Small Diameter Bomb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GBU-39 (Small Diameter Bomb)
4 SDBs (training/ground handling variant) loaded on an F-15E Strike Eagle
Type	Bomb
Place of origin	United States
Service history
In service	2006–present
Used by	United States Israel Italy
Wars	War in Afghanistan, Iraq War, Gaza War
Production history
Manufacturer	Boeing Integrated Defense Systems
Unit cost	US$40,000 (SDB)[1] US$250,000FY2014[2] (SDB II)
Produced	2005–present
Variants	GBU-39 / GBU-40
Specifications
Weight	285 lb (129 kg)
Length	70.8 in (1.80 m)[3]
Width	7.5 in (190 mm)
Warhead	AFX-757 Dense Inert Metal Explosive[citation needed] SDB: penetrating blast fragmentation[4] SDB FLM: blast ultra low fragmentation[5]
Warhead weight	206 lb (93 kg)[4][5]
Operational range	SDB I (GBU-39) more than 60 nmi (110 km)[3] SDB II (GBU-53) 45 miles (72km) against moving targets[6]
Guidance system	SDB I (GBU-39) GPS / INS SDB II (GBU-53) GPS/INS with coupled IMU/datalink, IIR and millimeter wave Active radar homing
Accuracy	SDB I (GBU-39) 5–8 m CEP SDB II (GBU-53) 1m CEP est.

GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb

The GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) is a 250 lb (110 kg) precision-guided glide bomb that is intended to provide aircraft with the ability to carry a higher number of bombs. Most US Air Force aircraft will be able to carry (using the BRU-61/A rack) a pack of four SDBs in place of a single 2,000 lb (907 kg) bomb.^[7]
The Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB-II) / GBU-53/B scheduled to enter production in January 2014 will add a tri-mode seeker (radar, infrared homing, and semiactive laser guidance) to the INS and GPS guidance of the original SDB.^[8]
The patent of the GBU-39 lists depleted uranium as one of the materials likely to be used for incendiary purposes.^[9]

Contents

 [hide] 

• 1 Description
• 2 Development
  • 2.1 Timeline
• 3 Aircraft
• 4 Ground-launched SDB
• 5 Laser SDB
• 6 SDB Focused Lethality Munition (FLM)
• 7 References
• 8 External links

Description

The original SDB is equipped with a GPS-aided inertial navigation system to attack fixed/stationary targets such as fuel depots, bunkers etc. The second variant (Boeing's GBU-40 or Raytheon's GBU-53 (SDB II)) will include a thermal seeker and radar with automatic target recognition features for striking mobile targets such as tanks, vehicles, and mobile command posts.^[10]
The small size of the bomb allows a single strike aircraft to carry more of the munitions than is possible utilizing currently available bomb units. The SDB carries approximately 38 pounds (17 kg) of AFX-757 high explosive.^{[citation needed]} It also has integrated "DiamondBack" type wings which deploy after release, increasing the glide time and therefore the maximum range. Its size and accuracy allow for an effective munition with less collateral damage.^[11]

• Warhead penetration: 3 feet (0.91 m) of steel reinforced concrete ^[12]
• Fuze: Electronic safe and fire (ESAF) cockpit selectable functions, including air burst and delayed options.

The GBU-39 has a circular error probable (CEP) of 5–8 meters,^[11] which means it has a 50% probability of hitting within that distance of its intended target. CEP is reduced by updating differential GPS offsets prior to weapon release. These offsets are calculated using an SDB Accuracy Support Infrastructure, consisting of three or more GPS receivers at fixed locations transmitting calculated location to a correlation station at the theatre Air Operations Center. The corrections are then transmitted by Link 16 to SDB-equipped aircraft.

Development

In 2002, while Boeing and Lockheed Martin were competing to develop the Small Diameter Bomb, Darleen A. Druyun—at that time Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition and Management—deleted the requirement for moving target engagement, which favored Boeing. She was later convicted of violating a conflict of interest statute.^[13][14]
On May 1, 2009, Raytheon announced that it had completed its first test flight of the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II, which has a data link and a tri-mode seeker built with technology developed for the Precision Attack Missile.^[15] And on August 10, 2010 the U.S. Air Force awarded a $450 million contract for engineering and development.^[16]
Although unit costs were somewhat uncertain as of 2006, the estimated cost for the INS/GPS version was around US$70,000. Boeing and the Italian firm Oto Melara have signed a contract covering the license production of 500 GBU-39s (INS/GPS) and 50 BRU-61/a racks for the Aeronautica Militare, at a cost of nearly US$34 million. US$317m was spent on R&D and spares for SDB II in FY13/14, with US$148.5m requested in these categories for FY15, the total budget split roughly 70:30 between USAF and USN.^[2] SDB II production began in FY14 with 144 bombs for the USAF at a unit cost of US$250,000.^[2] The FY15 budget requested 246 bombs at a cost of US$287,000 each.^[2]

Timeline

• October 2001 – Boeing is awarded the SDB contract.^[17]
• September 2005 – Small Diameter Bomb certified for operational test, evaluation.^[18]
• September 2006 – SDB team deliver the first SDBs to the USAF.^[19]
• October 2006 – Initial Operational Capability declared for SDB on the F15E.^[20]
• October 2006 – First use in combat.^[21]
• February 2008 – 1,000th SDB I and first 50 FLM delivered.^[22]
• September 2008 – Israel receives approval from the US Congress to purchase 1,000 bombs.^[23]
• December 2008 – Reportedly used against Hamas facilities in the Gaza Strip, including underground rocket launchers.^[23]
• January 2009 – Unnamed Boeing official stated that they have yet to deliver any SDBs to Israel.^[24]
• August 2010 – U.S. Air Force selects Raytheon's GBU-53/B for Small Diameter Bomb II Program.^[25]

Aircraft

The SDB is currently integrated on the F-15E Strike Eagle, Panavia Tornado, and AC-130W. Future integration is planned for the F-16 Fighting Falcon, F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning II, A-10 Thunderbolt II, B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit, and the B-52 Stratofortress. Other aircraft, including UCAVs, may also receive the necessary upgrades.
GBU-39 began separation tests on the F-22 in early September 2007 after more than a year of sometimes difficult work to integrate the weapon in the weapons bay and carry out airborne captive carry tests.

Ground-launched SDB

Boeing is modifying the Small Diameter Bomb with a rocket motor to be launched from ground-based missile systems such as the M270 MLRS. With the Army demilitarizing cluster munitions from M26 rockets, the company says a special adapter case could reuse the rocket to launch the SDB. After the motor launches it to a high enough altitude and speed, the wings will deploy and glide the bomb to its target. The company believes it can fill a gap for long-range precision fires while using its smaller warhead to save larger rocket munitions for strategic targets. While typical MLRS systems follow a ballistic trajectory, the rocket-launched SDB can be launched to an altitude and glide on a selected trajectory.^[26][27] Boeing and Saab Group announced a successful GLSDB test in March 2015.^[28]

Laser SDB

In mid-2012, the U.S. Senate recommended zeroing out funding for the SDB II due to fielding delays with the F-35 Lightning II. With the delay in SDB II fielding, Boeing recommended an upgrade to their SDB as a temporary gap-filler to get desired performance at a fraction of the cost. Called the Laser Small Diameter Bomb (LSDB), it integrates the laser used on the JDAM to enable the bomb to strike moving targets. Boeing began testing the LSDB in 2011 and successfully hit targets traveling 30–50 mph (48–80 km/h).^[29] In June 2013, the Air Force announced it would award Boeing a contract to develop and test the LSDB; the contract is for phase one part two engineering, integration and test, and production support and an LSDB Weapon Simulator. Boeing says the LSDB can be built at a lower cost than the planned Raytheon SDB II, as it will use the same semi-active laser sensor as the JDAM to hit moving and maritime targets. However, Boeing admits that it does not have the capability to engage targets in zero-visibility weather, as it lacks the SDB II's millimeter wave radar.^[30]

SDB Focused Lethality Munition (FLM)

Under a contract awarded in September 2006, Boeing is developing a version of the SDB I which replaces the steel casing with a lightweight composite casing and the warhead with a focused-blast explosive such as Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME). This should further reduce collateral damage when using the weapon for pin-point strikes in urban areas.^[31]
On 28 February 2008, Boeing celebrated the delivery of the first 50 FLM weapons.^[32]
The USAF intends to use the same FLM casing on a weapon of 500 pounds (227 kg).^[33]
In December 2013, Boeing delivered the last of the 500 FLMs under contract.^[34]

Mikoyan MiG-LMFS from Aircraft.Wikia.com

The Mikoyan MiG-LMFS (Lyogki Mnogofunkzionalny Frontovoi Samolyot = Lightweight Multirole Frontline Aircraft ), is an in-development Russian Multirole Aircraft, based on the MiG 1.44, after the failure of "Project R-33", the MiG-LMFS is the second try of Mikoyan-Gurevich ( newly RAC MiG ) to develop a replacement for the aging Mikoyan MiG-21 and Mikoyan MiG-23.

After the failure of the MiG 1.44 RAC MiG searched ways to use the new knowledge and technology otherwise. As Sukhoi was chosen to develop the heavy Air-Superiority Fighter PAK-FA, Mikoyan started to develop a new leightweight Multirole combat aircraft, the MiG-LMFS, which is also called "Project 1.27". Actually the MiG-LMFS is only a single engine stealth variant of the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG 1.44. While the PAK-FA challenges the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, the Mikoyan-LMFS is a direct competitor to the American F-35 Lightning II. Like on the MiG-1.44, Canards and tailless delta-wings will be used.
But at the beginning of 2011 RAC MiG published new concept designs of the LMFS, but this time, unlike on earlier designs, Diverterless Supersonic Inlets were included like they are on the F-35 Lightning II and the Chinese Chengdu J-20, and instead of Canards, conventional control surfaces are used.
RAC MiG is excepted to design the MiG-LMFS as a smaller and cheaper alternative to the heavy and expensive Sukhoi Fighters. Beacause of the MiG-23, MiG-21 and MiG-27, which are used in many countries and they must be replaced, the MiG-LMFS could be very successful on global market. The problem is that it is unknown if the Russian Air Force will want the LMFS, while it is impossible for Mikoyan to finance itself only with the MiG-29 and the MiG-35. But because the Sukhoi PAK-FA will have technical problems and will get more expensive, like the American F-22 Raptor, the LMFS, like the F-35 in the United States, could be very interesting for the Russian Air Force.

Comparable Aircraft

The performance of the LMFS is still unknown, but when looking on it´s design, it can be estimated against which aircraft it will compete and against which it will not:

China

Chengdu J-10 Vigorous Dragon

Sweden

JAS-39 Gripen

United States

F-35 Lightning II

MiG LMFS : Updates and discussion

The Russian Air Force made an unexpected shift in the priorities for its future fighter, stating that the service will back the simultaneous development of two programs for a fifth-generation aircraft. The PAK FA medium-weight fighter program, which has been underway since 2002, is joined by MiG's lighter-weight aircraft project. In addition to the goal of winning domestic orders, MiG's light multi-role fighter build on the company's earlier experience with its MiG 1.44 program, also may attract India as a co-developer and future customer.
In April 2002, the Russian military chose Sukhoi's T-50 proposal in the fifth-generation fighter contest — which was codenamed the Perspektivniy Aviatsionniy Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsii (PAK FA), or future tactical aviation air system. Since 2002, Sukhoi has been regularly meeting the subsequent milestones in the new fighter's development, which led to the Russian Air Force's approval of the T-50's preliminary design. To date, Sukhoi has developed a computer mock-up of the aircraft and an operating mockup of the cockpit. The PAK FA prototype's maiden flight is expected in 2009.
Sukhoi's victory in the Russian Air Force competition resulted not only from the T-50's design characteristics. The choice was made with the consideration of the company's sizeable profits from the sales of the Su-27 family aircraft to China and India in the 1990s and early 2000s. At that time, Sukhoi fighters represented half of Russia's aircraft production, and nearly half of Russian military technology exports. During the 1990s, Sukhoi maintained the largest workload of all Russian design bureaus. Unlike other Russian aircraft designers, the company counted more on its own resources than on government subsidies.
The Sukhoi T-50's rival in 2002 was the MiG design, the exact designation of which is classified. Later, when MiG Corp. decided to continue this program, it received the codename Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS) or Light Multi-role Tactical Aircraft. MiG Corp. did not accept defeat in the contest against Sukhoi, and criticized the decision-making procedure. According to MiG, several aspects were omitted during the evaluation, like the purchase cost for the Air Force, the aircraft's lifetime maintenance costs and the export possibilities of various versions during the next few decades. MiG insisted that instead of initial projects, the choice of a winner should have been made at the phase of prototype tests.

Looking for foreign partner
About a year ago, MiG's LMFS project came out of the shadows again due to a series of fortunate events. Some time ago, the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) started analyzing the development options for a home-grown fifth-generation fighter, called the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA), which was a twin-engine version of the its Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas fighter. After a bad experience with the LCA, India sought a partner in Russia for the MCA program.
The re-birth of MiG's LMFS project also was helped by the company's improved financial situation, resulting from several contracts for new versions of the MiG-29 that were signed in recent years. India ordered 16 MiG-29K/KUB ship-based fighters with the option for 30 more, Yemen purchased or upgraded 20 MiG-29SMT/UBT fighters, and Algeria ordered 34 MiG-29SMT/UBTs. New contracts for 32 fighters for Yemen and the upgrade of 66 aircraft in India are expected to be signed in the coming months. This will provide MiG with a portfolio of orders worth $4.5 billion.
Another event favorable for the LMFS program was the September 2004 nomination of Alexey Fedorov, the president of Russia's largest privately-held jet manufacturer — the Irkut Corporation — as the top manager at MiG. Fedorov is well known in India because in his previous role as Irkut's leader, he sold the Su-30MKI combat aircraft to India and was starting its license production there. Fedorov's contacts will certainly help the promotion of MiG-35 and LMFS fighters in India. In the coming months, Fedorov is to become the head of the OAK Corporation, which is a consolidation of Russia's aircraft industry. Therefore, it is expected that the LMFS program will be high on OAK's priority list.
A joint Russian-Indian fighter was discussed for the first time in June 2001. Later, during the visit of then-Indian Defense Minister George Fernandez to Moscow in January 2003, Russia and India signed a protocol declaring the intention to jointly develop a new-generation fighter. At the Sukhoi Design Bureau, Fernandez was shown the T-50 project. The trip of Indian Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee to Moscow in November 2005 (where he visited both MiG and Sukhoi) was crucial for the Indian-Russian contacts about the new generation fighter. The minister stated that India is not intending to be only a source of money for the project. "Our air force and industry are willing to participate in all stages of the new fighter's creation, starting with the conception, and continuing through the design and research to common production," he said. Mukherjee did not name specific companies and designs, but the phrase above distinctly refers to the MiG fighter, as Sukhoi's design is already complete and the documentation for prototype aircraft manufacture is nearly ready. Moreover, the Sukhoi aircraft is being developed in accordance with the Russian Air Force requirements and does not meet the needs of India. However, Russia is still pressing India to join the Sukhoi PAK FA program. In early August 2006, a Sukhoi delegation was again in India, and presented their project to the Ministry of Defense.

LMFS is different

A great advantage of the MiG project is the fact that its design and technical parameters are significantly different from the Sukhoi T-50. As a result, the market does not have to choose between an "either-or" situation, and both aircraft can find their place, depending upon the needs of potential export clients. The MiG proposal is for a "right-sized" aircraft that would be in the realistic price range for most foreign buyers, as best described by the frequently-quoted phrase of Mikoyan Design Bureau Director Vladimir Barkovskiy: "smaller and simpler aircraft would be inferior to its competitors, but larger and more sophisticated would be too expensive." In 2002, the then-CEO of MiG Corp. Nikolay Nikitin stated that an outlay of $1.3 billion per year between 2010-2025 would be enough to cover a Russian Air Force purchase and operation of a necessary number of MiG-designed aircraft, while a heavier Sukhoi aircraft would cost $2 billion per year. MiG also estimates the export potential of its lighter-weight fighter as 3-4.5 times higher than the Sukhoi fighter.
At the moment, one thing is certain: the LMFS will be about 30% lighter than the T-50. According to approximate assessments, the T-50 will have a normal take-off weight of 21 tons, which places it between present MiG-29 and Su-27 fighters — whereas the LMFS is likely to weigh 15 tons. Most probably, the LMFS will retain the delta canard configuration of the heavy MiG 1.44 prototype. Being asked directly about the new fighter configuration, Barkovskiy answered indirectly: "It would be illogical if we reject the experience we accumulated while developing that project [MiG 1.44]." He also mentioned that "the number of wind tunnel tests [of the 1.44 models] was vast, setting a new record in Russia. [So] we are making use of these materials and transforming them into the fifth generation aircraft."
It is not known at the moment whether the new MiG fighter will be powered by one or two engines. Originally, the company's design had two Klimov VK-10 turbofans rated at about 10.5 tons each, which are a further development of the MiG-29's RD-33 engines. In this configuration, the aircraft entered the Russian fighter contest in 2002 and was presented to India in 2005. In addition to their application on MiG's new aircraft, the VK-10 engines also could be used to extend the MiG-29's life in its new MiG-35 version. Moreover, the RD-33/VK-10's manufacturer, the Klimov Company, has become a part of MiG Corporation's engine division, and it is obviously easier for MiG to cooperate with Klimov than with other engine manufacturers.
Developing a single-engine design for MiG's fifth-generation fighter has become a more frequently discussed issue. Such an option was backed Russian Air Force Commander Gen. Mikhailov last January, while similar opinions have come from India as well. If the customers insist on a single-engine design, the use of a version of the AL-41 engine (to be installed on the T-50) with a thrust increase to about 20 tons is possible. Such a solution is cheaper, although it requires the engine to be mature at its entry into service and reach a high level of reliability first.

the Phazotron-NIIR institute will present the first Russian fighter radar with an active electronic scanning antenna (AESA): the Zhuk-MAE, which was developed for the MiG-35. Two prototypes of the radar were under assembly in the autumn of 2006. The fifth-generation LMFS fighter will certainly be fitted with a development of this radar. The cooperative links between MiG Corp. and Phazotron-NIIR were strengthened at the beginning of 2006 when a group of MiG's top managers purchased a controlling stake of Phazotron. In May 2006, Mikhail Korzhuyev became the director general of Phazotron, while Sergei Tsivilev, the MiG Corp's First Deputy CEO, was elected the chairman of Phazotron's board.

One or two fifth generation fighters?
The possibility of India's participation in the LMFS project generated new interest in this program from the Russian Air Force. Shortly after the Moscow visit of Indian Defense Minister Mukherjee last January, Russian Air Force Gen. Vladimir Mikhailov declared that "two fifth generation fighters, a medium one and a light one, are being developed" in Russia. The medium fighter will be Sukhoi's PAK FA chosen in 2002, while the light next generation fighter was described by the Russian Air Force Commander as a single engine MiG aircraft with the same engine, avionics and armament as the PAK FA.
It is understandable that Gen. Mikhailov's declaration caused anxiety at Sukhoi. A few days later, the head of Sukhoi Holding, Mikhail Pogosyan, said "there is no technology in Russia to develop a light fighter," clearly indicating that — in his opinion — only Sukhoi's PAK FA can be the fifth generation fighter. Moreover, he added that the PAK FA is not a heavy fighter, as "it is considerably smaller than the F-22A, Su-47 or MiG 1.44." According to Pogosyan, "any discussions about Russian heavy and light fifth generation fighters are pointless."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Russia Developing Yet Another Fifth Generation Fighter Jet

Posted By: Vikas ShuklaPosted date: August 25, 2015 01:08:07 PMIn: Politics, Russia41 Comments

Turns out, the dreaded Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA is not the only fifth-generation fighter jet under development by Russia. The PAK FA is expected to enter services in 2017. But the Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG is developing yet another cutting-edge lightweight fifth generation fight jet. The new lightweight fighter jet will be based on Mikoyan Project 1.44 (NATO reporting name: Flatpack), reports Sputnik News.

Russia's new fifth generation jet to replace MiG-29

The Mikoyan Project 1.44 was meant to develop an alternative to the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) project of the United States that led to the development of Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE:LMT) F-22 Raptor. The aircraft made its first flight in 2000. It boasted of stealth technology, advanced avionics, super-cruise, and super-maneuverability. However, Russia shut down the project over a decade ago.

On Tuesday, MiG CEO Sergei Korotkov said that the company will use the experience gained from the Project 1.44 to develop the new fifth-generation fighter jet. He added that the new plane will also use some of the technology developed for MiG-35 (Fulcrum-F) air superiority fighter. The new fifth-generation jet is supposed to replace the ageing MiG-29, which was first introduced in 1983.

Russian Air Force to get the first batch of PAK FA in 2017

However, it may take years before this lightweight jet is inducted into the Russian Air Force. Meanwhile, the first batch of Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA will join the Air Force in late 2016 or early 2017. PAK FA is a multi-role, twin-engine, single-seat, air superiority fighter with stealth capabilities. It is expected to have a service life of up to 35 years. It boasts of new avionics package that provides intelligent support and superior automatic control.
According to Sputnik News, the PAK FA is outfitted with a unique digital weapon guidance system with "fire-and-forget" capabilities. This technology allows the jet to lock on a target and hit it when it is no longer in the line-of-sight. It also features an improved technology to locate and track targets.
Russia is modernizing its military under a massive $400 billion program as tensions with the West continue to escalate.

Mikoyan Project 1.44

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MIG Project 1.44 MFI
Artist's conception of two MiG 1.44s in-flight
Role	Technology demonstrator
National origin	Soviet Union Russia
Manufacturer	Mikoyan
First flight	29 February 2000
Status	Unknown

The Mikoyan Project 1.44/1.42^{[N 1]} (Russian: Микоян МиГ-1.44; NATO reporting name: Flatpack)^[2] was a technology demonstrator developed by the Mikoyan design bureau. It was the Soviet Union's answer to the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) of the United States, incorporating many fifth-generation fighter aspects such as advanced avionics, stealth, supermaneuverability, and supercruise. The design’s development was a protracted one, characterized by repeated and lengthy postponements due to a chronic lack of funds; the Mig 1.44 made its maiden flight in February 2000, nine years behind schedule. The current status of the 1.44 is unknown.

Contents

• 1 Development
  • 1.1 Preliminary design
  • 1.2 Full-scale development
  • 1.3 Testing interrupted
• 2 Design
• 3 Testing and cancellation
• 4 Variants
• 5 Specifications (Project 1.42/44)
• 6 See also
• 7 References
• 8 External links

Development

Preliminary design

The MiG 1.44 had its origins in the early 1980s, when the U.S. Air Force began developing an advanced fighter under the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) project, which would ultimately materialise in the form of the supermanoueverable and stealthy, albeit costly, Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor. Consequently, the Soviet government tasked its fighter design bureaux the job of developing a fighter with which to counter the American threat, and replace the Sukhoi Su-27.^[3][4][5] Mikoyan busied itself with two concurrent projects, one of which focused on a heavy multi-role design designated MFI (Mnogofunksionalni Frontovoy Istrebitel, "Multifunctional Frontline Fighter"), the other a light tactical fighter named LFI (Lyogkiy Frontovoy Istrebitel, "Light Frontline Fighter"). To minimise costs, both designs were to share as many components as possible.^[6]
However, as the research and development phase for the two projects progressed, costs escalated due to the complexity normally associated with advanced aircraft projects. As a result, the Soviet government created the Combined Task Programme in 1983 with the aim of maximising efficiency and developing technologies to be used for all classes of aircraft.^[6] Mikoyan became the primary contractor for the programme, the importance of which was illustrated with its inclusion into the Soviet five-year economic plan.^[6] The design bureau soon formulated initial specifications for the new fighters.^[6]
Mikoyan proceeded with the preliminary design of both the MFI and LFI with participation from numerous institutions, which assisted in the progressive definition of the designs. TsAGI (Tsentralniy Aerogidrodinamicheskiy Institut, "Central Aero- and Hydrodynamic Institute") was responsible for collecting wind tunnel test results, which, along with theoretical studies, were vital during this phase of development. The institution recommended that Mikoyan include canards for the MFI, since it offers great agility and lift, the latter important as the MFI was a statistically unstable design.^[6] The delta wings then had a wing leading edge sweep of 40–45°.^[6] During this period, engineers undertook unprecedented wind tunnel testing to refine the MFI's aerodynamics and verify its radar cross-section (RCS).^[6]
The MFI would have a variable engine intake located under the front fuselage, reminiscent of the Eurofighter Typhoon; this was particularly important with the nature of the aircraft, since it allows for sustained air flow into the engine during sudden manoeuvres.^[6] As for the engine themselves, research was conducted on thrust-vectoring, allowing for markedly improved manoeuvrability and short take-off and landing performance.^[7] Besides the mechanical and aerodynamic aspects of the design, engineers investigated hundreds of issues to refine the layout and specifications.^[7] In 1987, Mikoyan and the associated institutions submitted the MFI and LFI proposals for review.^[7]

Full-scale development

While both MFI and LFI designs passed critical review, due to budgetary constraints, Mikoyan shelved the latter to free up funds for the development of the MFI, which had by then been redesignated Isdeliye (item) 1.42.^[7] Under the leadership and coordination of Chief Project Engineer Gheogiy A. Sedov, Mikoyan embarked on major design effort. Because the LFI was shelved, 1.42 had by then assumed the multi-role approach, meaning that it had to fulfill both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions.^[8] TsAGI was still a part of the design effort, having tested radio-controlled models for research into stability and handling characteristics, particularly at high angles of attack. It was later confirmed that the 1.42 is still controllable at angles of attack of up to 60°.^[8]
By now the specifications were being firmed. Engineers from various establishments had settled on a definite design, having refined the flight-control software, verified all wind tunnel test results, and checked important systems using test rigs and modified aircraft.^[9] In 1988, Mikoyan was issued a specific operational requirement for the 1.42. Three years later, the design passed the Soviet Air Force's critical review. This paved the way for the construction of a flyable technology demonstrator, and so Mikoyan issued specifications to specialised factories tasked with such roles.^[10]
The technology demonstrator, bearing the designation 1.44, would be used to verify the aerodynamic layout and flight control system of the design. Construction of it was halfway when the collapse of the Soviet Union brought a halt to further funding. Inevitably the scheduled first flight of the almost-complete aircraft slipped indefinitely.^[10] However, full-scale mock-ups and sections of the 1.44 were built in support of static tests, while factories were gearing up for the construction of prototypes.^[10] Mikoyan lobbied the government to declassify the project so it could display the aircraft at various air shows. In June 1995, MiG's Deputy General Designer Anatoliy Belosvet announced that the prototype could be displayed at that year’s MAKS Airshow; in the end, the government refused.^[11] The company tried in 1997, to no avail.^[12]

Testing interrupted

In early 1994, the incomplete aircraft was transported to Zhukovsky Airfield, where it would undertake flight tests. Ground tests began in later that year, culminating in the first high-speed runs at the controls of Mikoyan's Chief Test Pilot Roman Taskayev.^[10] Just as the test programme begin to pick up, it was again put on hold as the design bureau did not have enough funds to purchase the remaining components still missing on the demonstrator.^[10] This would be the main factor in the indefinite postponement of the programme for the next few years. In 1997, the Russian government cancelled the MFI program in 1997 due to its unacceptably high unit cost.^[13] Mikoyan was financially insecure, resulting with the change in the management during the years leading up to 2000; this opened up other sources of funds.^[14]
The change in the company’s management also brought many changes. In late 1998, the Russian government agreed to reveal the existence of the project. On 24 December 1998, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta published a brief article on the fighter, accompanied by several photos.^[15] On 12 January the following year, the 1.44 was officially rolled out in the presence of top-ranking Russian military and government personnel, international journalists and other dignitaries.^[16][17] Until then, the status of the 1.44 was largely a secret; the previous day, however, Aviation Week & Space Technology published a photo taken from the roof of the hangar in which the demonstrator was parked.^[18]

Design

Note: since the MiG 1.44 did not conduct an extensive flight test programme, not every predicted performance aspects by engineers were verified. Thus, this section refers to the design as the MiG MFI.

The MiG MFI was a delta wing, twin-tailed, fifth-generation air superiority/strike fighter design that incorporated advanced technology to theoretically give the aircraft excellent stealth and fighting attributes. It was of a tail-first (canards) layout which, when working in concert with the engines, give the aircraft remarkable manoeuvrability. It has a tricycle landing gear system, with a single, dual-wheel landing gear in the front, and two single-wheels in the rear. The MFI is controlled by a fly-by-wire flight control system, without which the aircraft is almost impossible to fly because of the statically unstable nature of the MFI.^[19] Mikoyan made use of weight-saving materials in the construction of the aircraft, with aluminium-lithium alloys making up 35% of the empty weight, steel and titanium alloys (30%), composites (30%) and others (5%).^[20]
The MiG MFI was unconventional in its layout, in an effort to improve in-flight efficiency and stealth characteristics. Efforts were made to minimise surface-area, possibly to reduce drag. The wings are of delta planform, with leading-edge sweep at 52°. At the tips are dielectric fairings which house electronic countermeasures/electronic support measures. The wings have full-span leading edge. The canards, meanwhile, have a leading-edge sweep of 58°, and have prominent dogtooth which improve airflow over the wings at high alpha (angles of attack).^[21] Russian aviation experts claim that the unorthodox design, use of radar-absorbent materials (RAM), and internally mounted weapons, give an RCS comparable to that of the F-22.^[22]
Two Lyul'ka Saturn AL-41F afterburning turbofans produce 177 kN (39,020 lbf) of thrust, giving the MFI a top speed of Mach 2.35. The engines also allow the jet to supercruise. The axisymmetrical engines can be vectored in both pitch and yaw planes. The nozzle's inner petals are lined with ceramic tiles to reduce heat signatures. The engines, through serpentine ducts covered in RAM, are fed by a rectangular intake underneath the front fuselage.^[5][23] Weapons and fuel tanks can be carried under the wings as well.^[5]

Testing and cancellation

During 1999, final preparations were made for first flight. The aircraft was finally completed after missing components were purchased. It underwent ground tests, including high-speed taxis during which the aircraft was rotated.^[24][25] On 29 February 2000, the aircraft performed its first flight at the hands of Vladimir Gorboonov. During the 18-minute flight, 1.44 reached a maximum height of 1,000 m (3,300 ft) and reached speeds of 600 km/h (370 mph). The aircraft touched down at 11:43 am Moscow Time, amid tight security. Gorboonov later described the aircraft as docile.^[5][25][26] After the 22-minute second flight on 27 April, engineers probably uncovered some problems, since there were no reported flights thereafter.^[25] The programme had since apparently been cancelled, with the aircraft's status unknown.

Variants

• MiG 1.42/42 Primary version which may go onto production; the functions are better than that of the 1.44. NATO named it "Foxglove".^[1]
• MiG 1.44 Demonstrator prototype with failed upgrades; will remain a demonstrator. 2 have been built. NATO named it "Flatpack".^[1]

Despite the close similarity to the Chengdu J-20, MiG has denied any intentional disclosure of technical information on the 1.44 to China.^[27]

Specifications (Project 1.42/44)

4 view illustration

Note: Since the 1.44 and 1.42 never went beyond pre-production, most specifications are estimated.

Data from^{[citation needed]}

General characteristics

• Crew: 1
• Length: 19 m (63 ft)
• Wingspan: 15 m (50 ft)
• Height: 4.50 m (15 ft)
• Empty weight: 18,000 kg (40,000 lb)
• Loaded weight: 28,000 kg (62,000 lb)
• Max. takeoff weight: 35,000 kg (77,000 lb)
• Powerplant: 2 × Lyulka AL-41F afterburning turbofans, 176 kN (39,680 lb) each

Performance

• Maximum speed: Mach 3.0 (3,185 km/h, 1979 mph)
• Range: 4,000 km (2,500 mi)
• Service ceiling: 21,555 m (70,720 ft)

Armament

• Guns: 1× 30 mm Izhmash GSh-301 cannon, 250 rounds
• Missiles: R-77 (AA-12 Adder) medium-range radar-guided missiles, R-73 (AA-11 Archer) short-range IR-guided missiles, K-37 long-range radar-guided missiles, K-74 short-range IR-guided missiles
• Payload: likely any AGM or small-diameter free fall bomb in the Russian inventory

See also

Aviation portal

Aircraft of comparable role, configuration and era

• Mikoyan LMFS
• Chengdu J-20
• Sukhoi Su-47
• Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
• Sukhoi PAK FA

Related lists

• List of fighter aircraft

References

ATF Concept Art for the America super fighter in the 1990's

Advanced Tactical Fighter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF)
The YF-22 (foreground) and YF-23 (background)
Project for	Air superiority fighter
Requirement	Advanced Tactical Fighter Statement of Operational Need (November 1984)
Issued by	United States Air Force
Value	$US 86.6 billion when winner was selected[1]
Date initiated	June 1981 (RFI)
Proposals	proposals from Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed, Northrop, and McDonnell Douglas[2]
Prototypes	Lockheed YF-22, Northrop YF-23
Date concluded	August 1991
Outcome	F-22 selected for production
Related programs	JAFE, NATF, Have Dash II

The Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) was a demonstration and validation program undertaken by the United States Air Force to develop a next-generation air superiority fighter to counter emerging worldwide threats, including Soviet Sukhoi Su-27 and Mikoyan MiG-29 fighters under development in the 1980s.^[3] Lockheed and Northrop were selected in 1986 to develop the YF-22 and the YF-23 technology demonstrator aircraft. These aircraft were evaluated in 1991 and the Lockheed YF-22 was selected and later developed into the F-22 Raptor.

Contents

• 1 History
  • 1.1 Background
  • 1.2 Request for proposals
  • 1.3 Selection
• 2 See also
• 3 References
  • 3.1 Citations
  • 3.2 Bibliography
• 4 External links

History

Background

In 1981, USAF began forming requirements for a new air superiority fighter intended to replace the capability of the F-15 Eagle. In June 1981 a request for information (RFI) for the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) was published by the Air Force. Design concepts were provided by defense contractors. The common areas among the concepts were Stealth, STOL and supercruise.^[4] It was envisioned that the ATF would incorporate emerging technologies including advanced alloys and composite material, advanced fly-by-wire flight control systems, higher power propulsion systems, and low-observable, or stealth technology.^[5]

Diagram of several designs submitted for request for information (RFI)

 

In September 1983, study contracts were awarded to seven airframe manufacturers for further definition of their designs. By late 1984, ATF requirements had settled on a fighter with a maximum takeoff weight of 50,000 pounds (23,000 kg), a mission radius of 800 miles (1,300 km), supercruise speed of Mach 1.4-1.5 and the ability to use a 2,000 feet (610 m) runway.^[6] A request for proposals (RFP) for the fighter's engine, called the Joint Advanced Fighter Engine (JAFE), was released in May 1983. Pratt & Whitney and General Electric received contracts for the development and production of prototype engines in September 1983.^[7]

Request for proposals

A request for proposals (RFP) for the fighter was issued in September 1985.^[5][8] In May 1986, the Air Force changed the RFP so that final selection would involve flying prototypes.^[9] In July 1986, proposals were provided by Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed, Northrop, and McDonnell Douglas.^[2] Two contractors, Lockheed and Northrop were selected in October 1986 to undertake a 50 month demonstration/validation phase, culminating in the flight test of two technology demonstrator prototypes, the YF-22 and the YF-23. Under terms of agreements between Lockheed, General Dynamics, and Boeing, the companies agreed to participate in the development jointly if only one company's design was selected. Northrop and McDonnell Douglas had a similar agreement.^[10]
Because of the added weight for thrust vectoring/reversing nozzles and related systems on the F-15 S/MTD research aircraft, the Air Force changed the runway length requirement to 3,000 feet (910 m) and removed the thrust reversers on the ATF in late 1987.^[11][12] Two examples of each prototype were built for the Demonstration-Validation phase: one with General Electric YF120 engines, the other with Pratt & Whitney YF119 engines.^[5][13]
The first YF-23 made its maiden flight on 27 August 1990 and the first YF-22 first flew on 29 September 1990.^[14] Flight testing began afterwards and added the second aircraft for each competitor in late October 1990.^[15] The first YF-23 with P&W engines supercruised at Mach 1.43 on 18 September 1990 and the second YF-23 with GE engines reached Mach 1.6 on 29 November 1990.^[15] The YF-22 with GE engines achieved Mach 1.58 in supercruise.^[16] Flight testing continued until December 1990. Following flight testing, the contractor teams submitted proposals for ATF production.^[15]

Selection

Following a review of the flight test results and proposals, the Air Force announced the Lockheed YF-22 with Pratt & Whitney engines as the competition winner on 23 April 1991.^[17] The YF-23 design was more stealthy and faster, but the YF-22 was more agile.^[18] The US Navy had begun considering a version of the ATF called Navy Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF) in 1986.^[19] It has been speculated in the aviation press that the YF-22 was also seen as more adaptable to the NATF.^[20] The Navy abandoned NATF by 1992.^[21]
The Lockheed team was awarded the contract to develop and build the Advanced Tactical Fighter in August 1991. The YF-22 was modified into the production F-22 Raptor version.^[22] The Northrop YF-23 design was later considered by the company for modification as a bomber,^[17] but the proposals have not come to fruition.^[23]