Iran Deal for $16.6 Billion of Jets Is First Since 1979

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... n-37-years

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 Dec 2016 00:13

^^^ LOL

So much for the axis of evil. The nonsense the power brokers peddle to us common folk....

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 00:27

Both candidate Trump, and many in the Congress were opposed to this so let's see this happens or not. Regardless, Flynn, Pompeo, and Mattis probably are as or more hawkish than the Bush administration was so expect some movement on other US-Iran matters. At the very least the deal may be hanging by a thread if Iran does not put more cards on the table. Mattis has in the past specificly pointed to its Ballistic missile program, and counter maritime capability.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2016 02:03

F-35 program:
•Cost: $400 billion
•Cost has nearly doubled since launching in 2001
•4 yrs behind schedule
•U.S. to buy 2,400+ F-35 jets https://t.co/JTCErrTLBi
— Fox News Research (@FoxNewsResearch) December 12, 2016
F-35 program 'cost is out of control,' Trump says
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12 ... -says.html

who cares? but I like this pic

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 02:20

The program cost is actually in the $390 Billion range when factoring in the cost to design, develop, test and procure the 2400+ aircraft for the US services. It is actually quite affordable given the size of the Defense budget and what %age it makes up . The problem was always with unreal expectations. Back in 2000 the US services were not Congressional mandated to do an ICE (Independent cost estimate) so whatever these reports say in terms of it was supposed to cost X, it was not really based on an audit of the technology or the capability being procured at the time of system design analysis. These figures are based on post program reporting and estimates from then year SAR's and CBO.

The problem is multi-fold including poor contracting and bad program management on part of Lockheed and the DOD for years but the initial 'wishful' thinking was not rooted in any independent estimate as is required in new programs at the moment. You'd have to be nuts to think you could buy 2400 fifth generation strike fighters for 200 Billion including R&D cost when 4.5+ generation fighters are going for >$100 Million (including US ones).

What Trump can do is get the partners and the US services to agree to a massive lot buy and then give a price to the Lockheed which it has to contractually agree despite profit margins. But wait, Obama just did that like 6 weeks ago

.

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/11/jpo- ... ip-9-deal/

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2016 02:39

Or herd some low wage Indic workers and get them to learn.. and then fund for how to produce the 2400 F35s for 120 billion.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Dec 2016 04:07

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/tu ... iyarbakir/
A Turkish jet had crashed in the predominately Kurdish city of Diyarbakir near an airport on Monday.The pilot survived and safely ejected from the crashing jet.The Turkish F-16 warplane had left a military air base in Diyarbakir for a training flight when it fell shortly after take-off in a village nearby, according to Turkey's Dogan news agency.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 04:45

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Dec 2016 05:28

They did the math: How NASA's black mathematicians multiplied success

Rammpal · Post by **Rammpal** » 13 Dec 2016 05:32

"...She beat cancer and now she will win your heart; Kanika Tekriwal’s JetSetGo story..."

https://yourstory.com/2014/06/jetsetgo/

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2016 05:32

All-Eyes moving F35s. It is one the best capable a/c out there now leaving the raptor alone

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 05:46

F-35 is like the F-16 to the F-15, only difference being that while the F-22 is clearly larger, faster, capable of doing some remarkable things when it comes to high and fast envelope, and its agility aided by both he sheer size of its controls surfaces and TVC, the F-35 departs from the F-16's Light weight fighter legacy. It starts off as a medium sized aircraft, with a fairly substantial sized front sensor (aided no doubt by its LOW RCS), lots of rooms for avionics, an internal EW self protection suite (that led to bumps on the F-16 family over its life) and the ability to carry the larger 2000 lb bomb internally. It's the "quantity" fighter as General Hostage coined it a few years ago and at roughly $100 Million per A in LRIP-9 and close to $80 Million at FRP it gets you that quality in the right quantity as long as production rates are kept high and acquisition quantity held steady (rate is more important than overall quantity for unit cost).

In some aspects it will never match the F-22, while in other aspects it has already (at baseline) exceeded it.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 Dec 2016 05:50

brar_w: Why did they show the face of that Israeli F-35 pilot? Unless he is the base commander of an airbase in Israel, showing faces of Israeli (fighter) pilots is considered taboo no?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 05:54

Those are USAF or Lockheed pilots delivering the aircraft. The IDF decided to only do Simulator and maintainer training in CONUS and will be developing their own training program in house. The first time an IDF pilot flies the F-35 will be one of these aircraft from Israel.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/isr ... lly-flying

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 16:10

EDIT -

First IDF F-35 pilot flies Israel's first F-35 sortie (also the first sortie from home base)

The first “Adir” takeoff in Israeli skies: Lt. Col. Yotam takes off into a new #era in the IAF

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Dec 2016 18:49

"Turkey to crashland?" "LIghtning" strikes? Trump's plane speaking..(pardon the pun!) on the JSF has seen US aerospace stock prices sliding and in this report a disaster warning for the RN/Britain,which has picked the STOVL version for its new QE carriers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12 ... g-control/

Defence experts warn of 'disaster' for Britain after Donald Trump suggests undoing 'out of control' F-35 fighter jet project
f-35
F-35B Lightning II, the first of Britain's new supersonic 'stealth' strike fighters CREDIT: BRITISH MINISTRY OF DEFENCE/EPA
Ruth Sherlock, washington Ben Farmer, defence correspondent Alan Tovey, industry editor
12 DECEMBER 2016
British defence experts expressed alarm yesterday after Donald Trump suggested he might undo a multi-billion dollar stealth fighter project that is to form a core part of the United Kingdom's defensive capabilities.

The president-elect took a casual shot at the F-35 programme for the world's most advanced fighter jet tweeting on Monday that the cost was "out of control".

"Billions of dollars can and will be saved on military (and other) purchases after January 20th," he wrote, indicating a change in strategy after his inauguration.

Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!

But defence experts told this newspaper there would be disastrous consequences for Britain if Mr Trump were to put the plan on the scrap heap at this late stage.

"If the US were to cancel the programme in its entirety tomorrow, the UK would truly be up a creek without a paddle," Francis Tusa, editor of Defence Analysis, said.

Financially, Britain would lose the £2billion it has contributed to the research and development of the supersonic jet, which has been designed to avoid detection on enemy radar.

And, Mr Tusa said, it would leave the UK without a plane to put on its new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers: "This is the only plane with vertical landing".
*(Solution.Britain buys back the early retired Harriers it sold lock,stock and barrel to the USMC! Perhaps the Donald might even give it to the RN for free)

Liz Quintana, air power expert at the Royal United Services Institute agreed that if America decided to cancel the programme, it would leave Britain and other European allies who have placed orders "a bit stuck".

She said there was no alternative so-called fifth generation stealth fighter available anywhere else, or even on the drawing board.

She said: "The US Air Force would be as stuck as anyone else in terms of what it buys instead."
If America cut its order numbers, it would also drive up the overall cost of UK orders.
Britain has agreed to buy 138 of the fighters over the next two decades and to buy 24 by 2023.

Mr Tusa said scrapping the programme would also have far-reaching implications in foreign diplomacy.

Israel, Japan and South Korea are among the countries who have committed to buying a number of the £70 million fighter jets, and who would stand to lose greatly if it were scrapped.

Mr Trump's tweet came as Ash Carter, the defence secretary, travelled to Israel to attend a ceremony marking the delivery of the country's first F-35 fighters.

But both Ms Quintana and Mr Tusa agreed that, given the dramatic repercussions, they could not imagine the United States pulling out of the programme altogether.

Rather, Ms Quintana, interpreted Mr Trump's message as the "first shot" in a tough round of cost negotiations with Lockheed Martin, the Government’s largest defence contractor and developer of the programme. The British defence giant is the only “tier one” partner in the project, and produces about 15pc of each aircraft.

The F-35 project has been criticised for its cost and delay
The project - which is expected to cost $1.5 trillion dollars over its 50-year lifetime including in service support - has come under fire for being overly costly, slow and failing to meet initial expectations.

The price for the 2,450 aircraft the US military will fly has almost doubled from early expectations to $400billion. Initial contracts also expected there to be about 1,000 of the jets ready by 2016, but by summer the consortium behind the aircraft had delivered fewer than 200.

The F-35 has also come in for criticism that it is unable to “dogfight” as well as jets which are 30 years older than it, though the manufacturers say this is an unfair comparison as it was never designed for this.

Ms Quintana said: "Frankly everyone would benefit in the programme if we managed to bring the price down."

Mr Tusa pointed out that many countries involved in the programme, including the US, appeared to be slowly backing off their from original commitments of how many planes to buy.

Following Mr Trump's tweet, Lockheed Martin shares reportedly plunged by more than 4 per cent in early trade, shaving billions of dollars from the company's market value, while BAE’s stock fell almost 2.5 per cent.

Jeff Babione, Lockheed's F-35 chief, said the company understood concerns about affordability, but added: "It's an amazing programme. It's great value and I look forward to any questions that the president-elect may have."

Mr Trump's attack comes a week after he condemned as "out of control" the cost of a new Air Force One plane being built by Boeing.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 13 Dec 2016 19:22

Half of the Marines ( The service that has its entire modernization reliant on the F-35, V-22, L-Class ships and the MAGTF) in the photo below will either serve in Trump's Cabinet, or the NSC. The current CSAF who is a proponent of the F-35 was the force provider (USAF) to the incoming SecDef during his time at CENTCOM and as a combat pilot has first hand experience of what enhanced survivability buys you in terms of capability. Add two GD/Lockheed alumni in his DOD transition team.

The F-35 and particularly the B (that the UK is interested in) isn't going anywhere. The Pentagon just signed (and Congress just approved) taking the lot rate to 90 aircraft with the Senate clearing the NDAA with close to if not more than 90% voting in favor.

What Trump wants to do is "negotiate" deals and lower price. I am sure the team that Lockheed represents want's to do just that (contrary to what many believe this is a volume business for them with margins (As shared with shareholders by their CEO and CFO last quarter) well below their F-16 line..certainty in production rates affects more than asking for more money per lot since it isn't a margin business like selling iPhones) and they could start by negotiating the last LRIP blocks and the first 2-3 FRP blocks in a massive block buy as was originally envisioned. Acquisition rules and laws would have to be changed but savings projected are in the $1-2 Billion range over something like 400 aircraft. The international customers are already doing it since their national laws allow them to negotiate in bulk and buy through a multi-block process. The US acquisition system doesn't until there is Milestone-C so there is significant potential savings avaialble if the next Secretary of Defense chooses to pursue that path.

F-35 JPO: Pentagon opted out of FY-17 investment in JSF multiyear

The Defense Department's fiscal year 2017 budget does not include near-term plans to invest in a multiyear F-35 procurement deal, but buy-in from international partners will keep it alive should the United States opt in in future years.

Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the F-35 program executive officer, told reporters during a Feb. 10 roundtable that the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps budgets do not include funds to join in on the block buy in FY-17. However, the FY-18 spending plan does include a $537 million plus-up across the services' budgets should they choose to participate.

"The department decided for lots of reasons that it would be best to wait a year," Bogdan said. "But they frontloaded and said, 'OK, we're going to go ahead and put the money in the budget in '18 because we are committed to doing a block buy in '19 and beyond."

The proposed FY-18 plus-up includes $280 million from the Air Force, $140 million from the Marine Corps and $117 million from the Navy, according to the joint program office.

The buy would combine F-35 Joint Strike Fighter production lots 12, 13 and 14 starting in FY-18, but requires some upfront FY-17 investment. Inside Defense previously reported that the Air Force was hesitant about investing in the block buy in FY-17 largely due to funding constraints. The service is awaiting an independent business case analysis of the proposed block buy from RAND, and expects that to be completed this month. The analysis will examine all three JSF variants, not just the Air Force's A model.

Bogdan noted this week that the procurement is expected to save more than $2 billion over three years, an estimate he called “conservative.” Because of that payoff, foreign partners opted to invest in the purchase in FY-17 despite the lack of U.S. investment. Even if DOD backs away from the FY-18 investment and chooses instead to join in later years, the savings are still considerable, Bogdan said.

"To them, the partners and the [foreign military sales] customers, they say, 'As long as I'm going to buy those airplanes anyway, why wouldn't I do this? Why wouldn't I put up a little bit of extra money in FY-17 to garner lots of savings?'" Bogdan said.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 14 Dec 2016 05:31

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 15 Dec 2016 06:39

Pictures of the first two Israeli F-35 I's flying alongside the F-16I's -

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Dec 2016 06:12

The pie at night: Meat and potato treat 'sent into space'

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 16 Dec 2016 13:01

Important lessons India should learn BEFORE jumping into the design of the Indian AMCA.

US has spent way too much money & effort on building a low performance JSF aircraft just so it can have stealth capability. Too many performance compromises had to be made and massive cost escalation occurred for too little in gains.

Spending a fraction of the funds spent developing the JSF on upgrading the F-16 and F-18 in their fleet would have been a much better investment compared to the the over 1+ trillion dollars spent on the JSF.

But now the US govt is too deep in the hole to jump out of the JSF. They have to go through with the project.

-------

Former US Navy commander :: Here’s what the US should have built instead of the F 35

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 16 Dec 2016 16:14

What exactly do you upgrade an F-16, and an F-18 with to make them competitive against an Su-35, PAKFA, and J-20 or more importantly, S300's, S400's, their chinese clones and other systems out there? You can't dramatically reduce their signature to go anywhere near these platforms. You can't all of a sudden turn them into heavy fighters without loosing other advantages and you won't be able to get sensor parity with those aircraft because they will wear you down staying mostly in LPI/LPD mode given the MASSIVE RCS advantage they enjoy. There are limits to how large your sensors (not just radar and IR sensors but Active/Passive EW/EA apertures as well) can grow, particularly when ESM is where it is. The only way then to get close, get a detection advantage is to suppress the RCS (that is passive Electronic Warfare of sorts). You can't do that when your strike fighter looks like this -

Keep in mind that a clean F-35A carries the same payload farther than the F-16 with the bags, bombs and sensors pictured above. This is before the IDF integrates its own drop tanks on it. The Super Hornet is a perfect example. All out performance had to be sacrificed to make it a larger strike fighter with more internal capacity to support higher performing mission systems. The mandate was to stay within the F-18 design and not shop for a clean sheet. An end result is an extremely capable advanced 4/4,5 generation aircraft but not something that is going to be competitive against modern 5th generation designs yet does not cost significantly LESS than a full rate production F-35A (though the difference between the naval is more). At FRP you are essentially paying $20 million or so more in 2020 to acquire the F-35A than what the USN or RAAF paid to acquire the F-18E/F in the 2000's.

The development cost attributed to the F-35 is amortized over thousands of aircraft for both the US and partners/FMS customers. Per jet R&D spend is far less than on say the Navy's F-18 program or the USAF's F-15 program. Also, there is R&D cost exclusive to developing the first stealthy, supersonic, short take off and vertically landing fighter in the world. The only reason they (as in the USMC) could do that was if they had their sister service's contribute to a joint effort. The USN's entire distributed lethality concept depends on the USMC showing up with its L-Class ships especially now that they even want to put TLAM's on them.

Low Observability is an enabler of other advantages the F-35 enjoys over its legacy 4th generation. The massive situational awareness advantage that is currently stressing the Electronic Warfare shop at Eglin (for mission data files) is enabled by the fact that the F-35 can get closer to its targets (Integrated air defense systems, SAM's and even other aircraft) in order to gather the sort of data it gathers. You can't do the same if you just take these systems and mount them on the F-16 even if one ignores that the Viper doesn't have the SWaP for them.

I also don't get the cost argument. The USAF, USN and USMC are recapitalizing an overwhelming majority of their strike fighter fleet to the tune of 2400+ strike aircraft for a developmental, MILCON and system procurement cost of around $390-398 or so Billion spread between 2000 and 2038 (first EMD contract award to last aircraft ordered). How is this unaffordable given the sheer number of aircraft it gets you and the size of US defense spending? I mean this year (FY17) the USAF paid around $100-105 Million for one F-35A which is less or equal to what other air-forces around the world paid for aircraft like the Rafale, Typhoon, or even F-15's. Also note that none of the air-forces acquiring 4/4.5 generation fighters at >$100 Million a pop have budgets anywhere near that of the USAF.

For other advantages between an F--22/F-35 over F-15/16/18 one can go directly to pilots who have flown all. The Mitchell institute discussion I've posted goes into that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjTpqF22Ous

In theory if you could take the stealth of the F-22, build up on it and mount it on an F-16 block 50 you'd get a great multi-role fighter. Guess what? That's what the F-35 is with a a lot of extra space for larger sensors and mission system growth thrown in for good measure.

Would they do the JSF program differently if they had the advantage of hindsight? Sure. The same applies to the F-16, F-18, F-22 and F-15 programs. The JSF was simply a DARPA study that was continued by the AFRL and rolled into a program of record by the US Congress that looked at how to replace thousand of cold war legacy aircraft in the 2010's and beyond. Who knows what the services would have one if it was left to them but much like other programs they would have changed certain things, while retaining others.

Meanwhile, here is an IHS analysis on how Israel is going to use its aircraft -

In a move that reflected the Israeli Air Force's (IAF's) intention to use its newest aircraft to empower its entire fleet, its first two Lockheed Martin F-35A 'Adir' Joint Strike Fighters flew their first training flight alongside F-16I 'Sufa' multirole fighters on 13 December, just a day after they arrived at Nevatim Air Base.

The arrival of the new aircraft made Israel the first country to have F-35s based outside the United States.

The hour-long joint flight with the F-16Is was symbolic of the ongoing initiative to integrate fourth- and fifth-generation aircraft, an effort that began years before the F-35's arrival. The inter-connectivity programme is led by the IAF's Ofek (Horizon) computer programming unit.

Ofek is creating a network that will enable F-35 jets to share the large quantity of data they are expected to gather during flights with the IAF's F-16s and F-15s, thereby improving the older aircraft's situational awareness.

The ability of F-35s to share their data with the rest of the IAF has been a key Israeli focus, and the Israel Defense Forces intend to connect ground forces to the F-35-fed intelligence picture as well.

Speaking in June, IAF Chief Major General Amir Eshel said the F-35 will significantly upgrade intelligence-gathering, as well as the ability to strike very large numbers of targets with guided air-to-surface weapons.

He said that the F-35s will be a key component in the IAF's goal of creating "intelligence 24-7" and said the data they will gather will be sent to ground-based processing centres within seconds of being obtained, where it will be rapidly turned into operational intelligence.

IHS Jane's understands that the IAF will probably begin using the new aircraft soon for advanced intelligence gathering missions.

Officially, the IAF has said that the new platforms will become operational in December 2017.

Lieutenant Colonel Yotam (full name withheld), who commands the IAF's first F-35 squadron, dubbed 'Golden Eagle', outlined the steps that need to be taken to get the aircraft operational to the IAF's official website.

"We will, at first, ensure that we are providing the appropriate safety envelope for the plane's activities. We will train ourselves, and we will develop combat doctrines. Only after the plane receives an in-depth check, and after we feel ready, will we embark on operational activities," he said.

After touching down at Nevatim on 12 December, the IAF's two F-35s were taken to an underground facility where technical personnel began preparing them for the training flight with the assistance of teams from Lockheed Martin and the US Air Force.

Earlier this year, the IAF Chief of Staff Brigadier General Tal Kelman confirmed that Israel will install its own cyber defences on the aircraft.

Israeli ministers from the cabinet's National Security Committee approved on 27 November the acquisition of 17 additional F-35As fighter jets, which will bring the total on order up to 50, sufficient for two squadrons.

The Israeli government is also weighing a request by the IAF to purchase a squadron of the F-35B short take-off and vertical landing variant, which would be useful if runways are damaged by missile attacks.