DAYTON, Ohio — A single Air Force Thunderbirds jet on approach to Dayton International Airport flipped over upon landing and crashed upside down as rain and wind gusts swept over the airfield on Friday.
The pilot and backseat crew member were listed in good condition moments following the crash. However, the Thunderbirds have elected to cancel Saturday’s 3:10 p.m. EDT performance, and will decide later regarding Sunday’s show.
The pilot of the jet is Capt. Erik Gonsalves, who serves as the team’s airshow narrator and advance pilot. Capt. Gonsalves was giving an informal familiarization flight to TSgt. Kenneth Cordova, a tactical aircraft maintainer. This is the first season with the Thunderbirds for both.
The two were landing aboard an F-16D Fighting Falcon aircraft in rain driven, overcast conditions with low visibility. Following the mishap, it took firefighters and airport personnel an hour to release the trapped crew members who sat upside down. As first responders arrived, they stated that one provided an immediate thumbs up signal.
The Thunderbirds issued a formal statement late Friday, “The United States Air Force Thunderbirds were conducting a single-ship familiarization flight on Friday June 23, 2017,” said Capt. Sara Harper, Thunderbird 12 and public affairs officer. “Upon landing there was a mishap at the Dayton International Airport with an F-16D Fighting Falcon at approximately 12:20 p.m. (EDT).”
“Our first priority is taking care of our Thunderbird teammates and ensuring future safety” said Thunderbirds commander Lt. Col. Jason Heard. “Both teammates were extremely brave during the extraction and we’d like to thank Wright-Patterson Crash and Recovery, Dayton International Fire Rescue, local police, medical personnel and team members on scene for their incredible recovery efforts.”
America’s Ambassadors in Blue will make a formal announcement on Saturday if they will perform on Sunday. As narrator, Capt. Gonsalves is the only announcer trained to discuss this season’s maneuvers by the Thunderbirds. He announces accurate details of each upcoming manuever in a memorized pattern during the 2017 airshow season.
Friday’s crash was the Thunderbirds second in the past 55 weeks. Last June, Thunderbird 6 jet was involved in a ditching maneuver near Colorado Springs. In that incident, the pilot, Major Alex Turner ejected safely and was unhurt. Maj. Turner still flies with the team as Thunderbird 5 lead solo.
UPDATE: Sunday’s performance is cancelled as well. No word on when the Thunderbirds will perform next.
(Charles Atkeison reports on aerospace and technology. Follow his updates via social media @Military_Flight.)
The Airbus A380 is easily known as the largest passenger aircraft in existence, entering commercial service in 2007. A big deal when it first came on the market, and even now, it can carry the most people on a regular basis, and continues to do so around the world. However, a trend’s popped up that can’t be ignored (and shouldn’t be ignored, if the major aircraft manufacturers know what’s good for them): in the airline industry, bigger isn’t always better. For that reason, the A380’s successor, the A380plus, may be doomed to failure. Here’s why:
Massive jets were created to circle the globe, whisking passengers away to far-off destinations, carrying 400 or 500 individuals at once. But at the end of the day, that’s just not what the greater public wants or needs. They’d prefer a convenient flight that gets them where they need to go, when they need to get there, without traversing a big hub. It’s why the A330 and 787s of the world are flying direct between smaller cities, and are continuing to do so. Not to mention, Boeing itself has acknowledged the downward trend in demand for super-sized jets; at the Paris Air Show, vice president of marketing Randy Tinseth expressed that, for lack of better words, the 747-8i and the A380 markets are dead.
2. The Fixed-Cost Problem Still Exists
Bigger planes are more expensive to fly. It’s simple fact. The A380plus may offer aerodynamic improvements to help out with some of the efficiency gap, but, fundamentally, four engines are more expensive to operate and maintain than two. They may need to take a page from Boeing’s book, and realize that efficiency is where it’s at in today’s market. Just look at the ultra-efficient 777X coming online in the next few years, and you’ll see where industry interest is headed.
3. The Plus doesn’t add up to more comfort
The interior of a commercial airplane should be all about the passenger — their comfort, accessibility and, again, convenience. The A380 was a very comfortable jet a 10 across seating. Unfortunately, when you’re jammed 11 into a row in economy on an A380, you begin to feel like you are in a sardine can. That’s the fallacy behind the “plus”. It’s squeezing more seats into a jet at the expense of comfort.
We’re guessing that there will be very few (if any) orders ever materialize for the A380 Plus.
Commercial aviation enthusiasts have been presented with a one-on-one battle for years — Boeing vs. Airbus. No matter which you prefer, whether it be for design, interior or even in-flight noise, there is one clear winner at the Paris Air Show.
Beyond Boeing’s reveal of the 737 MAX 10, they racked up a huge number of new orders and commitments, to the tune of 571. Airbus? A mere 336. All those orders for Boeing added up to a nice $74.8 billion. The largest order was placed by an unidentified major airline customer, for 125 of the 737 MAX 8 model. United followed close behind with 104 new orders. It seems that nearly every airline you know — and even some you don’t (Okay Airways, anyone?) — got in the game, placing an order for at least one version of the 737 MAX, with a much smaller number of Dreamliner orders.
The Airbus orders tallied up to about $39 billion. However, one aircraft valuation firm says that industry discounts could have slashed both manufacturer’s profits in half, with the real value (beyond the list prices), being somewhere around $35 billion for Boeing, and $17 billion for Airbus. Of course, as always, take note that even what the manufacturer may tout as a “firm agreement” may not come to fruition. Airlines back out of announced agreements regularly.
The loss of the unofficial race was just a sad fact on top of another for Airbus, as COO John Leahy, often credited with getting Airbus to where it is today, announced his 2017 retirement. He also had a few things to say about Boeing, noting, he “had expected they would have had a bigger launch on the 737 MAX 10, not quite as many conversions, more incremental orders.” He also mentions that the MAX 10 will probably not be a serious competitor to the A321.
Both manufacturers plan to up the ante to meet orders. Airbus is looking to produce 30 more planes this year than in 2016, and Boeing said it’d like to start producing two more 787s per month by 2020.
Boeing did admit that it had no new orders for its 777X.
The predicament isn’t unusual at the Air Show, though. Bombardier had no orders for its CSeries and Mitsubishi fared the same with its MRJ regional jet.
UPDATE: 6:58PM CT: A press conference was held this afternoon regarding the crash. Both occupants of the two-ship F-16D are in good condition. See recap of today’s events here.
UPDATE 12:34PM CT: Here is live footage of the incident provided by WHIO.
12:20PM CT
The Dayton Daily News is reporting that a Thunderbirds aircraft ‘crashed’ today at Dayton International Airport. However, if you read their latest reporting, it sounds as if the jet landed and then was flipped over by a gust of wind. There is no word yet on injuries. Here is their latest tweet.
While the winds are reported to be light, the field has been reporting heavy rain with low visibility. A significant cold front has converged with moisture from the remnants of Tropical Storm Cindy to produce heavy rain, thunderstorms, and wind in the region.
2.) The Thunderbirds practice for the Dayton Airshow was called off today due to weather but the two-seater F-16D did take off for a media flight. There were two occupants in the F-16–one pilot and one media guest.
Peter Thiel, PayPal founder and tech evangelist, noted several years ago that “We wanted flying cars, but instead got 140 characters.” He was, of course, talking about Twitter, but his larger point was that the technological advancements that seemed to be inevitable have—when they’ve even shown up— been underwhelming.
The pilotless airliner, like the driverless car, is one of those innovations that always seems to be around the next corner, but like a mirage in the desert, keeps receding into the distance. And it certainly isn’t for lack of effort. DARPA has recently been testing a robot which occupies the space where a copilot sits on an airliner.
A recent headline proclaimed that this robot was able to fly (and land!) a 737. So that’s that right? We can finally get on with the business of halving (or eliminating) our pilot force, solving the pilot shortage, and saving a ton of money to boot.
Well, I wouldn’t be so quick to quit flight school and dust off that medical school application. We are still quite a ways away from single or no pilot airliners for a number of reasons. But first, I’d like to review where we’ve come from when it comes to cockpit automation and what we’ll ultimately be asking our machines to do.
There was a time not too far removed when it took five or more crew members—in addition to flight attendants—to operate an airliner. Besides the two pilots up front, there were navigators to navigate, flight engineers to keep the engines running, and a radio operator to communicate. Over the years, these positions have been eliminated through the use of technology and automation.
The last airplane Boeing manufactured that had an engineer’s panel in the cockpit was the 747-300 model, which ceased production in 1990. Navigators and radio operators were eliminated decades earlier, replaced by inertial navigation systems and solid state radios.
Job Functions Were Consolidated, not Eliminated
Wikipedia: Felix Stember
I think it important to note that none of the functions that those earlier crew members accomplished were actually eliminated, but rather consolidated into the job of pilot. Airplanes still needed to be navigated, engines needed to be started, monitored and kept running through fuel management, and radios still needed to be tuned and monitored.
Automation has allowed pilots to assume all those duties while still flying the airplane. And as you’ve no doubt read somewhere on the internet, pilots only actually “fly” their airliners for just a few minutes per flight during takeoff and landing. For the most part this is true. I personally like to hand fly the jet more than most, but that is because I enjoy it. There is certainly no need to do so. For many, it is gear up, flaps up, autopilot on.
The dirty truth is the autopilot can fly better for longer than any human can. Sure, some pilots can fly a better final than “George” (the autopilot), but George doesn’t get tired or rusty. This is a good thing, because it is that autopilot which frees up the two pilots to deal with things like a low oil pressure light during a diversion in bad weather.
Why Have Pilots at All?
Technology has eliminated all those other jobs on the airplane, and we have autopilots that routinely handle almost all the flying already, so what’s the problem? Just make a machine that can handle the other three minutes of flying and we’re done here.
This gets down to the fundamental reason pilots are really on the airplane, and that is decision making.The reason there are two pilots aboard? Collaboration and validation of the decision making process. Plus having two people up front has the added advantage that they help keep each other awake. (Laugh, but it will need to be addressed in a single pilot airliner.)
So no problemo, simply write some software that can handle the decisions that pilots are expected to make. This gets down to the question of things that machines do well versus the things that humans do well. They each have their strengths and weaknesses.
Pattern Recognition and Heuristics
Computers are really good at tedious detail work such as, say, doing a spell check or a word find and replace on a blog post. What they’re not so good at is deciding if you’ve buried the lede, or if your prose is somewhat leaden. That takes judgement, which is more difficult to code.
Have you ever wondered why all the fruits and vegetables in the supermarket have those little stickers on them used by the scanner? Why can’t the scanner just look at a tomato and recognize it? The reason is that when you program the computer to recognize something that is “red” and “round” it will confuse tomatoes with apples (or red bell peppers). While humans will rarely mistake an apple for a tomato, getting a machine to routinely recognize the difference is much more difficult, (and expensive) hence the stickers.
In short, humans are much better than machines at pattern recognition and heuristics, which is a fancy word for an educated guess or hunch. Humans are better decision makers in ambiguous situations. And many situations on an airliner can be ambiguous.
Canned Decision Making or AI
What is software other than prepackaged expertise and decisions? Automation is threatening whole sectors of the economy such as accounting because expertise and best practices can be distilled into code and sold to people who couldn’t otherwise afford to hire a tireless expert. Accounting software, though, is unlikely to be presented a scenario which hasn’t been preprogrammed. If it does come across such a situation, it would likely come to a halt state to await human intervention.
The software in a pilotless airplane would need to be either pre programmed with every possible scenario likely to ever be encountered, or to employ some sort of artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the ability of a machine to be able to process information which it hasn’t specifically been programmed to handle, i.e. to learn. In short, it is canned judgement.
Advances in AI are being made all the time but it does have a way to go. Imagine a piece of software which would have the judgement to tell the difference between a need to do a gate return for a woman who’d left her purse in the gate area versus one whose husband had been seriously injured (or one of several million other scenarios). I can’t imagine that either.
So it seems apparent to me that we’re going to need humans available to make decisions on or about airlines for the foreseeable future. The question arises as to how many humans are required, and if they should they actually be on the airplane.
Pilot/Dispatcher/Controller
Our current commercial airline transportation system consists of at least four people watching over your flight at any one time. Two or more pilots are up front, a dispatcher has planned your flight and keeps watch over things like destination weather and other operational concerns, while air traffic controllers keep your airplane away from all the other airplanes flying around.
All of these jobs are supposedly ripe for replacement through automation. Back in my military days the crew would come in the day before a scheduled flight and spend the entire day flight planning. Dispatchers today plan and oversee many dozens of flights per shift using sophisticated software tools. They become extremely busy, though, when many airplanes under their control have to divert in the case of bad weather in one location.
In the scenario where there is one pilot aboard coupled with say, a “copilot” assistant on the ground connected through datalink, a decision would need to be made as to how many airborne planes would be assigned to each assistant. If the ratio is one to one, there would be little cost savings as assistants would likely make about as much as dispatchers and copilots currently do. Perhaps two to one or four to one. An optimal number will need to be found. This would open a new cost versus safety frontier that does not now exist.
These assistants would be only available for voice or text consultation given the current state of deployed technology. Robust telecommunications networks allowing for remote control of airliners along with control systems aboard airliners to allow such control, while technically feasible, currently do not exist and would require a sizeable investment in hardware and infrastructure to implement. This is certainly doable, but there is little evidence of any movement towards this future other than pure research.
Similar automation and technology advancements are impacting the job of the air traffic controller as well. The FAA has proposed using advanced data tools to have a flight fully cleared and deconflicted from all other airborne traffic before it has even taken off. Controllers would only be available to intervene in the case of rapidly changing weather or other unpredictable contingencies such as aircraft emergencies.
The trend is unmistakable. Fewer humans will, over time, be involved in watching over your flight, and this may work out just fine. The advantages of automation are manifest: lower costs and higher productivity being two of the greatest. A third metric, however, safety, may be the fly in the ointment.
Is It Safe?
Wikipedia
2016 was a record year in US commercial aviation as there were no fatalities on any US commercial airline anywhere in the world. It is also the seventh straight year that this feat has been attained. In 2015 that worked out to 7.6 billion miles flown with a (non-fatal) accident rate of 0.155 per 100,000 flight hours. There are about 24,000 commercial flights per day in the US. Flying is extremely safe and this is not by accident.
The current state of safety in the airline industry has been achieved over the years through dogged research into human factors, technical standards, preventative maintenance, training, and accident investigations. Current aviation policies and procedures for operators, controllers, and maintainers have years of development and history behind them.
One of the best reasons to cheer the introduction of driverless cars is the promise of a reduction in the 35,000 annual US auto accident deaths. The promise of the pilotless airliner is mostly economic. Our commercial aviation system is already nearly as safe as can reasonably be accomplished short of parking airplanes.
The burden of proof from a safety point of view will be upon those wishing to introduce large changes into this system for marginal economic gains. Measured in defects per operations accomplished, matching the current safety record will be a challenge. Not impossible, but the bar is pretty high.
I personally find myself having to intervene multiple times a day to correct “mistakes” made by our current state of the art automation. It is not nearly as automatic as advertised. This record of course must improve before the system can be fully autonomous.
The current pilot shortage, one of the justifications for increasing automation, is a mostly self inflicted injury by the US aviation industry compounded by Congress. It will eventually work itself out through rising wages and ab initio training programs for prospective pilots.
In Conclusion
I have every confidence that the goal of pilotless airliners will eventually be achieved given enough time and money, but I also believe that it will not be nearly as cheap or easy as some acolytes of pilotless airplanes believe. If you’ll notice, I haven’t even touched on the acceptance of this idea by the flying public. I leave that for you, dear reader, to discuss in the comments. In any event, I’ll be retired long before then.
Editors note: An earlier version of this story stated that the last Boeing plane with a navigator was a 727. It was actually a Boeing 747-300.
Father and Son share special moment as they pilot the mighty Lockheed L-1011 to Europe in a classic video
Aviation Media, Inc., produced a “Wonderful World of Flying’ video and this segment has a “take your son to work” story. TWA pilot Barry Schiff is the pilot and his son Brian is the flight engineer; it’s the first time they’ve flown together as professional pilots for the airline.
This was a TWA flight from JFK to Berlin with a stop in Brussels. TWA, at one time owned by eccentric millionaire Howard Hughes, was one of the major commercial airlines before it went out of business in 2001.
The aircraft featured is the L-1011, manufactured by Lockheed. The wide-body plane was developed as an alternative for Boeing’s 747 and the L-1011 closely resembled the DC-10 developed by McDonnell Douglas. The L-1011 went into service in 1972 and was phased out by most commercial airlines by the mid-1990s.
ENJJPT Is One of the Most Successful Joint Training Programs Ever
The Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training Program (ENJJPT) is a multi-national training program that trains combat pilots for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) air forces. The program consists of a 55 week long three-phased curriculum.
Official US Air Force Photograph
Producing Pilots for Everything With Wings
An average of 200 pilots graduate from the program each year, earning their wings and going on to fly everything from air superiority fighters to transports to tankers and helicopters for the air forces of their respective countries. In addition to the Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT), there are three other distinct training programs: Pilot Instructor Training (PIT), which produces instructor pilots, Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF), and IFF Upgrade Instructor Pilot Training.
Official US Air Force Photograph
Found on the Flightline
More than 1,300 military, civilian, and contractor personnel support the ENJJPT Program. The students fly Beechraft T-6A Texan II primary trainers, Cessna T-1A Jayhawk multi-engine trainers, and Northrop T-38C and AT-38C Talon advanced jet trainers. ENJJPT recently retired the last of their Cessna T-37 Tweet primary jet trainers. Other training aircraft are utilized for more specialized training as required.
official us air force photograph
Historic Heritage
The United States Air Force (USAF) 80th Flying Training Wing (FTW) traces its history back to World War II, when as the 80th Pursuit Group (Interceptor) they flew Curtiss P-40 Warhawks in the China-Burma-India (CBI) theatre. Deactivated soon after the war ended, the Wing was reformulated in 1972 and has been focused on training American and allied pilots ever since. The ENJJPT Program was established in 1981, with the IFF syllabus being added in 1994.
Futuristic aircraft manufacturer Boom Supersonic made waves at the Paris Air Show this week as it revealed its revolutionary aircraft prototype and design, which could hit the skies for testing as early as next year. The aircraft, which is expected to make supersonic travel affordable (though affordable is a relative term — it’s guessed that seats will be around $5,000 roundtrip), can reach speeds of Mach 2.2, or 1,451 mph.
What may have originally been seen as an overly ambitious goal is getting a fair bit of backing, with 76 aircraft ordered, some of those orders placed by international airlines. One recognizable name placing their bets with the company is Virgin, but not the Virgin you may have flown across the Atlantic or the States. Instead, Virgin Galactic has placed an order for the first 10 planes to roll out (and is also providing manufacturing services and testing support). The price tag? $200 million apiece.
The future of supersonic travel, now very within reach, is exciting to many aircraft and travel enthusiasts alike. After all, many travelers of a younger set are begrudgingly miffed they never had the chance to fly on the Concorde, which was not only expensive to maintain, but also ridiculously expensive to fly.
The interior of the Boom Supersonic passenger aircraft is anything but shabby. Photo: Boom SupersonicHowever, don’t just bet that hordes of people will be climbing onto a Boom Supersonic aircraft any time soon, though test flights of a technology demonstrator are scheduled for 2018. That first model, in fact, isn’t even for passenger travel. It’s about 68 feet long, and holds two individuals. The future passenger version is almost triple that size, at 170 feet, and makes space for six crew members and 55 passengers. This passenger version is expected to offer commercial flights around 2023.
The startup, though, is just getting started. It currently only has 35 employees and is receiving backing from investors to get its dream off the ground. Boyd Group International, an optimistic consulting firm, is projecting the sell of more than 1,000 aircraft, and maybe even 2,000 if the U.S. government relaxes its laws against over-land supersonic flights. While that seems like a ridiculously high sales estimate, the excitement level for a supersonic airliner is admittedly the highest it has been in decades.
Douglas A-4 Skyhawks have been proliferating in civilian use for some time now. One of the companies that is restoring and flying these former military jets is Sky Resources. They have taken several former United States Navy (USN) and United States Marine Corps (USMC) Skyhawks and restored them for various civilian uses including aerial photography, use by government contractors like DRAKEN International and Airborne Tactical Advantage Company (ATAC) as aggressor simulation aircraft, and airshow performers. Many of these Skyhawks are single-seat A-4L variants.
A-4E Skyhawk of VMA-124 pictured at NAS Memphis.
Transforming the A-4C Into the A-4L
A-4Ls are former Naval Air Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve A-4C model Skyhawks that were upgraded during the latter stages of the Vietnam War. Due to attrition of the fleet A-4E and A-4F models it became necessary to swap the standard A-4C Wright J65 turbojet engine with an uprated version of the same core engine, add the dorsal avionics “hump” from the A-4F model Skyhawk, and provide kits to add TA-4F leading edge slats to 100 USN and USMC A-4Cs to bring them up to ersatz A-4F standards.
The first A-4C modification to the A-4L standard was flown on August 21st 1969. A-4Ls were to equip two carrier air wings (CVWs) if force levels or attrition required additional fleet A-4 airframes aboard USN attack carriers (CVAs). A-4Ls were not equipped with the additional hardpoints under their wings for mounting underwing pylons that were present in the A-4E/A-4F models. The A-4Ls were replaced primarily by newer Skyhawk variants as they rotated from fleet to reserve squadrons.
A-4L BuNo 147761 pictured at AMARG before service with Malaysia.
Service With Malaysia and Back to the Desert
Several surplus A-4L aircraft were later reworked to A-4PTM standards for use by Malaysia. When Malaysia finally phased them out of service in 1999 several of those airframes returned to America and were placed in storage at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG) at Tuscon in Airzona. The Skyhawk featured in the video, Bureau Number (BuNo) 147761, saw service with USMC Attack Squadron 124 (VMA-124) Checkerboards based at Naval Air Station (NAS) Memphis during the early 1970s before she was reworked to A-4PTM standards, sold to Malaysia who flew her until the late 1970s, spent some time at AMARG, and was subsequently acquired and restored to operational status by Sky Resources.
Strike Fighter Wing Atlantic Took a Look Back at 100 Years of Naval Aviation History
During 2011 the United States Navy (USN), United States Marine Corps (USMC), and the United States Coast Guard (USCG) celebrated the centennial of naval aviation (CONA). Throughout the year there were special events held at Naval Air Stations (NASs), Marine Corps Air Stations (MCASs) and Coast Guard Air Stations (CGASs) to honor and respect the past and look forward to the future.
Image via US Navy
Some of the Most Colorful Colors Ever Seen on Navy and Marine Corps Aircraft
One highlight for Avgeeks all over the country was seeing current USN, USMC, and USCG aircraft painted in “heritage” colors- colors that hadn’t been used on Navy, Marine, or Coast Guard aircraft in some cases for more than 70 years. Strike fighters, electronic warfare aircraft, helicopters, maritime patrol aircraft, even trainers and transports wore eye-catching paint schemes and were showcased at air shows and gatherings all around the country.
image via us navy
One other way the CONA was celebrated was by the Strike Fighter (VFA) community. Strike Fighter Wing Atlantic (SFWL or STRKFIGHTWINGLANT) produced their 2011 Strike Fighter Ball video both as a review of the year 2011 in their community but also as a look back at the past 100 years of their existence. Featured in the video are the F/A-18s and crews of VFA-11 Red Rippers, VFA-31 Tomcatters, VFA-15 Valions, VFA-103 Jolly Rogers, VFA-34 Blue Blasters, VFA-211 Checkmates, VFA-106 Gladiators, VFA-32 Swordsmen, VFA-143 Pukin’ Dogs, VFA-83 Rampagers, VFA-213 Black Lions, VFA-81 Sunliners, VFA-37 Ragin’ Bulls, VFA-87 Golden Warriors, VFA-105 Gunslingers, VFA-131 Wildcats, VFA-136 Knighthawks, and VFC-12 Fighting Omars. Like most “cruise” videos these are easy on the eyes and feature pounding soundtracks. Please enjoy these two videos (parts one and two).
Lots of blowing stuff up (it’s part of what strike fighters do) and chasing baskets but also more great air-to-air footage. Also uploaded to YouTube by MegaAerodrome.
Flybys of warbirds and contemporary Navy, Marines Corps, and Coast Guard aircraft (with some Air Force birds thrown in) shot during the Parade of Flight at the 2011 CONA Open House, NAS North Island in San Diego. Uploaded to YouTube by wittmann51.
On the opening day of the Paris Air Show, Qatar Airways stole the limelight with the reveal of the first aircraft fitted with the new business-class Qsuite. The airline’s execs are building up the expectations, with CEO Akbar Al Baker noting, “This product will transform premium travel by bringing a first-class experience to the business-class cabin. With this innovative offering — which features the first-ever double bed in business class — we have set a new standard for the industry…”
It’s true — the Qsuite does offer the first-ever double bed in business class, and the privacy panels are removable, so passengers can create a private room of their own. In addition to two passengers enjoying some alone time, a traveling group of four can do the same, with adjustable panels and entertainment screens allowing four seats to switch things up in a secluded, totally customizable suite. There’s no doubting the Qsuite will be a top player on the luxury travel market.
So what’s it take to experience it for yourself? The very first flight featuring the Qsuite will leave from Doha for London, June 24, on a Boeing 777-300ER, and it’s announced the offering will be rolled out on one new plane each month, eventually adding on service to Paris and New York. The Boeing 777-300ERs will include 42 Qsuites, and later outfitted Airbus A350-1000s will include 46.
This big reveal wasn’t the only exciting news for Qatar Airways while at the Air Show. They also received Airline of the Year at the 2017 Skytrax Awards, winning the coveted title for the fourth year in a row. This award was just one of many for the travel provider; also included were awards for best first-class lounge, best Middle Eastern airline and best business class worldwide.
And it’s no wonder they’re a winner; Qatar Airways is growing at a remarkable pace. On July 4, the airline will begin five-times weekly service to Nice; they just opened a brand-new premium lounge at Charles de Gaulle; and they also just recently extended their service to Dublin, and service to Skopje and Chang Mai is expected to follow.
All of these exciting initiatives are a welcome distraction from some of the political challenges that Qatar has faced. Qatar is in the midst of a diplomatic spat with GCC nations who have cut diplomatic ties and blocked airspace and landing rights in the Middle East region.
Not the whole bomber, mind you, but rather pieces of it. Big pieces, including the wings and the “cargo hold” otherwise known as the bomb bay structure were delivered for assembly by C-5 Galaxy airlift.
But first, a little background on the B-2 is in order. The B-2 Spirit, America’s newest manned bomber, was first rolled out of the hangar at the Northrop facility at Plant 42 in Palmdale, California on November 22, 1988. Echoing the design of Jack Northrop’s YB-49 flying wing, the B-2 features computer flight controls to maintain the stability lacking in the earlier design along with advanced stealth structures and coatings designed to evade enemy radars.
As usual, the procurement program ended up being contentious. Starting with an initial planned buy of 132 aircraft, the number was later reduced to 75 aircraft, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union, further reduced to only 20 aircraft. A test aircraft retained by Northrop was eventually delivered to the Air Force as an operational bomber to bring the total to 21 airframes. Including spare parts and other support, the final cost was nearly a billion dollars per delivered bomber. Adding in development, facilities, and procurement costs resulted in an astounding final cost of over two billion dollars per aircraft.
I am of course reminded of the Calvin Coolidge quote in regards to aircraft acquisition: “Why don’t we buy just one airplane and let the pilots take turns flying it.” He was more prescient than he knew.
The B-2 was assembled by Northrop in Palmdale, Ca, as I mentioned above, but as with any large acquisition program, much of the work was actually farmed out to many subcontractors who manufactured major parts of the aircraft. One of these subcontractors was the Boeing Corporation which had responsibility for the outboard portion of the wing, the aft center fuselage section, landing gears, fuel system and weapons delivery system.
Special Delivery
This work was carried out at the Boeing Military Airplanes Company facility located at Boeing Field in Seattle, Wa. How these large aircraft structures got from Seattle to Palmdale is where your humble narrator comes in. Rather than ship them via rail, which was perhaps the most cost efficient method, they were shipped via C-5 Galaxy cargo aircraft. I don’t know the reason for this, but it was probably due to secrecy and security considerations.
I was assigned to the crew that flew one of these missions back in 1993. It encompassed two days flying from Travis AFB to Boeing Field for pickup, and then on to Palmdale for delivery before returning to Travis. We laid over in Seattle.
One of the enlisted crewmembers on the trip was particularly resourceful and had arranged to get the entire crew a tour of both the Boeing facility and the Northrop assembly plant. This was no easy feat as the program, while not officially “black” (secret), still retained many of the security safeguards and procedures from the “black” days. This meant getting background clearance and customized ID badges. It turned out to be a real treat.
Plastic Model Kit
The inside of the plant appeared as you might expect with lots of large machinery laying about along with many technicians moving here and there. Entrance from any section of the factory to another required a keycard swipe and code entry which for 1993 was new and exotic. Right away though, it was obvious that something different was being built here.
The wings of the B-2 are not made of aluminum, but rather are constructed of resin impregnated graphite fiber. This was a new material used in aircraft construction which was first used by Airbus in the A320. The difference for Boeing was that while Airbus still used aluminum for the main structure of the wings on the A320, the entire structure of the B-2 wing is constructed of composite material.
And even though the technology involved in the manufacture of large composite structures is quite complex, I got the feeling I was watching a huge plastic model airplane being glued together. A huge jig which matched the shape of the wing was used to hold the cloth which was laid down by a computer controlled spool exactly where it was needed. Resin would then be applied, and the entire structure, which probably weighed several tons, was floated on air jets into a giant autoclave, which is a fancy word for oven.
It was there that it would cook until the resin and cloth were bonded. This formed an upper or lower skin panel of the wing which was then attached to composite “stringers” or beams to make up the wing structure.
Surprise Finding at Boeing Military
As we walked around, I couldn’t help but notice a somewhat similar jig to that of the B-2 wing. It turned out to be for the tail of the new 777 project then undergoing. Like the Airbus, Boeing designed the horizontal stabilizer (or tail) of their new airplane using composites as well. Also interesting was that our guide was extremely reticent to talk about it when asked.
If you’ll recall, back in that timeframe Boeing and Airbus were conducting a war of words over government subsidies to their respective industries. Boeing claimed that Airbus was able to undercut their pricing due to subsidies they received from their government owners, while Airbus countered that Boeing had similar advantages due to military contracts and technology transfers from military programs.
It makes sense to put all your large composite manufacturing projects in one location to avoid unnecessary duplication, but no doubt our guide may have been concerned about the optics of such an arrangement or had instructions to not discuss the subject.
Oxygen and Heart Monitors
In another part of the factory we then observed the wing being assembled. After the top and bottom skins had been attached to the stringers, workers would enter the wing structure to install wiring and plumbing. These workers were outfitted with oxygen masks and monitors to ensure that if they became incapacitated, they could be rescued quickly.
Our guide explained that in years gone by, an incapacitated worker might have been extracted by actually cutting into the aluminum wing skin. That wasn’t happening on the billion dollar bomber, hence the monitors.
A Spy!
The next morning we were up early to preflight for our short flight from Seattle to Palmdale. As we got to the airplane, it was still being loaded with the B-2 wings which were tightly wrapped in tarps and attached to a travel framework. One of our contacts mentioned that in the “black” program days, the package would be augmented with extraneous pieces of styrofoam under the tarps to attempt to disguise the actual payload. The loading was also done at night. Neither of those precautions were necessary for our trip.
As we were in bright daylight and in view of the public, I asked for and received permission to take a few photos. In the process of so doing, another guard approached rapidly yelling for me to stop and wanting the film from my camera. The person who originally OK’d my reconnaissance intervened and I was allowed to remain out of custody with my camera film intact. That was just as well because there was no one else available to fly their bomber wings out that day.
Fred Soils the Boeing Ramp
As the loadmasters were busy closing up the nose of the airplane and securing our load, one of our APUs decided to blow a hydraulic line and dump some of the contents of the system onto the Boeing ramp. This got everyone quite excited. The folks at Boeing, being in a civilian organization under the auspices of the EPA and other government busybodies, were very concerned about a “hazardous fluid spill.”
Now I’ve seen my share of hydraulic spills from the C-5 over the years and this one was relatively modest and quickly handled by a few shovelfuls of oil dry onto the offending puddle. In between snide comments by the Boeing personnel questioning the parentage of Lockheed design engineers, the spill was cleaned up and the leak was secured.
Off We Go!
Other than being somewhat bulky, the wings didn’t weigh much so our airplane was rather lightly loaded. The flight from Seattle to Palmdale is only a few hours so the fuel load was light as well. The leg was mine and Fred (the C-5) was just as anxious as we were to depart and quickly leapt into the sky.
Northrop B-2 Assembly plant in Palmdale, Ca (Photo – R Graves)
After an uneventful flight to Palmdale we were ready to unload our precious cargo and enjoy another tour, this time of the Northrop assembly plant. Many of the same security protocols were in place here but we were not permitted down onto the factory floor. Instead we got to observe from a raised catwalk.
This factory did in fact look quite similar to any auto or aircraft assembly plant except that there were B-2 bombers in the line instead of 737s or cars. We did get to speak with one of the B-2 program test pilots whose name escapes me after the decades. This gentleman told us that he had also worked on the C-5 flight test program and relayed interesting factoids such as the B-2 having more wing area than that of the C-5.
One Last Story
That was the end of our B-2 adventure but I wanted to relay one more bit of B-2 lore. On that day back in 1988 when the B-2 was first rolled out of the Northrop plant for public viewing, the Air Force took extensive steps to ensure that the back of the airplane would not be publicly visible. Shielding the engine exhaust from radar was considered a difficult problem to solve and the intent was apparently to conceal the exact design.
An enterprising editor at Aviation Week magazine named Mike Dornheim noted, however, that the Air Force had neglected to close the airspace over Palmdale that day. Dornheim rented a Cessna and along with a photographer got complete photos of the entire B-2 which were featured prominently in the magazine the following week.
But one has to question the need for all the secrecy, as it was later noted that the stylized star design painted on the ramp for that occasion was actually made using silhouettes of the bomber.
Aviation has been a large part of my family’s history for nearly a century. My grandfather, Kenneth B Walton, imported a DeHavilland DH.60G Gipsy Moth biplane after spending time in England. KBW was the holder of private pilot license number 288. Known for his popular Kents restaurants in Atlantic City, KBW also worked on P-47 Thunderbolts for Republic Aviation at Farmingdale on Long Island during World War II before returning to his home on Brigantine Island in New Jersey.
Continuing Family Flights
KBW’s son John G Walton II (my father) was first introduced to aviation in a Fleetwings F-5 Sea Bird amphibian. JGW later informally learned to fly in Navy North American T-28B Trojans and Lockheed TV-2 Shooting Stars from instructor pilot friends during his service as an engineering staff officer with Navy Advanced Training Units (ATU)-200 and ATU-202 deep in South Texas at Naval Air Station (NAS) Kingsville during the late 1950s and early 1960s. JGW obtained his private pilot license in 1960 and his IFR rating in 1984.
Navy TV-2 with ATU-200 flying over deep South Texas. image via author’s father
First Flights for Generation III
Dad sometimes flew a Cessna 172 (78 Sugar) out of Atlantic City’s Bader Field while we lived in New Jersey. That’s where my first flight took place…over Atlantic City and out over the ocean and our house on Brigantine. I was thrilled but also only seven or eight at the time. My very first trip on an airliner was a TWA DC-9 to the Air Force Museum in Dayton…to see a real Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress of course. I owe my continuing interest in aviation to him and to that trip to what is still one of the top five aviation museums anywhere.
JGW and I posing as riveters. Note complete inner wing section suspended behind us.
Bitten by the Homebuilding Bug
Dad had wanted to build his own airplane for quite some time when his work took the family to Neenah in Wisconsin, just up the road from Oshkosh, in the early 1970s. JGW went to his first Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Fly-In that first year. Bitten by the bug in a serious way, he bought a set of plans for John Thorp’s T-18 design, the required sheet aluminum of various thicknesses, started forming parts, and recruited yours truly as chief rivet bucker and quality control inspector. Strange noises emanated from our basement at odd hours. Did I mention the T-18 was being built in our Wisconsin basement?
Dorky me standing next to the fuselage on gear with engine mount temporarily attached.
Options and Alternatives for Eskimo Homebuilders
When you live in Wisconsin and you want to build an airplane, you might be fortunate enough to have several options. Perhaps the easiest one is to utilize a barn, detached garage, or other outbuilding that is either already heated or can be heated. After all, it gets really bitterly unimaginably cold in Wisconsin and progress toward the first flight of an airplane would certainly be reduced during the winter months (typically from late August through early June) without available heat. It’s difficult to effectively wield tin snips or back up a bucking bar with mittens on. An attached garage might also be an option, again provided it could be heated, and that the family truckster would survive daily liberal cold-soakings in the elements while work on the airplane in the garage progresses. Engine block heaters should be standard equipment on vehicles sold in Wisconsin.
Dad standing next to the fuselage with engine mounted during November of 1977.
So the Garage is Out. Why Not Build It Underground?
One other option is available to many Wisconsinites. Many Wisconsin homes come equipped with basements. In this writer’s opinion, no house should ever be built without a basement. Providing endless options for usable space that by nature is always cooler than the rest of the house, but warmer than winter’s frozen embrace outside, basements are, in a word, perfect. But when one decides to utilize one’s basement to build an all-metal homebuilt airplane, at some point in the process (preferably early) one must consider how the airplane will inevitably and eventually emerge from the basement. This somewhat thorny problem often renders the basement a non-starter as an aircraft construction zone.
Thorp T-18 fuselage prior to basement extraction. Image via the author
You Use Math Every Day
We talked occasionally about how we would get the airplane out of the basement. Because the house was built up a bit higher than the houses on either side of us and the basement floor was closer to ground level on the north side, the plan we spoke about most often was to blow a hole in the north side basement wall, dig out / redistribute enough of the berm dirt to create a ramp, and just roll the flying machine out. To the best of my recollection we didn’t talk about the method we ended up using very often if at all, but it made more sense than the basement wall hole idea. Seriously- calculating how much dynamite would create a suitably-sized hole in the basement wall without collapsing the two story house above it required some serious head-scratching.
Not something you see every day. Looking down through the hole in the dining room floor at the T-18 fuselage in the basement. Image via the author
For the Rest of the Extraction Saga, bang NEXT PAGE below
As expected, Boeing announced the 737 MAX 10 at the Paris Air Show today. The aircraft will have the lowest seat-mile cost of any single-aisle airplane ever produced. Already, orders are being announced, and the aircraft is anticipated to appear as a part of a variety of fleets worldwide.
“Airlines wanted a larger, better option in the large single-aisle segment with the operating advantages of the 737 MAX family. Adding the 737 MAX 10 gives our customers the most flexibility in the market, providing their fleets the range capability, fuel efficiency and unsurpassed reliability that the 737 MAX family is widely known for,” said Kevin McAllister, president and CEO, Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
Overall, the MAX 10 provides a 5 percent lower seat-mile and trip cost (making it attractive to budget airlines and budget travelers alike). It will fit up to 230 passengers, and changes from other MAX models include an extra 66 inches of fuselage, modified wings and other tactical changes.
So, which airlines can you expect to boast the new aircraft?
So far, Boeing has announced commitments with 10+ customers, including Lion Air Group (50 craft for the Indonesian low-cost carrier), SpiceJet (20 craft), Tibet Financial Leasing, TUI Group, CDB Aviation, BOC Aviation and GECAS (otherwise known as GE Capital Aviation Services — yes, that GE — an Irish-American commercial aircraft leasing company). There are more than 240 promised aircraft across them all.
The 737 MAX continues to be Boeing’s fastest-selling airplane, and the MAX 10 is expected to take to the skies in about three years, following the MAX 9 and MAX 7. The MAX series as a whole offers expanded comfort and efficiency as far as single-aisle aircraft are concerned.
Want to try out the MAX series, which just recently entered commercial service?
The first 737 MAX 8 was delivered to Malindo Air, in Malaysia, in May. Southwest Airlines will take delivery this fall. A plethora of recognizable and easily bookable airlines plan to add at least one MAX series aircraft to their fleets — including Aeromexico, Air Canada, Air China, American Airlines, Air Europa, Alaska Airlines, China Southern, Icelandair, Norwegian, Southwest and United.
As we drove home to our house in Neenah after the last day of every EAA Fly-In (as it was called in those days) each year and went down into our basement to work on our homebuilt T-18 airplane, my late father would say “it’s just 51 weeks until Oshkosh.” Plenty of you Avgeeks look forward to it like he did…each week you’re one week closer to the event of the year. Well now that they call it the EAA AirVenture Oshkosh it’s a little bit more of a mouthful to say, but the sentiment is the same. The video here should help keep your gyros aligned and your GPS fixes tight for the next version of AirVenture. This compilation of “heavy iron” warbird footage was compiled at the 44th edition of EAA AirVenture at Oshkosh in 2016.
Photo Credit: Henry Kisor
Warbirds seen in action include the North American P-51 Mustang, B-25 Mitchell, and T-28 Trojan, the Curtiss P-40 Warhawk, Vought F4U Corsair, Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, Grumman F8F Bearcat and G-21 Goose, Cessna AT-17 Bobcat, Douglas A-1 Skyraider, Yakovlev Yak-3, the Canadian Harvard Aerobatic Team flying their aerobatic routine in their North American T-6 Harvards, and a massive Martin JRM Mars flying boat. Jet-powered warbirds include the Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet, Aero L-39 Albatross, and the Mikoyan-Gurevich Mig-15 Fagot and MiG-17 Fresco.
Current military hardware in the video are a Fort Wayne Air National Guard Station-based Indiana Air National Guard (ANG) 163rd Fighter Squadron Blacksnakes Fairchild Republic A-10 Warthog, a USAF Viper Demo Team General Dynamics F-16 Viper, and a Travis Air Force Base (AFB)-based Air Force Reserve 312th Airlift Squadron Lockheed C-5M Galaxy taxying to the static display area. Many more types are captured on the ground and in still shots and the sound quality is excellent.
Remember Avgeeks…Oshkosh is right around the corner! 2017 EAA Airventure Oshkosh will be held from July 24 to July 30th this year.
A USN F/A-18E Super Hornet takes off from the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77). Photo Credit: USNA U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornet from the carrier air wing aboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77) shot down a Syrian SU-22 fighter jet this afternoon, after it dropped bombs on part of a U.S.-led coalition dedicated to defeating ISIS.
“At approximately 4:30 p.m. Syria time, Pro-Syrian regime forces attacked the Syrian Democratic Forces-held town of Ja’Din, South of Tabqah, wounding a number of SDF fighters and driving the SDF from the town,” says the NAVY in their press release.
“Coalition aircraft conducted a show of force and stopped the initial pro-regime advance toward the SDF-controlled town.
Following the Pro-Syrian forces attack, the Coalition contacted its Russian counterparts by telephone via an established ‘de-confliction line’ to de-escalate the situation and stop the firing.
At 6:43 p.m., a Syrian regime SU-22 dropped bombs near SDF fighters south of Tabqah and, in accordance with rules of engagement and in collective self-defense of Coalition partnered forces, was immediately shot down by a U.S. F/A-18E Super Hornet.
Ja’Din sits approximately two kilometers north of an established East-West SDF-Syrian Regime de-confliction area.”
It’s the first air-to-air kill for the F/A-18 since two shot down a pair of Iraqi MiG-21s in the Gulf War, and the first air-to-air kill between manned aircraft for the U.S. since 1999, when an Air Force F-16 shot down a Serbian MiG-29 over Kosovo.
The U.S.-led coalition stressed its focus is on fighting ISIS, not the Syrian regime or Russian forces, but also reminded them it will not hesitate to defend their forces coming under attack.
“The Coalition’s mission is to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The Coalition does not seek to fight Syrian regime, Russian, or pro-regime forces partnered with them, but will not hesitate to defend Coalition or partner forces from any threat.
The Coalition presence in Syria addresses the imminent threat ISIS in Syria poses globally. The demonstrated hostile intent and actions of pro-regime forces toward Coalition and partner forces in Syria conducting legitimate counter-ISIS operations will not be tolerated.
The Coalition calls on all parties to focus their efforts on the defeat of ISIS, which is our common enemy and the greatest threat to regional and worldwide peace and security.”
The film “Grumman at War” was produced by Grumman in 1944. The film is “narrated” by a F6F Hellcat fighter. More correctly it’s told in the first person by a F6F Hellcat fighter. Well, yes- it sounds strange but it works really well in this film. It was produced during World War II so it’s a little bit hokey and old-fashioned, but the film delves into how Grumman developed and built the F6F. When the film was released it was accompanied by a book to commemorate Grumman’s 15th anniversary. During the time the film was being made Grumman had already moved production of their F4F Wildcat fighters and TBF Avenger torpedo bombers to General Motors’ Eastern Aircraft Division so Grumman could concentrate on production of Hellcats.
The first flight of the first production F6F-3 on October 3rd 1942 is dramatized in the film. Directed by Robert Elwyn and produced by Leroy G Philips along with Gordon Cox at the Princeton Film Center, the film stars the Grumman F6F Hellcat and the thousands of Grumman employees who designed, developed, built, and tested the fighter that won the war in the Pacific. Lots of Avgeeks might disagree about that last point, and that’s OK, but it’s difficult to argue with 5,223 Allied victories and 305 aces made in the Hellcat in only two years. Kill ratio numbers vary widely so they’re not an accurate gauge. It’s still a great film. There’s even some bonus footage of the prototype Grumman XF7F-1 Tigercat at the end of it. We’ll do a full history on the F6F some other time but for now, enjoy the film that chronicles the making of one of America’s true success stories of World War II- The Grumman F6F Hellcat.
Sierra Nevada Corp’s Dream Chaser prototype at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, Edwards AFB, CA recently. Photo Credit: SNC
To many avgeeks, NASA’s space shuttles will always hold a special place in their hearts. Now retired from service, they were – for a long time – the only reusable, winged “lifting body” vehicles ever employed for spaceflight.
SpaceX and Boeing, who both hold multi-billion dollar NASA contracts to fly astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS), are each developing reusable capsules (Dragon and CST-100 Starliner). And while the U.S. Air Force currently operates a hush-hush mini ‘spaceplane’ (X-37B / cargo only), its missions and whereabouts when in orbit are classified.
But there’s one company, Sierra Nevada Corporation, who is developing a reusable, rapid turnaround ‘mini shuttle’, and they currently hold a NASA contract to begin delivering cargo on at least six missions to the ISS beginning in 2019.
The Dream Chaser has been in development for a long time, and a prototype test article recently completed “Phase One” ground testing at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, located at Edwards AFB, CA, in preparation for its second free flight Approach and Landing test (ALT-2) on the base’s runway 22L.
NASA Langley did a lot of research on it in the 80′ and 90’s, based off a Russian heritage design called the Bor 4. They did thousands of hours of work, and created the control laws to be able to fly it. A lot of astronauts came in to try it and fly it too.
At the time, NASA was looking for a spacecraft to use as a return vehicle from the ISS, so the agency competed a couple of different designs for rescuing crews in case of an emergency. One design was the X-38, the other was the HL-20, which is now the Dream Chaser.
NASA eventually decided to choose the X-38, but after working on that for several years the X-38 was abandoned also, leaving astronauts to rely exclusively on the space shuttle and Russian Soyuz as the emergency vehicles for the ISS.
When SNC wanted a vehicle design, instead of starting from scratch, they built off what NASA had already done with the HL-20 and changed it slightly.
SNC put their test article through ALT-1 at Edwards AFB on October 26, 2013, the first such test since the space shuttle prototype Enterprise did so in the late 1970s. Using an Erickson Air-Crane helicopter, the prototype was dropped from 12,500 ft over Edwards, sending the vehicle into a steep 50-degree nose dive to exactly replicate the spacecraft’s orbital re-entry flight path to prove its design is truly air-worthy.
The test went about as good as SNC could have hoped for, until the command was given to deploy its landing gear. Only two of its three gear deployed, causing the vehicle to skid off the runway, sustaining minor structural damage.
The problem was traced to a mechanical issue with the specific landing gear, rather than something related to bad software (none of the primary systems that gave the commands that control the flight failed or had any problems).
“The 99% of the flight that we really wanted to get – which was does this vehicle fly, is it able to be controlled, does the software work, can we autonomously fly the vehicle in to approach and land on a runway – all that was 100% successful,” said Mark Sirangelo, corporate vice president, SNC’s Space Systems.
A year later, NASA awarded commercial crew contracts to SpaceX and Boeing, but not to SNC and Dream Chaser.
It wasn’t until January 2016, that NASA awarded a cargo contract to SNC’s Dream Chaser, and the company has made significant structural and systems improvements to the test article since. Engineers improved the composite wings and aeroshells, and invested heavily in maturing the vehicle’s orbital avionics, guidance navigation and control, flight software, and employed a number of new processes, all of which will be used on the orbital vehicle as well.
An advanced orbital Thermal Protection System (TPS) was installed on the vehicle’s skid too, in order to do advanced testing of the actual orbital TPS.
SNC’s Dream Chaser test article at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center, CA. Photo Credit: SNC
The test article will not only aid development of the orbital cargo vehicles, currently underway, but will aid the development of a crewed version as well. Both cargo and crew variants share an 85 percent commonality, and the cargo-version can actually be made crew ready if NASA or another customer needed it.
With the addition of orbital avionics to the test article, the same the actual orbital vehicle will use, SNC will earn direct certification credit out of the upcoming flight test series from NASA. All the testing and certifications will happen on the ground and within the atmosphere, eliminating the need for an orbital flight test.
The loss of two shuttle crews, Challenger STS-51-L in 1986 and Columbia STS-107 in 2003, surely weighed on NASA’s decision to skip another spaceplane design for flying astronauts, at least for now, but the Dream Chaser offers numerous benefits, unique to its design.
It’s capable of staying at the ISS for over 7 months, and can land on virtually any runway at least 8,000 feet long, anywhere around the world, without requiring specialized equipment. This translates to no abort blackout zones and the ability to de-orbit at any time in case of an emergency.
SNC technicians inspect the Dream Chaser engineering test article, ahead of its second flight test program, expected to begin at Edwards AFB soon. Photo Credit: SNC
With a propulsion system fueled by Nitrous Oxide and propane, ground crews will have immediate access to the spacecraft after landing, with only 10-20 minutes needed to exit the runway, keeping conflicts with other aircraft to a minimum.
An expected 1.5 G nominal reentry will provide ideal conditions for returning fragile cargo and science experiments too, in addition to making the return to gravity easier on the crew (SNC expects immediate access to crew and cargo upon landing).
And being as small as it is, it can be loaded on small cargo planes for shipment virtually anywhere.
No date has been given for ALT-2, but SNC expects to conduct it soon, and will fly more to validate the aerodynamic properties, flight software, and control system performance of the spacecraft if needed.
The Dream Chaser fleet will call Kennedy Space Center in Florida home, and SNC says it will be ready for its first launch atop a ULA Atlas-V rocket from neighboring Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral AFS in the first half of 2019.
Once the cargo-version establishes itself as a dependable, reusable, and cost-effective space system, SNC expects demand for the crewed-version to increase, taking lessons learned from the cargo-version and applying them to the crew.
And should NASA offer up another round of Commercial Crew contracts in 2020, SNC will put in a bid for their crew-version Dream Chaser again.
– Follow Mike Killian on Instagram and Facebook, @MikeKillianPhotography
Aerial refueling. Tanking. In-flight refueling. Passing gas. Air-to-air refueling. Tanker tracks. Tanker Toads. Texaco. All terms associated with ensuring one aircraft has the fuel necessary to complete a mission planned to cover more distance than its un-refueled range.
The United States Air Force (USAF) has been refueling its aircraft in flight since 1949, initially employing modified British looped-hose aerial refueling equipment during the world circumnavigation by the Boeing B-50 Superfortress Lucky Lady II. The “flying boom” method was originally introduced on Boeing B-29s, designated KB-29Ps, during 1950 and 1951. Every Air Force tanker placed in operational service since then has been equipped with the flying boom. Many Air Force tankers can also refuel refueling probe-equipped aircraft using the retractable drogue or “basket.”
Official US Air Force Photograph
The video was shot during the pre-flight and actual refueling mission of a Boeing KC-135R Stratotanker from the 128th Air Refueling Wing (ARW) Badger Tankers of the Wisconsin Air National Guard (ANG) based at General Mitchell Air National Guard Base (ANGB) on Milwaukee’s General Mitchell International Airport. The unit, equipped with the Boeing KC-135R Stratotanker since 1992, is designated as the 340th Expeditionary Air Refueling Squadron on deployment as an Air Mobility Command (AMC) asset. Prior to flying the KC-135R, the 126th also operated Boeing KC-97L Stratotankers and Boeing KC-135E model Stratotankers. Yes…they shared the same name.
Official US Air Force Photograph
The Wisconsin ANG tanker in the video refuels several 555th Tactical Fighter Squadron (TFS) Triple Nickle General Dynamics Block 40 F-16C Vipers during its mission on the tanker track. The 555th, based at Aviano Air Base in Italy since April of 1994, became a part of the 31st Operations Group (OG) when they moved to Aviano. Evidence suggests that these particular Vipers were prosecuting targets. Enjoy the HD sights and sounds (including talk between tanking pilots and boom operators) in this video.
With Hawaiian Airlines’ brand and livery updates, as well as new services, new airplanes on the way, and stellar on-time stats, flyers may think the airline has nothing to worry about in terms of competition. However, could larger airlines sweep in unnoticed and take a large chunk of the niche provider’s profit?
Just this month, United Airlines announced increased service on 11 routes connecting the continental United States and Hawai’i, making it now the airline with the most flights between the mainland and Islands. Starting Dec. 20, United will increase service to Hawai’i from Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles and San Francisco. It also will maintain current nonstop service from other destinations, including Houston; Newark; Washington, D.C.; Guam; and Tokyo. In addition to increased service that allows travelers to access a new selection of Hawaiian cities other than the current United destination of Honolulu, the airline is also offering new in-flight amenities, including 180-degree flat-bed seats on flights originating in Chicago, Denver, Houston, Newark and D.C.
It’s only expected that United’s loyal following will keep on booking the airline all the way to Hawai’i, but other travelers, particularly those within the budget-travel realm, may be looking to another new airline to fulfill their needs. Southwest Airlines has been looking at the Hawaiian market for a while now, but just recently announced the market as higher priority. It’s expected the budget airline will send its latest Boeing 737-800s and the 737 MAX 8 to Hawai’i, as it simultaneously begins retiring some of its older aircraft. However, while United is more of a pressing threat to Hawaiian Airlines, the Southwest threat is more longterm in nature, as the airline may not even launch flights to the Islands until later this decade.
Despite all this, Hawaiian Holdings, the parent name for Hawaiian Airlines, has seen market jumps thanks to airfare pricing and cheaper fuel, something investors should be pleased with. According to Cowen analyst Helane Becker, “Hawaiian continues to benefit from modest competitive capacity growth in their most important market, which is the U.S. West Coast to Hawai’i.” Additionally, rumors have been spreading of a potential Hawaiian-JetBlue merger, though the benefits for JetBlue seem to be small. Other aviation experts speculate an upcoming transaction similar to the Virgin American/Alaska deal.
Only time will tell if Hawaiian Airlines will feel significant pain from the United service expansion and Southwest’s impending market entrance. One thing, however, is for sure — with increased competition between airlines comes increased benefits for travelers in a leisure oriented marketing, as they can take advantage of better airfare deals and more amenities from airlines fighting for a much-coveted consumer base.
