Gripen287

Some naval aviation and arresting gear resources. REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT PHASE I Carrier Suitability of Land-Based Aircraft The Influence of Ship Configuration on the Design of the Joint Strike Fighter CVN FLIGHT/HANGAR DECK NATOPS MANUAL Arresting Gear: Metallurgical Analysis of Arresting Gear Deck Pendant Failures Development of [Arresting Gear] Cable Materials Modern Sandvik 11R51 Alloy Datasheet Analytical Study of Aircraft Arresting Gear Cable Design Mark 7 Arresting Gear Training Manual Useful Figures:

For the PBY Catalina lovers out there who are/where rich bastards with some class. Flying Yachts

Have at it! How do I make a FOIA request?

No it doesn’t. No F-35 model has any CAT 1A deficiencies at present. Are you surprised to learn that POGO and the media either don’t bother to differentiate CAT 1A from 1B deficiencies (the program office’s metrics) or use the Air Force’s definition of CAT 1 that is a lot broader and includes less serious deficiencies than those that represent a serious risk to the aircraft? Are you purposefully trying to conduct an impossible analysis to justify your preconceived notion that the F-35 is crap? Can you go back in time and apply today’s level of oversight and risk averseness to legacy programs? I’ve already given you more of my time than you appear to deserve. You don’t seem to have realistic expectations or a realistic frame of reference. So rather than submit a few hundred FOIA request hoping to get that nugget of releasable info that will surely, surely change your mind, I’m going to enjoy the rest of my day.

So in your clearly learned opinion how would you rate the F-14? Yeah, you might say sticking TF30s in the A-model birds was a "small problem." Only something like 375 or so TF30 A models made into the sky to try and kill their crews for staring at the throttle the wrong way. Every single Super Bug that will likely ever fly has gigantic, toed-out pylons because of unanticipated store separation issues. It's not even clear if your criticism is with issues due to specific engineering decisions that are liable to occur in any new aircraft program, let alone three as with the F35s, or with the general configuration of the aircraft. To the latter possibility, why is it even useful to compare the F-35 to the F-22, Su-57, or J-20? They all have very different design criteria, different missions, and fight in different organizations. I bet you're fun discussing WWII armor too. And like, dude, Kopp was trying get F-22s for Australia. Have you noticed that APA stopped trying to stir shit up after F-22 production ended in 2012?

What do you expect? What value, even if only entertainment value, do you think you've added? All you've done is trot out "arguments" from nearly a decade ago, or more, and slapped some CYA language over them lest someone hold you to the implications of advocating for those positions. Are you even aware of the rebuttals to the Kopp/Sprey drivel? I suggest you take a week or two to catch up on the Chip Burke debates/testimonials and the wealth of information and context here before getting back to us with a comparative analysis informed by a modicum of understanding of the compromises inherent in fighter aircraft design and the trajectory of air combat. Try googling "F-16 GAO." Try googling "F-15 GAO." Try googling "F-18 GAO." FYI, POGO was only established in 1981. As OSC said, I think you'll be shocked to find that agencies tasked with finding problems to justify their existence end up finding them. Oh, and don't forget to role in all the problems with legacy, podded sensors and systems that are integral to the F-35. Have fun!

10 years to get this baby ready!

FEA of M855 FEA of Lightweight Ammunition Materials Cartridge Case-Chamber Interactions

Space Shuttle Technical Conference, Part 1 (601 pages of Space Shuttle Development Documents) Space Shuttle Technical Conference, Part 2 (another 537 pages of Space Shuttle Development Documents)

CONFIDENTIAL From: Aldo Griffin, Chief Engineer, Ammunition Development Task Force To: The Second Joint Committee For Cartridge Development, Dakota Union Cartridges and Ordnance Department March 2, 2223 Re: Progress on .237 Antidote Mk.2 In response to the Committee’s request, I am pleased to report that the Task Force is finalizing details for the Capability Production Document (CPD). I know everyone is anxious for the Mk.2 CPD so that low-rate initial production and operational testing can commence. I can assure the Committee that the Task Force is proceeding with all due urgency with respect to Operation Shangri-La. It has been a long road, but I think even ol’ Big Bore would be content with what we’ve accomplished, if not entirely satisfied with the .237/.243 caliber. I do not believe the Scouts should have too much to complain about with this one. And they may not have been wrong about Mk.1. Not only have we equaled the long-range performance of their 175 grain .308 load, as the Scouts requested, we have surpassed it. While not as inexpensive as Mk.1, Mk.2 still beats the .308 on cost, bulk, and recoil. The move to the .435 case head has paid real dividends. Not only have we increased performance, at the behest of Mr. Lewis I believe we have successfully de-risked production of the General Purpose (GP) and Armor Piercing (AP) natures. As will be reflected in the CPD, GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 have experienced a slight increase in weight. Prototype samples weigh slightly more than 87 grains. The GP Mk.2 projectile comprises a partially exposed 24 grain, nickel-plated, 4340 alloy penetrator sitting atop a 36 grain, 1018 alloy core. The AP Mk.2 projectile comprises a partially exposed 59 gn, nickel-plated, D7 tool steel penetrator. The Task Force has elected to dispense with the cup-and-nose architecture in favor of a more conventional reverse-drawn CuZn5 gilding metal jacket. Like the Mk.1 and Mk.2 lead-cored projectiles, the GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 jackets include an integral rotating band to reduce barrel wear resulting from the full-length steel components. The Long Range (LR) Mk.2 projectile has experienced a slight reduction in weight to bring the boat tail length back to that of the GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 projectiles at one caliber. Prototype samples weigh approximately 101.5 grains. The LR Mk.2 projectile comprises a 4 grain, nickel-plated, 4340 alloy tip and a 68 grain Pb97Sb3 core. The LR Mk.2 jacket is pure copper to maximize sectional density and includes an integral rotating band. Performance of all three natures is outstanding. All three retain the .618 i7 form factor and outer mold line that was so successful during Phase 2 trials. The G7 GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 BCs are .342, and the G7 LR Mk.2 BC is .397. The slight decrease in BC for LR Mk.2, at least as predicted using the Task Force’s sub-standard equipment, is more than made up for by the significant increase in velocity provided by the .435 case head. The newly developed .435 - 1.85 inch, lacquer-coated, steel cartridge case is loaded with 36.1 grains of propellant irrespective of projectile nature. The .435 case provides GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 with a muzzle velocity of 3185 ft/s and a muzzle energy of 1966 ft-lbs when fired from a 22 inch barrel. The .435 case provides LR Mk.2 with a muzzle velocity of 2980 ft/s and a muzzle energy of 2001 ft-lbs when fired from a 22 inch barrel. The increase in velocity provided by the approximately 10 grain increase in propellant charge weight substantially increases down-range performance. A drop of 96” occurs at 800 yards and 775 yards for GP/AP Mk.2 and LR Mk.2, respectively. A drift of 36” occurs at 900 yards and 950 yards for GP/AP Mk.2 and LR Mk.2, respectively. Down-range energy reaches 700 ft-lbs at 1025 yards and 1175 yards for GP/AP Mk.2 and LR Mk.2, respectively. Additionally, GP Mk.2 and AP Mk.2 meet the 12” pine penetration requirement out to approximately 1400 yards at predicted muzzle velocity and approximately 1250 yds at 200 ft/s under predicted muzzle velocity. Most impressive of all, LR Mk.2 achieves 12” penetration at over 1500 yards, predicted muzzle velocity and 1500 yards, -200 ft/s. Recoil remains mild at 5.8 ft-lbs and 6.6 ft-lbs for GP/AP Mk.2 and LR Mk.2, respectively. Senator Brown’s predicted FY23 budget should be able to accommodate the modest increases in material cost, which is mostly attributed to the increase in propellant. Respective cartridge material costs for GP Mk.2, AP Mk.2, and LR Mk.2 are approximately 5.52 cents, 6.65 cents, and 6.317 cents. Respective cartridge weights for GP Mk.2, AP Mk.2, and LR Mk.2 are 15 grams, 15 grams, and 16.17 grams. Despite the modest increases in cost, bulk, and weight, the Task Force’s testing demonstrates that all three natures of .237 Antidote Mk.2 provide an as of yet unrivaled level of efficiency and performance. The Task Force is confident that .237 Antidote Mk.2 is the right choice given the terrain, temperatures, winds, and long sight lines that the Scouts and our new force of Rangers are likely to encounter in Operation Shangri-La. Moreover, Mk.2 will meet the Ranger’s call for a 30-round magazine for the new semi-auto having a stack height of less than 7” (Mk.2 30-round stack height is 6.74”). The Committee can expect the finalized CPD within the month. The Task Force looks forward to the Committee's decision, and hopes to bring this successful Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase to an end while spooling up the Production and Deployment Phase along with Mr. Lewis and Rapid City Union Ammunition Plant. Regards, Aldo .237 Antidote Mk.2 Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase Data IMAGES PERFORMANCE CONFIDENTIAL

From the age of slide rules: INVESTIGATION OF THE DRAG OF VARIOUS AXIALLY SYMMETRIC NOSE SHAPES OF FINENESS RATIO 3 FOR MACH NUMBERS FROM 1.24 TO 7.4 TRANSONIC DRAG MEASUREMENTS OF EIGHT BODY -NOSE SHAPES BODIES OF REVOLUTION HAVING MINIMUM DRAG AT HIGH SUPERSONIC AIRSPEEDS

General Purpose and AP Cartridges "Copperhead" Cartridge Heavy Lead Core Cartridge Comparisons

SECRETARIAL DRAFT DO NOT SUBMIT From: Chayton Jones, Lead Engineer To: Arthur Q. Lewis, Director of Production at Rapid City Union Ammunition Plant Sequestered away in the heart of the Black Hill with a copious supply of peyote, Through diligent effort over the last few weeks, my team has completed work on our entry for the Scout’s new cartridge. We believe Senator Brown and his committee will find it entirely acceptable. We call the new cartridge the .237 Antidote because it will cure all, or nearly all, of my team’s the Scouts’ troubles. We further believe that you will find the 103.2 grain loading in line with your requirements for a .260 projectile or greater. While our projectile is merely .237 in nominal diameter, and .243 in diameter at the rotating band, the 103.2 projectile and its .320 G7 ballistic coefficient approximates the performance of a low-drag, 140 grain .264 projectile. Even firing this impressive projectile, the magazines for the new semi-auto will surely fit 24 cartridges owing to the .40” rim diameter. The material costs for the 103.2 grain projectile and the loaded brass-cased cartridge are 0.95 and 5.50 cents respectively. In addition to the 103.2 grain loading, we have taken it upon ourselves acceded to the demands of the wretched accountants and developed a 85.8 grain general purpose (GP) projectile, a 85.8 grain armor piercing (AP) projectile, and a 86.5 grain expanding copper-jacketed, or “Copperhead,” projectile (CH). The 85.8 and 86.5 grain projectiles have G7 BCs of .266 and .268 and muzzle velocities of 2917 and 2905 ft/sec, respectively. For field use, my team considers these three cartridges ballistically equivalent. All natures of the new .237 projectiles are characterized by a projectile overall length of six calibers, a 3.33 caliber nose, a .243 rotating band, and a one caliber boat tail set at seven degrees. My team finds that the nominal .237 projectile diameter provides good external ballistic performance while retaining the internal ballistic performance of larger .243 projectiles. The .237 projectiles also provide slightly increased usable case capacity and lower projectile weight compared to a six-caliber .243 projectile at 2.8” COAL (without resorting to excessive internal cavities or exotic materials). Since the rotating band engages the rifling, the bearing surface merely rides along the lands. Therefore, the projectile can be kept stable within the bore, wear on the lands can be kept to a minimum, and the bearing surface/coating can possess high hardness. Apart from employing a rotating band, my team’s second great innovation is forsaking the cult of von Kármán foregoing the use of a von Kármán ogive in favor of a three-quarter power series ogive. While the von Kármán ogive is indeed very efficient in the transonic and low supersonic range of free-stream velocities, the most critical phases of flight with respect to this projectile, and modern small arms projectiles in general, occur above Mach 1.8-2.0. Above Mach 1.5 the L-D Haack/von Kármán ogive begins to lose out relative to ogives in the power series (for flight bodies having an L/D of 3). Long hours spent conjuring the spirits of the immortal aerodynamicists delving into dust covered NACA reports (e.g., Perkins et al., Report No. 1386)confirm that the three-quarter power curve, aka the one form to rule them all hypersonic optimum form, is an excellent form in at least the Mach 1.8-3.0 range. The three-quarter power curve approximates a von Kármán ogive near the meplat interface and transitions into an extremely shallow, nearly conical parabolic section at the bearing surface interface. Past research demonstrates that this form is nearly as efficient as a von Kármán ogive in the transonic flight regime and becomes increasingly more efficient as free stream velocity increases through the mid to high supersonic and low hypersonic regimes. Employing the three-quarter power curve will provide the .237 Antidote with the highest possible efficiency within 600 yards, where the .237 Antidote GP, AP, and CH projectiles are above Mach 1.7. In addition to the aforementioned innovations, the GP, AP, and CH projectiles utilize a new architecture comprising a low-carbon steel cup and a copper nose that is pressed into said cup. The half-caliber copper rotating band is also pressed onto the steel cup. Accordingly, it should prove relatively easily to switch production amongst these three projectile natures utilizing the same production lines. With the appropriate dies, it is likely that the copper noses can be economically produced via impact extrusion and drawing operations utilizing existing equipment. Producing the steel cups via impact extrusion, drawing, metal-injection molding, and/or milling is under investigation. Steels in the 1010, 1018, or 1020 ranges are candidate materials for the cups depending on the method of manufacturing ultimately chosen. The GP projectiles possess a 4340 steel penetrator, and the armor piercing projectiles possess a D7 tool steel penetrator. In soft tissue the penetrators will fracture the nose and provide divergent wound tracks that should rapidly incapacitate small-statured foes targets. The CH projectile includes a small D7 tool steel tip as well, to assist with penetration. The primary wounding mechanism of the CH projectile, however, is the monolithic copper nose insert that expands in tissue to generate large permanent wound tracks. The CH projectile will likely be the Scout’s best choice for taking large game animals, such as elk and bison. The GP, AP, and CH cartridges all utilize an economical lacquered steel cartridge case having an internal capacity of 35.75 grains H2O. This cartridge case, and the more expensive brass cartridge case used in conjunction with the 103.2 grain projectile, are loaded with 26.0 grains of propellant. An extremely modest relative capacity of 2.62 inches will provide exceptional barrel life and illustrates the tremendous potential of these projectiles when fired from higher capacity cases. At a mere 4.69 cents material cost per shot, the GP projectile is exceedingly economical and will allow younger Scouts to rapidly train up and qualify for the more expensive natures. The GP projectile also provides an outstanding blend of performance and economy in times of war or general unrest. At 4.99 cents material cost per shot, the CH projectile, while significantly more expensive than the GP cartridge, is nevertheless economical enough to provide each Scout with a sufficient number to meet their needs with respect to taking large game in the course of their duties. Scouts sent on special assignments may opt for the AP cartridge. While still more expensive at 5.12 cents material cost per shot, the AP cartridge will enable the Scout to carry one nature that is suitable for nearly any target that the Scout is likely to engage with a rifle within 600 yards. Most expensive of all is the 103.2 grain lead cored cartridge at 5.50 cents material cost per shot. Nevertheless, the 103.2 grain cartridge significantly outperforms the GP, AP, and CH cartridges at all ranges with respect to retained energy and outperforms them beyond 600 yards in terms of retained velocity. Like the other usurpers entrants in this competition, each .237 Antidote nature handily meets the specified penetration and recoil requirements. Unfortunately development of the impressive 103.2 grain, lead-cored cartridge is experiencing difficulties. The high one-in-5.5” twist rates needed to stabilize the extremely low drag, six caliber projectiles tend to cause instability and in-bore jacket separation when firing these heavy, lead cored projectiles with a sabotaged jacket. Accordingly, we recommend that we proceed with final development and deployment of the GP, AP, and CH cartridges with all possible speed. That is until the 103.2 grain projectiles are forgotten mature, of course. Additionally, my team requests all available funds to develop cartridges for the .237 projectiles having a .42” case head or greater, should the Scouts become captured by the General General Purpose Cartridge (G2PC) mafia and request a larger cartridge. Attached, please find additional documentation as to the specifications and performance of the .237 Antidote family of cartridges. Regards, Mr. Chayton Jones Lead Engineer, Mystical Research Advanced Technologies Division Post Script: My team and I humbly request that the monies now available in light of recapturing Mr. Smith’s funding and pension be applied to the accounts of the Production Engineering Division, as we are sure that their beratements and protestations will require accommodation assistance will prove invaluable in fielding the new .237 Antidote cartridges. Attachments: .237 Antidote Data Sheet .237 Antidote Dossier SECRETARIAL DRAFT DO NOT SUBMIT

The .246 Sweet Pea is no more. The .237 Antidote is ascendant! Death to cult of Von Karman! Fluff to follow.

Recognizing that our Sioux Scouts are expected to operate in the diverse environments of the Dakota Union, the engineers at our Rapid City munitions plant have developed a new cartridge to aid the Scouts in carrying out their duties. That cartridge is the .246 “Sweet Pea.” We believe that Scouts of today and tomorrow will put this cartridge to good use in the granite hills, wooded valleys, expansive prairie, and increasingly vibrant and prosperous towns of the Dakota Union. While some Scouts may judge its performance at 600 yards as merely being adequate, Scouts skilled in the arts of stalking and evasion will appreciate the Sweet Pea’s light weight, energy at closer ranges, extremely flat trajectory to 300 yards, and outstanding terminal performance on targets both large and small. A partially-exposed, steel “arrowhead” penetrator conveys an intimidating appearance that hints at the devastating wounds the bullet is capable of, particularly at closer ranges. It is true that the Sweet Pea’s meplat may be larger than that of some its target-shooting oriented contemporaries, but the Sweet Pea’s wider meplat aids in penetrating into the target rather than merely glancing off it when striking at an oblique angle. Stress relief channels pressed and cut into the bullet’s bearing surface help ensure long barrel life despite the Sweet Pea’s deep penetrating steel core. The middle channel also promotes generation of larger, deeper penetrating jacket fragments in tissue. Even though the Sweet Pea is optimized to end fights quickly and humanely kill game at the ranges our Scouts find themselves having to use their rifles most often, the Sweet Pea’s relatively long ogive and aerodynamic boat tail ensure that our Scouts will not have to shy away from taking shots out to 600 yards and beyond. Official magazine capacity is 22 rounds, although enterprising Scouts have been known to find room for 23. Moreover, even actuaries far from the frontier can take comfort in the Sweet Pea’s economy. At a mere 5.70 cents per round, the introductory 88 grain “ball” round is largely constructed from mild steel components, save for its bullet jacket, and therefore, the Sweet Pea will not overly impede the ongoing effort to rebuild the Union’s electrical infrastructure. Furthermore, the near total elimination of lead in the Sweet Pea’s construction will eliminate the expensive and onerous precautions that the workers in our munitions plants must endure when working with this toxic substance. Our engineers are optimistic that the cartridge will be entirely free of lead if efforts to redevelop the lead-free primers of an earlier time are successful. For additional information, please consult the materials provided. We hope that you too will discover why this new cartridge truly is a “sweet pea.” .246 Sweet Pea Data Sheet .246 Sweet Pea Renders and Performance Estimates