Nicknamed the ‘Douglas Flying Behemoth’, the little-known XB-19 was an experimental wartime bomber with a wingspan equal to that of a Boeing 747! Unloved and unlucky, it performed vital work that directly contributed to the exceptional B-29 Superfortress. 

From 1941, until the B-36 Peacemaker took its first flight in 1946, the largest American aircraft was the Douglas XB-19. This US Army Air Corps project started in 1935 with the aim of producing an experimental aircraft to explore the future of long-range bomber technology. The schedule called for detailed designs to be finished by 31 January 1936, and the first aircraft to be completed by 31 March 1938. Sikorsky and the Douglas Aircraft Company created mock-ups for evaluation, and the latter was declared the winner.

Work on the aircraft, now dubbed XBLR-2 (Experimental Bomber Long Range) did not run smoothly. Whereas US experimental aircraft would enjoy almost unlimited funding during the later Cold War, there was relatively little money available for R&D from 1935-1937. Douglas were receiving fitful government funding, and the programme was sucking up design personal that could have been working on types that had a chance of entering series production. In 1938, Douglas grew exasperated and tried kill the project, noting that the delays had made the it obsolete. Materiel Division would have none of it however, and insisted work go on.  

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

The XB-19 was completed in May 1941 and was an extremely impressive machine. Perched on a vast tricycle undercarriage with mainwheels an astonishing 8 ft (2.44 m) tall, the machine was in a class of its own. Its wing span of 212 ft (64.62 metres) was well over twice that of the B-17 Flying Fortress; its maximum weight of 162,000 lb (73482kg) was two and half times that of the USAAC’s standard heavy bomber. Its first flight on 27 June, 1941, was uneventful and was followed by a congratulatory cable from President Roosevelt.

The aircraft, with its impressive 7,710 mile (12,408 km) range, was a veritable gunship of defensive armament: it was fitted with five .50 cal M2 Brownings, six .30 cal Brownings and two massive 37-mm autocannon. These guns would be loaded during the later test stages as America was now at war with Japan, as another precautionary measure the aircraft was painted in a camouflage scheme. The maximum bombload was a hefty 37,100 lb (16828 kg), around eight times the B-17’s standard load for long range missions. In 1942 the aircraft was accepted, but it was clearly too slow — with a pitiful cruise speed of 135 mph and maximum of 224 — to be developed into an operational bomber, and the far faster and more sophisticated B-29 was only a year away from its first flight.

Total cost to the US Government was $1,400,064, a fraction of the four million it cost the manufacturer. Over less than two years, the aircraft and its 2,000-hp R-3350-5 radial engines were tested exhaustively. The data from these tests did much to make the Boeing B-29 Superfortress and Convair B-36 Peacemaker the successful aircraft they were. Once the XB-19’s job as flying laboratory was over, it become a lone cargo aircraft – before dying in Davis-Monthan Field.

If you wish to see more articles like this in the future please donate here. We are extremely grateful to all those who choose to donate.

Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

• Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Since we first reviewed The Aviation Historian, way back in the dark days of 2013, the publication has gone from strength to strength. Covering a fascinating selection of obscure and exciting stories from aviation’s past, it’s become a must-have item for discerning readers of aeronautical history. We cornered Editor Nick Stroud, pushed him against a Soho wall and refused to give him his Vespa back until he answered some questions about aeroplanes. We write this is in the hope of receiving another free copy of this handsome journal. 

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

What is your favourite aircraft, and why? 

“Always a difficult one this, as the minute you’ve plumped for something, you inevitably think twice and change your mind. Maybe if only for the sheer hubris of the machine and its 1970s soft-porn connotations, the Convair B-58 Hustler has to be up there among my favourites.  Wildly uneconomical, extremely hard to fly well and made obsolete by the introduction of SAMs, it nevertheless looked fantastic and set the tone for the steely projection of American airpower in the 1960s. Having said that, I also unreservedly love the D.H.60 Moth, the direct inverse of the Hustler. Small, economical, easy to fly and designed specifically to promote airmindedness for the masses, its “everyman” qualities represent the benign influence of aviation on humans. Hurrah to that!”

What is the greatest aviation myth?

“Having just completed our 60^th anniversary coverage of the UK’s 1957 Defence White Paper, the notorious defence review which has traditionally seen Minister of Defence Duncan Sandys cast as a panto villain sweeping onstage in a black cape to hisses and boos from the audience, I feel well-placed to say that there is a great deal more to the story than is often presented. We ran a series of three in-depth articles in TAH18–21 on varying aspects of the White Paper and its impact on Britain’s aviation industry, with contributions from Prof Keith Hayward on the document’s political ramifications; Greg Baughen’s thought-provoking history of the RAF’s longstanding relationship with “cruise missiles” and Cold War specialist Chris Gibson’s look at the immediate aftermath of the White Paper and the procurement choices available to the RAF as a result. Sandys is routinely pilloried as a missile-obsessed fool who single-handedly destroyed the British aircraft industry; it’s so much more complicated — and fascinating — than that!”

What should I have asked you?

“I think you should definitely have asked how to find out more about TAH and how to get your hands on it! We’re not available in newsagents or shops — except a few specialist non-traditional outlets (museums etc) — but you can find out all about us, see previews of articles, follow our Twitter and Facebook feeds, download our free PDF index (updated with the publication of each issue) and buy a subscription, back issues or single issues from our website at www.theaviationhistorian.com. Alternatively you can give us a ring on +44 (0) 7572 237737 or write to us at TAH, PO Box 962, Horsham, RH12 9PP, UK. We’re the world’s fastest-growing aviation periodical — try it and find out why!”

Urgent request: If you wish to see more articles like this in the future, please donate here. Your donations, how ever big or small, keep this going. Thank you. 

Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

• Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Created in China, perhaps based on an Russian idea, the JF-17 is solely in service with the Pakistan Air Force. Comparable in thrust and weight levels to the Swedish Gripen, the JF-17 is an intriguing design, but how effective is it? We asked Justin Bronk, from the Royal United Services Institute for his opinion. 

Click here to read an interview with a JF-17 pilot.

“The JF-17 as an airframe is certainly competitive with the F-16, being slightly aerodynamically cleaner, with a lower wing loading but a less efficient engine than the F-16s latest F110-GE-129/132 engine options. In terms of pilot interface, sensor suite and weapon flexibility, the JF-17 is roughly at a par with 1990s-vintage F-16 Block 40/42 and could be close to the USAF-standard Block 50/52, although without the conformal fuel tanks, JHMCS helmet sighting system and radar upgrades which distinguish the later Block 50/52+ and AESA which equips the UAE’s Block 60/61s.”

How would you rate the JF-17 in terms of within-visual range (WVR) and beyond-visual range (BVR) fighter capabilities? 

“WVR, equipped with the MAA-1 Piranha missile, the small and agile JF-17 will be a dangerous but not exactly world-beating opponent for existing fourth generation fighters. It is limited to +8/-3g and the current block 1 and 2 fighters do not yet have a helmet mounted sight system as standard (this is promised for block 3). The JF-17 also doesn’t have a greater than 1:1 thrust to weight ratio so would be at a significant disadvantage in terms of energy management against opponents such as the F-15C, Typhoon or Su-35. BVR, the KLJ-7 radar is significantly out-ranged by the F-16’s AN/APG-68 and completely outclassed by the Rafale’s AESA array, Typhoon’s CAPTOR-M and the Su-35’s monstrously powerful Irbis-E. The JF-17s small wing area and lightweight also limit its missile-carrying capacity which further disadvantages it in BVR engagements. However, it is worth remembering that the JF-17 is not really intended to take on Typhoons, Rafales, F-15s or Su-35s. It is meant to be a cheap and cheerful light multirole fighter and configured accordingly.”

For the full article go here

 

If you wish to see more articles like this in the future please donate here. Your donations, how ever big or small, keep this going. Thank you. 

Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

• Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians.

   

  

  “If you have any interest in aviation, you’ll be surprised, entertained and fascinated by Hush-Kit – the world’s best aviation blog”. Rowland White, author of the best-selling ‘Vulcan 607’

  I’ve selected the richest juiciest cuts of Hush-Kit, added a huge slab of new unpublished material, and with Unbound, I want to create a beautiful coffee-table book. Pre-order your copy now right here  

   

  TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY NOW

  

  From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.

  The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:

  “the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.

  The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.

  FEATURING

  • • • • Interviews with pilots of the F-14 Tomcat, Mirage, Typhoon, MiG-25, MiG-27, English Electric Lighting, Harrier, F-15, B-52 and many more.
        • Engaging Top (and bottom) 10s including: Greatest fighter aircraft of World War II, Worst British aircraft, Worst Soviet aircraft and many more insanely specific ones.
        • Expert analysis of weapons, tactics and technology.
        • A look into art and culture’s love affair with the aeroplane.
        • Bizarre moments in aviation history.
        • Fascinating insights into exceptionally obscure warplanes.

  

  The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.

  

  Rewards levels include these packs of specially produced trump cards.

  

  

  

  Pre-order your copy now right here  

   

  I can only do it with your support.

• 

Yesterday we revealed information about the previously classified British WG 44/47 studies for an advanced stealthy helicopter gunship. Today, thanks to former Head of Future Projects at Westland Helicopters, Dr Ron Smith, we have gleaned further information on this intriguing, and potentially word-beating, project. 

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations keep this going. Thank you. 

The WG 37’s boat-like hull is reminiscent of later US stealth aircraft, was research information being shared?  I have no knowledge of sharing of such data from the US. There was (at that time) a combined UK Industry and government discussion group that exchanged data between all parties. I was a member of that group.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

The study resembles the Eurocopter Tiger, are the two projects linked?  There was no link to Tiger, although I subsequently was much involved with that. The UK at this point was interested in using technology to produce a Light Attack Helicopter (LAH). Ultimately, the Army wanted Apache and the requirements changed somewhat over time. At this time, we had already been looking at pre-feasibility studies and were in discussion with the late Alan Jones at RAE (Head of Materials & Structures Division – which also looked after Rotorcraft), so were aware of their contemporary thinking.

The then interest in an LAH put the focus around the same weight class as PAH-2 / Tiger, rather than Apache and was reflected in the subsequent four nation funded study of A129LAH in which I played a central role.

What was the primary intended role and armament of the WG 44/47 Primary role anti-armour – missile choice TBD. (There were options at the time ranging from TOW and HOT through to Hellfire (not at that time in UK inventory) and LR Trigat (then at a very early stage).

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations, how ever big or small, keep this going. Thank you. 

ave the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations, however big or small, keep this going. Thank you. Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

• Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Dr Ron Smith joined the British helicopter company Westland in 1975, working in Research Aerodynamics, remotely piloted helicopters, before becoming Head of Future Projects. He had a strong influence on the design of the NH90, and was involved in the assessment of the Apache for Britain. He also explored a variety of exotic future technologies for Westland. One such exotic machine was a previously secret stealth attack helicopter. In our exclusive interview he revealed some fascinating insights into the shadowy world of advanced military helicopters. 

• Which of the advanced concepts you worked on would you have most liked to see fly?
  
•  

• There are a number of concepts that were not formally issued with WG numbers that my team worked on, including a purely commercial large transport helicopter with a clean streamlined fuselage and an S-76 style retractable undercarriage.

  Five options were put forward as WG30 developments to address the payload range limitations inherent in retention of the existing dynamic system (rotor and main gearbox). These all featured five blades and an increased rotor diameter, coupled with a new advanced technology main gearbox using high ratio conformal gears.

  The WG30-300 was built, but retained the existing gearbox and rotor diameter, it being judged that the development costs of a new gearbox and rotor design were unaffordable at the time. I do not have any copies of drawings of these concepts.

Stealth attack helicopters

A number of attack helicopter studies were carried out building on technologies being developed by Advanced Engineering and associated work coming from the MoD/RAE Applied Research budgets. These started with a low signature attack helicopter (WG44) based on Lynx dynamics, that evolved into the larger WG45 and WG47, which also featured low signatures and anticipated in some respects features of the Boeing Sikorsky Comanche project.  

The WG44 project dated from 1982 – and was presented at a highly classified conference during the Falkland’s War. WG44 was an in-house project in response to a request from the then Research Director asking where we would go to demonstrate our technology in the context of an attack helicopter based on Lynx dynamics. The other derivatives flowed from that starting point and included wind tunnel and radar models. Although initially in-house, some of this material was reported to UK MoD, but their procurement route ultimately favoured adaptation of a proven design, rather than development of a new type.

Light Attack Helicopter (LAH) and Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

WG44 using Lynx dynamics with

Shaped fuselage, coated canopy and retractable weapons for reduced radar signature

WG45 – new dynamic system and greater emphasis on IR signature reduction

WG47 – WG45 with revised canopy shape to reduce specular reflection (glint) I should have liked to have seen WG45 fly.

UPDATE ON WG45/47 attack helo here.

Another concept I should have liked to see is an Advanced Compound Technology Demonstrator. Here, I would have started with the speed record G-LYNX with a small auxiliary wing (possibly with planned incremental steps to lift augmentation via circulation control) and variable cycle engines to provide propulsion.

If you were to design a new generation helicopter gunship, what would it look like and feature? 

I guess that this depends on the role / threat. Today you need to operate in asymmetric conflict as well as in templated warfare against high end threats. Crashworthiness is an essential for all designs and a number of other features would be standard (e.g. ability to detect and avoid wires and survive wire strikes as far as possible).

Asymmetric warfare means taking out threats without killing civilians and non-combatants. Cannon and maybe rockets are required, with good ballistic protection against small arms and heavy machine guns. A capability for target designation is essential.

In coalition operations, positive discrimination of friendly forces is essential – not just by placing reliance on geographical boundaries. (Not everyone at all levels knows what their own special forces are up to (let alone those of coalition partners) and where they are operating).

Against top end threats, sophisticated anti-armour weapons are required, able to defeat ERA and (potentially) active countermeasures. This implies tandem charge warheads and (probably) top attack capability. Terminal laser designation (or imaging IR sensors) is likely to be required for target discrimination and precision. Missile launch signatures and any active seekers will potentially be detected by active protection systems.

Radar sensors can detect targets rapidly and at long range, but even today, this capability is likely to reach out further than the capability of IR sensors for positive target identification. To minimise the risks of friendly fire and civilian casualties, the positive ID capability should, if possible, reach out to the full engagement range.

This may not in reality be achievable, leading to the need to cooperate with forward ground units (special forces or manned armoured reconnaissance), reconnaissance helicopter and/or unmanned systems that can achieve positive recognition, identification and designation – dependent on the applicable rules of engagement. This makes anti-armour operations hard to orchestrate and potentially puts more personnel in harm’s way.

Against top-end threats, low helicopter thermal, acoustic and radar signatures will be required, together with robust design against electromagnetic pulse environments and consideration of directed energy threats. Mast mounted sensors are likely to be required for both reconnaissance and target engagement.

The design should anticipate future in-service growth at least in respect of systems bandwidth and processing capacity, ease of integration of new systems and mass growth over an extended in-service life. System architectures need to be partitioned appropriately for safety and resilience and robustness against possible cyber, EMC and EMP environments.

The aircraft will require sufficient agility to operate in the nap of the earth environment and will need to be able to operate and be maintained in world-wide extremes of both altitude and temperature. Engine particle separators will allow operation at low level in dusty and sandy environments.

Features driven by these requirements can be seen in current and proposed attack helicopters, but not all of the issues touched upon have yet been satisfactorily and robustly addressed.

As an aside, asymmetric warfare has shown the vulnerability of rear areas (operating bases and logistic supply chains). This lesson will, by now, have been learned by the more conventional forces, who may see value in attacking these areas, as well as the conventional approach of attacking the Command, ISTAR and air defence assets. Attack of the enemy rear infrastructure and / or defence of one’s own rear area may become a subsidiary attack helicopter role.

A further, if somewhat contentious aspect, might be in the provision of local air superiority against enemy unmanned air systems. (Although my experience of discussions, in both a helicopter and AFV context, suggests that the RAF would be reluctant for the Army to take on a significant anti-air role).

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations, however big or small, keep this going. Thank you. Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Dr Ron Smith joined the British helicopter company Westland in 1975, working in Research Aerodynamics, remotely piloted helicopters, before becoming Head of Future Projects. He had a strong influence on the design of the NH90, and was involved in the assessment of the Apache for Britain. He also explored a variety of exotic future technologies for Westland. In the first part of our fascinating interview, we ask him about the future of faster rotorcraft. 

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations, however big or small, keep this going. Thank you. 

HK: Of the various new efforts to produce faster helicopters, which are the most promising?

“In addition to the compound helicopter configurations, Sikorsky has flown a co-axial helicopter with nearly rigid rotor. This was first flown under the description of Advancing Blade Concept or ABC as the Sikorsky XH59A.

Rather than maintain a lateral balance between advancing and retreating blades, the retreating blade is unloaded and the lateral imbalance is cancelled out between the two contra-rotating rotors. Auxiliary propulsion is required to achieve high speeds.

The XH59A flew in 1973 and achieved a maximum speed of 274 mph in level flight.

The Sikorsky S-97 Raider, which first flew in 2015, is a modern development based essentially on the same principles. It followed the 2008 Sikorsky X2 technology demonstrator, which achieved speeds up to 290 mph in level flight. The S-97 Raider is promoted as having cruise speeds in excess of 220 kt (253 mph). Sikorsky are also teamed with Boeing on a larger concept, the SB-1 Defiant, due to fly in 2018, which is aimed at speeds up to 290 mph.

The ABC principle on which Sikorsky’s design is based is pretty much their proprietary technology, which means that evolution of other compound helicopter concepts (for example the Airbus RACER successor to the X3) is likely to be more straightforward for other manufacturers to investigate.

The main competitor to these concepts would be tilt rotor designs, which are not strictly helicopters), such as the AW609, Bell V-280.”

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

Helicopters rarely seem much faster than 200mph, what limits the top speed of helicopters? 

“There are two considerations: drag and rotor performance. Power increases with speed cubed and the helicopter, with its generally boxy fuselage and complex rotor head is not a very aerodynamic shape. My brother’s reaction to the Sikorsky MH53E was to say: – A spokesman for the air said “Aargh!”

A rotor rotates at tip speeds typically between 650-700ft/sec. On the advancing side the forward speed of the aircraft adds to this to produce transonic Mach numbers at the rotor tip. On the retreating side, the local speeds are reduced, which in combination with interactions with the vortices in the helicopter’s rotor wake can result in blade stall and stall flutter.

Stall flutter is associated with a rapid increase in fluctuating dynamic pitch loads in the rotor control systems, which can cause fatigue damage and limit the operational lives of key rotor system components.

The flight envelope has to be restricted to remain clear of stall flutter and the tip speed is restricted to limited external noise (and power penalties due to transonic wave drag).

Selection of aerofoils, knowledge of their dynamic stall characteristics, and modified tip shapes can be used to extend the operational envelope, but as stated, this would rarely extend beyond 200 mph.

Relieving the rotor of some of its lift and propulsion requirements by fitting an auxiliary wing and thrust devices also delays the onset of retreating blade limits, extending the flight envelope to perhaps 250 mph (think Fairey Rotodyne, Eurocopter X3 and so on).  This configuration is known as a compound helicopter. It can be lift compounded (wing only), thrust compounded (additional propulsion only), or thrust and lift compounded.”

What do you believe is the future of tilt-rotors? 

“Westland has a tilt rotor background going back to the WE-01 of the 1960s. When WHL were working with France and Germany on the GARTEUR studies, WHL favoured Advanced Compound Helicopters, whereas the French favoured tilt rotors. Subsequently, we find Agusta Westland / Leonardo picking up the Bell 609 tilt rotor, whilst Eurocopter / Airbus are looking at the Advanced Compound Helicopters.

The Osprey has demonstrated that a military requirement, Congressional backing and sufficient funds over a long period can bring a new rotorcraft configuration into operational service, albeit taking 18 years between first flight and operational deployment.

The Bell V-280 potentially offers a route to large scale military orders for a new tilt-rotor configuration, which is likely to be supported, if it goes ahead, with a sustained development funding stream.

The question for me, and I do not know the answer, is how fully de-risked is the AW609, in terms of its ability to gain world-wide commercial certification.

The loss of the second prototype is a concern, but is not untypical in a new rotorcraft development programme.

My question would be whether or not there are sufficient funds and commitment available from Leonardo to carry this project through to certification on a purely commercial basis. Once certificated, there remains the question of market fit (purchase / operating costs and mission performance versus competitors).

On the plus side, the high cruising speed of the AW609 means that it is something of an enabler in terms of medium range point to point operations. This is exemplified by the flight of the AW609 prototype covering the 1,161 km (721 mi) from Yeovil, UK, to Milan, Italy, in 2 hours 18 minutes.”

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Jim Smith had significant technical roles in the development of the UK’s leading military aviation programmes from ASRAAM and Nimrod, to the JSF and Eurofighter Typhoon. We asked his opinion on what we can learn from looking at China’s next superfighter, the Chengdu J-20. 

“The J-20 and the Su-57 are generally described as F-22 Raptor-class aircraft. In many ways this is true, but I think the J-20 is particularly interesting because of its rather different configuration.

The J-20 has a canard-delta rather than the (essentially) tailed-delta of both the Raptor and the Su-57. Additionally, unlike Typhoon, the canard is not closely coupled to the wing.

What might be the trade-offs here? I think the main benefit to be gained from this arrangement is the carriage of significantly more fuel, coupled with the scope for use of a longer weapons bay. The overall outcome could be a remarkable multi-role aircraft, with a particular strike role, carrying area-denial weapons. These might include, but are unlikely to be limited to, anti-ship missiles. The additional fuel could confer either additional range, or long combat persistence, and this suggests that, if armed with a long-range AAM a role as an anti-AWACS or anti-tanker system.

The large weapons bay might also provide sufficient volume for a wide range of strike weapons, but I would suggest this as a secondary role compared to the conflict-shaping area-denial role. Future internal carriage of high-speed weapons is a speculative possibility.

What of the compromises? I would suggest less energy manoeuvrability, as the configuration is likely to have somewhat higher transonic drag. In addition, signature (other than head on) looks likely to be a bit greater. Head on signature could be comparable to competing systems if appropriate engine installation and airframe treatments are used. The canard, I am assuming, will be held at low deflection for supersonic flight, especially if Su-35-like thrust vectoring is available to trim the aircraft. It is not clear from open source literature if this is the case, but if I were a PLA customer, I would be looking for it.”

_________

Hush-Kit notes

Some have speculated that the J-20 design may have been based on the Russian MiG project 1.44 tactical fighter design of the 1990s. MiG had been working on new generation fighters since the 1980s, and MiG’s 1.44 technology testbed flew in support of this effort, taking its first flight in 2000.

The theory goes that China bought research data and possibly worked with MiG to create the J-20. Though it is true that several Chinese aircraft (notably the Kamov designed CAIC Z-10 attack helicopter) were Russian designs never ordered by their parent state, the idea that MiG helped with the J-20 does raise some big questions. The first is ‘where did the money go?’ If MiG did provide vital work for a massively important programme they must have negotiated a very poor deal. MiG has been in a perilous state for years, in the 1990s in the chaotic early days of the Russian Federation, it fell out of favour. Despite its impressive history, it was at the mercy of officials friendly to the rival Sukhoi design bureau. The company limped on in the 1990s and early 2000s, and certainly didn’t seem buoyed by mysterious funds. The MiG 1.44 was killed for good in 2000, so presumably the Chinese relationship would have happened around this time. It could have happened before, as anything was possible in Russia in the 1990s, but selling high-tech secrets while trying to pitch the same projects to your own government seems a risky strategy. We also have the question of when this collaboration could have happened. According to Western sources, development of the J-20 began in the late 1990s, and it was officially announced by the Chinese in 2002. Things were still pretty terrible for MiG at this time, later still MiG were caught trying to palm off old (or ‘inferior quality’) MiG-29s as new aircraft to the Algerian air force. The infuriated Algerians returned the initial fifteen aircraft. This move severely damaged MiG’s reputation – would a company with lucrative secret deals have bothered with such dangerous chutzpah?

There’s also the question of what the design similarities are. Though superficially similar the two designs have a great deal of differences. They do indeed have a similar tailplane configuration, and are both canard deltas —  however we then start running out of physical similarities. Now at this point it should be noted that the the Russian aircraft was a testbed and the eventual aircraft may have been different in key details, though MiG has never confirmed this was the case. So lets look at the differences:

The J-20 uses the Lockheed Martin model for reduced radar conspicuity. The Raptor-like forward fuselage, angle alignment and F-35-style inlets are a far cry from the squashed forward fuselage and underslung box intake arrangement of the MiG. The canard foreplanes also seem to have a different relationship to the wing. The MiG’s foreplanes are far closer to the main leading edge of the wing, the J-20s meet a leading-edge root extension. The MiG’s foreplanes are mounted higher than the wing, the J-20’s start at the same height as the wing and at a pronounced dihedral angle. Not everything can be judged from the outline of an aircraft, and is possible that much in the way of internal structure or materials was directly informed by the Russian aircraft. If this was the case, then much Lockheed Martin DNA was also spliced into the programme. The LM stealth solution could have been arrived at completely independently, but this seems unlikely: a look at the other entrants to the ATF contest reveal there is more than one way to skin a cat. If American allegations of Chinese espionage relating to the F-35 are grounded, the similarities to the US’ fifth generation fighters may be more than skin-deep.

In conclusion, the evidence is far from damning, and appears to lead back to the Skunk Works as much as it does to Moscow.

 

Here is RUSI think-tanker Justin Bronk ‘s assessment of the J-20.

Two Up

 

“Two Up is a collection of anecdotes and stories drawn from our more than 50-year experience of photographing, flying, analysing, designing and generally working with aircraft. The 26 episodes in the book cover everything from schoolboy expeditions to photograph aircraft in England; to Ron’s visit as Westland’s Chief Future Project Engineer to Russia and Poland to examine their helicopter industry; my learning to fly aerobatics in the Chipmunk; Ron’s flight to Oshkosh on Concorde; and many more.

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Jim Smith was working in a technical liaison role in the British Embassy in Washington during the high stakes competition between the YF-22 and YF-23 to provide USAF with its next super fighter. In this role, he attended the YF-22 roll-out, and also wrote an analysis of the two aircraft.

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Why did USAF choose the F-22 and was this the right choice? 

My analysis observed the obvious differences in size, planform and shaping for two aircraft designed to meet the same requirements. From material available at the time, it was evident that the performance and range requirements were as demanding as the signature requirements, exceeding those of the F-15 while having a signature of the order of 1% of that aircraft.

I concluded that the YF-23 design looked to have been optimised for low signature, and that to achieve this, the wing design had been compromised, resulting in a less efficient wing design, and ending up with a larger, heavier design. At the time Aviation Week reported a wing area of 950 sq ft compared to 830 sq ft for the YF-22.

The high-risk of thrust vectoring 

The use of the 2-D vectoring nozzle, integrated with the FCS is an essential enabler for the YF-22, as this allows the agility and manoeuvre requirements to be met with a smaller airframe. At the time, this represented a significant risk for the design, as no current US exemplars existed although thrust-vectoring experimental systems had been flown using external paddle arrangements, incompatible with a low-signature solution. Apart from low-speed manoeuvre, thrust vectoring can also allow supersonic trim drag and signature to be reduced, as control surfaces can remain un-deflected and in line with the wing to reduce head-on RCS.

The YF-22 looked to me to have been designed to meet the manoeuvre and range requirements, and then shaped, packaged and integrated to have the lowest signature that could be achieved with the selected configuration. The fuselage shaping and planform appears less sophisticated than that of the YF-23, but I judged at the time that Lockheed had the know-how to meet the signature requirements, and, in delivering a smaller, lighter solution, stood well-placed in the competition provided the 2-D thrust-vectoring nozzles could be integrated successfully with the fcs.

In making this judgement, I was aware that there is a strong correlation between mass and cost at a given technology level. Although the technology decisions made by the designers were somewhat different, the smaller, lighter Lockheed design was likely also to come in at a lower cost (at least as viewed through the lense of this cost-mass correlation).

Was this the right decision? It is of course, impossible to know. But in my judgement, USAF expectations do appear to have been met by the developed F-22 Raptor.

Two Up

“Two Up is a collection of anecdotes and stories drawn from our more than 50-year experience of photographing, flying, analysing, designing and generally working with aircraft. The 26 episodes in the book cover everything from schoolboy expeditions to photograph aircraft in England; to Ron’s visit as Westland’s Chief Future Project Engineer to Russia and Poland to examine their helicopter industry; my learning to fly aerobatics in the Chipmunk; Ron’s flight to Oshkosh on Concorde; and many more.

Two Up Down Under focuses on a visit Ron made to Australia to enjoy an aviation and photographic road trip around the Riverina, leading to our visit to the Australian Antique Aeroplane Association’s fly-in at Echuca, Victoria. There is something for everyone in here, whether you are interested in Volkswagen kombis, recreational and antique aircraft in Australia, flying, photography or classic cars. In his later career, he was a well-regarded analyst working primarily on Land Systems for BAe Systems. Both Ron and I have been private pilots. He has owned a number of interesting aircraft, including a 1938 Tipsy B, and is also a winner of the Dawn to Dusk Trophy. My flying experience highlights include Chipmunk aerobatics and flying recreational aircraft in Australia.”

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and â€˜Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

 

Jim Smith had significant technical roles in the development of the UK’s leading military aviation programmes. From ASRAAM and Nimrod, to the JSF and Eurofighter Typhoon. We asked him about the concept behind the Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile 

Why did Australia choose the ASRAAM? 

“I had a significant role in this program. As manager of the Air Superiority and Anti-Air weapons research program, and then as Science adviser to the MoD Customer, technical lead  for the UK on the UK-Aus collaborative Group, and latterly as a member on that Group for Australia, I have a good understanding of both the technical capability, and of the partnership between Industry, Governments and research agencies underpinning the programme.

However, my past roles make it not possible for me to be very explicit on ASRAAM matters.

I will, however, observe, that the collaboration between UK and AS on ASRAAM has been one of full disclosure and access at the deepest technical level. This has been of benefit to both Nations. Australia has added new capabilities to the weapon, and has worked in cooperation with UK MoD and research agencies to ensure the capability of the weapon against advanced countermeasures.

This level of cooperative development is simply not available elsewhere.”

Does it need a thrust vector control to be effective against future threats?

“No. The missile seeker and kinematic capabilities make it highly capable at much greater range than other systems. It also has demonstrated all aspect capability.”

How is it different in concept to say- AIM-9X and IRIS-T?

“Primarily in the high-speed low-drag airframe coupled with highly advanced processing enabling long range all aspect engagements against targets deploying countermeasures.”

Is it effective? 

“Known as ‘the death dart’ in the F3 community. Stated to be well-ahead of any competing IR weapon. The weapon brings a pre-merge capability to the ‘SR’ AAM.”

Two Up

“Two Up is a collection of anecdotes and stories drawn from our more than 50-year experience of photographing, flying, analysing, designing and generally working with aircraft. The 26 episodes in the book cover everything from schoolboy expeditions to photograph aircraft in England; to Ron’s visit as Westland’s Chief Future Project Engineer to Russia and Poland to examine their helicopter industry; my learning to fly aerobatics in the Chipmunk; Ron’s flight to Oshkosh on Concorde; and many more.

Two Up Down Under focuses on a visit Ron made to Australia to enjoy an aviation and photographic road trip around the Riverina, leading to our visit to the Australian Antique Aeroplane Association’s fly-in at Echuca, Victoria. There is something for everyone in here, whether you are interested in Volkswagen kombis, recreational and antique aircraft in Australia, flying, photography or classic cars. In his later career, he was a well-regarded analyst working primarily on Land Systems for BAe Systems. Both Ron and I have been private pilots. He has owned a number of interesting aircraft, including a 1938 Tipsy B, and is also a winner of the Dawn to Dusk Trophy. My flying experience highlights include Chipmunk aerobatics and flying recreational aircraft in Australia.”

Save the Hush-Kit blog. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Copyright: Geoffrey Lee, Planefocus Ltd