Has Australia been out-Flanked?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pursuit Curve

New Member
pshamim said:
F16-XL data was never provided to India. It is still classified. Nor a simulator was ever provided. I know this for sure as a former Senior Manager with the General Dynamics-International Sales Team.

Stop spreading and putting in your comments that do not even close to reality.

In future, before you post such comments, please back them up with references. Take this as a WARNING.
Pshamim, As I remember it, the F 16XL was a airframe demonstrator. maybe you can clarify that for me, I remember it demonstrating new weapons carriage and the cranked delta married to an F 16. Thank goodness he didn't mention the X 29! :))
 

srev2004

New Member
pshamim said:
F16-XL data was never provided to India. It is still classified. Nor a simulator was ever provided. I know this for sure as a former Senior Manager with the General Dynamics-International Sales Team.

Stop spreading and putting in your comments that do not even close to reality.

In future, before you post such comments, please back them up with references. Take this as a WARNING.
The LCA avionics were tested on the F-16XL simulator in the USA. I never claimed it was given to India. I can't really reference it, it was a word of mouth in HAL after we submitted our software and hardware. Unfetted power invested in a individual who utilizes it for unfair purposes such as yourself is dangerous to freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. Now one can argue that this isn't really opinion but fact. Well does my fact change into opinion without a source? Hence if I don't provide a source right away, you shouldn't consider it to be rubbish either and claim I invented things out of the blue.

Now that i've expressed my opinion, I will go out of my way to find a source if you really want one.
 

Pursuit Curve

New Member
srev2004 said:
The LCA avionics were tested on the F-16XL simulator in the USA. I never claimed it was given to India. I can't really reference it, it was a word of mouth in HAL after we submitted our software and hardware. Unfetted power invested in a individual who utilizes it for unfair purposes such as yourself is dangerous to freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. Now one can argue that this isn't really opinion but fact. Well does my fact change into opinion without a source? Hence if I don't provide a source right away, you shouldn't consider it to be rubbish either and claim I invented things out of the blue.

Now that i've expressed my opinion, I will go out of my way to find a source if you really want one.
Umm, didn't the F 16XL, which is in the USAF museum now, stop flying in the eighties? Or is it the FBW that is similar to the F 16 that the LCA, which looks like an F 16. which the LCA is using, I mean really...........
 

srev2004

New Member
Pursuit Curve said:
Umm, didn't the F 16XL, which is in the USAF museum now, stop flying in the eighties? Or is it the FBW that is similar to the F 16 that the LCA, which looks like an F 16. which the LCA is using, I mean really...........
It is the simulator for the avoinics software. so this includes Fly by wire, equalizers, and other software applications which are part of the avoinics suite.
 

pshamim

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Pursuit Curve said:
Umm, didn't the F 16XL, which is in the USAF museum now, stop flying in the eighties? Or is it the FBW that is similar to the F 16 that the LCA, which looks like an F 16. which the LCA is using, I mean really...........
Since when LCA looks like a F-16. Exept for having no vertical fins, there is nothing common between the two. F-16XL has cranked arrow delta wings whereas LCA shows a double delta wings. Size wise, LCA is smaller than a standard F-16. Whereas F-16XL's wings were twise the size of a standard F-16s in service. How are the two similar? Could you kindly explain.

Regarding all data regarding the F-16XL was never shared with any other country including NATO. It is classified.
 

Pursuit Curve

New Member
pshamim said:
Since when LCA looks like a F-16. Exept for having no vertical fins, there is nothing common between the two. F-16XL has cranked arrow delta wings whereas LCA shows a double delta wings. Size wise, LCA is smaller than a standard F-16. Whereas F-16XL's wings were twise the size of a standard F-16s in service. How are the two similar? Could you kindly explain.
Actually I sit corrected, The LCA is more similar in layout to the Mirage 2000.
I was erely pointing out that the FCS being FBW that was pioneered on the F 16 for operational aircraft (Getting beyond test and development).
 

srev2004

New Member
Flight Control and Software and Other Avionics
The LCA uses advanced digital fly-by-wire technology which essentially employs computers to optimise the aircraft's performance. Foreign companies were consulted. Infact, LCA avionics were first flight tested on a US F-16XL.

Witout the automatic flight control, the LCA will not be flyable, due to the Delta wing's inherent instability. As more and more flights are conducted, the software is updated to allow the aircraft to do more complex maneuvours.

To combat the threat of obsolescence in the LCA Programme, a concerted effort has been made to introduce an Open-architecture Avionics system which permits hardware scalability and upgradability to state-of-the-art technology levels with reusability of the software.

LCA Avionics architecture is configured around a three bus system (MIL-STD-1553B) in a distributed environment. The heart of the system is a 32-bit Mission Computer (MC) which performs mission oriented computations, flight management, reconfiguration / redundancy management and in-flight system self-tests. In compliance with MIL-STD-1521 and 2167A standards, Ada language has been adopted for mission computer software.Accurate navigation and guidance is realised through RLG based Inertial Navigation System (INS) with provision for INS / Global Positioning System (GPS) integration. Jam resistant radio commumication system with advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) environment. In the EW suite, Electromagnetic and Electroptic receivers and jammers provide the necessary "soft-kill" capability.
DFCS Computer

The digital FBW system of the LCA is built around a quadruplex redundant architecture to give it a fail op-fail op-fail safe capability. It employs a powerful Digital Flight Control Computer (DFCC) comprising four computing channels, each powered by an independent power supply and all housed in a single line replaceable unit (LRU). The system is designed to meet a probability of loss of control of better than 1x10-7 per flight hour. The DFCC channels are built around 32-bit microprocessors and use a safe subset of Ada language for the implementation of software. The DFCC receives signals from quad rate, acceleration sensors, pilot control stick, rudder pedal, triplex air data system, dual air flow angle sensors, etc. The DFCC channels excite and control the elevon, rudder and leading edge slat hydraulic actuators. The computer interfaces with pilot display elements like multifunction displays through MIL-STD-1553B avionics bus and RS 422 serial link.

For maintenance the aircraft has more than five hundred Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), each tested for performance and capability to meet the severe operational conditions to be encountered.

* Mission Computer(MC): MC performs the central processing functions apart from performing as Bus Controller and is the central core of the Avionics system. The hardware architecture is based on a dual 80386 based computer with dual port RAM for interprocessor communication. There are three dual redundant communication channels meeting with MIL-STD-1553B data bus specifications. The hardware unit development was done by ASIEO, Bangalore and Software Design & Development by ADA.
* Control & Coding Unit (CCU): In the normal mode, CCU provides real time I/O access which are essentially pilot's controls and power on controls for certain equipment. In the reversionary mode, when MC fails, CCU performs the central processing functions of MC. The CCU also generates voice warning signals. The main processor is Intel 80386 microprocessor. The hardware is developed by RCI, Hyderabad and software by ADA.
* Display Processors (DP): DP is one of the mission critical software intensive LRUs of LCA. The DP drives two types of display surfaces viz. a monochrome Head Up display (HUD) and two colour multifunction displays (MFDs). The equipment is based on four Intel 80960 microprocessors. There are two DPs provided (one normal and one backup) in LCA. These units are developed by ADE, Bangalore
* Mission Preparation & Data Retrieval Unit (MPRU): MPRU is a data entry and retrieval unit of LCA Avionics architecture. The unit performs mission preparation and data retrieval functions. In the preparation mode, it transfers mission data prepared on Data Preparation Cartridge (DPC) with the help of ground compliment, to various Avionics equipment. In the second function, the MPRU receives data from various equipment during the Operational Flight Program (OFP) and stores data on Resident Cartridge Card (RCC). This unit is developed by LRDE, Bangalore.
* USMS Electronic Units: The following processor based digital Electronics Units (EU) are used for control and monitoring, data logging for fault diagnosis and maintenance.
o Environment Control System Controller (ECSC)
o Engine and Electrical Monitoring System Electronics Unit (EEMS-EU)
o Digital Fuel Monitoring System Electronics Unit (DFM-EU)
o Digital Hydraulics and Brake Management System Electronics Unit (DH-EU)
* V/UHF Equipment: V/UHF equipment is a secure jam resisant airborne radio communication set which provides simplex two way voice and data communication in the VHF and UHF frequency bands. This unit is developed by HAL, Hyderabad.
* Multi Function Keyboard (MFK): MFK is an interfce for pilot dialogue concerning certain selected equipment of Avionics system. It comprises LCD panel, alphanumeric keys, push buttions for power ON / OFF and LEDs indicating power ON / OFF status of certain Avionics equipment. This unit is developed by BEL, Bangalore.
* Head Up Display (HUD): HUD is of conventional type with a Total Field of View (TFOV) of 24 degrees circular. A Change Coupled Device (CCD) based camera is mounted on the HUD for recording purposes. HUD dsplays various navigation and weapon related data. This unit is developed by CSIO, Chandigarh.
* Colour Multi Function Displays (MFDs): LCD based colour MFDs hava a useful screen area of 125 mm x 125 mm. They have soft keys around their periphery for interaction with the systems. This display provides various aircraft system pages and navigation pages in addition to RADAR & FLIR display.

Digital fly-by-wire Flight Control System is another advanced feature of LCA. The unstable configuration of LCA demands a highly efficient Integrated Flight Control System (IFCS) to fly the aircraft. Control law resident in the flight control computer synthesises inputs from pilot's stick and rudder pedals with flight parameters from inertial and airdata measurements to generate commands to the actuators that move various control surfaces. The design of the control law is evaluated susing real-time flight simulator for acceptable flight handling qualities. The IFCS ensures stability, agility, manoeuvrability and carefree handling over the entire operating envelope of LCA. The Digital Flight Control Computer (DFCC) is the heart of IFCS, and uses a quadruplex redundant system to achieve high reliability and safety.

Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) activity is an integral part of the Software development process. From requirement specification to final testing, IV&V ensures correctness, consistency, completeness and adherence to MIL standards of the software.

The flight control system along with all the associated software is tested and validated at the iron-bird rig.

http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-lca.html

Happy now?
 

Pursuit Curve

New Member
srev2004 said:
Flight Control and Software and Other Avionics
The LCA uses advanced digital fly-by-wire technology which essentially employs computers to optimise the aircraft's performance. Foreign companies were consulted. Infact, LCA avionics were first flight tested on a US F-16XL.

Witout the automatic flight control, the LCA will not be flyable, due to the Delta wing's inherent instability. As more and more flights are conducted, the software is updated to allow the aircraft to do more complex maneuvours.

To combat the threat of obsolescence in the LCA Programme, a concerted effort has been made to introduce an Open-architecture Avionics system which permits hardware scalability and upgradability to state-of-the-art technology levels with reusability of the software.

LCA Avionics architecture is configured around a three bus system (MIL-STD-1553B) in a distributed environment. The heart of the system is a 32-bit Mission Computer (MC) which performs mission oriented computations, flight management, reconfiguration / redundancy management and in-flight system self-tests. In compliance with MIL-STD-1521 and 2167A standards, Ada language has been adopted for mission computer software.Accurate navigation and guidance is realised through RLG based Inertial Navigation System (INS) with provision for INS / Global Positioning System (GPS) integration. Jam resistant radio commumication system with advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) environment. In the EW suite, Electromagnetic and Electroptic receivers and jammers provide the necessary "soft-kill" capability.
DFCS Computer

The digital FBW system of the LCA is built around a quadruplex redundant architecture to give it a fail op-fail op-fail safe capability. It employs a powerful Digital Flight Control Computer (DFCC) comprising four computing channels, each powered by an independent power supply and all housed in a single line replaceable unit (LRU). The system is designed to meet a probability of loss of control of better than 1x10-7 per flight hour. The DFCC channels are built around 32-bit microprocessors and use a safe subset of Ada language for the implementation of software. The DFCC receives signals from quad rate, acceleration sensors, pilot control stick, rudder pedal, triplex air data system, dual air flow angle sensors, etc. The DFCC channels excite and control the elevon, rudder and leading edge slat hydraulic actuators. The computer interfaces with pilot display elements like multifunction displays through MIL-STD-1553B avionics bus and RS 422 serial link.

For maintenance the aircraft has more than five hundred Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), each tested for performance and capability to meet the severe operational conditions to be encountered.

* Mission Computer(MC): MC performs the central processing functions apart from performing as Bus Controller and is the central core of the Avionics system. The hardware architecture is based on a dual 80386 based computer with dual port RAM for interprocessor communication. There are three dual redundant communication channels meeting with MIL-STD-1553B data bus specifications. The hardware unit development was done by ASIEO, Bangalore and Software Design & Development by ADA.
* Control & Coding Unit (CCU): In the normal mode, CCU provides real time I/O access which are essentially pilot's controls and power on controls for certain equipment. In the reversionary mode, when MC fails, CCU performs the central processing functions of MC. The CCU also generates voice warning signals. The main processor is Intel 80386 microprocessor. The hardware is developed by RCI, Hyderabad and software by ADA.
* Display Processors (DP): DP is one of the mission critical software intensive LRUs of LCA. The DP drives two types of display surfaces viz. a monochrome Head Up display (HUD) and two colour multifunction displays (MFDs). The equipment is based on four Intel 80960 microprocessors. There are two DPs provided (one normal and one backup) in LCA. These units are developed by ADE, Bangalore
* Mission Preparation & Data Retrieval Unit (MPRU): MPRU is a data entry and retrieval unit of LCA Avionics architecture. The unit performs mission preparation and data retrieval functions. In the preparation mode, it transfers mission data prepared on Data Preparation Cartridge (DPC) with the help of ground compliment, to various Avionics equipment. In the second function, the MPRU receives data from various equipment during the Operational Flight Program (OFP) and stores data on Resident Cartridge Card (RCC). This unit is developed by LRDE, Bangalore.
* USMS Electronic Units: The following processor based digital Electronics Units (EU) are used for control and monitoring, data logging for fault diagnosis and maintenance.
o Environment Control System Controller (ECSC)
o Engine and Electrical Monitoring System Electronics Unit (EEMS-EU)
o Digital Fuel Monitoring System Electronics Unit (DFM-EU)
o Digital Hydraulics and Brake Management System Electronics Unit (DH-EU)
* V/UHF Equipment: V/UHF equipment is a secure jam resisant airborne radio communication set which provides simplex two way voice and data communication in the VHF and UHF frequency bands. This unit is developed by HAL, Hyderabad.
* Multi Function Keyboard (MFK): MFK is an interfce for pilot dialogue concerning certain selected equipment of Avionics system. It comprises LCD panel, alphanumeric keys, push buttions for power ON / OFF and LEDs indicating power ON / OFF status of certain Avionics equipment. This unit is developed by BEL, Bangalore.
* Head Up Display (HUD): HUD is of conventional type with a Total Field of View (TFOV) of 24 degrees circular. A Change Coupled Device (CCD) based camera is mounted on the HUD for recording purposes. HUD dsplays various navigation and weapon related data. This unit is developed by CSIO, Chandigarh.
* Colour Multi Function Displays (MFDs): LCD based colour MFDs hava a useful screen area of 125 mm x 125 mm. They have soft keys around their periphery for interaction with the systems. This display provides various aircraft system pages and navigation pages in addition to RADAR & FLIR display.

Digital fly-by-wire Flight Control System is another advanced feature of LCA. The unstable configuration of LCA demands a highly efficient Integrated Flight Control System (IFCS) to fly the aircraft. Control law resident in the flight control computer synthesises inputs from pilot's stick and rudder pedals with flight parameters from inertial and airdata measurements to generate commands to the actuators that move various control surfaces. The design of the control law is evaluated susing real-time flight simulator for acceptable flight handling qualities. The IFCS ensures stability, agility, manoeuvrability and carefree handling over the entire operating envelope of LCA. The Digital Flight Control Computer (DFCC) is the heart of IFCS, and uses a quadruplex redundant system to achieve high reliability and safety.

Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) activity is an integral part of the Software development process. From requirement specification to final testing, IV&V ensures correctness, consistency, completeness and adherence to MIL standards of the software.

The flight control system along with all the associated software is tested and validated at the iron-bird rig.

http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-lca.html

Happy now?

Okay, you have just described what FBW does, and has been doing for the last 26 years Srev.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
http://www.nal.res.in/pages/ipjun01.htm
actually, there are other links that state LCA's FBW software was tested on a F-16 simulator. Apparently, it worked alright. But that's simply saying that the software is passable for the task it is asked to do. At the same time, if I understood the test correctly, it was just using the simulator to make sure that the FBW software would work when it's put on LCA. Do you realize that you can't put LCA FBW software on a F-16 and expect it to do anything? This is common sense.

To be fair, quadriplex FBW is still quite a milestone (not many countries have the capability to develop a quadriplex FBW), but you are going to have to find something else to show that all of LCA's avionics was tested on F-16 XL and that improved the original performance by 30%. So far, we've only read that the FBW was tested out on a F-16 simulator, which is probably what happened. Your full claim really has no evidence.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Isn't this thread a discussion about the Royal Australian Air Force and it's ability to deal with the proliferation of SU-27/30 series Flankers within our region???

Why the LCA/F-16 discussion???
 

Pursuit Curve

New Member
Aussie, it seems to be the trend in forums now, and I am as guilty as the next guy.

I do not see any threat to Australia from the Su 30 pruchase, I would be more concerned from the Singapore F 15E purchase as this constitutes a real offensive capability. The Su 30, while on paper is potent, should be no problem when facing experienced and well trained pilots like the RAAF.

Does Australia have plans to get a AWACS system soon, ot do you already have one? That would be the greatest asset to have in my opinion when facing a SU 30.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Yep, Australia has 6x Wedgetail "pocket AWACS" on order. These will be extremely capable aircraft, combining almost the same level of radar and C2 capability as the E-3C AWACS, but into a smaller 737 based aircraft. Full (public) details and pics can be found here: http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/737aewc/

In addition the RAAF is buying a new fleet of 5x Airbus A330-200 MRTT air to air refuelling aircraft, which will increase the range and persistence of our F-18 and AWACS fleets. Rumor has it that additional refuelling aircraft are to be ordered soon, possibly second hand Qantas aircraft (it's standardising on 787's), which are practically brand new, but are reputedly quite a bit cheaper than new-builds. An additional 3-5 have been proposed to be added to the RAAF fleet, giving us a pretty reasonable capability, should it happen...
 

Big-E

Banned Member
Aussie Digger said:
Yep, Australia has 6x Wedgetail "pocket AWACS" on order. These will be extremely capable aircraft, combining almost the same level of radar and C2 capability as the E-3C AWACS, but into a smaller 737 based aircraft. Full (public) details and pics can be found here: http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/737aewc/

In addition the RAAF is buying a new fleet of 5x Airbus A330-200 MRTT air to air refuelling aircraft, which will increase the range and persistence of our F-18 and AWACS fleets. Rumor has it that additional refuelling aircraft are to be ordered soon, possibly second hand Qantas aircraft (it's standardising on 787's), which are practically brand new, but are reputedly quite a bit cheaper than new-builds. An additional 3-5 have been proposed to be added to the RAAF fleet, giving us a pretty reasonable capability, should it happen...
What is the furthest operational range of RAAF aircraft with tanker support from the mainland???
 

umair

Peace Enforcer
Listen up srev2004. What you are harping on about has been refuted by atleast two people in the know of things. Gary(gf0012) and Pshamim both of whom have either worked or are still (in Gary's case) working in the defence industry and would safely still know more than a "HAL Intern" .

And as for Cope India and DACT, this one example may open you'r eyes(again it may not). In 1978 a series of DACT exercises was held between the USAF and PAF involving F-111s,F-4s and the uber fighter of that time the F-15.

PAF Mirages and F-6s scored numerous kills against the F-15s. Wow! so now does that mean that in reality an F-6 could've sat prettily on an Eagle's six?:rolleyes: Go figure Einstien.:duel

And get back to the topic, that is Australia and it's neighbourhood Sukhois.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Big-E said:
What is the furthest operational range of RAAF aircraft with tanker support from the mainland???
Depends how many aircraft are involved, how many tankers are employed, how much ordnance/targetting pods is being carried etc. 1x "clean" F/A-18A and ALL five tankers could probably fly to 5-7000k's and back again with no trouble.

A strike force of 8 aircraft, plus 4-8 escorts for instance, would be quite a bit different. 1000-1500k's may be lucky in those circumstances.
 

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
umair said:
And as for Cope India and DACT, this one example may open you'r eyes(again it may not). In 1978 a series of DACT exercises was held between the USAF and PAF involving F-111s,F-4s and the uber fighter of that time the F-15.

PAF Mirages and F-6s scored numerous kills against the F-15s. Wow! so now does that mean that in reality an F-6 could've sat prettily on an Eagle's six?
Go figure Einstien
couple of F-7s got score against USNavy's F-14 not long ago (Pic of PAF F-7 flying with USNavy's F-14 available on DT)... if multinational-airforce war games and exercise make one country's airforce better than the other or rather say one aircraft better than the other, than considering F-7 scoring against F-14 makes it superior to Su-30. lol.

Anyways coming back to topic, why doesnt Australia operate more than 1 fighter in a High-Low possition? They are going for JSF for a multirole aircraft, than why not go for EF-2000 (or may be a sqdn or two of F-22, if US is willing and roumers are true that they will sell to trusted allies) for air superiority. That is if they realy think Indonaisan Su-30s are any threat to them. Other option is to get the F-18 MLUed and get more Air to Air capability for it and operate them with JSF in future. I hope they are not phasing all F-18s out after JSF induction.
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
The RAAF doesn't seem to think that the Typhoon WOULD provide the "hi" part of the HiLo mix. It appears convinced that the JSF will be second to none in strike/recce/CAS missions and second only to the F-22 in A2A combat. As such, it sees little point in investing it's limited resources, in aircraft of what it views as a lesser capability.

Our current generation F/A-18's are undergoing the final stages of being upgraded (MLU'd, if you like). This program is upgrading them about as far as they realistically can be. The aircraft are actually being completely stripped and re-built with a new "centre barrel", which is basically an entirely new fuselage.

The Head of Boeing recently described Australia's Hornets as the "best" legacy Hornets (not including Super Hornets) in the world. Which is a pretty fair complement considering the users of "legacy" F/A-18 (US Navy, US Marine Corps, Spain, Switzerland, Finland, Canada, Malaysia and Kuwait).

With the new weapons coming on board (JDAM and JASSM) and other recent weapons and targetting pod upgrades (AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM and AIM-132 ASRAAM, Harpoon Block II, Litening AT targetting pods), plus our "force multipliers (Wedgetail AWACS, A330MRTT A2A refuellers, etc) our Hornets are extremely well placed to counter any realistic threat to Australia, including regional SU-27/30 series purchases.

The only real issues I have with the path the Government and RAAF have chosen, is that Australia will only operate 71 F/A-18A/B Hornets as it's combat aircraft, with only around 57 operational airframes (the rest are for training, development and attrition birds).

If we are REQUIRED to conduct concurrent operations over a dispersed area, we are going to be very thin on the ground, (particularly with the cancellation of the medium ranged ground based air defence project). I would like to see Australia acquire sufficient additional airframes, to form another fighter Sqn based on the F/A-18 platform.

I just read the latest AirForces Monthly magazine (May 06). Apparently Bulgaria has just been offered the sale of up to 24 second-hand F/A-18C/D Hornets by the US, with these aircraft having significant airframe life left. Similar C/D model aircraft would be pretty close to the standard of the RAAF's Bugs and would do the job nicely IMHO. (The point being that the US obviously has "legacy" Hornets to spare and available for sale)...

I'd also like to see a sufficient F-35 purchase to equip at least 4 and preferrably 5 frontline fighter Sqn's (as per the Kokoda Foundation report) to ensure our ability to operate concurrently or in dispersed operations. If this costs more (as is likely) well bugger it. Peter Costello is sitting on an $11.6 BILLION surplus like Scrooge McDuck.

Pry some of that out from under him...
 

Magoo

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Just to amuse Srev for a moment, when he talks about the F-16XL being reprogrammed to test the LCA's software, I think he means the NF-16D variable stability in-flight simulator, or 'VISTA'.

The VISTA is an F-16 airframe which is basically a re-programmable flying simulator. It is operated by the US Test Pilot's School at Edwards, and is used to test FCS software for new aircraft, including UAVs, JSF, F-22, and I presume LCA.

Here's a pic...

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/simulators/Tech38G7.jpg

Some other links...

http://www.stormingmedia.us/54/5473/A547343.html

http://www.edwards.af.mil/tps/vista/VISTA-21st%20Century%20UAV%20Testbed.pdf#search='NF16D%20VISTA'

http://www.edwards.af.mil/tps/vista.htm

http://www.tireresearch.com/pdfs/VISTA062705.pdf#search='NF16D%20VISTA'

And this brief explanation from f-16.net...

VISTA program
In 1988, a contract was awarded to General Dynamics, Fort Worth Division to develop the VISTA (Variable stability In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft). Calspan, a subcontractor to GD, installed a center stick and integrated the computers needed to perform variable stability flights. Wright Labs bought the aircraft in 1988 and from 1988 until 1992, the VISTA/F-16 program was being accomplished. There was no connection between thrust vectoring and VISTA/F-16 at this time.
The VISTA F-16D was redesignated NF-16D, the N prefix meaning that the aircraft had a special test status and that the modifications were sufficiently drastic that it would be impractical to restore the plane to its original condition. The NF-16D has two variable feel sticks.
The sidestick is over on the console, while the center stick is mounted on a short pedestal between the pilot's knees. The upfront controller had to be remove to put the center stick in, but since the VISTA is a research plane and not a fighter, the loss was acceptable. Both sticks can be either force or motion sticks, with complete control of force gradients, shaping and range of motion.
Three Rolm hawk computers, mounted in the aircraft's dorsal fin, provide the variable stability functions and make VISTA an in-flight simulator. The computer system monitors the pilot's inputs and then moves the aircraft's control surfaces to produce the required motions. The controls to access the computer to change flight characteristics and engage the front seat controls are mounted in the back seat. The Variable Stability System (VSS) commands symmetric and asymmetric horizontal tail movement, symmetric and asymmetric flaperon movement, rudder and throttle control. The only surfaces not controlled by the VSS are the leading edge flaps and speedbrakes.
Other modifications included in the VISTA configuration include heavy weight landing gear and a larger capacity hydraulic pump and lines to accommodate the increased surface motions needed to simulate other aircraft.
The program objectives itself included the demonstration of the tactical utility of thrust vectoring in close-in air combat and in the use of integrated control of thrust vectoring in flight. The aircraft has demonstrated a steady angle of attack of as much as 86 degrees and a transient angle of attack of up to 180 degrees. In other words, the aircraft can fly BACKWARDS for a brief time. Thrust vectoring provides a significant advantage in terms of bringing armament to bear on a threat more quickly and in avoiding the risk of departure from controlled flight during violent maneuvers. However, the use of really high AoA maneuvers should only be a last-ditch operation in aerial combat in view of the increased vulnerability of the aircraft when it is in a low-energy state.

Now, back to the subject at hand... Flankers, right?

Magoo
 
Last edited:

srev2004

New Member
Magoo said:
Just to amuse Srev for a moment, when he talks about the F-16XL being reprogrammed to test the LCA's software, I think he means the NF-16D variable stability in-flight simulator, or 'VISTA'.

The VISTA is an F-16 airframe which is basically a re-programmable flying simulator. It is operated by the US Test Pilot's School at Edwards, and is used to test FCS software for new aircraft, including UAVs, JSF, F-22, and I presume LCA.

Here's a pic...

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Evolution_of_Technology/simulators/Tech38G7.jpg

Some other links...

http://www.stormingmedia.us/54/5473/A547343.html

http://www.edwards.af.mil/tps/vista/VISTA-21st%20Century%20UAV%20Testbed.pdf#search='NF16D%20VISTA'

http://www.edwards.af.mil/tps/vista.htm

http://www.tireresearch.com/pdfs/VISTA062705.pdf#search='NF16D%20VISTA'

And this brief explanation from f-16.net...

VISTA program
In 1988, a contract was awarded to General Dynamics, Fort Worth Division to develop the VISTA (Variable stability In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft). Calspan, a subcontractor to GD, installed a center stick and integrated the computers needed to perform variable stability flights. Wright Labs bought the aircraft in 1988 and from 1988 until 1992, the VISTA/F-16 program was being accomplished. There was no connection between thrust vectoring and VISTA/F-16 at this time.
The VISTA F-16D was redesignated NF-16D, the N prefix meaning that the aircraft had a special test status and that the modifications were sufficiently drastic that it would be impractical to restore the plane to its original condition. The NF-16D has two variable feel sticks.
The sidestick is over on the console, while the center stick is mounted on a short pedestal between the pilot's knees. The upfront controller had to be remove to put the center stick in, but since the VISTA is a research plane and not a fighter, the loss was acceptable. Both sticks can be either force or motion sticks, with complete control of force gradients, shaping and range of motion.
Three Rolm hawk computers, mounted in the aircraft's dorsal fin, provide the variable stability functions and make VISTA an in-flight simulator. The computer system monitors the pilot's inputs and then moves the aircraft's control surfaces to produce the required motions. The controls to access the computer to change flight characteristics and engage the front seat controls are mounted in the back seat. The Variable Stability System (VSS) commands symmetric and asymmetric horizontal tail movement, symmetric and asymmetric flaperon movement, rudder and throttle control. The only surfaces not controlled by the VSS are the leading edge flaps and speedbrakes.
Other modifications included in the VISTA configuration include heavy weight landing gear and a larger capacity hydraulic pump and lines to accommodate the increased surface motions needed to simulate other aircraft.
The program objectives itself included the demonstration of the tactical utility of thrust vectoring in close-in air combat and in the use of integrated control of thrust vectoring in flight. The aircraft has demonstrated a steady angle of attack of as much as 86 degrees and a transient angle of attack of up to 180 degrees. In other words, the aircraft can fly BACKWARDS for a brief time. Thrust vectoring provides a significant advantage in terms of bringing armament to bear on a threat more quickly and in avoiding the risk of departure from controlled flight during violent maneuvers. However, the use of really high AoA maneuvers should only be a last-ditch operation in aerial combat in view of the increased vulnerability of the aircraft when it is in a low-energy state.

Now, back to the subject at hand... Flankers, right?

Magoo
Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top