54 seconds from brake unlock, and this appears to be without the use of afterburners.
It appears to be one of the de-miled Su’s from those boys in Rockville, Illinois.
Color me impressed.
Of course if I got one, I’d need to get a pilot’s license too.
So, some yahoo attempts to sew explosives into his underwear on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit, and, is tackled by passengers when his attempt at setting it off fails.
I call wannabee. Means of securely detonating a bomb without flames or noise have been the purview of one-eyed, one-handed, three-fingered men since 1944.
This was just sloppy.
Then again, my track record on this is almost 100% wrong.
The Transportation Department has now forbidden airlines from keeping passengers on a plane for more than 3 hours while it waits on the tarmac.
This is a long overdue change.
And yes, I realize that there appears to be some dissonance from my prior post, lambasting Obama and His Stupid Minions™ on cutting another taxpayer funded giveaway to AIG fat cats.
The thing is, Obama is not every special interest’s bitch, just the FIRE (Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate) sector.
Airlines are not part of FIRE, so they don’t get a pass.
RQ-170
What are the fairings on top are for, maybe antennae?
So, I was wrong, when I suggested that there was no reason for the USAF to be flying a stealthy UAV in Afghanistan and that someone was Photoshopping a Burt Rutan project.
I was wrong.
The configuration is interesting, because while it is clearly low observable, the location of the exhaust is fairly conventional, rather than discharging on top of the wing, which implies that, despite it clearly being a LO design, it’s not a “LO is the be all and end all of the design” vehicle like the F-117 and B-2 are.
The USAF has now admitted to fielding the RQ-170 Sentinel UAV in Afghanistan as well as the fact that it was developed at Lockheed Martin’s Skunkworks.
It appears to have been developed in response to the diplomatic brouhaha that resulted from the interception and forced landing of an EP-3 at the beginning of the Bush Administration.
It should be noted that the RQ designation means that it is unarmed, (paid subscription required) and the linked article also gives a reason for the USAF to deploy a radar evading UAV to Afghanistan:
“Don’t get enamored with current conditions,” [Air Force deputy chief of staff for ISR, Lt. Gen. Dave] Deptula cautions. “We don’t know what the future will bring.” While operations in Afghanistan will be “more complex than ever,” the future is “not only going to be about irregular warfare.”
Beyond 2011, the Air Force’s first priority and the destination of the next dollar to be spent “if I were king for a day,” Deptula says, “would be for long-range [reconnaissance and] precision strike. That’s the number-one need.
The “black” Sentinel was seen in 2007 at Kandahar, Afghanistan. Two photographs surfaced this year via the Secret Defense Blog.“We cannot move into a future without a platform that allows [us] to project power long distances and to meet advanced threats in a fashion that gives us an advantage that no other nation has,” he notes. “We can’t walk away from that capability.
It’s all about the Benjamins. The USAF is deploying this to Afghanistan because they think that it will help them in their budget fights against other services.
They have conducted tests, and have successfully intercepted a high-speed “cigarette boat”, which simulates a drug running boat.
The idea here is that if an aircraft encounters a ground target while only armed for air-to-air, it could use the Sidewinder to take out the target.
Me, I’m wondering why they don’t just use the cannon.
One interesting bit here is that the F-22 crash 9 months ago might have been a part of this test, as it was reported that the smaller side bay doors were open at the time of the incident.
OK, we are in a period of some uncertainty in terms of the much delayed US Air Force tanker contract.
Basically, it all comes down to how the USAF will evaluate the bids.
If it simply says that that the cheapest plane that meets the specs wins, the the Boeing 767 wins, but if it includes total capability, basically dollars per pound of fuel offloaded at a giving distance from the airbase, then the Airbus A330 wins, because it is significantly larger and more capable, as well as being able to simultaneously carry cargo and fuel planes.
It appears that the request for proposals (RFP) is leaning in the former direction, because EADS/Northrop Grumman is threatening a no-bid, which would have Boeing doing the Air Force like a drunk Republican at a gay bar. (see also here)
EADS/Northrop Grumman has reportedly told the Pentagon that it does not intend to bid if the RFP remains the same as it did in the draft, though this seen as a ploy to pressure the USAF to change the requirements (paid subscription required), and Air Force Secretary Michael Donley has called their bluff, saying that there will be no major changes.
I think that there is a bit of a game of chicken going on, and Representative John Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, is saying that the tanker bid “must” have a competition, implying that he may use the appropriations process to require multiple bidders which adds yet more drama to the entire process.
First the A400M, and now the 787 have completed their maiden flights.
It took off at 1:35 PM PST, and everything appears to have went well, though the flight was cut short by bad weather.
What stands out for me is the amount of wing flex as it flies.
I saw it in various computer renderings, but it’s a bit of surprise when you see it for real.
Finally in the air
The Airbus A400M has made its maiden flight maiden flight at 10L15 am (GMT +1) today in Seville, Spain.
It appears that they never retracted the gear (not surprising) , and I have no details of the flight plant, but here is some video and picture pr0n.
The most detailed report of the flight that I could find says that the flight lasted for 3h 45m, and that the aircraft reached 800 ft and a speed of 230 kts, below the original goal of 300 kt, but sufficient speed to imply that the gear was raised for some portion of the flight.
*See here for reference.
Yes, Airbus has revealed its plans for the first flight of the A400M military transport.
In fact they are anticipating that the the first flight will be sometime this week.
That’s one humongous sh%$ load of fairy dust.
I didn’t expect them to make it to serious taxi trials before January.
Fail!
So we see a front page editorial in the Mobile Press-Register calling for Northrop-Grumman/EADS to be given a fair shake in the tanker competition, which is far from surprising, since that is where the tanker would be assembled if the A330 wins, but they also have an editorial cartoon showing the “customers” of the tanker.
Notice anything?
Like the model of the aircraft?
It’s an F-15 Eagle made by Boeing whose 767 is competing against the A330 for the contract.
Considering the fact that there are 3 fighters currently in front line service with the USAF, and two of them are not made by Boeing, the choice here seems a big….Inopportune.
Python 5 and Derby
Stunner with 2nd stage
Rafael’s video Pr0n, H/t ELP Defens(c)e Blog
Israel is looking at using its Stunner anti-missile interceptor as a starting point for follow-ons to their Python 5 and Derby missiles.
The Python is a 6″ diameter short range (20+ km) infrared guided dogfight missile, and the Derby is a slightly lengthened version active radar guided version with with an ogive nose, and other aerodynamic cleanups (and possibly a longer motor) to achieve a range of about 50km, so replacing both of these with one derivative of another missile is certainly in the realm of possibility.
On the basis of the pictures here, and not much else, it appears that the 2nd stage of the Stunner is about the same size as the Python/Derby.
I’m not sure how much would be gained by developing a Python replacement on this platform, the as the missile already has excellent kinematics, as shown by the marketing video, though marketing videos should always be taken with a bit of a grain of salt.
That being said, given the Stunner’s configuration, the 2nd stage has a dual pulse motor, the 1st stage that would not be carried in an air launched version, could give significant increases in range and lethality for any potential Derby successor.
Here is my earlier post on the Stunner missile.
At the Dubai air show, which finished up a few days before the Dubai meltdown, the developers of supersonic business jets were optimistic as to their prospects.
I’m inclined to disagree. One of the things that drove the adoption of the jet airliner, in addition to speed, was that, when you considered the reduction in crew cost per segment and the profoundly lower maintenance costs of jets versus pistons, they were cheaper to operate.
This is not the case of any form of SST, whether civil, or business/personal.
That’s why optimism by SSBJ companies like Aerion (shown) making comments like. “We are in active discussions with more than one OEM and should have an agreement concluded by the second half of next year if things don’t get any worse in the world economy,” are more an indication of delusion than of viability.
They have this real cool design, but no one willing to make it….
But the picture of the is cool.
It’s alive, I tell you, it’s alive!!
So, not only are all 4 engines running, but the aircraft is now taxiing under its own power, and has reached speeds of up to 20 kts.
We may see a timid hop into the air around year’s end.
I’m not sure how much catching up they can do, and they are still over weight and under what they promised.
So, the latest selling point for the F-35 JSF is the fact that you might, at some ill defined point in the distant future, be able to put a laser on it:
The Lightning II may eventually be fitted with lasers able to shoot down attacking missiles. The head of Lockheed Martin’s Lightning program and former test pilot, Tom Burbage, said in Canberra the company was looking at special applications including an anti-missile laser system.
”They are lethal countermeasures in that with a laser you could actually destroy something that’s coming at the aircraft,” Mr Burbage said.
The classic rejoinder is the Yiddish, “Az der bubbe vot gehat baytzim vot zie geven mein zayde.” (If my grandmother had balls she’d be my grandfather.)
Certainly, with the transmission for the STOVL lift fan being able to handle something on the order of 25,000 KW, but it’s clear than any aircraft purchased today will never have that capability.
The JSF remains obscenely over priced as it has been sold, over budget compared to that price, and well behind schedule, and no amount of Ronco™ style, “But wait there’s more,” revelations will change this.
I am not one of the people who thinks that building a gazillion F-22s at a cost per Troy ounce approaching that of gold before its recent run-up† is a good idea, but the F-35 JSF is an exorbitantly expensive pig, even before you have “Frikken laser beams attached to their heads.”
*Actually Mike Meyers missed a joke here. Dr. Evil, having been frozen in the 1960s, would never have heard of the “Sea Bass”, it’s a marketing term. If he had known about them at all, he would have know them as a “Patagonian toothfish”, which lends itself to confusion, and all sorts of puns, and a number of humorous asides….I’m just saying.
†Empty weight, 43,430 lb, 12 Troy ounces to a pound, and $200 million price tag, gives a cost per Troy ounce of $383.76, which is very close to where gold was 5 years ago. (click graph for full size)‡
‡Yeah, I know the whine, “But if we buy more, the unit cost would go down!” Listen, 187 were bought, for a cost of $62 billion, which gives a cost of $331½ million each, and even the USAF’s (bogus numbers put the marginal costs well over a hundred million, and that’s not including the modifications that any new production would need because the parts are not made any more….And let’s not go into thee fact that it’s as expensive expensive as hell to just plain fly too.
In this case, it’s the liquid cooled 120° V-6 Adept aviation engine Adept 320T avgas/mogas engine.
I’m dubious on market success, given that it has to use gasoline, though it is automotive fuel (mogas) compatible.
The cost, and relative unavailability of the fuel is what is driving people toward small turbine and diesel engines.
I came across their web site in a strange way, they were mentioned in an ad for Autodesk® CAD products on the back cover of the ASME magazine, Mechanical Engineering, and looked at their technology.
The basic features of the engine are:
There is a relatively uneventful video of an engine run at the bottom of this post.
Up and Running
But no time to remove the flag?
They have finally got all the Europrop International TP400-D6 engines running on the EADS A400M military transport a the same time.
If you look closely (bottom pic), you will notice that they have so busy, that they still have the South African flag on the fuselage, even though that nation canceled their contract.
What can I say, this is a day for death spirals.
Compare and Contrast
Well, we have yet another report that the F-35 well over budget and behind schedule:
Reports prepared by the Defense Contract Management Agency for Defense Department officials show that Lockheed and other contractors are months late on deliveries of test airplanes and components for future production aircraft.
The program is even farther behind on testing, and the reports say Lockheed could exhaust its development budget within a year.
Problems cited in the documents, obtained by the Star-Telegram under the Freedom of Information Act, support a recent Pentagon assessment that F-35 development will require two more years and billions of additional dollars.
That’s not the death spiral part. The death spiral part is that many of the partners are looking at deferring or canceling purchases on the basis of the schedule slips and price increases:
In a long-awaited decision, cabinet’s national security committee was due to sign off on the $16 billion purchase before Christmas.
But defence budget pressures and Defence Department concerns about Australia becoming the lead foreign customer for the initial production models of the F-35 fighter are expected to force a postponement until the new year of a government green light for the acquisition.
As the budget numbers come out, you will see reductions or orders, which will drive unit price up, which will lead to reductions of orders, rinse, lather, repeat.
Unlike South Africa, who canceled their order of the A400M military transport in the face of delays and performance issues, Malaysia has decided that it is still interested in the turboprop transport.
It looks now like the final decision by the Swiss will likely be delayed until 2011, (paid subscription required) and the size of the order may be reduced from 30 to 22 aircraft.
It looks to me like budget considerations are an issue, which would mitigate against the $100-$140 million Eurofighter Typhoon. The Rafale is somewhat cheaper, at about $80 million, and the Gripen is “cheapest” at $40-60 million, which would tend to favor the Gripen.
Additionally, the Gripen is about ½ the size of the competitors, which means that operating costs would be much less, and the aircraft that it is replacing, the F-5 was never the high end of the Swiss AF fighter mix anyway.
Of course, Saab lacks the industrial connections for potential offset deals too, and if the Swiss wish to train at nearby bases, these bases will either have Rafales (France), or Typhoons (Germany, Italy, and Austria) already deployed there, which might simplify support there.
This makes the entire decision process hard to predict, to put it mildly.
The IDF is looking at the CH-53K instead.
It makes sense, really. Israel is the size of New Jersey, and the CH-53 is much more flexible, and the difference in speed does not make much of a difference.
Let’s roll the numbers
| V-22 | Ch-53K | |
| Speed | 450 km/h | 315 km/h |
| Payload | 6,800 kg | 15,900 kg |
| Range | 1,627 km | 841 km |
| Cabin Size (lxwxh) | 7.3m x 1.8m x 1.8m | 9.1m x 2.7m x 2.0m |
Since going from one corner of Israel to the other is on the order of 400 km, the CH-53 K can cover the entire country, carrying more, and carrying more internally.
Additionally, the V-22 costs about $70 million as versus about $30 million for the CH-53K.
With a reduced payload and supplemental tanks, something like a special forces insertion is going to have similar range, and the larger internal payload allows the on an offloading of larger vehicles more quickly.
Finally, in a “hot” landing zone, the V-22, with its heavily loaded props/rotors, is more susceptible to vortex ring state (basically a stall in a rotary winged aircraft), and has to descend more slowly, increasing vulnerability to ground fire.
It’s a no brainer for Israel not to buy the V-22.
Come to think of it, it may be a no brainer for everyone not to buy the V-22.