US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Torpedoes That Fly Away

The U.S. Navy now has two glide kits for air-launched anti-submarine torpedoes. Raytheon recently successfully tested its Fish Hawk system. Two years ago, Lockheed Martin demonstrated a similar system called LongShot.

Putting wings on torpedoes is all about U.S. Navy concern about the growing use of anti-aircraft missiles by submarines. To deal with that problem, it wants to equip some Mk-54 torpedoes, that are normally dropped into the water at a low altitude, by P-3 patrol aircraft, with an add on glide kit. These systems consist of wings, control flaps, a flight control computer, battery and GPS for navigation. The kit allows a torpedo to be released at 20,000 feet, which is outside the range of submarine launched anti-aircraft missiles, and glide, for 10-15 kilometers, down to about 300 feet altitude, where the glide kit would be jettisoned, and the torpedo would enter the water and seek out the sub. Normally, the P-3 has to descend to under a thousand feet to launch the torpedo. This takes time, and puts stress on the aircraft. All existing P-3s are quite old, and it will be a few years before a replacement is ready, so reducing stress on the current ones is a major issue. Indeed, it may be the main issue for introducing the glide kit. The P-3 stress problem is rather larger than the number of subs out there equipped with anti-aircraft missile systems. These systems have been around for years, and many are basically shoulder fired type missiles adapted for launch from a water-proof container that is released by a submerged sub.

There are other reasons for the glide kits. Many subs have sensors that are sensitive enough to detect low flying helicopters (the main target for the subs anti-aircraft missiles) and aircraft. The P-3 is also more effective if it can stay at high altitude all the time. Moreover, the glide kit is easy to build, since it can use items already used for smart bombs (JDAM) and earlier glide kits.

A P-3 usually carries eight torpedoes. The Mk54 is a 12.75 inch weapon, weighing about 700 pounds and with a warhead containing a hundred pounds of explosives. Its guidance system has been designed to work well in shallow coastal waters.

There are several other light weight torpedoes that could use the glide kits. The new French-Italian MU90 lightweight torpedo already has orders for nearly a thousand of the 669 pound, 9.4 foot long, 12.7 inch torpedoes. The MU90 has a maximum speed of over 90 kilometers an hour (with a max range of 12 kilometers), and a minimum speed of 52 kilometers an hour (for a max range of 25 kilometers). It can operate at depths of over 3,000 feet. The MU90 apparently does a very good job with being stealthy (not alerting the target sub that it was coming), and being good at defeating countermeasures. The MU90 uses sonar and an acoustic sensor for finding its target, and its warhead can penetrate the hulls of all subs currently in service.

One of the MU90s main competitors is the American Mk 54 lightweight torpedo, which entered production four years ago. Costing about the same as the Mu90 (about a million dollars each), the Mk 54 is a cheaper, and somewhat less capable replacement for the Cold War era high tech Mk 50 and the old reliable Mk 46. The 750 pound Mk 54 is a more cost effective alternative to the three million dollar Mk 50, which was in development for over two decades. The Mk 50 was difficult to build because it was meant to be a "smart" torpedo that was light enough to be carried by helicopters, and could go deep to kill Russian nuclear subs. But when the Mk 50 finally became available in the late 90s, the typical target was a quieter diesel-electric sub in shallow coastal waters. So the Mk 54 was developed, using cheaper, off-the-shelf, electronic components, some technology from the Mk 50 and larger Mk 48, as well as the simpler, but not deep diving, frame and propulsion systems of the older Mk 46 lightweight torpedo. Thus the ten foot long Mk 54 is a bit of a hybrid, created to save money, and also be more capable against quieter subs operating in shallower water. The Mk 54 has a range of about 10,000 meters and a top speed of about 72 kilometers an hour. It has a built in sonar that can search for the target sub, as well as acoustic sensors (listening devices to pick up any sounds a sub might make). The Mk 54 also has an onboard computer and a data file of underwater noises and search tactics, which are used as it tries to find its target, and keep after it until it can hit the sub and destroy it with the hundred pounds of explosives in the warhead.

In the last 40 years, some 25,000 of the older Mk 46 torpedoes were made, and at least a few thousand Mk 54s will be manufactured. Mk 50s are kept in inventory to deal with the few hostile nuclear subs that are still out there, although the Mk 54 also has a capability of going deep, just not as deep as the more expensive Mk 50. The MU90 is seen as a better value than the Mk 54, if only because it is a more recent design, and costs the same.

View Poll Results: Future caliber of next generation assault rifles
Keep the 5.56 0 0%
Shift to the 7.62 0 0%
Standardize the 6.5 Grendel 1 33.33%
Standardize the 6.8SPC 1 33.33%
Other 1 33.33%
Voters: 3. You may not vote on this poll

Next Generation Caliber?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've always been curious as to what the consensus is on the current NATO standard rounds. Recently there have been several attempts at creating an assault rifle round that fits between the 5.56x45 and 7.62x51. It seems the goal is to find a combination that has increased lethality over the 5.56x45, but still is a practical size and weight in use for an assault rifle and has low enough recoil that it's possible to engage in fully automatic suppressive fire.

The two that stand out for me are the 6.8SPC and the 6.5 Grendel; but there may be more that I am unaware of.

What do people think of these two cartridges? Do they have potential to be adopted by the military? Is there a significant need to replace the 5.56x45? What trade offs do you think best fit an assault rifle cartridge?

Trying to prevent the need for people to visit other sites, I've copy and pasted some of the articles I found below. Sorry if this creates issues with scrolling down.


Quote:
6.5 Grendel: The World’s Best Assault Rifle Cartridge

By Stan Crist

In 1892 the U. S. Army adopted its first smokeless-powder small-arms cartridge. Designated the .30 Army, the then-new round was fired in Krag-Jorgensen infantry rifles and cavalry carbines, as well as the multi-barrel, rapid-fire Gatling guns. Thus began the practice of having a single caliber for rifles and machine guns, a practice that continued for half a century.

With the advent of the Second World War, the American military developed and fielded the .30 Carbine round, the world’s first purpose-designed, intermediate-power cartridge to enter service. Although the .30-caliber M1 carbine was originally intended to be a personal defense weapon, augmenting the larger .30-06 rifle and machine-gun round, its minimal weight, compact size, and increased firepower caused the troops to use it as a de facto assault rifle.

That two-caliber small-arms system lasted through the Korean War, at which time the U. S. Army attempted to revert to having a one-caliber system by adopting the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, for use in the M14 rifle and M60 machine gun. Unfortunately, the ammo produced almost as much recoil as the .30-06 it replaced, causing the M14 to have poor controllability in full-auto fire, even in the relatively heavy M14A1 automatic rifle version.

Also, the M14 — which was originally intended to be a “light rifle” — was nearly as heavy as its predecessor, the famed M1 Garand. Because of the weight factor, the Air Force refused to adopt the M14, and in the early 1960s purchased the AR15 with its 5.56mm round, a rifle that was almost as delightfully lightweight as the obsolescent carbines then in its inventory. Not long after that, the Secretary of Defense directed the Army to also buy the AR15 (subsequently dubbed the M16A1) and discontinue acquisition of M14 rifles, thereby forcing the Army back into a two-caliber system that endures to this day.

Is there a way to avoid a two-caliber system? It seems clear that it cannot be done with a full-power 7.62mm round, as the power of the ammunition determines the size and weight of the weapon. The Chinese have recently made a valiant effort to combine low weight with high performance in their 5.8x42 intermediate cartridge, but long-range effectiveness of the 5.8mm round has reportedly been found unsatisfactory for machine gun use. To date, every nation that has adopted intermediate-power ammunition for combat rifles has found it necessary to also retain a full-power cartridge in the inventory for machine guns and sniper rifles.

This long-running conflict between the quest for minimum weight and maximum performance raises the thought, is a one-caliber family of small arms any longer even an achievable goal? Some have suggested that Alexander Arms' 6.5 Grendel cartridge might be a viable answer to that question. To confirm this idea will require taking a look at the desired characteristics of the infantry rifle, machine gun, and sniper rifle, and then see if the 6.5mm round is truly capable of filling those needs.



Some individuals think that performance of 6.5 Grendel (center) is so good that it has the potential to replace not only 5.56mm NATO (left), but 7.62mm NATO (right) as well.

Evaluation Parameters
Infantry rifle. The weapon should have a large magazine capacity, weigh as little as possible, and provide a maximum effective range of at least 500 meters.

Machine gun. Same weight considerations as for the infantry rifle, but with maximum effective range of 1100-1200 meters. Penetration of "hard" targets should be comparable to that of the 7.62 NATO M80 Ball round.

Sniper rifle. Weight of weapon and ammunition is not as important as accuracy and effective range, which should be at least 800 meters.

Ballistic Performance

Perhaps the most logical start point for such an examination is the increased range advantage claimed for 6.5 Grendel. Unfortunately, full metal jacket (FMJ) ammunition in this caliber is not yet available, so any comparison to 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO Ball would be somewhat hypothetical in nature. However, since Sierra MatchKing bullets are loaded in the 7.62mm ammo used by snipers and 5.56mm ammo of special operations forces (SOF), a comparison with 6.5mm MatchKing loads should be sufficiently “apples to apples” for a useful evaluation of relative performance.



Sierra MatchKing projectiles: (l. to r.) 5.56mm 77-grain, 6.5mm 123-grain, 7.62mm 168-grain.

Ballistic coefficient (BC) is an indicator of how well a projectile retains velocity during its passage through the air. The higher the BC, the slower will be the rate at which the bullet loses velocity during flight, thereby making a correspondingly flatter trajectory. A list of BCs for applicable MatchKing loads is as follows:

5.56mm Mk262 77gr: BC = 0.362

7.62mm M852 168gr: BC = 0.462

7.62mm M118LR 175gr: BC = 0.496

6.5mm Grendel 123gr: BC = 0.510

When launched from a 20-inch barrel, the 6.5mm 123-grain MatchKing actually shoots a bit flatter than the 7.62mm sniper rounds, and its trajectory is considerably better than that of the 5.56mm Mk262. In addition, wind drift of the 6.5mm bullet is likewise superior to the other calibers. What this means is that an accurized version of the M16A4 rifle, chambered in 6.5 Grendel, would be capable of performing the precision-fire missions that are now done with two different weapons and calibers. The Marines employ the 5.56mm squad advanced marksman rifle (SAMR) and the 7.62mm Mk11 semi-auto sniper rifle, while the Army uses the 5.56mm squad designated marksman rifle (SDMR) and the 7.62mm M110 semi-auto sniper system (SASS).



An accurized M16 in 6.5 Grendel would be capable of precision engagements at long distances. (Courtesy of U.S. Marine Corps)

Even when fired from the shorter, 14-inch barrels of the Mk16 combat rifle that the Marines are reportedly evaluating, and the M4A1 carbine that is currently in service, trajectory and wind drift of the 6.5mm MatchKing are nearly as good as for 7.62mm sniper weapons. Because of the superior ballistic efficiency, 6.5mm carbines sacrifice little ability to “reach out and touch someone” compared to their 5.56mm siblings. This is a matter of some importance, since the compact, fast-handling carbines are increasingly being used to replace M16 rifles. As a prime example, the Army decided in 2006 to pure fleet deploying Brigade Combat Teams with M4A1 carbines in “next to deploy” order as they prepare for assignments in Iraq and Afghanistan.



The M4A1 carbine has been the subject of more than a few complaints regarding failures to incapacitate enemy fighters. Conversion to 6.5 Grendel would correct that deficiency, and also increase long range capability. (Courtesy of U.S. Army)

Terminal Effects
The primary mechanism for the lethality of 5.56mm ammo is the fragmentation that results when the bullet impacts soft tissue at high speed. M855 Ball does not attain sufficient velocity from carbine barrels to produce this effect beyond a short distance, so SOF units received approval to use the Mk262 round, a load that Black Hills had been manufacturing for service rifle competition. The 77-grain Sierra MatchKing loaded in Mk262 ammo offers a significant improvement in range and terminal performance, particularly for short-barreled weapons.

As might be expected, bigger MatchKings produce greater fragmentation and correspondingly larger wound cavities. In May 2006 ballistic gelatin tests were conducted for 6.5 Grendel ammunition loaded with 123-grain MatchKings, which penetrated 2.0-2.5 inches before yawing and fragmenting. The gelatin blocks were shot from a distance of 50 yards, using an Alexander Arms Tactical 14.5 carbine. With an impact velocity of 2385 feet per second, maximum penetration was a shade over 16 inches, and maximum permanent cavity diameter was more than 6 inches. The bullet broke apart into multiple small fragments with jacket pieces visible at 11 inches and 13 inches.




Gelatin block hit with a 6.5mm 123-grain Sierra MatchKing shows substantially greater disruption than blocks hit by 5.56mm projectiles.

After seeing the results of these tests, LCDR Gary K. Roberts (who performs terminal ballistics testing for the military) noted that 6.5 Grendel appears to offer outstanding terminal performance from 14.5-inch barrels “that is far superior to any 5.56mm loads.”

Penetration Potential
In urban combat, such as has occurred in Iraq over the last four years, machine guns will often be used to engage enemy personnel behind obstructions such as vehicles and building walls. The intense firefights in Somalia during 1993 first showed all too dramatically that the 5.56 NATO round was deficient at punching through such barriers, an important factor in adoption of the 7.62mm M240B machine gun.



When better penetration or longer range is required, the 7.62mm M240B machine gun is called into action. However, a light machine gun chambered in 6.5mm Grendel may be able to provide comparable "punching power" and effective range, without the weight penalties of the larger caliber weapon and ammunition. (Courtesy of U.S. Army)

The capability of a bullet to penetrate “hard” targets is determined by several factors, including impact velocity, core hardness, jacket toughness, and sectional density. All other factors being equal, a bullet with greater sectional density will have superior penetration capability. The potential of the 6.5 Grendel in this regard was dramatically illustrated during a May 2004 demonstration at the Blackwater training facility. Lapua 6.5mm 144-grain full metal jacket bullets fired from an Alexander Arms rifle punched through a 1.575" thickness of glass armor that was designed to stop 7.62mm M80 Ball.


Lapua’s 6.5mm 144-grain FMJBT bullet (left) exhibited better penetration of armor glass than did 7.62mm 147-grain M80 Ball (right), despite a 400 fps slower muzzle velocity.

This was quite an impressive accomplishment, and indicates that 6.5 Grendel may very well be capable of matching, if not exceeding, the performance of 7.62 NATO against targets taking cover behind trees, walls, cars, etc. However, final conclusions cannot be reached until testing is done with lighter bullets, since 144 grains is widely thought to be excessively heavy for a 6.5 Grendel general purpose combat load. FMJ projectiles of 110-120 grains in weight are said to be in various stages of development, but won’t likely be in production in the near future.

Carry Load
One minor drawback of 6.5 Grendel is the weight of the ammunition, some 30% heavier than that of the 5.56mm Mk262 cartridge. This means that for a basic load of ten magazines (nine in pouches, plus one in the gun), there is a slight increase in the carry load, as well as a decrease in the number of rounds immediately available to the rifleman.

5.56 Mk262: 10 x 30-rd mags = 300 rds @ 11.2 lbs

6.5 Grendel: 10 x 26-rd mags = 260 rds @ 13.6 lbs

Although this difference could conceivably be critical in some isolated instances of sustained combat where resupply is not possible, the reduced quantity of ammunition must necessarily be balanced against the increased per round terminal effects. Lethality, penetration, trajectory, windage, and other factors are likely to be far more important in most “close encounters of the hostile kind.” Superiority of 6.5 Grendel over 5.56 NATO in these areas is so great that it might outweigh the difference in ammo load. Anecdotal reports from Iraq say that often multiple hits are required with 5.56mm to incapacitate an opponent. If use of 6.5mm reduces the number of hits needed to neutralize a threat, the “stored kills” would effectively increase in spite of the reduction in magazine capacity.

Conclusion
The Army had a logistically sound idea in trying to create a one-caliber, small arms system in the 1950s, but the 7.62 NATO cartridge was simply too powerful to be compatible with a lightweight combat rifle. As a result, today we have a two-caliber system with a relatively short-range, low-power 5.56mm cartridge for use in infantry rifles, carbines, and light machine guns, and a long-range, high-power 7.62mm round fired in sniper rifles and medium machine guns.

Can we have it all? That is, can we have a lightweight, fast-handling weapon like an M4 carbine, and still have the long range “punch” of an M14 rifle? Has ammunition technology grown to the point where we don’t have to choose between minimum weight and maximum performance? The answer, in the form of the 6.5 Grendel, seems to be a resounding, “Yes!”

Quote:
The 6.5 Grendel--A Quick History
John Hanka, creator of 65Grendel.com, tells us: "The 6.5 Grendel is an evolution of the 6.5 PPC, first created by Dr. Lou Palmisano when he developed his famous 22 PPC and 6PPC. Com-petition shooter Arne Brennan of Houston, Texas, saw the potential in Palmisano's 6.5 PPC wildcat. He had a custom AR15 built to shoot it and used high BC bullets to take it out to 1000 yards. Roughly at the same time, Alexander Arms was experimenting with the 6.5 PPC for use in AR15s. Brennan and Alexander Arms compared notes and worked together to produce the resulting cartridge, the 6.5 Grendel. Alexander Arms contracted with Lapua to finalize the specifications and to produce the brass. Brass and loaded ammunition are now available."
6.5 Grendel Cartridge Specifications
Case length is 39mm. Case head diameter is .445". Case capacity is 35.0 grains of water and about 32.5 grains powder. The cartridge was developed to maximize performance in the AR15 platform. In that role, magazine-length loads are limited to 2.255" OAL. However, in single-round loading or in a bolt-action rifle, OAL can be extended with bullets up to 130 grains as far as 2.420".


Arne Brennan's custom 6.5 Grendel single-shot rifle in Speedy/Robertson F-Class Stock.

Quote:
6.5 Grendel -- Origins and Performance
by Arne Brennan
Development of the Round -- A PPC-Based 6.5mm Cartridge for Long-Range
The 6.5 Grendel was originally conceived for the AR15 platform. The idea was to have a cartridge that performed better at long-range than the .223 Remington, while still retaining the ability to feed multiple rounds from a magazine. AR15 National Match and cross-course shooters had turned to the long 80-90 grain VLD bullets in pursuit of better long-range ballistics. However, this required that the rounds be single-fed because the OAL (with VLDs) exceeded mag length. I wanted a cartridge that would mag-feed as well as the .223 Remington. In addition, I wanted a cartridge that would be good for hunting whitetail deer, feral hogs and other game.

While .223-chambered AR15s shooting VLDs performed well out to 600 yards and beyond, this was not an ideal solution. Given a choice of platform, top cross-course competitors favored other cartridges such as the 6mm BR Norma, 6mmXC, and .260 Remington in rifles such as the Tubb 2000, "Tube Guns" or the Armalite AR10. I wanted to develop a better round that would still work with the AR15 platform.

I looked to the PPC family of cases for the answer, since the PPC is considered the most accurate case design ever invented. The 22 PPC would drive the 80gr bullets needed for 600 yards in a mag-friendly length. However, I didn’t feel the 22 PPC using 80gr bullets would provide the competitive edge I was seeking nor would it perform well for hunting. In contrast to the 22 PPC, the 6PPC was able to do both jobs (competition and hunting) by using 105gr Bergers or 107gr SMKs for competition and 85-100 grain Nosler Partitions for hunting. But one thing still bothered me about the 6PPC. The 2.255" max mag length meant I had to seat the 105-107 grain bullets way back in the case, or I had to modify the mags. Notching magazines had zero appeal so before going further with the 6 PPC, I decided to think "out of the box".

I knew that Sierra made a 6.5mm 107gr Match King and Lapua made a 6.5mm 108gr Scenar. Given their larger diameter, these bullets were actually shorter than their 6mm counterparts. So, I could use these 6.5mm bullets without seating bullets back in the case or notching magazines. Then, I found that Lapua's 123gr 6.5mm Scenar matched the BC of Sierra's 107gr 6mm MatchKing yet it was no longer than the 108gr Scenar! Bingo--by moving up to 6.5mm, I could equal 6PPC ballistics with a 107gr Sierra without modifying mags or seating the bullet too deep in the case. In addition, 6.5mm was a proven game caliber with many good 100-125gr controlled expansion hunting bullets available.

In mid 1998, I made the commitment to go with a 6.5mm version of the PPC and contacted JGS Tool to construct a reamer. Since there were no standards for or published history on the 6.5 PPC, JGS Tool constructed a reamer with no throat and provided me with a separate 6.5 mm throat reamer to allow the gunsmith to cut the throat to proper length for my application. Using the final reamer dimensions, Redding constructed a bushing type full length-resizing die. Only thing left was to take the leap of faith and begin construction of a rifle. After speaking with numerous gunsmiths, Scott Medesha of Medesha Firearms undertook the project and delivered a custom rifle in late 2000.

As load development and testing continued, I discovered the 6.5 PPC was very effective and accurate using medium weight 6.5 mm bullets. My initial goal of achieving 2650 fps was surpassed as I developed loads using moly-coated Cauteruccio 128-grain bullets achieving 2750-2800 fps. I've tried a variety of powders, and right now Vihtavuori N530 is the most promising in terms of velocity, but I'm convinced the cartridge will perform well with a variety of propellants. Alexander Arms now offers 6.5 Grendel ammunition in Lapua brass, loaded to AR15 mag length with a choice of three different premium bullets. Alexander uses readily-available powders so hand-loaders can duplicate the recipes.

Load Development and 1000-yard Performance
Arne tells us: "Having shot thousands of rounds in developing the 6.5 Grendel cartridge (and in testing 6.5 PPCs), we had a good idea of what would work in the bolt gun--Vihtavuori N530 and Western TAC. Both these powders have load densities, kernel sizes, and burn rates that work well with the Grendel case. Though we're still early in the load development process for the F-Classer, our load of Vihtavuori N530 with Fed 205M primers and moly'd JLK 130s produces consistent 2760 fps velocities from a 28" barrel. This load is grouping well, even though it took some time for us to get used to that 2-ounce Jewell trigger! (To an AR15 shooter, one pound is a "light" trigger pull). The N530 and JLK 130gr VLD load produced 6"-7" witnessed five-shot groups at 1,000 yards. The amount of drop at 1000 yards surprised us--an even 30 MOA of adjustment (from a 100-yard zero) got us on target at 1000. That's nearly dead-even with a 6BR shooting a 107gr Sierra MK at 2900 fps. That means, at very long-range, the superior BC of the 6.5mm JLK made up for the lower initial velocity of the Grendel.

Though the 130gr JLK's performance has been great, we are studying ways to bump up the velocity. That would make the 6.5 Grendel's long-range performance even more impressive. Right now, as you're reading this, Speedy is working on a 30- or 32-inch barrel. We've tested many barrel lengths in Grendel-chambered ARs. Those tests suggest we can get a solid 2800 fps in a 30" barrel using the current load. And that load isn't a barrel-burner by any means. I have no worry about barrel life with the 6.5 Grendel. My original AR prototype is still shooting bugholes with over 6,000 shots down the bore."

How the 6.5 Grendel Stacks Up Ballistically
With the great performance of the 6BR, and the availability of larger 6.5mm cartridges such as the Rem 260 (6.5-08), one can ask "what is the advantage of the 6.5 Grendel"? The answer is three-fold: size (form factor), efficiency, and BC. The Grendel will fit in an AR15 platform. The Rem 260 will not. The Grendel can push a 130gr bullet to 2760 fps with 15 grains less powder than a Rem 260. Burning less powder reduces recoil, and signficantly extends barrel life.

Compared to a 6BR, the 6.5 Grendel enjoys the advantage of shooting higher BC bullets. For example, the 6.5mm Lapua Scenar 123gr bullet, with its .542 BC, beats the .530 BC 6mm 107gr Sierra Match-King. And the new 6.5mm 130gr JLK bullets enjoy a BC advantage over ANY 6mm projectile available, even the DTAC 115gr. Initial tests of the 130gr JLK show a BC of .620, which beats the DTAC, with its BC of approximately .580. The larger bore diameter of the 6.5 Grendel allows it to drive a heavier bullet at lower pressures. The same principle applies to the 30BR, one of the most efficient cartridges ever.

A 6.5 Grendel shooting a 130-grain JLK delivers 29% more energy on target at 600 yards than a 6mm BR shooting a 105-grain Scenar.

Energy on Target--Advantage Grendel
In a bolt gun, the 6.5 Grendel can push the 130gr JLK (loaded long) to 2760 fps. Comparing the ballistics with a 6BR shooting a 105gr Scenar at 2850 fps, the Grendel has just 3" more drop at 600 yards (102.9" vs. 100.2"), and, surprisingly, the Grendel bucks the wind better. With a 10 mph crosswind, the Grendel's 130 JLK drifts 20.9" at 600 yards, while the 105 Scenar drifts 23.8", based on PointBlank software calculations. So, with the 6.5 Grendel, you get performance very similar to a 6BR, with the benefit of a heavier bullet that may work better on knockdown targets.


Silhouette shooters have favored 6.5mm cartridges over 6mm variants because, no matter what the computers say, the larger diameter bullets just seem to smack the silhouettes more reliably than the 6mms. This may be a function of bullet cross-section as much as terminal energy--the fatter the bullet the more it tends to transfer energy to the target rather than penetrate or shatter. By the numbers, a 105gr 6mm Scenar launched with 2850 muzzle velocity (MV) retains 870 ft/lbs energy at 600 yards. The 130gr JLK with 2760 MV has 1130 ft/lbs of retained energy at 600 yards--29% more than the 105gr Scenar. Silhouette shooters, have we got your attention yet?

Factory Loaded Ammo--This Ain't No Wildcat
Among the many 6.5mm, short fat cartridges, the 6.5 Grendel stands alone as a standardized round, with
high-quality Lapua brass AND factory-loaded ammo. Optimized for the AR platform, 6.5 Grendel ammunition from Alexander Arms operates at a safe and sane 49,000 psi. Using the excellent 123gr Lapua Scenar bullet (.542 BC), the loaded ammo will run 2670 fps from a 26" barrel, and will feed reliably from a magazine. Custom 10- and 17-round 6.5 Grendel AR magazines are available for $27.00 from CompetitionShootingSports.com.

Current factory-loaded Alexander Arms cartridges are shown in the photo. Left to right: 129gr Hornady SST, 123gr Lapua Scenar, 120gr Nosler Ballistic Tip. Ballistics for Alexander Arms' factory-loaded ammo have not yet been released. However, I've produced a detailed ballistics chart for the 6.5 Grendel with 108gr, 123gr and 144gr bullets. It includes the .223 Rem, 6.8 SPC and 7.62x51 NATO (.308) for comparison.

For quite some time, Alexander Arms has offered loaded 6.5 Grendel ammo built with premium Lapua brass and bullets. That is great stuff, but a bit pricey at $24.99 per box.

Now Grendel shooters have an alternative. Alexander Arms now sells low-cost 6.5 Grendel Ammunition made by Wolf. Priced at just $10.77 per box of 20, the Wolf ammo is loaded with a 123gr softpoint bullet that packs enough punch for deer-hunters. The round, which runs about 2600 fps, is also well-suited for target and varmint use. Wolf 6.5 Grendel ammo is also available from MidwayUSA for $10.99 per box of 20, item 449268. For review of Grendel loaded ammo, visit 65Grendel.com.

6.5 Grendel for Hunting and Long-Range Shooting in the AR15 Platform Run the ballistics and you'll see why the 6.5 Grendel is finding favor with so many AR15 shooters. The Grendel cartridge offers a high-BC projectile in a normal magazine-length format. Feeding is reliable with the dedicated Grendel mags now being produced. The 6.5 Grendel transforms the AR as a hunting rifle, allowing it to shoot very effective polymer tipped and controlled-expansion bullets up to 125 grains. An AR15 for white-tails? You bet. The Sierra 120gr Pro-Hunter SPT or Nosler 125gr Partition will perform admirably at the velocities allowed by the 6.5 Grendel.


What the Future Holds
In summary, the 6.5 Grendel was developed to take the AR15 to a new level giving it the long-range capability of the M14 and 7.62 NATO cartridge as well as making for a mild-recoiling hunting cartridge suitable for many North American game animals. In competition, I believe it is only a matter of time until more shooters use the 6.5 Grendel to improve their standings. One customer, who recently used both the 6.5 Grendel in an AR15 and the 6XC in a Tubb 2000, posted virtually identical scores in the same match with both rifles/cartridges. When asked if he could have equaled his Tubb 2000/6XC score with his AR15 .223 rifle, his simple response was "no way". In the bolt gun sports, the 6.5 Grendel has received interest from a variety of disciplines including F-Class, Tactical, Benchrest and Silhouette.

Silhouette shooters are especially pleased with the availability of factory ammo in sufficient quantity to make the cartridge legal for Hunter Class Silhouette. In the Benchrest arena, Dr. Palmisano has started the ball rolling--getting some top bullet-makers working on new, light 6.5mm flat-base bullets.

In the military and law-enforcement fields, there is much interest in the Grendel. The Grendel can be belt-fed and discussions have been underway for quite awhile with companies involved in producing belt-fed systems. It also works very well in full-auto and three-shot burst mode using the AR platform.

Grendel Ammo, Components, Accessories, and Complete Rifles

Everything you need for a 6.5 Grendel project is available from Competition Shooting Sports (CSS), (281) 330-0352 in Houston, TX. This includes brass, bullets, magazines, complete AR15 uppers, and loaded 6.5 Grendel ammunition from Alexander Arms.
The complete SG&Y F-Class rifle is also sold by CSS for $3850 without optics, chambered for 6.5 Grendel. A variety of other chamberings are available. For more information on the 6.5 Grendel cartridge, visit .


Latest Developments--CIP Specifications on the Way
The cartridge is going through the CIP process and the detailed max specifications will be released at that time. These maximum specifications are in excess of the loads used in factory ammo for the AR15 due to bolt thrust limitations of the locking lug system. I have known Bill Alexander for many years and one thing he is safe and with hundreds upon hundreds of Grendel's out shooting without any failure, I would I say the proof is in the hand of shooters.

Given the sheer volume of Grendel brass that has been sold or given away at events such as SHOT show (2004 and 2005) and NRA show (2005), the cases are out there for someone to measure. As far as releasing the reamer specs, there are multiple reamer versions for various platforms and applications. This is no different then a standard .223 Rem chamber and other designs such as the Wylde chamber. I hate to think how many versions of the 6 PPC are out there and I am sure people have quite a few versions of the 6BR as well.

When the cartridge is CIP'd, a standard chamber specification will be in the public domain and people will then start tweaking the clearances and throats for their purposes. I have my own clearances [for a match reamer] as does Speedy Gonzalez. Robert Whitley has his necked-down version he calls the 6mmAR. Currently, for a variety of reasons, I have no plans to release the detailed dimensions of the match chamber I use nor will I authorize the reamer maker to sell the reamer to the public.

6.8SPC FAQ

This document is meant to answer the most common questions about 6.8SPC in AR15 rifles.

Background
I'm one of the early "regular guy" adopters of this caliber- I've had my 6.8SPC AR15 upper since March 26th 2004. At that time, I also secured two cases of the Remington pre-production ammution, which was intended for function testing only. After shooting some of that and pulling rest down, I have been shooting my own handloaded ammunition.
Pictures

The information here is correct to the best of my knowledge; either I know it first-hand ("[1]"), second-hand from someone who is in a position to know ("[2]"), or it has been publically stated and I haven't seen any contradictory information ("[PNC]").

History
The 6.8SPC was developed for better terminal effects while still having an acceptable long range trajectory. Anyone wanting more information should read DocGKR's post in this thread: Tactical Forums :: The Terminal Effects Forum :: 6.8x43mm SPC Rifles [PNC].

What is the point of 6.8SPC?
The point of 6.8SPC is: significantly better terminal ballistics against humans and animals to 300 yards and still fit and run reliably in the AR15/M16/M4 platform.
Is the 6.8SPC case a necked up .223? What is the parent case?

The parent case is .30 Remington, shortened to fit the AR15 magazine OAL.[PNC] This is slightly larger in diameter than .223, so a new bolt is required. Magazine capacity is slightly reduced vs. 5.56 in the proper mags.[1]

External Ballistics, Basics
When factory loads are fully developed, an 18" barrel should shoot the 115gr OTM at about 2750fps; the 16" barrel at about 2650fps; and a 12" barrel at just over 2500fps.

Does the muzzle velocity really meet Remington's advertised 2800fps?
The batch of Remington 115gr SMK "green box" which emerged 8-9/2005 chronos at 2460fps from an 18" barrel. My reloads shoot a 110gr VMAX at 2640fps.
How does 6.8SPC's trajectory compare to caliber X?

Since the ballistic coefficient (BC) and muzzle velocity (MV) of 6.8SPC is very similar to 75-77gr 5.56mm and 150gr .308, the trajectories will be almost identical. For other comparisons, plug the MV and BC into the ballistic computer of your choice. [2]

How can I shoot 6.8SPC out of an AR15?
The barrel and bolt are specific to 6.8SPC.[1] Magazine bodies and followers designed to work with 6.8SPC are required. [2]. Springs from a 30-round 5.56 USGI magazine can be used in the 25 round 6.8 mags. Those same springs cut down to about 14 coils work in the 15 round mags. The upper receiver is standard with the possible addition of larger M4 feedramp cuts (can be cut)[1]. A standard complete AR15 lower is used [1].

Do AR15/M16 magazines work?
No (*see note below) Not USGI 30's, 20's, Thermolds, nor Orlites. Approximately 5-6 will fit and feed properly. Loading more will cause the mag to swell and it won't fit in the mag well.[1] See this thread on Lightfighter.net for more information: Lightfighter Tactical :: Lightfighter Tactical Forum :: Weapon Systems :: 6.8 SPC Experiments.
Where can I get loaded ammunition

October 2005, Silver State Armory is currently shipping 6.8SPC ammunition using their own high-quality brass.
As of July 2005, Remington factory ammunition has hit distributors and has shown up at online vendors and local shops. Precision Crafted Ammunition is also currently shipping 6.8SPC ammunition.
Proper 6.8SPC magazines are available from several sources:

PRI directly in 5, 10, 15, and 25 round capacities. The 15 round mags may hold up to 18, but feed best when loaded to only 15. The 25 round mags may hold up to 28, but feed bet when loaded to only 25.
MSTN also sells the complete PRI mags.
Barrett is supposed to be selling the 15 and 25 round magazines also.
Conversion kits consisting of a new magazine body and replacement follower are available from MSTN to convert your old pre-ban AR15 5.56mm magazines to be 6.8-compatible, also in the 15 and 25-round capacities. This works just like Armalite's deal for AR10 conversion kits.[1]
* - There is one report that the cheap 20-round Triple-K 7.62x39 magazines work with 6.8SPC.

Magazines springs Springs for USGI 5.56 30-round mags can be used in the 25 round PRI mags. Cut these springs to approximately 14 coils for use in the 15 round PRI mags.

Where can I get a complete upper in 6.8SPC
MSTN is shipping uppers.[1] Model 1 Sales is advertising 6.8SPC uppers. Barrett Rifles is also advertising 6.8SPC rifles.[PNC]. AMEETEC Arms is advertising 6.8 uppers. DPMS lists 6.8 uppers.
What are the muzzle attachment dimensions?

To avoid unpleasantness if a 5.56mm muzzle attachment were screwed onto a 6.8SPC barrel, a different thread pattern is used: 5/8"x24tpi. This is the same as the Remington 700.[1] This is the thread pitch specified by the military.
It has been reported that some other 6.8 barrels are using a 1/2-32 or -36 thread pitch. I have no other information at this time.

What muzzle brakes / flash-hiders are available for 6.8SPC (5/8-24)
The MSTN/PRI Quiet Control ("QC") Comp. This is a modern comp and should be as effective as the JP BC Comp, the Miculek comp, or the Benny Hill comp (which are only available in 5.56).
The Vortex flash-hider. Smith Enterprises' Vortex for the Remington 700 PSS (.308) will work with 6.8SPC. You must request some custom machine work to match the shoulder-muzzle dimensions. It is threaded for 5/8"-24tpi.
Phantom 308 flash hider.
OPSINC 4-port brake. Pictured above, this is an older-technology brake.
OPSINC 2-port brake. This brake has only one chamber and is primarily designed as an attachment point for an OPSINC suppressor. OPSINC suppressors are only available to LEO & Military in the US because OPS is located in California.
Armalite AR-10 muzzle brake.

What is recoil like?
Shooting an 18" 6.8SPC barrel with the OPSINC 4-port muzzle brake has slightly more recoil impulse than a 18" 5.56mm with no brake. It is more noticeable than 5.56 recoil in rapid fire (e.g. double tap, hammer) and full-auto, but much more controllable than 308 weapons with comparable rates of fire. [1]

Are reloading dies available? If so, from whom?
Hornady will make you a set of custom 6.8SPC dies. $90 for a standard set, or $109 for a match-grade set (with bushing-style resize die). Turnaround time is 6-8 weeks.[1] Call them if you are interested.[2]
Redding has their "Series B" dies available for 6.8SPC, from distributors for $40-45.

Is new brass for reloading available?
MidwayUSA is selling new Remington 6.8SPC brass in 200, 500, and 1000 case lots.

What bullets are available for reloading?
The bore diameter of 6.8SPC is .277", the same as the popular .270 Winchester. Since the maximum cartridge OAL is pretty short and case capacity is limited, short bullets are preferred. The likely weight range of bullets is 90gr - 120gr. The 110gr Hornady VMAX shoots really well.
Barnes has just announced a new 6.8SPC 110gr Triple-X bullet.

There are currently no 115gr bullets available commercially. A Hornady and/or Sierra 115gr OTM may be available in the next 4 months.[2]

What bullets are appropriate for hunting deer?

The 110gr VMAX is too lightly constructed for deer, even at slow velocities. I recommend the following as good choices for deer: 110gr Sierra Pro-Hunter, 100gr Barnes X, 120gr Barnes X, 110gr Barnes Triple-X. There have been some reports that the 115gr OTM performs well, but this was not designed as a hunting bullets.
What bullets are best for self-defense?

(1) 110gr Hornady VMAX, (2) 115gr Hornady OTM
What bullets are best for target shooting?

(1) 115gr Sierra OTM first, (2) the 110gr Hornady VMAX second.
Where can I find reloading data

Reload data is currently available from both Hodgdon and IMI:
Hodgdon 6.8SPC data
IMR 6.8SPC data
Zak's Reloading Information

I have made available some 6.8SPC reloading information here: Zak's 6.8SPC reload data.

I'd like to acknowledge the help of Marty ter Weeme in simulating the internal ballistics of some of these loads, in addition to Derek F. who connected interested parties.

What about cartridge over all length (OAL)?
The whole point of 6.8SPC is that it feed through existing AR15 lowers and as such, the cartridge over-all length is limited. This in turn limits the bullets which will work to those whose ogive is blunt enough to be held by the case neck and still fit the OAL requirement.
The PRI magazines accept rounds loaded out to 2.315". I'm loading at 2.300".

Can I load 6.8SPC on my single-stage press?
Yes. Get yourself a set of dies from Hornady, and use a .30Remington shell holder (RCBS #9219).
Can I load 6.8SPC on my Dillon press?

Get a toolhead, populate it with your 6.8SPC dies. The following shellplates work: 40SW, 10mm, 30REM. I am using a 308 casefeed adapter with a piece of duct tape partially over the plastic feed bushing's opening for the shorter 6.8 case. Use the large primer system.

PDF File about the 6.8SPC:


Image comparing the 5.56, 6.5 Grendel, and 7.62:


Image comparing the 6.8SPC and the 6.5 Grendel:

A-12 Avenger II (proposed replacement for A-6 Intruder)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grumman Avenger (I)





reminds me of the Horten Ho 229




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More pictures here




A-12 Avenger II - The Flying Dorito


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Avenger II was to be the US Navy's new Advanced Tactical Aircraft, designed to replace the Grumman A-6 Intruder as the Navy's primary carrier-based attack aircraft. The design never reached production, cancelled by the US Government after a series of budget overruns, design problems, and political infighting. Not much has been released about the Avenger II, no doubt due to the lawsuits that followed the government's cancellation of the production contract. Virtually everything was destroyed in the aftermath - both data and jobs. Massive layoffs occurred at both McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics after the contract was cancelled.
This page is not about why the A-12 should or should not have been produced - it is simply my tribute to a plane that was never built. I hope this represents the ultimate collection of information about the Avenger II or, as it was known by those on the program, the Flying Dorito. All images and information was obtained from public sources - I never worked on or had access to anything to do with the A-12 program. Now you know as much as I do about the ultimate stealth aircraft, one that was *never* detected by radar...














reminds me of the Horten Ho 229





The A-12 Avenger II was an American aircraft program from McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics intended to be an all-weather, stealth attack replacement for the A-6 Intruder in the United States Navy and Marines. The aircraft suffered numerous problems throughout its development, especially with the materials, and when the projected cost of each aircraft ballooned to an estimated US$165 million, the project was cancelled by then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney in January 1991.

Artists' conceptions and mockups of the craft revealed a flying wing design in the shape of an isosceles triangle, with the cockpit situated near the apex of the triangle. The aircraft was designed to have two General Electric F412-GE-D5F2 turbofans (each producing about 13,000 lbf (58 kN) thrust and was equipped to carry up to two AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, two AGM-88 HARMs and a full complement of air-to-ground ordnance, including Mk 82 bombs or smart bombs in an internal weapons bay. The A-12 gained the nickname "Flying Dorito".

The cancellation of the project resulted in years of litigation between McDonnell Douglas/General Dynamics and the Department of Defense for breach of contract. The case was still on appeal in the court system as of 2007. [1]

The Navy shifted to buy the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which has replaced the A-7, A-6, and the F-14.

General characteristics

Crew: 2
Length: 37 ft 10 in (11.5 m)
Wingspan:

Unfolded: 70 ft 3 in (21.4 m)
Folded: 36 ft 3 in (11.0 m)
Height: 11 ft 3 in (3.4 m)
Wing area: 1,308 ft² (122 m²)
Empty weight: 39,000 lb (17,700 kg)
Loaded weight: 80,000 lb (36,300 kg)
Powerplant: 2× General Electric F412-GE-D5F2 non-afterburning turbofans, 13,000 lbf (58 kN) each
Performance

Maximum speed: 500 knots (580 mph, 930 km/h)
Range: 800 nm (920 mi, 1,480 km)
Service ceiling 40,000 ft (12,200 m)
Rate of climb: 5000 ft/min (25 m/s)
Wing loading: 61 lb/ft² (300 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.16

Raytheon Wins $59M Order for RAM Missiles

Pentagon Contract Announcement

(Source: US Department of Defense; issued June 11, 2008)

Raytheon Co., Tucson, Ariz., is being awarded a $59,502,180 contract for the production of 90 Block 1 MK-44 Mod 2 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) Guided Missile Round Pack All-Up-Rounds, and 60 ORDALT Kits.

The RAM Guided Missile Weapon System is co-developed and co-produced under a NATO Cooperative Program between the United States’ and Federal Republic of Germany’s governments.

RAM is a missile system designed to provide anti-ship missile defense for multiple ship platforms.

Work will be performed in Tucson, Ariz., (49.7 percent), Ottobrunn, Germany, (42.7 percent), Rocket City, W.Va., (4.5 percent), and Andover, Mass., (3.1 percent) and is expected to be completed by May 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington Navy Yard, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-08-C-5401).

LockMart F-35B STOVL Stealth Fighter Achieves Successful First Flight



The first Lockheed Martin F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing stealth fighter takes off from Lockheed Aeronautics in Fort Worth, Texas, on its inaugural flight Wednesday, June 11. The jet, which will be used by the U.S. Marine Corps, the United Kingdom and Italy, is the first aircraft to combine stealth with supersonic speed and short takeoff/vertical landing capability.

by Staff Writers

Fort Worth TX (SPX) Jun 12, 2008

With test pilot Graham Tomlinson at the controls, the short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II streaked into blue Texas skies Wednesday, marking the first flight of an aircraft that will provide a combination of capabilities never before available: stealth, supersonic speed and STOVL basing flexibility.
Tomlinson, a former Royal Air Force Harrier pilot now employed by BAE Systems, performed a conventional takeoff at 10:17 a.m. CDT from Lockheed Martin's Fort Worth facility.

As planned, all initial F-35B flights will be made using conventional takeoffs and landings, with transitions to short takeoffs, hovers and vertical landings beginning early next year.

Tomlinson guided the jet to 15,000 feet and performed a series of handling tests, engine-power variations and subsystems checks before landing at 11:01 a.m. CDT.

"A great team effort led to a relaxed first flight, with the aircraft handling and performing just as we predicted based on STOVL simulator testing and flying the F-35A," Tomlinson said.

The F-35B, known as BF-1, becomes the second Lightning II to enter flight test, preceded by the conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) F-35A, which first flew in December 2006 and has completed 43 flights.

The F-35B is the second of 19 System Development and Demonstration aircraft and the first to incorporate new weight-saving design features that will apply to all future F-35 aircraft.

Though nearly identical in appearance to the F-35A, the F-35B incorporates a counter-rotating shaft-driven lift fan positioned directly behind the cockpit. The lift fan, produced by Rolls-Royce, is turned by a drive shaft from the F-35's massively powerful single engine, which features a swiveling rear exhaust nozzle that vectors thrust downward during vertical flight.

The lift fan, engine and stabilizing roll ducts beneath the F-35B's wings combine to produce 40,000 pounds of lifting force. Converting the F-35B from STOVL to conventional flight and vice-versa requires only the push of a button by the pilot. The system otherwise operates automatically.

"We're absolutely convinced that this aircraft is going to only further enhance what is a tremendous asymmetric advantage that we hold in terms of controlling the air, taking advantage of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, multi-sensor capabilities, and the ability, if need be, to drop a bomb in a precision strike," said Gen. James Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps.

The F-35B will be the first of the three Lightning II variants to achieve Initial Operational Capability, beginning with the Marines in 2012.

The STOVL variant also will be used by the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and Italy's Air Force and Navy. With the capability to operate from a variety of ships or austere runways, the F-35B can deploy closer to shore or near front lines, shrinking distance and time to the target, increasing sortie rates and greatly reducing the need for support assets.

"This is truly an historic day for aviation and the JSF program," said Maj. Gen. C.R. Davis, F-35 program executive officer.

"It caps a commitment we made in August 2006 to the Department of Defense and the U.S. Marine Corps when we said we would fly a production-representative STOVL F-35 by June of 2008 - and the team did it. This flight is also a milestone in a 5,000-sortie flight test program that spans five years but continuously rolls out incremental F-35 war fighting capability. It's a proud day and proud beginning."

"The STOVL aircraft represents the ideal balance of form and function. It uniquely meets the warfighter's demanding requirements with 5th Generation capabilities to deliver lethality, survivability, supportability and affordability," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program general manager.

"The quality of this aircraft reflects the talent of the worldwide design and manufacturing team who made the flight possible."

The United States and eight international participants are involved in the F-35's funding, development, production and sustainment. Three versions of the F-35 will be produced:

- F-35A CTOL variant for conventional runways

- STOVL F-35B for operating off small ships and near front-line combat zones

- And the F-35C carrier variant (CV) for catapult launches and arrested recoveries aboard the U.S. Navy's large aircraft carriers.

All 19 F-35 flight-test and ground-test aircraft are in production flow or on the flightline, and assembly has begun on the first two production-model F-35s.

The F-35 Lightning II is a supersonic, multi-role, 5th generation stealth fighter. The three F-35 variants are derived from a common design and use the same sustainment infrastructure worldwide to replace at least 13 types of aircraft for 11 nations initially, making the Lightning II the most cost-effective fighter program in history.

Lockheed Martin is developing the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems. BAE Systems also is the prime contractor for the Royal Navy's next two aircraft carriers, from which the United Kingdom's 138 F-35Bs will operate.

Two separate, interchangeable F-35 engines are under development: the Pratt and Whitney F135, which powered the flight, and the GE Rolls-Royce Fighter Engine Team F136.

since i could not find anything on U.S. manned flight and space station in the search area i reckon this is as good a spot as any to start one.

poster note------------------------------------------------------------

June 11th, 2008
Launchpad Damage Threatens Future Missions
Written by Nancy Atkinson




The damage to Launchpad 39 A is apparently worse than first thought. According to a report from WESH TV in Orlando, not only were bricks blasted from launchpad walls during the launch of Discovery on May 31, 2008, but damage also extended hundreds of square feet under the pad. NASA Officials said engineers inspected the walls and found more areas ready to fail, making the pad dangerous to use. Repairs will begin as soon as possible, as there are only two launchpads for the shuttle. Complicating matters is that both pads, 39 A and 39 B must be available for the next space shuttle mission, a flight to the Hubble Space Telescope, and preliminary work has begun to switch 39 B from a shuttle launch pad to the site where the first Ares rockets will be tested next year for the new Constellation program.

STS-125's mission to Hubble, scheduled for October 2008, will require a shuttle ready on each launchpad, as post-Columbia flight guidelines require a backup shuttle to serve as a recue ship for any mission not going to the International Space Station, where the crew could take refuge if any damage occurred that would prohibit the shuttle from landing.

So, just closing down the damaged Pad 39A is not an option, said shuttle program manager Leroy Cain. "We need both launch pads, so that's not a negotiable term at this point."

But switching to pad 39B as the primary launch pad would also present issues, as this site is currently being readied for launches for the Constellation program.

Last week's launch tore huge gouges into the pad's walls. Bricks were blasted and thrown on a roadway a quarter of a mile away, and into the waterway behind the pad. NASA is concerned about bricks being thrust up and damaging the space shuttle during future launches.



"We have lots of things that are susceptible to breaking away, or peeling away and hitting the launch vehicle,"said Leroy Cain. "Will there be impacts to the shuttle program, potentially the station, and no doubt the Constellation program? I'm sure there would be."

Both launchpads were initially built to launch the Saturn rockets for the Apollo program, back in the 1960's.

But as it stands now, Launchpad 39 A can't be used again until NASA determines how and why the damage occurred, and how to prevent it from happening again.

Sources: WESH TV, NASA TV

Northwestern Testing Transistors For Radiation Resistance On Space Station

by Staff Writers

Evanston IL (SPX) Jun 12, 2008

Transistors based on a new kind of material created by Northwestern University researchers have been lifted into outer space on the space shuttle Endeavour and attached to the outside of the International Space Station for radiation testing.
Such transistors could prove helpful on long space missions, such as NASA's current Phoenix Mars Mission, since early experiments on Earth indicate that the transistors hold up well when exposed to radiation.

The transistors, which used a new kind of gate dielectric material called a self-assembled nanodielectric (SAND), were placed on the space station during a spacewalk March 22. The transistors will remain there for a year as part of a NASA materials experiment to see how they and other materials hold up to the harsh space environment.

SANDs were developed at Northwestern by the research group of Tobin Marks, Vladimir N. Ipatieff Research Professor of Chemistry in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences and Professor of Materials Science and Engineering in the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science.

Marks says that, in addition to possibly proving handy in space, SANDs could help pave the way for a variety of new technologies, including printable and transparent electronics.

Transistors, the devices used to amplify or switch signals that are the building blocks of all modern electronic devices, generally consist of a substrate, gate and semiconductor. In between the gate and semiconductor lies the dielectric, which acts as an insulator to prevent short circuiting while stabilizing charged current carriers in the nearby semiconductor.

While silicon dioxide has historically been the dominant dielectric material for silicon-based electronics, Marks and his research group have been trying to create next-generation semiconductor and dielectric materials with properties that silicon and silicon dioxide can't provide -- such as transparency, printability and physical flexibility.

The dielectric material would need to be thin, be a good insulator and be able to stabilize the charges moving through the semiconductor by having what is called a high dielectric constant, which is the relative ability of the material to store an electric charge for a given applied field strength.

What resulted were SANDs, which Marks and his team created through a dipping process that creates self-assembled molecular thin films. Not only do SANDs meet all the requirements for next-generation dielectrics, but they were also found to be resistant to radiation.

NASA is interested in SANDs because the radiation in space severely damages electronics -- especially dielectrics, since silicon dioxide captures the radiation, which then forms holes and electrons and irreversibly builds up a destructive charge in the transistor.

For long space trips -- like the current mission to Mars -- such electronics are exposed to years of radiation. Early tests with nuclear reactors showed that SANDs are largely resistant to such radiation damage.

"Everybody was astounded," Marks says. "These experiments showed that SANDs have the potential to revolutionize the whole field."

Marks and his team will have an even better idea of how the SAND transistors fare after they remain on the space station for a year. In the meantime, they hope to continue to improve upon the transistors, making better semiconductors with thinner dielectrics and even higher dielectric constants.

In a paper published online May 3 in the Journal of the American Chemical Society with colleagues Mark Ratner, Antonio Facchetti, Sara DiBenedetto and David Frattarelli, the team showed that SAND-type materials can be made through vapor deposition, a common process used in the semiconductor industry to produce thin films.

While SANDs could help researchers explore the final frontier, Marks and his group will continue to work toward technologies that will benefit everyone on Earth, such as the ability to print transistors like newspapers, making way for cheaper, more durable electronics.

"It's not just that these transistors are only good for outer space -- that's an illustration of just how tough they are," Marks says.

"There is one technology on Earth, and only one, that will create as many features per unit time as a chip plant, and that's a modern newspaper printing plant, since the paper flies at hundreds of feet per second. Every time Intel wants to make a new chip, it costs billions of dollars and takes years to do. And yet every day they print a new New York Times. So we thought, could you use printing to create electronic circuits?"

Such a technology could print large items like solar cells and flat-panel displays, as well as small items, like circuits for cell phones and medical equipment.

One of the long-range goals is to print radio frequency ID tags for items for sale in a store, which could provide information on the item's price, where it was manufactured, how it was made and how it was stored. It would also allow a cashier to zap a shopper's entire basket in one go, instead of scanning bar codes one-by-one.

"It's like the tollway iPass for packages," Marks says. "A bell could go off and say, no, that's expired or it could tell a central computer that the store is almost out of an item."

Another development from such technology could be transparent electronics, which could provide new items like decals that could be applied to a car windshield that would instantaneously show the car's speed, fuel level and other dashboard information.

Some cell phones on the market already have printed electronics inside, and Marks and his group have already created printed circuits with the team's materials. The group is continuing to make transistor materials into inks in order to make printed electronics an everyday reality.

US Navy sonobuoy deployed UAV flight test this year

By Rob Coppinger

A sonobuoy tube-deployed unmanned air vehicle is to be flight tested using a Lockheed P-3C Orion in the third quarter of this year.

Called the Coyote and developed by the US Naval Air Systems Command and Arizona based-Advanced Ceramics Research, the sonobuoy-launched UAV has a 1h endurance at its 60kt (110km/h) cruise speed, or 20min at 85kt dash speed, at an operational altitude of up to 2,000ft (610m).

Its deployment altitude is 20,000ft and its control is line of sight up to 37km (20nm).

Following ejection, the tube's parachute is deployed and 5s later the tube sleeve is released. The flight surfaces are then deployed, horizontal tail first, then the wing, then the vertical tails.

The parachute remains attached for a further 10s after sleeve release while the lithium polymer battery-powered pusher propeller speeds up and the global positioning system searches for satellites for navigation.

By 15s after launch the Coyote's parachute is released and it begins its climb-out. After about 20s from launch the Coyote is in full flight mode.

The Coyote was launched from a representative sonobuoy launcher from a Raytheon C-12 Huron in April 2007. A second test is planned for July. However, its in-service aircraft is expected to be the P-3C.

June 12th, 2008
The Latest in Space Fashion from NASA
Written by Nancy Atkinson


NASA unveiled a new design of spacesuits for the Constellation program today. Astronauts will be donning the new suits on the first flights of the Orion spaceship, scheduled for 2015, on trips to the International Space Station, with additional EVA suits ready for the first missions to the moon, scheduled for 2020. The spacesuits feature rear entry, enhanced shoulder mobility and modular, interchangeable parts. The spacesuits will be designed and produced by Oceaneering International Inc. of Houston, Texas, which received a contract worth $183.8 million for 2008-2014.






NASA required two spacesuit system configurations for the Constellation program. The first type of spacesuit (Configuration One) will be used for launch and landing operations, as well as inside the spacecraft during an emergency like loss of pressurization of the Orion crew compartment.




Configuration Two will build upon Configuration One and will support lunar surface operations. While preparing to walk on the moon, the astronauts will be able to build their own personal Configuration Two spacesuits by replacing elements of Configuration One with elements specialized for surface operations.

Suits and support systems will be needed for as many as four astronauts on moon voyages and as many as six space station travelers. For short trips to the moon, the suit design will support a week's worth of moon walks. The system also must be designed to support a significant number of moon walks during potential six-month lunar outpost expeditions. In addition, the spacesuit and support systems will provide contingency spacewalk capability and protection against the launch and landing environment, such as spacecraft cabin leaks

VIDEO SITE:

for PDF site: