Aerospace and Ordnance discussion/news.

[Krieger22]

https://news.usni.org/2018/08/14/35796

 

It's official: the Blue Angels are getting Super Hornets.

 

9 Es and 2 Fs, with completion of conversion work on the airframes expected to be in December 2021.

[Mighty_Zuk]

I remember being asked on this forum about the Israeli acoustic/dummy bombs Mikhol (paint brush) and/or Mikholit (small paint brush) which are used in the "Roof Knocking" protocol. Just found a video, from a recent event, that shows the implementation in a very clear way, compared with the limited available footage on YouTube.

 

 

[LoooSeR]

Tu-22M3M was shown today. First modernized planes are expected to enter service in 2021.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

Refueling rod installed and rear gun mount deleted.

[LoooSeR]

Orion-E UAV

 

Spoiler

 

[LoooSeR]

More from Army 2018

Quote

JSC Zaslon (St. Petersburg) presents a rocket pods of the modular design 9-A-5013 intended for 80-mm unguided S-8 rockets. The pods are made as a cassettes of 25, 20, 15 and 10 S-8 rockets and is intended for use on Mi-28NM combat helicopters.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[LoooSeR]

Azerbaijan loves those things.

[Krieger22]

"You lost another missile?"

Quote

A nuclear-powered Russian missile remains lost at sea after a failed test late last year, and Moscow is preparing to try to recover it, according to people with direct knowledge of a U.S. intelligence report.

Crews will attempt to recover a missile that was test launched in November and landed in the Barents Sea, which is located north of Norway and Russia. The operation will include three vessels, one of which is equipped to handle radioactive material from the weapon's nuclear core. There is no timeline for the mission, according to the people with knowledge of the report.

The U.S. intelligence report did not mention any potential health or environmental risks posed by possible damage to the missile's nuclear reactor.

 

[LoooSeR]

22 minutes ago, Krieger22 said:

"You lost another missile?"

 

Is there any better source for that, than a "we are talking out of our back holes"?

 

Quote

gasoline-powered engine

I have concerns about accuracy of reports that claim that cruise missiles are gasoline powered.

[Collimatrix]

Quote

While the report didn't address the potential effects of possible damage to the weapon's reactor, there remain concerns that radioactive material could leak.

"It goes without saying that if you fire a missile with a nuclear engine or energy source, that nuclear material will end up wherever that missile ends up," said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists.

 

 

Because it obviously doesn't matter.  There are nine nuclear submarines sitting at the bottom of the ocean already, and we're all still here.

[LoooSeR]

Quote

   Military expert of the "People's Diplomacy" Foundation, representative of the expert-analytical club "Future Today" Sergei Prostakov, in a conversation with a correspondent of the FAN, recalled that CNBC had previously stated that four tests of the new Russian cruise missile had failed.

/.../

   "The only real explanation for CNBC's statements is that the Americans mistook the missile launch tests for a full military missile tests. Only in this case, intelligence, which, obviously, became a source of information, will somehow correspond to reality. But, knowing the bias of this channel, which is well known both in the US and abroad, one can also assume a lie on their part, "Sergei Prostakov explained.

/.../

   The military expert stressed that the cruise missile "Burevestnik" is tested in cold mode, that is, separately - a missile equipped with a normal engine, separately - a nuclear engine on a test bed (laboratory equipment that is intended for special, control, acceptance tests).

/.../

I also heard rumors that nuclear-powered missile never actually flew with a nuclear reactor/engine outside of test beds.

[Krieger22]

USAF Chief of Staff: Light Attack Experiment is chiefly an international initiative

 

Quote

Interviewed in his Pentagon office last week, Goldfein said the Light Attack experiment is most valuable as a way to partner with allies. It would provide a means to operate together and share information, he said.

“When we started” the Light Attack experiment, Goldfein said, the idea was to create a long-term response to “violent extremism,” and do it in a way that allied air forces with limited resources could still contribute to the effort.

“We haven’t had many options for them to be able” to contribute in those fights, he explained. The light attack aircraft would offer such an opportunity.

Having green force operate these instead of the USAF is pretty much what Gums was advocating on F-16.net back then. Not going to bother linking Rogoway and his peanut gallery's reactions.

[LoooSeR]

VTOL Fregat drone 3D graphics (project from 2015-16)

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

[Ramlaen]

23 hours ago, Krieger22 said:

USAF Chief of Staff: Light Attack Experiment is chiefly an international initiative

 

Having green force operate these instead of the USAF is pretty much what Gums was advocating on F-16.net back then. Not going to bother linking Rogoway and his peanut gallery's reactions.

 

Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski, head of Air Force Materiel Command, told Air Force Magazine in a recent interview that she envisions a buy of “about 20” Light Attack aircraft, but she said she would not buy a robust logistics capability for them. When they wear out, she said, her preference would be to sell the aircraft to allies or put them in the boneyard and “buy new ones,” because support costs on small-inventory fleets are “eating us alive.”

[LoooSeR]

 

 

[LoooSeR]

Switchblade suicide drone from Syria now in Patriot park

 

[LoooSeR]

 

[LoooSeR]

YaK-141

[Renegade334]

Boeing wins MQ-25 competition.

 

Quote

The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a ceiling price $805,318,853 fixed-price-incentive-firm-target contract to provide the design, development, fabrication, test, verification, certification, delivery, and support of four MQ-25A unmanned air vehicles, including integration into the carrier air wing to provide an initial operational capability to the Navy.  The work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (45.5 percent); Indianapolis, Indiana (6.9 percent); Cedar Rapids, Iowa (3.1 percent); Quebec, Canada (3.1 percent); Palm Bay, Florida (2.3 percent); San Diego, California (1.5 percent); and various locations inside and outside the continental U.S. (37.6 percent), and is expected to be completed in August 2024.  Fiscal 2018 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $79,050,820 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.  This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposals; three offers were received.  The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-18-C-1012).

 

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/23273/boeing-is-the-winner-of-the-navys-mq-25-stingray-tanker-drone-competition

Boeing statement: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-08-30-U-S-Navy-Awards-Boeing-805-million-MQ-25-Contract

Navy announcement: https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=106913

[LoooSeR]

Quote

   The Taganrog aviation scientific and technical complex named after G. M. Beriev signed a contract for the supply of four Amphibian Be-200ChS airplanes to the USA. This is reported by TASS with reference to the company's press release.

 

   In addition, an agreement on the option for another six aircraft was reached with the customer. On the Russian side, the contract was signed by the Director General of the Taganrog aircraft plant Yuri Grudinin, with the American - the president of Seaplane Global Air Services Inc. Patrick Massardi. This company helps its customers to extinguish forest fires.

   It is noted that the first two aircrafts will be equipped with engines D-436TP (produced in Ukraine), the rest - engines SaM146 (a product of joint Russian-French production).

According Massardi, Be-200 - the most effective aircraft to combat forest fires. "Our pilots are ready to fly on this outstanding aircraft," he concluded.

 

   Preparation of the contract for the supply of Be-200 to the USA was actively conducted during 2018, the interest of American customers to this equipment was reported back in 2016. Then it was noted that this is a project that requires "political stability".

 

   The first serial Be-200ChS was introduced to the public in 2016. The aircraft underwent deep modernization and, according to the president of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) Yuri Slyusar, is two-thirds different from the basic version.

 

   The UAC, which is 90 percent state-owned, is the parent company of the Taganrog aircraft plant.

Ohh US giving money to Putin!

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

[LoooSeR]

Altair UAV (Medium class), first publicly shown flight (?).

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

[Ramlaen]

 

[Belesarius]

Japan approved to buy another 10 E-2D Advanced Hawkeye AWACS aircraft.

 

https://www.janes.com/article/82889/japan-cleared-to-buy-more-advanced-hawkeyes

 

3.14 billion dollar order.

[Ramlaen]

No F-15X or F-22/F-35 hybrid for the US air force.

 

Quote

Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said she believes the service needs to expend its precious financial resources on stealthy, fifth-generation platforms — specifically the F-35 — and thus buying even an advanced fourth generation fighter like the so-called F-15X is not in the cards.

Quote

What about a new fifth generation plane that would combine the F-35 and F-22?

Wilson shut down that idea as well, saying that proposal "is not something we’re currently considering.”

 

[LostCosmonaut]

A topic that came up on discord the other day

 

The USAF is starting work on upgrading the external pylons on the B-52 to carry 20,000 lb weapons (currently 5,000 lb is limit); https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=f8e2bdc27362d841b9d6cc76699e3f7d&tab=core&_cview=0

 

There isn't much in the Air Force's inventory that fits into the 5k-20k weight category. The GBU-28 is 5,000 lb, the AGM-86 and AGM-158 are both significantly smaller. On the other end of the scale, the GBU-57 MOP is over 30,000 lb, and wouldn't fit even on the upgrade pylons (additionally, it's unlikely the B-52 would be fitted to carry new freefall bombs, such a capability would be virtually useless against anyone with air defenses).

 

The new weapon this capability is being designed for is likely some sort of cruise missile. While existing American weapons are under 5,000 lb, there are larger ones; the Kh-22 is over 12,000 lb, while the P-270 is almost 10,000 lb. So, it is possible that the USAF is developing a new high performance, long range missile, likely with significantly higher performance than the subsonic AGM-86 and AGM-158.

 

One more interesting line of thought is that the US is developing a counterpart to the new Russian Kh-47. The Kh-47, also known as Kinzhal, is an air launched ballistic missile, comparable in size to the 9K270 Iskander tactical ballistic missile.

 

 

(User @LoooSeR on this site has posted about the missile before in this thread and the aerospace pictures thread).

 

Addition of such a missile to the US arsenal would represent a new and unique capability; the US (to my knowledge) has not dabbled in ALBMs since the abortive AGM-87 Skybolt (Which had the side effect of thoroughly fucking up British nuclear procurement and led to them getting Polaris and boats with licensed S5Ws. But I digress.) Presumably, an ALBM with its high speed (and likely a maneuvering warhead) would be far more capable against systems such as the S-300/400/500. Increasing the B-52's standoff range would also improve the survivability of it as a launch platform. (Wiki claims a range of up to 600 km / 370 miles for the S-500, although S-500 appears to be designed as an ABM, it is likely very capable against nonmaneuvering targets like a B-52).

 

The Russian missile is claimed to have a range of up to 3,000 km (1,800 miles) when launched from a supersonic platform such as the MiG-31 or Tu-22M. The B-52 is a slower platform, so a US missile would have to be larger or use some other tricks to get a similar range to the Kh-47. Alternatively, assuming a missile in the 10,000 lb weight class, an upgraded pylon could carry two of them. This would be highly beneficial, considering the low numbers of strategic bombers in the US fleet.

[Belesarius]

22 minutes ago, LostCosmonaut said:

A topic that came up on discord the other day

 

The USAF is starting work on upgrading the external pylons on the B-52 to carry 20,000 lb weapons (currently 5,000 lb is limit); https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=f8e2bdc27362d841b9d6cc76699e3f7d&tab=core&_cview=0

 

There isn't much in the Air Force's inventory that fits into the 5k-20k weight category. The GBU-28 is 5,000 lb, the AGM-86 and AGM-158 are both significantly smaller. On the other end of the scale, the GBU-57 MOP is over 30,000 lb, and wouldn't fit even on the upgrade pylons (additionally, it's unlikely the B-52 would be fitted to carry new freefall bombs, such a capability would be virtually useless against anyone with air defenses).

 

The new weapon this capability is being designed for is likely some sort of cruise missile. While existing American weapons are under 5,000 lb, there are larger ones; the Kh-22 is over 12,000 lb, while the P-270 is almost 10,000 lb. So, it is possible that the USAF is developing a new high performance, long range missile, likely with significantly higher performance than the subsonic AGM-86 and AGM-158.

 

One more interesting line of thought is that the US is developing a counterpart to the new Russian Kh-47. The Kh-47, also known as Kinzhal, is an air launched ballistic missile, comparable in size to the 9K270 Iskander tactical ballistic missile.

 

 

(User @LoooSeR on this site has posted about the missile before in this thread and the aerospace pictures thread).

 

Addition of such a missile to the US arsenal would represent a new and unique capability; the US (to my knowledge) has not dabbled in ALBMs since the abortive AGM-87 Skybolt (Which had the side effect of thoroughly fucking up British nuclear procurement and led to them getting Polaris and boats with licensed S5Ws. But I digress.) Presumably, an ALBM with its high speed (and likely a maneuvering warhead) would be far more capable against systems such as the S-300/400/500. Increasing the B-52's standoff range would also improve the survivability of it as a launch platform. (Wiki claims a range of up to 600 km / 370 miles for the S-500, although S-500 appears to be designed as an ABM, it is likely very capable against nonmaneuvering targets like a B-52).

 

The Russian missile is claimed to have a range of up to 3,000 km (1,800 miles) when launched from a supersonic platform such as the MiG-31 or Tu-22M. The B-52 is a slower platform, so a US missile would have to be larger or use some other tricks to get a similar range to the Kh-47. Alternatively, assuming a missile in the 10,000 lb weight class, an upgraded pylon could carry two of them. This would be highly beneficial, considering the low numbers of strategic bombers in the US fleet.

I'm betting something for the "Prompt Strike" ability/doctrine. Hypersonic and huuuuge.