Category: technology

American Dynamics Flight Systems: AD-1 UAV


AD-150 UAV

Startup company American Dynamics Flight Systems has been developing a UAV to address the needs of the various services for high speed cargo UAVS most notably the Marine Corps VTOL Group IV Program and Medium Programs, the USAF Unmanned Cargo VTOL UAV Program, and the US Coast Guard’s VTOL UAV Program.

All of these programs are requiring fairly high speeds, a cruise at least 250 kts, which pretty much rules out a conventional helicopters which tend to cruise at less than 175 kts.

The solution that was adopted on the V-22 is a tilt rotor, where the propellers are pivoted from horizontal to vertical in the transition from horizontal flight to vertical takeoffs and landings.


Typical swashplate (source: Wikipedia

The issue with a tilt rotor system is that, even more than in a conventional helicopter, managing the transition from horizontal to vertical flight can become difficult and complex.

In the V-22, this is handled with a cyclic type control system that mirrors the swash plate type setups that exist on helicopters.

While this is obviously a known quantity in vertical lift mode, issues in transition to wing-borne flight had to be resolved before the tilt-rotor could become viable, there is a cost in complexity, cost, and reliability in using a complex prop assembly for such a system.

ADF Concept


Moves in pitch and yaw

The solution for the AD-1 is different. A ducted fan which is controllable in pitch and yaw, but where the pitch of the fan is fixed is used, the High Torque Aerial Lift (HTAL).

Pitch is obviously a given in any tilt rotor, which theoretically makes the addition of yaw actuators for the propulsors less complex, and hence lighter, cheaper, and more reliable than going with a full up cyclic control system.


Fixed Aluminum Prop

This sort of control system has been used in the past, at the dawn of the development of helicopters, where the use of tilting rotor hub, rather than a swash plate style cyclic was, for example, used by Raúl Pateras Pescara used this on his early helicopters in the 1920s, where he pitched the hub forward to allow for forward flight without the need for a separate propeller to provide lateral thrust.

The application to a tilt-rotor aircraft, and the use of rotor hub in yaw, appear to be unique, and a patent is pending.


Propulsor shroud panel

Additionally, the use of a shrouded propulsor provides for greater thrust/lift for a given disk area, by acting as a nozzle to accelerate flow.

The shrouds themselves have composite skins. The panel shown is well under 10 pounds.

The use of a shrouded prop should also simplify deck handling, since it mitigates against the possibility of someone walking into a moving prop, and there are added efficiencies because the down wash in vertical lift mode does not impinge on the wing.


All moving ruddervators

It should be noted that the aircraft has been designed from the outset to be low cost, and so notwithstanding its appearance, it is not designed to be a low-observable (“stealth”) airframe.

The top mounted inlet is intended to minimize the possibility of FOD damage to the engine, the all moving ruddervators were developed after it was determined that a rear moving flap on a conventional rudder fin would not provide sufficient control authority, and the wing configuration is designed to minimize pitch changes during transition from vertical to horizontal flight.


Wind tunnel model

AD1 Development

ADF is relying heavily on computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to determine the characteristics of the, and according to Paul Vasilescu, VP of Engineering, their experiences at the Paul Vasilescu Glen L. Martin wind tunnel at the University of Maryland have been closer to the calculated predictions than any prior systems tested at the facility.

The simulations are run on 64 bit Linux rack mount systems, with some of the more complex simulations, which are being modeled in 6 degrees of freedom.


Instrumented Test Rig

The propulsors have been modeled, both in full size, and at the reduced size in which they will be tested in the wind tunnel, which should serve to further validate the mathematical modeling.

It is anticipated that the propulsors will be tested in full scale on an “iron bird” instrumented test rig at Aberdeen Proving Ground, where ADFS hopes to, “Confirm CFD performance data for hover in ground effect (HIGE) and hover out of ground effect (HOGE),” later this year, using a T53 turboshaft, used on the original UH-1 models, but flight models will use the T700, which is currently in use on the AH-64 and UH-60.

The mechanical design is done in SolidWorks®, which I’ve used extensively, and should be more than capable of generated the required geometries, though it’s associated FEA package, Cosmos®, is intended for less intensive analysis.

AD-1 Manufacturing Capabilities

Applied Dynamics Flight Systems has a 14,700 square foot manufacturing facility at the Jessup headquarters with 3 & 4 axis CNC mills, and anticipates being able to assemble 12 units a year upon receipt of a contract.


Manufacturing workshare

Paths not taken

At this point, the company does not believe that there is a reasonable market for civilian applications for UAVS, the FAA has not yet come up with a coherent regulatory environment, and the technology to allow UAVs to operate in civilian airspace, so called “sense and avoid” technology, is immature.

They believe the situation to be rather similar in terms of ambulance applications on the battle field, an area where the Israeli firm Urban Aeronautics’ similarly sized Air Mule is attempting to carve out a niche, there are serious issues with landing aircraft into unprepared areas, as many of the cues that a pilot has in a cockpit are lost on a remote display, and so additional technology needs to be developed in terms of automated imaging and auto-landing systems before one can expect a UAV

Full presentation in PDF after the break.

Full size photos can be viewed by clicking on the images.

Applied Dynamics Flight Systems Presentation Feb 17, 2010

Finished My Tour of American Dynamics Flight Systems

I have notes, and photos, taken with my cheap digital camera, as opposed to my profoundly cruddy cell phone camera.

I talked with Wayne Morse, the President, and Paul Vasilescu, the Technology Development Director for the firm at their offices in a Jessup, Maryland office park, right next door to, if the stickers on the doors of the neighboring are any indicator, old offices from the Baltimore Examiner.

We went over their technology, what they have covered under IP, potential customers and applications, and their capabilities.

They will be sending me a copy of their presentation in PDF, which I will be embedding via ScribD.

A full write-up will be coming in the next couple of days.

I had fun……It’s kind of a kid in a candy store thing for me.

Net Materials Create Really Ugly Spacecraft

Click for full size


This doesn’t fly, it is just so ugly that it repels the earth

In a move away from about 50 years convention in materials and aerodynamics, European aerospace firms are looking at faceted sharp edged reentry vehuicles: (paid subscription required)

Advanced thermal protection systems, to be tested in upcoming hypersonic experiments, will enable development of a reusable “sharp-edged” orbital launch vehicle with much greater flexibility than blunt-capsule or shuttle-type designs, say German researchers.

The team at the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in Bremen believes the move to simple, faceted geometries—away from the curved surfaces of conventional reentry vehicles— should also help cut costs while simultaneously offering improvements in aero-thermodynamic performance.

Basically, they are suggesting that the use of flat surfaces will make for more easily constructed heterogeneous materials, kind of like how Chobham armor give tanks angled surfaces, and that this can allow for sharp edged re-entry vehicles that can give more cross range performance and far lower G loads during reentry.

This is not an easy nut to crack. Not only are the temperatures higher with a weak shock wave, on the order of nearly 5,000°F as versus about 2300°F for the shuttle, but the high speed portion of reentry would take something on the order of an hour, as opposed to 10 minutes.

The technologies involved are ceramic matrix composites, basically composites where ceramics replace the conventional resin, advance ablative systems, and effusion cooling, which is basically where very small holes in the surface are used to pass a cooling fluid that carries away heat directly, as well as creating a thin film of relatively cool gas on the surface in question.

Effusion cooling has already been applied to cool combustors, but might prove more problematic in the rather less well controlled environments during reentry.

In French, found on a Russian BBS

Click for full size



In French, and posted on a Russian BBS
I would not call this definitive

Eric Palmer found the following 3-view of the Pak-FA with descriptions, in French, on a Russian message board.

Well, it shows a number of features, though the provenance is totally unclear.

Items of interest are the IRST in front of the nose(2), wing mounted radar arrays (10), in flight refueling provisions (8), external stores provisions (16), a missile warning system (4), and (most notably) a vertically inclined “S” duct for the engines.

It does appear to match the general configuration of what was seen in the flight video though.

I hadn’t thought about a vertical offset in the inlets to hide the engine face, but from this 3-view, it does appear to be there, so the engine does appear to be shielded, at least partially, though I would still bet on a radar blocking grid.

Well, Here is an Interesting Local Startup

Click for full size



Basic VTOL Configuration


Wind Tunnel Testing


Control Surface Tests

Mission scenario video

Images and video, American Dynamics Flight Systems*

Aviation Week has noted that a startup company with a interesting take on a VTOL UAV has received funding from the Maryland Industrial Partnerships (MIPS) program for wind tunnel tests on their AD-150 UAS.

The company, American Dynamics Flight Systems, has an interesting take on the tilt rotor system, and I don’t mean just their use of shrouded propulsors, but the fact that they can operate the propulsors asymmetrically in order to provide control inputs.

The final product is looking to be a 14½ foot long vehicle that can carry a roughly 500 pound payload at 300 kts, which places it within the requirements for the US Marine Corps “Group 4” drone requirement.

Given the specifications, it certainly will be able to keep up with the Osprey, though I have not seen any range data.

The company’s other products are the High Torque Aerial Lift (HTAL) propulsor, which is used on the AD-150, and an improved launcher for the 2.75″ FFAR called the, “LH Series Launcher,” which is lighter and more streamlined than the existing launchers, and so more suited to UAVs.

There seems to be a fair amount of “neat” tech there, the AD-150 appears to be leveraging on their HTAL propulsor, and their LH launcher appears to fill a real need.

Basically, with the advent of guidance heads for the 2.75″ rocket, APKWS and DAGRS, it is rather likely that this will become the weapon of choice for UAVS,

The rocket, which is smaller, lighter, and has a smaller warhead than the AGM-114 Hellfire, which means that more can be carried with less collateral damage.

Using the hellfire to take out a guy on a motorbike, or a bunch of guys in an SUV, is kind of like using an elephant gun as a fly-swatter.

In any case, I emailed them about getting a tour of their Jessup, Maryland facility, and will be having a tour on Wednesday, assuming that their schedule or the vicissitudes of mother nature (more snow predicted next week) don’t intrude.

I will be posting a request for any ideas for questions on a shorter post, which will remain at the top of the list until late Tuesday evening, so I’ve closed comments on this post, if there is anything you want to know, post it there. (Link to request for questions)

I recommend checking out the web site. It’s chock full of neat stuff.

*Their use statement on their website says, “Unless otherwise noted, the content in this collection is provided for non-commercial use and may be used for educational and editorial purposes only. All other uses require the explicit written consent of American Dynamics Flight Systems. For more information please contact media@adflightsystems.com.” My writing about them should qualify as an “editorial” purpose.

The Iranians are Selling Someone the Brooklyn Bridge

No, I am not talking about their nuclear program.

I am talking about their claim that they have flown a prototype stealth aircraft, or it may be a subscale drone demonstrator

The source is Fars News, and the aircraft is called the ‘Sofreh Mahi'(flatfish):

“The research model of this plane which staged a successful flight passed all radar-evading tests that we desired,” Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army Air Force General Aziz Nasirzadeh told FNA.

The General said that the flatfish-inspired shape of the aircraft as well as the materials used in its structure have provided the aircraft with the radar-evading capability.

Ummm….Flatfish? You are calling your aircraft a Flounder?!?!?!

I need a screen wipe.

AESA Radar Enters Flight Test on F-16

Northrop Grumman is now flying its Scalable Agile Beam Radar (SABR) on a USAF F-16.

The interesting question here is how much this will influence current F-16 operators who are currently considering purchasing the F-35.

I think that it is likely that the capabilities of an avionics suite installed on an F-16 can come close to that installed in a JSF: Even with an advanced sensor suite, it’s clear that the F-16 will be less than ½ the price, and less than ½ the direct operating costs.

Additionally, any avionics package is far more open to the development of national systems and upgrades, and the ability to operate 2-3 times as many aircraft, particularly if the nation expects to operate largely in coalition action or counter-insurgency scenarios, might very well deliver superior results on the battlefield.

People Who Don’t Get It

Click for full size


He’s smiling because he’s taking your money.

About 4 weeks ago, Segway, the folks who make the geeky little scooter, was sold to a British investor, and as a result, the earlier investors will lose their money, to the tune of something over $150 million dollars.

Well, Mercury News Columnist Chris O’Brien looked at what happened, and waxed poetic:

In this case, though, what’s fascinating is not just the money, but who gave it. Jeff Bezos of Amazon chipped in. And closer to home, so did venture capitalist Doerr and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

I’m not gloating over their failure. Their successes have made them legends, and for good reason. It turns out, though, that despite their foresight and immense personal fortunes, they remain human and fallible. Just like the rest of us.

You see, they didn’t just think the Segway would be successful.

They expected it to change the world. In a hype-filled month such as this, during the lull between the Google Nexus One and the Apple iSlate, it’s good to be reminded how rare it is for such lofty expectations to be met.

Why did people believe this? Because Dean Kamen was a “Genius”.

He had at the time designed the AutoSyringe, an automated injection/infusion device, a mobile dialysis machine which was highly commercially successful, along with the iBot, an all-terrain wheel chair.

I remember when the Segway was called “It”, and later it was called “Ginger”, and when people like Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos were saying that it was going to change the world.

Then “It” came out, and it was just an electric scooter, and kind of a dorky one at that.

The turn of events with the Segway, where it is largely reduced to punchline (see Paul Blart: Mall Cop) is not surprising.

What is surprising is not that a bunch of people thought that it would be a commercial success, which didn’t happen, or the initial investors would have gotten their money back, but rather that somehow or other people came to believe that it would literally change the world.

If there is a lesson to all this it is that the folks who are giants in Silicon Valley and related industries are not any more likely to see the next big thing than anyone else, and that they are where they are because they got lucky.

Death Spiral, JSF Edition, Chapter 2 of Many

Well, this week, SecDef Robert Gates has just fired the program manager for the JSF program, Major General David Heinz, and is withholding millions of dollars in performance fees to the prime contractor, Lockheed-Martin, because of schedule and budget slips, citing a “troubling performance record.” (see also here, here, and here)

Lockheed-Martin’s response has been nothing short of delusional, at least as described by Steve O’Bryan, L-M VP for “business development and customer engagement” for the JSF, “:

Gates’ actions, in O’Bryan’s view, “reflected the commitment of the U.S. government to the F-35… the program is fully funded, with more development funding and more robust leadership.” The decision shows that the aircraft is “relevant today, and that the customer wants the jet right now.”

I’m beginning to think that part of the reason that this program is over budget and behind schedule is that Lockheed Martin has, and so the tax payer is paying for, a, “vice president for business development and customer engagement on the JSF program”.

It seems to me that this is a rather high falutin, and likely highly paid, position for what amounts to a PR flack with heavy duty knee pads.

Misapplication of resources may be a part of the problem, and Mr. O’Bryan’s continued employment does not seem to me to be an example of “spending smart.”

Of course, the USAF chief of staff is similarly sanguine, suggesting that the delays in the pro will only raise unit cost in the immediate term, because, like no other program before it, the delays will increast the cost only, “for a period,” and he does not see a Nunn-McCurdy breach in the costs.

It makes me want to quote that Samuel L. Jackson speech from Pulp Fiction again, because it’s clear that they want to f%$# the taxpayer like a bitch.

There are people who recognize the truth, like the Director Of Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E), who says that even with a flawless program, there will be a slippage of at least 18 months on the program, but that a flawless program is extremely unlikely, since things like the idea that modeling and simulation can reduce testing are unlikely to succeed.

Of note in the DOT&E report:

  • LRIP configuration is not yet defined.
  • Clutch heating on the STOVL variant
  • Increases in weight and landing speeds means that tires are running into their thermal limits for the carrier (F-35C) version.
  • Software instability
  • They aircraft is pulling out many of its survivability features, fuel check valves in the engine nozzle and fire extinguishers, to reach the specified weight.

Additionally, it now appears that the F-35C fuselage is under-strength:

Lockheed Martin Corp. is fixing a structural weakness in the Navy version of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter that limits the jet’s ability to launch from aircraft carriers, according to a company spokesman.

Engineers in July discovered a “strength shortfall” in an aluminum structure in the aircraft’s center fuselage that helps absorb stresses during a catapult takeoff, Lockheed spokesman John Kent said today in an e-mailed statement.

Additionally, it appears that the carrier model may be too hot, literally for carrier decks:

The Pentagon’s Gilmore said in his report that the engine and power-systems’ exhaust on the Navy and Marine versions is powerful enough to pose a threat to carrier personnel. The blasts also may damage shields used to deflect heat on the deck, including on the CVN-21 carrier, the Navy’s most expensive warship.

“Early analyses of findings indicate that integration of the F-35 into the CVN-21 will result in damage to the carrier deck environment and will adversely affect hangar deck operations,” Gilmore wrote.

<snark>Actually, it’s not a worry, since their new electromagnetic catapults don’t work anyway. </snark>

FCS-MGV* Successor to Have Tracks

Click for full size


Tracks vs wheels


Linked band track

One of the lessons from Stryker in Afghanistan is that they are too road bound which creates regular predictable routes, which makes them more vulnerable to IEDs.

When juxtaposed with their relatively thin armor, the consequences are unfortunate:

What doesn’t work is the Stryker in Afghanistan, says Scales. The 5th Stryker Brigade, operating in southern Afghanistan’s Kandahar area, has taken heavy casualties, losing some 21 of the eight-​​wheeled vehicles and two dozen soldiers killed. “The vehicles have proven to be too thinly armored to survive the very large explosive power of Taliban IEDs and too immobile to maneuver off road to avoid them,” Scales writes.

I would also add that, for a given envelope, tracked vehicles are more space efficient, since the wheels on something like a Stryker are large, have significant travel, and the front (and sometimes rear) wheels sweep out a larger volume as an artifact of their pivoting to steer. (see picture)

Also, tracked vehicles are a lot better in urban conflict, because they can go over something like a junked car road block, while wheeled vehicles cannot, and because they can pivot steer, their maneuverability in close quarters is superior.

The downside of tracks is operational cost and road speed.

It’s why it’s rather cramped in Strykers.

Unfortunately, it appears that they are still fixated on some sort of “very quiet” track system:

“The lesson of contemporary wars is that IEDs can best be defeated by designing a vehicle capable of avoiding them,” he writes, in other words a vehicle that can go off road across rough terrain so that it isn’t limited to predictable routes. That means the future GCV must be tracked. It must also be quiet enough to be somewhat stealthy, Scales argues, which would imply a rubberized band track.

This is an area that I worked on extensively on the FCS-RMV, since, as a recovery vehicle, it would have to perform field repair, and from this perspective, band track, basically a continuous rubber band is a complete disaster.

First, with link track, every vehicle can carry a few extra links, and if there is damage to one, or two, they can repair it themselves. Additionally, they can short track, shorten the track by pulling links, and reroute the it so that one or more road wheels are not in the path.

By contrast, if a band track is broken, the crew can’t repair it, the replacement has to take part as a whole (as opposed to feeding the track a link at a time around the drive and road wheels), and it’s a unit, which when stored is huge, as in large enough that you need a truck to carry it to where ever you need to go to do the repairs.

There is a solution, called segmented band track, which splits the difference, so, for example, as opposed to rigid links, the tread would be made with (for example) 10 flexible treads that are linked together with pins (bottom pic), which splits the difference.

It is hoped that this will combine the simplicity of transport of link track with the light weight, lower noise, lower vibration, less wear on the road, and higher performance of continuous band track.

I will say that one of the things that should be avoided, at least on the basis of my experience with the FRMV specifically and the FCS-MGV generally, is to make a fetish of commonality between different vehicles performing different roles.

In the FCS program, almost every vehicle carried significant weight and cost penalties as a result of having a common chassis.

Commonality in systems is good, but if you take it to chassis design, you have start increasing weight and cost of the systems to attain this.

*Future Combat Systems – Manned Ground Vehicle.

Sikorsky’s X2 Looks to Break 250 MPH Early This Year

Click for full size


Soon to hit 250 MPH?

Sikorsky is looking at taking the coaxial rotor compound helicopter to more than 250 miles per hour soon:

Sikorsky expects to exceed 250 kt. with its X2 Technology coaxial-rotor compound helicopter demonstrator early in the year, resetting speed expectations for rotorcraft that have been stuck at around 150 kt. for decades.

A modern reinterpretation of Sikorsky’s XH-59A Advancing Blade Concept (ABC) testbed, which reached 238 kt. in the 1970s, the X2 combines fly-by-wire control, integrated engine/rotor/propulsor system, variable-speed rotor, high-lift/drag rigid blades and active vibration control to realize the speed potential of a coaxial rotor while retaining the hover agility of a helicopter.

The ability to auto-rotate in an emergency is a big plus too.

It works by offloading the retreating blade, and so preventing retreating blade stall, which occurs when the relative speed of the blade versus the air at higher speeds falls.

The issue has always been the complexity of the flight controls, the X59A required two pilots, and vibrations, which appear to be satisfactorily addressed through active digital flight control system on the X2.

I’ve always favored it over the tilt rotor concept, it appears to be both simpler and more redundant, and the rotors are not a compromise between lift and propulsion that they are in something like the V-22.

Earlier posts

Why I Prefer Working for the Marine Corps

Click for full size


Launching the MICLIC

I have done worked for both the US Army, on the recovery vehicle for the now-canceled Future Combat System, and for the Marine Corps on the EFV (Called the AAAV when I worked on it) amphibious landing craft.

I found that the Marine Corps requirements, as well as their personnel, were much more straightforward and matter of fact.

A case in point is the Assault Breacher engineering and mine clearance vehicle, which clears a path through mines launching, the Mine Clearing Line Charge (MICLIC), 1,750 lbs of C4 on a 100 meter rope to clear a path.

It was developed after the Army’s Grizzly was canceled.

The Grizzly was much more sophisticated, with a dozer blade/plough, which would automatically maintain the desired depth, and turn over and predetonate mines, it had an automated turret, and when reviewed by the military, they found over 50 flaws that they thought made the vehicle dangerous, and potentially life threatening.

There was also the problem that creating an automatic plough to clear a lane is a non-trivial operation. The Assault Breacher has a far less ambitious blade on the front, which is not intended for quite that level of speed or automation, and because of this, it actually works.

While the EFV is still a bit of a mess, I think that its goal was too ambitious, in general the Marines look for good enough, as opposed to the ultimate in whiz bang, so they get the job done.

Russia Looks to Joint Venture With Chinese for Mi-26 Successor

Click for full size


Proposed Mi-46

The Russians make the largest production helicopter in the world, the Mi-26 “Halo”, and they have been considering an updated helo in the same (humongous) size range for some time.

Now, it appears that they are looking to do a joint venture with the Chinese to develope a 20T payload class helicopter. (paid subscription required)

Seeing as how the helicopter originally flew in 1977, and has been in service since 1983, there is a lot of room for improvement.

Just updating the transmission to modern aluminum alloys in the transmission and going with a more modern rotor system would probably add about 10% to payload and range performance, but that would be an upgrade rather than a completely new design.

A completely new variant might be based on the canceled Mi-46, though that was about a 12 tonne class machine.

I think that the reason for a joint venture has more to do with a potential market, they want to sell to the Chinese, than it does to any real technical or development advantage that they might gain.

Some More on the Pak-FA

Click for full size


H/t Douglas Barrie at Ares

First, is that the wheels are large, and I would assume relatively low pressure, implying, as is consistent with Russian doctrine, that it is intended to operate from poorly prepared fields.

The second is that it has relatively small all moving vertical stabilizers, which implies to me that thrust vectoring might be a part of further development, though there was no evidence of such in the initial videos.

Also, the wheels were never retracted, but this is not a surprise on a first flight.

There is also what appears to be a not-particularly-lo IRST on the nose.

Also, if you look at the somewhat more detailed video, it appears that the leading edge of the leading edge extensions (a mouthful that). Aerodynamically, it appears to me to be rather similar to the leading edges of the inlets on an F-15, which pivot down for better pressure recovery at high angles of attack.

Also, lots of rivets on a closer look in the new video, which implies that this is, as I originally surmised, a demonstrator rather than a true prototype.

Urban Air Mule Demonstrates Hover

Click for full size




Looks a bit Buck Rogers

So, the Israeli ducted fan cargo UAV concept has finally left the ground.

This appears to have validated the basic control systems, as well as the software.

It appears that the most likely route to success will be on an eventual autonomous ambulance (bottom pic), particularly since the ducted fan arrangement eliminates those pesky rotors which can strike buildings and people.

Here is my original post on this.

Russian R-77 (AA-12 Adder) Upgrade Tests are Complete

Blah, blah, blah!

It appears that the upgrades involve significant changes (paid subscription required):

The upgraded R-77 is both heavier and longer than the basic missile. It weighs 190 kg. (418 lb.) rather than 175 kg., and is 3.71 meters (12.17 ft.), rather than 3.6 meters, in length, according to company data.

The increased range is at least in part due to improved aerodynamics. A company executive says the radome shape has been refined, while a “boat-tail” configuration has been introduced at the rear to help drag reduction. Adapting the missile to fly lofted trajectories would also increase the maximum launch range. The executive adds that the active radar seeker has been improved. The manufacture of the RVV-SD seeker is believed to still be Istok.

It also looks like they may be moving away from the unique lattice fins, so as to improve range, at the cost of a slight loss of agility, and the need for larger actuators to move these surfaces.

Considering that the IR guided R-73 (AA-11 Archer) already out ranges the Sidewinder for dogfight applications, this may be a reasonable trade-off.

A further development of the basic R-77 design, previously associated with the Article 180 designation, is also underway, though manufacturer TRV remains unwilling to discuss the program. It is likely that the missile’s signature lattice fins have been replaced with a conventional design, with further range improvements included. This is possibly based on the introduction of a dual-, rather than a single-pulse, solid-rocket motor.

With a weight of 190 kg, as opposed to the 152 kg, physics would seem to dictate that it would have superior range and terminal energy to the AIM-120 AMRAAM, even with the “egg crate” fins.

The use of a lofted trajectory may very well be something that can be retro-fitted through software, which might allow for significant improvements in range for the existing inventory.

I will suggest that this story seems to indicate that reports of a ramjet powered R-77M1 on Wiki are premature.

How About Paying Them More?

Yawn, another day, another report saying that the dearth of US citizens interested in majoring in technical fields is a national security threat:

Sure, we’re all plugged in and online 24/7. But fewer American kids are growing up to be bona fide computer geeks. And that poses a serious security risk for the country, according to the Defense Department.

The Pentagon’s far-out research arm Darpa is soliciting proposals for initiatives that would attract teens to careers in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), with an emphasis on computing. According to the Computer Research Association, computer science enrollment dropped 43 percent between 2003 and 2006.

Umm ………… Hello?!?!?!?

You are asking how to encourage people who have the proficiencies to go into a technical field to do that, as opposed to, for example, becoming a banker or a stock broker.

But, of course, like the Cylons, they have a plan:

The agency doesn’t offer specifics on what kinds of activities might boost computing’s appeal to teens, but they want programs to include career days, mentoring, lab tours and counseling.

Like that will work: Ignore the poor pay and benefits, and the fact that your barista at Starbucks® used to be in IT, but after he got laid off the last time, he couldn’t find another job, because he only knows C++, not C#, because being a computer programmer or an engineer is just so f%$#ing cool.

By definition, people who have the wherewithal to go into science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) are people who can count.

If you want them to take a technical major, you have to promise better pay and benefits.

Duh …………