Military Aviation News and Discussion

[Ananda]

Govt set to buy Chinese fighter jets, helicopters

Bangladesh is in the process of purchasing Chinese J-10CE fighter jets, attack helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) systems to modernise its air force, Prime Minister’s Policy and Strategy Adviser Zahed Ur Rahman has said.

www.thedailystar.net

Bangladesh commit for J-10CE to modernise their AF. For a 4.5 gen fighter, the price is attractive enough compare to F-16V.

 

[John Fedup]

Some information from TWZ regarding GA's low cost alternative to the Reaper, the Wildfire. Hard to determine what capability is sacrificed in order to meet the $10 million basic unit cost specification from this article. A build number of 180 is mentioned but I assume that is the initial requirement as Wildfire is likely just as vulnerable as Reaper.

First Look At General Atomics' Wildfire, Its Successor To The MQ-9 Reaper (Updated)

 

[Ananda]

Egypt Air Show at El Alamein 2026. Show case potential market offering not only for Egypt, but also North Africa and MENA region.

 

[Ananda]

Nice photo on Royal Saudi AF 3 main strength, Eurofighter. F-15S, and Tornado IDS.

 

[John Fedup]

Some new information on LM's CCA Vectis. It seems to be a more capable design than other offerings albeit likely more expensive which the USAF doesn't want. Their price point is $20-30 million. It will be interesting to see which design ends up winning . My guess is at least two.

Everything We Just Learned About The Vectis Collaborative Combat Aircraft From The Skunk Works

 

[John Fedup]

Yet another story about a C-17 production re-start. Can't see it happening, too expensive and it will bugger plans for a replacement (NGAL). A continued slow production post 2015 was the the properer solution. More ulilization of commercial cargo jets (where feasible) and perhaps some C-2s or A400Ms to ease the demand on C-17s is the best way forward along with serious action on the NGAL.

USAF Assessing Feasibility Of Restarting C-17 Production As Part Of Its Future Airlift Vision

 

[Terran]

Yet another story about a C-17 production re-start. Can't see it happening, too expensive and it will bugger plans for a replacement (NGAL). A continued slow production post 2015 was the the properer solution. More ulilization of commercial cargo jets (where feasible) and perhaps some C-2s or A400Ms to ease the demand on C-17s is the best way forward along with serious action on the NGAL.

USAF Assessing Feasibility Of Restarting C-17 Production As Part Of Its Future Airlift Vision

Disagree, C17 restart would be expensive yes but it would cost the same as NGAL well giving the existing fleet a roadmap for upgrades and service life extension. The USAF at this point has no plans for or offers to procure A400M or C2. Farther A400M was designed by Europe to lock out the US supply chain as much as realistically possible. Created a barrier for entry into the USAF by Airbus own design.
C2 might have a potential inroad but it would also eat into NGAL and require the USAF to have a realistic requirement for the platform.
Commercial and MRTT like the KC46 are also covering the logistics mission where possible however we are talking about the Rough strip landing requirement for large strategic oversized cargo. It’s not a mission commercial aviation has an asset to currently provide solutions for more likely to in the future save for some long shots like the Wind runner concept or Airships. Even then they make large trades in density for size.

 

[John Fedup]

Disagree, C17 restart would be expensive yes but it would cost the same as NGAL well giving the existing fleet a roadmap for upgrades and service life extension. The USAF at this point has no plans for or offers to procure A400M or C2. Farther A400M was designed by Europe to lock out the US supply chain as much as realistically possible. Created a barrier for entry into the USAF by Airbus own design.
C2 might have a potential inroad but it would also eat into NGAL and require the USAF to have a realistic requirement for the platform.
Commercial and MRTT like the KC46 are also covering the logistics mission where possible however we are talking about the Rough strip landing requirement for large strategic oversized cargo. It’s not a mission commercial aviation has an asset to currently provide solutions for more likely to in the future save for some long shots like the Wind runner concept or Airships. Even then they make large trades in density for size.

I guess it depends on what NGAL will be. IIRC it will be a hybrid C-17/C5M replacement. Guessing some kind of stealth is also planned. If these requirements are downgraded then perhaps a C-17 restart makes sense but only if IMHO. If the claim the F-47 will place too much stress on the fighter industrial chain for F/A XX then the same argument would be applicable to the supply chains for a C-17 and NGAL.

 

[Ananda]

https://www.state.gov/releases/bureau-of-political-military-affairs/2026/09/kingdom-of-saudi-arabia-f-35-lightning-ii-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft

This come after video circulating online that shown one of Saudi AF F-15SA being shoot down in Yemen. Israel media quite upset as this is also being approved without guarantee that Saudi will be in Abraham Accord.

US interligence community reportedly give strong caution, due to China increasingly closer relationship in defense with Saudi. My personal opinion, it is due to that matter (plus regional Iran-Houthi) that lead to this.

 

[Terran]

I guess it depends on what NGAL will be. IIRC it will be a hybrid C-17/C5M replacement.

Generally yes however that’s two very different aircraft. Generally a C17 redux would undergo significant modernization if it was selected instead of a completely new design. As part of the Process the USAF is doing an analysis of alternatives.

Guessing some kind of stealth is also planned.

Unless the USAF has been reverse engineering a Romulan Cloaking device, call me skeptical. An aircraft the size of a C130 is huge and Very low Observable Technology has limitations.

If these requirements are downgraded then perhaps a C-17 restart makes sense but only if IMHO. If the claim the F-47 will place too much stress on the fighter industrial chain for F/A XX then the same argument would be applicable to the supply chains for a C-17 and NGAL.

It wouldn’t be the C17A. Or even a C17B (that was conceptualized). Recall that the C17 evolved from the much smaller YC15 and you have the example of the Antonov planes where in you have the AN124 and its bigger AN225. So it’s entirely plausible to develop a bigger version if that is deemed appropriate.
farther we are living decades after the end of the C17 production and this wouldn’t start production until 2038 meaning that any production would likely involve extensive modernization in engines, materials, production technologies and avionics.
Yet that all comes down to the question of whether it seems like the better value as this isn’t a situation where you can have both. C17R would be an alternative to a clean sheet NGAL. It comes down to the question of if the USAF feels that they are in an opportunity and that the technical aspect of a Clean sheet NGAL would be the better investment.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Generally yes however that’s two very different aircraft. Generally a C17 redux would undergo significant modernization if it was selected instead of a completely new design. As part of the Process the USAF is doing an analysis of alternatives.
Unless the USAF has been reverse engineering a Romulan Cloaking device, call me skeptical. An aircraft the size of a C130 is huge and Very low Observable Technology has limitations.

It wouldn’t be the C17A. Or even a C17B (that was conceptualized). Recall that the C17 evolved from the much smaller YC15 and you have the example of the Antonov planes where in you have the AN124 and its bigger AN225. So it’s entirely plausible to develop a bigger version if that is deemed appropriate.
farther we are living decades after the end of the C17 production and this wouldn’t start production until 2038 meaning that any production would likely involve extensive modernization in engines, materials, production technologies and avionics.
Yet that all comes down to the question of whether it seems like the better value as this isn’t a situation where you can have both. C17R would be an alternative to a clean sheet NGAL. It comes down to the question of if the USAF feels that they are in an opportunity and that the technical aspect of a Clean sheet NGAL would be the better investment.

The Romulan Cloaking Device will be totally obsolete in 2041, they should go for the Minbari Stealth Systems.

But yes, one of the designs studied, is a blended-wing-body design. On the other hand, how stealthier the design will become, how more expensive, and it will have a negative effect on range, speed and cargo capacity.

USAF plans to replace C-5 and C-17 with 274 new cargo planes by 2038.

 

[Terran]

Blended wing body can mean stealthy but it’s more often about fuel economy. Though the non tubular body may allow for a larger cargo size.

 

[John Fedup]

Blended wing body can mean stealthy but it’s more often about fuel economy. Though the non tubular body may allow for a larger cargo size.

Larger volume but what about weight? Just asking, no idea on the answer. Also, for commercial passenger applications, are there pressurization disadvantages wrt tube versus blended wing airframes?

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Larger volume but what about weight? Just asking, no idea on the answer. Also, for commercial passenger applications, are there pressurization disadvantages wrt tube versus blended wing airframes?

For disadvantages: of course much more expensive than a 'simple' tube fuselage. A tube fuselage is normally circle or oval shaped, which is actually the best shape for strength vs weight and production costs. A tube shaped pressurized inner fuselage with a BWB outer layer design (like a double hull submarine) is possible, but heavier, complicater and more expensive to build.

In a circle shaped pressurized fuselage, the forces/pressures are evenly spreaded, weird shapes, specially sharp corners are more sensitive for cracks.