Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-10 Topic
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 10:02:14 pm »
Sorry, I should have been more specific. For example, the J-10b already has divertless inlet, looks to be getting thrust vectoring, integrated IR sensor, more advanced aerodynamics/canard layout.
All things the F-16 doesn't/will never have.

 Alot more growth potential over the F-16 with new engine (some conformal tanks) and increasingly better avionics. And overall a better value and will be produced much more cheaply than Lockheed could ever roll out a newer F-16V or I for.

With newer avionics will even compete with the F-35 apart from internal weapons carriage. But maybe the Chinese will figure that one out for a future version of the J-10 as well.

The F-16 could have had a diverterless inlet, 3D TVC, IRST, an AESA, and 36k thrust over a decade ago (probably closer to two decades ago).  We could have done one better and put it all on an F-16XL.  We decided not to.
My point exactly. Sure a couple f-16 one-off's had some of that installed over the last 30 years. But all those great items that were decided not to be put on the f-16 will end up on the j-10 at a much cheaper price and will be operational.
We'd rather have F-35s than an uber F-16.
2
Military / Re: DDG-1000
« Last post by Moose on Today at 09:58:57 pm »
From GAO's "WEAPON SYSTEMS ANNUAL ASSESSMENT" April 2018 (my highlights).
If the Zumwalt hull ends up forming a baseline for the CG, it's imperative that additional units are purchased to bridge the gap until Cruiser buys start. Every year of gap will just make the process of re-starting that much more problematic.
3
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-10 Topic
« Last post by kcran567 on Today at 09:57:02 pm »
Sorry, I should have been more specific. For example, the J-10b already has divertless inlet, looks to be getting thrust vectoring, integrated IR sensor, more advanced aerodynamics/canard layout.
All things the F-16 doesn't/will never have.

 Alot more growth potential over the F-16 with new engine (some conformal tanks) and increasingly better avionics. And overall a better value and will be produced much more cheaply than Lockheed could ever roll out a newer F-16V or I for.

With newer avionics will even compete with the F-35 apart from internal weapons carriage. But maybe the Chinese will figure that one out for a future version of the J-10 as well.

The F-16 could have had a diverterless inlet, 3D TVC, IRST, an AESA, and 36k thrust over a decade ago (probably closer to two decades ago).  We could have done one better and put it all on an F-16XL.  We decided not to.
My point exactly. Sure a couple f-16 one-off's had some of that installed over the last 30 years. But all those great items that were decided not to be put on the f-16 for political  or whatever other reason, will end up on the j-10 at a much cheaper price and will be soon operational. The j-10b/c and future versions are really developing into what the f-16 should have developed into. Even then, because it's such a newer design it has more growth potential than the f-16 has. Too bad the f-16xl lost to the f-15e.
4
Aerospace / Re: SpaceX (general discussion)
« Last post by Michel Van on Today at 08:52:13 pm »
Musk is saying Spacex will attempt a 2nd stage recovery using an inflatable hypersonic decelerator to reduce speeds re-entering the atmosphere.  The stage will then be captured using one of their fairing catcher boats.  He didn't clarify if the stage would use booster burns to slow down before dropping into the net or if a parachute would also be deployed.  No timeline but it will be an interesting comparison with ULA to see who pursues this technology more aggressively.

Musk on Twitter

Quote
SpaceX will try to bring rocket upper stage back from orbital velocity using a giant party balloon
follow by
Quote
And then land on a bouncy house

I guess the second stage will have inflatable heat shield for reentry
decerate to terminal velocity and land with help Airbags

Seems some one is putting NASA - IRVE program and Mars rover landing system to good use...
5
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-10 Topic
« Last post by Avimimus on Today at 08:45:10 pm »
That would've been pretty.
6
Military / Re: DDG-1000
« Last post by seruriermarshal on Today at 08:40:57 pm »
GD Bath Iron Works Delivered the future USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) to the US Navy

Posted On Wednesday, 25 April 2018 09:31

The U.S. Navy accepted hull, mechanical and electrical (HM&E) delivery of the future USS Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001) from shipbuilder General Dynamics Bath Iron Works (BIW) April 24.

Delivery of DDG 1001 follows extensive tests, trials and demonstrations of the ship's HM&E systems, including the boat handling, anchor and mooring systems as well as major demonstrations of the damage control, ballasting, navigation and communications systems.

"Delivery of DDG 1001 marks the culmination of years of dedication and hard work from our Navy and industry team," said Capt. Kevin Smith, DDG 1000 program manager, Program Executive Office, Ships. "We have incorporated many lessons learned from DDG 1000 and are proud of the end result. DDG 1001 will be a tremendous asset to the Navy."

The 610-foot, wave-piercing tumblehome ship design provides a wide array of advancements. The shape of the superstructure and the arrangement of its antennas significantly reduce radar cross section, making the ship less visible to enemy radars.

Like the first ship of the class, USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), DDG 1001 employs an innovative and highly survivable integrated power system (IPS), distributing 1,000 volts of direct current across the ship. The IPS's unique architectural capabilities include the ability to allocate all 78 megawatts of installed power to propulsion, ship's service and combat system loads from the same gas turbine prime movers based on operational requirements.

DDG 1000-class ships are delivered through a two-phase approach in which combat systems are installed and activated subsequent to HM&E delivery. Following HM&E delivery, Michael Monsoor will transit to its homeport in San Diego, California, for commissioning in January 2019 and to begin combat systems activation, testing and trials.

DDG 1001 is the second ship of the Zumwalt class. The third and final ship of the class, the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002), is currently in construction at BIW's shipyard along with Arleigh Burke-class destroyers Daniel Inouye (DDG 118), Carl M. Levin (DDG 120) and John Basilone (DDG 122).
7
Aerospace / Re: Eurofighter Typhoon
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 07:38:02 pm »
Tonal change or merely headline change?

Germany doesn't have any nukes.  Oh, they think we'll enable their Typhoon to carry them after they pass on F-35s?

8
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-10 Topic
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 07:27:43 pm »
Sorry, I should have been more specific. For example, the J-10b already has divertless inlet, looks to be getting thrust vectoring, integrated IR sensor, more advanced aerodynamics/canard layout.
All things the F-16 doesn't/will never have.

 Alot more growth potential over the F-16 with new engine (some conformal tanks) and increasingly better avionics. And overall a better value and will be produced much more cheaply than Lockheed could ever roll out a newer F-16V or I for.

With newer avionics will even compete with the F-35 apart from internal weapons carriage. But maybe the Chinese will figure that one out for a future version of the J-10 as well.

The F-16 could have had a diverterless inlet, 3D TVC, IRST, an AESA, and 36k thrust over a decade ago (probably closer to two decades ago).  We could have done one better and put it all on an F-16XL.  We decided not to.
9
Propulsion / Messerschmitt Propellers
« Last post by sienar on Today at 07:18:36 pm »
P6 - variable pitch reversing 3 blade, testing on one 109F and several 109Gs
P7 - variable pitch two blade, used on the 108
P8 - variable pitch reversing 3 blade, for the 309 and later 209, tested on the 190v15

Does anyone have more information on these props? Was there a P5 and earlier?
10
Aerospace / Re: Chengdu J-10 Topic
« Last post by kcran567 on Today at 07:14:28 pm »
Sorry, I should have been more specific. For example, the J-10b already has divertless inlet, looks to be getting thrust vectoring, integrated IR sensor, more advanced aerodynamics/canard layout.
All things the F-16 doesn't/will never have.

 Alot more growth potential over the F-16 with new engine (some conformal tanks) and increasingly better avionics. And overall a better value and will be produced much more cheaply than Lockheed could ever roll out a newer F-16V or I for.

With newer avionics will even compete with the F-35 apart from internal weapons carriage. But maybe the Chinese will figure that one out for a future version of the J-10 as well.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10