It looks like the General Dynamics is developing a lightweight .50 cal machinegun to replace it.
It’s supposed to be about ½ the weight of the venerable M2HB.
If the new weapon is better, then it’s better, but the retirement of one of John Browning’s many classics is melencholy.
Airbus is refining the aerodynamics and structure of its A350.
Changes include:
The Office of Naval Research is looking at a very large hovercraft for amphibious operations.
It would have a 2500 mile range at 20kts, followed by a 250 mile 40+kt dash to the beach, with a 500-750 ton cargo capability, as versus the 70 ton capability with a 200 mile range for the LCAC currently in deployment.
If this runs true to Navy procurement form, we’ll next hear of it when it’s 18 months late and 35% over budget.
Well, this is one way to ensure that it’s difficult for the ISPs to claim that they are not messing with your traffic, as Comcast clearly is.
The case is LG Electronics vs Quanta, where LG licensed the technology to Intel, who made the chips used, but wanted to charge buyers of the chips an additional royalty.
Basically, patent exhaustion says that if someone licenses a patent from you, and they sell stuff made with that patent to someone else, the recipient can use that stuff without any more restrictions. It’s a 100 year old precident, but the patent court decided to ignore it.
You can find a very good primer on why this happened here.
The district court ruled for Quanta, but the patent court ruled for LG on appeal, and the Supreme Court completely reversed the patent court, which is becoming a regular thing.
The special patent court is out of control and needs to be abolished.
I really don’t give a damn. I don’t do high end phones, or Apple computers, so it doesn’t interest me.
No offense intended.
What took them so long.
Discounts for volume are fine. Discounts for not buying the competitors products, not so good.
As I’ve said before, the F-22 is a sort of roach motel for data. It collects data from its own sensors and other platforms, but nothing ever leaves, at least not in the current software drop.
It’s a legacy of its Cold War origins, where it was expected to operate in a post apocalyptic sky above a Europe in flames.
Well, it looks like the USAF is finalizing plans on how to rectify this problem (Paid Subscription Required).
They are looking at a number of different technologies to implement their, “IP-based advanced tactical data link (ATDL)”, “Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) wideband data link”, which transmits to ground stations for relay, the “Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL)”, which is more distributed and is slated for use in the F-35.
ATDL looks to be fielded somewhere in the 2014 time frame in any case.
You can get a good summary of the progress of the NLOS-C howitzer and NLOS-M mortar here, and things seem to be proceeding well, with the tube and the autoloader performing well.
Some pics of the NLOS-C:
FWIW, I don’t think that the FCS MGV (Future Combat System — Manned Ground Vehicle) is a particularly good idea. These platforms will be more expensive than their predecessors, but lighter weight, half the weight of a Bradley, 1/3 of the weight of an Abrams, so they will be more vulnerable to things like IEDs.
The systems they contain, communications and sensors, not the hybrid drive system, do have military value, and I expect them to see service, but it’s cheaper, and to my mind more militarily advantageous to retrofit the boxes on existing systems.
As to whether the military will buy any of these, I think yes, but only the NLOS-C, because the artillery folks at the military are currently using a vehicle first fielded in 1963, the M109 Paladin, and with the Crusader cancellation in the late 1990s, it’s still their turn.
I don’t think that the rest will be manufactured, though the ICV (Infantry Combat Vehicle) is in one very significant way, it carries a full infantry fire team of 9, as opposed to the Bradley’s 6, because of space freed up by making the turret remotly operated.
You could retrofit a Bradley with a new turret for the same effect though.
Active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars look to be approaching some major reductions in cost as the technology matures(paid subscription required). They are looking at the cost to drop from $5 million/m2 to $500K/m2 so “cheap” is a relative term.
Additionally, the use of an AESA with a parabolic reflector setup can give a much larger effective aperture, and hence resolution. It’s called AESA-fed reflectors (AFR), and it’s less agile than pure AESA, but a lot cheaper.
The MDA is looking about upgrading its interceptors to handle a missile penetrating with decoys and other penetrating aids.
While this technology sounds difficult and complex, basically it’s just this:
Aluminum coated mylar balloons. What’s more, it’s entirely possible to put the warhead inside balloon, as was stated by a WMD experts years ago (can’t dig up the link, I think that he was from MIT).
Lockheed and Raytheon are competing for the contract. (Paid subscription required) They are taking two different design approaches.
Raytheon is developing multiple vehicles that are largely autonomous, and the number can be therefore be taylored to the size of the payload bay, with the first vehicle ejected serving to direct the others:
Lockheed has a “bandoleer” of smaller interceptors grouped around a central “mother ship”, which, while less flexible as to payload size, allows for a better sensor, and more maneuverability, for the initial contact and tracking with the kill vehicles being dispensed relatively closer to the interception point:
According to this article(paid subscription required), Lockheed’s sensor on the carrier will have 4x the resolution, 512×512 pixel staring array, as versus Raytheon’s 256×256 staring array.
Of course, these things look to cost a few hundred thousand bucks a pop, and I can get a silver mylar balloon for a buck fifty from the party store.
So, now the cable companies are looking toward an “application agnostic” way of limiting bandwidth, see here and here, combined with metered service, where you are charged for bandwidth over a certain level.
The basic problem here, and it’s a Google search away, is that in the rush to get to broadband quickly, the cable companies came up with an inadequate network architecture, so they are afflicted with problems that do not hit DSL of fiber (FIOS).
The real solution is fixing their networks.
It has been cleared for test flights on Pratt’s 747SP testbed.
Daimond aircraft announced its new Austro Engine AE300 2.0 170hp diesel, which uses the same Mercedes diesel based block as the Thielert engine, to replace Thielert’s Centurion engine at the ILA 2008 air show.
The comments from Christian Dries, chief executive of Diamond, were very informative:
Why did we start our own engine development programme? Answering his own question, Dries said: “Well, it was not our intention to invest €40m in the factory, I’d rather have saved the money. But the TBO of the Centurion 2.0 was becoming very short. It would almost be cheaper to operate with a twin turboprop…”
On a potential certification date, Dries says: “As soon as possible. As you can see it’s close. It has to be if we are flying three aircraft into the show on them.
From the article, it is clear that the negotiations between Diamond and Thielert have been contentious, and I’m inclined to take Diamond’s side, as we now have reports that the bankruptcy administrator is gouging on parts that were covered by warranty:
Now comes Kuebler [the bankruptcy administrator] to revise the rules in such a way as to leave owners not just in the cold, but with virtually no financial support of any kind. We’re told that as of mid-May, a Thielert 2.0 diesel still costs about 33,000 Euros or just over $52,000. That sounds like a huge sum and it is– twice the cost of a Lycoming overhaul for equivalent horsepower. But the diesel’s fuel specifics are favorable enough to offset the higher cost over an avgas engine on a lifecycle basis. Or at least they used to be.
Now, Thielert no longer warrants the engines or parts. When you come up on the 300-hour gearbox requirement, they’ll sell you a new one at $16,000 or an inspected one for $7800—if you wire the money to Germany upfront and arrange for your own shipping. On your Maalox-powered run to the 1000-hour TBR, you get to do that three times, plus the cost of the pumps, alternator, shipping and who knows what else. If you go to 2400 hours on the new 2.0 engine, do it seven times. The gearboxes alone have the potential of more than doubling the cost of the engine to nearly $100 an hour—and that’s before you buy fuel. What this means, in my view, is that Thielert’s management needed help in killing the company for good, Kuebler seems to be providing it. The part about no warranty support for anything is especially galling to owners.
“Does this mean that if I buy a $16,000 gearbox that’s no good, my only recourse is to buy another one?” one angry owner asked me this week. It evidently means exactly that, which is why Diamond, in a bulletin to owners, accused the bankruptcy firm of being more interested in short term cash flow than long term survival of Thielert and making its customers reasonably whole.
So it sounds to me like they are trying to suck the marrow out of the bones.
In any case, the fact that the reduction gears need replacement after 300 hours and a 1000 hour TBO seem to be a large part of the reason that they are in trouble. The warranty claims killed them.
According to Bloombert, Thielert has resumed spares shipments to customers, but I wonder how much of this is just inventory that they are selling off in attempt to make a quick few bucks.
Pity…It seemed like a promising technology, but 300 hours on a $16,000.00 gearbox? Ouch.
I think that the Bum’s rush on OOXML pushed by the US and Microflaccid may end up backfiring:
Now Brazil has become the latest country to put the boot in by objecting to what it claimed was a flawed BRM that saw processes rushed through in favour of Microsoft gaining approval for its document format.
….
Marcia Cristina de Oliveira, manager of the standardisation process at the ABNT claims in a letter to the ISO (a copy of which is provided by Andy Updegrove here) that “the Brazilian delegation was not allowed to present an important proposal regarding the legacy binary mapping.
“Brazil had tried to present this proposal, during the debates, on the first day of the meeting… On Friday, when USA ended their part of presentation and asked for Brazil to present its part of it, the convenor denied this opportunity to Brazilian delegation.”
According to Updegrove, that’s quite a serious allegation. “While this latest appeal overlaps the South African objections in part, it also raises new concerns, some of which are particular to the interests of Brazil, rather than applying to the process as a whole. “As a result, it raises not only additional issues, but also ones that present a categorically different basis for appeal as well,” he said.
Interestingly enough, OOXML is already out of compliance, as the standard, DIS 29500, is supposed to be published no more than one month after approval.
In this case, this is actually a potentially useful military technology, specifically what is called the Unattended Ground Sensors (UGS) system.
These are a family of disposable/deployable sensor ranging in size from something a bit smaller than a shoe box to about the size of a cigarette pack:
The UGS come in two forms, the Tactical UGS and the Urban UGS. Tactical have four different versions, including the ISR node, which contains magnetic, seismic, and acoustic sensors; the Gateway node which is a communications relay system; an Electro-optics node with an EO camera for the day and an infrared camera for night; and a Radiological/Nuclear node. The Tactical UGS are about a foot long and several inches wide (exact specs are classified), and are typically partially buried so they aggressor units can’t see them while passing by. Urban UGS are smaller, and are placed on walls inside buildings to monitor rooms already cleared by soldiers. The two UGS send data back to the Gateway, which then processes the information and send its out through the FCS communications system.
The basic objective of the technology is to create a networked picture of the battlefield.
Situational awarness is frequently the most important part of winning a battle, but when one considers that any foreseeable conflict in the immediate future will be a counterinsurgency operation, where US forces would be operating at an information disadvantage that will not be helped by this sort of technology.
The Russians are looking at advanced high speed helicopter concepts too (Paid Subscription Required):
Among the concepts are:
We have the case of a belligerent patient in a Connecticut hospital, who was brought in with atrial fibrillation brought on from a jump into an ice covered lake.
When he would not control himself, security tasered him, and it corrected his irregular heartbeat.
This is what a medical defibrillator does, and it can kill people too, just like the taser, though the defibrillator has not been called an instrument of torture by the UN’s Committee Against Torture
The use of TaserX26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and that in certain cases it could also cause death, as shown by several reliable studies and by certain cases that had happened after practical use.
The flight lasted 30 minutes, took place yesterday and was uneventful.
You can see the differences between the demo and the stock Gripen in this photo:
Notice that the inlets are slightly reshaped, and the wing roots increased to include the repositioned landing gear.
Flight International is reporting that Sikorski’s X2 technology demonstrator is doing ground tests on its rotor system, and that Boeing’s A160T helo drone set an endurance record (18.7 hours) this month.
The former uses coaxial blades to offload the retreating blades, and allows for increased top speed, and the latter uses a variable speed rotor to increase efficiency to match the needs of the specific flight regime.
A160 T