Not content with a machine that's second in complication only to the Space Shuttle, it would seem some folks are looking into the practicality of a variable-diameter tilt rotor aircraft. That's a really nifty idea there chief. You get to ride it first. *Boot*

The C-17 is one versatile aircraft. I can remember, before it became operational, the usual anti-military suspects making all sorts of noise about how it would be over-priced and under-whelming. Yeah, they're not talking too much about that anymore.

An Israeli company has created a full-featured electronic defense systems for UAVs that weights only 36 kilos. While nearly 80 pounds is nothing a person might want to carry, the average system providing this capability weighs nearly five times as much.

The F-35B has finally made its first flight. The video seems to be identical to the one we linked a few weeks back. However, it seems it will be some time before the -B does anything the -A hasn't already done.

Ares has the latest on the B-2 crash investigation, with video of said crash! According to this AvWeek summary, the cause was moisture in some of the wing sensors of the plane. Crews long ago learned a quick and simple fix, but nobody bothered to write it down. Considering the consequence was the loss of a very expensive bit of weaponry, something tells me there's a whole chain of noncom maintenance people who are in one helluva lot of trouble.

It would seem the F-35B is quite close to its first flight. I don't think the Navy has shown interest in this variant, which is too bad. The things a flight demonstration team could do with this, I can only imagine.

It would seem the reason we haven't heard much about the Air Force's new bomber initiative is because we're not supposed to. Personally, I'd hope a new multi-billion dollar black program would result in something other than a B-2 on steroids (as pictured). Then again, speculation has seldom matched actuality when it comes to the appearance of black programs which eventually saw the light of day. The millions of "F-19" stealth fighter kits stand testimony to that.

And that's it. Hope you enjoyed them! I'll try to create an "all-in-one" entry later today.

Everyone has one of these. So what? There's a reason, ya know.

They were very precise this year. Smooth, even.

And so it begins...

The AOA is actual. To my knowledge, this is the last remaining common user of JATO bottles. Considering how many must've been made in the 50s and 60s, they're probably still going through OEM stock.

For some reason this shot makes me think of the model planes I used to have hanging from my ceiling.

If there had been an F-86 at the show, and they'd convinced one of the F-104s to take part, we would've covered every generation of fighter except the first and the third. I'm not sure it's actually possible for an F-15 to fly formation with, say, a SPAD.

Time for a break from pictures, at least until I get home and fix up some more. It appears a new "aviation mystery" is intriguing enough to have caught AvWeek's eye. I got nothing, looks like a dart to me, but if Aviation Leak thinks it's interesting, it's most likely worth a look.

For some reason the announcer kept babbling on about QF-4s during the demo. I couldn't quite figure out if he meant this F-4 was actually a pilotless drone somehow rescued, or if the only other flying F-4s in the US were missile targets. Common sense would seem to imply the latter case, but I've been wrong about such things before.

Oliva, looking over my shoulder while I prepped this: "Daddy! That's the airplane with the parachute on its tail!" For some reason the drag chute made a real impression.

A first for all of us was the Starfighters flight demonstration team. I would've been thrilled to see just one of them toodling around in the sky. Three doing precision aerobatics sent me into airplane geek heaven.

I'd always been told the F-104 was perhaps the prettiest jet fighter ever made. I would stare at various models and static displays over the years and ponder this. Now, for me at least, there is no doubt.

These are the last flying F-104s in the world, making this quite a rare privilege. Keep an eye on your own airshow schedules, and if they end up anywhere near you run, do not walk, to go see them.

Another May, another Andrews AFB Open House. This time... this time... I had the good sense to bounce the ASA ISO a lot higher and, most importantly, had the Best. Birthday. Gift. Evar! Ellen gave me a motion-comp zoom lens. No more wobbly images for you!

In previous years, 75% of the pictures I wanted to show were ruined by blur. No more. We're going to have some fun now.

Well, ok, I'm going to have some fun. S'my blog, s'my pictures!

Making the rounds: an enterprising Swiss pilot has created what sure seems to be one nifty jet-pack for human flight. Could this be what finally creates the "Rocket Man?" Well, I'd certainly like to see one!

Robert H. gets a very buoyant no-prize for bringing us the Aeroscraft, which purports to be the "FOURTH DIMENSION OF FLIGHT." Having your own personal blimp certainly sounds nifty enough. Sort of like a big yacht, but without the piracy worries and (perhaps) the ability to steer around a few storms. It doesn't seem they've actually built any yet, and there's no price listed, which almost certainly means what it usually means.

It looks like everyone's favorite egg-beater helo is getting an interesting upgrade. Funds pending, of course. The Chinook is rather well-known for being the only operational aircraft which can have a mid-air collision with itself. I wonder if this will improve the chances?

More details of Israel's attack on... something... in Syria are emerging. If it makes that pesky Persian bomb harder, more expensive, and less convenient to build, I'm all for it.

Flaps: Check
Throttle: Check
Glideslope: Check
Alignment: Check

... now what was that last thing again?

An RAF Top Gun crash-landed a brand new £69million Typhoon fighter – apparently after FORGETTING to put the wheels down.

What is this, 1938 or something?!?

The first F-35B (STOVL version) has finally started its engine. It's been (and likely will continue to be) touch-and-go, but they do seem to be making progress.

In honor of the last F-117 leaving Hollman AFB for the Tonopah Test Range, we have this round-up of trivia concerning the oldest and (to-date) most successful operational stealth attack aircraft. Been a long time!

DARPA is apparently serious about developing a UAV capable of remaining in flight for up to five years. As with most DARPA projects, it's as much about finding out if such a thing would be useful as it is figuring out if it can be done at all.

More news is coming out regarding the Air Force's tanker decision. If they practiced fending off a protest as hard as they're claiming, I wouldn't hold out much hope for Boeing.

While brief, this short video of the new V-22 on its first operational deployment does show the marines are actually using that complicated beastie to do something useful. Considering the amount of money which was spent on it, I can only hope we see much more.

Mark gets a wild and woolly no-prize for bringing us this HUD video of an F-15 coming home with an engine fire. Fire is not your friend!

Most people think Global Hawk is a marvelous success. Most people are wrong. Is it just me, or is the US Air Force the world's most spectacular monument to Murphy's Law?

More details are emerging about just exactly what is wrong with the F-22. Swallowing one's own RAM does not a reliable fighter make. You know, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if these problems are due to people applying lessons learned in low-energy aircraft to a high-energy one. I know first-hand the F-22 is capable of maneuvers simply not possible in an F-117 or a B-2.

Ares has a report detailing new information about the Air Force's upcoming advanced bomber competition. It would seem if the Air Force really wants one by 2018, they need to start planning it now. It also seems that the era of proposing a new system and fielding it in less than a decade are long, long gone.

It would appear the F-22's stealth technology is not as easy to maintain as first advertised. Our Air Force is mis-stating something's cheaper than it actually is until they have to pay the bill? Shocking!

Raetheon is throwing its hat in the ring in the Navy's Small Tactical Unmanned Aircraft System program. I once thought it a foolish concept that future combat aircraft would be unmanned. Now, at least in a few important missions, I'm not so sure that's the case.

Those new helmet mounted displays better work, because I'd hate to look this weird for no reason at all. Even when the price goes down it may be awhile before I pick something like that up. Ellen makes enough fun of me when I game as it is.

Jeff gets a no-prize nobody can see for bringing us more details on the upcoming retirement of the F-117. Looks like after April that'll be it, no more flying darts. It would seem they're going into storage, at least at first, so it's not "really really really" the end, but most likely very close to it. Unlike the SR-71, there are several platforms either operational or nearly so with capabilities which either replace or surpass the 117's, so a sudden return from retirement would seem unlikely.

Don't expect to see them flying in vintage air shows either. The DoD has a very long-standing policy of rendering surplus military aircraft unflyable before allowing civilians to purchase them. They'll most likely get turned into razor blades instead.

And if that isn't a modern version of beating swords into plowshares, I don't know what is.

Instapundit linked up this colorful recollection of what it was like to fly the SR-71. When you're talking about what is still the world's fastest jet, it's hard not to stray into superlatives.

Those wanting the in-depth 411 on the recent tanker buy need look no further than Aviation Week's coverage. What I found rather interesting is that N-G/EADS has already flown the first prototype to a German factory for immediate conversion. After production unit 2, all aircraft will be assembled in Mobile AL.

The Air Force is mulling over installing nuclear reactors in an effort to "green up" its air bases. As long as they can't be mounted under the wing of a B-52, it should be safe enough. Well, until the "real" greens get wind of it, at any rate.

Aviation enthusiasts may find this AvWeek editor's opinion on the new Air Force tanker deal of interest. The guy flew C-5s for a living at one point, so it's most likely somewhat more informed than most. His advice for Boeing: the Air Force needs this, don't jam it up with protests for the next two or three years.

Mark gets a tiny but impressive no-prize for bringing us this RC aircraft demonstration of a B-29 and an X-1. Yeah, they're not built on the same scale, and the carriage is all wrong, but hey... it's a scale model flying B-29! It just don't get much better than that!

More information is now available regarding the first-ever B-2 crash last weekend. It would seem a fire of some sort is what triggered the auger, and unfortunately one of the crew is in the hospital. It would appear that the Air Force can lose exactly two more airframes before the whole squadron stops being operational.

The first-ever B-2 crash happened this morning at Guam. Both pilots ejected safely. That's a mighty expensive pile of aluminum and carbon fiber you got there, Joe!

The latest Russian Flanker variant made its first flight yesterday. The type is seen as an interim replacement until a fifth-generation type can be developed and deployed.

Apparently the Swedes take a dim view of a pilot playing crop duster with one of their C-130s. A better video link is here. Remember folks, the best you'll ever be able to do in the "lowest pass" contest is second place!

James H. gets a no-prize that will efficiently escort him out of the area for bringing us evidence that F-22s weren't the only advanced fighter to intercept Russia's oldest intercontinental bomber this year. From my readings, it's been said Tu-95 duty is not highly prized. You're in the air for hours and the Bear is supposed to be loud inside.

I still think it would be cool to see one in an airshow.

More pictures of the first Bear intercept by an F-22 have surfaced. Since only two people could've taken them, here's to hoping nobody gets in trouble for their release. Single-seat means mooning the Russian crew is a bit more challenging.

It seems that, while most people "in the know" think a new strategic bomber is a good idea, conventional wisdom is the Air Force isn't doing a particularly good job of fielding it. The Air Force is screwing up a massively expensive yet extremely shiny new program. Color me unsurprised.

Not only is Australia the last operator of the F-111, they also have a squadron of hot air balloons. Puts a whole new spin on, "burners now."

It looks like funding for more hypersonic research will be included in the FY2009 budget. Will it actually allow hypersonics to stop being, "the future of aviation, now and forever"? Well, we can always hope.

People who think any new air traffic control system is going to help airport congestion are most likely going to be disappointed. While the author's talking points seem pretty unassailable, I personally don't think his solutions automatically follow. Rationing (and let's face it, that is what he's talking about) never works in the long run.

Congestion is the automatic result of demand exceeding supply. To reduce demand, increase the cost of the supply. This can be done negatively via "congestion pricing" landing and takeoff fees, and positively by providing "off-peak" fee discounts. These prices would provide clear signals to consumers, who would adjust their travel plans (and airline schedules) accordingly. The profits generated could be large enough to provide the funding required to fight off the lawsuits which are the main impediment to airport expansion. New runways means more capacity, which causes the price to drop, and now you have a positive feedback loop that's self-sustaining.

That's how it should happen. But we all know, if it happened at all, it wouldn't be easy. Most US airlines are too poorly run to understand such an arrangement, let alone take advantage of it. Anti-market luddites on the left would start shrieking about "limousine runways" denied to "the poor." Statists, who see government regulation's hammer as the tool useful for any nail presented, would refuse to even consider something that didn't provide more government jobs at taxpayer expense.

And so we'd end up with a problem that is, well, the problem we have today. Still, there are incentives being applied. Congestion and the resulting delays provide their own form of increased price, causing customer dissatisfaction, which takes business from airlines and airports who participate in booking shenanigans and gives it to those who don't. Does it decrease safety? Perhaps, but, considering the always-improving safety record of air travel, not by very much and never the same way twice. Does it increase the stress of everyone involved? Absolutely. Markets are almost always stressful places in which to work, but they most definitely do work, and pretty well at that.

Saying "updating air traffic control software won't solve airport congestion" is a real and valid point. Coming to the conclusion that the only workable fix is increased government regulation and imposed rationing is, in my opinion, unwarranted and most definitely counter-productive.

Via Instapundit through James Fallows.

Oklahoma State University is working to create a propulsion system small enough to power unmanned aircraft the size of birds for hours at a time. No word on how loud the thing would be. Then again, with no moving parts, it may move fast enough for it not to matter. At least until it hits a wall, at any rate.

Everyone's favorite airport that doesn't exist appears to now, well, exist. As noted in the article, just because you can set the Groom Lake airport as a destination in your airplane's GPS system, doesn't mean you should. The "arrest" part would bother me a lot less than the "confiscate your airplane" part. Bail usually costs a lot less than a new airplane, donchaknow?

Advanced word is the first crash of a French Rafale is being blamed on "pilot disorientation". The report is very short on details, hopefully the eventual final version will include what, exactly, must have gone wrong.

It would appear the on-again, off-again Australian flirtation with the F-22 is now on again. Japan's been trying to pry them out of Congress for a few years now, without success. Now that something like 1/4 of the F-15 fleet is grounded for the foreseeable future, and additional foreign purchases would reduce per-unit costs for the good ol' USAF, it'll be interesting to see if all interested parties take another run at getting the Raptor approved for export.

Filed under "airplanes" only because they're all about, well, airplanes. Aviation fans should find this collection of aircraft photos of interest. This one includes AW&ST's "best picture" winners, so even non-airplane folks will most likely want to take a brief look.

At least one pilot calls the recent Mythbusters episode on civilians landing jetliners bunk. Having taken the controls of a real airplane exactly once, I guess I'll have to defer to his judgment. I definitely see lack of familiarity with an airliner's cockpit as the primary difficulty in pulling something like that off. It is, however, a bit disappointing to think all those hours of learning what a correct approach looks like from a cockpit, and how to control it with a stick and a throttle, aren't very useful in the real world. Ah well, I guess that's why they still have flight schools, eh?

Remember the one about the propeller really being meant to keep the pilot cool?

Suspended at 16,000 feet in an airplane with no power, no propeller and motor oil streaming across the front windshield, 60-year-old Barry Cox remembered that panic wasn't going to do much good.
...
Looking out the side windows, and relying on 35 years of flying into that tricky Aspen airport, Cox carefully took the plane down to runway.

If PC simulators are as accurate as they claim to be, dead stick landings are possible on even the largest aircraft as long as the pilot has enough skill, altitude, and a reasonably flat place somewhere close by. On light private aircraft, they're not even particularly difficult. It's the "keeping cool and watching the instruments" bit that's the real trick.

There's just something I find very amusing about guys augering really expensive toys. Most of the wrecks seemed quite survivable (what's the deal with scale model landing gear anyway?), but there are definitely some (scale) fatalities in there.

Finally, there's this "Wiley Coyote" moment.

Scientists have developed the first completely autonomous seaplane. At only slightly bigger than a pelican, it's not going to set any lift records, but it definitely represents an interesting solution to yet another aviation problem.

Swedish defense manufacturer SAAB has announced the successful test of a Mach-5 guided missile. Speculation is this may be part of a since-canceled air defense system designed to intercept stealthy targets.

Today's "why are you spending so much money when the old stuff is doing the job?" article is brought to you by the Washington Post.

I remember these sorts of stories coming thick and fast during the last fighter jet procurement cycle. Everyone knew the F-4 was the plane to have, we knew how they worked, we had tons of parts, and all the R&D was paid for. Of course, it wasn't their butts getting strapped into a design a generation out of date, so who cared?

I do think the development cycle of modern combat weapons is suspiciously protracted. Then again, considering it's the federal government we're talking about here, I suppose I should be impressed they're able to get anything done well.

I'd known for some time that an early F-15 Eagle had survived a spectacular mid-air collision which resulted in the nearly complete loss of one wing, but I'd never seen any pictures. Until now, at any rate. How the special got by me is anyone's guess. Curse you TIVO!

Scramjets seem to be getting closer to reality. It's always a good sign when Big Science stops predicting a technology will show up "in about 25 years" (which is Big Science Speak for "after I retire") and starts predicting it will show up "real soon" (BSS for "adequate funding and a materials breakthrough").

The French Air Force has lost its first Rafale fighter. Details are still sketchy, but it would appear the pilot didn't get out. They're opening three separate inquiries, so one would assume whatever caused this will be found out.

After delays resulting from electrical glitches and engine defects, the F-35 program is resuming flight testing. The much more interesting (and higher-stakes) F-35B is also nearing final assembly, with a first flight scheduled for some time in May of 2008.

The very last Mirage 2000 has rolled off the assembly line. I think this represents the second "fourth generation" fighter to end production. The F-14 remains the only gen-4 to be completely retired (as far as I can recall).

Pretty sad when you start seeing airplanes you grew up with as the latest-and-greatest being sent out to pasture as old gray mares.

Robert R. gets a no-prize that breathes funny for bringing us this look at the helmet-mounted displays scheduled to equip the F-35. Now if they'd just make them affordable, I could use them on my flight sims.

Robert R. gets a no-prize that can spot a cruise missile a hundred miles away for bringing us news of a military controversy down under:

Aviation analyst Dr Carlo Kopp told the Four Corners program on ABC TV that the Super Hornet would be far outclassed by the new generation of advanced Soviet-built aircraft being acquired by China, Indonesia and Malaysia.

"In most of the engagements scenarios that we could postulate the Super Hornet would get shot down. It's as simple as that," he said on the program.

The defence department rejected the claims as Four Corners went to air.

Aviation Week has been covering the Australian purchase of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets (as well as the aircraft itself) extensively over the years. If the information in linked the article accurately summarizes what was in the show, this program, and this gentleman in particular, should not be taken seriously.

It is true that the Super Hornet is somewhat slower than the C/D variant it is replacing. This does make it somewhat less maneuverable, and therefore somewhat more vulnerable in air combat. However, this is not "just" an airplane; it's a weapon system. And as a system, the E/F variants are extremely capable. Perhaps not as capable as an F-22 (it also doesn't cost as much), but nonetheless extremely effective, much more so than the C/D variant.

Most damming of all is that the film in question does not seem to mention the AESA radar system at all. Short for Active Electronic Scanned Array, these systems are far more powerful than their predecessors. Indeed, they're so powerful and so new, their full capabilities are still being explored, and what has been figured out is highly classified. What is known is they work very well, allowing a force multiplication that often makes them a deciding factor in any engagement in which they participate*.

As to the comparison with and retirement of Australian F-111s, well, it is true that, on paper at least, the Super Hornet does not compare all that well to the older system. That said, the F-111 was a remarkable platform whose performance statistics will most likely never be equaled again. However, the Aardvark's design is forty years old, it is becoming increasingly difficult (and therefore expensive) to maintain, and adapting it to newer and more effective munitions may not be possible for much longer. Almost nobody expects it to last long enough for the F-35 to directly replace it, hence the Super Hornet purchase.

True, the Russians are beginning to roll out some worryingly capable weapon systems of their own. However, none are available in large numbers, and their capabilities have not been proven in anything close to combat situations. It would be interesting to find out what the opponents of this purchase are proposing as an alternative strategy.

Because, from everything I've read at least, there really isn't one.

-----
* Indeed, it was the lack of AESA-equipped radars that is most often seen as the reason why a flight of four F-15s was not able to defeat an Indian opposition force four times its size a few years back.

If my experience in various airplane sims is any indication, flying this low is actually not as hard as it looks. Just gotta keep a steady hand and a very close eye on the HUD. Which is not to say I'd ever want to try it in real life. Remember folks, in a contest for lowest altitude you don't want first prize.

Aviation Week's latest cover story provides the proverbial "10,000 foot view" on various developments in supersonic flight today. We might be closer to regular supersonic travel. Then again, we might not. Success has as much to do with politics and regulation as it does with engineering and technology. In other words, business as usual!

Robert R. gets a no-prize with an obligatory barf bag for bringing us this video of someone willing to put a Cessna 152 through 60 full spins. The ground looked awfully close toward the end, but on recovery it looked as if she had several thousand feet of "cushion" below her. Not that I'd want to be along for the ride, mind you.

While nearly a year old, this write-up of the F-22 Raptor's first visit to Red Flag was still informative, at least to me. And having flown hours in buggy simulators I can say yes, it is damned annoying when you can't lock up an aircraft you can see. Even moreso, I would suppose, when it happens in the real world.

Joshua gets a no-prize full of screaming passengers for bringing us certainly one of the most original flight-sim videos I've ever seen. I'm not completely sure it's possible to barrel-roll a 747. Then again, with enough energy and the skill to keep the plane at no more than 1G, probably anything's possible.

Special no-prize to the first one to spot a huge modeling gaffe on one of the airplanes.

Ron gets a no-prize that makes a very sweet sound for bringing us news of an airshow scheduled to feature 100, yes, 100, P-51 Mustangs. I didn't know there actually were 100 flyable P-51s in the world. If they manage to put them all in the air at once it'll be... spectacular.

Too bad it doesn't look like it'll be an annual event. That's definitely something I'd think about penciling into the calendar next year.

Personally, I'd rather be a spectator when a KC-135 does a flyby at 5 feet than a passenger. At least, that's about how low the #3 engine looks to be from the ground at one point. Pilot better hope the original video tape doesn't show any tail numbers. If it does, he should expect to spend a few days at his local Barb Wire Hilton.

Just in time for critical flight testing, a former Boeing engineer is claiming the company's newest product, the 787, is unsafe to fly. Unfortunately I've been cut off from my main source of inside info, Aviation Week and Space Technology, due to a subscription lapse, so I don't have the absolute latest on the program. However, such issues, especially regarding the fire safety of the fuselage, could have been (and therefore almost certainly were) investigated and addressed very early in the design phase.

The claims of toxic smoke seem to me particularly weak, as in an airplane fire it's my understanding the contents of the fuselage will be the primary contributor to smoke, and those are essentially the same no matter what the plane is made of.

Boeing is definitely taking any number of risks in the creation of their latest passenger aircraft. However, these involve things like production schedules, profit margins, and delivery dates, not basic safety. If it gets certified, I'd have no problem riding in one.

Slashdot linked up news of a record-breaking 54 hour flight by an unmanned solar-powered aircraft. This shatters previous records for both unmanned and unmanned solar-powered flight.

Hell, I didn't know French navy fighters could land on US aircraft carriers. You people are supposed to tell me these things, ya know?

The "super predator" MQ-9 Reaper is now operational, with the first squadron of four deploying this week to Iraq. While development was troubled, with the program nearly being canceled a few times as I recall, the result seems to be an extremely capable weapons platform. Upgrading from two hellfire missiles to fourteen definitely gives you more options.

Scourge of the Cold War skies one minute, razorblades the next. Not as noble an end as a Q target, but if it keeps the Persian 'cats grounded, I suppose it's a good thing.

To me, the hardest part of aerial photography is conveying a sense of motion. Fortunately, those of you interested in seeing just what that upside-down helicopter featured yesterday won't have to imagine anymore. It really was that breathtaking.

Looks like another "you can ride it" B-17 has started operation, this time seemingly based in the Southwest. It includes a nice video, with shots that go well with my own memories of flying a different B-17. At $430, what's not to love?

Looks like the A380 visit to Dulles won't be much of an event (for the general public) after all:

The aircraft is expected to arrive at Dulles some time after 9 p.m. on Sunday, March 25 and depart some time after 9 p.m. on Monday, March 26. The organizers of this event have not made arrangements for the general public to view the aircraft, its takeoffs or landings. Public areas of the airport do not offer a good view of the A380 when it is parked on the airfield.

Ah well.

The Airbus A380 will be making a tour of the US next week, including a March 25th stop at Dulles. On a Sunday. Next to my house. Woot!

Aviation Week's latest cover story details UAV operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a helluva lot more complicated than I thought it would be, and that's saying something.

Spend thousands of hours, tens of thousands of dollars, crash and burn anyway. 16 foot of jet-powered R/C airplane, reduced to flinders in a moment. Hey, at least he got a divorce out of it!

It's taken six years of R&D, but it appears Boeing is really going to deploy an emergency external autopilot system to prevent terrorist attacks. While a good idea in theory, there are so many different ways for something like this to go wrong I'm actually surprised it's come along this quickly. You go first.

I guess one of the few perks of flying in a war zone is flight restrictions aren't really all that restrictive. Kudos to the cameraman for having the cajones to let an A-10 fly so low the backwash actually knocks him around.

Jeff gets a gigantic no-prize that nobody seems to want anymore for bringing us news that UPS has canceled its A380 order from Airbus. This is not as unexpected as it would seem, Aviation Week has been reporting UPS was considering this for a few months now. Airbus was already diverting resources to the passenger variant, and the conventional wisdom seems to be that, while certainly not a good thing, it would be better to delay the cargo version entirely than accept more slowdowns on the passenger type.

Mark gets a no-prize that'll make him dizzy just looking at it for bringing us this impressive flight demonstration of the SU-30MKI. Most of the maneuvers are fun to look at but not particularly useful in combat. Still, it's impressive to see a jet the size of WWII medium bomber doing things you'd expect a Pitts Special to be doing.

More info on the SU-30 and it's many sub-variants is here. According to the article, this aircraft is operated primarily, perhaps exclusively, by the Indian Air Force. The video seems to be by an aircraft with Soviet Russian markings, but it's too fuzzy for me to be sure.

While a bit rah-rah in tone, this NRO article on the F-35 Lightning II still provides a decent snapshot of where the program is right now. Aviation Week crib notes:

• It's still overweight, especially the STOVL version. However, production managers are still "very optimistic" weight and performance targets will be met.
• "Very optimistic" is often industry lingo for "cost overruns", and this appears to be no exception. Conventional wisdom is currently betting on the price (both per-unit and whole program) to go up.
• The UK is making a lot of noise right now about withdrawing from the whole thing. They want access to what is in effect the source code for the aircraft, and DoD and State are dragging their heels about that. If the Brits actually pull out, the cost will go up a lot. Negotiations are ongoing.
• That said, this will most likely be a spectacularly capable weapon system. Fanboys may (will) bemoan the loss of generation IV combat aircraft like the F-16, A-10, or AV8B, but keep in mind those designs will be forty years old when the F-35 enters service. Aircraft, engine, and systems design has come a very long way in those 40 years, and it will show.

People weren't sure Lockheed would be able to pull off the lift fan design, but they did. I have a feeling they'll overcome these obstacles as well, putting us (at the end) two full generations ahead of any potential competitor. Take that, Mr. Mujji!

Mark gets a gigantic, antique no-prize for bringing us this YouTube clip of an Me 323 cargo aircraft in action. The 323 was Germany's attempt to salvage a useful aircraft from the monstrous 321 glider program, which had turned into something of a debacle once the invasion of England was called off. More info on the 323 is here...

Aviation Week's latest cover story details the F-22 Raptor's first operational deployment. Turns out the thing is a lot more than "just" a cold war relic. From this article and the others that were in the print issue, it's nearly a single-seat mini-AWACS. And they haven't even started using the radar as a weapon. Once that happens it's possible they'll be able to fry electronics from high altitude.

I could've sworn we'd linked up these harrowing pictures of the results of a commercial cargo jet's encounter with a severe hailstorm, but I couldn't find them. This article includes the back-story, which I don't believe I've seen anywhere else. To me, the picture of the windscreen is the most dramatic. I can't imagine what it must've been like to be inside the aircraft at the time.

Mark gets a no-prize that's going to be expensive to repair for bringing us proof that even after some seventy years of regular use, pilots still sometimes forget to lower their retractable landing gear. Career, meet toilet. Toilet, career.

AW&ST this week is carrying this detailed article describing what it's like to take a flight on White Knight, the one-of-a-kind carrier plane for the Rutan group's successful X-prize winner Space Ship One. While it's completed its designed purpose, it's such a unique aircraft many other agencies are paying to use it for high-altitude research. The article also does a nice job of explaining why the thing looks so weird, and what it's like to try to see out of the front.

Mark gets a no-prize that'll collect the occasional jackrabbit for bringing us this spectacular footage of low-flying military aircraft. I couldn't quite make out the type, I think it may be some sort of late 70s Mirage (F-1?). Couldn't see any markings either, but the terrain (combined with the type) makes me think it perhaps might be Israeli.

The barrel rolls at low altitude may not simply be showing off. If my simulator experience is any indication, when flying low and fast it's actually easier to keep the altitude low by inverting and pulling "up", then rolling upright.

Aviation Week this week carried this detailed look at the Navy's latest Seahawk helicopter variants, the "R" and "S". The two types combine roles once filled by several different airframe types, helping to lower maintenance and training costs substantially. The helicopters have also been updated with the latest technology, providing a significant boost in crew productivity over earlier versions.

Sub hunters, ho!

Aviation Week's latest cover story is a detailed account of what it's like to fly the new Airbus A380. Unsurprisingly, the new type combines the well-tested best of Airbus's previous models, while incorporating new ideas and technologies to improve things where possible. I can't wait to see this thing modeled in something like MS's Flight Simulator (actually, I imagine it already is, somewhere). Fortunately for us all, that's most likely the closest I'll ever get to the cockpit of one.

While speculation about what is being worked on at Area 51 tend to be heavy on "what I think" and light on "what I know", this Popular Science article still makes for a fun read. Stealth transports, resurrected A-12s, and Auroras, oh, my!

Fark linked up this video of an impressive flight demonstration by a MiG-29 equipped with thrust vectoring. It's one thing to see these maneuvers pulled off by a 3,000 pound stunt plane, quite another to see them done with a 30,000 pound fighter.

So far I've yet to see a flight demonstration of the F-22, which should be far more impressive than even this.

Problem 1: A NASA office wants 3 ex-SR71 Pratt & Whitney J58 engines for research. They need to be checked out and confirmed to be in working order.

Problem 2: How to dispose of the last of the JP7 fuel used for these engines, as well as the really nasty triethylborane (TEB) used to start them.

Solution: Well, go see for yourself. These are guys we're talking about, ya know.

Can't see how this snuck past us when it happend, but hey, better late than never.

Because it's a cool picture, that's why.

Aviation Week this week is featuring this story on attempts to convert a 747 freighter into the world's largest fire bomber. Able to drop 20,500 gallons of water or fire retardent in 10 seconds, it's capacity is equal to 8 "normal-sized" air tankers. While the concept seems to work, there are still a very large number of regulatory hoops to jump through before the aircraft can see service.

The small cover picture featured with the article doesn't do this thing justice... it's huge.

While digging around for obscure German WWII aircraft (it's a slow day), I found this nifty collection of photographs of the old Smithsonian Paul Garber Storage Facility. This was where most of the Smithsonian's air and space collection was held, and it was, well, sort of open to the public. You had to make an appointment, and tours were given most days.

I saw it back in 1995, four years before these were taken, but still recognize most of the things in the pictures. It's closed now, and I never got around to going back. Ellen claims to be quite disappointed, but she tends to roll her eyes when she says it so I'm not sure I believe her. A dusty, un-airconditioned collection of warehouses full of junked old airplanes... what's not to love?

A lot of these aircraft are now on display, but many are not. I hope once they get the restoration section of the annex built that The Swoose (the only "shark-fin" B-17 in existence) and the Go-229 flying wing (a Nazi "might-have-been" that never flew) are at the top of their "to-do" list.

Ron gets a somewhat crazy no-prize for bringing us this nifty picture of a stunt plane doing the limbo. Nope, that's not a typo. Yep, that's what I meant.

I've heard of aerobatic performances being restricted to a "stunt box", but this is ridiculous. It's probably for the best that real airplanes can't get away with this stuff, although I've seen a few try.

Mark gets a no-prize that whistles like a jet for bringing us this video of one of the new Me-262 jets puttering around a German airshow. As I recall, a Texas-based company built about a dozen of them, using original blueprints and, with the exception of the engines, duplicating the originals exactly.

Also interesting to see that American newscasters aren't the only ones who can't shut the f--- up.

Update: According to this Wikipedia article, it's actually the second of a half-dozen run of the fighters. It's "conversion" model (meaning it can be configured as either a single or two seat aircraft), and operated by a German historic society. More info on the whole project is here...

You parked it where?!?

And, in the comments on Fark, also found:

• Gophers are a biatch. Where's Bill Murray when you need him?
• Careful where you park those Apaches dude, they're expensive!

Ain't aviation grand?

Joshua gets a gargantuan no-prize for bringing us the first on-line pic of the Airbus A380 cockpit. Aviation Week had featured what is most probably this exact photo a few weeks ago, but that was in print. Note what seems to be a tail-mounted camera display, useful I'm sure for preventing "controlled taxi into terminal" and "ground crew pasted to tarmac" incidents.

The next Andrews AFB open house will be May 20th & 21st. Be there or be, well, not as sunburned! The Blue Angels are s