AircraftNews.Com

To no one’s great surprise, on Monday President Obama canceled the Man on the Moon program started by his predecessor Present Bush the younger. It always looked like a forlorn hope. Common comments were that it was under funded and motivated by the wrong impulses. Some very uncharitable persons suggested it was more about getting some good vibes by appealing to public pride in past achievements to counter adverse vibes from other directions.
In its place President Obama has directed NASA to develop a more focused and creative cost effective interplanetary explorations strategy.
Some have said the decision is long over due and that the previous plan was sub optimal. It has for instance been recently suggested that a better plan would be to aim for the colonization of one of the moons of Mars as a first step in the extensive exploration of Mars which seems generally regarded as the next major step in man’s further exploration of the solar system.
Read more…

The long running saga of the Airbus A400 moves slowly to what seems to be the only logical conclusion which is that the customers will have to cough up much more for considerably less. Various spokespersons for the interested parties have been talking tough but taking it all together there seems no other logical outcome. The customers particularly France and Germany have no other viable alternative and international affairs are moving in the direction of more and more requirements for foreign powers to intervene in global situations requiring massive airlift. If for instance Germany were to not go ahead with the a400 acquisition it would face enormous cost to refurbish its current fleet and still end up with a very much inferior product. The issue then seems to be simply one of who will cop how much of the cost overruns. Certainly there seems to be something systemic about the cost over runs as almost no modern aviation program has been finished on time and on budget. This is something which surely the responsible parties know and can plan for so one wonders if it is not just a game of very high stakes poker. Read more…

What do we look back on. Fuel shocks, peak oil, environmental concerns, civilian space travel, the spread of mass air transport, innovation, war, the rise of killing airborne Robots and terrorism. 9/11 was perhaps the most riveting and defining moment of the last decade with the most wide spread consequences. It was focusing and a watershed and yet its seeds were being sown for many of the preceding years. Osama wrought much more than he knew and we have not yet learned all that we must from this single event. To me one of the central facts is that air travel is not like anything else. It is perhaps outside electronic communications one of the most pivotal of world activities. While people are people there will be those who would do harm and those who would protect. Maybe the aviation community needs to be even more proactive than it has been in exploring the development and administration of aviation. Watching the rise and fall of airlines some of them state supported and others not (with the relevant states breathing many sighs of relief that they are not involved) it is tempting to conclude that some sort of stabilizing interventions at a multinational level are increasingly called for. Meaningful Dialogue between the players would be a good start.
Happy new year to all.

I was wondering what were the most important developments of the Decade. So perhaps for starters I will ask all those out in the blogosphere. What has been the essence of it all for the world, the West, the East and the developing world? In Oz it has been as usual a hectic end of the year but not too much pivotal stuff in the last month of Aviation. In the decade, lots of stuff but still sorting it out. Efficiency, Security (much madness still about) the end of piloted planes etc. Much to think about. More to come. Tell me your thoughts.

When you think about it, it makes sense in a way. If you are a terrorist you may be a bit short of manufacturing power and money especially when compared to the West and so it makes sense that you find a way to take over control of the UAVs that are shooting you up.
It may be cynical but to me the recent claim by the Military that they have plugged a security breach tells me that this is possible and will happen. What a Christmas present for the infidels that would be! Let the good old USofA build them and then take them over. A good bit of spying would help. I wonder how hard it would be. Read more…

Airbus Military this week hopes to finally fly the A400M military airlifter, kicking off a three-year effort to get the transport into the first customer’s hands.

Barring poor weather or technical issues, Airbus Military officials late this week expect to complete a roughly 3-hr. flight from the company’s facility here to demonstrate the aircraft’s basic handling characteristics.

The event has been a long time coming, owing, in part, to development delays with the engine and subsystems that have set the program back several years. The event marks the official beginning of a flight-test program that calls for 4,370 hr., says Eric Isorce, chief flight test engineer. About 60% of the effort will focus on military certification, the balance will be dedicated to gaining European Aviation Safety Agency approval.

Six crew will be onboard, backed by 50 engineers at each of the two main telemetry stations in Seville and Toulouse.

The aircraft will initially be flown in direct law with some dampening. After takeoff—rotation speed is projected to be 120 kt.—the aircraft will climb to a medium altitude and the gear will be retracted. At 10,000 ft. some basic performance checks will occur, the aircraft will be taken close to its maximum speed of around Mach 0.72, and then to its minimum speed, says Ed Strongman, Airbus’s chief military test pilot who will be at the controls. Afterward, flight controls will be shifted to normal law and further segments of the flight envelope will be explored before returning to Seville.
Read more…

The trouble stricken Airbus A400 is said to be on the verge of its first flight after many months of delays. Most of these delays have been sheeted home to the engines which were virtually a clean sheet design but in reality they were a result of a very aggressive development plan and the very ambitious performance specifications. This must have been very embarrasing after the A380 debacle but their major competitor Boeing has been prevented from crowing because of the delays the initially much vaunted Dreamliner has suffered. The A400 delays have been very expensive and have lead to the project appearing frequently on the verge of being cancelled. There have certainly been very expensive consequences and losses, with the number of orders being cut and some even cancelled entirely.

If the new development schedule can be met it may still be that the aircraft will attract a wide market and come to be a mainstay of Military airlift.

The A400 is intended to carry up to nearly 40,000 kg 1800nm, cruise at up to 400 kts and take off from unprepared fields under 1000 m. It is planned to have a ferry range of 5000nm. Wow. Read more…

Higher And Higher
November 21, 2009: Now that the U.S. Marine Corps has a squadron of ten MV-22 tilt rotor transports in Afghanistan, these aircraft are being put to work by taking advantage of some unique capabilities. For example, MV-22s operate more effectively in the thin air of the mountains than the helicopters currently used. However, above 20,000 feet (6,500 meters), the MV-22s can only carry cargo, as there is no oxygen for passengers (although this can be arranged for special situations.)

The MV-22s, which fly higher and faster than the helicopters they replace, are less vulnerable to ground fire. MV-22s were only fired on a few times in Iraq, and none of the aircraft were hit. The high speed and altitude (at least 9,000 feet, or 3,000 meters), kept the aircraft out range of most enemy weapons. Helicopters fly lower and slower. To do otherwise would further reduce the range of a helicopter. A big advantage in Afghanistan is the higher speed (about twice that of helicopters), enabling reinforcements to reach their objective in a more timely fashion. MV-22s also have longer range than helicopters, meaning more of Afghanistan is within range of fast moving reinforcements (of troops and supplies.)

The MV-22s proved easier to maintain than the CH-46 aircraft they are replacing. The MV-22s needed 9.5 man hours of maintenance for each hour in the air, versus 24 hours of maintenance for each hour the CH-46s fly. These helicopters are all over twenty years old, which adds a few hours to their maintenance requirements. While the MV-22 required less maintenance than expected, the dust and sand in Iraq led to some engines being replaced earlier than expected. That problem has been tended to, so the MV-22s in Afghanistan will have less of a problem.

Some of the MV-22s sent to Afghanistan are equipped with a GAU-2B machine-gun fitted to the bottom of the aircraft. The GAU-2B is a remote control turret using a six-barrel 7.62mm machine-gun. This system has a rate of fire of 3,000 rounds per minute (50 per second), and max range of 1,500 meters. The system weighs a few hundred pounds and includes 4,000 rounds of ammo. A member of the crew uses a video game like interface to operate the gun.

The marine MV-22s can carry 24 troops 700 kilometers (vertical take-off, level flight, landing, and return) at 400 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 is replacing the CH-46E helicopter, which can carry 12 troops 350 kilometers at a speed of 200 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 can carry a 10,000-pound external sling load 135 kilometers, while the CH-46E can carry 3,000 pounds only 90 kilometers.
From http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairmo/articles/20091121.aspx

Buck Rogers is not here yet but a number of significant milestones have been passed in recent months and it seems as if we are moving steadily to the point where robots will fight robots with wonder weapons and humans will watch. Presumably at some stage it will be necessary for the victors to incinerate or otherwise painfully excoriate some of the enemy in order to make the point but it will become progressively easier for risk averse nations, with populations that dislike being sent in to battle to be killed, to assert themselves over less well endowed competitors. The weapons race looks set to recapitulate the evolution of the Combat fighter jet which has now become so expensive even the richest of nations can only afford a small number. War will become more and more expensive so that less and less money is available for taking care of humanity. That figures if you look at recent global behavior.
The most recent example of the advances referred to here is the successful shooting down of 5 UAVs by ground based laser weapons (must have a spiffy euphemism or technical term: these are directed energy weapons) and other workers claim to have passed the so called critical 100 KWatt boundary with conventionally pumped solid state Lasers rather than the more toxic and difficult chemical lasers. Hang on for the ride. Read more…

There are many things which should remind us that the US of A is a mighty power and that the somewhat fearful China worship that surrounds us is a little over done for the time being at least. Some of these things really only hit you when you visit the US. Their penchant for big has to be experienced to be really perceived and the massive capacity of the armed forces is really only apparent after a bit of reflection when you put together what you can see during say a week or so of touring. Everywhere you go awesome and potent military hardware is roaring about practicing their skills and doing their works. And this mind you in continental USA where there are no enemy armies lined up within shooting range and in a country that has never I think, had a foreign attack on their shores since the declaration of independence. Cause and effect?? Maybe. Anyway it is impressive. Another recent event which might have caught the eye and is evidence of the above is the 45th anniversary of the C-2A Greyhound. For it to be worthwhile for a nation to design and produce an aircraft specifically for the purpose of transporting people and materiel to Aircraft Carriers at sea is not something many nations have to worry about and yet there is was, 45 years of it being celebrated by Northrop Grumman on Nov 18th. What an awesome effort it all is. Are we the safer for it??
I think probably yes. What do you think? Read more…