A modern Railway gun... why Jura how pie in the Sky of you.
generally yes, I do; if I don't, I say something like Mar 17, 2018Jura.. I have a question for you. Do you actually read all the news articles you post?
of course sometimes I skip some paragraph(s), if written for brainwashed audience etc.I now skimmed over
The catch, of course, is that the Army's tried to field all these things before -- and failed. Why would things go any better this time around? Brig. Gen. Christopher Donahue has an answer for that.
: the headline is about naval helos, but later they talk Patriots!
LOL it's good for you I guessI barely get past the headlines and first paragraph. Really.
... and at that time I didn't know the energy figure for Ambram's shell, was 'estimating' it could be something like 10 MJ, now googled it: 13 point 2 MJ hahaha
USAF sets evaluation criteria for second phase of light attack experiment
- 24 APRIL, 2018
- SOURCE: FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM
- BY: GARRETT REIM
- LOS ANGELES
After deciding to forgo a combat demonstration, the US Air Force is moving forward with phase two of its light-attack aircraft experiment, which will examine sustainment requirements, networking with allies’ platforms and flying costs of two propeller-driven aircraft: Textron Aviation's Beechcraft AT-6 Wolverine and Sierra Nevada/Embraer’s A-29 Super Tucano.
Gen David Goldfein, chief of staff of the USAF, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on 24 April that the experiments being conducted at Holloman AFB in New Mexico between May and July 2018 would enable the service to get “a better outcome” than doing a combat demonstration and could allow the service to accelerate the programme. The USAF believes it has enough information to move forward with the programme without having to conduct trials overseas, the USAF chief of staff’s office added in an email.
The Air Force is interested in buying propeller-driven aircraft for surveillance and light-attack duties as a cheaper alternative to using aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-35, Boeing F-15 or Fairchild Republic A-10.
Once relieved of their light-attack duties, more advanced aircraft, which are also more expensive to operate, would be redeployed to counter threats from more capable adversaries; for instance, so-called great power nations like Russia and China.
The cost of operating the AT-6 Wolverine and A-29 Super Tucano are a focus of phase two of the light-attack experiment, said Gen Goldfein in his testimony.
“We are taking a really deep dive on this one on the sustainment aspects: how many maintainers we need; how are we sustainable at home and forward?” he said. “How do we integrate this particular weapons system in ways that allows us to get to a price point … in the $2,000 per flying hour range over time, as opposed to the $20,000, $30,000, $40,000 range, given the fact that we are going to be in this (counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency fight) for a long time?”
Phase two of the light-attack experiment will also focus on the aircrafts' abilities to network and operate in coordination with foreign militaries.
“We are looking at this through the lenses of allies and partners because a big part of the light-attack experiment is a common architecture, information [and] intelligence network,” said Gen Goldfein.
The USAF plans to experiment with “building and operating an exportable, shareable, affordable network to enable air platforms to communicate with joint and multi-national forces and command-and-control nodes,” the USAF chief of staff’s office added in an email.
Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson said in March 2018 that she may ask Congress to reallocate funds to the light-attack aircraft programme this year, a move which would accelerate the department’s purchase of the aircraft by one year to 2019.
Funding for procurement of the light-attack aircraft is currently scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2020 and there is about $2.5 billion budgeted over the next five years for the programme, according to the Air Force.
NASA To Kick Off Study On Fighter Pilot Breathing
Apr 23, 2018
The study will leverage a unique new sensor suite built by Cobham that monitors a pilot’s inhalation and exhalation in real-time, enabling for the first time the collection of critical data points about pilot physiology and the way humans interact with the flight environment.
The NASA study cemented a view to which many experts, particularly in the Air Force community, already subscribed. But the PEs persist across the military. Since the NASA assessment, the Navy has seen some progress mitigating the incidents on its F/A-18s and T-45 Goshawk trainers, but the Air Force continues to see
The problem is that virtually no data regarding this man-machine interface exists today, NASA discovered. Neither service regularly measures pilot breathing rates or the composition of the air entering and leaving the pilot during flight.
This prompted NASA to embark on a new assessment to study the way pilots flying high-performance aircraft breathe during flight.
“The idea is to begin to collect data on the human that has not been collected,” according to one NASA official, who said that the agency will use several NASA aircraft, including an F/A-18 and
To support the study, NASA is procuring four units of Cobham’s VigilOx breathing sensor system, according to an
VigilOx is made up of two separate modules, one on the inhale side and one on the exhale side, that monitor the air entering and leaving a pilot’s body. The sensors assess that air for changes in pressure, humidity, temperature, oxygen concentration, flow rate, carbon dioxide—anything that might cause dangerous, hypoxia-like symptoms such as headache, dizziness or disorientation during flight. Professionals can download the data post-flight and correlate it to reported PEs to identify trends.
In addition to the VigilOx units and operator’s instructions, Cobham will provide one day of in-person training for pilots, test engineers and instrumentation engineers at NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center in Edwards, California, according to the Statement of Work The units must be capable of measuring oxygen and carbon dioxide percentage, gas flow and gas delivery pressure both on the inhale and the exhale, as well as cabin pressure, pilot acceleration and mask pressure, according to the document.
NASA does not yet have a detailed test plan, the official said. But the hope is that NASA’s findings will have implications for the Navy and Air Force as they continue to investigate the PEs.
“What I’m hoping is that when we get done we will be able to provide some data to the services,” the official said. “I can’t tell you if we are going to find out anything amazing or interesting. All I know is that this kind of testing has not been done before.”
US Air Force, Boeing still clash over KC-46 delivery timeline
By: Valerie Insinna 1 hour ago
The Air Force has met with Boeing over the KC-46, but the service still thinks the company's schedule estimates are over ambitious. (Boeing)
WASHINGTON — Meetings between Boeing and the U.S. Air Force on the KC-46’s schedule appear to have stagnated, with both parties still at odds about when the first tanker will be delivered.
“We have had meetings with Boeing, and additional meetings last week to get an agreement on a schedule,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.
“We believe — the Air Force believes — that the schedule that Boeing has is still overly ambitious, and we’d like to get agreement on a delivery date and drive to that delivery date.”
Last month, the Air Force projected that the first KC-46 delivery would be delayed yet again — an assessment with which Boeing has vehemently disagreed.
Based on the service’s estimates, Boeing may be able to deliver the first KC-46 aircraft by the end of the year, with a contractually required delivery of 18 tankers slipping from October to spring 2019. But Boeing asserts it will be able to deliver the first aircraft this summer, with a total of 18 tankers delivered by the end of the year.
“We are working with the Air Force to complete all the required testing and are committed to delivering the first tanker as soon as possible,” a Boeing spokesman said in a statement. “Discussions are ongoing as to a specific delivery date.”
Missing the October deadline for required assets available, or RAA — in this case, 18 certified KC-46As and nine refueling pods — could trigger another round of penalties for Boeing, which is locked into a fixed-price contract that leaves the company financially responsible for schedule delays and cost overruns. Boeing has already had to pay about $2 billion post-tax out of its own pocket.
The Government Accountability Office estimates that RAA “could slip to May 2019, 21 months from the original schedule, if risks are not mitigated.” The agency’s findings were in an report on the program released this month.
Those risk factors include ensuring all aircraft are in the correct configuration and fixing a number of deficiencies, including one that involves the boom scratching the receiver aircraft. Boeing will also have to complete 6,550 test points in a window of February 2018 to June 2018 to meet its schedule projection, which GAO says amounts to a rate of double its current pace.
Addressing the boom-scraping issue, a Boeing spokesman said the company had begun flight testing a software enhancement that is expected to improve visibility.
Despite the schedule issues, lawmakers have generally been supportive of the program.
Oklahoma’s Jim Inhofe, currently the top Republican on SASC, told Wilson that the committee was “anxious for the first KC-46 to get delivered” to the service.
The fiscal 2019 budget requested an additional 15 tankers, he added. “Do you agree that is an adequate number, an achievable number and a desirable number?”
Wilson said that it was.
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein added that the 15-aircraft-per-year rate was the best way to sustain production as the weapon system comes online.
“We are a global power because of our global reach, and it’s all of the services that rely on that tanker force, and our allies and partners, to be able to project power globally. So it’s a critical capability that we need to bring on as fast we can bring it on,” he said.
while House lawmakers move to stop Air Force from canceling JSTARS recap
Members of the House Armed Services Committee have taken the first step to
The HASC’s Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee on Wednesday put forward its portion of the fiscal 2019 defense authorization bill. Included in it is a provision that would cap funding for the Advanced Battle Management System at 50 percent until the Air Force puts JSTARS recap on contract.
“The restriction would remain in effect until the Secretary of the Air Force certifies to the congressional defense committees that the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System Recapitalization program, as submitted and described in the fiscal year 2018 budget request, is proceeding unhindered with originally planned activities associated with engineering, manufacturing, and development; low-rate initial production; production; and initial contractor support,” the text of the subcommittee’s part of the bill stated.
Or in short: Proceed with the original JSTARS recap plan, or move forward with serious financial constraints on its alternative approach.
The Air Force
All competitors — Boeing,
The Air Force wants to proceed with a concept it’s calling the Advanced Battle Management System, or ABMS, which calls for upgrading existing platforms and improving how they are networked together.
For instance, the service intends to put a miniaturized ground moving target indicator radar on the MQ-9 Reaper drone, which would allow it to detect, find and shoot down adversaries without help from another platform. It also would revitalize seven E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System planes with new communications gear.
But HASC members
In its markup, subcommittee members also pushed up against the Air Force’s intention to retire three JSTARS aircraft in FY19. Instead, it would only allow the service to divest one of its 16 JSTARS planes.
The subcommittee also included provisions calling for a number of reports on the program, including an assessment of the ABMS acquisition strategy by the comptroller general and an Air Force report on whether it could accelerate JSTARS recap.
What the language doesn’t do, HASC staffers told reporters, is require the Air Force to purchase all 17 JSTARS aircraft originally included in the program of record.
That could lead the way to
The JSTARS provisions still have a long way to go before becoming law, including HASC subcommittee and full committee markups where members have a chance to amend the bill. From there, it moves onto debate by the House, and afterward will enter into “conference,” in which both chambers of Congress settle on one version of the defense bill.
However, the decision to fund or defund a program ultimately rests with the Appropriations committees — meaning that even if the House and Senate Armed Services committees agree to force the Air Force to continue JSTARS recap, appropriations will still need to sign onto continued funding for the program.
In the upper chamber, Senate Armed Services Committee member David Perdue, R-Ga., has raised concerns about a capability gap should the Air Force mothball its fleet. He is pushing for his own interim solution.
Perdue had been working to defend the surveillance aircraft, whose mission is carried out at Robins Air Force Base in his home state. On Wednesday, he declined to say how he would attempt to address the issue in the SASC’s version of the NDAA, only that “we’re talking about it.”
“The current fleet is aging out, and before the new fleet comes on, there’s a four- to eight-year gap,” Perdue said. “We are asking questions, expressing concerns. The Air Force is developing a new capability ― it’s space-based and land-based. I get that, but I’m concerned about the mid 2020s.”
Instead of extending the life of the JSTARS fleet, Perdue argues the Air Force could build a new low-cost fleet for the interim. It’s in keeping with the spirit of the program, as JSTARS originated with used Boeing 707s as a cheap way to surveil over the horizon in Europe.
“Go to Arizona and buy a platform that’s sitting there for nothing, put the capability on there, and keep flying it,” Perdue said. “The current cost to maintain these 707s is outrageously expensive.”