Krieger22 Posted January 10, 2019 Report Share Posted January 10, 2019 Speaking of KC-46, the first USAF KC-46 has been delivered. Is there a catch? Well, yes... Quote The agreement, finalized after months of sometimes public and contentious discussions, allows McConnell Air Force Base in Kansas to receive the KC-46 as early as this month, with more set to follow, said Air Force spokeswoman Capt. Hope Cronin. However, the new tankers will arrive with several outstanding category-1 deficiencies, the term used by the military to describe the most serious level of technical problems. That may sound like a blow to the Air Force, whose leaders had previously implied that all category-1 deficiencies must be fixed before the service begins accepting the tankers. However, service leaders believe the Air Force retains significant financial leverage, even as Boeing delivers the KC-46 aircraft, and the service sees it as vital that Air Mobility Command be able to begin training pilots and boom operators to use the tankers even as technical problems are being corrected. Quote Perhaps more importantly, the Air Force holds a significant trump card in its hand. According to the terms of its fixed-price contract with Boeing, the service can withhold up to $28 million per aircraft upon delivery — and the Air Force official said the service intends to keep that amount until it sees a good faith effort by Boeing to fix deficiencies. That means Boeing could miss out on $1.5 billion if the maximum withholding is applied to all 52 aircraft on contract. “That is not something that legitimately can be contested by Boeing. That is purely a government decision until the airplane is brought up to specification,” the official said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted January 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2019 http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25989/intel-report-confirms-china-developing-stealthy-regional-bomber-in-addition-to-strategic-bomber "An arm of the U.S. Intelligence Community has publicly confirmed the existence of not one, but two Chinese stealth bomber development programs for the first time in a new report. In addition to the much-reported H-20 stealth heavy bomber program, China is also working on a smaller, regionally-focused stealthy bomber, commonly referred to as JH-XX. This new information was contained in the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) latest China Military Power report, which the Agency released on Jan. 15, 2019. DIA restarted issuing its "Military Power" unclassified public reviews, which trace their origins to the Cold War-era Soviet Military Power reports, in 2017. This new examination of China's capabilities says the information it contains is up to date as of November 2018." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieger22 Posted January 18, 2019 Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 Su-34 midair collision during training over Sea of Japan. The crews ejected safely, and rescue efforts are underway. https://ria.ru/20190118/1549543529.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xlucine Posted January 18, 2019 Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 (edited) 21 hours ago, Belesarius said: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25989/intel-report-confirms-china-developing-stealthy-regional-bomber-in-addition-to-strategic-bomber "An arm of the U.S. Intelligence Community has publicly confirmed the existence of not one, but two Chinese stealth bomber development programs for the first time in a new report. In addition to the much-reported H-20 stealth heavy bomber program, China is also working on a smaller, regionally-focused stealthy bomber, commonly referred to as JH-XX. This new information was contained in the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA) latest China Military Power report, which the Agency released on Jan. 15, 2019. DIA restarted issuing its "Military Power" unclassified public reviews, which trace their origins to the Cold War-era Soviet Military Power reports, in 2017. This new examination of China's capabilities says the information it contains is up to date as of November 2018." Looking through that report linked, I'm pretty sure they've used a photoshopped image. Check out page 81 - the amphib vehicles in the background look awfully similar. Reverse image searching it shows up the same 'shopped image all over the place, so I think it got attached to an AFP news item. Here's an example of a typical report using it: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/1996073/china-russia-hold-joint-naval-drill-south-china-sea This is very off topic, I know ETA: I just noticed that that AFP news item credited the image to Xinhua news agency. Edited January 18, 2019 by Xlucine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted January 18, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Xlucine said: Looking through that report linked, I'm pretty sure they've used a photoshopped image. Check out page 81 - the amphib vehicles in the background look awfully similar. Reverse image searching it shows up the same 'shopped image all over the place, so I think it got attached to an AFP news item. Here's an example of a typical report using it: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/1996073/china-russia-hold-joint-naval-drill-south-china-sea This is very off topic, I know ETA: I just noticed that that AFP news item credited the image to Xinhua news agency. Pretty sure most of the images have been shared here on SH before. More interested in the idea of a theatre-range plane in development. We shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 18, 2019 Report Share Posted January 18, 2019 11 hours ago, Krieger22 said: Su-34 midair collision during training over Sea of Japan. The crews ejected safely, and rescue efforts are underway. https://ria.ru/20190118/1549543529.html Not safely, 2 dead. https://news.mail.ru/incident/36027850/?frommail=1 Quote Rescuers discovered the body of the third Su-34 pilot MOSCOW, January 18 - RIA News. The body of the second dead Su-34 pilot without signs of life was found in the area of the search in the Sea of Japan, the Russian Defense Ministry reports. /.../ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 19, 2019 Report Share Posted January 19, 2019 Weird, reports here (admittedly in not brilliant sources, but allegedly quoting Interfax) are claiming one of the Su-34s managed to land after the collision: “One Su-34 fell after the collision, and the other managed to land with a defunct engine,” a source said. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/two-russian-su-34-fighter-13875952 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Quote MOSCOW, January 22. / TASS /. A Tu-22M3 bomber crashed while landing at a military airfield in the Murmansk region. /.../ “The Tu-22M3 bomber crashed while landing at the airfield of the long-range aviation regiment in Olenegorsk (Murmansk region). 3 out of 4 are dead. Belesarius, Laviduce and Sgt.Squarehead 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 23, 2019 Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 Claimed to be a photo of Okhotnik-B UAV @Collimatrix Zyklon and Belesarius 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 23, 2019 Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 Landing gear is similar looking Zyklon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 Spoiler Zyklon and Belesarius 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 On 1/23/2019 at 2:42 AM, LoooSeR said: 3 out of 4 are dead. Spoiler Sgt.Squarehead and Zyklon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Size comparison (same tractor is pulling them) Collimatrix and Sgt.Squarehead 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collimatrix Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 With the air intake on top, there must be a lot of room inside the fuselage for a large weapons bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 26, 2019 Report Share Posted January 26, 2019 Il-112V ground tests on airfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Video of Tu-22M3 crash appeared Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collimatrix Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Best guess three view of the new Sukhoi UCAV I found on the Key Publishing Forums. It's Yuge! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Aaaah.....Now I understand why the Kirovets drawing was in the other thread. 10 hours ago, LoooSeR said: Video of Tu-22M3 crash appeared He seemed to be coming in very fast, but the bounce on landing is strange, did it hit something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 8 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: /.../ He seemed to be coming in very fast, but the bounce on landing is strange, did it hit something? Yes, ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Uhuh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted January 27, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 That approach speed was super fast. The flex when the fuselage came apart was pretty brutal. Edit: I wonder if the wing sweep mechanism failed? I couldn't tell if the wings were fully deflected forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 At approximately 1:22 the starboard undercarriage bogey deflects upward, this appears (to me) to happen just before the aircraft commences the fatal 'bounce'.....Not sure if it's the cause or just a symptom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zyklon Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 21 minutes ago, Belesarius said: That approach speed was super fast. The flex when the fuselage came apart was pretty brutal. Edit: I wonder if the wing sweep mechanism failed? I couldn't tell if the wings were fully deflected forward. It looks like the wings are fully swept forwoards, but the its hard to tell. Are there already some official explanations of what exactly caused this fatal crash? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N-L-M Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Looks like a very high sink rate. The aircraft is fully flared on landing, so either the approach angle was too steep or the plane thought it was several hundred meters higher up than it really was. The bounce is characeristic of extremely heavy landings- the undercarriage can't damp it all out, and the pneumatic springs shove the airframe right back into the air. It looks like the impact may have been violent enough to fully compress the springs to their mechanical stops, at which point the shock gets transferred directly to the aircraft. The shock bending loads on the structure trying to accelerate the heavy nose cantilever from "steep descent" to "rebound" exceeded the load limit and the airframe broke where the bending moment causes maximal stress- at the base of the cantilever. Ramlaen and Sgt.Squarehead 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted January 29, 2019 Report Share Posted January 29, 2019 Karnivora UAV was tested here. Armed with anti-drone nets, handgrenades or VOGs for UGL and 1944 PTAB-2.5 AT bombs, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.