Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Italian Heavy Fighters
« Last post by Ifor on Today at 08:29:10 am »
I really do hope the do an Italian or Axis secret projects at sometime.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: PRC Peking Red Banner 1
« Last post by famvburg on Today at 08:17:44 am »
Thanks! It seems to indicate only the prototype at the time of writing and suspected if their were no development problems, it would have a long production life. It is interesting that it was actually based on the Yak-12 and not the An-2. Another thing I disagree with the book is classing the An-2 with the DHC-2. IMO, there is too much difference in the two. Even the DHC-3 doesn’t compare to the An-2, again, IMO. Thanks for the info.
I have wondered about the engine for a while.
Whilst i am sure there is some parts commonality with civilian models..running a fleet of less than 150 airframes on a unique afterburning engine can't be easy.

Still, to re-engine with a 404 would probably entail new build might as well start afresh instead of a 30 year design.
That is pretty much the case.  In some of the research I did at the National Archives, I saw reports stating that Concorde economics weren't good, even by 1960's standards.  I remember seeing information TWA turned over to McNamara about this.  Sadly, I didn't copy these things, but any of the American designs would have been either more profitable than Concorde, or at least less of a loss.

While I don't recall seeing economic analyses like the one I posted of the NAC-60, I suspect they're out there, somewhere, to be discovered.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Postwar Payen projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 06:30:04 am »
Thanks for sharing Hesham

Ant service my dear Deltafan.
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Italian Heavy Fighters
« Last post by hesham on Today at 06:26:55 am »
Wow,many thanks my dear MC72.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Postwar Payen projects
« Last post by Deltafan on Today at 05:49:18 am »
Thanks for sharing Hesham
Missile Projects / Re: Patriot SAM replacement
« Last post by bring_it_on on Today at 03:26:44 am »
Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System extends hundreds of miles to enable the multi-domain battlespace

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – Aug. 15, 2018 – The Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC)-developed Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) Battle Command System (IBCS) successfully demonstrated its ability to scale up and network across long distances during a recent U.S. Army-led test. The evaluation was conducted by U.S. Army soldiers over a five-week period with air and missile defense assets located at sites in New Mexico, Texas and Alabama.“The ability of IBCS to integrate sensors and shooters over a vast area and grow the single integrated air picture offers huge advantages to air defenders and the joint forces,” said Dan Verwiel, vice president and general manager, missile defense and protective systems, Northrop Grumman. “This was demonstrated using an operationally realistic equipment laydown across several states and showed how IBCS is truly a force multiplier.

“This Soldier Checkout Event (SCOE) demonstrated the ability of IBCS to scale broadly. It further demonstrated IBCS’ robust network management technologies to efficiently and effectively maintain voice, data and video connectivity for the warfighter’s increasingly complex and challenging environment,” said Verwiel.

As part of SCOE 4.0, the multi-node distributed test examined IBCS’ scalability, resilience and performance under stressing threat conditions. The open-architecture IBCS networked more than 20 nodes across White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico; Fort Bliss, Texas; and Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. Integrated to operate as a single system, the test involved nine IBCS engagement operations centers and 12 IBCS integrated fire control network relays, along with Sentinel short range air defense radars and Patriot radars, Patriot Advance Capability Two (PAC-2), PAC-3 and PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement interceptors.

The test required IBCS to virtually form an IAMD task force to defend four critical assets while tracking ‘red’ and ‘blue’ fighter aircraft, cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. Multiple two-hour scenarios were run to check IBCS abilities, including: providing and managing a network to maintain voice, data and video connectivity; performing friend-or-foe identification of air objects and forming the single integrated air picture; and planning, executing and monitoring simulated threat engagements.

The test also included dynamically adding and removing nodes to confirm IBCS’ ability to self-configure as a mobile ad hoc network.

The IBCS-enabled enterprise system provides significant benefits over standalone, proprietary systems that merely ‘talk’ with each other. With IBCS, air and missile defense commanders can orchestrate forces over extensive distances using whatever means of communications that are available. Today, commanders are restricted by the proprietary and limited networks tied to the individual closed systems.

“Extensive testing has shown IBCS to be increasingly mature and its capabilities will be game-changers on the battlefield. IBCS delivers an unprecedented degree of integration to fill gaps in today’s air defenses while enabling multi-domain concepts such as affordably integrating unmanned or fifth generation fighter aircraft,” said Verwiel.

IBCS continues to validate the advantages of an open-systems, net-centric, enterprise approach to air and missile defense for getting capabilities to the warfighter that make a pivotal difference on the battlefield. Previous SCOE trials proved IBCS’ value for building a significantly more accurate integrated air picture and its effectiveness for countering electronic attacks.

The system has already demonstrated its ability to take out live targets, having conducted a successful intercept on its inaugural flight test and a more difficult “engage-on-remote” on its second flight test. During its third flight test, IBCS simultaneously intercepted two types of threats with two different interceptor types by providing command-and-control for sensors and weapons never designed to work with each other. Two more successful flight tests in support of the Indirect Fire Protection Capability were conducted with Sidewinder and Longbow Hellfire missiles. Both missiles were integrated into the system within a few short months.

IBCS is the central component of the Army’s future IAMD construct. The program is managed by the Army Program Executive Office for Missiles and Space, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama.
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: PRC Peking Red Banner 1
« Last post by toura on Today at 02:33:33 am »
I Don't remember where i've found this...a long time ago
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: PRC Peking Red Banner 1
« Last post by walter on Today at 02:19:49 am »
A photo of the Red Banner 1 and some text from Flight Magazine.
Did the book you refer to mention anything about producton?.  Afaik there was only a prototype.
Red Banner No 1 From its nose back to the
rear of its cabin, the all-metal Red Banner
is little different from the Yak-12; but there
the resemblance ends, for it has a shallow
tail-boom and clam-shell rear loading
doors. The usual 240 h.p. AI-14R radial
engine is retained, driving a Type V-530D
variable-pitch propeller. Payload consists
of up to six people or 1,1001b of freight.
The prototype was built in Peking,
probably by the team which produced the
Peking No 1.
• Span, 41ft 8in; length, 29ft Win; height
lift 2in; wing area, 260 sq ft; gross weight,
3,3301b; empty weight, 2,425lb; max speed,
111 m.p.h.; cruising speed, 84 m.p.h.; service
ceiling, 13,780ft; range, 310 miles
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10