About a month ago, I blogged about how the noise levels of the F-35 might be an issue for the Norwegian Air Force.
Well, Lockheed Martin is now saying that, in violation of the laws of physics, the noise level in the “far field” areas will be less than the F-16, which has about 60% the installed thrust.
I inclined to believe that this is Lockheed speak for “we’ll cook the books with a test we design, and you’ll like it.”
I don’t mean junk the planes, just fold it back into the US Army Air Corps.
Case in point, the Air Force Top Brass is spending some $20 million counter-terrorism funds to build “comfort capsules” to be used by senior generals when traveling.
And these people were very involved in this project:
One request was that the color of the leather for the seats and seat belts in the mobile pallets be changed from brown to Air Force blue and that seat pockets be added; another was that the color of the table’s wood be darkened.
Changing the seat color and pockets alone was estimated in a March 12 internal document to cost at least $68,240.
(emphasis mine)
I understand the need of these guys to stay connected, but that would be a large screen laptop with secure network connections and a satcom link, not this.
Apparrently General Robert McMahon, Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for logistics, installations and mission support, who appears to be the prime mover behind this, and claims that it is, “not opulent”, and that he wanted the change to blue because “it would not show as much dirt” as brown, the color of dirt.
The Russians are now showing their SU-35 Flanker derivative prototype to air force officials and foreign representatives.
Note that, somewhat confusedly, this is the second aircraft designated Su-35.
These changes, along with other weight reductions in the airframe are supposed to, among other things, give supercruise capability, and it is expected to be fitted with some form of phased array radar.
I’m inclined to believe that the supercruise will be meaningful in air to air mode, if just because the aircraft carries so much fuel internally anyway that it will only be carrying 8 or so missiles in that configuration.
I think that the desire for supercruise is what drove them away from canards, likely increased transonic and supersonic drag a bit, though I am not an aerodynamicist.
It’s also has a new fly by wire flight control system, and so I’m a bit surprised that they haven’t reduced the size of the vertical tails a bit to cut down on weight and drag.
It should be an impressive aircraft, and competitive, particularly on price, in the export market.
Pull size pics at link.
The CDI has a good review of the process, which gained much of its currency in missile defense, and has spread like Athlete’s Foot to infect the US defense procurement process.
Basically, the project is never done, and never needs to meet requirements, because there is always a “spiral” upgrade that takes care of some short coming.
The full report is a PDF, though the summary linked to is not.
I encountered this worthless bullsh%$ while working FCS.
The ROK (South Korea) is looking at fielding its own advanced combat aircraft (Paid Subscription Required), EADS is pushing a Typhoon pushed somewhere past tranche 3, and SAAB is pushing a new stealth supercruiser, Boeing is pitching a significantly updated F-15, while Lockheed-Martin is pitching the F-35.
This is in parallel to the (IMHO overambitious) indiginous KFX stealth fighter program.
SAAB is proposing both a one and a two engine variant.
Honestly, the only two I see likely are the F-35 and Boeing’s proposal. The former because it is the 800 lb gorilla in the room, and the latter because they are currently taking shipments of the F-15K.
Note that in the competition that selected the F-15K, the Rafale was widely rumored to have won, but the fact that it was not a US product led to the selection of the Eagle.
It appears part of the decision regarding the rebid has to do with DefSec Gates’ ongoing war with an insubordinate, and frequently incompetent, US Air Force.
Among other things, USAF has been removed from the bid process.
I don’t think that the decision will change, as Gates is asking for amended bids, not new ones, tough the competitors can submit a completely new bid, and he isexpecting to issue a new request for proposals (RFP) in August, with a final decision in December, and in order for Boeing to have a better aircraft, which it needs to have because its on time and on cost performance has been pathetic, it would need to submit some sort of modified 777.
The only question is whether Boeing will rebid with their clearly inferior proposal, or go with something like a shortened 777.
It appears that the Indian defense establishment has noticed that something is wrong when a small, relatively austere fighter program enters its 25th year without any fielded aircraft. (Paid Subscription Required)
Development started in 1983 for a very unambitious program, as compared to the 1981 for the F-22 with a formal entry into service in 2004, and India still needs to use a foreign engine, the F-404, to power the the aircraft, because the indigenous engine the Kaveri, is still not ready for prime time.
It’s somewhat reassuring to see a procurement process more screwed up than that of the good old USA.
Both companies have refused to provide the Dutch updated technical information because they believe that the game is fixed, and the JSF will be selected.
Let’s look at the rundown:
The only reason that SAAB is taking the competition seriously is because their numbers are so much better than those of the JSF (or the Typhoon or Rafale) that they have a chance of winning, or getting some orders in a high-low procurement.
You may recall that while he was in Congress, his daughter’s offices at Defense Solutions, an arms trading firm working for the Russians, were raided by the FBI.
Well, Curt Weldon is now a senior executive for the firm, working to smooth deals in Iraq, Libya, by banned arms exporter Rosoboronexport.
Well, the Kabuki dance that is the Dutch F-16 replacement selection has added a few new steps, with them adding the Gripen NG into the mix and deselecting the Super-Hornet and Raptor for being too large and to expensive respectively.
Honestly, if I were working for Eurofighter, Dassault, or SAAB, I wouldn’t bother.
The Dutch have already sunk around €550 million into the F-35 JSF, and I think that pretty much locks them into two alternatives, the JSF, and upgrading its existing F-16s.
Of course, I was wrong on the tanker deal, so YMMV.
Sweden is planning to transition from its earlier model Gripens to the more capable E/F models, (Paid Subscription Required) with improved payload and range capabilities.
The idea is that SAAB will find it easier to sell the aircraft abroad if the line is already for the Swedish military.
I still think that this aircraft is a winner simply because it so much cheaper to own and operate than its competition.
By mid next year, they should be testing the AESA radar, improved avionics, and the ability to carry larger external tanks.
‘Besluit voor JSF is allang genomen’, or you can read the English translation here.*
While the dutch have attempted to get Eurofighter, Dassault, and SAAB to bid in competition, the problem has always been that they are currently throwing a lot of money at the F-35 JSF that won’t be coming back to them if they buy another aircraft.
They’ve sunk $800 million into this, and unless costs spiral completely out of control, I’d put that at 45%, they are stuck with the plane.
*I don’t speak a word of Dutch. I read a synopsis and used Google to translate the original.
Saab sees as many as 500 Gripens being sold worldwide.
I tend to agree. I think that the Gripen is the Mirage III of this era, offering the equivalent performance of its counterparts for somewhere around half the price.
There are some tradeoffs in payload and range, though less so for the heavier variant they are now offering, but the new aircraft out there are too damn expensive.
There is no evidence that this is happening yet, but US merchants of death are worried that it might(paid subscription required):
Access to the European defense market for U.S. companies could be one of the first areas where the GAO decision will leave its mark. One senior U.S. industry official developing business opportunities in Europe says there’s concern that European countries will react by excluding U.S. products for consideration in competitions on their home turf.
If the Northrop Grumman/EADS North America team were to be stripped of the tanker contract, it would have “unpleasant” implications for the transatlantic security relationship on a broader scale, notes Giles Merritt, director of the Security & Defense Agenda, a Brussels-based think tank. “Europe will be in a distinctly unfriendly frame of mind” when it comes to matters such as troop commitments to Afghanistan and other initiatives that would require burden-sharing, he states.
Let’s be clear. This is not yet happening. What’s going on is that Americans are afraid that the Europeans will act like them.
Aviation journalist Stephen Trimble notes that the B-52 dedicated standoff jammer has been resurrected.
This idea has risen, and been killed a number of times, the last time in 2006.
I’m wondering if this is not an attempt to pull the B-52 from the bomber force so that the path for the USAF’s next generation bomber is clearer.
Basically, this is an acknowledgment that the program as currently was ill conceived (see here and here).
They will be accellerating the small airborn and ground vehicles, and soft pedaling the armored vehicles:
The moves will shift the focus of the overall FCS effort to infantry brigades instead of armored units. The Army will also work to get large numbers of robots and miniature aerial drones — both of which are designed for use in crowded urban areas — out to forces in Iraq and Afghanistan by late 2010, instead of in 2015 or 2016 as initially planned.
This is an admission that it will be infantry, and not armored units that will be necessary in the most likely future war fighting scenarios.
The manned ground vehicles will be small and lighter, and so in a number of ways inferior to their predecessors, so this should come as no surprise.
It appears that people in the USAF who have seen the whole GAO report do not believe that it will require a complete rebid of the contract.
I’m not sure if this means that the errors are small, or if the Airbus bid was that much better, or that they need the tanker right now, or some combination of all of the above:
“Their finding is that the full document is quite different from the summary,” issued last Wednesday, said a source familiar with the issue. The source said Air Force leaders believe much of what was challenged is “procedural” and can be resolved without rebidding the deal.
We should know in the next week.
The system is called David’s Sling (paid subscription required), and it makes no sense at all.
The system’s features:
So, you’ve got a missile that weighs somewhere north of 500 pounds (bottom pic for scale), and will probably cost something well north of $¼ million a piece, and they will use it to intercept Kassams and Katyushas that cost something less than $100 and $1000 each respectively.
That’s sounds like a really good trade….not.
I agree with Bill Sweetman’s assesment (see also here), that this is a sweetspot for tactical airlift.
Looking at the picture’s, it’s clear that the aircraft is about twice the size of a C-130, and half the size of a C-17, and it’s got a lot of tire, which translates to good rough field performance.
The only real competitor out there is the AN-70 (picture below), which carries about 10 more tons, but has somewhat shorter ranges at a similar load out, but the Russians and the Ukrainians need to fund it past the one remaining prototype (see bottom picture).
Comparison:
|
|
A400M |
An-70 |
|
Empty Weight (kg) |
70,000 |
66,230 |
|
Max Gross Weight(kg) |
145,000 |
141,000 |
|
Speed (km/h) |
780 |
780 |
|
Max Payload (kg) |
37,000 |
47,000 |
|
Range w/20 t Payload |
6,600 |
3,300 |
|
|
8,000 |
9,300 |
I would note that with its contra-rotating props, the An-70 is a lot louder, and would therefore likely be unacceptable for the partners in EADS, France, Italy, Germany, and Spain.
Also, there are provisions for aerial refueling the An-70 in the pictures that I’ve seen.
On the minus side for the A400M is that it’s engines are behind schedule, and so it will be a while before it flies and ships.
A400M
A400M
AN-70