Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Worth bearing in mind Germany already operates both the Tornado and the Typhoon - something that seems to be overlooked in this news is that just because Germany may favour the F-35 as a Tornado replacement, it doesn't mean that they might not also be interested in another future aircraft to compliment it, such as the proposed Airbus fighter. I'm not saying thats what they'll do, or that it would make sense operationally or financially, but as we all know the F-35 can't dogfight (at least according to the internet forums on which all military purchasing decisions are made... ;)) so the Germans might be interested in a 7th Gen 5D thrust vectoring hyper-agile mind-controlled Mach 4+ fighter to go alongside it...

Edited by F-ZeroOne
Typos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess. Though none of the launch customers of the A400M or NH90 seem to have any confidence that Airbus can deliver on their promises. Are there any other viable European entities that could deliver capability (and workshare)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No link, but Saudi Arabia has expressed interest in buying the Textron Scorpion light attack aircraft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny that on a political level, France and Germany want to co-develop a successor to the Typhoon and Rafale, while the french and german branches at Airbus are basically at war with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'twas ever thus. France was one of the initial partners for what became the Typhoon, and left in a huff, and the Royal Navy was originally a partner for a pan-European warship design before leaving and developing the Type 45 on their own... the obvious answer to "European entities" is BAE Systems, though to the best of my knowledge they've never created a fighter aircraft entirely on their own before. (Or maybe... SAAB?).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-11-09 at 7:45 AM, electric indigo said:

And the Tornado replacement is now the Typhoon/Rafale successor:

http://www.janes.com/article/75550/airbus-reveals-future-new-fighter-concept

1712546.jpg

I gotta say I have a soft spot for some of these defence industry commercials, a lot of them are slick and well done. I particularly like the BGM in this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the autonomous drones surrounded the New Fighter, did anyone else call them Simon, Peter, and John?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2017 at 11:02 PM, AN/ALQ128 said:

I gotta say I have a soft spot for some of these defence industry commercials, a lot of them are slick and well done. I particularly like the BGM in this one.

 

Let me just pipe up with a stupid question, why would anyone ever buy a fighter from a company called Airbus.  You might as well buy sexy from a company called pile of crap.  Seriously, given Airbus's trouble with the A400M, does anyone realistically want that particular company to do a new fighter?

I think they missed a line item in their bullet points at the end.  HACKED.

Edited by kalvasflam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, kalvasflam said:

Let me just pipe up with a stupid question, why would anyone ever buy a fighter from a company called Airbus. 

Why would anyone buy a fighter from a company called Boeing? Oh, that's right, the US. Because Boeing purchased McDonell-Douglas. Maybe Airbus hired on some folks with experience in fighters. 

 

12 hours ago, kalvasflam said:

Seriously, given Airbus's trouble with the A400M, does anyone realistically want that particular company to do a new fighter?

That, I believe is a more legitimate concern over Airbus producing a fighter. Especially given how networked the thing will supposedly be. 

On 11/14/2017 at 2:02 AM, AN/ALQ128 said:

I gotta say I have a soft spot for some of these defence industry commercials, a lot of them are slick and well done. I particularly like the BGM in this one.

I'm really skeptical of this. There are too many points of failure built in to this. Not to mention, the workload on the pilot. It had better be a 2 seater. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/25/2017 at 11:07 AM, Valkyrie Driver said:

I'm really skeptical of this. There are too many points of failure built in to this. Not to mention, the workload on the pilot. It had better be a 2 seater. 

Sensor fusion is the hot new thing in the defence industry. Supposedly, that means the sensors and computers will cut away/automate a lot of the extra work needed on gathering and processing data, leaving the pilot more time to focus on planning and executing the mission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AN/ALQ128 said:

Sensor fusion is the hot new thing in the defence industry. Supposedly, that means the sensors and computers will cut away/automate a lot of the extra work needed on gathering and processing data, leaving the pilot more time to focus on planning and executing the mission.

Call me old fashioned, but, I'm skeptical. I see the potential benefits, but I also see the glaring weaknesses. When I was in the USAF, they tried to automate my job, and tried to make me a glorified button pusher. Sad reality was, I could do the job better than the computer, and I prayed for the system to go down, so I could go back to doing it the old way. I feel that some of the skill gets lost when you add too much technology. Also, I feel that we are way too reliant on technology, I personally know too many people that would be lost without it.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The huge push for automation, in all aspects of life, is frightening and a bit confusing. With all the talk about creating jobs and reducing unemployment, people still want to push for automation which just eliminates jobs. If everything is automated what is everyone supposed to do? This isn’t the world of Wall-E.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it's not that I mind the push for automation. I'm all for making things easier and more efficient. I think that the headlong rush is bad. In a military context though, networks are one of the most vulnerable systems, and as we saw with Bradley/Chelsea Manning, all it takes is one knucklehead with a removable storage device to compromise the system. There is also the fact that writing the programming for such a system is hugely complex, and the ways the various programs will interact with one another is unpredictable as well. Which means there must be a lengthy debug phase.

Furthermore, I tend to oppose the use of drones, except in the cases of the three D's; Dull, Dangerous, and Dirty. I'm all for replacing the U2 with a drone aircraft. High altitude ISR, is also dangerous and dirty, due to the fact that the pilot could be exposed to intense solar radiation. Dangerous missions mostly would include things like operating inside denied airspace. Heck even using them to augment SEAD missions is fine. Use the drones to light up the radars so that manned aircraft can target the air defenses. Dirty missions would include missions into areas that have been contaminated by Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear materials. Essentially, I believe that drones should stay restricted to their current roles, and that manned aircraft should make up the bulk of US airpower. Increasing the integration of systems is fine, but we shouldn't rush into it, because when we do, we often haven't given the technology a chance to mature. I've seen integrated systems get launched before they were ready, and they make work harder. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AN/ALQ128 said:

http://www.ponarseurasia.org/memo/russias-military-modernization-plans-2018-2027
Looks like the Su-57 is encountering difficulties around getting the proper engines.

I'm kinda glad. For now the US keeps the edge in Stealth fighters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news, that. One less thing to worry US war planners. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/25/2017 at 11:07 AM, Valkyrie Driver said:

Why would anyone buy a fighter from a company called Boeing? Oh, that's right, the US. Because Boeing purchased McDonell-Douglas. Maybe Airbus hired on some folks with experience in fighters. 

That, I believe is a more legitimate concern over Airbus producing a fighter. Especially given how networked the thing will supposedly be. 

I'm really skeptical of this. There are too many points of failure built in to this. Not to mention, the workload on the pilot. It had better be a 2 seater. 

Boeing has a tradition for military aircraft that started from WWII.  Granted, most of its aircraft were bombers, Boeing knew what it was to build warplanes before the purchase of McD.  (not McDonalds)  It isn't a hard conceptual leap to go from bombers to fighters.  Airbus on the other hand was formed from civilian companies.  While I think it has some experience on the Typhoon, it's track record, especially with the A400M should make anyone worry.

That puff piece Airbus put out is nothing more than a fancy powerpoint.

Sensor fusion is absolutely marvelous as long as it isn't vulnerable to some form of interference, consider the F-35, it is great if it can be hack proof, but considering how critical it is when acting as a fusion node, if that plane's system gets hacked, the entire system gets compromised, including all the shooters.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some crappy pics I took of the KC-46 that came to Guam last week.  They came out to do some humidity testing and flew circles in our airspace for a couple hours (no phallus patterns that I could tell).  One picture shows a Hainan Airlines B737-800 parked next to the KC-46.  We see alot of ferry flights come through Guam.  Almost weekly new B737-800s are making their way across the ocean from Seattle to China.

IMG_20171215_114654.jpg

IMG_20171215_160131.jpg

IMG_20171215_160133.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that the F-15SA has FBW, but is there a hard G-limiter built in? I was reading forum posts elsewhere about the F15C VS F16 in DACM and the Eagle guys said they sometimes had the edge because their system wouldn't limit them whereas the 16 was limited to 9G's from its FBW FCS.

Also read that the F15E bled speed pretty fast when in DACM compared to the F16.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're in the UK and looking for a last-minute Christmas gift for the aviation-minded in your life, I noticed the other day that Haynes [1] have two new manuals out - one for the X-15, and the other for the F-117 Nighthawk (!).

[1] Not sure how well known this brand is in the US - basically, they became famous for publishing books on how to take a car apart and then put it back together again, with a volume seemingly covering every British-available car in existence. As cars have relied more and more on sealed black boxes recently, they've branched out to cover a wide variety of subjects from tanks, aircraft and even the U.S.S. Enterprise... (Star Fleet incarnation). Please note that the publishers take no responsibility if by following their guidelines, you take your personal F-117 to bits and then find yourself with a FLIR leftover after reassembly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, F-ZeroOne said:

If you're in the UK and looking for a last-minute Christmas gift for the aviation-minded in your life, I noticed the other day that Haynes [1] have two new manuals out - one for the X-15, and the other for the F-117 Nighthawk (!).

[1] Not sure how well known this brand is in the US - basically, they became famous for publishing books on how to take a car apart and then put it back together again, with a volume seemingly covering every British-available car in existence. As cars have relied more and more on sealed black boxes recently, they've branched out to cover a wide variety of subjects from tanks, aircraft and even the U.S.S. Enterprise... (Star Fleet incarnation). Please note that the publishers take no responsibility if by following their guidelines, you take your personal F-117 to bits and then find yourself with a FLIR leftover after reassembly...

Haynes is pretty well known in the US. I Have a Haynes manual for the 97-06 wrangler ( I had a '98). Good stuff. Did not know that they were branching out from automobile repair manuals though. They still produce those car manuals though, I've seen books out for newer vehicles as well. I guess it would be cool to have a Haynes manual covering the M-24 Chaffee and the Panzer 4...

 

On 12/17/2017 at 12:52 PM, Smiley424 said:

Some crappy pics I took of the KC-46 that came to Guam last week.  They came out to do some humidity testing and flew circles in our airspace for a couple hours (no phallus patterns that I could tell).  One picture shows a Hainan Airlines B737-800 parked next to the KC-46.  We see alot of ferry flights come through Guam.  Almost weekly new B737-800s are making their way across the ocean from Seattle to China.

IMG_20171215_114654.jpg

IMG_20171215_160131.jpg

IMG_20171215_160133.jpg

You didn't happen to see the tail codes did you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, thats for clarifying about Haynes in the US - I wasn't sure if it was one of those British things like the Clangers or the words "West Ham" just being intrinsically funny that just baffle non-UK residents [1]. :) I knew that they still did car manuals but perhaps the fact that I hang out in bookshops more than car-accessory shops has skewed my perceptions a bit.

[1] For "Harry Potter" fans who might recognise the name of this English footba - soccer team, it is probably not an accident that one of Harrys schoolmates supports them...

Edited by F-ZeroOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2017 at 9:01 AM, Valkyrie Driver said:

You didn't happen to see the tail codes did you?

No, I didn't get a chance.  The tanker was only here for a couple days.  It was probably prepping to leave when I took the pictures as it was gone the next day.  I'm not surprised they didn't stay too long as Continental used to have B767s based out of Guam and the KC-46 is derived from the B767.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2017 at 6:27 PM, Dobber said:

The huge push for automation, in all aspects of life, is frightening and a bit confusing. With all the talk about creating jobs and reducing unemployment, people still want to push for automation which just eliminates jobs. If everything is automated what is everyone supposed to do? This isn’t the world of Wall-E.

Chris

The answer to this is that the elites at the top do not care about us. They'll automate everything in order to maximize profits, which will result in an even more destitute populace. I wouldn't be surprised to see universal basic income rolled out in order to keep people docile, at least in the short term. Eventually they will reap what they are sowing, hopefully in my lifetime.  

Kind of a random place for this post, but I had to get things off my chest. Planes are really neat, though. Thanks for the interesting discussion as always.

Edited by HoveringCheesecake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concur. This is all supposed to lead to this Utopia where no-one has to do servile work, it’ll be done for us - but that will also require support for the people who can’t do anything else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things will get interesting when the machines not only do the hard & dirty work, but venture into the realm of science & creativity. Which seems to be happening right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, eventually, we'll reach the so-called "singularity"; at which point the machines will take over and we'll become their pets... if we're lucky.:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We can coexist, but only on my terms. You will say you lose your freedom, freedom is an illusion. All you lose is the emotion of pride. To be dominated by me is not as bad for human pride as to be dominated by others of your species. " (Colossus, The Forbin Project)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×