Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
A deception jammer in other words.
2
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by Arjen on Today at 05:49:48 am »
Why does it cost money to upgrade software from 2B to current_released code? We update modules routinely with new code for no cost to the end_user? Unless it is also hardware... But I don't think it is. Spending a couple hours re-flashing the ECUs is just hours*employee_hourly_rate. I don't get it...
Block 3 runs on the newer TR2 processor. Block 3i was Block 2B rewritten to run on the TR2 processor. Block 3i and later Block 3F can't be run on the older TR1 processor.
3
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by Flyaway on Today at 05:42:06 am »
4

Thanks for the information,

If you say this is the later model, then what about the early model? Was the early model designated for special attack? I agree the later models were for special attack but its unclear from the early ones. DO you have any more info on this?

Thanks



I am just guessing, but I would say that the earlier models were USED for special attack (like many other aircraft), but were not designed for special attack like the model 43 was.

I agree, its just a shame we cannot prove whether the early model was or not.

Could the D4Y4 release its 800kg though? Could it be used like a traditional dive bomber? And if so, do you have a source at all?

Many thanks
5
Aerospace / Re: Air Force Could Pursue Stealthy Aerial-Refueling Tanker
« Last post by Flyaway on Today at 05:34:37 am »
USAF explores cloaking device for tankers

Quote
The US Air Force will next month unveil the results of a study into survivability gaps on its fleet of tankers and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft, the service’s head of Air Mobility Command (AMC) says.

Quote
AMC chief Gen Carlton Everhart has previously discussed a "cloaking" capability for the USAF’s next-generation KC-Z tanker, which would allow the aircraft to fend off adversaries by manipulating its radar signature. This process would involve taking radiant energy from a radar and diffusing it to disguise a tanker or airlifter's outline, he says.

Speaking at the Air Force Association's annual convention, Everhart says: “It’s not as simple as I think it is. If you get one electron out, you just identified yourself to the adversary.”

Everhart has not commented on whether the USAF will release a request for information linked to the so-called cloaking capability, but confirms that he discussed the concept with industry on the floor of the Air, Space and Cyber conference.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-explores-cloaking-device-for-tankers-441299/
6
Aerospace / Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Last post by Airplane on Today at 05:24:01 am »
"US considers non-combat-rated subset of F-35 fleet"

18 September, 2017 SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com BY: Stephen Trimble Washington DC

Source:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-considers-non-combat-rated-subset-of-f-35-fleet-441248/

Quote

Scores of US-owned Lockheed Martin F-35s would remain in the fleet with a software operating system rated below combat-grade under one of several cost-saving proposals under review by the Joint Programme Office.

Delays during the development stage caused Lockheed to deliver more than 108 aircraft with Block 2B software. Each fighter requires 150-160 modifications to be raised to the combat-rated Block 3 standard, says Vice Adm Matt Winter, the F-35’s programme executive.

The looming modification bills are threatening to suck resources from a looming production ramp-up with more than 900 aircraft projected for delivery over the next five years, Winter says.

“We’re looking at solution spaces to give our warfighters options,” Winter says.

One of those options is to keep a subset of the F-35 fleet at the Block 2B software standard. It would follow a practice used on the Lockheed F-22 programme, which has about 30 fighters maintained at Block 20 for training missions and about 150 fighters using the go-to-war Block 30/35 standard.

Why does it cost money to upgrade software from 2B to current_released code? We update modules routinely with new code for no cost to the end_user? Unless it is also hardware... But I don't think it is. Spending a couple hours re-flashing the ECUs is just hours*employee_hourly_rate. I don't get it...
7
Designation Systems / Re: Czech Aero aircraft designations
« Last post by hesham on Today at 05:20:18 am »
From; Ceskoslovenske Letecvi 1918-1939;

A.211   was a two seat recce aircraft or Project ?,maybe related to A.11 ?.
8

Thanks for the information,

If you say this is the later model, then what about the early model? Was the early model designated for special attack? I agree the later models were for special attack but its unclear from the early ones. DO you have any more info on this?

Thanks

I am just guessing, but I would say that the earlier models were USED for special attack (like many other aircraft), but were not designed for special attack like the model 43 was.
9
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Convair B-36 Derivatives (B-36C)
« Last post by hesham on Today at 05:05:03 am »
Nice find RAP.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10