Boeing’s Phantom Ray was flownb toi Edwards AFB on the back of the 747 that was used to carry the Space Shuttle.
They did this, as opposed to breaking it down and shipping it via truck or inside an aircraft, because it was not designed with a wing break at the attachment, which makes disassembly and reassambly a rather non-trivial operation.
The UK has now unveiled its stealthy drone, the Taranis, and rather unsurprisingly, since the electromagnetic spectrum and aerodynamics work the same for the Brits as everyone else, even if they do drive on the wrong side of the road, it looks like just about every other flying wing type stealth drone.
You can see a few more pix here.
One of the recent developments in air to ground munitions has been the addition of guidance to the 2.75 inch FFAR (Folding-Fin Aerial Rocket) in the form of the of the laser guided APKWS (Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System) and DAGR (Direct Attack Guided Rocket).
This venerable weapons system, originally developed as an air to air weapon in the 1940s, found its niche as an unguided air to ground weapon, but with the addition of laser guidance, this system has the very real ability to in precision strike roles that do not require the weight, and cost of an existing system.
Theoretically, this could allow for a rocket, now improved to “Hydra 70”, to be used in scenarios for which the Hellfire is, pardon the pun, overkill to take out a room, or a guy in a truck.
The problem is that many of the applications for Hellfire are for smaller UAVs, the launcher for the 2.75″ rocket, the M260 and M261 are too heavy and too draggy to be effectively carried.
As is clear from the photo, they have the aerodynamics of a garbage can.
Additionally, they are limited life items, with the aluminum missile tubes having a life of 32 firings.
The folks at ADFS have an improved variant geared toward the guided variant, which, unlike the unguided variant, does not require ripple firing in order to achieve a reasonable chance of hitting the target.
It has two aerodynamic caps on the front and rear of to provide greater streamlining, and there is a single door on both caps to provide for launching.
Both rotate in sync, and the door opens prior to firing, and then shut until the next round is to be fired.
Additionally, the launcher is made from high temperature composites, which allows for an essentially unlimited lifetime, as well as significant weight savings.
Interfaces between the aircraft and the launcher are supposed to be identical to the M260/M261 launchers.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
As I wrote about them earlier, and I have facilities tour with them with them.
This post is a request for any questions you might like for me to ask, and write about.
My original post on about the company and its products, the is UAV shown, is here.
I have this post dated, so scroll down for newer posts.
Image, American Dynamics Flight Systems
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.
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.
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.
Now that I’ve had about 15 minutes to think of it, the accusation that the Iranians are hacking into the signals is a tacit admission by the US military drones are secretly overflying sovereign Iranian territory.
The Wall Street Journal has a bomb shell of s story.
It appears that insurgents in Afghanistan have hacked into the video feeds of US drones:
Militants in Iraq have used $26 off-the-shelf software to intercept live video feeds from U.S. Predator drones, potentially providing them with information they need to evade or monitor U.S. military operations.
Senior defense and intelligence officials said Iranian-backed insurgents intercepted the video feeds by taking advantage of an unprotected communications link in some of the remotely flown planes’ systems. Shiite fighters in Iraq used software programs such as SkyGrabber — available for as little as $25.95 on the Internet — to regularly capture drone video feeds, according to a person familiar with reports on the matter.
(link to SkyGrapper software mine)
I am surprised by this. Not so much by the idea that anyone in a situation to be surveilled and attacked by the US might attempt to use SIGINT to defend themselves, that it just basic common sense, but by the fact that the US military has been using an unencrypted feed to transmit data.
And, of course, we have the accusation that it was Iran who actually hacked the feeds, or developed the method to hack the feeds, because, much like in the case of the the Explosively Formed Penetrators (EFP) used by insurgents in Iraq, it is claimed that only the Iranians have the technical know-how to use such a system.
Of course, in the case of the EFPs, this accusation relied on a number of lies, in particular the idea that EFP construction was so technically challenging that only the Iranians could do it, despite the fact that the IRA was using EFPs in Ireland over 30 years ago, and that they actually discovered workshops where IEDs were manufactured…………It turns out all you need to make an EFP is a simple lathe and some copper.
The idea that once someone discovered the video feeds were unencrypted, and my guess would be that this has been known since the Kosovo campaign, because the Serbs were typically all over this kind of stuff.
In any case, the military is now claiming that this breach has been fixed, implying that encryption has been added.
I’m wondering what took so long. The satellite TV providers have been encrypting their signals with minimal computational overhead for decades.
Of course, I have an improvement on this idea, and it involves lesbian pr0n. (You were wondering when we would be getting to the pr0n, weren’t you)
In addition to using encryption, the video feed should use steganography to embed the signal inside an unencrypted non-tactical video feed.
The unencrypted video should be lesbian pr0n,* because the then the insurgents would in order to extract the true signal, be forced to watch nekkid women (Oh my God, tits!) deriving sexual satisfaction (Oh my God, female orgasm!) without benefit of a penis (Oh my God…………You get the idea), and it just screws with their heads (both upper and lower).
One of the reasons for the pr0n,† is because any relatively competent state actor would be able to decrypt a video feed in a relatively short period of time by gang tackling the signal with a video game based massively parallel super-computer.
*It was actually Bill Volk who made the suggestion.
†Beside the fact that I am a smart ass.
There are definitely reasons for such a craft, but I think that unmanned ambulance is not one of the better applications.
If you are evacuating someone, you want have a doctor or paramedic on site to administer things like plasma, etc., and they would likely need to monitor the patient for the trip if it is any longer than about 10 minutes, and once you have to do that, having a pilot too makes sense.
That being said, things like remote resupply would be a viable application.
Nothing particularly sinister or Area 51 here, it’s just that the former GFS (Geoff’s Flying Saucer, Ltd), now Aesir, is continuing to develop their Coanda effect VTOL UAV, which uses a blower and the Coanda effect (earlier post here) to get the desired characteristics, has come up with a 1000kg payload concept, the Hoder.
You can see more pictures here, and there is a video below.
It appears to be stable, and it has an advantage over a ducted fan in that the entire bottom of the aircraft could be used to hand sensors or weapons.
The Marine Corps is looking for a UAV cargo carrier that can handle the rigors of operation in Afghanistan, and the Boeing A-160T Hummingbird and the Kaman K-MAX. (paid subscription required)
The goal is to be able to carry 750-1000 lbs at a density altitude in excess of 12,000 feet.
Boeing probably has the edge on UAV operations, though Kaman’s partnership with Lockheed-Martin may close the gap on this, but the K-Max has a lot more in the way of flight hours under harsh conditions, both in firefighting and logging operations.
I lean toward Kaman, because with a twin main rotor design, it may handle better in high altitudes, like the Hindu Kush.
Remember my post a few hours ago regarding a photograph of a mystery aircraft photographed over Afghanistan?
I’m almost ready to call it a hoax.
To refresh your memory, here is the photo (top), and here is a photo of the LongEZ modified by the AFRL to test pulse detonation propulsion
mystery aircraft, and below it are three photographs the first one from Wiki, and the next two from Mojave Skies (I’ve mirrored and cropped them to more closely match match the orientation of the mystery pic).
The similarities, cranked wing, large boxy structure under the fuselage, location of the canopy, are all rather striking.
What is missing are the canards, wingtip rudders, and the pulse detonation tubes sticking out the back, but with photoshop/GIMP and some reduction in resolution, I think that the conclusion that it is a faked photograph may be higher on the list.
The aircraft only flew at the Mojave airport, and now sits at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base outside of Dayton, Ohio, and it clearly never shared even the same hemisphere as Afghanistan.
(click pics for full size images)
Actually, as lot of people’s “my bad”, because that picture I posted as a “mystery UAV”, was the wrong picture, as Stephen Trimble observes.
The previous photo was apparently the wrong one, and I posted it in error.
If this one is accurate, and it is almost as bad as the other one, It looks like a slightly cranked wing, and maybe a radome underneath, and a canopy, or maybe air intake above.
In any case, I’m confused, and have no clue as to what is in the air over Afghanistan.
OK, so we now have a picture to go along with the reports of a stealthy UAV operating in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
So, you have the grainy picture, and the artist’s conception.
The thing is, it doesn’t make any sense to use stealth in Afghanistan.
The Taliban does not have any air defense radars operating, so why work on a specialized stealth shape?
I can see aural stealth (noise), and IR stealth, and visual stealth, but using a radar avoiding platform where there is no radar just makes no sense.
[on edit]
I just came across the BAE Corax (Raven in Greek) as a possible answer.
It’s a British system, and it matches the general configuration, including the long wing, though the photo seems to show a lot more wing sweep.
So, the details are out, and we have a big, confusing, and sprawling story from a big confusing, and sprawling building, the Pentagon.
Here are some links, and some things that I find noteworthy.
Specific programs:
With $439 million budgeted, the USAF is definitely going full speed on the tanker replacement bidding.
The Next Generation Bomber and the F-136 alternate JSF engine are on the chopping block, and the Gerald Ford class aircraft carrier has been delayed a year to work out the bugs on its electric catapults.
Star Wars takes a hit, with both the multiple kill vehicle and the airborne laser being canceled.
UAV’s did very well, with the Raven (shown) getting over 700 orders.
Aviation:
The DEW Line has a rundown.
Classified:
The Pentagon classified budget is now, up above $50 billion, which, on its own, makes the black programs something like the 3rd largest military budget in the world.
US Army:
spending on Helos is up, as are both unmanned vehicles and the number of active duty soldiers.
Navy:
We already know the story, cancellation of the DDG-100, restart of the Brukes, and continued procurement of the LCS, more here, here, and here.
Short version, it’s a generally down, but the Navy has done OK.
USAF
Basically, talk to the deer.
The USAF did not fare well, with the end of the F-22 and C-17 production lines, underfunding of the Air Force One replacement, the Joint Dual-Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM), and the follow on to the Predator drone, and the cancellation of the TSAT satellite system.
Cost Guard:
Not the Pentagon, it’s technically in the Department of Commerce, but its budget is up by about 3%.
Urban Aeronautics is now showing its ‘Fast Mule’ ducted fan UAV.
It’s supposed to exceed 250kts and it is, “is 20% larger and 50% heavier,” than the MULE UAV, which (from the UA Website) has a payload of about 750 lbs, so I’m guessing that this aircraft’s payload is in the ½ ton range.
It looks wicked neat, though.
And this is a deep cultural problem, not a simple case of a penny wise and pound foolish mistake.
What is going on is that both the Army and the USAF operate models of the Predator drone, but the Army’s loss rate is much lower because the USAF has refused to incorporate an auto-landing system on their UAVs:
Outgoing Pentagon acquisition czar John Young sharply criticized the Air Force today in his last meeting with reporters, saying the service had refused to budget for auto-landing gear for Predator UAVs even though the Air Force has lost a substantial portion of these to landing accidents. The new undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, Ash Carter, was sworn in this afternoon.
Young said the Air Force has lost one-third of the 183 Predators it has bought, and one third of those have crashed because of ground control issues. (Young’s spokesman, Chris Isleib, later sent an email to reporters slightly changing the numbers. “Since 1994 the Air Force has procured 195 Predators. 65 have been lost due to Class A mishaps,” he said.) Isleib added that of the 65 mishaps, 36 percent are laid at the door of human error and “many of those attributable to ground station problems.” About 15 percent of the total was destroyed during the landing phase, Isleib clarified in his email. (For a very human and honest portrayal of the difficulties of flying a Predator, catch this briefing by a NASA pilot who has flown them.)
Young said he told the Air Force to “move as fast as possible to auto-land.” A clearly irritated undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics told reporters “it will not surprise you that the Air Force is resisting this.” No cost estimates are available yet for equipping the Predator fleet with auto-land.
Young drew a sharp contrast with the Army’s Shadow UAV, saying it had lost very few aircraft to landing mishaps because it possesses auto-land capability.
What is going on here is a calculus that is very close to the USAF’s raison d’etre.
The air force is about pilots flying things, and pilots land what they fly, so if you add an auto-land system, then why do you need a pilot, as opposed to some sort of weapons system operator, who might *gasp* even be an enlisted man…..horrors!
Another example of why spinning off the USAF as an independent service has not served the military, or the taxpayer, well.
