SONIC BOMB

Search underway after F-16s collide over Atlantic

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 07:57:00 -0700

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US military launched a nighttime search for a pilot missing in the Atlantic ocean Thursday after two F-16 fighter jets collided, the US Air Force said.

One of the two aircraft landed safely at an air force base near Charleston in the southeastern state of South Carolina, from where the single-pilot fighters were conducting a night proficiency training mission.

"There is a search underway for one pilot," Air Force Technical Sergeant Vincent Mouzon told AFP, adding that the search was continuing into early Friday.

The US Coast Guard launched search and rescue teams in two vessels and a helicopter to try and locate the pilot some 30 miles (48 kilometers) off the coast of Charleston, a Coast Guard official said.

The jets involved in the collision are stationed at Shaw Air Force Base, where pilots routinely practice with night-vision equipment as part of their combat training.

Sometimes You Wonder...

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:10:00 -0700

There is a story running around about the potential for the V-22 Osprey to replace the C-2A Greyhound as the Navy's carrier onboard delivery (COD) transport. Based on the E-2C Hawkeye wing, engines, tail and cockpit married to a tubby fuselage (the name Greyhound was someone's idea of a joke) the C-2 has a niche mission of running guests, VIPs and urgently needed supplies on and off the boat.

Apparently the idea of the V-22 as the C-2's replacement was floated, and a Navy representative said that it was "one of the ideas being considered". Oddly, too, there are 48 Navy V-22s still in the "program of record" even though nobody in the Navy has identified a need for them in decades. But consider a few facts:

There's no great rush to replace the C-2s. They are just emerging from a rework that should let them fly until 2027, with other upgrades in the works.

From a support viewpoint, they are common in most respects to the brand-new E-2D Hawkeye, so there will be support for them until hell freezes over or the Navy retires the E-2, and I'm not sure which will come first. The V-22 would be a new (and rather maintenance-hungry) arrival.

People have compared the V-22's maximum range with that of the C-2 - but the only way that the V-22 can get anywhere near the C-2's range is to fly at high altitude, as the C-2 does. Unfortunately the V-22 is not pressurized, so the passengers and crew are going to have a cold and uncomfortable ride.

Finally, the "48 Navy V-22s" appear to be a hangover from the program's early four-service days when the Navy was supposed to buy them for CSAR (what, two per battle group?). The last mission I remember for them was an S-3 replacement, using surface combatants as refueling platforms to extend their time-on-station. Oleh:Bill Sweetman

F-35 Helmet Display System To Scare the Bejeezus Out of Enemies

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Sun, 24 May 2009 12:16:00 -0700

This is the new helmet-mounted display system for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. The helmet is designed to provide pilots with binocular-wide field-of-view, give night vision abilities and scare enemy pilots at first sight. It was used for the first time last April, making the F-35 the first combat plane without a cockpit-mounted heads-up display in a very long time.

Beyond making the pilot look like a spooky insect (comic book nerd moment: the Morpheus helmet from Neil

Gaiman's Sandman comes to mind), the F-35 HDMS is loaded with all kinds of amazing goodies, like extreme off-axis targeting and head tracking "providing the pilot with unprecedented situational awareness and tactical capability." The helmet was developed by Vision System International, a company that has other quite weird designs that are already operational, like the DASH and the JHMCS. Technical specs and another image of the F-35 HMDS after the jump.

F-35 HMDS Specs
- Binocular Wide Field-of-View
- Integrated day/night capability with sensor fusion
- Highly accurate head tracking hardware and software
- Digital image source for helmet vision displayed symbology
- Custom helmet shell, liner and suspension system for lightest weight, optimal C.G. and maximum pilot - comfort.

jet tempur AS di bobol Hacker

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Sun, 24 May 2009 12:04:00 -0700

Ribuan data rahasia pesawat tempur paling canggih milik AS, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, telah dibobol hacker selama dua tahun terakhir.

Pembobol berhasil mengacak-acak sistem elektronik pesawat itu melalui komputer-komputer kontraktor Pentagon yang bertugas merancang dan mengembangkan pesawat tersebut. Demikian diungkapkan sejumlah pejabat yang enggan disebutkan namanya karena sensitifnya kasus ini.

Seperti dilaporkan CNN, Rabu (22/4), para hacker juga bisa memasuki sistem kontrol lalu lintas Angkatan Udara AS. Mereka bahkan bisa mendapatkan informasi tentang lokasi penerbangan pesawat militer AS.

F-35 Lightning II, pesawat baru ini dirancang menjadi pesawat tempur yang bisa digunakan bagi Angkatan Laut, Angkatan Darat, maupun Angkatan Udara. Proyek pembuatan pesawat itu bernilai 300 miliar dollar AS.

Sebagian besar data yang dibobol seputar rancang bangun dan statistik kemampuan pesawat, termasuk sistem elektroniknya. Dengan data itu, pembobol bisa dengan mudah menggunakannya untuk membuat pesawat tandingan.

Sementara itu, The Wall Street Journal menyatakan, hacker mampu menyalin beberapa terabyte data mengenai salah satu pesawat termahal di dunia itu. Satu terabyte adalah 1.000 gigabyte. “Tak pernah terjadi yang seperti ini,” kata seorang mantan pejabat.

Belum jelas seberapa parah penerobosan tersebut atau siapa sesungguhnya para peretas itu, tapi data paling peka mengenai proyek pesawat tempur dilaporkan disimpan di komputer yang aman dan tak tersambung ke internet.

Wall Street mengutip beberapa mantan pejabat AS yang tak disebutkan jati diri mereka dan mengatakan serangan itu “tampaknya berasal di China”. Satu laporan belum lama ini dari Pentagon menyatakan, militer China telah membuat “kemajuan pasti” dalam pengembangan teknik bagi peningkatan perang online sebagai bagian dari upaya mengimbangi militer yang kurang berkembang.

Awal April, China membantah laporan The Wall Street Journal bahwa para peretas China dan Rusia telah berusaha mengirim virus ke dalam instalasi listrik AS.

sumber : kompas

F-22 Raptor Jatuh

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:32:00 -0700

Sebuah pesawat tempur canggih F-22A milik Angkatan Udara Amerika Serikat (AS) jatuh di gurun pasir dekat Pangkalan Udara Edwards di negara bagian California. Pesawat berkursi tunggal itu jatuh pada hari Rabu 25 Maret 2009 sekitar pukul 10.30 pagi waktu setempat (Kamis dini hari WIB).

Menurut sumber di Angkatan Udara AS, penyebab kecelakaan masih diselidiki dan nasib pilot masih belum jelas. Menurut stasiun televisi CNN, kecelakaan terjadi saat pesawat itu sedang melakukan uji terbang.

Ini merupakan kali kedua F-22 jatuh. Kejadian Pertama(lihat videonya) berlangsung pada Desember 2004. Dalam suatu uji terbang di tempat yang sama, pesawat buatan Lockheed Martin Corp. itu jatuh, namun pilot berhasil menyelamatkan diri setelah melontarkan diri. Sedangkan pesawatnya sendiri hancur.

F-22A merupakan jet tempur paling canggih saat ini sekaligus paling mahal yang dimiliki Angkatan Udara AS. Harga per unit di banderol sekitar US$150 juta.

Another picture of F-22 Raptor.

Tips Penerbangan

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:18:00 -0700

Demi kenyamanan dalam perjalanan anda, tips berikut ini mungkin berguna ketika anda memutuskan akan menggunakan moda transportasi udara untuk mencapai tujuan anda.

1. Lakukanlah check in minimal 2 jam sebelum jam keberangkatan
2. Nama yang tertera di tiket harus sesuai dengan identitas diri.
3. Pastikan tanggal keberangkatan sebelum membeli tiket karena untuk pembatalan akan dikenakan biaya
sesuai administrasi yang berlaku di maskapai yang anda pilih.
4. 30 menit sebelum berangkat sebaiknya masuk ke pintu keberangkatan (Boarding Gate).
5. Barang / dokumen berharga tidak dimasukkan kedalam bagasi.
6. Barang yang dibawa ke dalam cabin pesawat maksimal 5 kg.
7. Apabila memiliki penerbangan lanjutan international dan domestic sebaiknya berikan selisih waktu
minimal 4 jam sebelum keberangkatan.
8. Penumpang yang holding return ticket, agar melakukan re-konfirmasi di kantor perwakilan setempat,
minimal 1 hari sebelum tanggal keberangkatan.

MiG-29 FULCRUM

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:54:00 -0700

By the late 1970s Western analysts had identified a new fighter under developement for the Soviet Air Force. Since its first sighting at the Ramenskoye test range in 1977, when it got unofficially dubbed with the rather tentative and anonymous RAM-L designation, the Fulcrum has been one of the key aircraft on the military aviation scene. The twin-finned air superiority fighter, now known as the MiG-29, first flew in 1977 and entered service with Soviet fighter regiments in 1983.

In contrast to the primitive electronics of the MiG-25, the MiG-29 has a radar system comparable to wome Western machines. Like the post-Vietnam generation of US fighters, it was an agile aircraft capable of maneuvering in a dog-fight. The MiG-29 was marketed worldwide and equaled or surpassed the F-15C in several areas. Consequently, the MiG-29 was initially a useful export fot the new Russian Republic, though subsequently it was eclipsed by the larger Su-27.

The MiG-29 is superficially similar in layout to the larger Su-27, and unlike counterpart American fighters which are easily distinguished, a close attention to design details is needed to distinguish the two Russian fighters:

The most striking difference is the Su-27's signature centerline fuselage stinger, which protrudes well aft of the engine exhaust, and is entirely absent on the MiG-29, though this feature may not be apparent from all angles.
The vertical stabilizers on the MiG-29 are canted outward, while those of the Su-27 are vertical.
Conversely, the air intakes on the MiG-29 are canted inward, while the air intakes on the Su-27 are vertical.
The Mig-29 fuselage sits entirely above the air intakes, engine pods and exhaust beneath the wings, whereas on the Su-27 there is a distinct droop of the forward fuselage below the upper edges of the air intakes.

The MiG-29's wings are swept-back and tapered with square tips. The Leading- Edge Root Extensions (LERXs) are wide and curved down to the front. LERX begins on the nose below the mid-mount point, and the wings’ trailing edges end at a high-mounted point. Twin jet engines are mounted low and to the sides of the fuselage. Diagonal-shaped air intakes give a box-like appearance, with large exhausts. The fuselage is made of a long, thin, slender body with long, pointed drooping nose. There is a high-mounted bubble canopy. The tail fins have sharply tapered leading edges, canted outward with angular, cutoff tips. Flats are high-mounted on the fuselage, movable, swept-back, and tapered with a negative slant.

There are half a dozen major variants of the MiG-29 recognized under the NATO reporting name taxonomy, while MiG itself accounts for variants too numerous to enumerate.

Fulcrum-A - MiG-29 basic version
Fulcrum-B - MiG-29UB two-seat conversion trainer
Fulcrum-C - MiG-29S bulged and extended spine houses both fuel and avionics
Fulcrum-D - MiG-29K/ MiG29KUB navalized for carrier ops
Fulcrum-E - MiG-29M wide-ranging upgrades, did not enter production
Fulcrum-F - Mig-29OVT/ MiG-35 thrust-vector control engine

The MiG-29 basic version fighter is capable of hitting air targets day and night, in any weather, in free airspace and against the earth background and in active and passive jamming environment. The MiG-29 fighter (export version B) is armed with R-27R1 medium-range missiles with semi-active radar homing heads and R-73E short-range missiles, and unguided weapons (S-24B and S-8 rockets and FAB-250 and FAB-500 free-fall bombs) for hitting ground and sea-surface targets. The aircraft also has a built-in GSh-301 gun (30 mm caliber).

The MiG-29 has a few advantages over its more electronically advanced American counterparts. At about 40 miles apart, the American planes have the advantage because of avionics. At 10 miles the advantage is turning to the MiG. At five miles out, because of the MiG weapons sight and better maneuverability, the advantage is to the MiG. The weapons sight is a helmet-mounted system that allows the missile to follow the line of sight of the pilot's helmet. Where the pilot looks is where it goes.

The MiG-29 is a widely exported aircraft, flown by Iraq, Iran, North Korea, India, Syria, Cuba and Afghanistan, as well as Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Yugoslavia. Aside from MiG-29 basic version B, other modifications of the MiG-29 family, such as MiG-29SE, MiG-29SD, MiG-29SM and MiG-29SMT, can be offered to customers. Moreover, the MiG-29 fighters operated by customers can be upgraded to the level of the SE, SD, SM and SMT versions. The MiG-29UB aircraft and its modifications are manufactured by "Sokol" Joint-Stock Company of Nizhny Novgorod.

MiG Corp. offers its customers three basic versions - the MiG-29SD, MiG-29SM and MiG- 29SMT. They significantly differ from each other in terms of functionality and price. The MiG-29SD is an air superiority fighter adapted for NATO/ ICAO standards. Its advanced version, the MiG-29SM, is a cost-effective multi-role aircraft. Finally, the MiG-29SMT is a generation 4+ fighter equipped with new targeting system, avionics and armament.

The US Department of Defense of the United States of America and the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Moldova reached an agreement to implement the Cooperative Threat Reduction accord signed on June 23, 1997, in Moldova. The Pentagon pounced on the planes after learning Iran had inspected the jets and expressed an interest in adding them to their inventory. Although Iran already flew the less-capable Fulcrum A, it doesn't own any of the more advanced C-models. Of the 21 Fulcrums the United States bought, 14 are the frontline Fulcrum C's, which contain an active radar jammer in its spine, six older A's and one B-model two-seat trainer. This agreement authorized the United States Government to purchase nuclear-capable MiG-29 fighter planes from the Government of Moldova. This was a joint effort by both Governments to ensure that these dual-use military weapons do not fall into the hands of rogue states. From Oct. 20 to Nov. 2, 1997, loadmasters and aerial port experts squeezed two MiGs apiece, sans wings and tails, into the cargo holds of C-17 Globemaster III transports from Charleston Air Force Base, SC. The Charleston airlifters delivered the MiGs to the National Air Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson AFB near Dayton, Ohio. If NAIO can discover how the Fulcrum works, Air Force pilots might gain an edge if they faced the Fulcrum in future combat.

The MiG-29 upgrade project involves two main packages for customers. The first package offers the full upgrade of the aircraft up to the MiG-29SMT level. The second package offers the upgrade of certain aircraft units and aggregates and installation of new completing elements (including those of Western produce) to suit customers' requirements. In the process of upgrade, some share of contract works could be transferred to the aviation plants of the customer's country.

Improvement of aircraft performance includes: increase of flight range, improvement of aircraft maneuverability and upgrade of engines. An increase of the flight range up to 3,000 km can be reached by installation of additional 1800 l conformal tanks. Installation of the in-flight refueling system makes it possible to use both Russian and Western tankers. Due to installation of three external fuel tanks and in-flight refueling system, the aircraft flight range can be increased up to 6200 km;

The RD-33 engine upgrade provides for the thrust-vector control and increase of engine thrust and fuel efficiency. The core upgrade of the engine itself is now at the test bench stage and should be completed in the nearest future. The installation of these engines will enhance the aircraft power-to-weight ratio to the level of fifth-generation aircraft. All these characteristics will allow the operator to keep the aircraft air superiority till 2010-2015.

The aircraft was criticized for the low assigned lifetime (2,500 hours only). However, the operation of the aircraft produced in early 1980s have demonstrated that the lifetime could be extended to 4,000 hours in the event they are maintained properly. This allows extension of their lifetime till 2010-2015. The practice of overhauls has also been revised. Transition to on-condition maintenance has been adopted. The calculations have shown that the operating cost of one air vehicle can be reduced by 15-20% if 4000 hour lifetime is assigned and transition to on-condition maintenance is performed. The worked to increase the engine lifetime have been carried out.

At MAKS-2003 airshow MiG Corp. presented, along with the basic version of MiG-29, its newest modifications – MiG-29K, MiG-29M2, MiG-29SMT, MiG-29OVT. MiG-29K/KUB and MiG-29M/M2 belong to a family of multirole single/twin-seater ship and shore-based fighters accordingly. Aircraft designs are unified up to 90%. Such approach gives several advantages. Serial production becomes cheaper thus influences market price of the aircraft. Exploitation, maintenance and logistics support system as well as the system of pilots and ground personnel training become simpler. The fleet of aircraft in the Air Force can become more unified. All this, along with flight-technical and combat characteristics, makes MiG-29 family quite attractive for potential customers.

HISTORY:
First Flight	(MiG-29) 6 October 1977 (MiG-29M) 1989 (MiG-29UBT) 8 October 1998
Service Entry	1983
CREW:	1 pilot
ESTIMATED COST:	unknown
AIRFOIL SECTIONS:
Wing Root	unknown
Wing Tip	unknown
DIMENSIONS:
Length	56.83 ft (17.32 m)
Wingspan	37.29 ft (11.36 m)
Height	15.54 ft (4.73 m)
Wing Area	408 ft² (38.0 m²)
Canard Area	not applicable
WEIGHTS:
Empty	24,030 lb (10,900 kg)
Typical Load	33,600 lb (15,240 kg)
Max Takeoff	40,785 lb (18,500 kg)
Fuel Capacity	internal: unknown external: unknown
Max Payload	6,614 lb (3,000 kg)
PROPULSION:
Powerplant	(MiG-29A) two Klimov/ Sarkisov RD-33 afterburning turbofans (MiG-29M) two Klimov/ Sarkisov RD-33K afterburning turbofans
Thrust	(RD-33) 36,600 lb (162.8 kN) (RD-33K) 41,450 lb (184.44 kN)
PERFORMANCE:
Max Level Speed	at altitude: 1,520 mph (2,445 km/h) at 36,090 ft (11,000 m), Mach 2.3 at sea level: 805 mph (1,200 km/h), Mach 1.06
Initial Climb Rate	65,000 ft (19,800 m) / min
Service Ceiling	60,700 ft (18,500 m)
Range	typical: 810 nm (1,500 km) 340 nm (630 km) with max payload ferry: 1,570 nm (2,900 km)
g-Limits	unknown
ARMAMENT:
Gun	one 30-mm GSh-301 cannon (150 rds)
Stations	six or seven external hardpoints (MiG-29K) nine external hardpoints (MiG-29M) eight external hardpoints
Air-to-Air Missile	R-60/AA-8 Aphid, R-27/AA-10 Alamo, R-73/AA-11 Archer, R-77/AA-12 Adder
Air-to-Surface Missile	AS-12, AS-14, AS-17
Bomb	free-fall, guided, cluster bombs
Other	rocket pods, ECM pods, munitions dispensers
KNOWN VARIANTS:
9-01	Pre-production model
MiG-29 'Fulcrum-A'	First production model, prototypes included three slightly different models with varying types of nose gear, fin, and rudder arrangements
MiG-29UB 'Fulcrum-B'	Two-seat trainer with radar removed
MiG-29S 'Fulcrum-C'	Improved single-seat fighter for serial production with an enlarged fuselage, new avionics, and a larger fuel capacity
MiG-29KVP	MiG-29K prototype built to test catapult takeoff and arrestor gear systems, may also have been used as a trainer for the MiG-29K
MiG-29K 'Fulcrum-D'	Navalized one-seat multipurpose fighter for use on aircraft carriers; Russian production cancelled after trials completed but a derivative was later purchased by India
MiG-29KU	Trainer version of the MiG-29K with a modified nose adding a separate cockpit for the instructor forward and below the normal cockpit; cancelled
MiG-29KUB	Trainer version of the MiG-29K purchased by India and the Russian Navy
MiG-29B	Two-seat version, details unknown
MiG-29UBT	Two-seat strike model designed for special operations
MiG-29SD	Export version of the MiG-29S
MiG-29SE	Export version of the MiG-29S with a new ECM jammer
MiG-29N	Export version for Malaysia similar to the MiG-29SD and optimized for air defense but equipped with in-flight refueling capability, updated communications equipment, improved navigation systems, and updated engines
MiG-29UBN	Two-seat trainer exported to Malaysia
MiG-29SM	Improved MiG-29S/SE with in-flight refueling capability, increased payload, and the ability to carry improved air-to-air missiles plus a TV display compatible with the KAB-500KR guided bomb or the Kh-29T missile, also capable of carrying the Kh-31A and Kh-31P missiles
MiG-29SMT	Modernization program for MiG-29SM export models with an improved cockpit, improved avionics, and increased range
MiG-29SMT-2	"Second stage" modernization program for export models that provides a new radar, improved engines, revised ECM equipment, a digital fly-by-wire control system, and compatibility with numerous adbanced air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons
MiG-29SMTK	Carrier-based export model offered to India, includes folding wings, arrestor gear, and improved navigation systems
MiG-29M 'Fulcrum-E'	Improved fighter with fly-by-wire controls, upgraded engines, a modified tail and wing layout, a revised canopy, and the ability to carry guided-munitions
MiG-29MaE or MiG-29MEh or MiG-29EM	Export version of the MiG-29M
MiG-29MR	Reconnaissance version of the MiG-29M
MiG-29UM	Two-seat combat-capable trainer version of the MiG-29M
MiG-29M2 'Fulcrum-F'	Two-seat variant of the MiG-29M
MiG-29 'Fulcrum-Plus'	MiG-29 variant equipped with thrust-vectoring nozzles and canards, not believed to have been completed or flown due to financial problems
MiG-29OVT	Early designation for the MiG-35
MiG-29AS	Upgrade program for single-seat MiG-29 fighters used by Slovakia that includes installation of new IFF equipment and American radios while also adding an improved navigation system; 10 converted
MiG-29UBS	Upgrade program for MiG-29UB trainers used by Slovakia; 2 converted
MiG-33	Believed to be a designation for an export version of the MiG-29M
MiG-35	Upgraded model based on the MiG-29M2 primarily for the export market
KNOWN COMBAT RECORD:	Iraq - Operation Desert Storm (Iraq, 1991) Chechnya (Russia, 1994-present) Bosnia - Operation Deliberate Force (Serbia, 1995) Kosovo - Operation Allied Force (Serbia, 1999)
KNOWN OPERATORS:	Algeria, Al Quwwat al Jawwawiya al Jaza'eriya (Algerian Air Force) Angola, Força Aérea Popular de Angola (Angolan People's Air Force) Armenia (Armenian Air Force) Azerbaijan (Azerbaijan Air Force) Bangladesh, Bangladesh Biman Bahini (Bangladeshi Defense Force Air Wing) Belarus, Voyenno Vozdushnyye Sily (Belarus Air Force) Bulgaria, Bulgarski Voenno Vozdushni Sili (Bulgarian Air Defense Force Military Aviation) Croatia, Hrvatske Zracne Snage (Croatian Air Force) Cuba, Defensa Antiaerea y Fuerza Aérea Revolucionaria (Anti-Aircraft Defense and Revolutionary Air Force) Czechoslovakia, Ceskoslovenske Letectvo (Czechoslovak Air Force) Czech Republic, Cesk Letectvo a Protivzbusna Obrana (Czech Air Force and Air Defense) East Germany, Luftstreitkräfte/Luftverteidigung (Air Force/Air Defense Force) Germany, Deutsche Luftwaffe (German Air Force) Hungary, Magyar Légierö (Hungarian Red Air Arm) Hungary, Magyar Honvedseg Repülö Csapatai (Hungarian Air Defense Group) India, Bharatiya Vayu Sena (Indian Air Force) India (Indian Naval Air Squadron) Iran (Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force) Iraq, Al Quwwat Al Jawwiya al Iraqiya (Iraqi Air Force) Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan Air Force) Lebanon, Al Quwwat al-Jawwiya al-Lubnamia (Lebanese Air Force) Malaysia, Tentera Udara Diraja Malaysia (Royal Malaysian Air Force) Moldova (Moldovan Air Force) North Korea (Korean People's Army Air Force) Peru, Fuerza Aérea del Perú (Peruvian Air Force) Poland, Sily Powietrzne Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej (Polish Air Force) Poland, Polska Wojska Lotnicze i Obrony Powietrznej (Polish Air Defense and Aviation Force) Romania, Fortele Aeriene Române (Romanian Air Force) Russia, Voyenno Vozdushniye Sili (Russian Air Force) Russia, Aviatsiya Voyenno-Morskoyo Flota Sily Rossii (Russian Naval Aviation) Serbia, Vazduhoplovstvo i PVO Vojske Srbije (Serbian Air Force) Slovakia, Velitelstvo Vzdusnych Sil (Slovak Air Force) Sri Lanka (Sri Lankan National Air Force) Sudan, Silakh al Jawwiya As'Sudaniya (Sudanese Air Force) Syria, Al Quwwat al-Jawwiya al Arabiya as-Souriya (Syrian Air Force) Turkmenistan, Voyenno-Vozdushneyye Sily (Turkmenistan Air Force) Ukraine, Viys'kovo-Povitriani Syly Ukrayiny (Ukraine Military Air Forces) Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Voyenno Vozdushniye Sili (Soviet Air Force) Uzbekistan (Uzbek Air Force) Yemen, Al Quwwat al Jawwiya al Yemeniya (Unified Yemen Air Force) Yugoslavia, Ratno Vazduhoplovstvo i Protiv Vazdusna Odbrana (Serbia and Montenegro Air and Air Defence Force)
3-VIEW SCHEMATIC:

Rusia Larang Terbang Semua MIG-29 Setelah Kecelakaan

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:50:00 -0700

MIG-29

Angkatan Udara Rusia mengatakan telah melarang terbang semua pesawat tempur jet MIG-29 setelah salah satu pesawat itu jatuh di Siberia selatan.

Seorang pejabat Angkatan Udara Rusia mengatakan hari ini, Angkatan Udara memutuskan penghentian penerbangan semua pesawat itu sampai penyebab kecelakaan dipastikan. Menurut para pejabat pesawat itu jatuh sekitar 60 kilometer dari lapangan terbang Domna di wilayah Chita.

Mereka mengatakan pilot pesawat dapat melepaskan diri dan dalam kondisi memuaskan.

Tidak ada korban ataupun kerusakan di lokasi dimana pesawat itu jatuh.

Pesawat tempur jet MIG-29 bermesin-ganda itu merupakan kekuatan inti utama Angkatan Udara Rusia. Oleh:voanews

Woman Captain

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:45:00 -0700

As the airliner pushed back from the gate, the flight attendant gave the passengers the usual information regarding seat belts, etc. Finally, she said, "Now sit back and enjoy your trip while your captain, Judith Campbell, and crew take you safely to your destination."

Joe, sitting in the eighth row thought to himself, "Did I hear her right? Is the captain a woman?"

When the attendants came by with the drink cart, he said, "Did I understand you right? Is the captain a woman?"

"Yes," said the attendant, "in fact, this entire crew is female."

"My God," said Joe, "I'd better have two scotch and sodas. I don't know what to think of all those women up there in the cockpit."

"That's another thing," said the attendant, "We no longer call it the cockpit. Now it's the box office."

Pilot Recruitment

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:41:00 -0700

The chief of staff of the US Air Force decided that he would personally intervene in the recruiting crisis affecting all of our armed services. He directed a nearby Air Force base that will be opened and that all eligible young men and women be invited. As he and his staff were standing near a brand new F- 15 Fighter, a pair of twin brothers who looked like they had just stepped off a Marine Corps recruiting poster walked up to them.

The chief of staff walked up to them, stuck out his hand and introduced himself. He looked at the first young man and asked, "Son, what skills can you bring to the Air Force?" The young man looks at him and says, "I'm a pilot!" The general gets all excited, turns to his aide and says, "Get him in today, all the paper work done, everything, do it!" The aide hustles the young man off.

The general looks at the second young man and asked, "What skills to you bring to the Air Force?" The young man says, "I chop wood!" "Son," the general replies, "we don't need wood choppers in the Air Force, what do you know how to do?" "I chop wood!"

"Young man," huffs the general, "you are not listening to me, we don't need wood choppers, this is the 20th century!" "Well," the young man says, "you hired my brother!" "Of course we did," says the general, "he's a pilot!" The young man rolls his eyes and says, "Dang it, I have to chop it before he can pile it!"

The ROKAF at Fifty

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:38:00 -0700

Fifty years ago this June, North Korean troops stormed south of the 38th parallel, the dividing line between North and South Korea established at the end of World War II.

The invasion marks the beginning of the Korean War and the earliest days of the Republic of Korea Air Force. Today, the Republic of Korea defends that same parallel with a modern military that includes Korean-built KF-16s.

ROKAF F-51 pilots flew over
8,000 missions during the Korean War.

The Peoples Army of North Korea captured Seoul, the capital of the Republic of Korea, three days after the invasion in 1950. By early August, ROK forces held only a small portion of southeastern Korea from the Korean Strait in the west to just north of Pusan on the east coast. North Korea’s overwhelming strength at the beginning of the war fueled the quick advance. Its 135,000 troops outnumbered South Korean forces by more than 40,000. Its army was seasoned from fighting alongside Soviet and Chinese forces against the Japanese during World War II. North Korea had 120 tanks; South Korea had none. The north also had 180 aircraft (mostly Soviet-built YAK fighters and attack bombers). South Korea had only twenty liaison aircraft (L-4s and L-5s) and ten newly purchased T-6 trainers.

As a result of a United Nations resolution on 27 June 1950, twenty-one countries came to the aid of South Korea. By late summer, the UN troop strength exceeded that of North Korea. UN and ROK forces began counterattacks from Pusan in September. In mid-September, Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s bold landing of UN forces at Inchon, a port city halfway up the west coast on the Yellow Sea, turned the tide of the war. The North Koreans were forced out of Seoul by the end of September and soon after were pushed all the way back to the Yalu River, Korea’s northern border with China.

The momentum shifted back to the north in late 1950 when China entered the conflict. By early January 1951, Chinese and reconstituted North Korean forces captured Seoul. UN forces retook Seoul in March and pushed farther north. The battle line shifted north and south until late summer when it consolidated near the original starting point at the 38th parallel. A relative stalemate — marked by a series of peace talks, major offensives, and hill battles — continued for almost two years. A cease-fire signed on 27 July 1953 effectively ended the war.

The precise number of casualties during the Korean War is not known. Estimates of the total losses range between 1.5 and 2 million. Total casualties for the UN forces (killed, wounded, or missing) were almost 500,000, including 300,000 South Koreans. Civilian casualties incurred in South Korea totaled one million. Over forty percent of the industry and more than thirty percent of the homes in South Korea were destroyed.

The Korean War is often termed “the forgotten war” in the United States, where most Americans derive their knowledge of the conflict from warmed-over episodes of M*A*S*H. Koreans, however, have clearer memories and a more distinct understanding. Their country remains divided by a four-kilometer buffer zone that stretches the width of the peninsula. The armistice that ended the fighting, still in place today, amounts to a cease-fire — not a formal peace treaty. North Korea maintains a sizable force near the buffer zone, which is a thirty-minute drive from Seoul. North Korean forces have a variety of chemical and biological weapons at their disposal as well as missiles and heavy artillery that can deliver these and other weapons at long ranges. The North test-launched a multi-stage rocket in August 1998, sending it over Japan and into the Pacific.

Today’s North Korean army consists of twenty corps with 4,000 tanks, 2,300 armored vehicles, and 12,000 artillery pieces. Their navy operates ten battle groups and some 570 vessels, including ninety submarines and 260 amphibious landing craft. Their air force includes almost 800 fighters, 80 bombers, over 500 support aircraft, and 320 helicopters. Four long tunnels built by North Korea under the demilitarized zone have been uncovered since 1974. The tunnels are large enough to allow the passage of 30,000 armed troops in one hour. North Korean patrol boats and ROK navy vessels have exchanged gunfire as recently as June 1999.

Unsurprisingly, South Korea places a priority on national defense. The country’s military counters the numerical superiority of the North Korean threat with more modern equipment and a well-trained fighting force. The army consists of eleven corps that operate about 2,000 tanks, 2,300 armored vehicles, 5,000 pieces of field artillery, and 600 helicopters. The ROK Navy operates three fleets and some 200 vessels including ten submarines and sixty aircraft. The ROK Air Force consists of about 800 aircraft organized into eleven wings, which includes one composite wing, one tactical airlift wing, and nine tactical fighter wings. About 130 F-16s constitute the core of the ROK fighter force.

A good portion of ROKAF’s F-16 fleet is located at Sosan Air Base, southeast of Taejon in the central part of the country. Sosan, the newest base in Korea, is home to four F-16 squadrons that comprise the 20th Fighter Wing, which was formed in December 1996. The F-16s at Sosan are referred to as KF-16s to indicate their Korean origin at the F-16 production facilities at Sachon in the southern part of the country.

“This wing is the most modern F-16 unit in Korea and probably the most modern F-16 unit in the world,” notes Gen. Chang, the wing commander. “All of our aircraft here are Block 52 KF-16s. The differences between our air force’s Block 32 and Block 52 F-16s in terms of capability are almost revolutionary. The KF-16 performs flawlessly in both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. Its friend-or-foe interrogator system combined with AMRAAM allows us to intercept enemy aircraft in beyond-visual-range conditions. Improved avionics make it possible to target several aircraft at a time. Also provisions for close-in fighting have been expanded. The KF-16’s LANTIRN has remarkably boosted its capability for night fighting. The precision guidance system works well with laser-guided munitions and Maverick air-to-ground missiles. Additionally, the Block 52’s HARM capability allows us to dominate the air space. The KF-16 successfully performs a variety of missions and it improves on the excellent repair and maintenance reputation set by our Block 32 aircraft. Our mission capable rate hovers around ninety percent.”

Gen. Chang commands the
KF-16 wing at Sosan AB.

As the first Korean pilot to fly an F-16, Gen. Chang speaks from experience that includes almost 4,500 total hours in the F-4, F-5, and F-16. He was the first Korean pilot to ferry an F-16 from the United States to Korea as well.

“The KF-16 is the cutting-edge, the latest aircraft in the Korean Air Force,” says Gen. Chang. “It’s also one of the main pillars in the Korean armed forces. We have the best aircraft, pilots, and excellent maintenance crew. The KF-16 serves as a powerful deterrent against North Korea in times of peace and a formidable weapon in times of war.”

The four squadrons at Sosan fly with precision-guided bombs and LANTIRN navigation and targeting pods. Unlike current USAF F-16s, the KF-16 can handle both HARM and LANTIRN missions.

(An avionics program in work for USAF Block 50 and Block 40 F-16 fleets will provide a common capability in the near future.)

The advanced capabilities of the KF-16 are complemented by the modern facilities of Sosan Air Base, which sets a high standard for other ROKAF bases. Maintenance hangars are well lit, spotless, and extremely organized. Squadron buildings match some of the best in the United States. Well fortified NATO-style aircraft hangars flank long twin runways. The base has new living quarters, churches, athletic fields, and many other facilities to improve the living conditions for ROKAF personnel.

“Quality of life issues are as important in our air force as they are in yours,” notes Gen. Chang. “Even though military service is required in our country, conscripts are allowed to choose which branch they want to serve for periods up to thirty months. So, the ROKAF must try to attract conscripts. The service must also improve living conditions to retain its best and brightest officers. Korea’s thriving economy adds to the challenge.”

Future KF-16 pilots may also be attracted to ROKAF by its proud history, which has been popularized in Korean-produced movies and television shows. These entertainment venues can draw on more than fifty years of aerial accomplishments that officially began in December 1949 when the ROKAF was established. But Korea can trace its aviation heritage back to 1922 when An Chang-nam became the first Korean pilot to fly in his country’s air space. Military aviation started about the same time. Korean expatriates desiring to support the independence movement in their homeland went through flight training at aviation schools in other countries. Korea’s first six military pilots received their training in Curtiss JN-4s in 1920 at the Redwood flight school in northern California.

Choi Yong-duk, who later played a leading role in establishing ROKAF, set up an organization called the Air Force Foundation Committee in 1943 to train Korean pilots in China to fight in the independence war against Japan. When World War II ended, thousands of other Koreans involved in the independence war returned home. Yong-duk and several others set up several private organizations that promoted aviation. Yong-duk, Lee Young-Moo, and Chung Jin-Il integrated these organizations in August 1946 to form the Korean Aviation Establishment Committee. As relations between the north and south became more confrontational in the late 1940s, the committee began negotiations with US forces in Korea to establish an aviation unit under the control of the ministry of national defense. The unit, equipped with L-4 and L-5 liaison aircraft, was acti-vated in May 1948. An air force academy was established at Kimpo Air Base eight months later.

As the communist forces of North Korea strengthened their airpower with Soviet equipment and as US forces withdrew from the peninsula in June 1949, South Korea asked for more military aid, including fighter aircraft. The United States denied the request to avoid increasing tensions in the region. Republic of Korea President Lee Seung-Man went about finding other avenues for procuring military hardware to respond to the North Korean military build up. A nationwide donation campaign called “National Flag” collected money for aircraft. The funds raised were used to buy ten T-6 trainers. The aircraft were rolled out in ceremonies at Yoido Air Base in May 1950 and named “National Foundation Aircraft” to commemorate the public’s part in providing them for the country’s defense. The timing could not have been more portentous — the war began less than six weeks later.

In the first days of the war, ROKAF pilots made heroic but vain attempts to turn back North Korean forces by dropping hand grenades on enemy tanks from their liaison aircraft. The day after the initial invasion, ten ROKAF pilots were rushed to Idasuke Air Base in Japan to receive conversion training for the F-51 Mustang. They returned to Taegu Air Base in South Korea less than two weeks later to take part in the war. ROKAF operations were soon moved to Jinhae Air Base near Pusan as ROKAF pilots sup-ported the Naktong River defense line around that city after the initial retreat.

Col. Lee commands
the 123rd FS.

ROKAF forces became more proficient as the war progressed. In October 1951, ROKAF F-51 pilots conducted their first independent air operations against enemy supply lines. South Korean pilots later distinguished themselves by destroying the Sung-Ho-Ri iron bridge after many unsuccessful attempts by US bombers in January 1952. Other memorable operations include the Pyung-Yang bombing operation in August 1952 and a series of highly effective close air support missions in March 1953.

From its first mission in July 1950 to the armistice in July 1953, ROKAF F-51 pilots completed about 8,500 combat missions. Thirty-nine out of a total of 115 ROKAF combat pilots flew 100 combat missions or more. Seventeen ROKAF pilots lost their lives during the war. The service grew from a meager force of twenty-two liaison aircraft and 1,100 troops at the beginning of the war to 118 aircraft and about 11,500 troops at war’s end.

ROKAF and PACAF F-16 pilots
regularly fly joint missions.

From the end of the war to today, ROKAF has sought prudent and effective ways to increase its capabilities and to maintain technological superior-ity. The air force entered the jet age in 1955 with F-86F fighters and T-33 trainers. ROKAF soon took over air traffic control and warning tasks and established its own communications and aircraft control and warning units. The service entered the supersonic jet age in 1965 with the F-5A. F-4D fighters were introduced in 1968. ROKAF entered the modern age of fighter aircraft with Block 32 F-16s in April 1986. The first Korea-produced KF-16 was delivered in formal ceremonies in December 1994, followed two years later by the first all-KF-16 wing at Sosan Air Base.

The close ties established between South Korea and the United States during the Korean War con-tinue in the form of economic trade and national defense. The longtime US security commitment to the ROK has both legal and moral sanctions. US legal obligations fall under UN Security Council resolutions of 1950, by which the United States leads the United Nations Command in Korea. The ROK/US Mutual Security Agreement of 1954 commits both nations to assist each other in case of outside attack. The United States is also a partner in the operations of the ROK/US Combined Forces Command, an integrated headquarters established by the two governments in 1978, and is responsible for planning the defense of South Korea and, if necessary, directing the ROK/US combat forces to defeat enemy aggression.

Major elements of US forces in Korea include the Eighth US Army, the Seventh Air Force, and US Naval Forces Korea. Together with ROK forces, these US forces share the rigors of maintaining a deterrent to another North Korean attack.

Cooperation with United States forces comes in two primary forms for ROKAF— large-scale exercises and pilot exchanges. Large-scale exercises, such as Ulchi Focus Lens, Foal Eagle, Cope Jade, and Hokuk Training, improve the mutual understanding of unit operations, unit structures, weapon systems, and strategies and tactics of each service from both countries. Pilot exchanges include a buddy wing program in which several PACAF pilots fly with ROKAF units for a few days, and maintenance crews get to service PACAF aircraft. These exchanges improve communication and understanding between ROKAF and PACAF personnel. ROKAF also sends exchange pilots to PACAF units for longer terms.

“Both of these forms of cooperation are critical to our national defense,” notes Col. Lee, who commands the 123rd Fighter Squadron at Sosan. “These exercises and exchanges improve the ability of our joint operations in wartime. They also increase understanding between Korean and American forces and help us detect and solve problems. We are always looking for better ways to work with our American counterparts to ensure our nation’s defense.”

These KF-16s from Sosan AB form
the first line of defense for South Korea.

“Joint exercises with the USAF are something of an absolute necessity to accomplish what we are supposed to in case of war,” adds Gen. Chang. “A systematic and detailed plan has been made at the levels of Air Force Component Commander and Air Force Operation Commander with respect to the concept and procedure of operation. Despite its short history, the 20th Fighter Wing at Sosan performs a key role in these joint operations.”

US Air Force operations in Korea fall under the command of the 7th Air Force, which is headquartered at Osan Air Base, just south of Seoul. The 7th Air Force plans and directs air component operations in the Republic of Korea and in the Northwest Pacific in support of US Pacific Command, United Nations Command, US/ROK Combined Forces Command, and US Forces Korea. The 7th develops the total air campaign and reinforcement plans for ROK defense and sustains mission readiness of 117 operational units and 8,300 US Air Force personnel.

“We have a great ally with ROKAF, which I would match with any air force in the world,” says Lt. Gen. Charles Heflebower, who commands the 7th Air Force. “They are very capable. ROKAF officers and leadership are professional, and they take their job very seriously. ROKAF pilots fly a lot and train a lot. They are scrambling almost every day, reacting to potential threats. Many of these units are located a minute or two from the front, so they have no margin for error.”

Korea is an intense assignment for US military personnel. Over ninety percent deploy to Korea without their families. “Few airmen volunteer to come to Korea,” notes Heflebower. “Who wants to tell their spouse and children that they want to be away from them for a year? We try to make the assignment more attractive by giving people more weight in choosing their next assignments. Still, most soldiers come to Korea with heavy feet.

“Once they get here, though, that attitude changes,” Heflebower continues. “Serving in Korea is unlike any other assignment in the Air Force. Everyone here is focused on the mission. We have very few distractions. We constantly remind our people that we are not at peace. The situation is a formal cease-fire, a pause in a war. Less than fifty miles from here, the North Koreans have arrayed a huge capability in artillery, infantry divisions, and a good size air force. People have to be ready to fight as soon as they arrive in Korea.”

As a required part of their orientation, newcomers to Osan are sent for a guided tour to the demilitarized zone at Panmunjom. “That tour provides a good reminder of why we serve here,” says Heflebower. “The north and south were the same country for almost 5,000 years. They have been separated for about fifty years, and the difference between the two countries today is huge. The south is bright, colorful, and self-sufficient with a well-educated and industrious population. The north is a wasteland. Every American should come here and take a tour of the DMZ. They will feel grateful for the freedoms they enjoy in the United States.

“We are here to help a nation that shares our values against a nation that has no values,” Heflebower sums up. “We value the human spirit and rights of the individual. I won’t even say that the north values the state—it values a regime. The soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines that serve here understand the situation. When people return home, they are better from the experience. They get a lot of real-world training in that one year. They also gain a better appreciation for what we are protecting in this region and for what they have in America.”

Many Americans and most Koreans will certainly reflect this June on the war that began fifty years ago. With reflection comes hope. And the next fifty years will certainly see renewed efforts — if not true success — at reuniting the two Koreas through peaceful interchanges and cooperative programs that have begun recently by South Korea under its “Sunshine Policy.” A strong defense is a key to this policy of engagement and critical to South Korea’s larger geopolitical role in Southeast Asia. So, the coming years will also bring improvements in South Korea’s military as it becomes more technologically advanced and self-sufficient. The country’s aviation industry is taking part in these efforts. With experience gained from licensed production programs like the KF-16, South Koreans are developing their own military aircraft in the form of the KTX-2, recently named the T-50.

“With a sense of pride and mission as a major fighting force,” reflects Gen. Chang, “the ROKAF is here to deter any possible provocation of the enemy and to defend our country’s air space. Our air force will grow stronger strategically to ensure the security of the country in the twenty-first century and to prepare for the time when Korea will be reunited into one country.”Oleh:Eric Hehs

Schlemming with the Fulcrum

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:35:00 -0700

Pilots of the 510th Fighter Squadron and Germany's Jagdgeschwader 73 train as adversaries but relax as friends. This deployment was the first large-scale encounter with the MiG-29 Fulcrum for the US Air Force.

Four Cyrillic letters adorn a toggle switch in the MiG-29 cockpit. The letters spell a word that sounds like schlemm. The switch activates a helmet-mounted sight system used to designate targets for one of the most formidable air-to-air missiles any USAF fighter pilot may ever face, and actually ever face-the AA-11 Archer. The system allows pilots of the MiG-29 to shoot the thrust-vectored Archer where their planes are not pointing. With a turn of the head, they can target opposing aircraft up to forty-five degrees off the nose of the MiG. When MiG-29 pilots of Germany's Jagdgeschwader 73 (Fighter Wing 73) use the helmet-mounted sight system in simulated engagements, they call it a schlemm shot. (Not surprising, schlemm means grand slam in German.)

Only a handful of US Air Force fighter pilots have ever been schlemmed. Those who have, though, consider themselves lucky. They have experienced what others have only read about or encountered in simulations. With experience comes credibility. And as of last May, the most credible squadron with it comes to fighting the MiG-29 is the 510th Fighter Squadron from Aviano Air Base in northern Italy.

Most people associate Aviano with Deny Flight Operations over Bosnia. Many pilots of the 510th Squadron and its sister F-16 squadron, the 555th, have been flying over Bosnia from Aviano for almost three years without much attention. Until recently, that is. These days, the squadrons fly these missions for two-month shifts every six months. The units spend two of the remaining four months training at Aviano and two months deployed. On one. such deployment last year to Decimomannu Air Base on the southern tip of Sardinia, Capt. Will Sparrow of the 510th learned about an upcoming German MiG-29 visit to the island. The Fulcrums, he heard, were looking for aerial adversaries. 'We were on the phone about thirty seconds later getting our name on the books to come back down here," Sparrow said.

A few months after that call, the 510th headed back to Sardinia with ten F16s and an able support team for a four-week MiG-29 Fest. The JG-73 sent ten Fulcrums and fifteen air-to-air German F-4Fs. The pilots flew a variety of setups, from simple one F-16 flying basic fighter maneuvers against one MiG-29, to more complex encounters of four F-16s teamed against four MiG-29s. Two F-16s also flew against two MiG-29s and two F-4Fs. "We called that two v two-plus two," explained Sparrow. "The MiGs practice a lot of tactics with the F-4s to make use of the F-4's radar."

The more complex engagements were simultaneously monitored by ground controllers who used the air combat maneuvering instrumentation facilities at Decimomannu to guide the aerial combatants. The ACMI facilities were also used by the aircrews to review the engagements. "Decimomannu is a fantastic place to train," said Sparrow, who was in charge of the deployment for the 510th. "The base has an ACMI that can't be beat for debriefing. And they have a bombing range nearby at Cappa Frasca."

"I hope this deployment receives a lot of attention because it deserves a lot," Sparrow continued. [Pictured on the left] "Not because we're here, but because we're learning about aircraft very similar to the German MiGs, aircraft that could cause us a lot of problems. As for what we expected before coming down here, we would get ten different answers from ten different pilots. We've heard a lot of things about the MiG-29. We all read the same stuff and get the same information. But we never really know what to believe. We now know they are a great adversary. They were everything I expected and more. Nothing can substitute for training like this. We go out and fight ourselves a lot and we try to make those encounters as realistic as possible. But this is the real thing. And these MiG pilots are really well trained.

"Germany's MiG29 unit is based at Laage Air Base near Rostock on the Baltic coast. Before German reunification in 1990, the aircraft flew for the former East Germany and the Warsaw Pact. After reunification, the Fulcrums became a test wing for the German Air Force. In 1993, the unit became an operational wing. Its twenty-four Fulcrums and twenty-eight pilots officially became a combined wing with an F-4 unit from Pferdsfeld Air Base in 1994. The unit formally maintains an alert role and polices the air over the five republics that comprise the former East Germany. Many of Germany's MiG29 pilots are former F-4 pilots who were trained in the United States. These pilots volunteered to convert to the Fulcrum, which currently represents the most advanced fighter in the German Luftwaffe.

The JG73 has also retained a number of former East German MiG-29 pilots who have had to tailor their knowledge of the airplane to fit western style tactics. Most of the Fulcrum pilots have less than 300 hours in the aircraft. Only a few have over 400 hours. No one in the unit, including former East German pilots, has over 500 hours in the MiG29.

This was not the JG-73's first encounter with advanced western aircraft. The wing flew against Dutch F-16s at Decimomannu last year and against Spanish F18s for two weeks in 1993. The Germans deploy to Sardinia because the ACMI facilities are there and because air-to-air combat training is restricted over the former East Germany, which covers Laage Air Base. The restriction, however, may be dropped later this year.

"The highlight of this deployment for me has been the BFM [basic fighter maneuvering, i.e., modern dog fighting] against a clean F-16C," explained Capt. Oliver Prunk, the operations officer for the JG-73. "The F-16C performs significantly better in terms of power when compared with the F-16A. I was also pleased with the proficiency of the American pilots. They take their jobs very seriously. We try to be the best adversary we can. I think they were surprised with the performance of the MiG-29 and with what we can do with it."

The most impressive aspect of the Fulcrum's performance for the American pilots was its low-speed maneuverability. "In a low-speed fight, fighting the Fulcrum is similar to fighting an F-18 Hornet," explained Capt. Mike McCoy of the 510th. "But the Fulcrum has a thrust advantage over the Hornet. An F-18 can really crank its nose around if you get into a slow-speed fight, but it has to lose altitude to regain the energy, which allows us to get on top of them. The MiG has about the same nose authority at slow speeds, but it can regain energy much faster. Plus the MiG pilots have that fortyfive-degree cone in front of them into which they can fire an Archer and eat you up."

The off-boresight missile, as described in the opening scenario, proved to be a formidable threat, though not an insurmountable one. "Some of their capabilities were more wicked than we originally thought," said McCoy. "We had to respect the helmet-mounted sight, which made our decisions to anchor more difficult. In other words, when I got close in, I had to consider that helmet mounted sight. Every time I got near a Fulcrum's nose, I was releasing flares to defeat an Archer coming off his rail."

"Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG's helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight," explained Lt. Col. Gary West, commander of the 510th. "We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected. We encountered some positions-particularly in an across-the-circle shot or a high-low shot and in a slow-speed fight-where a Fulcrum pilot can look up forty-five degrees and take a shot while his nose is still off. That capability has changed some of the pilots' ideas on how they should approach a MiG29 in a neutral fight. Below 200 knots, the MiG-29 has incredible nose-pointing capability down to below 100 knots. The F-16, however, enjoys an advantage in the 200knot-plus regime. At higher speeds, we can power above them to go to the vertical. And our turn rate is significantly better. By being patient and by keeping airspeed up around 325 knots, an F-16 can bring the MiG29 to its nose. But the pilot must still be careful of the across-the-circle shot with that helmet-mounted display.

The MiG-29's avionics are a shortcoming. Its radar-warning and navigational equipment are not up to Western standards.

Capt. Mike Raubback, a Fulcrum pilot of the JG-73

"We have done very well on neutral BFM engagements," continued West. "We have tried single- and two-circle fights, depending on how much lead turn we had at the merge. Without exception, we have been able to use finesse or power to an advantage after at least a couple of turns. I don't think any F-16 pilot has gotten defensive and stayed there. As always, and this applies to any airplane, success depends on who is flying."

Three pilots from the 510th received backseat rides in one of the JG-73's two-seat MiG-29 trainers. Capt. Sparrow was one of them. "The MiG is harder to fly than the F-16," said Sparrow. "The Soviet airframe is great, but the avionics are not user friendly. After flying in the backseat of the Fulcrum, I got a feel for how spoiled we are in the F-16. I always felt good about the F-16, but I wouldn't trade flying the F-16 for any other aircraft, foreign or domestic.

"The Fulcrum doesn't have the crisp movements of an F-16," Sparrow continued. 'You need to be an octopus in the MiG29 to work the avionics. Those German pilots have it tough. Just to get a simple lock on and fire a missile may take a half dozen hands-off switches or so. We can do the same with a flick of the thumb while we are looking at the HUD. F-16 pilots also have a significant sight advantage. A couple of hundred feet advantage can make a difference in air-to-air combat; the actual difference is more significant than that. MiG29 pilots have a tough time checking their six o'clock. Their canopy rail is higher. They can lose sight of us even when flying BFM."

"Their visibility is not that good," agreed McCoy, one of the other two pilots who enjoyed a spin in the Fulcrum. "Their disadvantage is a real advantage for us. F-16 pilots sit high in the cockpit. All the MiG29 pilots who sat in our cockpit wanted to look around with the canopy closed. They were impressed that they could turn around and look at the tail and even see the engine can."

"Besides visibility, I expected better turning performance," McCoy continued. "The MiG29 is not a continuous nine-g machine like the F-16. I tried to do some things I normally do in an F-16. For example, I tried a high-AOA guns jink. I got the Fulcrum down to about 180 knots and pulled ninety degrees of bank and pulling heavy g's I then went to idle and added a little rudder to get the jet to roll with ailerons. The pilot took control away from me in the middle of these maneuvers because the airplane was about to: snap. I use the F-16's quick roll rate like this all the time with no problem.

"I also tried to do a 250-knot loop," McCoy recalled. "I went to mil power and stabilized. As I went nose high, I asked for afterburner. I had to hamfist the airplane a little as I approached the top of the loop. I was still in afterburner at about 15,000 feet and the jet lost control. The nose started slicing left and right. I let go of the stick and the airplane righted itself and went down. It couldn't finish the loop. In the F-16, we can complete an entire loop at 250 knots."

Like Sparrow, McCoy climbed out of the MiG-29 cockpit feeling better about the F-16, especially its automation. "The biggest instrument in the MiG29 cockpit is the clock," McCoy said. "It took me a while to understand this. But a large clock is needed to keep track of the time after launching a missile. When they launch a missile, they have to consider their shot range and the type of missile they are shooting and estimate how long it will take to impact before firing. When they take a five-mile Alamo shot, for example, they have to calculate mentally the time required for the missile to reach its target so their radar can illuminate it for the duration. They fire and watch until they know when they can turn away. That procedure is a real disadvantage if they're flying against someone who shot a missile at them at about the same time.

"F-16 pilots don't have to think about these things," McCoy continued. "We have great automation. When we launch a missile, the airplane performs all the calculations and displays a countdown on the head-up display for us. When we're within ten miles, we want our eyes out of the cockpit looking for flashes or smoke from an adversary. That's why our head-up display is focused to infinity. We can view information without refocusing our eyes to scan the horizon. Inside of ten miles, Fulcrum pilots are moving their hands around flipping about six switches, some they have to look at. I am moving one, maybe two switches, without taking my hands off the throttle and stick."

Before coming here, some of our pilots may have thought of the MiG's helmet-mounted sight as an end-all to a BFM fight. We have found that it is not as lethal as we had expected.

Lt. Col. Gary West, commander of the 510th

German Fulcrum pilots realize the limitations, and advantages, of their aircraft. "If you define an F-16 as a third-generation fighter, it is not fair to speak of the MiG29 as a third-generation aircraft because of its avionics," said Lt. Col. Manfred Skeries, the deputy commander of the JG73. "Aerodynamics, now, are something different." Skeries is the former commander of all East German fighter forces and the first German pilot to fly the MiG-29. His comments came after he received his first flight in the F-16.

"The MiG-29's avionics are a shortcoming," admitted Capt. Michael Raubbach, a Fulcrum pilot of the JG-73. "Its radar-warning and navigational equipment are not up to Western standards. The Russian idea of hands-on throttle and stick is not the same as it is in the West. It is true that we have to look in the cockpit a lot to flip switches. And the way information is provided and the accuracy with which it is provided-in the navigational equipment in particular-doesn't allow full employment in the Western concept.

"Our visibility is not as good as an F-16 or even an F-15," Raubbach continued. "We can't see directly behind us. We have to look out the side slightly to see behind us, which doesn't allow us to maintain a visual contact and an optimum lift vector at the same time. This shortcoming can be a real problem, especially when flying against an aircraft as small as the F-16. But as a German, I can't complain about the MiG's visibility. The aircraft offers the greatest visibility in our air force."

Raubbach is one of many Western-trained pilots who volunteered for the first five MiG29 slots that became available after Germany made the JG-73 an operational wing. He is now an instructor pilot for the unit. "The helmet-mounted sight is a real advantage when it comes to engagements requiring a visual identification," Raubbach said. "It offers no advantage in a BVR engagement, however, unless you enter a short-range fight, which is not very likely against an AMRAAM-equipped opponent like we are facing here."

The Westernization of an Eastern aircraft has presented its own problems. The MiG-29's powerful Isotov RD-33 engines, designed as disposable commodities for a mass force, were designed to run about 400 hours before they had to be replaced. (By comparison, F-16 engines can run about 4,000 hours between overhauls.) The Germans have managed almost to double the RD-33's life span by detuning the engines by ten percent. Besides lowering thrust, the cost-saving fix has reduced range and dirtied the exhaust at lower altitudes. The move from JP-4 to NATO's standard fuel JP-8 has also hurt engine performance.

"This deployment answered so many questions I had in my mind about the MiG-29. The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29 ability to turn and to fight in the phone booth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime.

Capt Mike McCoy, F-16 Pilot with the 510th

"The engines have been extremely reliable," commented Raubbach. "It goes from afterburner to military power, without problems, at various speeds and under varying g conditions. I can feel the difference detuning makes only at higher speeds. We have many spare engines. We had a shortage at one time, but we now have a big supply. Engines do not represent a shortcoming for us."

Though aerodynamically adept, the MiG-29's performance is constrained by avionics conforming to Soviet tactical doctrine. The aircraft was designed to rely heavily on a centralized system of ground controllers, which could take control of the aircraft's radar. The system could also land the plane if necessary. "Warsaw Pact pilots were not taught to evaluate a situation as it occurs in the air," Prunk explained. "Pilots were used to a system that made many decisions for them. The aircraft's guidance system had room for only six preprogrammed steerpoints, including three targets. The radio had twenty preselected channels at frequencies unknown to the pilot.

"The aircraft was not built for close-in dog fighting, though it is aerodynamically capable of it," Prunk continued. "The East Germans flew it as a point defense interceptor, like a MiG-21. They were not allowed to max perform the airplane, to explore its capabilities or their own capabilities. Sorties lasted about thirty minutes. The airplane was designed to scramble, jettison the tank, go supersonic, shoot its missiles, and go home." This relatively strict operational scenario presents its own limitations. Many of these involve the aircraft's centerline fuel tank. The MiG-29 cannot fly supersonic with the tank attached. Nor can pilots fire the aircraft's 30mm cannon (the tank blocks the shell discharge route) or use its speed brakes. The aircraft is limited to four g's when the tank has fuel remaining. The tank creates some drag and is also difficult to attach and remove. The MiG-29 can carry wing tanks that alleviate many of these shortcomings, but the Luftwaffe has no plans to purchase them from Russia.

Even given its drawbacks, the MiG-29 remains a formidable foe. "This deployment answered so many questions I had in my mind about the MiG-29," said McCoy, who flew in eight sorties against the Fulcrum and in one with it. "The experience confirmed what I knew about the MiG-29's ability to turn and to fight in the phone booth. It is an awesome airplane in this regime. The awe, though, fades away after that first turn in. The biggest adrenaline rush was getting to that point. After that, I started evaluating it as a weapon. The German MiG-29 pilots represent a worst-case threat for us because their skills are so good."

"When Western pilots merge with a MiG for the first time, they tend to stare at it in awe," said West, who flew in three sorties against the Fulcrum. "Instead of flying their jets and fighting, they are enamored by this Soviet-built aircraft that they have spent their lives learning about. Pilots lose this sense of wonder after a first encounter. It is no longer a potential distraction. They are going to know what type of fight to fight and exactly where they may be in trouble. No one can learn these things by reading reports. Air-to-air fighting is a perishable skill. But the lessons we learned here won't be forgotten. These pilots will know at the merge exactly what they are up against. They will have more confidence. And they know they are flying an aircraft that is superior in maneuverability, power, and avionics.

Pilots of the 510th FS and the JG-73 train as adversaries but debrief and relax as friends. The deployment was the first large-scale encounter with the MiG-29 Fulcrum for the US Air Force.

"When our pilots first arrived here, they almost tripped over themselves because their eyes were glued to the ramp and those MiG29s," West continued. "After a few days, though, those MiGs became just like any other aircraft. And that's the way it should be."Oleh:510fs.org

NASA's Kepler Mission Rockets To Space In Search Of Other Earths

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:26:00 -0700

A United Launch Alliance Delta II rocket carrying the NASA Kepler spacecraft blasts off from Space Launch Complex-17B at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., at 10:50 p.m. EST March 6. After a 62-minute flight, the spacecraft was successfully delivered to its assigned orbit. (Credit: Photo by Carleton Bailie, United Launch Alliance)

NASA's Kepler mission successfully launched into space from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla., aboard a United Launch Alliance Delta II at 10:49 p.m. EST (7:49 p.m. PST), Friday, March 6. Kepler is designed to find the first Earth-size planets orbiting stars at distances where water could pool on the planet's surface. Liquid water is believed to be essential for the formation of life.

"It was a stunning launch," said Kepler Project Manager James Fanson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "Our team is thrilled to be a part of something so meaningful to the human race -- Kepler will help us understand if our Earth is unique or if others like it are out there."

Engineers acquired a signal from Kepler at 12:11 a.m. Saturday EST (9:11 p.m. Friday PST), after it separated from its spent third-stage rocket and entered its final sun-centered orbit, trailing about 1,529 kilometers (950 miles) behind Earth. The spacecraft is generating its own power from its solar panels.

"Kepler now has the perfect place to watch more than 100,000 stars for signs of planets," said William Borucki, the mission's science principal investigator at NASA's Ames Research Center at Moffett Field, Calif. Borucki has worked on the mission for 17 years. "Everyone is very excited as our dream becomes a reality. We are on the verge of learning if other Earths are ubiquitous in the galaxy."

Engineers have begun to check Kepler to ensure it is working properly, a process called "commissioning" that will take about 60 days. In about a month or less, NASA will send up commands for Kepler to eject its dust cover and make its first measurements. After another month of calibrating Kepler's single instrument, a wide-field charge-couple device camera, the telescope will begin to search for planets.

The first planets to roll out on the Kepler "assembly line" are expected to be the portly "hot Jupiters" -- gas giants that circle close and fast around their stars. NASA's Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes will be able to follow up with these planets and learn more about their atmospheres. Neptune-size planets will most likely be found next, followed by rocky ones as small as Earth. The true Earth analogs -- Earth-sized planets orbiting stars like our sun at distances where surface water, and possibly life, could exist -- would take at least three years to discover and confirm. Ground-based telescopes also will contribute to the mission by verifying some of the finds.

In the end, Kepler will give us our first look at the frequency of Earth-size planets in our Milky Way galaxy, as well as the frequency of Earth-size planets that could theoretically be habitable.

"Even if we find no planets like Earth, that by itself would be profound. It would indicate that we are probably alone in the galaxy," said Borucki.

As the mission progresses, Kepler will drift farther and farther behind Earth in its orbit around the sun. NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, which was launched into the same orbit more than five years ago, is now more than about 100 million kilometers (62 million miles) behind Earth.

Kepler is a NASA Discovery mission. Ames is the home organization of the science principal investigator and is responsible for the ground system development, mission operations and science data analysis. JPL manages the Kepler mission development. Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. of Boulder, Colo., is responsible for developing the Kepler flight system and supporting mission operations. NASA's Launch Services Program at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, Fla., managed the launch service including payload integration and certifying the Delta II launch vehicle for NASA's use.Oleh:sciencedaily

Small Robots Can Prepare Lunar Surface For NASA Outpost

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:24:00 -0700

Small excavation robots, such as these conceptual vehicles, would be capable of preparing lunar landing sites for a future outpost, a new study shows. (Credit: Astrobotic Technology Inc)

Small robots the size of riding mowers could prepare a safe landing site for NASA’s Moon outpost, according to a NASA-sponsored study prepared by Astrobotic Technology Inc. with technical assistance from Carnegie Mellon University’s Robotics Institute.

Astrobotic Technology and Carnegie Mellon researchers analyzed mission requirements and developed the design for an innovative new type of small lunar robot under contract from NASA’s Lunar Surface Systems group.

The results will be presented February 27 in Washington, D.C., at a NASA Lunar Surface Systems conference co-sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its Space Enterprise Council.

“NASA faces a challenge in planning the layout for its outpost, which is expected to begin operations in 2020,” said William “Red” Whittaker, chairman and chief technical officer of Astrobotic and a Carnegie Mellon professor of robotics. “For efficient cargo transfer, the landing site needs to be close to the outpost’s crew quarters and laboratories. Each rocket landing and takeoff, however, will accelerate lunar grit outwards from the pad. With no atmosphere to slow it down, the dry soil would sandblast the outpost.”

The research examined two potential solutions: 1) construction of a berm around the landing site, and 2) creation of a hard-surface landing pad using indigenous materials.

In the first solution, researchers found that two rovers weighing 330 pounds each would take less than six months to build a berm around a landing site to block the sandblasting effect. A berm 8.5 feet tall in a 160-foot semi-circle would require moving 2.6 million pounds of lunar dirt. Robots this size can be sent to NASA’s planned polar outpost site in advance of human expeditions. Astrobotic Technology Inc. has proposed that landing site preparation be provided by commercial ventures.

In the second solution, researchers showed how small robots could comb the lunar soil for rocks, gathering them to pave a durable grit-free landing pad, said John Kohut, Astrobotic’s chief executive officer. “This might reduce the need to build protective berms. To discern the best approach, early robotic scouting missions need to gather on-site information about the soil’s cohesion levels and whether rocks and gravel of the right size can be found at the site.”

Also at Carnegie Mellon, Whittaker is directing the development of Astrobotic’s first lunar robot, which has been undergoing field trials for several months. The company’s first mission, to win the $20 million Google Lunar X prize by visiting the Apollo 11 landing site and transmitting high-definition video to Earth, is set for December 2010.Oleh:sciencedaily

Gamma Ray Burst Captured In Early Stages

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:23:00 -0700

Illustration of GRB. (Credit: NASA)

UK astronomers, using a telescope aboard the NASA Swift Satellite, have captured information from the early stages of a gamma ray burst - the most violent and luminous explosions occurring in the Universe since the Big Bang.

Swift is able to both locate and point at gamma ray bursts (GRBs) far quicker than any other telescope, so by using its Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope (UVOT) the astronomers were able to obtain an ultraviolet spectrum of a GRB just 251 seconds after its onset - the earliest ever captured. Further use of the instrument in this way will allow them to calculate the distance and brightness of GRBs within a few hundred seconds of their initial outburst, and gather new information about the causes of bursts and the galaxies they originate from.

It is currently thought that some GRBs are caused by immense explosions following the collapse of the core of a rapidly rotating, high-mass star into a black hole, but there are still many mysteries surrounding them.

"The UVOT's wavelength range, coupled with the fact that Swift is a space observatory with a speedy response rate, unconstrained by time of day or weather, has allowed us to collect this early ultraviolet spectrum," said Martin Still from the Mullard Space Science Laboratory (MSSL) at UCL.

Paul Kuin, also from MSSL, who works on the calibration of the UVOT instrument explained: "By looking at these earlier moments of gamma ray bursts, we will not only be able to better calculate things such as the luminosity and distance of a burst, but to find out more about the galaxies that play host to them and the impact these explosions have on their environments. Once this new technique is applied to much brighter bursts, we'll have a wealth of new data."

Massimiliano De Pasquale, a GRB scientist of the UVOT team from MSSL, added, "The UVOT instrument is particularly suited to study bursts with an average to high redshift (1) – a part of the ultraviolet spectrum that is difficult for even the very big ground-based telescopes to study. Using UVOT with Swift, we can now find redshifts for bursts that were difficult to capture in the past and find out more about their distant host galaxies, about ten billion light years away."

Professor Keith Mason, Chief Executive of the Science and Technology Facilities Council, said, "This is an amazing first for the UVOT instrument and an exciting new development in the study of these most violent and energetic explosions. Thanks to the hard work of our UK scientists at MSSL, and their partners, we can now gather far more information about gamma ray bursts and the early Universe."

Since its launch in 2004, the Swift satellite has provided the most comprehensive study so far of GRBs and their afterglows. Using the UVOT to obtain ultraviolet spectrums, the Swift team will be able to build on this study and even determine more about the host galaxies' chemistry.

Paul Kuin said, "The new spectrum has not only allowed us to determine the distance of the gamma ray burst's host galaxy but has revealed the density of its hydrogen clouds. Learning more about these far-away galaxies helps us to understand how they formed during the early universe. The gamma ray burst observed on this occasion originated in a galaxy 8 billion light years from Earth."

Swift is a NASA mission in collaboration with the STFC in the UK and the Italian Space Agency (ASI)Oleh:sciencedaily

Method Of Predicting Clear Air Turbulence Could Make Flights Smoother In The Future

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:10:00 -0700

A new forecasting method could help pilots chart new courses around patches of rough but clear air that can turn an otherwise unremarkable flight into a nightmare. (Credit: iStockphoto/David Joyner)

It comes blasting out of the blue on your airplane flight: sudden bumpiness and sometimes even a violent plummeting. It arrives without warning, and it can be more than frightening, since it causes tens of millions of dollars in injury claims every year.

It's called clear air turbulence (CAT), and a new forecasting method, published in the Journal of Atmospheric Sciences and led by a researcher at the University of Georgia, could help pilots chart new courses around these patches of rough but clear air that can turn an otherwise unremarkable flight into a nightmare.

"Our new method allows superior forecasts for CAT beyond the tools that have been in use," said John Knox, an assistant professor in the department of geography in UGA's Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. "Commercial aircraft encounter severe-or-greater turbulence about 5,000 times each year, and the majority of these occur 10,000 feet above the Earth's surface. This new method gives pilots a way to avoid turbulence that's not associated with nearby thunderstorms or significant cloudiness."

Other authors on the paper include Donald McCann of McCann Aviation Weather Research, Inc., of Overland Park, Kan., and Paul Williams of the department of meteorology at the University of Reading in Great Britain.

The new method predicts energy associated with gravity waves—phenomena in the atmosphere that look like ocean waves but which can occur in clear air. They can be created by air flow over mountains, frontal boundaries or other causes. The type of gravity wave that Knox and his colleagues identified as a possible source of bumpiness comes from a different source. These waves are spontaneously generated and associated with jet streams at high altitudes, near cruising levels for airplanes.

When a plane flies through them, the sensation is like being in a small boat on a stormy sea. But where a boat's skipper can see rough sea, gravity waves in the air are usually invisible, and pilots often don't know they're present until they're flying right into them.

Predicting turbulence caused by nearby storms or low pressure systems is much easier than knowing when CAT might hit, said Knox. Still, several hundred significant injuries occur in the U.S. because of clear air turbulence, and because it occurs in the absence of obvious weather, wary passengers tend to wonder if they are in danger.

There are predictive models in use now, and an improved version of the Graphical Turbulence Guidance (GTG) algorithm, currently the best CAT forecasting method, will soon be online for airline pilots, said Knox. But he noted that even the GTG doesn't have some of the desirable features of the method just published in the Journal of Atmospheric Sciences.

The new method is based on something called the Lighthill-Ford theory of spontaneous imbalance, developed by a British theoretician in the early 1990s. Knox and his colleagues spent several years turning this theory into a forecast tool.

The team first simplified the theory then developed an algorithm to use the theory to make predictions of turbulence. The algorithm was next tested on five months' worth of high-resolution weather forecast model output from 2005-2006. The researchers then compared the algorithm's prediction of turbulence to actual pilot observations of it. The results of this statistical analysis demonstrated that the team's method performed better than the best methods of CAT forecasting available during that period, said Knox.

"Essentially what we have is a mathematical model that translates the theory into numbers that describe the gravity waves," said Knox. "These numbers can then drive an algorithm that gives you a forecast of the kinetic energy associated with turbulence."

The researchers hypothesize that a clear sequence of events occurs to create CAT and understanding that sequence is crucial to predicting the location of the turbulence.

"Gravity waves act upon the environment and then destabilize it," said Knox. "Even weak gravity waves may initiate turbulence."

One problem with current CAT-forecasting models is that they are "at least partly empirical," said Knox. "Current methods often rely on rules-of-thumb based on pilot experience that aren't always grounded in rigorous theory." The new method is based "on a single, consistent theory of spontaneous imbalance," and thus should at least theoretically be more reliable, Knox said.

He added that adoption of the new method could potentially create "major improvements in CAT forecasting." Thousands of passengers who are fearful of "things that go bump in the flight" hope he's correct. Oleh:sciencedaily

Skyray 48 Takes Flight

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:08:00 -0700

The X-48B Blended Wing Body aircraft in flight. (Credit: NASA photo by Carla Thomas)

Calm excitement filled the ground control station. Engineers stared intently at their computer screens as the pilot, sitting next to them, flexed his fingers on the controls. Ground crew tending the aircraft finished putting away their equipment. Preparations for the first flight of the unmanned X-48B Blended Wing Body research aircraft were complete.

Years of research, design, construction, wind tunnel and ground tests coalesced into this one moment of time.

Radios crackled. "Tower, Skyray 48 in position, lakebed runway 23, request clearance for takeoff..."

"Skyray 48 roger, main base winds 220 at 6, report airborne, lakebed 23..."

"Wilco"

"Five, four, three, two, one, brakes..."

Quickly, the manta ray-shaped aircraft rolled down the dry lakebed runway trailing a plume of dust as it picked up speed, its three small jet engines whining.

With an excitement that only comes with an aircraft's first flight, the triangular red, white and blue X-48B leapt into the air, obviously wanting to fly.

"Skyray 48's airborne," Boeing pilot Norm Howell called, matter-of-factly. And with that, years of toil blossomed into the sweet fruit of success on July 20, 2007 at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center on Edwards AFB, Calif.

One of the latest cutting-edge experimental aircraft, or X-Planes, the X-48B BWB is a collaborative effort of the Boeing Co., NASA's Fundamental Aeronautics Program, and the Air Force Research Laboratory. The 21-foot wingspan, 500-pound, remotely piloted plane is designed to demonstrate the viability of the blended wing shape. And demonstrate it has.

After completion of six flights, the X-48B team began a four-week maintenance and modification period during which removable leading edges with extended slats are being replaced with slatless leading edges in order to mimic a slats-retracted configuration. The change requires a software update to the flight control software. In addition, the team is removing and replacing all of the aircraft's flight control actuators for maintenance purposes.

NASA is interested in the potential benefits of the aircraft - increased volume for carrying capacity, efficient aerodynamics for reduced fuel burn, and, possibly, significant reductions in noise due to propulsion integration options. In these initial flights, the principal focus is to validate prior research on the aerodynamic performance and controllability of the shape, including comparisons of flight test data with the extensive database gathered in the wind tunnels at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia.

The Subsonic Fixed-Wing Project, part of NASA's Fundamental Aeronautics Program, has long supported the development of the blended wing body concept. It has participated in numerous collaborations with Boeing, as well as several wind tunnel tests for different speed regimes. The team is focused on researching the low-speed characteristics of the design and expanding its flight envelope beyond the limits of current capabilities.

In addition to hosting the X-48B flight test and research activities, NASA Dryden is providing engineering and technical support -- expertise garnered from years of operating cutting-edge air vehicles. NASA assists with the hardware and software validation and verification process, the integration and testing of the aircraft systems, and the pilot's ground control station. NASA's range group provides critical telemetry and command and control communications during the flight, while the flight operations group provides a T-34 chase aircraft and essential flight scheduling. Photo and video support complete the effort.

The composite-skinned, 8.5 percent scale vehicle can to fly up to 10,000 feet and 120 knots in its low-speed configuration. The aircraft is flown remotely from a ground control station by a pilot using conventional aircraft controls and instrumentation, while looking at a monitor fed by a forward-looking camera on the aircraft.

Up to 25 flights are planned to gather data in these low-speed flight regimes. Then, the X-48B may be used to test the aircraft's low-noise and handling characteristics at transonic speeds.

Two X-48B research vehicles were built by Cranfield Aerospace Ltd., in England, in accordance with Boeing specifications. The vehicle that flew on July 20, known as Ship 2, was also used for ground and taxi testing. Ship 1, a duplicate, was used for the wind tunnel tests. Ship 1 is available for use as a backup during the flight test program.

So far, so good as the Skyray 48 team works through the late summer heat of the Mojave Desert as they continue blazing a trail with this futuristic aircraft design. Oleh:sciencedaily

NASA Flying Wing Model Soars In Historic Wind Tunnel

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:00:00 -0700

Ask anyone what an airplane looks like and most will tell you a tube with wings. NASA researchers are trying to expand that image. They're testing a design for a flying wing, called a blended wing body.

Image above is artist concept of one version of the blended wing body aircraft. (Image courtesy of NASA)

Technicians have installed a five-percent scale model of a blended wing body in the Langley Full-Scale Tunnel at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. During tests in the tunnel's huge 30X60 foot test section, pilots "flew" the 12-foot wingspan, 80-pound model. It stayed aloft in the tunnel's wind stream constrained only by a tether cable. The flying wing is the biggest model ever free flight tested in the Full Scale Tunnel.

"We want to understand the edge of the envelope flight characteristics of the blended wing body," said Dan Vicroy, blended wing body flight dynamics principal investigator. "We're comfortable with the flight characteristics of conventional tube with wings airplanes, but we don't have much experience with flying wings."

NASA is working with Boeing Phantom Works, Long Beach, Calif., on this advanced, more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly airplane concept. Researchers say a blended wing body could be useful as a multi-role aircraft for the military, including functioning as a tanker, cargo or transport plane.

Much testing needs to be done before the flying wing could be safely introduced as a transport aircraft. The blended wing body doesn't have a conventional airplane tail, used to control pitch (up and down) and yaw (side to side) motions. Instead it uses a combination of control surfaces on the trailing edge of the wing to maneuver the airplane. The free flight tests will help assess the best combination of control surfaces and limits.

Other questions also need to be answered about the blended wing body configuration. "One question is how do you build a lightweight structure that can be pressurized," Vicroy said. "It's easy to pressurize a tube, but not as easy to pressurize a non-cylindrical shape."

Even building the blended wing body model was a challenge. For this test the model had to be dynamically scaled. It had to have the same scaled shape as the real plane, same scaled weight and inertia characteristics of roll, pitch and yaw. The model had to be light for its size. It was built from graphite composite material similar to a Formula 1 racecar.

Owned by Langley and operated by Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Va. The Tunnel was completed in 1931. It has tested World War II fighters, submarines, the Mercury space capsules, supersonic transport concepts and the flying wing.

The research is part of the Fundamental Aeronautics Program in NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. The program's goal is to advance breakthrough aerospace technologies.

Video of testing is available on the NASA TV Videofile. For continental North America, NASA TV is carried on an MPEG-2 digital signal accessed via satellite AMC-6, at 72 degrees west longitude, transponder 17C, 4040 MHz, vertical polarization. It's available in Alaska and Hawaii on an MPEG-2 digital signal accessed via satellite AMC-7, transponder 18C, 137 degrees west longitude, 4060 MHz, vertical polarization. A Digital Video Broadcast compliant Integrated Receiver Decoder is required for reception. For information about NASA TV, including digital down link information, oleh:sciencedaily

Bio-inspired Wing Design To Revolutionize Aircraft Flight

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:57:00 -0700

It's a bird, it's a plane, it's ... both! While aircraft have always borne a resemblance to their feathered counterparts in the sky, new research at U of T is bringing the two even closer together.

Common swift. (Credit: iStockphoto/Andrew Howe)

Inspired by nature, mechanical engineering professor Shaker Meguid is currently developing aircraft wing designs that imitate the amazing flight of birds by altering the planform of the wings in order to optimize the aerodynamics for a given flight stage.

"When you observe eagles in flight, you would notice that when they are high in the sky they soar and their wings are fully extended. They are gliding, attempting to increase lift and reduce drag. This helps them to glide effortlessly and navigate for long durations in their search for a prey. However, they fold their wings and go on a fast attack when they dive to catch a prey," Meguid explained.

After studying research on birds, in particular the Apus apus (common swift), a bird whose wing-morphing ability makes it an especially versatile flyer and allows it to eat, sleep and mate in the air, Meguid began plans to develop a more effective alternative to the traditional fixed-wing aircraft.

"Morphing implies large seamless shape change. Right now we have aircraft control surfaces that allow discrete morphing such as ailerons and flaps. What we want to do is undergo changes in a seamless fashion, resulting in increased efficiency," he said.

To achieve these seamless transitions in wing shape, Meguid and his research team are combining two types of advanced materials. The first is shape memory alloy (SMA), which contracts when heated above a certain temperature. The second are piezoelectrics, which compress or extend when an electric field is applied to them. They plan on using these materials to allow the wing to change shape and respond to an aircraft's changing mission with an overall reduced system complexity.

Meguid explained how this works using a model developed by one of his post-doctoral fellows, Aarash Sofla. "The shape morphing truss structure ... uses shape memory alloy actuators to achieve bending, twisting and undulating shape changes. The structure consists of tetrahedral truss unit cells, which are connected using a spherical freely rotating joint. The joint provides a means for connecting several struts at a node while ensuring sufficient rotational freedom.

"In addition to increasing an aircraft's performance and adaptability, morphing wings carry many other benefits, including lower costs, reduced pollution and noise during take-off," Meguid added.

Meguid's morphing wing research is funded by the DSO National Laboratories in Singapore, where he founded the aerospace division at Nanyang Technological University in 2004 while on leave from U of T. This three-year project, which was launched in April, is focusing on developing morphing wings specifically for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), aircraft that are often used for surveillance, imaging and operation in locations where human safety is at risk.

Meguid is looking forward to seeing his morphing UAV wings literally take off as he and his team, consisting of one post-doctoral fellow, one doctoral student and three undergraduates, realize their designs. "It is design and build; it's not a paper exercise," he said. "We will be examining the aerodynamic performance and the mechanical integrity of the successful wing morphing designs and aerodynamic tests will be carried out in a wind tunnel in DSO National Laboratories in Singapore."Oleh:sciencedaily

Continuous Descent Arrivals: Atlanta Flight Test Evaluates Technique For Saving Fuel And Reducing Noise In Airliners

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:54:00 -0700

Airline passengers arriving in Atlanta on early morning “redeye” flights during the past few months may have noticed something different during their descent to the runway. Instead of the typical sound of engine power rising and falling as the aircraft descended in a series of level flight steps, they may have noticed a quieter arrival – without the steps.

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, currently the nation's busiest airport, was chosen to evaluate the continuous descent arrival technique in about 600 flights. (Credit: Georgia Department of Economic Development)

The changes were part of Georgia Tech’s flight-testing of “continuous descent arrivals,” a procedure designed to save fuel and time while producing environmental benefits by reducing both noise and emissions. Involving more than 600 flights, the Atlanta study was done in collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), FedEx and Atlanta’s two dominant air carriers: Delta Air Lines and AirTran Airways.

The continuous descent arrival procedure has already been studied at Louisville and Los Angeles airports. Proponents hope the 90-day test at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport – currently the nation’s busiest airport – will move the concept one step closer to nationwide implementation. Estimates suggest that continuous descent arrivals could save a large airline as much as $80 million per year in fuel costs alone.

“In commercial aircraft, we see anywhere between 300 and 1,000 pounds of fuel saved for each arrival,” said John-Paul Clarke, director of the Air Transportation Laboratory at Georgia Tech and an associate professor in the Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering. “With fuel cost at $3 per gallon, that would amount to as much as $600 per arrival and could really add up for the airlines at a time when they need all the savings they can get.”

Because aircraft engines don’t throttle up and down during a continuous descent arrival, there are also significant reductions in noise and emissions. Keeping engines at idle power can cut emissions of nitrogen oxides by nearly a third, and reduce noise by 6 decibels along certain portions of the flight path – both significant reductions that would improve the environment in the vicinity of airports.

And the technique could cut two minutes off the approach and landing portion of a flight. While that doesn’t seem like much, it could result in more efficient utilization of aircraft and reductions in flight times for crews.

Continuous descent arrival is one in a series of improvements aimed at creating the next generation of air transportation technologies. The goal is to redesign the airspace to allow future airliners to travel the most efficient paths to their destinations.

Though the final numbers from the Atlanta evaluation won’t be known for several months, the potential savings have been demonstrated by more than 60,000 landings at Los Angeles with a continuous descent arrival technique developed by Georgia Tech. But adopting the procedure throughout the airspace system won’t be easy. Safety considerations must be paramount, and there are a number of optimization challenges caused by widely varying aircraft types, wind conditions and airport configurations.

“Imagine a line of aircraft descending through a long tube that’s fixed laterally and limited vertically to be within a narrow band,” explained Clarke. “If each airplane were like a ball with a different coefficient of friction, then when you put the balls in the tube at equal intervals, they would begin to catch up with one another. The ball with the lower coefficient would tend to catch up with the ball with a higher coefficient. That’s something that we have to work very hard to avoid.”

While the risks of getting aircraft too close are obvious – and governed by FAA rules on minimum spacing – too much spacing between landing aircraft can waste time and reduce airport throughput.

“The goal is to design a procedure that allows the aircraft engines to throttle back to idle power at the point of initial descent and to remain at idle power along the flight path to the runway as long as possible,“ Clarke added. “We have figured out how to put altitude and speed constraints along the flight path so they can stay at idle power as long as possible while achieving the required minimal spacing at the runway threshold.”

Determining those constraints requires detailed knowledge of the performance of each aircraft type in use. Clarke and his research team have obtained performance data for most Boeing aircraft, as well as some of those manufactured by Airbus. Based on the performance data, they have simulated the operation of each aircraft type under varying wind and weight conditions.

The researchers have also modeled variation in pilot behavior, because small differences in when flaps are deployed and landing gear lowered create variations in speed, which affect aircraft spacing.

Arrivals would be customized for each airport, taking into account wind and traffic patterns. And because the spacing between aircraft is determined well before they arrive at their destinations, adoption of the technique will require changes in the nation’s air traffic control system.

“The air traffic control system currently isn’t designed to allow the kind of fine-tuning we need, but I’m very optimistic about being able to change that,” said Clarke. “Throughout all the areas, the FAA and the airlines, there is a growing acceptance that this is a solution. We have been able to do the analysis, the flight-testing and the number crunching to show that it can be done.”

Clarke, who began the research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology before joining Georgia Tech in 2005, believes the cost savings will ensure adoption of continuous descent arrivals. He compared the technique to the adoption of fuel-saving winglets, small vertical attachments that have replaced traditional wingtips on many aircraft.

“For years people knew that winglets provided better performance, but it costs money to install them,” he added. “When fuel got more expensive, airlines started installing winglets because the savings justified the costs. The benefits of continuous descent arrival may also take some time to be realized.”Oleh:sciencedaily

Future Helicopters Get SMART

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:51:00 -0700

Helicopters today are considered a loud, bumpy and inefficient mode for day-to-day domestic travel—best reserved for medical emergencies, traffic reporting and hovering over celebrity weddings.

Tests in a NASA wind tunnel of this SMART rotor hub confirm the ability of advanced helicopter-blade active control strategies to reduce vibrations and noise. (Credit: NASA)

But NASA research into rotor blades made with shape-changing materials could change that view.

Twenty years from now, large rotorcraft could be making short hops between cities such as New York and Washington, carrying as many as 100 passengers at a time in comfort and safety.

Routine transportation by rotorcraft could help ease air traffic congestion around the nation's airports. But noise and vibration must be reduced significantly before the public can embrace the idea.

"Today's limitations preclude us from having such an airplane," said William Warmbrodt, chief of the Aeromechanics Branch at NASA's Ames Research Center in California, "so NASA is reaching beyond today's technology for the future."

The solution could lie in rotor blades made with piezoelectric materials that flex when subjected to electrical fields, not unlike the way human muscles work when stimulated by a current of electricity sent from the brain.

Helicopter rotors rely on passive designs, such as the blade shape, to optimize the efficiency of the system. In contrast, an airplane's wing has evolved to include flaps, slats and even the ability to change its shape in flight.

NASA researchers and others are attempting to incorporate the same characteristics and capabilities in a helicopter blade.

NASA and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, also known as DARPA, the U.S. Army, and The Boeing Company have spent the past decade experimenting with smart material actuated rotor, or SMART, technology, which includes the piezoelectric materials.

"SMART rotor technology holds the promise of substantially improving the performance of the rotor and allowing it to fly much farther using the same amount of fuel, while also enabling much quieter operations," Warmbrodt said.

There is more than just promise that SMART Rotor technology can reduce noise significantly. There's proof.

The only full-scale SMART Rotor ever constructed in the United States was run through a series of wind tunnel tests between February and April 2008 in the National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex at Ames. The SMART Rotor partners joined with the U.S. Air Force, which operates the tunnel, to complete the demonstration.

A SMART Rotor using piezoelectric actuators to drive the trailing edge flaps was tested in the 40- by 80-foot tunnel in 155-knot wind to simulate conditions the rotor design would experience in high-speed forward flight. The rotor also was tested at cruise speed conditions of 124 knots to determine which of three trailing edge flap patterns produced the least vibration and noise. One descent condition also was tested.

Results showed that the SMART Rotor can reduce by half the amount of noise it puts out within the controlled environment of the wind tunnel. The ultimate test of SMART rotor noise reduction capability would come from flight tests on a real helicopter, where the effects of noise that reproduces through the atmosphere and around terrain could be evaluated as well.

The test data also will help future researchers use computers to simulate how differently-shaped SMART Rotors would behave in flight under various conditions of altitude and speed.

For now that remains tough to do.

"Today's supercomputers are unable to accurately model the unsteady physics of helicopter rotors and their interaction with the air," Warmbrodt said. "But we're working on it."Oleh:sciencedaily

Saab JAS39 Gripen

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:01:00 -0700

The Saab JAS39 Gripen is to be used for three mission types: Figh (Jakt), Attack (Attack) and Reconnaissance (Spanings). The combination of high-speed performance with short-field take-off and landing characteristics has been achieved by the association of a delta wing with canards. The canards on the Gripen are fully movable, and together with the elevons, gives the Gripen the optimum combination of maneuverability.

Image: Peter Karlsson, Svarteld.

Several system functions also contribute to flight safety, e.g. automatic maneuver limits provided by the flight control system, a ground proximity warning system and an efficient pilot support system to improve tolerance to high G forces (+9/-3g). The wide-angle holographic Head-Up Display and the three large multi-function color head-down displays give the pilot an excellent overview of the situation in any flight conditions.

The two-seat version of the Gripen has been designed primarily for improved tactical training, particularly in the demanding high-g close-in combat air-to-air mission which is difficult to simulate accurately on the ground. The JAS39B/D Gripen has a 0,65 m longer fuselage to accommodate the rear cockpit. The cannon and its installation components have been deleted, so that the two-seater have the same fli

terght performance as the single seat version.

The cockpit, including windshield and canopy, the air intakes and engine compressor are reinforced to withstand bird strikes. For emergency crew escape the Gripen with the Martin-Baker Mk 10L, zero/zero ejection seat.

The Saab Gripen has a modern fire-control and weapons system with an all-aspect look-down/shoot-down capability even against small low-flying targets. The impressive beyond-visual-range (BVR) air-to-air combat capability of the Gripen is achieved by using a high-performance radar (Ericsson) combined with a low radar signature. The Gripen has the ability to share and display tactical data information with other aircraft in the combat area, this increases situation awareness and tactical surprise opportunities and enhances the capability of a group of aircraft working together.

In the Swedish Air Force, servicing is performed by five flight-line mechanics with limited training under the leadership of a single-technician. In a turn-around time of less than 10 minutes.

Image: Photo Katsuhiko Tokunaga.

The prototype 39-1 wasn't so successful it crashed on his sixth flight, with test-pilot Lars Radestrom on February 2, 1989 at Linköping. The pilot flew for the first time with the Gripen, he had some problems with the stability (fly-by-wire) of the fighter, in the landing he hit with his left-wing the runway and the plane made an un-controlled flight, that ended on his back alongside the runway, the pilot had only a broken elbow.

Another crash was on August 8, 1993 at the Stockholm Water Festival with the same pilot as the first crash and also with fly-by-wire problems. This example was the second production JAS39A (39.102)

On September 20, 1999 Swedish Air Force lost his third JAS39A (39156/56) the pilot escaped safely. This aircraft came in the jet blast of an other JAS39 the pilot lost the control, the plane crashed in Vänern lake near the island Djurö.

The first air-to-air refueling trials took place in early November 1998 over the Irish sea. The Gripen linked with an RAF VC 10 tanker with a crew from DERA.

Developing nation:	Sweden.
Manufacturer/designer:	Saab Defence.
Production line:	Linköping.
Task:	Multi-Role Fighter/Bomber.
First flight:	-JAS39 December 9th 1988, 39-1. - JAS39A September 10, 1992, 39101. - JAS39B April 29, 1996, 39800. - JAS39C August 2002, 39208. - JAS39D June 2, 2004, 39815.
First delivery:	June 9, 1996.
First operational:	October 1, 1997, F 7 wing at Såtenäs AB.
	Saab JAS39 Gripen
Crew:	- JAS39A/C 1. - JAS39B/D 2.
Ejection seat:	Martin-Baker Mk 10L, zero/zero.
Wing Span:	8,40 m incl. wingtip launchers.
Length:	- 14,10 m (single seat). - 14,80 m (dual seat).
Height:	4,50 m.
Wheelbase:	5,30 m.
Wheeltrack:	2,40 m.
Engine:	One Volvo Aero Corporation RM12 (F404-GE-400) rated 54 kN dry and 80.5 kN with reheat.
Weight:	- Empty: 7.400 Kg. - Internal fuel: 2.270 Kg. - External fuel: 3.110 liter tanks. - Max. payload: 5.300 Kg.
Max. take off weight:	14.000 Kg.
Max. speed:	- 1.400 km/h (at sea level). - 2.126 km/h (high level).
Max. ceiling:	14.000 m.
Range:	- ferry range 3.000 km without drop tanks. - 800 km combat range. - 3000 km max. range.
Performance:	- max. rate of climb at sea level 6.000m per minute. - climb to 10.000 m in 1 minutes 40 seconds. - take-off run 400 m at max. take-off weight. - landing run 500 m at max. landing weight.
g limits:	-3/+9.
Radar:	Ericsson/GMAv PS-05/A pulse Doppler multimode look down/shoot down radar with multiple target track. incl. scan and ground mapping capabilities.
Centerline hardpoints:	2.
Underwing hardpoints:	6.
Wingtip hardpoints	2.
Weapons:	-27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon with 120 rounds (JAS-39A/C). -Rb 74 (AIM-9L Sidewinder). -Rb 99 (AIM-120B AMRAAM). -IRIS-T. -GM-65 Maverick (210 kg). -M70 Rocket pods 6x 135 mm (364 kg). -RB 15F Anti ship Missile (598 kg) -Bk 39 Bombkaspsel M/90 Mjölner (600 kg) this is a gliding bomblet dispenser with 48 submunition of the types MJ-1 (Fragmentation) and MJ-2 (anti-tank). -General-purpose bombs. -Cluster bombs.

Test fleet Saab JAS39 Gripen
Serial	first flight
39-1	December 9, 1988 (crashed February 2, 1988.
39-2	May 4, 1990.
39-3	March 25, 1991.
39-4	December 20, 1990.
39-5	October 23, 1991.
Production Swedish Air Force (Flygvapnet):
Lot	Nr. ordered	Total type	Serials
-	5 (June 1982).	JAS 39 Gripen.	39-1 / 39-5
1	30 (June 1982).	JAS 39A Gripen.	39101 / 39130
1	1 (June 1982).	JAS 39B Gripen.	39800
2	77 (June 1992).	JAS 39A Gripen.	39131 / 39207
3	15 (June 1992).	JAS 39B Gripen.	39801 / 39814
4	50 (June 1997).	JAS 39C Gripen.	39208 / 39276
5	15 (June 1997).	JAS 39D Gripen.	39815 / 39829
First production (JAS39A) maiden flight was on September 10, 1992 with pilot Reino Lidvik on the controls. The first time in service by the Swedish Air Force was on June 9, 1996. The first JAS 39C was delivered in 2003.
Order book from outside Sweden:
South Africa.	9 dual, and options for 19 single sweaters. The two sweaters will be delivered in 2006-2008 and if the option for the single sweaters is exercised (2004), they will be delivered in 2009-2011.
Hungary.	Leased 14 Gripens from Saab / Swedish Air Force (November 7th 2001) 12 JAS39C and 2 JAS39D.
Czech Republic.	Leased 14 Gripens from Saab / Swedish Air Force 12 JAS39C and 2 JAS39D.

Saab JAS 39 Gripen operators:
Swedish Air Force:	- 5 JAS39 prototypes. - 107 JAS39A. - 15 JAS39B. - 50 JAS39C. - 13 JAS39D.
Czech Air Force:	- 12 JAS39C.
Hungarian Air Force.	- 12 JAS39C. - 2 JAS39D.
South-African Air Force.	- 19 JAS39C. - 9 JAS39D.

Saab JAS39 Gripen written-off by accidents:

02feb89 39-1 Prototype Saab
08aug93 39102 JAS39A Swedish Air Force
20sep99 39156 JAS39A Swedish Air Force

Super Flanker TNI AU Telah Tiba

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:44:00 -0700

Tiga unit pesawat tempur jenis Sukhoi Tahap pertama baru milik TNI Angkatan Udara yang direncanakan akan tiba pada Oktober 2008 ini, akan dirakit di Lanud Sultan Hasanuddin, Makassar. Panglima Komando Operasi Angkatan Udara (Pangkoopsau) II, Marsekal Pertama TNI Yushan Sayuti, mengatakan Lanud Sultan Hasanuddin sebagai home base Sukhoi telah siap, termasuk landasan yang telah mampu didarati pesawat angkut Antonov yang akan membawa tiga unit Sukhoi TNI AU dari Rusia, sebelum dirakit.

Hanggar baru bagi ketiga unit aset TNI AU itu pun hampir selesai sekitar 80 persen. Tinggal menyelesaikan sebagian halaman depan hanggar dan instalasi listrik yang diperkirakan memerlukan dana sekitar Rp 4,5 milyar. Nantinya akan ada enam pesawat yang datang, terdiri atas tiga SU-30MK2 dan tiga SU-27SKM, guna melengkapi empat pesawat Sukhoi yang sudah dimiliki TNI Angkatan Udara sebelumnya.

Tiga unit yang dijadwalkan akan tiba di bulan Oktober 2008 ini telah dilengkapi dengan persenjataannya dan avionik lengkap. Terutama untuk amunisi SU-30MK2, sedangkan pada 2009 akan tiba jenis SU-27SKM dan persenjataannya. Pembelian enam Sukhoi itu tidak termasuk dalam skema kredit negara yang diberikan Pemerintah Rusia senilai satu miliar dolar AS bagi modernisasi persenjataan Indonesia selama masa 2007-2010.

Sementara itu, tiga pilot Sukhoi yang baru menyelesaikan pelatihan di Rusia telah tiba di Indonesia. Ketiga pilot tersebut adalah Mayor Pnb Ikoputro (Komandan Skadron Udara 11), Mayor Pnb Dedy Ilham Suryanto, dan Mayor Pnb David Yohan Tamboto. Selain kesiapan infrastruktur, TNI AU juga telah menyiapkan kembali delapan calon penerbang Sukhoi.@swaberita

E-Bombs Could Go Mainstream

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:32:00 -0700

E-bombs, weapons that destroy electronics with an intense pulse of electromagnetic radiation, have been discussed for decades. But despite years of research and development, there is little sign of their deployment. The prospect of knocking out communications and other electronic systems is attractive, but commanders prefer proven weapons with known effects. Now the U.S. Army is developing technology to provide the best of both worlds, by creating munitions that combine conventional and e-bomb effects in one package.

Explosive munitions rely on blast, fragmentation and sometimes armor-piercing shaped charges for their effects. Researchers want to add an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) damage mechanism as well. This is in contrast to previous e-bomb projects that were intended to be nonlethal so they could destroy materiel without causing casualties. The Army program seeks to enhance existing warheads, adding the feature without affecting blast, fragmentation or armor penetration, and with minimal extra weight.

The power supply in traditional e-bomb design is a magnetic flux compression generator with metal coils carrying current. The coils rapidly compress in an explosion, producing an intense pulse of energy. The generator is bulky and cannot easily be integrated into existing munitions.

An alternative approach explored by the Army is a shockwave ferromagnetic generator. This is a magnet that blows up and spontaneously demagnetizes, releasing energy as a pulse of power. The effect is known as pressure-induced magnetic phase transition, and only occurs with some types of magnets in certain situations. In 2005, researchers from the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering Center (Amrdec), working with contractor Loki and scientists from Texas Tech University, demonstrated an explosive pulsed-power source based on neodymium alloy magnets, a type used in speakers and headphones.

Having proven that the principle works, the researchers moved on to more exotic lead zirconate titanate magnets. This enabled them to reduce the volume of the power generator from 50 cu. cm. (3 cu. in.) to 3 cu. cm., excluding explosives. Army requirements call for assembly of the power generator, power conditioning and aerial in a 1-in. space. Power output will be measured in hundreds of megawatts for microseconds.

The aerial needed to shape and direct the electromagnetic energy is an engineering challenge, due to the intense force of the explosion and the size required. Allen Stults of Amrdec is working on a “conducting aerosol plasma warhead.” A flame conducts electricity due to the presence of charged particles in it. By altering the chemical mixture of a fireball produced by an explosion, Stults aims to turn it into an electrically conductive aerial, a “plasma antenna.”

This builds on previous Army work with explosively generated plasma antennas. Stults is working with military explosives and ensuring that other blast effects like armor piercing are not compromised by the changes. Previous work has also shown that the composition of the fireball needs to be matched to the frequency of the desired output.

An explosion takes the shape of a roughly spherical fireball, but a plasma antenna needs to be more cylindrical. This is why Stults works with shaped charges that produce more linear explosions. An earlier project looked at using the jet of metal produced by a shaped charge as an antenna, but this has been dropped for the plasma antenna.

An enhanced warhead could knock out a tank even if it did not penetrate. The vehicle would be left without ignition, communications or other electronics. A warhead would also knock out other electronic systems, including mobile phones used by insurgents to detonate bombs and circuitry in rocket-propelled grenades.

There is one big question with an EMP weapon: How to tell if it works. Carlo Kopp, an assistant professor at Monash University of Melbourne, Australia, and cofounder of the Air Power Australia think tank, is an authority in this field. He wrote papers that shaped strategic thinking on electromagnetic pulse weapons in the 1990s, and coined the term “e-bomb.”

“Damage assessment for all electromagnetic weapons, be they e-bombs or beam weapons, is problematic,” Kopp says. “Unless the attack fries the power supply and you observe related electrical breakdown symptoms, you will never know whether you fried the target or the victim intentionally shut down. The expectation that such weapons should provide easy-to-observe bomb damage assessment mechanisms is not realistic.”

The multifunction munition provides more signs of its effects than the traditional e-bomb, whose effects are invisible. It is possible to determine whether a target has been hit, and a target within the radius of blast and fragment damage will also have suffered EMP effects. But these are variable, depending on the angle between the target and the pulse, the nature of the electronic component and the amount of shielding. Effects range from temporary disruption and forced rebooting to permanent damage or electrical burnout of components similar to that of a lightning strike.

With their comparatively low power output, the Army’s new small multifunction munitions are for point targets. Two candidate munitions for upgrade are the Tow missile and 2.75-in. rockets fired by helicopter. This is unlike previous e-bomb efforts, which have focused on large air-delivered bombs or unitary artillery munitions that cover a large area, what Kopp terms “weapons of electrical mass destruction.”

A small e-bomb will be qualitatively different than larger versions. Radiated power falls off with the square of distance, so a target 3 meters (10 ft.) away receives 100 times the effect of one 30 meters away. An EMP-enhanced Tow missile would produce a pulse strong enough to destroy what it hits, but should not disrupt electronics over a wide area. The possibilities of electronic “friendly fire” rule out more powerful tactical e-bombs, but Kopp warns that even smaller versions may cause unpredictable collateral damage. If urban electrical power or telephone wiring picks up the pulse, damage could extend over a wide area.

The smallest weapon that the Army is looking to upgrade is the M77 bomblet fired by the Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS). A bomblet has a shaped-charge warhead and throws out antipersonnel fragments. Bomblets cover a wide area—one launcher can fire a 12-rocket salvo blanketing an area the size of six football fields—and are used against soft targets. An EMP-enhanced version would cover the same area, providing even destruction over the target zone.

If the M77 can be upgraded, shoulder-launched rockets and similar weapons could be modified to produce an EMP. Small infantry rockets have limited effectiveness against modern armor. An EMP-enhanced round might not penetrate but could provide a “soft kill” capability that immobilizes a vehicle. This damage is hard to repair and would probably require the replacement of electronic systems.

The U.S. Air Force has an interest in this area, but few details are available. Air-to-air missiles might gain considerably with EMP capabilities, if they could be modified without affecting performance. Antiradiation missiles that target air-defense radar would be another market.

The U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Indian Head Div. wants to build a warhead that knocks out improvised explosive devices (IEDs) with a plasma fireball. The aim would be to produce a controlled explosion, destroying the IED without detonating it, and so minimizing collateral damage.

Tests in 2007 used explosively generated plasma against artillery and mortar rounds, which are often the basis for IEDs. Information about the project has been removed from the Indian Head web site and no details are being released. This suggests the work is at an advanced stage, possibly field-testing.

Multifunction warheads may finally bring e-bombs into the mainstream of armaments, by making a munition effective against all targets as well as electronic ones.

Photo: US Army;Oleh:David Hambling

F-35 May Need Thermal Management Changes

noreply@blogger.com (RedJunker) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:30:00 -0700

MELBOURNE, Australia – The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II may be redesigned to improve its ability to absorb heat from its electronics and systems.

The aircraft is meeting the specification for thermal management, but the Joint Strike Fighter program’s deputy executive officer, Maj. Gen. David Heinz (select), says he is asking contractors to assess the costs of changes to give it a bigger margin over the requirement.

“We meet that requirement but it is a very tough requirement,” Heinz says, adding that, while he has asked for studies for an improved margin, “at the moment I don’t need it.”

The F-35 is designed to transfer heat from its powerful electronics and systems to its fuel, to keep the aircraft cool and make it less detectable by infrared cameras.

Under most conditions, that presents no challenge, but if the aircraft is at the end of a mission, it will have little fuel aboard to absorb the heat energy, says Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s executive vice president for F-35 program integration. And the toughest part of the specification is to distribute the heat into the remaining fuel while operating in the tropics in hot and high conditions.

While Heinz says the aircraft can do that, his interest in finding ways of increasing the margin – for example, by circulating the fuel faster and reducing the amount of generated heat – implies that the aircraft is only just meeting its specification without much room for comfort.

High fuel temperature would not result in critical failure, Burbage says, speaking at the Australian International Airshow here. The limit on the temperature is set by the heat tolerance of the full-authority digital engine control unit submerged in a fuel tank, he says. Overly hot fuel will shorten the unit’s life, but not cause it to suddenly fail.

Apart from a design change, there is an operational way to work around excess fuel temperature: fly higher, to reach cooler air.

That method may not suit every mission, however, and it will obviously be unavailable at the end of a flight, when the small volume of remaining fuel presents the greatest challenge but the pilot must descend for landing. This is particularly an issue for the F-35B, the vertical-takeoff-and-landing version that must hover and land at high power at the end of a mission without exceeding fuel temperature limits.

Meanwhile, extensive testing by Lockheed Martin and the Royal Australian Air Force, an intended customer, has found that the F-35 is not as noisy as feared. That issue has threatened to disrupt basing plans and potentially presents health risks to ground personnel.

The F-35 is only about as noisy as an F-16 fitted with a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 engine, Burbage says. It is quieter than the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor and the Boeing F/A0-18E/F Super Hornet. “It is noisier than a classic Hornet [F/A-18A-D] but not much noisier,” says Air Vice Marshal John Harvey, manager of Australia’s New Air Combat Capability program.

Moreover, the F-35 often will be able to minimize airfield noise by taking off without afterburner, partly due to its internal weapons and fuel stowage.

Photo: Lockheed Martin; Oleh:Bradley Perrett