It’s the world’s smallest helicopter, and it’s going to fly at Leonardo da Vinci’s birthplace, Florence, Italy.
With a top speed of 90 km/hr and an endurance of about 1 hour, it’s much more practical than a jet pack, which I still want…just a little bit.
It’s only ¥6 million, about $57K us.
Coaxial rotors.
Have to worry if it can get my fat ass off the ground though.
The May 12 issue of Aviation Week, has some interesting articles on various advanced engine technologies under development in Europe (Paid Subscription Required) under the sobriquet Newac (new aeroengine core technology).
As opposed to some of the other initiatives, such as P&W’s geared fan, this is focusing on increasing the efficiency of the core, not the fan.
A basic description of the technologies that they are looking at are very aggressive active clearance management between the case and the turbine blades to minimize losses, the use of intercooling (blue in picture above) and heat exchangers (green in picture above) increase turbine inlet temperatures while keeping flame temperatures lower (less NOx, also called “exhaust heat recuperation”), and aggressive management of cooling air to minimize losses.
The intercooling and recuperation are actually not new technology, they have been used in stationary turbines for years, but its application to aero engines is new.
Daimond is looking at developing its own aircraft diesel engine as an alternative to the Thielert engine, as a result of of the Bankruptcy of the engine manufacturer, and Cessna has delayed its turbodiesel Skyhawk.
I’m still not sure what was involved, the founder of the company was terminated for some sort of accounting shenanigans, and I’m not sure what, though some of the comments in the various aviation fan boards there are indications that the company was getting hosed by warranty claims.
Not that important in the scheme of things, but the Gripen’s performance in a non-western air force is likely to be significant to its sales prospects.
It’s not too significant, except that I like it. Some nice pics at the link.
Graham Warwick has the details, but basically, it involves putting wings above the rotors of a tandem rotor helo, and using this to allow the retreating blade to be offloaded, and more generally to allow the rotors to be offloaded, in forward flight.
It appears to me to be basically an attempted end run around Sikorski’s patent on its advancing blade concept, but it;s kind of neat.
It looks like the Aussies, now working with NASA are conducting a new series of tests on hypersonic vehicles. (paid subscription required)
The vehicle.
The flight plan.
Well, at least the initial one. It looks like they will be doing a wind range of vehicles, and eventually going with a flatter trajectory to get more time under thrust.
It’s amazing what those guys have done on a shoe string.
It appears that India is making a major push into manned space flight. (Paid subscription required)
They are looking at a first flight in the 2015 time frame with some significant collaboration with the Russians.
This to my mind is the least sensible way to spend money of space flight. They are already spending significant amounts on reconnaissance and imaging satellites, which meet actual needs, as opposed to perceived status in the world.
Needless to say, the Boeing rent-a-crowd is probably all over this, but really, this grounding is a normal part of a test program. (Paid Subscription Required)
Basically, they are installing updated plumbing, and setting up a remote station for the boom operator in the cockpit.
Earlier tests have been about verifying the airworthiness of the boom, which it passed in flying colors, with testing of the boom in use being done on a smaller A310 testbed.
The MRTT is almost identical to the KC-45 selected by the USAF.
This is really getting ugly. They are talking about another nine month delay on the 787.
Boeing is denying this, but my money is on the rumor.
I believe that this was made from parts manufactured at or around the end of the USSR, but this does represent a serious dedication towards Russia rearming.
Basically, think B-1, only faster (Mach 1.05 or so down on the deck) and bigger.
This is the one with the wiring that does not massive hand rewiring to work, which is what caused the delay in the deliveries of the super jumbo.
About bloody time.
Basically, the Swiss have been operating F-5E/Fs in 1976, and they are looking towards replacing them.
In the competition were Boeing (F/A-18E/F), Eurofighter (Typhoon), Dassault (Rafale), and my favorite SAAB (Gripen).
Boeing has now pulled out of the competition, even though they would appear to have a leg up, as the Swiss already operate the F/A-18C/D. The official word was that their withdrawal was based on “Thorough review of Switzerland’s requirements for partial replacement of its Tiger fighter aircraft,” which I tend to agree with.
The F/A-18 is about two sizes larger than the F-5, and would require modifications to the facilities to accommodate their size.*
My guess would be that SAAB is at an advantage in this competition:
One wonders if the Swiss would be interested in the base C/D model of the Gripen, or if they would want the upgraded variant.
Considering their needs, I would expect them to go with the lighter original, as I’ve said, they do not need the payload/range, which is already far in excess of the F-5s that are being replaced, though the AESA radar might be a part of an upgrade.
*It probably did not help when, earlier in the competition, Boeing claimed that it would kick ass in short field capabilities relative to the competition.
While the aircraft does take off in a remarkably short distance from an aircraft carrier, that involves the use of catapults and arresting gear.
With the lowest power to weight ratio and highest wing loading of the competitors, they may have had representatives of the Swiss government laughing in their face.
Proposals for the Indian Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition were sent in recently. See my earlier post here)
A good rundown on the competitors is at the link, though I count the IAF’s familiarity with Russian equipment as a plus, not a minus.
The competitors are the MiG-35 (a Mig-29 derivative), Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, F-16 and F-18E.
I think that the US fighters may be ruled out because of the effects of possible sanctions in the future, the US is much more aggressive in these actions than the French or British.
The Rafal and Typhoon are too pricey.
This leaves the MiG-35 and Gripen, with the former being cheaper to buy but more expensive to operate. The upgraded Gripen closes some of the gap in payload and range, but both are far superior to the MiG-21s that they would replace.
Then again, we know how good my predictions are.
It’s been a while, so we need to feed that tanker dispute Jones.
First, we have a press release from Northrop Grumman saying the obvious, that “Compared to the KC-767, the KC-45 can deliver more fuel at equal ranges (decreasing the number of aircraft required to meet mission requirements) or the same fuel load from greater distances (increasing potential Air Force basing options),” which is at this point in the “well duh” category, but a few lines down, they say, “Furthermore, the Air Force added that the KC-45’s greater refueling capability “Enables it to execute (the mission) with 22 fewer aircraft than Boeing’s … an efficiency of significant value to the government.”
22 Aircraft ain’t chicken feed.
By way of a very small cloud on the KC-45 Horizon, the Australian A330 MRTT is getting some new parts and modifications, some of which probably involve the boom.
The bottom line on the boom, however, is that while it was invented by Boeing, it was also designed from a clean sheet by McDonnell Douglas for the KC-10, and it’s been around for 50 years. It is not rocket science.*
*Full Disclosure, in 1999-2000 and 1996-1998, I worked as a mechanical engineer for what is now Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, and I have some claim to actually being a rocket scientist.
It looks like the first flight of the EADS A400M airlifter will will be delayed again (paid subscription required).
Once again, it is all problems with the engine, with the C-130 testbed not ready yet to fly, and the #1 aircraft will not be flying with final the high pressure compressor, which is in redesign:
The CEO admits that a number of issues could push the flight date out further. The most critical involves the software on the full-authority digital engine control which he said is three times as complex as that on the Airbus 380. Feedback from engine ground tests and static tests, which started in March, will also be critical. Suarez says the engine will total 1,200 hours on the bench by the end of May.
I would assume that the FADEC also includes blade pitch.
Of course, if they had bought the AN-70, it would be already for flying for less money, and if they had gone with the US engine proposal they might be flying already.
The #1 airframe is basically complete except for the engines.
This increase in focus in training ground forces, which accompanies an increase in the status of ground forces is not surprising.
The conclusion of the Winograd report*, which reviewed the 2006 Lebanon campaign was quite clear:
The military has abandoned the doctrine that stressed precision stand-off firepower over maneuver warfare, arguably the biggest mistake Israel made in the conflict.
It should be noted that the doctrine that they are abandoning is the central doctrine of the US military, particularly the USAF, and it is why you are seeing changes as a result of the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In fact, when one looks at the failures of the US military, at their core have been a consistent over-reliance on air power, whether USAF fast jets or slower helicopters.
*Warning, the format is some sort of mutant flash called NTXbook.
I think that it is cool.
For most of the forces out there, what they need is strategic airlift capability, not tactical, and honestly, the An-124 pretty much owns the field, and will for the foreseeable future, as the only potential competitor in terms of size, the A-380 is far more restricted in terms of airports, if just because with its low wing, it will Hoover debris off an austere strip.
As the article notes, Anotov has some real problems, noting the fact that the An-70, which is a great tactical airlifter*, is languishing, and wondering if Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation might be looking at a corporate takeover.
*Once you replace the avionics with western equivalents, and allow one of the large western turbine manufacturers to license produce with higher quality materials to improve reliability.
Now that Sweden has rolled out the advanced Gripen demonstrator, they are aggressively marketing it to Norway.
Among other things, Sweden is offering co-development on some of the technologies, and a promise to upgrade their Gripens to this standard should Norway buy them.
My money is still on the steamroller that is the JSF, at least until deliveries start showing late and more expensive than previously anticipated, my guess is a price tag 2/3 that of the F-22 ($120 million a pop) as versus the $50-60 million for the Gripen.
At that point, the Gripen will look very attractive to countries that are taking a wait and see approach.
Yep, the Gripen is my fighter obsession right now. In an age of ever spiralling costs, it’s half a generation ahead of the F-16 at around the same prime price, though even with the additional fuel and thrust, it will be smaller and lighter.
