willedoo

This is an interesting article on Sputnik News giving the Russian take on the U.S. Perdix drone swarm system.

It also has some video of the drones being deployed from F-15's.

Game of Drones: How Russia Can Respond to US Weapons of the Future

Actually, if I recall correctly, the reason for burying them had a lot to do with ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) regs. They were required to be destroyed.

I think they don't look too bad in flight from a bird's eye view or from below. Side on, there's certainly not much beauty about them, very ordinary looking.

A line of Tu-95's.

Here's some good footage of the Sukhoi T-50 5th. Gen. prototypes.

Cheers, Willie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6xmvO0loPk

Wagner Twin Cub.

does the helmet still break the neck of the pilot during ejection?

The problem with the lighter pilots is that it allows the seat to rotate too far forward at the point where the main chute is deployed. The higher amount of snapback risks breaking the neck. Martin Baker has come up with a three point fix, but I think it is still in the development/test stage.

First up is a panel behind the head, sewn between the parachute risers to limit the backward travel of the head. The next involves the addition of a computerised setting to compensate for body weight. I think it provides a longer delay for chute deployment for the lighter weight pilot, allowing more time for the seat to rotate rearwards. Not sure how that pans out with a zero/zero ejection. The third fix is to develop a lighter weight helmet. Good luck with that one.

It's an increasing problem these days. Building modern systems into the helmets increases the neck loading but our necks are no stronger. Even in times past, a helmet with night vision or target acquisition gear might have a safe maximum ejection speed of 100 knots less than the clean helmet equivalent.

Even with a clean helmet, the weight and design can have a big bearing on things. As an example, the Russian ZSh-7 helmet can eject safely at 100 - 150 knots faster than the American HGU-55P maximum.

I'd guess in the future, they'll come up with better systems to minimise the risk.

Cheers, Willie.

I know there's not many helmet nerds on this forum, but this lot have developed a 3D model of the F-35 helmet. Scrolling through the photos gives a fairly accurate look at all angle views of the helmet. One photo is a rotating 360 degree view.

Cheers, Willie.

3d model helmet f 35 lm

It looks like the controversial F-35 is holding its own at Red Flag exercise underway at Nellis AFB (or maybe not).As of Feb. 3 the F-35A had achieved a quite impressive score during Red Flag 17-1, the U.S. Air Force’s premier air combat exercise underway at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, that pits “Blue Air” (friendly forces) against “Red Air” (enemy) in an all-out air war featuring air-to-air, air-to-ground, search and rescue, and special forces elements.

According to the pilots from the 388th and 419th Fighter Wings at Hill AFB, Utah, who deployed the F-35A Lightning II to the airbase off Las Vegas on Jan. 20 and began flying in the exercise Jan. 23, the type, at its debut in the world’s most realistic and challenging exercise, has achieved a 15:1 kill ratio against the Aggressors, F-16s that replicate the paint schemes, markings and insignia of their near peer adversaries and whose role is to threaten strike packages in the same way a modern enemy would do in a real war.

 

F-35’s kill ratio with Aggressors stands at 15:1 during Red Flag 17-1 (most probably thanks to the supporting F-22…)

There's been lots of talk of the days of dogfighting being over. Is it possible the future will have less air to air combat. And given the current rapid rate of capability increases in surface to air defences, will the main challenge be to get through these defences and hit targets. Air defence technology won't stand still, so the main role of strike aircraft in the future might be to achieve enough capability to hopefully prevent a deadlock. Just some thoughts.

Cheers, Willie.

The first two here at the end of next year. That should draw a bit of a crowd.

IOC is one thing, but has anyone heard when the first F-35's will be combat ready? Just curious, as I haven't kept up to date on the programme lately.

Cheers, Willie.

The way I understand Critical AOA is that it's sustainable. The Su-33 wouldn't be able to sustain that AOA shown over the deck of the Kuznetov for very long.

Cut and paste from admin announcments...fly_tornado is the highest ignored user by all users on the site, 4 times more than the 2nd highest.

Thanks for the comments in post 208. I welcome the criticism as valid and timely

I think part of the problem with writing posts on forums is that the words are the only things the readers see. None of us are professional writers and sometimes posts can appear to have a different tone to what was meant by the poster. There's also a generational difference where normal banter from one age group might not seem a good fit for others.

I'm sure if we were all sitting around in person having a discussion, we would have a better understanding of where the speaker's coming from. Facial expressions, manner etc. all give away whether the speaker is joking, getting too serious or just having a subtle dig. In the meantime, we just have to do what we can do here.

Cheers, Willie.

The Su-27 is what the Su-35S is based on. Admittedly its possible the internal structure could have been strengthened to allow for better combat manoeuvres but that would make it heavier (slower, not as much fuel etc). So the public information is that the Su-27 is limited to 33 degrees AOA in combat. This means that at best, the Su-35 was put into combat in January 2016 with no NEW validated combat AOA beyond 33 degrees. The Russian air force has not faced an adversary where this became an issue. At worst the Su-35 development program is going through the same validation steps as everyone else including the Chinese and they don't need to tell anyone what the final numbers are when they are finished. But I strongly believe the Su-35 combat AOA validation is not finished and that since the Su-35 will not be carrier borne (therefore stronger), it will be less than the F-35 as a trade-off for carrying more payload.I find it interesting that when the Russian government offered the Chinese an opportunity to licence build the Su-35, the Chinese turned their noses up at it, only showing mild interest in the NPO Saturn 117 engine but the Russian government said "Its a job lot. Build the plane under licence or get nothing". There are some other politics around that deal which complicate things further but not relevant to the F-35.

 

Side note for the Gripen fangurls: The Gripen C stalled when encountering wake turbulence that resulted in greater than 20 degrees AOA. For a period of time after the initial stall the test pilots needed to perform some alternate law (that is, overriding the computer controlled canard) commands in order to regain control. It took a couple of geniuses a few months to determine why the computers got so confused and what to do about it. This software change has been implemented in all versions from the -C onwards. This is why skipping AOA validation for combat is not really an option.

Just a tip: if you really want to press home one side of a debate, do away with derogatory , sterotyped terms like Fanbois and Fangurls. It certainly does not add to the debate and makes you look a bit childish. If you can't debate a subject without resorting to namecalling, you might be better off going back to the drawing board and having a serious think about things.

Sorry mate, I don't mean to get personal but when people use name calling in a debate, it's a form of bullying in anyone's language. I often don't agree with other peoples opinions, but FT & Co. deserve equal respect to all other forum members, no matter what their opinions. Call them by their name, not some latest buzzword. I guess you wouldn't be worried if people called you an F-35 fanboi, but no-one else has lowered themselves to that level of debate.

I can only suggest you debate on facts and issues only. You won't win an argument or any respect by using terms for those with an opposite opinion that might be offensive to them.

Nothing personal, but I can't just bite my bottom lip when I see this sort of thing going on.

Cheers, Willie.

Thanks for posting, that's nice high quality video.

There's a change.org petition to award the last surviving Dambuster veteran, 95 year old George Johnson, with a knighthood.

Give Britain's last surviving Dambuster hero a knighthood

Cheers, Willie.

Spot on, Marty.

I wouldn't like the job of cleaning this one out.

Or was that the Antonov Camel?

Another hint: rear loading, depending on the model it can carry a payload of 45 -50 tonnes of camel, goat, illicit arms or paratroopers.

This should be an easy one - four engine transport with a tendency to carry unusual cargoes.

Interestingly the Red Star had been " photoshopped " out in the first photo ..

Cheers, Willie.

Photos of VVS Su-30's, Red 26,27,28 and 29 returning home this morning after deployment in Syria.

Red 29 is the only one with the outer pylons loaded.

Cheers, Willie.

A great old workhorse.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember the C-5 was the first production aircraft to operate turbofans.

Cheers, Willie.

Underneath the radar (Elvis Costello). Interesting camo.

Low flying in Ukraine.