US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Bernard

Junior Member
All Army Aviation helos
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
From the website
9:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
/17. 5

getasset.aspx


AirTeamImages

Our data suggests that five Mi-8/17 transports are on the US Army’s books, for utility and training use. These are believed to include aircraft originally owned by Iraq, and others acquired from Soviet-era operators.

10:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. 3

getasset.aspx


AirTeamImages

A trio of Mi-24 “Hind” attack helicopters are recorded as being used for experimental and training purposes. Our pictured example – registration 91-22270 – was originally operated by the East German air force.

I love this kind of stuff, I had never heard of them having these. I wonder what other goodies America has secretly gotten and studied. I am sure Russia and China have their fair share of old American aircraft and vehicles.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
AFB, you are going to like the latest F-35 flight test report from Aviation Week..

As a few of us indicated when we saw the initial High Off Angle Departure tests...the F-35 is showing itself to be an extremely maneuverable bird.

Read what , David “Doc” Nelson, the Lead F-35 Test Pilot at Edwards AFB, is saying here:

Pilot report said:
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has been flown in air-to-air combat maneuvers against F-16s for the first time and, based on the results of these and earlier flight-envelope evaluations, test pilots say the aircraft can be cleared for greater agility as a growth option.

The availability of additional maneuverability is a testament to the aircraft’s recently proven overall handling qualities and basic flying performance. “The door is open to provide a little more maneuverability,” says Lockheed Martin F-35 site lead test pilot David “Doc” Nelson.

“When we did the first dogfight in January, they said, ‘you have no limits. It was loads monitoring, so they could tell if we broke something. It was a confidence builder.” AF-2 was the first F-35 to be flown to 9g+ and -3g, and to roll at design-load factor. The aircraft, which was also the first Joint Strike Fighter to be intentionally flown in significant airframe buffet at all angles of attack, was calibrated for inflight loads measurements prior to ferrying to Edwards in 2010.

The operational maneuver tests were conducted to see “how it would look like against an F-16 in the airspace,” says Col. Rod “Trash” Cregier, “Pilots really like maneuverability, and the fact that the aircraft recovers so well from a departure allows us to say to the designers of the flight control system laws, ‘you don’t have to clamp down so tight,’”

Departure resistance was proven during high angle-of-attack (AOA) testing, which began in late 2012 with the aircraft pushing the nose to its production AOA limit of 50 deg. Subsequent AOA testing has pushed the aircraft beyond both the positive and negative maximum command limits, including intentionally putting the aircraft out of control in several configurations ranging from “clean” wings to tests with open weapons-bay doors. Testing eventually pushed the F-35 to a maximum of 110 deg. AOA.

High angle-of-attack testing included intentional departures with weapons bay doors open.

"An aggressive and unique approach has been taken to the high alpha testing", says Nelson. “Normally, test programs will inch up on max alpha, and on the F-22 it took us 3-4 months to get to max alpha. On this jet, we did it in four days. We put a spin chute on the back, which is normal for this sort of program, and then we put the airplane out of control and took our hands off the controls to see if it came back. We actually tweaked the flight control system with an onboard flight test aid to allow it to go out of control, because it wouldn’t by itself. Then we drove the center of gravity back and made it the worst-case configuration on the outside with weapons bay doors and put the aircraft in a spin with yaw rates up to 60 deg./sec., equal to a complete turn every 6 sec."

"That’s pretty good. But we paddled off the flight-test aid and it recovered instantly,” he says.

Pilots also tested the ability of the F-35 to recover from a deep-stall in which it was pushed beyond the maximum AoA command limit by activating a manual pitch limiter (MPL) override similar to the alpha limiter in the F-16.

“It’s not something an operational pilot would do, but the angle of attack went back and, with the center of gravity way back aft, it would not pitch over, but it would pitch up. So it got stuck at 60 or 70 deg. alpha, and it was as happy as could be. There was no pitching moment to worry about, and as soon as I let go of the MPL, it would come out,” Nelson says.

Following consistent recoveries, the test team opted to remove the spin chute for the rest of the test program.

“The airplane, with no spin chute, had demonstrated the ability to recover from the worst-case departure, so we felt very confident, and that has been proven over months of high alpha testing,” says Nelson.
“It also satisfied those at the Joint Program Office who said spin chute on the back is not production-representative and produces aerodynamic qualities that are not right.” Although there are additional test points ahead where the spin chute is scheduled to be reattached for departure resistance with various weapons loads, the test team is considering running through the points without it.

With the full flight envelope now opened to an altitude of 50,000 ft., speeds of Mach 1.6/700 KCAS and loads of 9g, test pilots say improvements to the flight control system have rendered the transonic roll-off (TRO) issue tactically irrelevant. Despuite earlier being highlighted as a “program concern” in the Defense Department’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) 2014 report, now TRO “has evolved into a non-factor,” says Nelson.

“You have to pull high-g to even find it.” The roll-off phenomena exhibits itself as “less than 10 deg./sec. for a fraction of a second. We have been looking for a task it affects and we can’t find one.”


15373409918_d806bc574f_b.jpg

15560380152_52c78f0a02_b.jpg

15373533207_e84c987641_b.jpg

15560380022_9dee1b60fe_b.jpg

15372923399_9dbab58be0_b.jpg
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
From the website


I love this kind of stuff, I had never heard of them having these. I wonder what other goodies America has secretly gotten and studied. I am sure Russia and China have their fair share of old American aircraft and vehicles.
It's known that from time to time the US Army has uses Russian made IFV's, APC's and Tanks including T80's, I would not doubt a number of exported chinese models as well. The US Air Force has operated a number of older model Migs 17, 21, 23 and SU as well as Chinese made clones both as aggressors and for flight evaluation. IT's been hinted but never confirmed that the USAF has "sampled" Mig29 and SU27 models being flown by the 422d Test and Evaluation Squadron for much the same and from time to time Photos in 1994 published in popsci of a Airbase in the middle of a Dry lake bed located in the state of Nevada, that the Air force says is just a figment of your imagination have been seen with the tail profile of a SU22
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
It's known that from time to time the US Army has uses Russian made IFV's, APC's and Tanks including T80's, I would not doubt a number of exported chinese models as well.

Hehehe...I know for a fact that the US got a LOT of Soviet stuff from the wars between the Arabs and the Isralis...and then a lot more after Desert Storm.

Others came through a variety of ways from defection to espionage.

I can remember my Dad going to the test ranges in New Mexico in the 70s and 80s and testing a lot of anti-tank and other weapons/missiles against Soviet Army we got from the Israelis. During the late 70s and early 80s I worked at Vought too.

One weapon, which was later produced for our attack aircraft, was a hyper-velocity missile which literally would penetrate spaced homogenous armor on Soviet tanks of all types up through the T-72 and T-80.

No explosive warhead...just hypervelocity and a very classified warhead design of very hard metal which spalled through the armor spacing and ultimately filled the tank interior with plasma and metal shrapnel leading to instant death for the crew and all sorts of secondary explosions.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
The US I know has had at least 5 T80 Tanks at least 1 T80U was given the US by the UK who bought a number of them from the Russians. the Blokes in Mi6 earned there Double 0 numbers when they created a Trading company which bought the T80U's supposedly for Morroco at 5 million per. The Tanks then ended up being tested by the brits with a single unit given to the US.
in 2003 the Ukraine gave the US 4 more T80UD's
 

Bernard

Junior Member
The US I know has had at least 5 T80 Tanks at least 1 T80U was given the US by the UK who bought a number of them from the Russians. the Blokes in Mi6 earned there Double 0 numbers when they created a Trading company which bought the T80U's supposedly for Morroco at 5 million per. The Tanks then ended up being tested by the brits with a single unit given to the US.
in 2003 the Ukraine gave the US 4 more T80UD's

Just because I think it's really interesting. What kind of things could the U.S learn from these stolen pieces of military equipment? So like stolen tanks, helicopters, or Migs/flankers. Could we and would we reverse engineer something they do better and use it for our own?

And another question. I watched a documentary on this but it's called Project Azorian.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The 1968 sinking of the K-129 occurred approximately 1,560 nautical miles (2,890 km) northwest of Hawaii.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Project Azorian was one of the most complex, expensive, and secretive intelligence operations of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at a cost of about $800 million ($3.8 billion in 2015 dollars).

We found a Soviet Sub (K-129) on bottom of the Pacific in 1968. Supposedly during the operation half the sub broke apart and we only recovered half, with 2-3 nuclear warheads. What could we obtain from half a sub and 2-3 nuclear bombs
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
Just because I think it's really interesting. What kind of things could the U.S learn from these stolen pieces of military equipment? So like stolen tanks, helicopters, or Migs/flankers. Could we and would we reverse engineer something they do better and use it for our own?

I doubt the US will back engineer anything BUT it will provide vital information on how to counter those weapons by learning it's full potentials to find weak spots and provide insight on their attack strategy by understanding their strong points as well. This real gives an upper hand to those who are on the battlegrounds as adversaries against those weapons knowing what to evade and how to attack.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
From the website


I love this kind of stuff, I had never heard of them having these. I wonder what other goodies America has secretly gotten and studied. I am sure Russia and China have their fair share of old American aircraft and vehicles.
And USAF have also some Mig-29 especially former Moldovan, Su-27, 3 and 2 ?? based to Tonopah, secret base and RQ-170 also based there but shuuut :)
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
That depends on what it it we are looking at.
In the Case of Tanks like the T80U, the US and UK gauged there And it's materials allowing them to better develop anti armor weapons to counter it, The power of it's cannon allowing development of armor to defend against it. It's range of terrain and limitations of speed and sensors.
In the Case of the Mig program the US learned it's performance characteristics how it turns how it fights and what it sees. For example on the early Migs they found that the pilot had a tiny field of view which forced them to perform a series of maneuvers to search for targets using this the US developed strategies to kill migs, It also Gauged data on the Migs Radar allowing better Radar warning receivers.
In the case of the Mig 25 The US thanks to a defector gained access to a top of the line Soviet fighter. The US learned it's actual not perceived performance specs. how it turns how fast it runs and what it can and cannot do allowing for better SAMs and fighter counters. The Us also Ran Constant Peg a Program who's Goal was to give American pilots the opportunity to fly against actual Migs in a training environment the reduced the chances of "Buck Fever" A condition where in a individual faced with actually engaging a real enemy target will lock up. By facing the real deal over Groom Lake rather then Siberia the american Pilots stood a far better chance of dominating.

On the Other side in Russia they also sought to sample American equipment especially aircraft they in they cloned the B29, Aim 9 Sidewinder, Optical gun sights, radars, better alloys and Radar warning receivers. Word is they even flew a few captured american models in active combat during Korea
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Iranians have cloned US Drones captured when they crashed during recon missions.

the case of the K129... there stated goal was the code books missiles and technical bits of the sub, but at that time all of it would have been 20 years out of date.
A better case would be U110 which was captured in 1941 Which gave the Royal nave the German Navy's Enigma Code books and allowed there code breakers to break the Reservehandverfahren. Access to such captured subs also allows sound profiling, lessons on materials and metallurgy allowing knowledge as to where the subs can and cannot go granting development of better ASW.
 
Top