Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: UK ER.134T Projects
« Last post by blackkite on Today at 05:22:38 pm »
You mean this airbrake?
2
USAF’s Future ‘SiAW’ Strike Weapon To Arm F-X, B-21


Quote
The U.S. Air Force is moving forward with two new weapons for its future fighters and bombers, the previously undisclosed Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) and Small Advanced Capabilities Missile (SACM).                                                                       
SiAW is an air-to-surface weapon, designed to “hold at risk the surface elements that make up the anti-access/area-denial environment,” the service says in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 29.

SACM is a miniature air-to-air weapon that will cost less and can be carried in greater numbers than today’s radar-guided Raytheon AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles and heat-seeking AIM-9X Sidewinder.

SACM was spawned by the Air Force Research Laboratory and the concept is now being matured under contract with Raytheon, along with the separate Miniature Self-Defense Munition. The laboratory began speaking publicly about SACM last year, but with scant detail.

There has been no prior mention of the SiAW surface attack weapon, and the acronym does not appear in any recent Air Force budget documents or technology roadmaps.

Service officials tell Congress that both weapons are being supported and are “crucial to realizing the full potential of our next generation of aircraft.” SACM is intended for future fighters born of the Penetrating Counter-Air (PCA) program.

SiAW will arm the Lockheed Martin F-35, Northrop Grumman B-21 and PCA/F-X. Both are designed for high-end warfare against peer adversaries such as Russia and China, which have each fielded an eclectic mix of surface-to-air and air-to-air weapons designed to undermine U.S. dominance of the skies.
3
Aerospace / Re: DARPA Launches Gremlins Program
« Last post by marauder2048 on Today at 04:55:50 pm »
Lubrication is also a challenge since most engines use a total loss system,
The stated requirement of 1.2kW is way more than cruise missiles demand. A bigger generator would be required, and i wonder if the engine cycle would be ok with a much increased drain.
If the air force were willing to fund engine development, it may be a different story. I think there is a need for small UAV gas turbines for both Gremlins and other programs such as AFRL's LCAAT.

There is a separate Air Force effort to improve miniature turbojet/turbofan durability through new materials for the bearings/housing/cages etc which would permit just JP-8 lubrication.
So ideally, not so much a redesign but a recoating/refabrication of some of the components to give them 60+ hours of life.
And 1.2 kW isn't that much more than what's provisioned for the MALD payloads.

But I agree with you that wide-envelope windmill start capability is a real challenge.
4
Aerospace / Re: SpaceX (general discussion)
« Last post by sienar on Today at 04:46:48 pm »
5
Naval Projects / Re: "Husky" fifth-generation submarine (Russian Federation)
« Last post by RP1 on Today at 04:41:19 pm »
Quote
Looks like multiple pump jets plus a screw at the stern? What's going on there?

Single screw with X-planes, I thought. Popular nowadays.
6
Naval Projects / Re: Russian and Soviet Aircraft Carriers
« Last post by RP1 on Today at 04:39:20 pm »
Quote
Why would you want to beach the aircraft carrier?

It's an LST, too - there is a vehicle ramp at the bow. It's not a completely absurd idea, if you want a single vessel to have multiple methods of landing a force, it's just...  very crowded conceptually.
7
Aerospace / Re: SpaceX (general discussion)
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 04:16:19 pm »
"It's been 15 years to get here. . ."  and this is exactly why the private sector, and countries willing to accept failure, will dominate the future.
8
Aerospace / Re: SpaceX (general discussion)
« Last post by Michel Van on Today at 04:00:08 pm »


Today is begin of new era in Space flight: entering low-priced launch
SpaceX manage to launch there reused Falcon9 and to land save on there Drone Ship
9
Aerospace / Re: SpaceX (general discussion)
« Last post by Dragon029 on Today at 03:49:54 pm »
Successful launch, landing and therefore reuse of the first stage.
10
Amazon UK finally revised the revised delivery date to match Crecy, when the last date in February slipped again, Amazon put it to the End of march but a check on the Crecy site listed the 28th of April, so hopefully it will finally be out in a months time.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10