It’s been almost a decade since the last Blue Angels crash, on April 21, 2007, when Lt. Cmdr. Kevin Davis became disoriented during a G-pull and crashed in the final minutes of the Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort Air Show in South Carolina.
Three years earlier, Lt. Ted Steelman suffered minor injuries after ejecting from his F/A-18, which suffered major engine structural damage when it struck the water off Perdido Key, Florida.
Source:
DefenseNews.com
If you want an understanding of the early issues with the Rafale program I suggest reading the below report. It pretty accurately predicts the issues the Rafale was going to face in the market place as well as more realistic dev and production estimates.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSD106.html
Thanks for sharing. Excellent analysis (so far reading). This should be also posted in the Rafale thread.
What a sad day.
I wonder if such has ever happened (simultaneous losses).
856k US!? Or did I make a mistake in the conversion?
Nearly 1b$
😀
Aaarfff. I should have not abused of that poire spirit …
Ouch… Material defect + recent MGB swap = quality issues. Not really something that Airbus (Eurocopter) needed.
That comes on top of the A400.
Three emergency landing in the last 24hours
Warning systems […] Acars are said to have signalled an anomaly on board shortly after takeoff from three airports where the Airbus had stopped.These alert procedures were investigated each time with a technical audit on the ground. The findings must have been negative since the plane was allowed to take off again.
So far the details of the acars alert are not divulgated.
It sounds however similar to the rudder trim. Adding the trajectory (spiral down preceded by an abrupt 90deg turn, we have here a convergence of possible events.
Source:
Euronews.com Via France 3
[B]The inherent problem is with human operators. What happens when the ADS-B constant is manually entered incorrectly on the ground…
Definitively, not something you want to do with thousands of airliners flying around and soon, hundred of thousands of drones. This is madness… And laziness.
The ICAO should forbid this asap.
If you read the document you will see that the recommendation is to not go for a hugely expensive new fighter project.
I did. But when billion numbers start flying around, it sounds always too much expensive for those not enjoying the comfort of 300ft private yacht 😉
Airstrikes alone won’t help sh!t.. When you have ~200 flight missions resulting in ~60 attacks with a result of ~30 militants killed, how do you want to win?
I think the emphasis is more on killing the right guys, Avoiding collateral damage and immobilizing only the right amount of resources…
Assad is reigning pretty much on the statistics for the number of “kills” and probably nobody want to claim that trophy from him.
It’s election year in the US. Perfect times to raise some momentum for the next fighter project. Also, now that the 35 is on straight path for IOC, it is about the right time to start thinking at what comes next. It is what have been done for generations. Then the PAC might or might not see the light of the day as an original design. Or perhaps as a radical upgrade for the 35 airframe. There is quite a potential (new engine, new material, new emphasis on speed or/and probably on the idea of decoupling the service’s needs).
And anyhow, after the US election in the mind of any administration, the F35 will remain an Obama project. It usually suits better any type of administration to have their own project since the B21, the race for Mars and the commercial launches will all have their roots in the former administration.
But it also might not. Don’t underestimate the public fatigue with all the drama that the average voter had to endure regarding the F35, something, quite understandably, on the opposite side of their priorities.
My 2 cents
Reverse it , Tomcat : Italy is still one of the few industrial product net exporter countries in the world while UK (& France) is not such from almost the nineties.
I know. I thought at you after writing down my short essais and tried at the last time to accommodate Italy in the lot but failed to do so properly (as it seems).
My bad.
Meteor may not be a ‘magic weapon’, but it is unique in that it remains under power all the way to impact, burning the last of its propellant as it reaches the target. This maximises its manoeuvrability.
… And increase its vulnerability … At least with DEW. So, it does not import much for now, but a country like Russia may well field early DeW any day from now depending on their priority.
In a decade from now, there is a high probability that Meteor users might face such systems on a regular basis.
Vulnerability also for the shooter. With net-centric targeting capabilities, the last thing you want is to keep a beacon on your target. Agile targeting will be the norm when time to kills increases. Then, will Meteor users will still be able to constitute a credible threat for their adversary in view of the increased difficulties and number of platforms needed to achieve longer range engagements?
Think that your missile will need a lot of offset platforms (EW, Datalink, resilient space sensor and communication network supportive assets for the shooter etc… Hence an increased burden on the logistics, manpower and cost etc… Not really a domain where the typical Meteor user enjoy a clear advantage. Hence why go in that direction?
IMOHO, the Meteor is an excellent deal enabler for exports where the buyer might face only near pear opponents (think UAE vs Iran). But what about the Nato Vs a full fielded Ru or a post 2020s China?
Allow me the credibility of a doubt.
Short but instructive. Thx for sharing.
Did they really call for a stand-in refueling cap?