Airbus to move further into military AC inc Heavy Bombers

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...


This concept is
way beyond anything the US has concieved for the as-of-yet
undetermined B-3.


If its undetermined one can hardly claim that another system is in
advance of it.

Keith

Respectfully Keith, B-3 concepts are already being investigated and
some of the design work already proposed. See my archived "B-3" posts
with links.

Equally respectfully I seriously doubt that you have access to such work or
that anyone with access will be posting about it in a public forum.


The German NiMet, however, is way beyond THOSE proposals because it is
a Metamorphic bomber concept. The future materials and systems
proposed for the NiMet include a type of cellular material that can
absorb radar as well as direct hits from enemy a/c guns and missiles
without damage to the craft. It would have the unique ability to
transform, reform, and deform at will. Also, its outer bio-like
structure would allow weapons to be imbedded at various points and
released by a complex internal light control system. The future
Luftwaffe pilot is expected to be wearing a gel-suit and "cocooned" in
the event of an emergency.

The basic technology you describe is not available at this time and its
development will
be protracted and expensive. Smart structures have been a buzz
word for may years now and their proponents are all seeking funding
but while promising in the long term we cannot plan weapons system
on the basis that they exist, they do not. More limited applications
of metamorphic systems design such as variable wing leading and trailing
edge contours, embeddable and nonintrusive sensors and smart actuator
materials will doubtless be available rather earlier.

The next generation of strike aircraft will very likely utilise unmanned
vehicles,
unlike close air support or air superiority there really is no need for such
aircraft to carry along a human for the ride. They will essentially be
re-usable cruise missiles.

Since the IOC of the future craft (and the future B-3) is not expected
to be until the late 2030s, the technology proposed will take time to
develop. But as stated earlier, the German proposal is way beyond any
current B-3 concept.
As for Airbus conversion aircraft, that is possible NOW. A converted
A-series cargo carrier could air drop palletized cruise missiles or
munitions.

As could any transport aircraft


Keith

Nothing new about 'metamorphic ' airframes. They have been discussed
in Av Week for a few years now. NASA has been working with the
concept. But what struck me is 'absorb hits by guns and missiles.'
Even Bismarck and Yamato found out that didn't work. There is a
definite limit to how much any structure can absorb, and some extant
missiles definitely can exceed that limit no matter where they hit the
airframe..
Walt BJ

(WaltBJ) wrote in message . com...
Nothing new about 'metamorphic ' airframes. They have been discussed
in Av Week for a few years now. NASA has been working with the
concept.

True. But the German future design incorporates a range of
technologies that would be unprecedented in aerial warfare. The outer
structure of the craft is a a non-metallic material that functions
like an advanced living organism.

But what struck me is 'absorb hits by guns and missiles.'

That's why it would be unique. Since the outer structure is
non-metallic, fire from 20-30mm cannon would do nothing except lodge
in the material... which would react immediately by expelling it,
pushing it out of the outer skin. If a missile hit, a chunk of the
material would be exploded away... but again the reaction would be an
immediate repair of the damage through a form of electrosynthesis.

Even Bismarck and Yamato found out that didn't work. There is a
definite limit to how much any structure can absorb, and some extant
missiles definitely can exceed that limit no matter where they hit the
airframe..
Walt BJ

The NiMet proposal is not a giant armored battleship. You're talking
apples and oranges. This craft is a highly metamorphic, adaptive craft
with ultra high tech internal systems that operate mostly by light.
The only drawing of the machine I've ever seen this year was a craft
that looked "alien" to say the least. It is not even in the same
category as the early B-3 proposals. As for NASA's Metacraft design,
it is a simplistic base-design that looks conventional when placed
next to the NiMet. NiMet looks like (in physical form) a giant,
hostile butterfly. It's quad wing shape surrounds a long segmented
body with a circular flight center at the head,followed by a
mid-section compartment, and then a long tail. At the front of the
craft is a U-shaped inlet of some sort that feeds the non-jet
powerplant (not specified in the article). Bulges near the front and
rear of the craft are suspected of being some form of decoy projection
system (holomorphics?).

It will be an amazing craft if built, but I do agree that it will take
the better part of two more decades to develop and integrate various
systems. I would just like to point out the deviation Germany is
taking in its approach to future combat. Rather than exploit
evolutionary designs like the US does, the Germans appear to be using
the same tactics as before- introducing small numbers of revolutionary
craft that can counter large numbers of conventional craft. On the
ground the Heer is breaking its army into future fast-moving hunter
groups that will be aided by ACRs (Autonomous Combat Robots), UCAVs,
and Smart Soldier technolgy. On the sea the stealthy Type 212 AIP SSK
will also be operating in the future with UUCVs, stealth surface
ships, and very high speed transports.

Rob

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
(WaltBJ) wrote in message
. com...


It will be an amazing craft if built, but I do agree that it will take
the better part of two more decades to develop and integrate various
systems. I would just like to point out the deviation Germany is
taking in its approach to future combat. Rather than exploit
evolutionary designs like the US does, the Germans appear to be using
the same tactics as before- introducing small numbers of revolutionary
craft that can counter large numbers of conventional craft.

A strategy that lost them the war, lots of P-51's , T-34's and cheap
frigates turned out to be a winning plan.

Keith