NationStates Jolt Archive

[I think I'll go with the royalty option. It seems like you've come up with an updated airframe and I'd have to produce new aircraft to come up with the C variant. As it is, my current F-125s are getting old, so I need to replace them.]
OOC: Well, about the aircraft thread, I might be able to start it tonight. About your old F-125A, how many do you have? I'm thinking of a special deal in which you wouldn't have to pay the royalty for a portion of the F-125SCs (that's what I'm planning to name this "special" variant of the F-125C) that you'll be able to produce.

OOC: Blast it, just hold the competition at your place, Omz. You've got the area and the machine shops so the various tech people can set up and monitor. This is, of course, assuming since your aircraft/R&D capabilities are stronger, you'd have lots of testing airfields and similar.

OOC: Well, about the aircraft thread, I might be able to start it tonight. About your old F-125A, how many do you have? I'm thinking of a special deal in which you wouldn't have to pay the royalty for a portion of the F-125SCs (that's what I'm planning to name this "special" variant of the F-125C) that you'll be able to produce.

[I have 12,960 of the old S variant.]

OOC: About the competition, I will post the post very soon, and about the F-125S variant, I'm thinking if you might want to trade half of the retiring F-125S' an offer of no royalty for half of what you might want to produce in the first batch... We need spare parts :D

Alright, the thread is here:
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=7475515#post7475515

Also, some stats for my prototype:

Os-288A/B/C "Dreamfalcon" Prototype
Length: 19.4m (Standard A), 19.1m (Carrier Version B), 21.2m (Strike Version C)
Wingspan: 14.8m main wing (A variant), 14.6 (B variant), 16.1m (C variant)
Height: 5.4m (A and B), 5.6m (C variant)
Crew: 1 (A/B), 2 (Multirole)
Empty Weight: 43,000lbs (A variant), 44,520lb (B variant), 47,000lb (C variant)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 115,000lb (A and B variant), 105,000lb (C variant)
Propulsion:
A and B variants: Two Honjak Electrics HRA-220 PDE-turbofan hybrid with 47,000lbs of thrust each and 3D thrust vectoring
C variant: Two HRA-221C PDE-turbofan hybrid with 44,200lbs of thrust each and 3D thrust vectoring

Maximum Speed: >Mach 2.5, Mach 1.8 supercruise (A and B), >Mach 2.4, Mach 1.68 supercruise (C)
Ceiling: >65,000ft
G Limit: "Above 8Gs"
Range:
A and B variants: 1500km combat radius (with expected load), 7500km ferry (with fuel tanks)
C variant: 1800km combat radius, 7700km ferry
Payload:
A/B Variants: 1x GRA-271 27mm, 16,3154lb (7400kg) of ordnance in one Weapons Bay, two Side Weapons Bay, and 6 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip)
C Variant: 1x GRA-271 27mm, 17,857lb (8100kg) of ordnance in two Small Weapons Bays, two Side Weapons Bays, and 6 hardpoints (4 underwing, 2 wingtip)
Note: To improve stealth, hardpoints are of stealthy design with an oval structure, and can be (along with weapons) covered in small round/oval "cases"/"bubbles" to improve stealth and aerodynamics

Airframe Structure: Titanium and aluminum alloys with various composites, with RAM materials, low-reflection/heat paint coating, and kevlar and carbon nanotube/buckytube/buckyball-based lightweight armor protection. Additional electrochromic panels added to confuse IR signatures, small "light cells" in certain areas to reduce visual signature

Airframe Design: Delta-trapezoid-like wing (Imagine a F-16XL and F/A-22 merged together) with tailless structure, elevons, "flap-decelerons", and thrust vectoring for flight control. Two small canards are added to improve aerodynamic performance on side of the "extended" fuselage

Avionic Systems: Fly-by-optics and advanced HOTAS (hands on throttle and stick) with voice command software. Glass cockpit with wide angle HUD and Advanced Flight Control and Awareness Helmet (AFCAH) helmet-mounted sight systems. Special voice command systems are also included. Standards are ELPI radar, IRST, and extensive ECM systems for A and B versions, in addition to extensive FLIR/LLTV/LADAR targeting systems for strike versions:

ELPI radar -
A and B versions: Honjak Electrics APG-322/323 ELPI radar suite with front and rear (in pod) sensors, with improved LPI, "anti-stealth", and counter-active radar cancellation techinques
C version: Honjak Electrics APG-355/356 ELPI radar suite with additional extensive navigational and ground attack capabilities, though slightly reduced air-engagement capabilities.

IRST - Honjak Electrics HI-220/221 IRST suite with front and rear sensors, with improved target tracking, searching, recongition, and engagement capabilities, in aditon to improved anti-IR countermeasures capabilities

Digital Camera System (colour or LLTV) - Aids in pilot's visual identification capabilities, with multiple "super-zoom" settings

ECM System - Radar jammer, IR countermeasures, RWR and LADAR warning receivers, decoy systems, active radar cancellation system (can either be custom or Honjak Electrics ARC-12 system, can be turned on or off by pilot, to provide countermeasures against radar-guided missiles and less capable fighter/ground-based radars)
-Smoke deployment system - when in clear weather, this system dispenses smoke, and perhasp to a limited extent, confuse enemy LADAR systems

FLIR/LLTV System (C version only) - For navigation and all-weather, day/night ground attack, with secondary air-to-air functions
LADAR system (C version only) - mounted in pod, uses laser to search, track, and engage both ground and air targets.

OOC: About the competition, I will post the post very soon, and about the F-125S variant, I'm thinking if you might want to trade half of the retiring F-125S' an offer of no royalty for half of what you might want to produce in the first batch... We need spare parts :D

[I can turn them in the extras as the new ones are produced, but the F-125s are my primarily assigned for defense of the homeland, I can't afford to weaken their force. If that's fair, we have an agreement.]

OOC: And the demonstration begins... Of course, I'd need one more "setup" post before the real fun begins.

OOC: As for the RP post, I'll agree that we should make it more "slower" so that we can 1) get things more organized and 2) research on more things on-the-fly (it is typical anyways, and the YF-22 didn't transform to the F/A-22A the next dat).

To SS however, that's fine, but I'm thinking of a similar deal. You could produce the F-125SCs under royalty and keep the F-125As, but when you do decide to return some of the F-125As (without the stuff you might've installed of course), we'll return the royalty you paid for a number of F-125SCs that is two-thirds (2/3) the number of F-125As you've returned back to us. In simpler language, if you produced 300 F-125SCs and returned us 300 F-125As, then we'll return the royalty for 200 F-125SCs back to you. Sounds like a deal?

Exclusive interview, excerpted from the Adejaani Picayune
by Belinda Vaughn


Doctor Marianne Brooks is a name you might've heard a lot. She's head of Adejaani Government Industries (AGI) and is one of the most influential business executives within Adejaani. We were fortunate enough to get this brief exclusive interview.

Belinda Vaughn: Doctor Brooks, thanks for your time.

Marianne Brooks: A pleasure.

BV: What exactly does AGI do?

MB: Well, we do everything. From constructing skyscrapers to highways to building seaports, sewerage systems and entire cities. But mostly, our most visible and sought after products are in the aerospace sector. Aircraft and to a far lesser extent, spacecraft.

BV: Yes, we've heard a lot, especially AGI's partnership with the Omzian group OMASC. Can you please tell us how that works?

MB: Well, many years ago, we entered into an agreement with OMASC. We share technologies and designs. We strive to make some of the best military aerospace technology in the Modern world.

BV: I see. And as I understand it, AGI is at the crest of something of a significant breakthrough.

MB: Absolutely correct! Our AFD-7 Starfury aircraft is revolutionary already. I don't believe anyone even considered such a concept, let alone making it a reality! Our work right now is turning it into a UCAV-

BV: I'm sorry, a what?

MB: UCAV. Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle. A pilotless aircraft.

BV: Oh! My apologies. Continue.

MB: No problem. Well, the AFD-7 design is extremely maneuverable. The only thing currently stopping it from being used to the full potential is the pilot and the co-pilot. What most people don't understand is that no matter how 'great' an airplane anyone can come up with, it's the pilot that causes the big problems.

BV: How so?

MB: Well, for one thing, a human being is fragile. They need to be able to operate the aircraft. That means getting them oxygen, getting them the right information so they can fly the aircraft, fight it in combat and so forth. You then have to keep the pilot safe, get them out if the aircraft is lost and so forth. About a full quarter of most aircraft is dedicated to the pilot.

BV: Really?

MB: Yes, really. So aircraft have to lug all this stuff around to keep the pilot healthy and able to fly and fight it. An unmanned aircraft can do away with most of it, certainly the ejection seats, the cockpit and all the various support systems. Replace that with a highly advanced computer and it's perfect! G forces, gravity forces, are currently the main limiting factor on aircraft. A pilot (and co pilot) can only take so many Gs before he or she blacks out.

BV: Which is bad.

MB: Very bad. If the pilot blacks out from G forces, you've probably lost a plane and most importantly, a trained pilot which is not so easy to replace. But without anyone aboard, an unmanned version of the AFD-7 would be able to do about thirty or forty Gs. it could even outturn the best missiles in the world!

BV: Which means...

MB: Which means we've got an aircraft which is probably the most maneverable in the world, which can literally take off in a different direction at a moment's notice and which is fully stealth! It'll be as fast and maneuverable as a missile! And we won't put a precious pilot at risk!

BV: How soon will development of this take?

MB: Oh, a while, yet. The AFD-7 isn't yet perfect, we're upgrading it constantly and gaining a lot of experience with it every day.

BV: Wow, so the future's bright, huh?

MB: And profitable. It will change the face of warfare.

BV: Okay. Well, Doctor Brooks, thanks for your time.

MB: Not a problem. Thanks.

OOC: As for the RP post, I'll agree that we should make it more "slower" so that we can 1) get things more organized and 2) research on more things on-the-fly (it is typical anyways, and the YF-22 didn't transform to the F/A-22A the next dat).

To SS however, that's fine, but I'm thinking of a similar deal. You could produce the F-125SCs under royalty and keep the F-125As, but when you do decide to return some of the F-125As (without the stuff you might've installed of course), we'll return the royalty you paid for a number of F-125SCs that is two-thirds (2/3) the number of F-125As you've returned back to us. In simpler language, if you produced 300 F-125SCs and returned us 300 F-125As, then we'll return the royalty for 200 F-125SCs back to you. Sounds like a deal?

[That sounds like a deal.]

OOC: And... SS, since that deal's good for you, you want to do something similar for the AFD-7, eventually? Or are you going to pick just one from the competition?

[Just one, I like to keep a single type of aircraft for each role in the IAF.]

OOC: About the Os-280/AFD-7 competition, I have secured some time at weekend to do this. A lot of stuff to come soon.

IC:

OMASC Starts Second Stage of XB-106 Development

DefenceNewsOmz (Kanze) - With the short announcement of the start of the development of a new medium bomber released by OMASC a while ago, OMASC has now announced that the basic XB-106 concept has been refined, and is entering a second stage of development. Although not much details are released by the Omzian Air Force nor Navy, it has been revealed that the Omzian Air Force is anticipating this to be a stealthy, supersonic, medium-range bomber that are to be deployed in hundreds in terms of numbers, providing the Omzian Air Force with a new strike capability between the acquired FB-22 intermediate range supersonic bomber and the long-range supersonic bombers, such as the B-101A.

"It's pretty exciting," an unidentified OMASC official commented. "We are anticipating a stealthy, low supersonic boom, airframe of a conventioan wing design and a possible semi-tailless design with somewhere of between 2 to 4 engines. We are also expecting this bomber to hold a standard load of about 10,000 to 20,000kgs over a long range of about 6000km."

Lt. Col. H. Jonara, a member of the Omzian Air Force's 6th Bomb Wing, has revealed additional information about this project. "We are anticipating that this will fly both low altitude and high altitude missions, while carrying a variety of glided munitions ranging to SDBs to 2000lb PDAS units, in addition to a new class of hypersonic missiles that will replace the Dagger series," he said. "We are anticipating that several wings, previously equipped with F-15E and B-1Bs for theatre missions, to be converted to this bomber."

F/A-40 Unity Multirole Strike Fighter Project
F/A-40A Ground-Based Variant
F/A-40N Carrier-Baed Variant
A Joint Project Between Freethinkers Defence Industries and OMASC

(Credit goes to the Freethinkers for these excellent renderings)
Basic Plan of the F/A-40 Unity (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/The_Freethinkers/unityplan.jpg)
Bomb and JASSM missile-equipped F/A-40A participating in a high altitude attack mission (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/The_Freethinkers/unity6.jpg)
Two F/A-40Ns conducting low-level attack mission over snowy grounds (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/The_Freethinkers/unitytwin.jpg)

Length: 24.2m (A version), 23.8m (N version)
Wingspan: 18.2m (Not folded)
Height: 5.92m
Propulsion: Two Mjolnir turbofans at 46,000lbs thrust each
Empty Weight: 41,500lbs
Max Takeoff Weight: 96,000lbs
Max Speeds: Mach 2.56 at altitude, Mach 1.5 supercruise
Ceiling: 63,000ft
Range (Ferry): 5200km
Crew: Two (Pilot and Weapons Systems Officer)
Armament: 1x replaceable gun pod (20mm or 40mm, placed in enclosed pod under cockpit)
24,000lbs of ordnance on 15 hardpoints (two wingtip, five under each wing, 3 fuselage), including air-to-air missiles, air-to-surface missiles, bombs, rockets, anti-ship missiles, fuel tanks, and one recon pod (camera and FLIR)
Note: Wingtip stations can only carry small air-to-air missiles, while fuselage stations can carry at least two anti-ship missiles

Other features: Noran APG-288/289 ELIP front/rear-facing multimode radars, Noran NJR-350/351 front/rear-facing IRST (Infrared Search and Track Systems), Noran NJ22 Visual Identification Camera (Magnified visual camera for air target identification, low light TV-enabled for night operations), Noran NRL-24 LADAR (mounted in pod for air-to-ground and air-to-air targeting, >80km range), Noran COWS-IIE (II-Export) countermeasures systems

Cost: $60 million (A/N variants)

A new joint venture of both the FDI and OMASC, the F/A-40 Unity is a new and highly maneuverable ground attack aircraft designed to replace older aging ground attack systems such as the F-15E or the Tornado. Its airframe, while similar to some aircraft such as the Su-35, is drastically different from many aircraft of OMASC and FDI, featuring a pair of F/A-22 like wings and another pair of canards at front, while incorporating various materials (mainly titanium alloys and composite materials) and armour (titanium, kevlar, and buckyball/buckytube materials placed around the cockpit and fuel tank) to make it a suitable ground-attack aircraft also capable of close-in engagements with enemy fighters. Additionally, although this plane is designed for a large load and ultramaneuveribility at or even suppressing the level of the Su-35, various RAM materials has also been applied onto the aircraft, while it can be painted with light or dark camoflauge patterns, or a standard low-reflection white-grey paint. Powered by two FDI Mjolnir turbofans, the aircraft is provided with 3D thrust vectoring capabilities, and allows the aircraft to carry a large load over long ranges. Furthermore, the naval version of this aircraft also offers additional airframe strength, and the necessary carrier operation systems, allowing full carrier operations capability.

The weapons and avionics systems are also as advanced. The aircraft is equipped with a total of 15 hardpoints, including 2 wingtip hardpoints, 3 fuselage hardpoints, and 5 hardpoints under each wing (including 1 on each engine intake housings). The wingtip hardpoints are rated for light missiles, while the fuselage hardpoints are capable of carrying heavy air-to-ground missiles, including anti-ship missiles. Furthermore, a FDI-designed interchangable gunpod system is also installed, which consists of a system mounting either a 20mm cannon or a heavy 40mm ground attack cannon below the cockpit, giving the aircraft with a strong ground attack capability. The avionics system, besides the two-seat "glass" cockpit and advanced helmet-mounted sights and voice recongition and command systems, also offers an advanced Noran APG-288/289 ELPI radar with front and rear-facing sensors, Noran NJR-350/351 dedicated air-to-air IRST systems, an advanced NJ22 magnified digital camera system for visual identification of enemy air targets in both day and night (using LLLTV), and a special pod with a Noran NRL-24 LADAR, FLIR sensors, and laser designators for ground targeting and attack. This is coupled with a COWS-IIE countermeasures syste, which allows the aircraft to respond to various threats using radar warning receivers and jammers, a ladar warning receiver, IR countermeasures, decoy dispensers, and a towed decoy system.

OOC: Welcome back. :D I might have time this weekend too... I usually lose (Australian) Saturdays due to fishing and Sundays are usually going out to do stuff... But it's a prediction of lots of rain. :p

Anyway, as I said... No pressure, no rush. Take your time.

[Hey Omz, I have yet another project for you. I want a strategic bomber that can carry more than 100,000 pounds in payload. It should have some stealthy feature to reduce its signature, but I don't expect it to be anything resembling a true stealth bomber. After this I have three transport and a couple helos I want you to do for me and then I'll have nearly an entirely OMASC-equipped air force. BTW, I'll be purchasing your B-106, the B-101 will be replacing my B-30s simply because it's too large to be a medium bomber.]

[Hey Omz, I have yet another project for you. I want a strategic bomber that can carry more than 100,000 pounds in payload. It should have some stealthy feature to reduce its signature, but I don't expect it to be anything resembling a true stealth bomber. After this I have three transport and a couple helos I want you to do for me and then I'll have nearly an entirely OMASC-equipped air force. BTW, I'll be purchasing your B-106, the B-101 will be replacing my B-30s simply because it's too large to be a medium bomber.]

OOC: Actually, you've just revealed my project here, and I'm currently working on a B-1B alternative that flies a low profile, is supersonic at higher altitudes, and carries about 46,000kg to 54,000kg as max load. I'd expect it to still be a swing wing although the whole structure takes a lot more space, but you can expect this to be a Mach 1.2-1.8 class bomber carrying a huge load over a very long range, aside from extra armor and large bomb bay spaces. But if you are looking for those huge subsonic bomber capable of carrying 200,000lbs of stuff and the likes, I'll consider that, but as my workload increases in RL it isn't quite likely.

Now about the B-106, I should note that it will carry about 30,000lb to 40,000lb load oer an intermediate range, which isn't really an intercontinental bomber, but you'll be rather looking at a much more high tech and stealthy alternative to the Tu-22.

EDIT: Also, I do want to freely admit that I'm next to zero in terms of helo designing, as I'm primarily a fixed wing aircraft person. But I do have some tech handy, and I'll consider that.

OOC: Yay, finally up there! I will post more later, damn uni presentation. Looks good though :D

E-5 Watchtower

The Adejaani Air Forces had long ago replaced the E-3 Sentry aka AWACS with the E-767. However, the development of the APG-77 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) on the F/A-22 Raptor had rendered the old fashioned radar sets almost completely obsolete. Finally, Adejaani developed an indigenous ARS-4 (Adejaani Radar System Four) which was a development of the APG-77 and placed it in almost every single aircraft it developed. Thus naturally, the AWACS was the next in line.

The first and most glaring drawback was that the current generation of AWACS were based on civilian airliners, which, while superb in their own right, are not as capable of defending themselves in the stresses of a heavy combat environment. Thus, Adejaani Government Industries (AGI) began experiments.

First, a C-17 Globemaster III was used, employing a "radar billboard" which was towed behind the C-17. It proved effective, but having a large rectangular device created too much drag. The design of the "billboard" was chosen because each radar element did not require a "dish" and the "billboard" could mount more sensors for more radar coverage.

The E-737 next looked like the way to go, with a much smaller "billboard" on top of a venerable Boeing 737. However, that aircraft lacked the capabilities of self defense and had too low a flight speed.

Then someone had the brilliant idea of using a B-1 Lancer. The "billboard" radar could be lowered, literally hanging from underneath the B-1 as it flew around. The B-1 already had its own Electronic Warfare defense systems and could at a push, fly at Mach 1. Further, with its variable geometry wings, could also loiter for long periods of time.

Thus was born the E-5 Watchtower, a B-1 with a "billboard" version of the ARS-4 radar. Though unlike previous AWACS aircraft, the E-5 is just a flying radar. Advanced data-links and communications relays the radar picture to another aircraft... Like a modified E-4 which the Adejaani Air Force uses to coordinate battles anyway.

Thus, unlike previous AWACS aircraft, the E-5 has virtually unlimited endurance. The crew of four, pilot, co-pilot and two systems operators could fly around virtually forever, as the previous AWACS personnel, particularly the operators were the limiting factor, being fatigued. But the pilots could swap responsibilities at will, taking it in shifts. All that's needed for the E-5 to stay aloft is a simple mid-air refuelling.

Currently, two prototype E-5s are in service, mounting the older ARS-4 radar. Production E-5s will mount the more advanced ARS-5 after it completes testing and development.

The E-5 is expected to cost around $70 million each.

MGM-327B Battle Smasher
Length: 6.35m
Diameter: 0.86m
Weight: 2400kg
Guidance: AINS-R (Advanced Inertial Navigation System - Reduced) w/ GPS backup, datalink with ground radar or JSTARS at midcourse and/or terminal, TCIM (Tactical Combined Images Match system - radar and IR) at terminal (active or passive radar)
Range: 140km
Warhead: 800kg (High Explosive, FAE, incendiary), Submunitions Dispenser (292 CEB, 28 IATS or DATS "smart" bomblets)
Propellant: Solid (High Energy)
CEP: ~20-40m
Launch Platform: GOR-302KA/303KA High Mobility TEL/Reloader System
Cost: $3.4 million

MGM-327C Battle Smasher
Length: 6.35m
Diameter: 0.86m
Weight: 2400kg
Guidance: AINS-R (Advanced Inertial Navigation System - Reduced) w/ GPS backup, datalink with ground radar or JSTARS at midcourse and/or terminal, TCIM (Tactical Combined Images Match system - radar and IR) at terminal (active or passive radar)
Range: 80km
Warhead: 1200kg (High Explosive, FAE, incendiary), Submunitions Dispenser (438 CEB, 36 IATS or DATS "smart" bomblets)
Propellant: Solid (High Energy)
CEP: ~20-40m
Launch Platform: GOR-302KA/303KA High Mobility TEL/Reloader System
Cost: $3.4 million

The MGM-327B/C Battle Smasher are a slightly modified variant of the Battle Archer with a slightly lengthened body, larger warhead, or less fuel and range. These missiles, unlike their larger counterparts, are primarily designed to be fired directly against invading enemy forces in times of emergency, in a confrontation between two or more ground forces. Aside from the larger warhead and less range, the missile now also features a datalink with JSTARS or even emeny ground radars, to receive additional targeting information specifically for engaging and striking enemy ground forces, including large armoured/mechanized formations and open infantry.

==================================

BGM-332 Tinybee Low-Cost Strike Missile System
Length: 3.9m
Diameter: 38cm
Wingspan (Deployed): 2.3m
Weight: 350kg
Guidance: Inertial with GPS and datalink with ladar altimeter, IIR or optical or radar homing sensor or LADAR at terminal
Propulsion: Solid Rocket booster and Jorana Machinery Systems JEST-IV turbofan
Speed: Mach 0.7
Range: 1200km
Warhead: Interchangable 110kg HE, FAE, incendiary, prefrag, submunitions dispenser (38 CEB or 5 IATS or DATS "smart" bomblets), or parachute-deployed Noran NJ58 radar jammer. Alternate load includes IR camera, or optical (B&W/colour or LLLTV).
Launch Platform: Surface ships (in VLS - 2 rounds per Mk.41-like Strike or Tactical Canisters, possibly ground, air (on two or three round racks)
Cost: $180,000

The BGM-332 Tinybee, developed by OMASC, is a new low cost land attack missile system, designed to strike low to medium priority and protected targets with precision and firepower similar to the SDB (Small Diameter Bomb) over long ranges. Built using many available and low-cost components, the missile is a very cheap alternative to large Tomahawk-sized cruise missiles for ground strike against less protected and smaller targets.

The missile body is a tublar structure with a pair of pop-out wings and small fins, with an rocket booster attached for ground or ship operation, and is built from cheap materials. The warhead, like the INWARS system on the Omzian Type 190/320 RABS rocket artillery system, is completely interchangable, in which typical loads includes various unitary warheads (HE, FAE, incendiary, prefrag/blast-frag), submunition dispensers (each housing standard CEB bomblets or 5 IARS or DATS "smart" anti-armour bomblets - described in Type 190/320 RABS post), or even a parachute-deployed Noran NJ58 radar jammer. Because of the good loitering, in-flight retargeting, and re-attack capabilities, and as the missile is able to fly through a total of up to three predesignated hardpoints at very low altitudes, the interchangable warhead system can also consist of either an IR camera or an optical camera for reconaissance duties and battle damage assessment, in which the missile's datalink will connect with ground, sea, or air assets. The guidance system primarily consists of a GPS-aided inertial navigation system, in addition to a satellite/radio datalink, and a simple ladar (LAser Detection and Ranging) altimeter to determine the missile's altitude. The terminal sensor is also interchangable, in which sensor packages includes an imaging IR sensor, an optical sensor, a passive radar homing sensor, or even a low-cost LADAR system.

The missile can be launched from many platforms, including VLS systems aboard surface ships (in which one canister is able to hold two missiles), vehicle-based ground launchers (including modified MLRS and HIMARS vehicles), and even aircraft (on three-round "racks"), although the most common platform is surface ships. A rocket booster is attached onto the missile, in order to propel itself out of the caniser, before it is dropped and the low-cost turbofan engine is activated, and the missile begins its low altitude flight.

S-6 Sea Intruder

The S/MV-22 Osprey was originally designed to replace the S-3 Viking in the Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) role aboard aircraft carriers. However, the tiltrotor's design made the S/MV-22 both a boon and a curse. On the one hand more equipment could be packed in, but range and speed was far slower, as was overall mission flexibility.

The S-6 is a development of AGI's A-6G Ultra Intruder, the four seat version and modified with the same ASW suite of the S/MV-22.

Cost is $35 million.

========================

E-55 a C-55 Lander

The basic V-22 Osprey airframe was of a solid design, but lacked the speed, range and overall flexibility required for aircraft carrier operations. Thus, the C-55 Lander airframe was begun. It looks somewhat like a scaled down C-17, and uses the same advanced technologies, like engines and wing design to give it the necessary short take offs.

The E-55 variant is meant to replace the EV-22 Osprey and E-2 Hawkeye carrier borne Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft. Prototype models currently mount a cylindrical ARS-4 radar, though production models will mount the more advanced ARS-5 radar when it becomes operational.

The C-55 variant is meant the replace the CV-22 Osprey and C-2 Greyhound in the carrier resupply role. However, unlike the CV-22, it is not capable of vertical landings and cannot operate off anything other than a full carrier deck or airstrip.

The CV-22 is expected to remain in service with the Adejaani Naval Forces aboard replenishment ships for the foreseable future, though the long range carrier version is going to be the C-55.

Cost of the E-55 AEW variant is $40 million; the C-55 cargo variant is $35 million.

AGM-337A Bankaran (Hailstorm) Hypersonic Attack Missile (HAM)

Length: 12.8m
Diameter: 0.8m
Wingspan: 2m
Weight: 7900kg
Guidance: Inertial with GPS, active/passive radar at terminal
Propulsion: Scramjet
Speed: Mach 4.6
Range: 1200km (maximum), 150km (minimum)
Ceiling: 96,000-100,000ft
Warhead: 2400kg (5291lb) HE
Launch Platform (Supersonic High Altitude Release With Target Data ONLY): B-101A (4-5), B-101B Sea Bombardier (9)
Cost (Available to Selected Allies Only): $5.2 million

This is the Omzian replacement for the recently retired Kh-22/AS-4 and KSR-5/AS-6, which are plagued with reliability problems (OOC: Apparantly they didn't work well when the Iraqis used them against Iranian targets in the Iran-Iraq war), and is a huge improvement over the Kh-22 in almost every aspect. A dual use weapon against large ocean targets (e.g. carriers, "dreadnaughts", large LHAs/LHDs) and large ground targets such as SAM installations and storage complexes, this is a very powerful scramjet missile to complement foreign-made ones current in Omzian service. It features a lightweight and temperature-resistant body made of various composites and titanium alloys, and with the exception of the small fins and wings that gives the missile improved supersonic performance, the "clean" design and the applications of RAM allows the missile to have a low RCS. A scramjet is also installed, along with fuel tanks containing a special fuel known as "OR-880", allows the missile to reach a very high altitude over high ranges with high speeds, while carrying a huge warhead. The scramjet engine also has thrust vectoring nozzles to achieve good maneuveribility and flight characteristics, and coupled with a percision Inertial and GPS system developed by Noran, the missile can achieve accurate hits on large targets and relatively slow-moving large ships, such as various dreadnaughts and large carriers. The missile's terminal guidance, an optional feature that can be switched off in land attack mode on "standard" targets, consists of a dual mode active/passive radar, in which the sensors can either switch between active and passive modes or stay at passive mode during different attack missions.

========================

AGM-337B Bankaran Hypersonic Attack Missile (HAM)

Length: 10.6m
Diameter: 0.68m
Wingspan: 1.7m
Weight: 6000kg, 7500kg with booster
Guidance: Inertial with GPS, active/passive radar at terminal
Propulsion: Scramjet
Speed: Mach 4.8
Range: 1000km
Ceiling: 96,000ft-100,000ft
Warhead: 1500kg (3307lb) HE
Launch Platform: B-52 (4 w/ booster), B-2 (2 w/ booster), B-1B (4 w/ booster), B-101A (4-7), B-101B Sea Bombardier (12!)
Cost (available to allies only): $4.8 million

This is a smaller cousin of the AGM-337A, and now with a lighter weight, a rocket booster can be carried without too many problems, allowing air launch from subsonic platforms at high altitudes.

===========

AGM/UGM-335 Shooting Star Long Range Supersonic Cruise Missile
Length: 13.1m without booster, 13.8m with booster
Wingspan: 2.7m
Diameter: 1.4m
Weight: 8400kg (18,519lb) withoout booster
Guidance: Inertial with GPS and altimeter, optionally IR and EO at terminal.
Propulsion: PDE-turbofan hybrid engine
Speed: Mach 3.4 in high altitude profile, Mach 2.3 in low altitude profile
Ceiling: 82,000ft (high altitude profile)
Range: 4700km (high altitude), 2900km (low altitude)
Warhead: 1300kg (2866lb) penetrating HE
Launch Platforms:
Aircraft - B-1B (4), B-101A (3-5)
Possibly SSGNs (in VLS)
Cost (Available to close allies only):
$2.1 million (AGM-335)
$2.3 million (UGM-335)

Developed by OMASC and the Omzian Air Force, the Shooting Star Long Range Supersonic Cruise Missile is a new development, intended to give Omzian Air Force bombers a capability to strike at targets deep within enemy territories from very long ranges with a large warhead for the destruction of large-scale enemy facilities. Featuring several pieces of technologies taken from previous developments such as the LRALCM, the SGAM, and the new Omzian Intercontinental Cruise Missiles, the A/UGM-335 missiles refines the Soviet Meteorit design, and gives it new capabilities for penetrating enemy defences.

The body of the missile is made of various materials, with lightweight kevlar and buckyball/buckytube-based lightweight materials, titanium panels, and various composites as armour to protect the large fuel tanks present in the missile. The missile also has a pair of retractable wings similar to thoe on the F-125 and the Omzian intercontinental cruise missiles, with two small retractable canards. A hybrid PDE-turbofan engine is installed to give the missile great speed over long ranges, and features 3D thrust vectoring. Various RAM and low-heat and low reflection coatings are also applied to make the missile more stealthy, which are applied at various locations including the front of the missile and the air intake of the engine. A huge 1300kg warhead is also placed within the missile, configured to destroy large enemy facilities and concentrations. Furthermore, for submarine launch from VLS systems, an waterproof body is also designed along with an attached rocket booster.

The electronic systems of the missile is equally impressive, taking most from the LRALCMs. The missile features an advanced inertial guidance system along with an additional GPS system for guidance, along with optional IR and optical sensors for terminal targeting. The missile has limited retargeting capability, and can follow up to 7 waypoints during its flight. Its ECM system is equally impressive, incorporating a simple radar jammer with a RWR and a LADAR warning system, the ability to conduct evasive maneuvers, and a simple set of active radar cancellation systems to be used against radar-guided missiles.

==============================

AGM-336 Sea Horse Lightweight Anti-Ship Missile
Length: 4.1m
Wingspan: 1.4m
Diameter (varies): 32-39cm
Weight: 450kg
Guidance: Inertial optionally with GPS and laser/radar altimeter, IIR and EO, OR passive radar at terminal
Propulsion: PDE-turbofan hybrid engine
Speed: Mach 0.9 high subsonic profile with Mach 1.2 at terminal or Mach 1.6 supersonic profile
Range:
Subsonic profile - 170km (air-launched), 120km (ship/ground launched with rocket booster)
Supersonic profile - 120km (air-launched), 80km (ship-ground launched with rocket booster)
Warhead: 135kg
Launch Platform: Missile watercraft, helicopters, light tactical aircraft
Cost (Only available to selected allies): $960,000

The AGM-336 on an Attack Mission Against Invading Enemy Amphibious Craft (http://www.home.no/lintvedt/NSM/nsm01.JPG)

The AGM-336 Sea Horse lightweight anti-ship missile, as a result of the research completed for the older Sea Horse project, is a new missile system designed to be launched from small platforms against small unarmored and lightly armored vessels. As a replacement for the Penguin Mk.II and surpassing the Kongsberg NSM, this missile has a very low radar signature, an advanced passive sensor suite, has extreme maneuveribility and flexibility, and seaskims at a very low altitude. The casing is made of various materials, with a hardened head to improve penetration, a series of lightweight layers of kevlar and buckyball/buckytube armour materials, and has various RAM materials and low heat and sunlight reflection coatings.

Unlike both the Penguin and NSM, it also features a hybrid PDE-turbofan, which allows the missile to reach a speed of Mach 0.9 in a standard subsonic flight profile (to achieve suprise), or Mach 1.6 in a supersonic profile (to reduce enemy reaction time), and flies at very low altitudes. The use of small control surfaces and the 3D thrust vectoring nozzles allows the missile to achieve great agility, and the missile burns a special fuel that is efficent and will cause greater damage once it reaches the enemy vessel. Its guidance suite is composed of an INS guidance system along with GPS for modcourse guidance, along with a terminal guidance package composed of an imaging infrared seeker and optical seeker or a passive radar seeker. Its flexible mission planning system allows the missile to follow up to five waypoints during flight at various low altitudes and heights to achieve great surpise. Its IIR/EO passive seekers are very advanced, sporting target recongition features (and is able to discriminate between military and civilian vessels when the option is on in certain attack modes) and allows the missile to hit specific points of the targeted vessel, and passive radar versions of the missile is able to target the radar specifically with its advanced sensor and great agility. Because of this, the missile's seekers is completely immune from radar countermeasures and simple IR decoys, and its armor gives it light protection against small shrapnels. The missile's flight computer is also tied to a RWR an a LADAR warning receiver, and is able to conduct evasive maneuvers. Finally, if the missile hits the vessel, the flexible fuze system would do the job along with the blast frag warhead along with the flammable fuel and hardened case, or if not, the missile is able to reattack.

ABD-1 Spearchucker

The ABD-1 (Adejaani Bomber Design One) Spearchucker was initiated based on Scandavian States' requirements for a new strategic bomber with 100,000 pounds of payload. Using the experience gained from the AFD-7 Starfury program, ABD-1 rapidly grew from a dream to a reality.

The same airframe shape was used, though with a slightly greater angle giving it more proportional length than of the AFD-7, which is essentially looks like a large flying spear-head (partially hence the name). However, ABD-1 is a far less ambitious project and its approach is extremely conservative in light of its smaller design cousin.

Because of the significantly large fuselage volume in comparison to say, the B-1 or the B-52 bomber, the ABD-1 meets the requirements extremely well, with an internal payload of approximately just over 100,000 pounds. The use of the patented Velcro Rack™ system allows for multiple munitions to be carried in almost any configuration imaginable. For those not familiar, the Velcro Rack™ is almost exactly what it sounds like and movable pallets can be used to mount almost any ordnance in any place without specific mounting lugs. In the case of the ABD-1, almost every air to ground missile, bomb and even cruise missiles. Everything except for air to air weapons and larger weapons like MOABs.

ABD-1 is also interesting due to the fact that, despite its staggering size and maximum takeoff weight of almost 500,000 pounds (the B-1B, in comparison was 477,000 pounds approx and the B-52 was 488,000), there is actually provision to travel almost 24,000 miles unrefueled (by comparison, the B-52's range was about 9,000 miles)!

This is due to the fact that the Velcro Rack™ system has been applied to the under fuselage, with minor modifications. All in all, the range extension system, used only during take off and the first stage, uses one large external fuel tank to service two fully self contained ramjet engines. There is no appreciable increase in maximum speed and this external ramjet system is only used to extend range. These disposable rocket pods are exactly the same in principle as those used on the Space Shuttle, as well as looking almost exactly the same. While they would need to be replaced, nevertheless, the speed and range is well worth the added flexibility.

If the disposable rocket pods are not utilised, then additional large drop tanks can be used, though this will, of course, ruin the stealth characteristics. An additional 10,000 pounds of ordnance and cruise missiles can, due to the Velcro Rack™, also be mounted, though the speed decrease, the loss of stealth characteristics and the significant drop in operating range should be noted with worry.

It should, of course, be noted that without the ramjets, ABD-1 was an internal unrefueled range of approximately 9,000 miles. With the under-fuselage drop-fuel tanks, range is approximately 18,000 miles. With full under-fuselage arming with ordnance, range drops to approximately 6,000 miles on internal fuel.

Length: 60m
Wingspan: 50m
Height: 13m
Propulsion: Six AED-17 engines with 52,000 pounds thrust each
Empty Weight: 150,000 pounds
Max Takeoff Weight: 500,000 pounds
Max Speeds: Mach 0.8 maximum
Ceiling: 70,000+ feet
Range:

Internal: 9,000 miles
With external drop tanks: 18,000 miles
With external ramjet sytem: 24,000 miles
Internal fuel, with external ordnance and no external drop tanks: 6,000 miles

Crew: Four (Pilot, Co-Pilot/Navigator, two Mission Specialists)
Armament:

Internal: 100,000 pounds of bombs and cruise missiles
External: Additional 10,000 pounds


Cost is $250 million each.

OOC: Well, an interesting bomber, and this is not to say that the ABD-1 is a piece of junk or something as it does seem much more than just modern tech, but somethings to note:

-Scramjets typically requires a very high speed to have itself started (more than just Mach 1 supersonic speed), which means that they won't work unless your turbofans are able to propel the aircraft to a supersonic speed, which in most cases would be much more than Mach 0.8.
Another problem of releasing munitions at high supersonic speeds, aside from the fact that the munitions will be pretty hard to be released from bombbays (one of the problems that the XB-70 designers faced was the fact that the bombs would often just "hover" in the bombbay, which is basically a result of compression lift, and because of this some kind of "ejector" system would be needed to have missiles "ejected" out of the aircraft before having them igniting and have them fly on their own), is that at this speed the munitions will also burn up pretty easily, considering the heat buildup involved. This is also exactly the same reason as to why the modified FAB-500 bombs that some of the MiG-25 versions uses has a special temperature-resistant skin (not mentioning that it used a special bomb"sight" and release system so that the bombs would at least hit somewhere near the target... or else they'll just scatter to nowhere). On the contrary however, the USAF did intend to mount heavy missiles and bombs on the Mach 3+ XB-70 externally (the Skybolt air-launched ballistic missile was an option, and was to be mounted under the fuselage), although there were still the problems of payload release at Mach 3+ speeds.

With that, another suggestion I would give is to cut down the max takeoff weight and the range with scramjet on abit, since the max thrust of the six engines combined is close to only half of the max takeoff weight, and that scramjet engines still require a lot of fuel, aside from the fact that they are much more inefficent when you have them operating at low to medium altitudes.

Again, just some suggestions.

OOC: Are we being geeky again? :rolleyes: Which reminds me, the competition awaits... :p

I did note about the scramjets (I watched the X-43 scramjet test). What happens with that is, the scramjets don't fly immediately. Instead, the ABD-1 goes up as high as it can go and it dives. Because it has no wings, I guess it's alright. It might not make the right speed... I don't know, I'm not an aircraft designer.

As for the multi-mach-scramjet thing... The scramjets are only meant to go from Point A to Point B. It's not meant to fly the whole way at that speed. As I noted, it's like the space shuttle. It does its job and then drops off. So the bomb thing is pretty okay after that as it's a normal subsonic bomber...

And yes, I have no real idea about the stats... I'm a "fighter" guy... I'll do a bit of reading and check the numbers later. Thanks, though.

OOC: Well, I'll be posting the competition thread soon enough, though there are still a lot of schoolwork waiting for me.

The dive method does seem interesting, but even with that it still might not be able to attain that type of speed (Mach 1+) to activate the scramjet engine, but it is interesting to note that the XF-103 design did have a ramjet for high speed propulsion. The airframe design itself will limit the speed though (not that much, and perhaps if the engines are powerful enough it could reach supersonic speeds), and because of this my recommendation is to have some kind of ramjet engine instead, which will be much easier to activate at Mach 0.8, or have this aircraft's max speed bumped so that the activation of the scramjet would actually be possible once you have this bomber in the air at Mach 1<.

OOC: Okay, I went and thought about it after a short stroll, during which I blew my nose a few times (I'm on the tail end of a cold)...

I'm going to change it from scramjets to simple chemical rockets. Four smaller ones would propel it at a slightly more sane, say... Mach 1.5. Range with the rockets now is reduced to say... 26,000 miles. I'm also lopping each of the other range calculations a fraction (internal fuel, to say 9,000 and with external drop tanks, about 18,000), which still leaves it modestly better than either the B-1 or B-52.

For the chemical rockets, it's going to be shaped rather like the B-1's... Or for that matter, the Concorde's, so the drag effect will be minimised, so I still think it's possible to go at say, Mach 1.5 on these rockets, with normal speed being Mach 0.8. And don't forget, this thing is basically a nice big glider, so there's no reason why it can't fly high, stay up there and essentially glide most of the way along, with a bit of help from the engines. Of course, it would definitely need a lot of tanker support on the way back...

And yes... Pay attention, everyone, I am going to admit it! I did *Gasp* Godmod just ever so slightly with the weights and the ordnance levels. The weights and some other stats are being slimmed back just ever so slightly to make it more sane.

Stats are being changed, hopefully for the last time.

OOC: Okay. I have now slimmed down the stats by quite a fair bit. It meets the original 100,000 pounds ordnance requirement and is generally 10 to 20% better than the B-52 or B-1 and stealth.

The use of podded engines gives it a temporary max speed of Mach 1.5 for the first leg of the journey, but will need a lot of tanker support once it gets back. I am not touching the stats ever again. :p

Well, the rockets does seem interesting, but the least thing I'll recommend is that. Even when compared to ramjet, the rockets wouldn't be able to provide a big range increase, unless you got huge ones that will take up the majority of your payload. The glider concept also seems interesting, but frankly it's not going to work well considering the size of the aircraft and the payload that it will carry.

Now, from the look of the design, I'd guess that with a "spearhead" design you could somewhat go at supersonic speeds with 8 engines, and then activate the scramjet or ramjet, although I'd prefer ramjet more if you still want to keep the Mach 0.8 speed.

OOC: Omz, if I didn't respect you so much, I'd strangle you. :rolleyes:

Okay... The Mach requirements have been deleted. Yes, deleted!

Instead, the ramjet propulsor looks almost exactly like that of a space shuttle. One large fuel tank in the centerline, plus two fully contained ramjets which use the fuel from that.

Maximum speed remains Mach 0.8. Are we happy now?

OOC: Well, these are just suggestions BTW, although from my viewpoint the aircraft would more believable and "accepted". But anyways, it is still a good bomber :P

OOC: Well anyway, I fixed up the lot. External and completely separate ramjets which do not add to the speed.

I guess the reason why I did this in the first place is my philosophy. I can't think outside the box if there is no box! The box doesn't exist where I'm concerned!

Each of my aircraft are unique in some really unique way. AFD-7 had the obvious multi-thrust vectoring. This was my attempt at something unique, even if it took me four tries. :p

Would you post the updated stats? I want to see what Omz can come up with first, but I really like your design.

Also, I need to know if the test RP can be continued, and possibly finished within the next week. While I'd ideally like for it to finish, I can't hold out on picking a winnder much longer.

OOC: The stats are updated (it's about halfway down Page 52).

As for the competition... I can propose an alternative. The RP dogfight (which I am really looking forward to) is simply going to be too complex and take too long...

So I suggest the compromise being that we just do the demonstration. Just about do everything except the competition dogfight between the two competitors. That way, we can do a 100% 'perfect' demonstration and utilise the aircraft... Think showing off.

That's about the best way to get it wrapped quickly.

I thought you said the external ramjets were deleted?

Well, I'll see if I have the time on the weekends to finish this off, though as I said homework is the most important concern for me right now. I'll come with the bomber stats soon, and the bomber of mine is basically a mega-sized B-1B with improved supersonic performance for high altitude flight, instead of focusing on extremely-low level penetration. Stealth will be a second concern, although a notable amount of radar signature reduction features are applied.

OOC: The scramjets were deleted. The plain ramjets are kept. They're subsonic. So basically, if you did the ramjet deployment, the bomber really only just hitches a ride (with engines on idle). Sort of like a drone deployment.

With the ramjets, the maximum speed is still the same, I think that was what I was trying to say.

And Omz, your call, buddy.

Supplemental note to ABD-1 Spearchucker

At first note it seems somewhat redundant, if there's the ramjet range boosting option aka "ramjet ride", to also note the external drop tanks option. Primarily the option of the drop tanks is simple.

It should firstly be noted that not all of the underside of the ABD-1 is suitable for use. Apart from the obvious landing gear are the "rectangles" of the two centerline bomb bays. It is directly on "top" of the bomb bays that the external fuel tanks for the ramjets are mounted. Thus, the use of the ramjet extension option requires the loss of that equipment.

The drop tanks option, on the other hand, does not cover the bomb bays (the tradeoff is the disruption of the stealth characteristics), although they too can be jettisoned and it is a far cheaper option to build (and expend) four small metal cylinders than it is to build (and expend) one large cylinder and two engines. The difference is, the drop tanks option gives a lesser range extension.

Thus, both options must be considered, as well as the cost, range and stealth capabilities of the ABD-1 when planning the next mission.

So is the range still 24,000 miles?

Correct (24,000 on ramjets). Basically, I make everything with flexibility and possibilities, so it gives whoever's RPing more things to play with.

AHD-1 Commanchero

The first Adejaani indigenously designed attack helicopter, the AHD-1 (Adejaani Helicopter Design One) incorporates many of the features and lessons learned from previous types of attack helicopter. Particularly, the AH-64 Apache; the Mi-24 Hind; the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior; the RAH-66 Commanche; and the Eurocopter Tiger.

The Mi-24 Hind's toughness was the starting point, with the almost exact same front fuselage containing the famous stepped cockpits. However, for the rest, the fuselage pretty much resembles the AH-64 Apache, though with the same type of main rotor and shrouded tail as the RAH-66 Commanche.

Provision for a mast mounted sensor (above the main rotor head) is available, with any of the previously named designs' mast mounted sensors capable of being mounted on the AHD-1, though later production models will eventually feature an AGI developed indigenous sensor.

The fixed armament is particularly impressive, with a triple barrel 12.7 mm machinegun, similar to that of the Apache, though with three barrels. What is different with the AHD-1 is the fact that it also mounts a 'revolver' single barrel version of the GAU-8 cannon on the A-10 Warthog, which fires the same ammunition and is designed for use against tanks or heavy targets.

Finally, the wings, which look like the Eurocopter Tiger's, beefed up considerably, contains six hardpoints, for a load of twenty four (24) Hellfire missiles or similar.

Overall performance, values and other factors is generally similar to the AH-64 Apache.

Cost is expected to be around $22 million each.

[Oops, did I forget the stealth part in my helo specification? That applies to my transport helo as well.]

OOC: Well, I haven't got started quite much yet, but some previews:

-NOTAR (No, no tail rotor, and not two main rotors either :) - also to slightly improve maneuveribility)
-New IR supression and anti-IR missile systems
-Very large weapons load (if you don't want "Radar stealth" - see below), including a pod-mounted cannon (which is enclosed in a stealthy pod just below the cockpit, and is designed to be interchangable allowing a heavy 30mm cannon or a multibarrel 27mm with a faster ROF - somewhat similar to the gun system of the F-40 Freethinkers and I developed)
-Interchangable targeting pod system (MMW and IR will be standard and will be mast mounted along with laser designator, but a LADAR pod is also possible, mounted below the belly)
-Small storage place (1-2 persons, or ammo reloads or additional fuel with field maintenance equipment)

However, about the stealth part, I'll admit that I'm not too sure. Even with a large helicopter if you fit all the load inside, it won't be much unless you have the wings completely extended out externally, which means that you will be getting a much higher load . However, the main point of stealth on an attack helicopter is, even if you do have some "radar stealth" the major threat is still coming from IR missiles, so frankly adding "true radar stealth" isn't as important as having a good load and the necessary IR supression measures on a dedicated attach helo. If we decide to go non-radar stealth, I'd envision a load similar to the Apache's, although without the bay I will be able to fit an additional 2 wingtip hardpoints (each mounting two Stingers or one AIM-9X Sidewinder for self-defense) and somewhere between 6-8 underwing hardpoints (24 Hellfire + 2 rocket pods or light bombs!), though I am still considering a small weapons bay holding perhaps 6-8 Hellfires and 2 additional Stingers.

The transport helos I'm still not really planning right now, but I envision that my version would feature additional weapon-carrying capabilities besides stealth, (if you want an utility helo), though I've seen many different designs (and many of them are very good) here in NS for heavyweight transport helos.

Basically what I want is a heavy Commanche, at least in concept. I don't necessarily care about a heavy weapons load because the attack helo I have now isn't a big one and can't carry much.

OOC: This isn't, well... You hadn't sent in your helo specifications request, SS. This was something for my own sake. :p The AHD-1 was mostly to replace Apaches in my own arsenal.

But SS, can you please officially release your specifications request? What you need? Stealth is one...

[Sorry, I hadn't realized that. Basically the concept I'm looking for is a heavy Commanche, something that can serve as a true attack helo instead of a light scout. Other than that you have free reign, helos are on those things that I can accept radical innovations in. Omz has a good start, but I'm sure you can match it.]

OOC: Ah, once again I have developed something unique. I now patent the Fingers™ launch system! :D And nobody ever dare accuse me of trying new things or not thinking about things thoroughly! :p

IC: AHD-1B Commanchero

The original AHD-1 design, which never went past prototype stage (though two models were built for testing purposes) has been replaced on production lines by the "B" model. The "B" model is really an a significantly redesigned airframe incorporating additional stealth features.

The "stepped cockpits" of the Mi-24 Hind were retained (though slightly reshaped for a stealthier profile) and the swivel turret is now a retractable "gattling" version of the venerable M2, .50 calibre machine gun. However, it should be noted that due to the ammunition feed belts, which literally dangle from the fuselage into the gun, the gun itself has a limited arc of fire, generally forward. In short, the gun hangs down from the fuselage when extended, then withdraws back inside. This gun can fire just about every type of .50 calibre munition in service.

The sides of the AHD-1B are perhaps the least stealthy, due to the complex launch system, which is essentially slab sided, much like the old Mi-24 Hind. Nicknamed Fingers™, the launch system is rather like putting your hand down on the table (fingers together) and then raising the fingers up, but keeping the palm and the rest of the hand flat on the table.

The use of the Fingers™ launcher (one port and one starboard, four "barrelled" and one on the underside of the fuselage, three "barrelled") allows a completely stealth profile yet allows the ability to launch numerous missiles. Sixteen missiles (four ready, four reloads) in the upper launchers (ie eight missiles on each side) and six (three ready, three reloads) in the lower fuselage launcher is the maximum internal payload. AGM-114 Hellfire missiles are standard, though the M220 TOW missile can also be accomodated.

Further, behind the cockpit (and the retractable gun), but before the lower launcher is a small recessed well which looks basically like the internal bomb bay of an airplane, except without the hatches. It was thought that no one would bother pointing their sensors into it... And in any event, the recessed well would most likely be out of any radar's line of sight anyway.

In this recessed well, there is room for four AIM-9 Sidewinders OR a single AGM-65 Maverick missile for a heavier punch (or their equivalents/replacements). This recessed well does not interfere or occlude the lower fuselage launcher, though care needs to be taken that debris like dust etc does not work its way into the recessed well.

An indigenously designed mast mounted sensor (which looks like a scaled down version of the AH-64D Apache Longbow one) now tops the same rotor type as on the RAH-66 Commanche, though bigger for obvious reasons and driven by four turboshafts. A shrouded tail rotor which is imbedded within the tail (as featyred ib tge Eurocopter Dauphin 2) is standard on the AHD-1B. Although the side of the fuselage is not particularly stealthy, the same quietning techniques of the Commanche were applied.

Further, a new type of armor has been trials tested. A new AGI product, it is dubbed Hardhat™ armor and is a classified combination of carbon fibers, kevlar, titanium, ceramics and other materials designed to reduce the radar returns. The addition of ceramics to the armor package gives off less ambient heat. Hardhat™ is essentially a honeycomb package (though one engineer dubs it "beef jerky in armor form!"). It is impervious to .50 calibre fire and testing of the Hardhat™ armor to close range fragmenting warheads (like that on anti air and air to air missiles) reveals a roughly 89% effectiveness, the majority of the fragments remaining imbedded on the outside of the armor sheets. The Hardhat™ package is lightweight and adds no significant weight penalties.

Finally, due to the design and placement of all the systems, additional weapons can unfortunately not be carried. Lightweight detachable "wings" to mount additional weapons can be done, but they must first be expended and detached as their placement will occlude the upper Fingers™ launch systems.

Length: 17.0m
Width: 8.0m
Height: 5.5m
Propulsion: Four AEDH-2 turboshaft engines
Empty Weight: 16,000 pounds
Max Takeoff Weight: 19,000 pounds
Max Speed: Approx 500 kph
Range: 960 km
Crew: Two (Pilot, Weapons System Operator)
Armament:

Fixed/internal: 22x AGM-114 Hellfire or M220 TOW
Recessed bay: 4x AIM-9 Sidewinder OR 1x AGM-65 Maverick


Cost is $25 million each. The original AHD-1 is no longer for sale. All models will be the "B" model.

OOC: Well, nice copter, but just a note that NOTAR (NO TAil Rotor) doesn't involve a tail-rotor (rather something to replace it), and the Comanche uses a tail rotor :P

More info -- http://www.kulikovair.com/Notar.htm

OOC: You are no longer getting a Christmas card. :p And I know what it is (thank you, Mister Clancy)... But I wrote that up in like half an hour. :p Grammatical error. The NOTAR system. :p I changed it anyway, I went with a shrouded tail rotor imbedded within the tail.

Oh and Omz, while I've got you, I intend to use the Hardhat™ armor to build almost every new product, so if you can think of a way to improve it ICly, do so, please.

AFD-10 Chimera

The second aircraft to benefit from the Hardhat™ armor system, the AFD-10 is Adejaani's indigenous replacement CAS (Close Air Support) aircraft. The large body is ponderously large and basically triangular when viewed front on and is actually large than the A-10 Warthog.

The Hardhat™ armor makes the AFD-10 nearly impervious to most missiles and essentially requires a direct hit to the engines to cause it critical damage. Further, the armor on the under fuselage and sides is double the thickness, giving it an extremely powerful undercarriage and making the AFD-10 carrier capable.

Because of its stubby design, the AFD-10 has a much lower stall speed and can operate slowly and loiter for a long time, but the high performance engines allows it to quickly dash even above Mach 1.6 to escape danger.

Length: 20.1m
Width: 21.5m
Height: 10.0m
Propulsion: Two AED-18 turbofans with 24,000 pounds thrust each
Empty Weight: 36,000 pounds
Max Takeoff Weight: 65,000 pounds
Max Speed: Normal: Mach 0.6 (cruise); Max: Mach 1.6
Range: Approx 1000 miles
Crew: One
Armament (represents maximum of any one type):

1x GAU-8 internal cannon
12x AGM-65 Maverick
12x AGM-114 Hellfire
12x cluster OR unguided bombs
12x GBU-30 JDAMs


Cost is $18 million each

Addendum to AHD-1B Commanchero

If it was not made particularly clear, the Fingers™ launchers lie flush (flat) along the surface and then pop up, rather like fingers in shape... Further, newer versions will mount a slightly more sophisticated version of the launchers and will add more reload missiles to the complement.

In addition, due to the space that was originally occupied by the turret, a small enclosed radar for ground mapping is included.

========================

AHD-2 Sergeant

A large transport helicopter built upon the experience of the AHD-1B Commanchero, also by AGI, the AHD-2 applies many lessons learned.

The CH-53E Super Stallion was the starting point, though only the overall dimensions and internals were kept. Overall, the AHD-2 has a far slimmer profile and actually looks like a sausage, or at least a thin candle.

The upper fuselage and rotor head assemblies use the exact same materials and design as on the RAH-66 Commanche, scaled up (of course) and with the same seven rotors as on the Super Stallion.

However, the current model of the AHD-2 is only for infantry (though the external cargo hook is rated at 18 tons for a swing load), up to sixty-five troops with minimal comfort. The doors are of the same type as on airliners (to open, unlock, pull in, slide to the side, then to close; to close, slide into place, push the door into the slot, then lock in place), with two forward, two aft on the side, with no stern ramp.

Advanced avionics, infueling probe, glass cockpits, Hardhat™ armor system and various defensive systems are standard. To ease logistics, the AHD-2 uses the same engines as AHD-1B.

Length: 25.3m
Width: 6.3m
Height: 4.5m
Rotor width: 21.2m
Propulsion: Four AEDH-3 turboshaft engines
Empty Weight: 34,000 pounds
Max Takeoff Weight: 85,000 pounds
Max Speed: Normal: 180 kph
Range: Approx 1000 miles
Crew: Three (Pilot, Co-Pilot, Crew Chief)
Armament: None
Cargo:
[list]
Internal: 65x troops
External: Up to 18 tons (but with range reduced)

Addendum to AHD-1B Commanchero

Due to slight advances, the reloads of each Fingers™ launcher has been increased by 100%. Thus, the total number of Hellfire (or equivalent) missiles is now thirty two (32) in total. Four ready, eight reloads on each of the upper launchers (two launchers) and three ready, six reloads on the lower launcher.

[Right, the whole fighter fly-off isn't moving fast enough for me, so I'm just going to declare Omz the winner. However, Adejaani recieves the helo contracts. Same manufacturing deals as usual, guys?]

OOC: I baulk. No, I protest... :confused: I worked hard for it. How about something different, SS... That you dogfight me. If you're not satisfied... Omz gets the helicopter contract too.

I firmly believe AFD-7 is the more unique and more advanced aircraft with more capabilities and... What's the word? Versatility, I think... No, wait, flexibility.

This is not sour grapes or anything... We're not giving this up without a fight.

And the RP was important since quite a few features of AFD-7 required a demonstration which would then filter into here and the tech would become standard on everything else.

I urge you to give me this shot.

OOC: Well, sorry for the delay (haven't noticed this post), but although I'd gladly accept the contract, I do agree that the AFD-7 does have some more interesting features, to say at least. Though, if you (SS) is willing to wait a bit more, I am able to continue the RP for a bit and also allow Adejaani a chance to show off his own systems. Or if this has proved not possible with Adejaani, I'd suppose that we all could just post the features of our planes here in one big post, and allows SS to reconsider his choice (and choose whatever competitor out of the two).

However, I'll also openly admit that I'm not exactly optimistic about the helicopter contract and I'd rather let Adejaani have it, since I already got a good unit at my hands (imported design though), and that Adejaani's one does seem quite interesting. Maybe aside the fact that there's this big exam coming up. In other words, I'm willing to give up the helo contract.

I'm not holding anything against anyone, but I do want a fair competition here.

About the bombers, sorry if I'm pretty inactive, but some previews:
B-105: Mach 1.5-1.8 top speed, 70,000kg (154,323lb) load in bomb bays and on fuselage hardpoints. Swing wing is expected. 70m long (the size of a 747), with some stealth features that will hopefully give it a RCS similar to the B-1B.
B-106: Mach 2.0-2.5 top speed, 20,000kg load (44,092lb) in bomb bay (more than the B-2), features a delta-like wing, threatre-intercontinental range, RCS cross between the B-1B and B-2.

EDIT: I have posted in the Over the Horizon thread, if SS is still interested. However, I do still urge SS to hopefully hang on onto this RP for a few days, so that Adejaani could show off his own air to air capabilities, and that we'd at least get a fair competition with everyone happy even if the results still say the same.

However, I am still sorry for the absense (A combination of being busy and not having sighted new posts within this thread for the past few days), but I'm still opeful that by perhaps having SS allow us to continue the RP thread for a few days (no more than say... 1 week, perhaps), we could have the air-to-air part finished, and that we'd be able to present all features within our aircraft.

However, I'd still be willing to accept Adejaani as a winner for the helo contract, considering that I don't have a new requirement for helos within my military and that I will use the Os-280 in my own Air Force anyways.

I'll see what SS says on this matter.

Hey! I need some aircraft.

Got anymore F-14 models for my new Light Carriers?

Hey! I need some aircraft.

Got anymore F-14 models for my new Light Carriers?
As OMASC is considering a possible sale to New Kiev, and as the Omzian military and the Omzian Parliament continues their reviews, it has been decided that we are still willing to offer the F-14F Tomcat II for sale to fill the requirements set by the New Kiev military.

However, as we are reviewing New Kiev's request, we must be assured from the New Kiev military that the F-14F will be used for their intended purpose and requirements within the New Kiev armed forces only, and this includes using them only within the New Kiev Navy, and is not to be sold or passed to any privately owned organization. If New Kiev is willing to accept this, we are willing to offer the F-14F Tomcat II under standard price.

Excellent, New Kiev previously acquired some F-14Fs for our main line Carriers and will except your offer. Can we have 90 F-14Fs? We will pay full price.

Excellent, New Kiev previously acquired some F-14Fs for our main line Carriers and will except your offer. Can we have 90 F-14Fs? We will pay full price.
As we are satisfied that New Kiev has assured us, we are willing to go ahead with the contract proposal. It has determined that, with additional delivery fees, the total price is $4.58 billion USD, as we expect that with the current production rate, these aircraft will be delivered over a period of 6 months (NS).

As we are happy to seal off another contract with New Kiev, we wish that these aircraft will serve well in the New Kiev military as a very capable unit.

It has been good doing business with you. The money has been wired. Thank for the aircraft. We will be back.

OMASC Announces Completion of MIM-329B High Arrow Development for Osaria Air Defense Artillery Command

It has been reported that as part of a modernization program of air defense units surrounding the Omzian capital of Osaria, OMASC has completed a new version of the MIM-329 High Arrow, known as the MIM-329B. Like the MIM-329A, it is expected that the missile fills the role of defending Osaria from massed bomber attacks, but it is also expected that more units will follow shortly to defend other major cities and military installations. With a published cost of $12 million per missile, it is still expected that a number of these are to be fielded. Specifications, as reported, are as of follows:

Height: 15.2m
Wingspan: 3.7m
Diameter: 0.94m
Weight: 8500kg
Propulsion: Solid-fueled rocket booster and two scramjet sustainer with thrust vectoring
Range: 820km
Speed: Mach 5-7
Ceiling: ~190,000ft max, 40,000ft-80,000ft cruise
Warhead: 1000kg (2205lb) blast-frag
Guidance: Command (with datalink) with inertial and GPS, NR-128 active LPI radar and IRST at terminal
Launch Platform: Silos, mountain based rail/tube launchers, SKR-17 mobile launcher system

Along with various other improvements, it is also expected that this enlargened version features two scramjets, along other features. Although this missile is compatible with existing datalinking and fire control systems, a new datalinking system, enabling additional datalink capabilities with various ground sensors (most notably SIGINT/ELINT sensors) and even AWACS aircraft, is in the works, to give it additional capability for long range operation against both low observabable targets and even high flying cruise missile formations (where it is expected that one will destroy several enemy missiles flying in close formation). A new radar has also been designed for operation against low-RCS targets, which also feature longer ranges, and it is also believed that an ECM system may also be installed to improve the survivability of the missile against enemy aircraft. Finally, a huge and specially developed 1000kg blast-frag warhead has been designed to provide a lethal punch against ultraheavy bombers and other bomber aircraft flying in close formations.

Currently, as stated, the unit is entering service only in selected units in the Omzian 3rd Group Army's Osaria Air Defense Artillery Command, where a total of 38 launchers of various types has already been deployed. Though preparation has been made to deploy the system around other large cities such as Kanze, Honjaksgrad, and Port Hagras, it is also expected that additional units are to be deployed to protect major naval bases and yards. However, because of the high cost, it isn't expected for this system to be fielded to protect smaller cities.

[You have until next Wednsday. I hate to become impatient with a comp I contracted, but I simply can't wait much longer. And Adejaani, the fighter and helo contracts are unrelated, I think you have a truly kickass set of helos that are probably some of the best designs I've ever seen. I'm not so enthusiastic about your fighter design, but since I'm a nice guy I'll give you a shot to prove my worries wrong and to be fair I'll list them:

1) The aircraft is a flying wing in escence. Even with design improvements it would still be prone to stalling due to the manuevers my pilots are able to pull off thanks to the hydrostatic g-suits they use. In a related note, I'm not entirely convinced about the manueverability aspects either.

2) I'm not too happy with using thrusters for manuevers, a solid hit to one of them and the aircraft is a mission kill and probably wouldn't even be able to make a safe landing, assuming the entire system wasn't totally screwed by a lucky hit.]

OOC: Actually, on second thoughts... You're right. Sorry if I sound... Unstable, but I'm conceding the aircraft competition and I'm only keeping the RP going for demonstration purposes. Omz has, of course, full prod rights, but no one else may even purchase AFD-7s without my express permission.

SS, the plans for the AHD-1B Commanchero have been shipped, along with a hundred (100) models for no charge, compliments of AGI.

[No, it's all right. I should have given you the reasons in the first place, you were right to be upset as short as I was about it.

As for the helos, thank you for your generosity, that's enough helos to outfit two Imperial Marine divisions. What's the price of the production rights for the stealth transport/utility helo?]

Same deal. Royalties, I think you said? The rights are free, and a hundred (100) of the transport helos are being shipped, again at no charge.

I am sorry if I sounded sour grapes, but hey, it's business. ;) And this is business once more. Now on to the Bomber competition! :p

Beginning of AHX-2 program

AGI has begun a study into a next generation tiltrotor (or tiltengine) aircraft. The batchall AHX-2 designation will apply to a whole family of airframes testing new principles and concepts into tiltrotor technology. Details will be made public after full scale testing is completed.

OOC: Well, I'm extremely busy these days, but I'll see if I would have some time or not later this week, and hopefully I'll have a prototype for both bombers up soon.

OOC: Take your time. Actually, the RP could just be a demonstration thread for all our products. ;)

IC: E-7 Chessmaster

The E-7 is designed to replace the E-4 NEACP (National Emergency Airborne Command Post, pronounced "Kneecap") which was based on the Boeing 747. The E-7 is based on the Boeing 777, which is more modern and considerably more cost effective to operate. The advanced communications and computer systems is capable of networking into almost any computer network, store of information and can connect any communications equipment (television, radio, satellite, email etc) almost instantaneously.

Used in conjunction with the E-5 Watchtower AWACs aircraft sending along real time battlefield information, the E-7 can provide a safe airborne command post for a nation's leader or any officer directing the field of battle.


The E-7 is widely used to coordinate large scale police, emergency and relief actions and a number of 'civilian' versions have been distributed to various Adejaani government and emergency agencies for use as an exclusive mobile command and coordination post.

Nation specific software and hardware can be installed when ordering the aircraft.

The E-7 Chessmaster costs around $120 million each.

OOC:The E-7 Chessmaster costs around $40 million each.
OOC: I can't recall if I addressed this kind of error earlier or not (believe I did say something to Omz some time ago). I pretty much forgot until this caught my eye.

To put it bluntly, you can't sell the aircraft that cheaply. The cost of a basic Boeing 777 is $150-250 million, depending on model and options, and a modified version would cost more, not less. $50 million could be the cost of converting, but then that has to be specifically noted.

This goes for all the other civilian aircraft, as well as EW and tanker units based on them. While everything else is priced well, these units are amazingly cheap, to the point where I have to wonder. Before giving such low prices, I suggest you look into how much they actually cost. This site (http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRcivil.htm) would be a good place to start - just check the data for a cost section, which is present for the majority of them.

OOC: The next person to poke holes through any of my designs will get a salad fork up their nose. :p The price has been fixed to 80 million.

There's nothing wrong with my aircraft or prices, dammit! :mad: If you've ever played Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2, imagine me currently doing what Soviet Premier Romanov did at the mini cutscene at the end of the second last Allied mission... The temper tantrum. :p

OOC: I updated the E-5 Watchtower AWACs to... Dammit, what did I put? 70 mil? Anyway, I did that because it's just a B-1 with a radar underneath it. No staff. For the E-7 Chessmaster, I bumped it to 120 mil, for the reason that the staff that normally goes in an AWACs (which won't fit on the E-5 due to its size) is now on the E-7. Add in enough electronics to make any CNN technician drool and now you have the price discrepancy. So there. Thanks, CSJ!

IC: AHD-3 Tweety

When the UH-60 Blackhawk became online to replace the venerable UH-1 Iroquis (more commonly known as the Huey), it was found that smaller nations did not at all like the Blackhawk. For one, it was too large, too heavy and too complex. For smaller Army and Air Force organisations, it was too difficult to maintain properly (two engines, mainly) and was cumbersome and unweildy.

Thus the AHD-3 Tweety (as in Tweety Bird from the Bugs Bunny cartoons) is basically a new build and redesigned UH-1. At the top of the agenda is that the airframe is built using the patented Hardhat™ armor developed by AGI, which gives it slightly stealth characteristics and significantly improved protection from ground fire. The engines have also been greatly uprated and a four bladed rotor is standard.

Internally, padding, spall armor and slightly increased personnel comfort, as well as vastly improved avionics and glass cockpits is standard. The doors are standard and are armored and mounts for heavy machine guns are available in the door space.

Statistics are almost exactly the same as the original UH-1 with the exception of a four bladed rotor and significantly upgraded engines.

Cost per AHD-3 Tweety is $8 million

AHX-2A testbed preliminary results

The first testebed of the advanced AHX-2 program to test the second generation of tiltrotor technology. The simple principle anything goes was truly taken to heart and the "A" vehicle has finished and now the preliminary findings are available.

What makes this aircraft unique is that it does not feature any "engines" as commonly regarded on aircraft, either in pods outboard of the wings, or in the tail of the aircraft.

AHX-2A is, in fact, an extremely modified C-130 Hercules. It is, in fact, powered by fully internal engines. With special air inlets, two conventional turbofan engines are inside the cargo bay, with the output trunked upwards (actually, the engines more or less are mounted back to front as compared to normal aircraft) to the wings.

With a similar design to the AFD-7, the exhaust gasses and the output are distributed into the wing area, where they are vented either downwards (VTOL mode) or out the back of the wing (normal level flight).

It should be remembered that this is mostly an experiment and highly inefficient, but it may eventually be possible to apply it fully on a larger scale to produce a fully working, internal engined VTOL aircraft which is also capable of normal horizontal flight.

OOC: Sorry for short posts, but it's getting late, so I will do more tomorrow when I finally finishes Half-Life 2.

OMASC Releases Specifications for Prototype XB-105 Skyhammer Heavy Bomber Aircraft

Length: 78m
Height: 16.8m
Wingspan (Swing wing): 45m Swept, 76m Extended
Propulsion: Eight HEK-760C turbofans rated at 63,000lbs each - Six engines are required for normal flight without external payload carried.
Empty Weight: 182,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 480,000kg
Crew: 3 + 2 accompanying personnel OR maintenance equipment
Ceiling: >60,000ft
Range: 9000-10,000km with max load, 15,000km with standard load, without fuel tank
Speed: Mach 1.7 max, Mach 1.2 supercruise
Payload: 80,000kg (176,369lb) maximum, 50,000kg (110,231lb) standard
Four internal bomb bays and five hardpoints (three fuselage, two wing-gloves)
Other Armaments: Two mini-bays for 4-6x AMRAAM, 27mm tail gun, Three-four "Self-Defense Turret System" (SDTS)
Cost: ~$600-800 million each

A massive bomber, the B-106 will be expensive to purchase and operate, but will also be well worth the price. Featuring advanced combat systems and a new SDTS system, incorporating both missiles and a newly designed laser system for self-defense against large air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles and nearby fighter aircraft, the B-106 combines a low-observable airframe with advanced ECM systems to resist the threat posed by modern air defense systems.

Current development status is near prototype stage, as a full-scale mockup has already been constructed, with four prototypes being constructed, as construction is expected to last as long as months per bomber.

New AMRAAM Variant Set For Release in Near Future

OMASC has announces that a newer and much more advanced version of the AMRAAM is near completion, which will be based on the AMRAAM airframe, but will be incorporating revolutionary features for combat into the twenty-first century, including a newly designed ELPI seeker, thrust-vectoring variable-thrust ducted ramjet system, new flight control computer, improved ECCM capabilities, and a much larger and effective warhead. Desigend to be compatible with slightly modified launchers for the AIM-120C, the new version of the AMRAAM ensures that the AMRAAM continues to live on, but with much newer features.

Program initiation announcement, AFD-11

The already impressive AFD-7 Starfury, although it lost the Scandavian States' fighter competition, forms an impressive part of the Adejaani Air Forces' arsenal, on both land and sea.

Though as good as the AFD-7 is, yet another offshoot program, tentatively type-numbered AFD-11 has begun, hoping to build on the lessons learned. No other details are available, but at least one senior engineer and designer on the project is reputed to have exclaimed:

"It's exciting! It's really really really really exciting! It's going to once again make people wonder what AGI will develop next! It's going to be even more revolutionary than the '7! The '11 is going to make the '7 look like a conventional aircraft!"

AIM-120P NLRAAM - New Long Range Air-to-Air Missile
"Not Just a Huge Improvement over the OMASC AIM-120N 'AMRAAM 2005'"

Propulsion: Honjak Electrics throttle-enabled, thrust vectoring ducted ramjet system
Length: 5.8m
Diameter: 18cm
Finspan: 38.6cm
Weight: 230kg
Speed: Mach 4.8 at high altitude
Range: 160km at high altitude (from "typical" fighter aircraft)
Guidance: Inertial with GPS and mid-course updates or two-way datalink, ELPI-type active radar and IR at terminal. With configurable laser proximity fuze.
Lock on After Launch: Yes
Home on Jam: Yes
Home on Transmission: Yes (Omzian military use and close allies only), No (General export version)
Warhead: 35kg blast frag
Cost: $650,000

Although still bearing the same designation, the NLRAAM is essentially a new air-to-air missile, improving every aspect of the AMRAAM. Although larger and more expensive than the AIM-120C variants, it incorporates various cost-saving measures, while making sure that it is well worth the price on combat aircraft.

One of the major improvements of the missile is the usage of an advanced ducted ramjet system, incorpoating advanced features such as a throttle feature, and full 3D thrust vectoring system. Because of the use of new components adn construction materials, a large amount of empty space has been created, allowing the fitting of advanced sensor systsmes. Because of this, an advanced flight control system has been designed that directly contols the throttle of the engine by determining the best targeting solution and by constantly tracking the target, allowing vastly improved performance against highly maneuvering targets at medium to long ranges, while saving fuel for long range engagements. This is also coupled with a new battery unit for long range operations. Because of the thrust vectoring, the size of the fins has been reducd, allowing greater flight performance and maneuverability.

Other systems has also been improved. Unlike the AMRAAM, the NLRAAM now incorporates an advanced ELPI seeker, designed to surprise enemy aircraft, and to reduce the effectiveness of active radar cancellation systems. The seeker also allows a longer seeker range, along with an optional target identification feature that reduces the risk of friendly fire. An IR seeker is also installed within an aerodynamic "pod", allowing the missile to operate completely passive in high threat environments, although it is typical that the missile would switch between active radar and IR in different situations. The seeker suite also features a "home-on-transmission mode", in which the missile is able to home on transmissions from enemy radars, jammers, or even active radar cancellation sensors, although the nature of the seeker is still classified, and will not be available for general export. Finally, armed with a new and larger blast frag warhead, the missile is also designed to engage larger and the lightly armoured aircraft currently seen in service around the world today.

A second huge improvement is the emphasis on cruise missile defense and operations against unmanned aerial vehicles (including UCAVs), vastly improving on the AMRAAM's anti-cruise missile capability. With a highly capable flight profile and a seeker suite, the missile is fully capable of engaging both low-observable/"stealthy" low-flying subsonic cruise missiles and high-flying and supersonic cruise missiles, primarily at medium to even long ranges.


The missile is compatible with slightly modified AIM-120C launchers, allowing compatibility and ease of logistics.

Additionally, a ground and ship-launched version is also under development, and it is expected that this missile will be compatible with modified CLAWS systems, and it is also expected that various VLS missile canisters will be designed for naval operations. As the missile is currently ramjet-powered, plans calls for the development of a rocket booster, or the design of a new launcher using cold-launch methods to propel the missile towards the necessary speed before the activation of the ramjet.

Finally, taking advantage of new seeker modes, it is also expected that there will be a new multirole NLRAAM to replace the current NLRAAM in the far future, in which the missile would be capable of targeting ground, sea and air targets with a new type of warhead and engine system.

AFD-11 Saucer

It was someone revolutionary, wide eyed and daring to dream, who came up with the completely unique concept for the AFD-7 Starfury, which combined stealth, limited V/STOL and thrust vectoring into an above acceptable bomber-fighter design. The AFD-11 has been allowed to fully capitalise on all the lessons learned with previous designs only this time, no attention was paid to convention, nor were any restrains placed on the team.

Thus, the AFD-11 could be considered a second generation stealth multi-vectoring aircraft (the AFD-7 being the first generation).

The overall design looks, well... Like a Flying Saucer (which was the program's internal nickname at AGI). The hull looks remarkably like the old Flat Dish helmets used by the Americans in the early stages of World War 2 (before the "pot bowl" shape), two of them slapped together. For those not familiar with the overall shape, take an ordinary postal envelope (the paper kind) and make it as large as possible without tearing it.

The AFD-11 is further unique in that, because of its roomier upper side, mounts upperside missile launchers. However, due to the curvature of the hull, it is almost impossible to mount any air to ground ordnance, so the AFD-11 is a pure anti-air machine. Note that this does not infer "air superiority machine".

Despite the AFD-11's size (in diameter almost exactly the same as the F-14 Tomcat is long: 59'2"/18.1 metres, which makes it suitable for carrier operations!), it is actually capable of VTOL operations, as the upperside is slightly larger (proportionally) than the lower side, although the weight/fuel penalties is about the same as a first generation V/STOL jet (ie not particularly worth it), but has been included for maximum flexibility.

Because of its rounded shape, there is no particular care which direction (except forward, for the pilot) and smaller versions of the aft engine nozzles are installed at the left and rightmost points on the hull, allowing the AFD-11 to actually fly sideways at a respectible Mach 0.7, though pilot disorientation is the major limiting factor and forward is still the preferred method.

Despite the complexities of the thrust vectoring trunking (which was actually scaled down due to a less pressing need for air superiority), a fairly significant air to air arsenal can be carried, generally consisting of, at (maximum), four AIM-54 Phoenix, four AIM-120 AMRAAM and two AIM-9 Sidewinder. This is, of course, the theoretical maximum (not recommended under any circumstances) and of course, nation's equivalents/replacements for these missiles can be substituted where applicable. A much more normal mission load is two AIM-54, eight AIM-120 and two AIM-9.

Because of the shape and the excellent stealth designs, augmented by a newer version of the patented Hardhat™ armor system, the AFD-11 boasts incredible stealth capabilities and should really be considered a mobile air-to-air standoff firing platform.

Diameter: 18.1m
Height: 5m
Propulsion: Two AED-19 engines with 36,000 pounds of thrust each
Empty weight: 38,000 pounds
Maximum takeoff weight (theoretical maximum): 90,000 pounds
Max speed: Mach 1.2
Range: Approx 1,200 nm
Crew: One
Armament (of any one type maximum):

4x AIM-54 Phoenix
6x AIM-120 AMRAAM
2x AIM-9 Sidewinder


The AFD-11 is not available for general purchase. Nations which wish to purchase the AFD-11 must apply specially to Adejaani for that right, which will be reviewed in due course.

OMASC Begins Second Phase of "Future Soldier X" Program, Starts Modernization of Omzian Combat Suit Mark II

As a response to an open request by the Omzian National Honour Guard and the Army's elite Heavy Armoured Divisions, OMASC is participating in a government program known as "Future Soldier X", as the program is entering the second phase. Also known as the Research for the Future Omzian Combat Infantrymen Program (REFOCOIN), the "Future Soldier X" series of programs projects the deployment of an advanced, practical, and environmental-friendly exoskeleton system within a timeframe of twenty years. Competing against three other competitors within the Omzian military, OMASC is expected to hand in a full concept proposal (FCP) soon, ready for evaulation by the Omzian Army.

However, it is a surprise even for the Omzian military themselves, to receive the news that OMASC is participating. "It is a surprise for them, but our proposal will involve the use of several types of strong and lightweight composite materials that are available to us," Gagarin Ares of the OMASC design team said. "Although the exoskeleton concept for us is still on paper, we project that it will be available for use by special units within the Omzian Army within twenty years, and available to the regular infantryman within twenty-five years as things get easier. However, our interm plan involves a heavily modified OCS [Omzian Combat Suit] Mark Two, a power system involving an engine, batter, and a charger system, and an extensive computer system, controlling the motion of the machine, while sensing the human soldier's motion. It will also hopefully integrate a voice command system for the advanced situational awareness and communication systems present on the suit, as well as a storage space for the soldier's necessary items. It will be fully able to imitate human motion, while also allowing greater situational awareness, threat avoidance, and of course, allowing our regular infantrymen to lift a meavy machine gun as if it is a piece of paper," he joked.

Another welcoming news is the completion of the upgrade for teh Omzian Combat Suit (OCS) Mark II, dubbed the Mark III currently. As the Mark II is now available for use of the regular infantryman, the OCS Mark III allows several upgrades:

-Full Level 4 ballistic protection for the head and the thigh, with the introduction of advanced ceramic and composites plates, in addition to new materials such as a modified version of the buckytube. This allows the soldier to withstand multiple 5.56mm and 7.62mm hits at one given area/ Further, additional side armour protection (including side of thigh), neck armour protection, knee protection, crouch protection, the helmet-mounted visor covering system, are all improved;

-Improved electronics system, including a more powerful computer system, a radio system, a completely integrated PDA system, and a HUD-based display system for situational awareness. As well, a small video camera will be mounted at the helmet, for the soldier to capture real-time colour images for reconaissance and situational awareness. This is coupled with a new battery system (including a simple solar cell system for temporatory electrical power), a new power charger system, and a series of new control systems such as the standard voice command system, and a "lip biting system", allowing the user to send commands and conduct simple functions (such as sending others signals to attack, etc.) through the biting of a lip.

-New systems allowing hydration and the intake of food, including a system allowing the soldier to intake and drink water from a specially designed "sack", located at the back of the suit. Furthermore, designers are also experimenting with a special nutrient intake system, allowing the user to intake nutrient in long missions in liquid form, as a temporatory solution to standard food rations. In addition, a special water-based cooling system is also added for body cooling, in addition to a small and special fan system allowing air cooling at hot temperatures, and a sweat intake system.

OOC: I'd hoped to unveil this during the demonstration/competition... But now seems a good time as any.

IC: Adejaani unveils ARS-5 radar system

To properly understand the significance of the ARS-5 radar system, minor explanation into radars and stealth principles are necessary. The most simple radar acts by sending a pulse of energy forward. If it 'hits' something, the beam is reflected and whoever's monitoring can see that there's 'something' out there and can now track it. This simple principle has not changed ever since the first radar system was built and operated.

The first air-search radars thus used a large array. When power was fed to the array, it would send out a single beam, which slowly sweeps a pattern. It worked well, but was typically extremely slow and seconds counted in air combat.

The first AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar first went into operation as the APG-77 on the F/A-22 Raptor. Instead of using a single beam to sweep the skies, multiple beams were used at once and thus a massive volume of air could be scanned in the blink of an eye.

Most modern aircraft nowadays use some sort of RAS (Radar Absorbing Structures) or RAM (Radar Absorbing Materials) to reduce their radar returns, allowing an aircraft to close with their enemies with a far lesser chance of detection. However, for those not particularly familiar with stealth, this is not the primary factor! Think about it: RAS and RAM help reduce radar returns. What about if the radar beam doesn't hit it at all? Then there'd be no radar return to reduce, of course!

This is why stealth aircraft look so strange, with their steep angles. With a steep angle, radar beams can be mostly deflected, if the angles are right. Contrary to popular belief, stealth aircraft can eventually be detected. Sooner or later, a radar beam hits a section of the aircraft which has a small enough deflection angle and the RAS and RAM are less effective. This is why the upper and lower sides of most stealth aircraft are the most vulnerable, because they present the most radar return.

The ARS-5 combines the AESA technology... With a completely different twist. The first significant item to be noted is nicknamed Chopsticks, Instead of single radar beams, multiple radar beams are used. However, instead of all straight-forward scanning one area of air, different angles are used, much like a pair of chopsticks. It was hoped (rightly), that multiple radar beams converging on a target, one of which will find a favorable angle, resulting in hitting a stealth aircraft where the beam cannot be deflected and RAS and RAM has minimal effect.

Does it work? Well AGI tested the radar extensively. An AFD-7 Starfury was the testbed. Three separate crews each time flying a different airplane against different targets, which were the F-117 Nighthawk, F/A-22 Raptor and B-2 Spirit. Each of the target aircraft had again three separate crews and three separate aircraft.

The testing then took place over 64,000 cubic kilometres of space. Basically, a cube 40 kilometres wide, 40 km long and 40km 'high' was used. The rules were simple: The AFD-7 would do the hunting the the target would do everything it could to evade (and remain undetected) for an hour. The results were startling. It was found that, when the numbers came back...

The F-117 was tracked an amazing 89% of the time
The F/A-22 was tracked an appreciable 64% of the time
The B-2 was tracked a respectable 53% of the time

More precise numbers are unavailable, though it should be mentioned all aircraft were maneuvering freely, at significant distances and 'every trick in the book' at evasion used.

The second important item of note is the fact that it's no longer a conventional radar. Before, radar systems on aircraft only pointed straight forward from the nose. Only a RWR (Radar Warning Receiver) was included to tell the crew when they were being tracked. However, the RWRs typically gave absolutely no indication of bearing, height, speed, range and so on. Indeed, pilots almost literally had to turn around in their seat to see the enemy missile tracking them (or, for that matter, an enemy aircraft).

The ARS-5 isn't one radar, it's several. Simply put, smaller arrays are placed throughout the aircraft, giving it almost complete coverage, not only on the horizontal axis, but also up and down as well. The data is fed to the target computer, giving the crew a full and complete radar coverage of literally the entire sky around them.

The third important aspect is that it contains LPI (Low Probability of Intercept), but it has a far lesser chance of being jammed. Due to the mass of radar beams flying about, the ARS-5 can switch frequencies, modulations, just about everything. Thus, the target simply cannot jam the radar beams because each beam is literally different, with thousands flying about.

This method is a favorite tactic of Adejaani pilots, who use a domestic version of the AIM-7 Sparrow (with significant improvements), which has a far lesser chance of being jammed or spoofed and can now be guided from inside the cockpit, which has a better tracking capability than anything before.

The ARS-5 radar is now becoming standard on every Adejaani aircraft, with the main obstacle being raw computing power to sort out the various radar feedbacks. However, when it works, it works extremely well and performs magnificently.

[Hmm, that would have indeed impressed the IAF, but I don't think it would have mattered incredibly much in the end. Still and all, if you don't mind I'd like to purchase a few to tinker around with, I'm looking to upgrade some of my EW systems and this could serve as a base. I do have a couple of questions, however.

1) How much mass and space is taken up with the entire system compared to one radar?

2) How much power is required compared to normal radars?

OOC: Well... It was mostly the fact that the AFD-7 would've launched a pretty fairly unjammable missile (short of shooting it down, literally)... :p Not to mention maintaing a pretty much all the time lock on the aircraft, regardless. :rolleyes:

The 'forward' (main) radar itself can be tailored. So literally any aircraft which has a radar suite can employ the ARS-5 (though it might struggle a bit if it doesn't have enough processing power).

However, the 'secondary' arrays, which give it complete spherical coverage, not that much space either. Say about the size of a human head. It's the linkages and the wiring that's the big issue. You might have to rebuild the plane to fit it in to connect everything together.

It's not electrical power that's the problem, it's processing power. Let's say that... An F/A-22 with all three computers (equivalent to six Cray supercomputers) will be just suitable (but two computers is not enough). Let's use that as a minimum figure.

OOC: A very interesting system to say at least, but however, I strongly vote against using AIM-7. While the AIM-120 does have an active radar, you still have to remember that it can have midcourse updates from aircraft when fired from longer ranges, and future versions are also integrating a two way datalink (missile also communicate with aircraft, yes), and if you put an AESA or LPI radar seeker on it like me, it will be pretty hard to defeat, aside from integrating some nifty features that allows the missile to not only lock onto the target AFTER launch (although it isn't like as if you can just fire it from soemthing like 300km and still able to do that), but also home on jamming transmissions of the enemy jammer.
However, the issue with AIM-7 is that if you lose the radar lock, you can be guarenteed a miss. While with this radar it seems jamming are not that much effective, a break of radar lock can still be achieved sometimes by hard maneuvering (although it isn't just some form of magic maneuver you could just do), or even something like flying really low (and ground clutter comes into play), not mentioning that you also aren't going to have much success at very long ranges anyways. Further, since you have to illumentate it for the entire duration of flight, it leaves your fighter open for enemy attack no matter what the firing range is, not mentioning that you'll have some difficulties keeping the radar lock again if you conduct evasive maneuvers (even if you have these sensors around your aircraft, semi-active radar missiles do require a special function on them), and judging the AIM-7's body, its maneuveribility will be further hampered.
Over ARH missiles, while it does offer the "unjammable" advantage in many cases, its overall disadvantages over-shadows the advantages greatly, also putting the aircraft itself into danger of enemy attack, not mentioning that you still have to lock onto the fighter for as long as the missile flies towards the target (which wouldn't be too good if you are pitted against multiple fighters).
/OOC

Avionics and Survivability Systems of the F-107 Dreamfalcon (Previously Os-280) Fighter

Radar:
The F-107 integrates an ELPI radar suit, which includes a nose-mounted Honjak Electrics APG-322 ELPI radar, and a rear-facing, pod-mounted APG-323 ELPI radar, designed to give the aircraft near-360 degrees coverage. Unlike other concepts, these two radars are fully functional, and integrates advanced features. Taking a "reduced detection" approach rather than an "anti-VLO aircraft" method, these radars integrates advanced frequency-hopping and other technologies and techniques technologies, to ensure that not only the transmissions are not picked out by RWR systems, but also to significantly degrade the capabilities of active radar cancellation and other ECM systems. Furthermore, a "snapshot" system has been integrate to allow the radar to only emit a "snapshot" emission for situational awareness, before shutting the radar off or exiting air-to-air modes again. Advanced NCTR systems are included, in addition to various improved software data-processing suites that will optimize the radar's capabilities against low observable/stealthy aircraft. With the aircraft's advanced integrated fire control system, the aircraft is able to track well over 50 targets and engage over 20, though in practice the full capabilities of the fire control system will not be used in combat.
As with other advanced AESA and LPI radars, the radars can work in different modes at the same time, although the ELPI radar improves the concept by allowing an option to enable the radar to work in both air-to-air and air-to-ground or navigation modes at the same time.

IRST:
A feature commonly missed, the F-107 integrates the Honjak Electrics HI-220 front-facing IRST system, and a rear-facing HI-221 IRST system. The system is capable of both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations, though it is optimized for air-to-air operations only. Featuring a "medium" range in excess of 60km, it integrates a software suite to detect and track targets with IR signatures, and through the integrated fire control system of the aircraft, it also allows engagement of these targets with air-to-air missiles. It is also believed that limited target identification capabilities are also included, in which the system is capable of identifying the type of aircraft, although it is currently not possible for the system to identify the specific model of aircraft.

Optical Air-to-Air Sensors:
The aircraft features an advanced digital camera system that permits the pilot to identify enemy targets visually at long ranges, and is able to work in both day and night, though it will only function well in clear weather. It integrates nightvision capabilities, in addition to a feature that allows the pilot to take photos or even short videos of the target.

Ground Attack Sensors:
The F-107 integrates the Modular Surface Attack Sensors System (MSASS), which includes an integrated FLIR system, low light television system, and a module space allowing the installation of a ground-attack LADAR or a MMW radar. While FLIR and the LLLTV systems will be standard for most attack missions, the LADAR is optimized for targeting at medium to high altitudes, while the MMW radar will be more useful at lower altitude and ranges against vehicle-like targets. Furthermore, the LADAR also acts as an integrated laser designator.
The aircraft also features several data and video datalinking systems, in addition to an advanced unguided bomb targeting computer, to assist in both the firing of precision, long-range attack munitions (such as the SLAM-ER or the JASSM), or iron bombs (like the Mk.82 or 84).

Countermeasure Systems:
The aircraft features the Integrated Countermeasures Suite, a development of the COWS-IIA, which includes an advanced radar warning receiver, LADAR warning receiver, ECM systems, and various decoy and countermeasures dispensing systems, in addition to an active radar cancellation system.
The radar warning receiver on the F-107 is a development of those present in the COWS-IIA system, designed to counter the threat of LPI radars. With the assistance of an advanced digital computer, it is able to not only determine the location of the emitter, but also the type of emitter. With this, it also permits improved capabilities against LPI radars by recording the emissions received, and analying them before possibly classifing them as LPI radar.
The LADAR warning receiver, an indigenous Omzian development, consists of networked sensors placed around the aircraft that detects laser energy transmissions. With the help of a computer, it is also able to determine the location of the threat.
The active radar cancellation system, also worth mentioning, consists of a series of sensors and a central processing computer. Although this is not intended to be a countermeasure against powerful airborne and ground radars, it reduces the threat of older active radar guided missiles and other older fighter-mounted airborne radars and small SAM/AAA radars.

Armour:
The F-107 is an armoured aircraft, even though the amount of armour does not cause a significant weight increase. Primarily using lightweight materials such as kevlar and buckytube-like materials, in addition to layers of light composite plates, the armour scheme protects the aircraft from small shrapnels created by nearby explosions of small AAMs, in addition to small-calibre anti-aircraft artillery. Although not all parts of the aircraft is protected by this armour scheme, the most notable uses are at the fuel tanks, cockpit, and engine systems. However, the aircraft's body itself, consisting of new composites and metal alloys such as advanced titanium and aluminum alloys, gives the aircraft great strength and protection.

OOC: Omz, my dear boy, you're making an assumption. :p


(A) domestic version of the AIM-7 Sparrow (with significant improvements).

I have been leaving the missile designs to you and while I admit I sometimes go a little bit overboard, I know all about the Sparrow's limitations (and why the AMRAAM was developed). Short of it was a two way data link and two guidance methods. Either the 'traditional' Sparrow guidance or simply just the Back Seater (aka Weapons Systems Officer or Radar Intercept Officer etc) taking a small joystick and piloting it. I admit it's not a perfect system, but it's different.

Further, against multiple targets, that's where you're wrong. ARS-5 is an AESA first of all. Further, it's a system, not a radar set. With the additional smaller arrays, it can maintain a target tracking literally anywhere, as long as it's in range. The whole system is designed to operate by 'painting' numerous areas of the 'sky' at any one time.

I've taken your comments to heart, but I really don't know which way is better. But I'm trying it my way. You've got your moment of glory, I'm making mine. :p

[Well, your radar system is genius, combined with an NPI system there isn't an ARC in the world that could stop this. Well, I take that back, but that information is classified.]

[Well, your radar system is genius, combined with an NPI system there isn't an ARC in the world that could stop this. Well, I take that back, but that information is classified.]
OOC: I'll have to confirm to that with regards to Adejaani's radar, and say, do you have some examples that could be sent to us? :P As with ARC systems however, while therotically towards some point it could defeat one sensor, you will still have some very serious problems if you encounter several of these going in the air around you.

I also think that this will serve a good purpose as some form of early warning radar though, although it would still be entirely different once it is on the ground (most stealth aircraft are designed to be more stealthy when "looked" from the ground anyways).

[No. Sorry, but I'm not going to even let a small piece of my new ARC system out of the lab it is currently in. In fact, there are only a handful of people IC that know about it.]

OOC: Sure, just take what you need and cut me out of any discussions and R&D and... *Trails off mumbling* :rolleyes: :p

Seriously, though, you can use my radar... However, I only ask that you send back something in exchange. That's only fair, right?

OOC: Sure, just take what you need and cut me out of any discussions and R&D and... *Trails off mumbling* :rolleyes: :p

Seriously, though, you can use my radar... However, I only ask that you send back something in exchange. That's only fair, right?
If that's directed at me, you'll be granted a technology exchange for my ELPI radars .Can't really think of some other things, but tell me what you are interested in.

OOC: Sure, just take what you need and cut me out of any discussions and R&D and... *Trails off mumbling* :rolleyes: :p

Seriously, though, you can use my radar... However, I only ask that you send back something in exchange. That's only fair, right?


[Would money not suffice? If not, I'm coming up with my own software that'll trump even Taiwan's vaunted NPI. If I'm sucessful in tampering with your radar like I think I'll be, I'll send back the finished product for you to use, but no sales without my say-so.]

OOC: It's not about the money, it's about the research. I'm not saying "divulge all your secrets", I'm just saying "let's all benefit". I mean, we're making some of the best modern tech aircraft available, so why not we all just share a bit? Maybe with your help, SS, together, we three can trump this... Taiwan's radar system. We can only benefit by sharing. If you feel it's against your nation's best interests (remember that WE are seeking profit and friendship by sharing OUR hard-work and developed products too)... Then you don't really have to. But it would help us help you.

OOC: It's not about the money, it's about the research. I'm not saying "divulge all your secrets", I'm just saying "let's all benefit". I mean, we're making some of the best modern tech aircraft available, so why not we all just share a bit? Maybe with your help, SS, together, we three can trump this... Taiwan's radar system. We can only benefit by sharing. If you feel it's against your nation's best interests (remember that WE are seeking profit and friendship by sharing OUR hard-work and developed products too)... Then you don't really have to. But it would help us help you.
OOC:
Well, I'll actually subscribe to that, and if SS is willing to participate, I'd be more than willing to. With three people's efforts, it will after all be much better, and we ALL get profit, friendship, and experience.

However, if SS finalizes his choice and chooses F-107/Os-280, I'd be willing to allow SS to install his own or our own radar systems, then I'm willing to go with a royalty system that is the same as the F-125C royalties. However, the unit cost of this unit is particularly expensive, and it is about $120 million, and I'd say that at most the unit price is about $60-80 mil in "ultra"-mass production (unless of course you put much cheaper materials and electronics on it, and get rid of the RAM and RAS altogether). But however, it offers a much greater performance than something like the F/A-22A or the F-117A in both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations.

[I don't mind doing joint research, perhaps we can make an RP out of it. However, I don't want you guys selling the technology willy-nilly, it's out of my character to share my state of the art technology in the first place and by doing so I'm placing an incredible amount of trust in you guys to be responsible with it. Is my trust misplaced or can you guys go along with my wishes?

Omz, yeah I'm going with your fighter.]

[I don't mind doing joint research, perhaps we can make an RP out of it. However, I don't want you guys selling the technology willy-nilly, it's out of my character to share my state of the art technology in the first place and by doing so I'm placing an incredible amount of trust in you guys to be responsible with it. Is my trust misplaced or can you guys go along with my wishes?

Omz, yeah I'm going with your fighter.]
OOC: I'll go along with that, but as for selling them the farest we will go is to provide them to some OMP Members, and no one else. Personally, I'll also prefer some degree of customization of the radar for each military, as I'll fully admit that I'd rather prefer a more durable and reliable system of the <40GHz class than something like the 100GHz< processors used on the NPI systems. Temperature problem is one, and they are rather delicate without expanding them into the size of a Cray.

OOC: I should state that I haven't held anything back so far, not technically. I trust you both implicitly. ICly, you've got every little technical secret in every aircraft and helicopter of mine. So if you invaded me, ICly, I'm screwed. :p

SS, think of it this way: I'm like an artist. I strive to make works of art. I will promise you, if I use any of your technology, I'll let you decide if I can use it/sell it in my designs, alright?

Though in general, anything we develop, we generally share and benefit from, internally.

[Omz, part of my new radar system is new processors. Specifically carbon processors that require less power and run cooler compared to silicon processors with similar performance. In fact, carbon electronics are becoming something of a computer revolution in my country, so we can show you guys how to make them much much cheaper than someone who has almost no experience with the things. Having said that, I tend to customize the things I buy a great deal, just ask Freethinkers.]

OMASC Announces XB-105 Undergoing Flight Testing

OMASC today has offically announced that the XB-105 "Skyhammer" aircraft is "doing well" in flight tests around the Hagrasporten Testing Range, as the aircraft is undergoing a series of extensive flight tests before it enters the second phase of the prototype testing stage. Intended to be a massive bomber aircraft designed to deliver a very high amount of ordnance in one single strike at high, medium, and low altitudes, the XB-105 is designed to augment the B-101A as a "heavy hitter" and "carpet-bombing" aircraft.

"We are encountering many problems, but overall, the number of praises overweighs the number of problems and criticisms," test pilot L. Borane said. As a test pilot of the XB-105 prototype "Sky Blue One", he has reported that the "aircraft is a massive monster... but is easy to handle, and does surprisingly at low altitudes". As confirmed, engineers at OMASC still faces many problems, as the cost escalates and as various maintenance and airframe fatigue issues are also encountered at various areas of the aircraft. However, it is expected that a new design, taking advantage of advanced composites and new radar absorbing materials, will be added at the end of the first prototype phase, both making the aircraft lighter and improving the strength and resistance against fatigue in low level missions.

Additional reports also suggests that OMASC officials are considering to add hybrid PDE-turbofan engines as a replacement for turbofans, though this is determined to be unlikely.

Reported Specifications for XB-105 "Sky Blue One":
Length: 81m
Height: 18.2m
Wingspan: 45m swept, 76.8m Extended
Propulsion: Eight Omzian Automobile Factories Engine-557K turbofans rated at 66,200lbs each (derived from civilian series)
Empty Weight: 173,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 470,000kg
Crew: 3 + 3 accompanying personnel
Ceiling: >58,000ft
Range: 9000-10,000km with max load (~0.48 fuel fraction), 15,000km with standard load
Speed: Mach 1.5 max, Mach 0.9-1.1 cruise
Payload: 80,000kg (176,369lb) maximum, 50,000kg (110,231lb) standard load, within four bomb bays and seven hardpoints (three fuselage, four near/under wing gloves)

===================

Private Company Announces the Development of "Seafire Mk.I" Carrier-Based Fighter Aircraft

It has been reported that a private company, named Vanron Aerospace Incorporated, has signed a deal with the OHDF Navy to design a new stealthy carrier-based fighter, currently named the "Seafire". Like the WWII aircraft bearing the same name, the Seafire is a carrier-based fighter, but is a result of the Omzian Navy's general dissatisfaction with the F-35C JSF in addition to the Os-280 (because of various issues related of doctrine and tactics, including the Omzian navy's "non-stealth" approach), even though the Os-280 has performed superbly during tests as a carrier fighter, while the Omzian Air Force has adopted the Os-280/F-107 as a stealthy strike aircraft.

It is reported that the new Seafire aircraft appears to be a cross between the American F-35 JSF and the French Rafael aircraft. Featuring a stealthy design, it is reported that the aircraft will augment the F-14G, fill the role of the F-35C and may even eventually replace the F-14 as the primary fighter aircraft within the Omzian Navy. Believed to be a multirole aircraft, the aircraft will feature an internal weapons bay as well as an array of external hardpoints for the carriage of various ground attack and air-to-air munitions.

[Okay, here's my basic concept for an active cancellation system.

1) Small radio recievers with wavelength detection capability are embedded into the skin of the aircraft, these are probably the most important part of the ACR system.

2) Thin firberoptic cables with just enough badwidth to channel the incoming radio waves are run between each reciever in a grid pattern. These cables will be what trap the radio waves and prevent them from returning to the originator of the signal.

3) A large central radio wave cancellation unit, probably the size of the primary units of most conventional ARCs, will be reponsible for totally concelling out the incoming radio waves. It won't be perfect because it will only manage to cancel out 95% of all incoming waves, but if the aircraft has passive stealthing features such as RAM and an angled frame, the aircraft will be nigh undetactable.]

[Okay, here's my basic concept for an active cancellation system.

1) Small radio recievers with wavelength detection capability are embedded into the skin of the aircraft, these are probably the most important part of the ACR system.

2) Thin firberoptic cables with just enough badwidth to channel the incoming radio waves are run between each reciever in a grid pattern. These cables will be what trap the radio waves and prevent them from returning to the originator of the signal.

3) A large central radio wave cancellation unit, probably the size of the primary units of most conventional ARCs, will be reponsible for totally concelling out the incoming radio waves. It won't be perfect because it will only manage to cancel out 95% of all incoming waves, but if the aircraft has passive stealthing features such as RAM and an angled frame, the aircraft will be nigh undetactable.]
OOC: Well, an interesting concept, but still I have doubts about it performing as well against something like multiple LPI/NPI/whatever sensors from different directions in the air and on the ground (assuming that your ARC unit actually realizes that it is someform of LPI/NPI radar playing tricks against you). The reason for this is that since you'd have multiple emitters coming at you, the radio waves from all these radars will often come in not only different frequencies, but also many other things like the magnitude and phase (which also depends on the angle that it is coming from, the shape and form of the aircraft's body, and the material that you are using, from what I see and IIRC), in addition to the polarity (IIRC which is pretty important for ARC to actually work). Even considering how radars now are so complex even in RL, I would say that while it could function against LPI radars such as the APG-77, it'll be much more difficult to have this system function even to 90% (to be frank) when you are penetrating someone's airspace with multiple LPI sensors from the ground and from the air at different places.

Regarding ground radar however, you also have to be careful about adjusting the power of the radio wave that the cancellation unit will emit to acheive ARC. Since in the particular sensario you'd have different airborne LPI sensors in addition to more powerful ground-based ones, you'd need to make sure that the radio waves will be able to be replicated matching the power of all incoming signals at the same time, not mentioning that you'll have to put all the different radio waves (with many changing frequencies per second) onto the right bearing and direction (e.g. up or down) so that the radio waves would actually get "cancelled". With this, even if you could somewhat "mess up" the other guy's radar, you would not be able to achieve the purpose of active radar cancellation as ARC is supposed to hide the aircraft completely, instead of having the radar operator know that you are there.

With this, I would suggest to use several smaller and separate cancellation units and computers, each responsible for different "regions" of the aircraft. Granted that this will be not perfect, especially not against the particular scenario I mentioned, but it could ease up the workload of the computers. Not only would this be important to ease up the workload, but assuming that one ARC unit goes out, you would still have other small ARC units functioning, as opposed to having the aircraft exposed as a result of the loss of one unit. Even with the new type of conductors, we cannot expect the only unit to always work perfectly, aside from considering how the F/A-22 is still plagued by computer failure problems even when computer technology has gone so far since the sixties and seventies (IIRC the Apollo 11 also experienced computer failures, even considering how long they worked on the modules of the spacecraft).

With this, another three forms of stealth we must consider are infrared, visual, and sound. Visual will be pretty easy in the future, but since IR signatures and sound will always be there, we must try to minimalize them as well. Exactly one of the reasons why the USAF is considering to deploy a "low sonic boom" design for their future strike aircraft concept.

[Yes, it would have a problem with such heavy air defenses, all ARCs do, but I'm not in the habit of sending aircraft into undamaged air defenses either.

Also, I'm thinking of sharing the computers of Ade's radar system, it would allow me to do what you suggest and I'd still be able to coordinate the cancellation from a large central unit. If the arrangment that I have in mind for my computers work, we'll have over a terrahertz of total processing power at the very least. More likely it'll be near three terrahertz.]

[Yes, it would have a problem with such heavy air defenses, all ARCs do, but I'm not in the habit of sending aircraft into undamaged air defenses either.

Also, I'm thinking of sharing the computers of Ade's radar system, it would allow me to do what you suggest and I'd still be able to coordinate the cancellation from a large central unit. If the arrangment that I have in mind for my computers work, we'll have over a terrahertz of total processing power at the very least. More likely it'll be near three terrahertz.]
OOC: I still personally advocate for separate, smaller, but much more dedicated computer systems, without overloading any particular computer system or having the aircraft plagued by such failures (IIRC right now the F/A-22's central computers could only function for some hours, and they still have a lot of bugs) of only one computer system.

Another two concerns are, 1. power, and 2. heat. The power one I'm not really sure, but what I'm sure is that you definately need a lot of power if you want such computer with that much processing power. With that, heat is also another matter, and considering how important IR stealth is, and how sensitive and long ranged today's IRST system can be (if the Americans actually decided to continue working on IRST like the Soviets), even if you decide to stick a cooling system on it (which will probably need more space and possibly power), the heat produced will be very counterproductive.

[As I understand it Ade's system has seperate computers for each of its nodes.

As for heat, you're talking to someone who really knows his computers. First, each computer will have a variable number of MPC (Multiple Processor Chips), which are basically chips will two or more processors on them, and each of them only requires the power of one of today's top-of-the-line processors. Furthermore, all of my circuit boards and chips will be of the carbon variety, instead of silicon, this means they'll have faster speeds for the same power and will also run cooler.]

OOC: Well, we'll see where this goes to. However, if we do decide to jointly develop the system together, then for my own military I'll personally have to somewhat "reduce" its capabilities (I'm not that much of a post future tech nation) for my own purposes though. /OOC

OMASC Releases Photos of XB-106 Mockup

As the XB-106 enters mockup stage, OMASC officials are evaluation, OMASC today has offically released two photos of a mockup of the currently unnamed XB-106. A medium bomber designed to augment the B-1B in regional and intercontinental operations, the XB-106 exhibits several features. Featuring a boxy shape for the fuselage but a sleek wing, the aircraft featurs a a rather large pair of canard wings near the nose, with a flat nose an a pair of wings spread around the aircraft, along with a V-tail design. These features helps to reduce the sound of the supersonic boom of the aircraft, as the engines are also mounted above, also exhibiting extensive applications of RAM.

"The aircraft will be one of the major steps OMASC will take in the so-called 'quiet' supersonic aircraft designs, and our first application will be on a bomber. Although other aspects of 'stealth' characteristics will take a second seat, we are expecting [the signature of] this aircraft to fit between the signatures of the B-1B and the B-2, while we are also experimenting various visual signature reduction methods," an unidentified OMASC official said. "We can expect the bomber to enter service five years from now at least."

Unmanned, Stealthy Supersonic Reconaissance Drone Believed to be in Development

DefenceNewsOmz (Port Hagras)- It has been revealed by "unidentified sources" that OMASC is jointly developing a series of stealthy supersonic reconaissance drones with the Omzian Air Force, as a result of years of research following the reactivation of SR-71 squadrons within the Omzian Air Force, and as the Omzian Air Force is seeking new drones to augment the Darkstar and Global Hawk UAVs in services. It has been reported that the drone, entering late development phases, will feature a "very fast" speed and a ceiling exceeding those of the Global Hawk, and will take advantage of new PDE propulsion technologies. However, as details right now is extremely sketchy, it is unclear if the drone will enter Omzian Air Force service.

[It's not post-modern, at least not in the way I'm familiar with the term. IIRC, Intel already has a working 20Ghz example, but full scale production won't be possible for at least a decade.]

OOC: Uh... I missed something. Anyway, I thought I'd clarify the system architecture of the ARS-5...

Somewhat OOC/IC: The ARS-5 is basically composed of two systems:

1 The primary radar array in the nose.
2 The secondary smaller arrays at various locations throughout the airframe.

The operation of the ARS-5 basically is three systems (with one divided into two sub-categories):

1: Defense/passive mode: Sort of like a Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) and constantly sweeps the skies for threats. If a radar tracking beam is detected, the system ensures the distance/bearing/atltitude (etc) is passed on to the pilot.

2a: Active search mode: Using the Chopsticks and continuously flinging radar beams in every direction to attempt to find stealth aircraft. This mode is continually active when the radar set is operating.

2b: Identification mode: Similar to Non Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR), multiple radar beams are used to find the overall 'shape' of the target aircraft and the analysis is passed to the pilot.

3: Tracking mode: Once a target is identified, multiple radar beams are sent to the target, trying to maintain a lock.

Of course, it should be noted that really, only the nose radar could perform Mode 2 to any real effect. The smaller arrays aren't efficient enough, they're mostly to aid in Modes 1 and 3.

That said... What to do with the computer heat? I came up with this idea for an RP I'm at... Elsewhere. Denser panels on the inside, less dense panels on the outside. The heat basically radiates outwards.

Or, since my Hardhat™ is partially ceramics... Why not radiate the heat into a ceramic, water cooled shell? Which gives me a bright idea for a next generation armor system...

OOC: About the ceramics, that might work a bit, but you still have to consider how much space and weight such system would take in an aircraft. That means unless you are designing something like a huge bomber, you aren't going to be able to fit all that in and still get the desired payload on a fighter-sized aircraft. Even if the ceramics can be light, they will still take up much space if you make them "large" enough. IIRC the titanium-based armour on the Su-34 weighed somewhere around an extra 1-2tons (it might not seem much, but it does affect the amount of payload and fuel you could carry), and even though if you use ceramics, they still take some space. I personally use a combination of kevlar-like materials (actually, they are carbon-based) and compsites, but it still all comes down to the construction of the aircraft - for example, the early MiG series jet aircraft were known to be very rugged, whereas the American ones had superiority later on because of their stronger construction and the general thickness and strength of the airframe. Armour is basically an aid in some areas, not something that you can apply everywhere on the aircraft.

Also, as a note: some stats are designed for deception. /OOC

Omzian Air Force Weapons Labs Releases New Details on Omzian Intercontinental Cruise Missiles

As speculated, Omzian Air Force Weapons Labs has officially announced additional specifications and informations of the new Omzian intercontinental cruise missiles, after various speculations and rumours, in addition to several cases of sightings of these units flying near the Hoganvara Plains Testing Range near Hogan Point. Although much of the details are still classified to the general public (even after an unspecified technology exchange with a nation of the Three-Nation Alliance, in addition to additional release of the information of the missile with OMP member nations), the Omzian Air Force Weapons Labs has released some specifications of the missile, in addition to two pictures of the missile, one showing the top of the missile only, while another showing the missile sitting on a semi-mobile rail launcher from a hardened shelter.

RF-102 (Red Flag-102) Intercontinental Cruise Missile
Length: 8-24m
Diameter: 2-3m
Wingspan: 6-10m
Weight: Classified
Range: "In excess of 3000km"
Altitude: "In excess of 10,000ft"
Speed: "In excess of Mach 2"
Payload: 1000-2000kg
Guidance: INS with GPS and datalink
Propulsion: Rocket booster attached to rear of missile, and two scramjets.
Cost: Not for sale ($62 million)

RF-105 Intercontinental Cruise Missile
Length: 10-24m
Diameter: 2-3m
Wingspan: 6-10m
Weight: Classified
Range: "In excess of 9000km"
Altitude: "In excess of 20,000ft"
Speed: "In excess of Mach 1"
Payload: 5000-8000kg
Guidance: INS with GPS, datalink, and TERCOM system, with active radar or EO at terminal
Propulsion: Booster - Solid fueled rocket
Sustainer: Solid fuel rocket, two hybrid PDE-turbofan engines
Cost: Not for sale ($58 million)

It is reported that both missiles' has wings similar to those of the F-125 Rapier interceptor, while low reflection and camoflauge paintings are standard on the missile. As the Omzian military no longer operates any nuclear or radiological weapons, it is expected that as one of the major components within the Omzian "conventional anti-nuclear deterrent" force, the missiles are able to provide precision targeting against enemy military targets and other targets of interest in the event of retailation. It is not known if mobile launchers has been designed, but it has been reported that mobile launchers has bee designed for the missiles, with additional plans to test the missiles off a modified Soviet Akula (Western Codename Typhoon SSBN) submarine testbed belonging to the Omzian Army Department of Special Weapons Research.

======================

New Ballistic Missile Testing Program Under Fire as Testing of RF-38 Ends in Major Accident

Omzian Tonobran (Osaria) -- Following the failed testing of the RF-38 "Super ICBM" design at an unspecified location within the Northern Mountains Range, which has resulted an explosion followed with the destruction of the isolated testing facility and over one hundred casulties, the Omzian New Ballistic Missile Project, under the long-term Conventional Deterrent Program Against Unconventional Weapon Attacks (CODEPRO) Program crashes in a halt as opposition Parliament leaders discredit the program as a "unnecessary project that is worth nothing more than a piece of junk".

The New Ballistic Missile Project, intended to provide the Omzian Nation with a conventional deterrent capability in the event of a nuclear attack, will consist of a series of new rocket-propelled platforms along with payloads that will consist of scramjet-powered maneuverable reentry vehicles, for attacks on military targets and other target of interest in an event of retailation. However, as the program now comes under a halt because of the still under-the-dark incident, many opposition Parliament members and leaders are once again beginning to place the project under fire. In a Parliament session Friday, Omzian Progressive Socialist Party member Loran Vares discredited the project as an "outrageous lie", as additional members called for a new legislation that might possible force the project to close down.

However, the Omzian military has commented on the incident, but declined to comment further more. In a press conference, Omzian Army spokesman Sergeant Major Norane Yanze has called the incident "a major factor of delay of the program", while refusing to comment on the exact cause of the incident. One family member, who has been informed of the cause of the incident, refused to comment specifically, but had said that the incident is "a very serious one that is unheard of since decades."

F-109A Seafire Carrier-Based Fighter Aircraft
A Joint Venture between Private Omzian Contractors, A Milestone For the Omzian Private Aerospace Contractor Industry

Contractors: Vanron Aerospace Incorporated (Airframe Design, Construction, and Assembly), Seinfield & Sons Composites (Airframe Construction Materials), 32nd and 33rd Factories of the Omzian State Motorworks Corporation (Engine System), Noran Systems (Avionics and Weapon Systems)
Length: 18.7m
Height: 5.12m
Wingspan: 13.5m
Propulsion: Two Omzian State Motorworks STG-224 turbofans rated at 45,100lb thrust each
Empty Weight: 14,525kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 34,350kg
Crew: One
Ceiling: >60,000ft
Range: 3800km
Speed: Mach 1.68 supercruise, Mach 2.52 max
Armament: Internal 27mm cannon, 9400kg maximum in one weapons bay (rated at 2400kg), and ten hardpoints (two wingtip, eight underwing), standard load is about 6000kg-9000kg. Standard load within weapons bay is two 1000lb or 2000lb PDAS OR ten 250lb PDAS AND two AMRAAM/NLRAAM for standard ground attack, or six AMRAAM/NLRAAM OR three-four Phoenix/AAAM AND two Sidewinder/Air Snake for air superiority.
G Limit: "In excess of 10Gs"
Cost: $75 million (for approved customers only)

Originally designed as a private project between several smaller contractors, the F-109A Seafire Carrier-Based Fighter is a new, stealthy carrier-based multirole aircraft designed to fill the role of the F-35C in a carrier air wing, and to augment the F/A-18E Super Hornets and the F-14G Tomcat Plus aircraft within Omzian Naval service. As a new fighter aircraft, this aircraft marks a milestone for smaller and private Omzian aerospace contractors, pushing OMASC's dominance out of the Omzian military. As a fifth - or even sixth or seventh generation - aircraft, the F-109A Seafire is suitable in both air superiority and precision strike against enemy forces.

Airframe Design

The airframe of the F-109A is similar to a cross between the F/A-22A, F-35C, and the Rafale, featuring a delta wing with "angled" rear edges similar to those of the F/A-22A and the F-35C, and a streamlined fuselage with two intakes on the side. Various signature-reduction and other advanced features are present, including an internal weapons bay, a V-Tail, and relatively few angles, aside from the application of RAM throughout the aircraft, and various signature-reduction designs present within the intakes (including a "S-shaped" path similar to those of the Eurofighter, but is vertically-oriented), although a system similar to the vertical "ramps" are still present on the intakes for improved speed. The wings are also relatively mid-mounted on the fuselage, with a pair of canards. However, there are no horizontail tails, and elevons are used, along with a pair of backup airbrakes present on the fuselage. A refueling probe is also present, and is removable in certain missions. The landing gears are strengthened for both carrier and rough field operations. Additional, optional electrochromic panels are also attached, which is linked to the aircraft's defensive avionics system to distort the aircraft's infrared sigature to provide protection against newer IR-guided air-to-air missiles. Additionally, it is also believed that contractors S&S Composites and Noran Systems are also experimenting with visual concealment techniques for the aircraft that greatly reduces the visual signature of the aircraft with special composite materials and electronics, though this system will not be present on the inital production version, nor will it be available for export.

The airframe is primarily constructed of advanced composites along with titanium and aluminum alloys, while provides a light weight and great strength for extreme maneuvering, enduring battle damage, and enduring the impact sustained during carrier landings. The use of other protective materials (armour) on the aircraft is limited, but various materials such as kevlar, lightweight composites, thin ceramic panels, and some applications of buckytube and carbon-based materials are present throughout the aircraft with minimal weight, especially around the cockpit and fuel tanks. Two painting schemes are primarily used on the F-109A. One is a low-reflection grey-light blue colour with a "digital camoflauge" (similar to those present on the USMC uniforms) painting scheme, which permits lower visibility in flight. Another one, present on certain selected aircraft, also uses the same style, but has a blue/green/brownish colour scheme, permitting concealment on land. Additional special coatings, aside from special RAM coatings, also allows low reflection, visibility, and a lower heat emission.

The aircraft is propelled by a pair of STG-224 engines, provided by the state-owned Omzian State Motorworks Corporation, which is able to propel the aircraft to a maximum speed of Mach 2.48, along with a supercruise speed of Mach 2.68. The engines features a pair of 3D thrust vectoring nozzles, and various shapings has allowed a slightly reduced heat emission. The movement of the nozzles are controlled by the Central Flight Computer (mentioned under Avionics section), and greatly increases maneuveribility, in addition to turn, roll, and climb performances.

Avionics

The aircraft features various advanced avionic suites. One of the major components of the avionics suite is the Central Flight Computer, tied to an advanced fly-by-optic computer, providing a huge amount of improvement in flight performance over fly-by-wire systems. Within the cockpit, a full "glass cockpit" is augmented with a special large-sized wide-angle HUD system, along with backup emergency gauges and an automatic carrier landing system to reduce the stress of the pilot during night strike missions. An advanced helmet sight system is present, along with a special voice command system in addition to a pressure sensor-based system mounted within the pilot's mouth ,which are entirely optional but reduces the pilot's stress. An advanced weapons sight for the internal cannon system, along with dumb bombs and rockets, are also built in, allowing the aircraft to deliver unguided munitions with great accuracy in various bombing methods (including dive bombing and even level bombing). An advanced communication and datalinking system is also integrated, allowing the pilot to obtain a high degree of situational awareness, as in emergency cases, ground-based controllers (such as GCI) are also able to control the aircraft with great accuracy.

The aircraft's sensors are equally advanced. The centerpiece of the aircraft's sensor suite is the Noran APG-387 ELPI radar suite, which integrates a front nose-mounted sensor and a rear-facing pod-mounted sensor, giving the pilot 360 degrees situational awareness. The ELPI radar, a step ahead of the LPI, combines various frequency jumping and ECCM capabilities with various other advanced features such as a "snapshot" system, allowing the pilot to get an idea of what is around him/her while still hidden without a continuous radar emission. The radar also has a range of "more than 300km" and incorporates advanced NCTR target identification features. Like those on the F/A-22A, the radar is also capable of tracking low-flying, stealthy targets such as cruise missiles and UAVs, allowing the aircraft to serve in the role of fleet defense effectively. The radar itself can also act as a device similar to a jammer, using a powerful, concentrated radar emission onto a specific target (such as a radar or communication anteena) to achieve the purpose of jamming. The aircraft also features an IRST system from Noran, this time consisted of three sensors, with one frontal sensor and two side/rear sensors, allowing the aircraft to acquire the infrared emission of enemy aircraft, and to track them passively at a range of "in excess of 40km", along with "limited target identification" capabilities. A laser rangefinder is also included, although it is optional for safety reasons. With the advanced fire control system, the pilot is capable of tracking the targets (such as bombers, fighters, helicopters, cruise missiles, UAVs/UCAVs) on a screen resembling a bird's eye view, and is able to track more than 60 of them and engaging over 10 at the same time, though in combat the number is reduced for practicability reasons. Finally, a visual target acquision system is installed, which allows the pilot to visually acquire targets at ranges "in excess of 20km" in clear weather conditions in day or night (with the help of a low light TV system).

The radar warning receiver (RWR) system, also designed by Noran, allows the pilot to track radar and other radio emissions passively, while a computer system is also linked to the RWR for countering AESA and LPI radar systems. Additionally, the RWR system also allows the engagement of enemy radar systems, allowing the pilot to engage enemy air defense systems. Further, a LADAR warning receiver, similar to those on the OMASC-design COWS-II, is also included. Composed of various laser energy-delection nodes around the aircraft, the system allows the pilot to acquire the direction and location of the LADAR-equipped enemy threat. A combination of IR and radar-based missile launch warning system is installed on the aircraft.

The ECM system is composed of a powerful radar jammer and various decoy dispensers (including chaff, flares, and towed and/or launched decoys), in addition to a special active radar cancellation system. The radar jammer allows the aircraft to counter enemy radar systems over multiple frequencies, as the aircraft is equipped with various chaff and flare dispensers around the airraft, in addition to mounts for towed decoys. An active radar cancellation system is also interested, although the system is intended to be used against older enemy airborne radars and air-to-air missiles.

Weapon Systems

The aircraft is equipped with an internal weapons bay in the fuselage, along with a total of ten hardpoints, including two wingtip stations and eight underwing stations. The underwing and fuselage hardpoints are designed to be stealthy, and appears to be "merged" into the airframe to provide relatively few angles. The maximum payload is 9800kg.

The internal weapons bays is capable of holding a combination of large bombs and missiles, in addition to air-to-air missiles, in which the munitions includes unguided and guided bombs, air-to-surface missiles, anti-radiation missiles, and various air-to-air missiles. The weapons bay can hold payloads of up to 2400kg.

The external hardpoints allows a more diverse range of payload, ranging from bombs and rockets to air-to-air missiles and anti-ship missiles, although the wingtip station can only accept one Sidwinder/Air Snake or one AMRAAM/NLRAAM each. The inner four underwing hardpoints (one under each wing) is rated for payloads of up to 2500kg, while the outer four underwing hardpoints are rated for up to 1500kg. In addition to these munitions, other payloads such as reconaissance and targeting pods (such as FLIR and special LADAR pods), in addition to ECM/jammer pods and a range of stealthy fuel tanks.

The aircraft is also equipped with an internal 27mm cannon, which is suitable for the destruction of both air and ground targets, with the help of an advanced gunsight system. A total of 230 rounds are stored in the aircraft.

Future developments: It is expected that this aircraft will be in service for decades within the Omzian Navy Aviation Corps, as a high performance alternative to the F-14G and the F/A-18 that boasts better performance as a multirole aircraft for the 21st century, along with a better airframe and a lower maintenance cost and flight time rate. However, it is projected that in the future a new laser system will be designed for the fighter, which will be completed within two decades. As a weapon, it will be used against soft targets and open troops, aside from being a special jammer that is to be used against LADAR emitters in high power bursts.

It is also expected that the Omzian Air Force's PDE propulsion development program will also allow the installation of hybrid PDE-turbofan engines on the aircraft, along with the integration of new electronic warfare systems.

Status: In service within the Omzian Navy. It is expected that the aircraft will be avaialble for limited export.

=================================

FV-109C Skyfire STOVL Fighter Aircraft
Contractors: Vanron Aerospace Incorporated (Airframe Design, Construction, and Assembly), Seinfield & Sons Composites (Airframe Construction Materials), 33rd Factory of the Omzian State Motorworks Corporation (Engine System), Noran Systems (Avionics and Weapon Systems)
Length: 16.6m
Height: 4.89m
Wingspan: 12.1m
Propulsion: One Omzian State Motorworks STN-225 turbofan/liftfan system (45,800lb/20,774kg thrust total in flight) with four additional thrust vectoring nozzles (on side of aircraft)
Empty Weight: 12,070kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 28,600kg (Short Take Off), ~21,000kg (Vertical Take Off)
Crew: One
Ceiling: >55,000ft
Range: 2700km
Speed: Mach 2.1 max
Payload: 27mm cannon, 8000kg maximum ("conventional" short take off) in one weapon bay (rated at 1800kg, normally PDAS or dumb bombs and 2x NLRAAM), and eight hardpoints (two wingtip, six underwing). 4000kg-6000kg normal for medium-long range missions with short distance take off, 1000kg-3000kg in normal short/medium-range missions for vertical take off.
Cost: $72 million (for approved customers only)

The FV-109C Skyfire STOVL fighter is a heavily modified F-109A Seafire that is optimized for STOVL operations aboard light carriers in the Navy, and on rough Air Force airfields in support of ground forces. Like the Yak-41, the FV-109C is primarily an air superiority aircraft designed for operations aboard light carriers or as a "backup weapon" in the case of an enemy invasion on rough fields, though ground attack is a secondary and very important role. As a "semi-stealthy" alternative to the F-35B, the airframe permits a great amount of load, though stealthy design features are also present in the design, allowing the design to feature a radar signature slightly larger than the F-35B JSF in normal conditions (without external munitions). Designed with both maneuveribility and load in mind, this STOVL aircraft is designed to be more of a multirole aircraft, instead of an attack aircraft like the Harrier and the F-35B JSF, featuring a very maneuverible airframe design, improved thrust vectoring engine systems, and a new airframe construction that is stronger and lighter.

The STOVL propulsion system is based on those of the Yak-41 and the F-35B, though a liftfan system is used instead of the liftjets on the Yak-41, and the number of additional control ducts and thrust vectoring nozzles is foru instead of two on the F-35B. Although the design permits extra power and efficency in exchange, ease of maintenance and maneuveribility is still somewhat limited, although the use of new materials and new construction methods has allowed easier maintenance in times of war (where the aircraft's base location is in the front line), as the Seafire-based airframe design allows improved maneuveribility over the F-35B and the Harrier designs.

The airframe construction and design is very similar to those of the F-109A, though various modifications has been made, including modified intakes, and a pair of "stubbier" wings. The aircraft is also smaller and lighter, with a smaller pair of wings. The airframe is also made of various composites and features the RAM and special coatings on the F-109A, along with the electrochromic panels, though additional armour has also been added, which composes of kevlar, buckytubes, ceramics, titanium, and various composites, and are applied throughout the aircraft to allow protection against light arms fire and small shrapnels.

The avionics suite of the aircraft is very similar to those of the F-109A, but there are still some changes. One of the major changes is a new radar system, which is a slightly downgraded variant of thhe APG-387, that is designed for operations on the STOVL aircraft, and is also optimized for ground attack. The IRST system is also redcued to a total of two sensors, while a builtin targeting pod has been installed. Composed of a FLIR system, a low-light TV system, and a modular MMW radar or LADAR system (each is to be placed by the other one in combat operations), the pod gives the pilot additional all weather ground attack capability.

The maximum payload and armament on the FV-109C are decreased, with a smaller bomb bay allowing a maximum of 1800kg of payloads, in addition to eight hardpoints, with two wingtip stations and six underwing stations. Together, a maximum of 8000 kg of payload could be carried, which includes bombs, rockets, air-to-air missiles, air-to-ground missiles, fuel tanks, and ECM pods. A 27mm cannon is still present, though the total rounds now is only 160. For vertical takeoff however, the maximum amount of payload is even fewer and restricted, while cannon rounds for the gun would often be removed to allow a lighter takeoff weight.

Status: In service within the Omzian Navy Marine Corps and the Omzian Air Force.

[Hmm, the Imperial Navy just might purchase the Seafire instead of converting the CAS aircraft like it originally planned.]

[Hmm, the Imperial Navy just might purchase the Seafire instead of converting the CAS aircraft like it originally planned.]
OOC: Well, that is a possibility, but keep in mind that this is a multirole aircraft that is originally designed for the Omzian Navy only as an alternative to the more stealthy F-107/Os-280 (IMHO not that the A-102 would make a good carrier aircraft anyways). I might try a different scheme for a possible deal, since this is the first major non-OMASC aircraft (well, it is still listed in this thread :P ), and still considering the unstableness of the private contractors (whom would probably be more incapable of handing international deals), we might look for some form of technology exchange instead with a complete domestic production contract (that means no royalties ever but still for domestic uses only), if that's ok with you. I'd admit that one of your tech/stuff did catch my attention, and if you want, we can discuss this privately.

OMASC Releases Specifications for the RF-6/7BN Medium-Range Ballistic Missile Refits

RF-6B Mace
Length: 16.1m
Diameter: 1.36m
Weight: 19,000kg
Guidance: AINS (Advanced Inertial Navigation System) w/ GPS backup, active/passive radar or EO at terminal
Range: ~1400-1600km (2200kg MaRV warhead), ~2100-2300km (1500kg MaRV or 1200kg MaRV or 2x 500kg MaIRV warheads)
Payloads:
1x 2200kg Noran Systems M225 MaRV (Maneuverable Reentry Vehicle) - High Explosive, Fuel-Air, Incendiary, or Submunitions dispenser (CEB and AIAT); OR
1x 1500kg Noran Systems M210 MaRV - HE, FAE, or Incendiary; OR
1x 1200kg Noran Systems M217 MaRV - HE, FAE, or Submunitions; OR
2x 500kg Noran System M192 MaIRV (Maneuverable Independent Reentry Vehicle) - HE or FAE
Stages: Two
Propellant: Solid (High Energy)
CEP: 20-30m
Platform: Mobile Ground TEL System, Orca Class SSGN-RF6 (Eight, Imported)
Cost: Not Intended For General Export ($8-12 million)

RF-7B Warhammer
Length: 19.8m
Diameter: 1.36m
Weight: 26,000kg
Guidance: AINS (Advanced Inertial Navigation System) w/ GPS backup, active/passive radar or EO at terminal
Stages: Two
Propellant: Solid (High Energy)
Range: 2600km with 2200kg MaRV warhead, 3400km with 1500kg MaRV, 3700km with 1200kg MaRV, 2700km with 3x 500kg MaIRV warheads
Payloads:
1x 2200kg Noran Systems M225 MaRV - HE, FAE, Incendiary, or Submunitions Dispenser; OR
1x 1500kg Noran Systems M210 MaRV - HE, FAE, or Incendiary; OR
1x 1200kg Noran Systems M217 MaRV - HE, FAE, or Submunitions; OR
3x 500kg Noran Systems M192 MaIRV - HE or FAE
CEP: 20-30m
Platform: Mobile Ground TEL System, Orca Class SSGN-RF7 (Eight, Imported)
Cost: Not Intended For General Export ($12-16 million)

The RF-6/7 Mid-Life Service Refit program is designed to correct many of the deficencies of the previous RF-6A/7A, and to bring new technologies for these missiles. One component of the Omzian "multidimension conventional attack" plan, the missile is a very important tool within the Omzian Navy.

As the construction and the frame design of the missile has drastically changed to reach the limit of the deployed platforms, as evident, the new missiles allows various changes to take place. One major change is the use of stronger, lighter, and a more temperature-resistant missile body to improve durability and survivability against anti-ballistic missile weapons, with additional appliation of kevlar and buckytube-based materials, similar to those of the Pershing II. A new type of fuel is also used on both missiles, and finally, the RF-6B is a two-stage missile to improve performance. An improved rocket motor is also installed, and to improve compatibility with multiple warheads, a new computer system is designed. To improve survivability, it is also believed that the computer is linked to a radar warning receiver, a simple radar jammer, and a LADAR warning receiver system.

However, the missile receives a range of brand new payloads. Developed by Noran Systems, the M-series MaRV/MaIRV (Maneuverable Reentry Vehicle)/Maneuverable Independent RV) allows a greater load and improved survivability against enemy radar, IR, and laser-based systems. Unlike previous warhead systems within Omzian service, the M-series is composed of various composites and ceramic materials, and has several design features. One of the most welcoming feature is the use of small thrusters and control nozzles, which serves the purpose of both making the warheads much more accurate, and to allow them to maneuver to evade enemy ABM systems, including KVs and laser-based systems. The nozzles are controlled by a central computer system, which is also linked to a GPS receiver, a radar warning receiver, and a special LADAR/laser warning receiver, allowing the missile to respond when it is being attacked by enemy ABM systems (including missiles and laser-based systems). Furthermore, the use of the composites also allows improved heat resistance, along with a reflective skin and a special "small mirror" network to counter enemy laser ABM systems. RAM coatings are present, along with an attached radar jammer, and while this does not offer protection to the more powerful radars and the more "exotic"/indigenous ABM systems, the jammer is tuned to protect the missile against very common air defense systems such as the Patriot PAC-2, PAC-3, and the S-300PMU/V systems. Furthermore, taking lessons from the Pershing II design and various Russian SRBM designs, the M225 and the M210 MaRVs utilizes an active radar guidance system, while the smaller M217 MaRV and the M192 MaIRV are equipped with an electro-optical/IR guidance system. This allows a great degree of accuracy, rivaling those of older cruise missiles.

It is also believed that for the two larger warheads, easy-to-deploy decoys are also included, designed to appear like the actual warheads, with a heating system to allow it to appear similar to an actual warhead, and additional small "planes"/flaps and edges to replicate the radar signature of the actual warheads, therefore degrading the performance of enemy IR-based weapons. Another system is also believed to be installed to allow the warheads to have its own infrared signature changed using small heaters to "blend in" the different IR signatures across the warhead, in addition to manipulating the "shape" if its signature, also degrading the performance of the target recongition features on enemy IR-based ABM systems. As well, as a simple measure, it is again believed that small flare dispensers are attached, although again, this is not present within the smaller warheads.

Launch of Prototype Red Flag-22 ICBM and Maneuverable Reentry/Air Vehicle a Success

DefenseNewsOmz (Osaria) -- The Omzian Army Headquarters today has announced the successful testing of the Red Flag-22 ICBM. The first live firing test of this prototype-stage missile, the Red Flag-22 ICBM carried a total of two of the so-called "Maneuverable Reentry/Air Vehicle" (MARAV) in this test, which also successfully hit their designated target zones.

Army Headquarters has revealed that the 160,000kg RF-22 ICBM, carrying a total of two of these MARAV vehicles, was successfully launched from a railway-based launcher within the Northern Mountain Range. Beleived to be carrying a full load of decoys and sportign additional countermeasures against enemy laser, kinetic energy, and EMP-based weapons, the missile successfully travelled a total of 8000 kilometers before releasing the two MARAV vehicles. Believed to weigh around 1600 to 2000kg, these scramjet-powered MARAV has successfully conducted maneuvers and other procedures against "enemy" radar systems (which were provided by the Omzian Air Force), and had self-destruct within 50m of their intended target in the Atlantic Ocean. Each of these triangular air vehicle travelled to two separate zones that are between 300 to 600km from each other, over a separate flight of 500 to 1000km.

No further detail is provided, and the Army is planning to conduct three additional test launches soon. As part of the Omzian non-nuclear "conventional deterrence" plan, these missiles will serve as an important component of the system while avoiding the possible confusions that might result in a nuclear war.

[Omz, do you have stats for the B-106 or is it not done yet? Also, do you have the big ass strategic bomber or is still in development?]

[Omz, do you have stats for the B-106 or is it not done yet? Also, do you have the big ass strategic bomber or is still in development?]
OOC: I'll admit that the B-106 bomber is still not done, but you can expect a payload exceeding those of the B-2, a M2.2-3 (!) max speed, and some degree of stealth, with my "self-defense turret" finally put into use (which consists of a missile launch detection system, IRST system, small mini-AAMs OR a tail gun). The B-105's stats are at the previous page I believe, but they will incorporate even more of these turrets. Since it seems that you want a lot of bombs in that, it will have 4 bomb bays, 80,000-85,000kg payload (though a full load will most certainly reduce range quite a bit), low level flight capability, and a size bigger than the 747, although speed will be very low (no more tham M1.5). Further, as a way of detecting stealth aircraft, I'm also considering to add an IRST system in addition to a visual detection system, with the LADAR having a secondary air-to-air function. All bombers will be equipped with backup AAMs, though they are for self-defense as a last ditch, as the B-105 especially will not be an ideal anti-air platform.

[Cool. Something I'm not clear on, though. When you state maximum range, is that the range a plane can go and still have enough fuel to return home or is that as far as it can go period?]

[Cool. Something I'm not clear on, though. When you state maximum range, is that the range a plane can go and still have enough fuel to return home or is that as far as it can go period?]
OOC: The range that it travels before refueling, and you'd still need refueling when you have the plans go back to their airbase. Onboard supplies is another matter, and if you get rid of the accompanying personnel, you can fit stuff like food and "waste disposal equipment" there. Now, the new B-105 stats are drastically changed, and I'll post that along with the B-106 one.

As the OMASC design boards continues to work ith the bomber design, an updated specification set has been released:

XB-106 Warcrow Medium Bomber
Length: 45m
Height: 10.2m
Wingspan: 31.2m
Propulsion: Four Honjak Electrics HEK-1022A turbofans rated at 62,000lbs each
Empty Weight: 62,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 154,000kg
Crew: 2 + 2 accompanying personnel
Ceiling: >70,000ft
Range: 6000-8000km with max load, 10,000km with MaxICR load, 12,000km for standard load
Speed: Mach 2.6 max
Payload: 21,200kg max (46,738lb), 18,500kg (40,785lb) max for intercontinental range ("MaxICR" configuration), 16,000kg (35,273lb) standard

The XB-106 is a smaller cousin of the successful B-101, with a pair of large canards and a pair of large delta wings similar to a cross between the wings of the FB-22 concept and the Concorde (with some hints from the B-58 Hustler and the Vulcan), reducing the aircraft's supersonic boom. With no horizontal tail, the aircaft has a V-tail design, along with four top-mounted engines (with a "ramp" intake design to increase supersonic performance at the cost of enlargened RCS), and a slightly "blunt" nose. There are a total of two bomb bays, two self-defense weapon side bays (each housing 2x AMRAAM, 3x Sidewinder, or 1x Light AGM such as HARMs or Mavericks), and one self-defense turret at the tail. In addition, there are a total of eight wing hardpoints in total, which are of a stealthy "blended" design, and can hold additional fuel tanks and munitions. Additionally, reconaissance pods can also be carried, along with additional targeting pods, though the aircraft already features a LADAR system, a FLIR system, an air-search IRST system, and ELPI radar systems. Radar stealth is not the top concern, but various methods has helped to reduce the infrared emission of the aircraft, along with the visual signature and the contrails.

Additionally, OMASC will also be offering a version with four Honjak Electrics HEP-3N PDE Engines with increased speed and payload, though it is also believed that the range would slightly decrease in exchange.

XB-105 Skyhammer Heavy Bomber
Length: 81m
Height: 20.2m
Wingspan: 56m swept, 84.5m Extended
Propulsion: Eight Omzian Automobile Factories ENGINE-557N turbofans rated at 71,000lbs each (derived from civilian series)
Empty Weight: 243,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 580,000kg
Crew: 3 + 3 accompanying personnel
Ceiling: >58,000ft
Range: 9000-10,000km with max load, 15,000km with standard load
Speed: Mach 1.36 max, Mach 0.9-1.1 cruise
Payload: 87,000kg (191,802lb) maximum, 50,000kg (110,231lb) standard load, within four bomb bays and seven hardpoints (three fuselage, four near/under wing gloves). Three-four self-defense turrets (SDTS) with one STDS armed with 27mm tailgun.

OOC: Before I begin, the picture is from the cartoon series Robotech, but I am not using any Robotech technology in my designs. They are just simply the pictures and the designs. These aircraft are meant to be Modern Tech.

AFD-14 Skyfire

http://home.iprimus.com.au/quincyw/afd-14.gif

Although OMASC had developed their Seafire aircraft to supplement the F-14G Tomcat Plus and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, AGI began the AFD-14 fighter program... To replace both. Simply put, an aircraft with the F-14's reach, long range, extended loiter time, coupled the the F/A-18's maneuverability and agility, all in a newer airframe design.

In other words, it was an interceptor. Capable of dashing at high speeds, to reach out and pluck enemy aircraft at significant distances. It was also meant to be capable of high maneuverability, to put smaller, shorter range missiles in a dogfight situation, even capable of going directly behind an enemy for a guns pass. Lastly, a secondary air to ground capability was required.

It was a tall order to fulfill, but the AFD-14 (the F-14/AFD-14 was purely coincidental, the programs having been numbered that way) was more than adequate.

At first glance, the AFD-14 has a lot to be desired aesthetically. While its predecessors had some shaping to try and reduce its radar signature, the AFD-14 seems designed to increase the radar return. While this has caused some alarm with potential pilots, this is offset by the use of a third version Hardhat™ armor, plus maneuverability which would make even F-16 pilots blush.

The most interesting design feature would have to be the wing mounted engines, reminiscent of the SR-71 Blackbird. This design was used after a strengthened center fuselage was used, in order to give the AFD-14 carrier compatibility, as well as a modest increase in air to air armaments over its F-14 and F/A-18 predecessors, though it generally tended to increase structural fatigue problems upon heavy landings (generally in the inner wing, engine pod and outer wing areas), though this was able to be offset by a much lower landing speed (which was itself a problem requiring much strengthened landing gear and strengthened carrier recovery systems).

The center fuselage is reminiscent of the F-14 in that it provides most of the lift, with the wings being relegated to simply improving aerodynamic performance. As such, although the AFD-14 is not swing-wing, it is still capable of high speeds, though it suffers slightly on long loiter missions.

Overall, it is capable of the F-14's long range and reach, with the F/A-18's maneuverability, with the cost being very non stealthy and literal cost (it is expensive).

Stats:
AFD-14 Skyfire
Missions: Air superiority, interceptor, strike fighter
Length: 14.9m
Height: 3.7m
Wingspan: 14.3m
Propulsion: Two AED-20 turbofans at 40,000 lbs each
Max weight: 40,000 kg
Range: 600nm
Max Speed: Mach 2.2
Crew: 2
Payload (represents maximum of each type of weapon, which is not recommended under any circumstances.):

10x AIM-54 Phoenix
10x AIM-120 AMRAAM
8x AIM-9 Sidewinder
8x GBU-31 JDAM (2,000 pound version)

Typical mission loads:

Interceptor: 8x AIM-54, 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9
General air superiority: 2x AIM-54, 8x AIM-120, 4x AIM-9
Strike: 6x GBU-31, 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9


Price per AFD-14 Skyfire is $50 million each.

OOC: Hmm, very interesting and nice aircraft, though the Seafire is not an OMASC aircraft, but an aircraft produced by an alliance of small aircraft and automobile companies, and the only reason I put it here is that I don't have another thread for my stuff :P

OOC: Came out of your head, that makes it OMASC even if it isn't an OMASC design. :p

Just out of interest, before you can criticise... :rolleyes: The AFD-14 is smaller than the F-14. However, my product has a generally larger usable volume on its underside, which accounts for the larger amount of AAMs overall. :p

And AFD-14 is not stealth. ARS-5 is standard. :p

OOC: Before I begin, the picture is from the cartoon series Robotech, but I am not using any Robotech technology in my designs. They are just simply the pictures and the designs. These aircraft are meant to be Modern Tech.

IC: AFD-12 Matador

http://home.iprimus.com.au/quincyw/afd-12.jpg

If the AFD-14 Skyfire could be not aesthetically pleasing... Then the AFD-12 is decidedly ugly. Built to replace the A-6 Intruder (including the latest versions), the AFD-12 furnishes aircraft carriers with a heavy strike capability. Though, like its A-6 predecessor, it is not stealth and relies on plain old toughness, relative agility and the aggressiveness of its pilots to accomplish the mission... Which it does well.

Beyond that, the AFD-12 is basically a repackaged A-6, in a stronger, bigger airframe. Perhaps the biggest difference between the two is the fact that the AFD-12 can actually launch cruise missiles. Formerly the domain of heavy bombers or naval vessels, the AFD-12 can furnish a maximum of two (2) AGM-86 CALCM or AGM-109 Tomahawk, though no additional ordnance may be carried (external fuel tanks may be added for increased endurance).

While the launching of such cruise missiles may seem redundant, the simple fact was that such an aircraft so armed can respond much faster to fast breaking intelligence, while waiting for a bomber or ship to make its attack may cause the target to move away or be concealed.

Beyond that, the AFD-12 is improved on the A-6 (the H version) by approximately 25% more ordnance and 30% more range.

Stats
AFD-12 Matador
Mission/type: Carrier borne heavy strike fighter
Length: 18.3m
Height: 6.4m
Wingspan: 16.2m
Propulsion: Two AED-21 turbofans with 37,000 lbs each
Max takeoff weight: 90,000 lb
Ceiling: 45,000 ft
Max Speed: Mach 0.85
Max Range: 3,700 km
Payload (represents maximum of each type of weapon, which is not recommended under any circumstances.):

2x AGM-86 CALCM or AGM-109 Tomahawk
12x AGM-65 Maverick
36x Mk-82 (dumb bomb)
6x GBU-31 JDAM (2,000 lb version)
18x CBU-87/97 (cluster bombs)


Additional armaments may be fitted as required. Cost per AFD-12 Matador is $58 million.

AGI announces special discounts, short time only!

To celebrate the Regime of Adejaani's population surpassing the three billion mark (3.002 billion at the time of writing), all customers purchasing A*D products (eg the AFD series fighters and so forth) will receive a 10% discount. Trusted allies will receive a 25% discount! For valid orders over a hundred units, 50% discount and no charge delivery!

Hurry now! This offer is only for a limited time!

Fine print: Subject to sales constraints as per original specifications. Adejaani reserves the right to refuse sale to any nations if necessary.

AIWD-1 Scorpion

The first Adejaani indigenously designed weapon, the AIWD-1 Scorpion (Adejaani Indigenous Weapon Design One) is, unlike its predecessors, designed to be a multiple use weapon. Looking externally similar to the AGM-114 Hellfire missile, it is far more complex on the inside.

The use of an IIR (Imaging Infrared) seeker head, dual use warhead and slightly modified motor assembly, the AIWD-1 has been designed as a dual use anti-armor/fixed target (eg Hellfire) and short range anti air missile (eg FIM-92 Stinger). In anti armor mode, it acts just like a Hellfire and is the dual use warhead is designed for delay action, which penetrates into the hull before releasing its fragments.

In anti air mode, however, the missile warhead is in its second mode, which fragments. It should, however, be noted that AIWD-1 isn't a "true" anti-air missile and is more a "counter punch" missile. In other words, a reaction to an enemy helicopter or CAS aircraft that gets too close. AIWD-1 simply doesn't have the range or speed against high performance fighters and bombers.

More advanced versions of the missile are under development.

Cost per missile is $6 million.

OMASC Announces Conversion of MiG-19 and F-104 Starfighter Aircraft as Cruise "Missiles"

In a surprising move, OMASC has announced that an apparant conversion of nine hundred MiG-19 and an additional four hundred F-104 Starfighter fighters to unmanned cruise missile configurations, as these aircraft are gradually replaced by the QF-4 Phantom, the QA-4 Skyhawk, the QF-16, and the QF-21 (MiG-21 drone) in the target drone role. It is believed that the new specifications are as of follows:

MQ-19 Farmbee (Conversion of MiG-19 J-6 variant/Omzian Designation F-3)
Length: 14.9m
Height: 3.88m
Wingspan: 9.2m
Weight: 10,000kg
Propulsion: Two LWP-9C turbojets, afterburning enabled
Range: 1300km
Speed: Mach 0.9, Mach 1.1 terminal
Ceiling: 58,000ft
Payload: ~500-600kg HE in total
Guidance: Inertial with GPS aid and datalink with possible remote control, optical camera at terminal

MQ-104 Starbee (Conversion of F-104G Starfighter/Omzian Designation F-6)
Length: 16.69m
Height: 4.11m
Wingspan: 6.68m
Weight: 13,000kg
Propulsion: One Jonares J8 turbojet, afterburning enabled
Range: 750km
Speed: Mach 0.9, Mach 1.1 near terminal, Mach 1.4 terminal
Ceiling: 58,000ft
Payload: ~1500-1600kg HE in total
Guidance: Inertial with GPS aid and datalink with possible remote control, optical camera at terminal

As additional aircraft are being pulled out of storage in various depots around Omzian nation, and as the modification process continues, it is expected that full conversion of both fleets of aircraft will be completed within two years. Primarily involving replacing manned flight control equipment, ejection seats, unnecessary avionics equipment, and the cannon, it is expected an advanced autopilot system and an optical camera will be installed instead, with smaller explosives placed around the aircraft, and with bombs attached onto the pylons of the aircraft. Because of this, it is expected that while these "cruise missiles" will be able to fly autonomously without outside control at low altitudes (with the help of a new LADAR altimeter), for true precision targeting against certain targets a remote control system would be used, or in the case of the MQ-104, it is also believed that the multimode radar will be used instead in some situations. As well, because of the nature of these conversions, these "missiles" will be rather designed to act as decoys or be sent in swarms, than to be used as true companions or even replacements for much more effective and dedicated systems such as the OMASC LRALCM. Furthermore, it is again believed that these drones would also aid in reconaissance and battle damage assessment by carrying the optical camera system.

OOC: Expect new updates soon, including a face change of the main page, and new products :)

B-106A Warcrow Supersonic Medium Bomber
"The Big Fighter That Got Turned to a Supersonic Bomber"
Length: 43m
Height: 10.2m
Wingspan: 31.2m
Propulsion: Four Honjak Electrics HEK-1022A PDE-turbofans rated at 60,000lbs/27,216kg each
Empty Weight: 63,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 155,000kg
Crew: Two
Ceiling: >70,000ft
Range: 6800km with max load, 10,000km with MaxICR load, 12,000km for standard load
Speed: Mach 2.64 max, Mach 1.5 supercruise
Payload: 21,200kg max (46,738lb), 18,500kg (40,785lb) max for intercontinental range ("MaxICR" configuration), 16,000kg (35,273lb) standard, within two main weapons bays, two self-defence weapons bays, and six hardpoints (two near wigntip, four underwing). Additional Self Defence Dome (SEDED) with 1x 27mm rear-firing cannon. Additional 250lb "chaff bombs" can also be carried within the two self-defence weapons bays.
Sample Loads (Standard Configuration):
Strike #1 -- 8x 2000lb PDAS (or 16x 1000lb PDAS or 24x 500lb PDAS or 40x 250lb SDB) in each main weapons bay, 3x AGM-88 AARGM/AMRAAM OR 3x 250lb SDB in each self-defence weapons bay. Four additional fuel tanks can be mounted on external hardpoints OR munitions of 500kg-1000kg classes.
Strike #2 -- 4x ALCM or OMASC LRALCM in forward main weapons bay, 8x 2000lb PDAS (or 16x 1000lb PDAS or 24x 500lb PDAS or 40x 250lb SDB) in back main weapons bay, 3x AARGM/AMRAAM OR 3x 250lb SDB in each self-defence weapons bay, fuel tanks on external hardpoints.
Strike #3 -- 8x JASSM or JSOW in forward main weapons bay, 8x 2000lb PDAS (or 16x 1000lb PDAS or 24x 500lb PDAS or 40x 250lb SDB) in back main weapons bay, 3x AARGM/AMRAAM OR 3x 250lb SDB in each self-defence weapons bay, fuel tanks on external hard points.
Maritime Strike #4 -- 8-10x Harpoon/SLAM-ER missile OR 4x CSJMI-OMASC Bankarit-B (2000kg) missile in each main weapons bay, 3x AARGM/AMRAAM in each self-defence weapons bay, fuel tanks on external hardpoints.
Maritime Mine Operations/Strike #5 -- 24x Mk.62 500lb Quickstrike mine (or 8x Mk.65 2000lb Quickstrike Mine) in each main weapons bay, 3x AMRAAM or 1x Mk.62 500lb Quickstrike in each self-defence weapons bay.
Cost: $280 million (available to selected allies only)

The B-106 bomber is a new supersonic aircraft designed by OMASC to fulfill a requirement set by both the Omzian and Scandavian States Air Force that seeks for a supersonic medium bomber that is capable of penetrating enemy airspace at high speeds, and to deliver a variety of precision munitions quickly and efficently. Looking like a small version of a B-101 with a wing similar to a cross between of those of the Concorde and the FB-22, with a blunt nose and a pair of canards, the aircraft is designed with both high speed and reduced sonic boom in mind. Because of these factors, the bomber is primarily designed for high speed penetration of enemy air space at medium to high altitudes, although with the help of a stronger airframe and the avionics systems low level flight missions is also possible, though in that case maintenance issues and airframe fatigue would also come to life.

Airframe Design, Construction, and Weapon Systems

The B-106 airframe features a streamlined fuselage with a blunt nose and two canards at front, which are designed for the purpose of reducing supersonic boom (by creating a spike of pressure ahead of the forward shock of the boom, which results in slowing down the rise in pressure, and reducing the peak overpressure, influenced by studies done in the seventies). There are also a pair of wings spread out throughout the lower part of the length of the fuselage. Appearing like a cross between of those of the Concorde, FB-22, the B-58, and the B-101, the wings are designed to provide good supersonic performance while also allowing a reduced supersonic boom. There are a pair of vertical tails of the "V tail" configuration, and horizontal tail is eliminated. There are four HEK-1022A PDE-turbofan engines mounted below the wings, in which each allows a maximum thrust of 60,000lbs. The air passageways are of a "S shaped" design similar to those on the Eurofighter Typhoon to reduce the RCS of the intakes and the engines. The nozzles also features 2D thrust vectoring, and are carefully shaped to also allow hot gases to quickly mix with cold air outside of the aircraft, allowing a lower heat buildup, and a reduced IR signature. The intakes placed below the wings, and despite the use of a "variable ramp" system to permit high supersonic speeds, engineers has tried to reduce the signature by not only applying RAM materials extensively, but also allowing the ramps to "blend in" within the intake, and avoiding any unnecessary sharp angles. Other forms of shaping are used to both increase supersonic speed and decrease the RCS of the aircraft, especailly the frontal RCS and the under-fuselage/wings RCS. With the addition of various materials, engineers has achieved an RCS that is similar to those of the B-1 and slightly above those of the Rafale and the Typhoon (though primarily because of the size of the aircraft, and the designs that allows it to possess the capability to reach Mach 2+ speed).

The construction of the airframe is primarily composed of strong, lightweight, yet temperature-resistant materials such as advanced titanium alloys, various composites, and ceramic materials. This allows a lighter weight than older methods of construction, yet still allows the airframe to safely enter supersonic speeds, or to conduct low level attacks where airframe strength is very cruical. To reduce the RCS of the aircraft, a new form of RAM, codenamed "Green Slick". This is a 2nd/3rd generation RAM material that is designed to prove better performance and end results over 1st generation RAM materials (such as earlier RAM materials on earlier versions of the the F-117 and B-2). These RAM materials are also applied at specific points to allow radar wave energy to be "absorbed" in larger amounts instead of having them scattered, both allowing a more "conventional" airframe (end result being improved supersonic flight performance), and also allow the aircraft to effectively counter threats such as bistatic radars. RAS (Radar Absorbant Structure) are also present in key areas, which primarily consists of honeycombed layers of various composites and other materials such as Nomex and Kevlar. To reduce other aspects of stealth, the painting and other coatings used on the aircraft is a low reflective light blue/grey colour, which also allows a smaller IR signature by also preventing heat buildups and allows a mroe efficent heat dissipation. There are also some degree of application of armour, which primarily consists of layers of titanium and ceranic plates, and other materials such as kevlar and buckytube-based materials, though the application is limited to only regions around the fuel tanks and cockpits to minimalize the empty weight of the aircraft. As standard, electrochromic panels are present, which are placed around the aircraft. These panels, connected with a central computer, is used to distort the IR signature of the aircraft to confuse the newer and more sophiscated IR-guided missiles and to disguise the aircraft's "true" and "natural" signature, therefore confusing the computer of the enemy IR-guided missile. Additionally, special visual "light cells" and other composites are used around the aircraft to disguise the aircraft's visual signature and to blend the colour outside edges of the aircraft. These light cells are primarily small receptors and sensors that "sees" the colour of the background of the sky, in which a central computer would later direct these sensors to display the colour of the background, effectively blending the aircraft "into" the sky. Both the electrochromic panels and the light cell systems could be turned off from the cockpit.

There are a total of four weapons bays and six hardpoints, which includes two main weapon bays, two self-defence weapons bays, two near-wingtip external pylons, and four underwing external pylons. Each bay features various features that allows not only stealthiness, but also high capacity and efficent delivery of payloads at supersonic speeds with the help of an extending arm system (in special weapon racks) and a smaller "ejector" system (in both racks and rotary launchers) to "eject" the payload out. Normally rotary launchers are carried for weapons delivery, though rack systems could also be used for some munitions. There are also six external hardpoints of stealthy designs (which consists of stealthy, removable pylons of various types that "blends in" with the airframe and has applications of RAM), with each being rated around 2500-3000kg. Each pylon could mount special weapon racks, though in reality only 500kg-1000kg weapons are typically carried, with one per hardpoint, to preserve the low RCS and to reduce the amount of payload carried. These hardpoints could also carry additional targeting pods, reconaissance pods, additional ECM pods, and special fuel tanks (of stealthy designs with RAM and some degree of armouring). In total however, the maximum payload is 21,200kg, though the standard payload is around 16,000kg, which allows intercontinental range.

Self Defence Dome: the Self Defence Dome, also known as SEDED, is a variant of the Self Defence Turret used on the B-105 Skyhammer design. Instead of missiles however, the system incorporates a 27mm tail cannon, which is rotatable around 360 degrees. The barrel is "embedded" within the dome along with the muzzle, to reduce the barrel's affect on RCS, and the radar and IR sensors are downsized, although they are still more than capable at automatically targeting enemy aircraft and large missiles, and to provide additional situational awareness.

Avionics Systems

The B-106A boasts a highly capable avionics system, which includes an advanced fly-by-optics flight control system, a modern glass cockpit, a highly capable sensor suite, and a powerful countermeasures suite. One of the major centerpiece of the new avionics suite is the advanced flight computer, which incorporates a fly-by-optic system and various sensors and other systems to greatly enhance the agility of the aircraft. These sensors also plays a major role in low-level flight, as they help to reduce turbulence, and warns the crew when the airframe is undergoing excess stress in low-altitude flight. This is connected to a HOTAS (Hands on Throttle and Stick) system, which is available to both the Pilot/NDS and the BOS (explained next).

The B-106 also consists of a total of two crew, consisted of the Pilot/Navigator/Defensive Systems Operator (Pilot/NDS) and the Bombardier/Offensive Systems Operator (BOS). The BOS sits beside the Pilot/NDS, and both members faces an array of advanced and sophiscated multi-functional displays (MFDs) and a set of emergency gauges. There is also an advanced wide-angle HUD for the Pilot/NDS, and both members are also equipped with a helmet sight system to improve situational awareness and self-defence capabilities. Both members also has access to a HOTAS system, though HOTAS is often disabled for the BOS, and is enabled only in emergency. These touch-screen MFDs are coupled with a set of smaller but powerful and EMP-hardened data-processing computers, which is responsible for various tasks, including weapon targeting, navigation, situational awareness, and electronic warfare (explained later). The automation of these systems also allows minimal workload, which is the reason why the B-106 only has two crew. With the access to these advanced forms of control, the Pilot/NDS is primarily responsible for operating the aircraft's systems, navigation, and defensive systems (including the electronic warfare system), while the BOS is responsible for operating some specific systems of the aircraft (such as the advanced IR and visual signature distortion systems mentioned earlier), weapons targeting, and communication. The use of advanced datalinks also not only allows the crew greater situational awareness, but also much better ground strike coordination with friendly air, naval, or even ground threats, and various secure communications channels are also enabled by the advanced datalinking and communications system. A space is included behind the cockpit, which can serve as storage of maintenance equipment, personal items, food, or in some cases, a seat could also be installed there to accomdate between one to two more personnel.

The B-106 also features an array of advanced sensors, which includes a radar system, a set of infrared and visual sensors, and a variety of other sensors for various different attack missions. The centerpiece of the B-106 is the Noran LAN/APG-428 ELPI radar, which is capable of multiple modes against bith air and ground threats, and possesses advanced SAR modes, ground mapping/terrain-following technologies, and other ground target tracking and identification features, and it is said that the radar is so precise to a point where it "could see the barrel of an autocannon on an APC" (as quoted from a test pilot/BOS), thanks to the advanced computer of the radar and various advanced NCTR capabilities. This is coupled with advanced frequency-hopping and other features, and also incorporates a special "snapshot" feature, allowing the radar to emit in continuous snapshots for the acquision of various targets. Like those on the F-125C, the radar also includes a jamming feature by concentrating a high level of energy onto a tight spot of enemy radio transmission, to jam the enemy transmittor. With the datalink system, it is also possible for the radar to send targeting information to other aircraft. This main radar is coupled with other advanced subsystems, such as a separate pulse dopplar radar and an advanced LADAR altimeter. An advanced IRST system is also installed for air-to-air tracking and early warning against stealthy enemy aircraft, although the system is not intended for operations against ground targets..

The second major system is the Integrated Bombsight and Targeting Systems (IBTS). The IBTS consists of a powerful targeting computer and a set of advanced IR, visual, and LADAR systems for ground targeting, and is also linked to the main radar system, and the datalink system for receiving target data and coordinates from a remote friendly unit. It also includes datalink systems which links to the munitions themselves, and when using some of the advanced cruise missiles, the datalinks enables the crew to reassign targets inflight, and to conduct battle damage assessment. When coupled with the PDAS precision bomb kits, the "targeting in the fly" feature also allows the IBTS computer to continuously feed updated targeting coordinates to the PDAS bombs after they've been dropped, enabling targeting against mobile targets. Aside from these systems, the second set of systems is composed of an integrated network of three targeting pods placed ahead of the main weapons bays and within the wings, in which all integrates advanced FLIR, low-level TV, and even thermal systems. The main pod ahead of the main weapons bay also includes a LADAR system and a MMW radar system for targeting against smaller targets. This not allows absolute precision and all-weather targeting under intense ECM environments, but also allows an alternative and passive method for ground targeting (instead of "active" methods such as using radars) by offering multiple methods for the targeting of ground targets.

Perhaps one of the most important piece of hardware is the B-106A's powerful countermeasures and electronic warfare system, which gives the aircraft extensive ECM capabilities against enemy air defence systems when the aircraft enters hostile airspace. The centerpiece of the system is the advanced Noran ShockMaster SM/225 integrated electronic warfare system, which offers extensive ECM and attack capabilities against enemy air defence and communication systems, yet the advanced computer system of the SM/225 also allows reduced workload for the crew. Consisting of transmittors and radar warning receivers throughout the aircraft, the SM/225's computer acquires, tracks, and identifies sources of radar and other forms of radio transmittions, which can include air defence radars, communication links between enemy air defence units, and airborne radar units. The powerful computer aboard also allows extensive capabilities against AESA and LPI radars by allowing the computer to track the strings of transmissions and determine an apparant pattern and/or determine the possible number of transmittors from the direction of the LPI radar transmissions, among other sophiscated methods. This unit is linked to a jammer unit, which is resposnible for jamming the enemy radars and communication links, and with the help of multiple transmittors, the aircraft is able to jam multiple radars and/or communication links at one time. A small active radar cancellation system is also used to defeat smaller and older enemy radar units, and to provide a form of defence against enemy radar guided SAMs and air-to-air missiles. Further, the unit is also able to provide target data for the enemy radar units to electronic warfare aircraft such as the EA-6B or the upcoming EB-106C.

The B-106A also includes the PulseMaster PM/12 laser jamming suite, which consists of a small turret emitting a series of powerful short-duration laser "snapshot" pulses, designed to be emitted at the direction of enemy LADAR emitters or even IR-guided weapons, and with enough power and with a set duration of time (which could be adjusted according to information received from the LADAR warning receiver), these pulses is able to effectively overwhelm and "blind" the enemy LADAR receiver. The "snapshot" pulse feature is included to prevent the laser jamming suite from acting as a beacon or a continuous source of laser energy, though as said, the duration of the pulse could be readjusted. The numerical figures for the power for the laser system is not released either, but it is also believed that such laser could also be used as some form of weapon against some "soft" ground targets. Not much information is provided to the general public.

Aside from the powerful radar jammer and laser-based jamming suite as described above, the B-106A's ECM suite also consists of a standard LADAR warning receiver (consisting of small laser energy-detecting sensors around the aircraft), a missile warning receiver system (composed of both IR/UV and pulse dopplar radar systems), infrared jammers, and decoy dispensers, which permits chaff, flares, and other decoys such as fiber optic table-towed decoys and launched decoys.

[Nice]

(Thanks. With a majority of winter holiday homework out of the way, here's some preview of what's ure to come:

B-105
New Cheap Attack UAVs

Here's what I'm planning, but I'll put it here:
EB-106 EW/Bomber Escort Fariant
FB-106 Bomber-Interceptor (Think Tu-128)
RB-106 Reconaissance
F-125C Mini-Satellite Launcher Platform
EV-109C STOVL "Mini-AWACS"
New Light Attack Aircraft
New SAM System (S-300/Patriot PAC-2 Replacement)

But there's still some surprises ;)

OOC: I'm pretty much "done" for now. Though I would like technical assistance on this second generation multi-missile. I'd already developed it for my Space Tech forces, but not for modern tech. Basically, a whole family of missiles, but all using the same common design (like the XGM-84 Harpoon, SLAM and SLAM-ER), scaled up or down depending on its launch platform and intended use.

For example, a small infantry launched version for short range air defense (ie Stinger) and anti tank (ie TOW/Javelin); one to replace the Scorpion I developed; one to replace the AMRAAM and supplement say, the Paveway LGBs; and all the way up to a large Tomahawk like version, but which is both anti structure and anti ship.

I could do it on my won, but I'd like your input.

OOC: Well, I personally stay away from space as much as I can for the tim being, though pretty much I'm considering to go for 2030 perhaps sometimes later during the summer (though I could change my mind and stay in 2010, I have transformed to a nation using aircraft from the 80es to a nation with scramjet missiles and such). Multimode missiles are indeed possible, and since I recall that the Americans are considering to deploy a multimode AMRAAM replacement, I'd suppose that a missile with a dual active/passive radar or an IIR seeker that is able to attack both ground and air targets would be very much possible.

I also believe that the Americans have also used AIM-9s in Vietnam for attack against soft-skinned vehicles (although not much is revealed about the matter), and some Soviet block nations also used the AA-8/R-60 heat seeking AAM in border skirmishes/small conflicts as well against armoured vehicles (I don't remember what it said about the effects though).

As for the ground-launched Stinger/ATGM replacement missile, although if you want serious anti-tank capability I'd still prefer dedicated missile, I suppose that such missile could be possible (the Soviet Spetsnaz used Strela/SA-7 soldier-fired SAMs to attack Mujahideen targets, and it was pretty simple to do actually with the IR seeker - you lock it up and fire it). I'd still suggest a tandem or even three-stage HEAT warhead though, although a dual mode missile with an anti-air mode and a top-attack mode could also be possible with something like a penetrating rod. One disadvantage though is that the missile often has to come into contact with the aircraft body instead of exploding nearby, but I think that to foil enemy countermeasures a wire-guidance system could work.

As for the dual-use Tomahawk, that also exists somewhat in the form of the AGM-84K SLAM-ER, and I recall that even older Soviet missiles like the AS-4 are dual-use. Probably if you want to start from the "easiest" missile to the "hardest"/mos complex missile, start with this one.

OMASC Unveils New Variants of WCMD: WCMD-II Long-Range Area-Wide Attack System

Versions
CBU-203/B (1400lb) - CBU-87/B with WCMD-II tailkit, 202x CEB bomblets
CBU-204/B (1400lb) - CBU-89/B with WCMD-II tailkit, 72x BLU-91/B anti-tank mine and 22 BLU-92/B anti-personnel mines
CBU-205/B (1500lb) - CBU-97/B with WCMD-II tailkit, 10x BLU-108/B SFW
CBU-206/B (1350lb) - OMASC CBU-94L "Blackout Bomb II" with WCMD-II tailkit
CBU-207/B (1400lb) - Dispenser with 2000 titanium and tungsten flechettes, for attacking exposed fuel or CBW weapon storage facilities (by puncturing storage tanks and igniting them with a special charge)
CBU-208/B (1350lb) - Dispenser with 16 BAT smart submunitions
CBU-209/B (1400lb) - Dispenser with 208 small incendiary bomblets
Guidance: Inertial with GPS, optional IIR seeker for targeting for submunition dispersion
Range: 40-80km (under ideal medium-high altitudes at high subsonic/low supersonic speeds, ranges may vary with different attack modes/configurations; ranges boosted with glide wing kit and thrustor-equipped rocket booster)
Cost: $14,000 (per kit only)

The WCMD-II is the next step from the WCMD as a precision attack area-effect weapon, which is a series of cluster bombs with a special tailkit to give the bombs precision attack capability. However, facing the emerging threats, OMASC engineers has determined that it is important to produce a special version of this system that allows medium-range attacks while still permitting wide-area damage effects against small targets such as vehicles. Because of this, the WCMD-II is born. Although it should be noted that the WCMD-II is more of a longer ranged companion or counterpart of the WCMD and is not designed for replacing the WCMD, the WCMD-II is designed for both short and longer-range attacks, while staying out of enemy air defences.

The WCMD-II primarily consists of three main components: Guidance, Flight Control, and Targeting. The WCMD-II snap-on kit consists of a pair of pop-out glide wings, with carefully placed and located movable surfaces for correcting the course of the bomb and for maneuveribility (described later). On the tail, a specially designed tail assembly allows course correction, and also holds a GPS-assisted inertial guidance system, which allows the bomb to achieve a CEP of "less than 20m" under standard circumstances. A rocket booster is also attached to give the bomb improved speed and a vastly superior range, and small thruster-like systems are also placed for flight control. Under standard circumstances, when the bomb arrives at a specific release point, the submunitions would be released by the dispenser, before a small explosive charge destroys the dispenser to protect the guidance and computer systems from falling into enemy hands.

The targeting system is also vastly improved, allowing the WCMD-II to be released with precision, and also allowing attack capabilities against moving targets. For the purpose, the snap-on kit is also equipped with a small top-mounted IR seeker and a datalinking system. The datalinking system allows the bomb to receive a continuous stream of updates for attacking moving enemy ground formations, while the IR seeker also allows the bomb to attack these mobile formations if the datalink does not receives the updates coordinates. This fully allows mobile target attack capability. However, under standard circumstances, the inexpensive IR seeker will be "ejected" from the bomb before the dispenser opens to release submunitions. As well, when attacking targets protected by air defence systems, the onboard computer can also be programmed to maneuver in flight to counter enemy anti-aircraft artillery systems that might attack the cluster bomb unit.

In a standard scenario, the pilot onboard a strike aircraft would first feed the GPS coordinates to the bomb and determine one of the many available attack profiles and options (for example, the altitude in which the dispenser releases the submunitions, whether to come in from the side or the top of the target, etc.), before feeding these data into the unit. Once the unit is released, the glide wings pops out, while the booster activates. If the bomb is attacking a moving target, the datalink would also activate to receive the stream of updates from the launching aircraft or even another airborne or ground unit (for example, ground controllers). Once the bomb approaches the target area, the bomb will start to maneuver as it moves into an ideal release point for the submunitions, before releasing them onto the target.

OOC: :rolleyes: I was commenting that I'd previously developed a family of missiles on my own, but as Space Tech. I am merely asking your help to develop a Modern Tech equivalent. :p

So basically I have no idea what sort of guidance systems or engines I should use. If this is any help, this was my Space Tech... Well, all the versions of these multi purpose missiles as I'd developed them:

"A" infantry carried, anti air/armor (Stinger/Javelin)
"B" fighter carried, short range anti air/armor (Sidewinder, Maverick)
"C" fighter carried, long range anti capital ship (Harpoon)
"D" fighter carried, medium range anti air (AMRAAM... An anti armor/ground version would be similar to JDAM, I suppose, but this never got developed... Why? :p )
"E" ship carried, short range anti air/missile/torpedo (Rolling Airframe Missile/Standard Medium Range)
"F" ship carried, medium range anti air/missile/torpedo (Standard Extended Range)
"G" ship carried, long range anti capital ship (not really an equivalent, but say, Tomahawk)


So... This is basically the "lineup" of what the missiles will be, and its intended purposes. Any ideas? :p

OOC: Hmm, well, I don't have any knowledge about spacetech weapons or whatsoever, but about the "Earth-based weapons", it really depends on what type of role your missile will serve. For example, you'll want some type of turbofan or even a hybrid PDE-turbofan for a long range cruise missile, whereas you might want something like a ducted ramjet/ramrocket engine for medium range air-to-air missiles. Scramjet could be another possibility for some, but if you want to strike something like a ship, I still wouldn't suggest a Mach 5-7 weapon for the job unless the target is a huge capital ship. Similarily, a rocket could be more than enough for your Stinger and Javelin combination.
Guidance somewhat follows the same way, and also depends on what you want, really. For a stealthy cruise missile you'll want to avoid emissions that might alert the enemy, and IR on a cruise missile also has the benefit of enabling the missile to somewhat distinguish a friendly ship from an enemy one (the Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missile's radar seeker had pretty a hard time in doing that, and often it would end up hitting a friendly or even neutral vessel - not good). Similarly for anti-air missiles, IR is a must for a short-range missile, though for longer ranges you might want a dual mode active/passive radar and/or IR missile if you want to attack both air and ground targets, allowing some flexibility, though comparing the size of an AMRAAM to a JDAM you would see that the JDAM would be a much more efficent "building buster".

Also, SS: As for royalties, I originally thought about limiting the deal we had to the B-105 (and originally considering that the B-106 is more a unit that is designed for Omzian requirements originally), but on a second thought, I've been thinking about a scheme where you can produce 216 units with each unit bearing the same amount of royalties as the F-125C, and when you finished the 216 aircraft, you can produce more of them without any royalties. Deal?

[Sounds like a deal.]

OOC: I was making a general comparison. :p The 'AMRAAM' version could be scaled down... Say somewhere between 'heavy AMRAAM' and 'light SLAM'. We could also create another version with SCRAMjets for ballistic and out of atmosphere anti-satellite missiles.

Though if I asked you for your recommendations as to the guidance, warhead, employment and "equivalent in real world weapon"... Can you do that? You're better at this than I am. And remember my listing was guideline, so feel free to mix and match requirements and intentions if it makes for a better fit.

OOC: Sure, I'll see what I can do, but keep in mind that scramjets are still jet engines, thus they do still require air. They don't really need propulsion when you put them into the "collision course", but the problem is that with a jet engine you wouldn't get the necessary amount of air - if at all - at extremely high altitudes to propel the missile so that you could put it into the correct course.

OOC: Then a solid fueled rocket. :rolleyes: :p

[Actually Omz, given the fact the even at extremely high altitudes scramjet missiles are still subject to surface heating from air friction, such an engine would be more than capable of propelling a missile at high altitude and at hypersonic speeds.

[Actually Omz, given the fact the even at extremely high altitudes scramjet missiles are still subject to surface heating from air friction, such an engine would be more than capable of propelling a missile at high altitude and at hypersonic speeds.
OOC: It's not that the missile wouldn't be able to go to a high altitude, but its capability to break off from the atmosphere and be put into the same orbit as the targeted satellite (therefore creating a collision - that's how kinetic ASAT weapons work - even with a separate kinetic kill vehicle you'd still have to actually get it there instead of letting it go while still in the atmosphere). I'm not aware that jet engines would still be able to function at the edge of space.

OOC: Isn't Treknology so much simpler? :rolleyes: I've been thinking a little, maybe will these notes help?

Ramjet powered, GPS/IIR (non stealthy) 'light cruise missile'. I can see this being used as a standoff, low level weapon for use against SAM and AAA sites or Command Posts.
Multi stage missile, for ballistic/out of atmosphere work. A missile within a missile. The solid fuel/Scramjet booster stage discards itself and the actual missile then flies away. The disposable nose cone is basically a heat shield.

I don't really know... I'm not as knowledgeable in this field.

[No, no jet engine I'm aware of could operate at the 100 kilometer mark. I wasn't aware you were talking about ASAT missiles.]

OOC: I don't know. :p But as I mentioned, my Space Forces uses only one family of missiles. All with common frames and components (with literal 'bolt on' attachments like fins and radar deflecting nose cones) as needed. I just figured we should try... :p

[Omz, where are your new ASROC torpedoes? Also, I have some more projects for you.

1) A tactical transport roughly the size of a C-17, but with the ability to drop 185 men (a full airborne company.) Since stealth isn't ever an issue with transports I'd like the aircraft to be a box-wing.

2) A heavy transport roughly the size of a C-5. It should have the ability airdrop two full companies of paratroops. Wing shape should either be a box or U wing.

3) For the strategic transport I want you to go over the top. Five companies of paratroops or a single Main Battle Tank.

BTW, if you don't know what a U wing is, go to these places:
http://www.x-plane.org/registry/4422.shtml
http://www.x-plane.org/registry/4794.shtml

You don't have to go that big, of course. Just big enough to get the job done. I'd also suggest you take a look at the M-7 Jackson and M-2 Vampire MBTs so you know what you're designing for in the last aircraft.]

OOC: ASROCs? You mean those I posted in the OMP boards?

About the transports, I'll have to say that I'm less knowledgeable when it comes to those, but I do have some good documentation and sources of knowledge. However, I'll still have to see if I can do them. I got a Math mid-final that costs me 50% of my marks next week, and another Chem/Bio Final the week following that. The B-105 I'll see if I can come through, but by any luck, I'll have to question myself regarding whetehr I can do these.

[I'm in no hurry. Do well on your tests and then come back to work on the transports, which I'm sure you'll do just fine.]

[I'm in no hurry. Do well on your tests and then come back to work on the transports, which I'm sure you'll do just fine.]
OOC: Yeah, thanks. For the B-105, you can use the specs for it for now since that one I posted is the final version, and I would just need to do the descriptions, including the one for the Self-Defence Turret (which, if you want to know, basically is a small turret with various sensors and a pack of small missiles).

OOC: SS, I developed that transport ages ago. http://home.iprimus.com.au/quincyw/dwlaugh.gif It's basically a big flying box. Dual engines, conventional and Scramjets. It's theoretically trans atmospheric, but it can fly high and fast. It can carry about four M1A2 Abrams battle tanks. See below:

Adejaani unveils C-34 Speedhawk

The concept for the Speedhawk grew out of research into the use of SCRAMjet technologies, which had already been applied to certain surface to air/space missiles. However, for an aircraft, say a fighter or a bomber, it was an impractical as the aircraft would need to be travelling in excess of Mach 4 or so, before the SCRAMjets could take effect. Such a small aircraft would be unable to carry enough fuel to take advantage of SCRAMjet technology and have enough fuel to carry out its usual missions.

However, the power and range of a SCRAMjet powered aircraft did make obvious advantages and thus was born the Speedhawk, as pictured below.

http://freespace.virgin.net/ra.day/mtb2e.jpg

At first glance, yes, it does indeed resemble Thunderbird 2, from the old TV show Thunderbirds. Indeed, the picture shows the model and the two prototypes were nicknamed "Thunderbird 2" in homage. The simple fact was, the airframe design was near perfect for SCRAMjet operations.

The Speedhawk is basically one large cargo hold, with a cockpit in front and engine pods along the sides of the fuselage. The cargo hold is serviced by one large stern ramp and is large enough to accomodate four M1A2 battle tanks, or roughly 600,000 pounds of payload.

Range is simply phenomenal, as this aircraft has been stressed and is essentially a spacecraft design (though it doesn't exit the atmosphere), capable of skimming just under the edge of the atmosphere, where it makes maximum use of the SCRAMjet to propel it high and fast above the earth.

Cost is currently $300 million each.

It's on page 42. :D

Nice aircraft, but it's not what I had in mind. The altitude and speed of this aircraft preclude jumps by infantry, which has to be the first priority of any transport. Also, I dislike scramjets on aircraft, both because the speed makes them unmanueverable and they're more labor-intensive than even PDEs, never mind regular engines.

OOC: It was a starter, SS. The C-34 was meant to be a large strategic transport. I can easily scale it down (to an appropriate size) and reduce the engines, but keep the same overall characteristics. I was planning to do that anyway, I forgot. :p

But mainly, it's got the altitude and speed to go anywhere. It's basically like a C-5 Galaxy, with a lot more range.

OOC: Since I have some more time, and since it is only a slight modification, here it is. Also SS, since you are a computer expert (I forgot the majority of the stuff I learned about computers), is it possible to link vacuum tubes with transistors? /OOC

OMASC Announces New F-125C Variant

OMASC today has announces that a new F-125C Rapier variant is near completion. Dubbed the F-125CB War Rapier, the F-125CB is a step away from the F-125C Interceptor/SEAD aircraft as a pure air-to-air interceptor.

"The aircraft will share many components, but will have a few additions and deletions as well," one of the test pilots of the F-125CB, Lt. Col. Noren of the 255th Interceptor Wing of the Air Defence Command, said in an interview. "One of the major changes is the inclusion of a pair of newer hybrid PDE-turbofan, which will give it a higher maximum speed, although the supercruise speed will be slightly reduced along with the range. Another thing we are considering is to get rid of external armaments altogether, which will hopefully increase supersonic performance and speeds. Because of this, unlike the F-125C, the F-125CB is an actual dedicated interceptor. Like the F-125C, it's not really of a dogfighter, but considering that the F-125C is already a good dedicated interceptor, the F-125CB will excel."

It is also believed that the aircraft will be the first Omzian aircraft to once again include vacuum-tube technology, this time incorporating modern designs with the use of carbon nanotube technologies, designed for improved survivability in an EMP attack. However, it is also said that regular transistors will also be incorporated elsewhere, which will also utilize technologies such as the use pf carbon nanotube. Because of this, the radar is also expected to be higher powered to counter enemy active ECM systems, although LPI capabilities will be reduced.

Not much information is released, but it is expected that as a variant of the F-125CB, the F-125C will enter service as a dedicated interceptor to counter the advanced high speed Mach 4+ aircraft seen today.

[Adejaani, it's not the size I have a problem with, it's the speed and altitude. I don't want a supersonic transport nor one with greater than normal altitude, just a very big one. Also, the U wing is something of a prerequisite.]

Interesting... :confused: I'll get a design back to you in 48 hours. I seem to think best without a keyboard in front of me.

Program initiation, ATD-1 Harmonica

Against Scandavian States' requirement for a multirole transport with "u wings", the ATD-1 program, backhandedly named the Harmonica, has begun. Most intriguingly, the ATD-1 uses the U wings, except the engines are mounted forward. The same extended jutting engine design as used on the C-17 Globemaster III is repeated in this design, which gives it a harmonica like look, hence the name. Additional details will become available after first flight testing.

OOC: SS, what are the size dimensions of your MBTs?

[
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7826074&postcount=17
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7213276&postcount=1

The top one is the MBT used by my shock armies, the other one is used by all other Imperial Army divisions.]

OOC: Well, as much as I want to incorporate the U-Wing design, apparantly I can't find too much actual info on the design, considering that I'd still need an actual overview of such design before I come up with the description and specifications, and that if this is an one-person design I'll have to think about it even for a virtual nation roleplaying game. But I'll give my shot.

OMASC Announces Development New Transport Aircraft

The OMASC design teams today has announced the development of a series of new transport aircraft, which are rumoured to be designed as a result of requirements set by Scandavian States. Although it is expected that these projects may be hindered by current government budget allocations and the Omzian Air Force's apparant lack of interest, it is also expected that the design bureaus may turn the projects into a series of private ventures.

The first project is believed to be the deveploment of a new tactical transport aircraft with a size of between those of the C-130J and those of the C-17. It is not believed that any conventional designs will be incorporated, but instead, a blended wing or a box-wing design will be incorporated for maximum performance and loads, coupled with advanced survivability for airborne missions. It is also expected that the load will primarily consist of dry cargo or even soldiers, and will incorporate near-intercontinental range with in-flight refuel capability.

The second project is believed to be the development of a new strategic transport aircraft either based on the ULTRA concept, or a box-wing design, with a size similar to those of the An-225. However, it will be improving upon the reliability of large transport aircraft such as the C-5, and will be able to incorporate new large engines in addition to a set of new landing gear and shock absorber systems for slightly shorter takeoff and landing distances for better compatibility with more airbases and airports. Exceeding the size of those of the C-5, it is expected that this aircraft will serve as a companion rather than a replacement for BWB aircraft, featuring a more conventional airframe design will still offering a maximum load of between three to five main battle tanks.

[Well, the design obviously works. I mean, those two are for one of the most advance and realistic home flight sims available, so if they work in that there's very little chance that it wouldn't work in a real aircraft. I think the wing design is basically just a connected bi-place wing with an anhedral/dihedral combo to increase lift and stability.

If you're uncomfortable with that, go with a C-wing.]

OOC: I'm doing a U wing. Thanks for the stats, SS. As I said, I've got some nice ideas and I'll be getting them in as soon as my mind finishes grappling with them.

[Hey Omz, would it be possible to upgrade existing F-125Cs to the CB variant?]

[Hey Omz, would it be possible to upgrade existing F-125Cs to the CB variant?]
OOC: Well, it is not really of an upgrade, but a modification, considering that with the F-125CB you will be getting rid or reduce of the following:

-Some of the radar's advanced frequency hopping capability
-Ground attack capability
-Most external weapon carriage capability (note: most, though the CB for the time being will not have any weapon-carrying external pylons or the likes, but only fuel tanks at best)
-Range and endurance
-Some computer processing capability
-Some stealth design features

Instead of the F-125C being a dual-use interceptor/high speed SEAD aircraft (still not really a multirole aircraft or a digfighter though), the F-125CB will be getting slightly improved max speed, improved operating altitudes, improved cruising speed, improved anti-ECM capabilities (think of a radar with a power of those of the MiG-25 and -31 to burn through jamming and reduce capabilities of ARC systems), and a even bigger improvement for EMP resistance by using new EMP-hardened computers (though the regular F-125C is EMP-hardened as well, but it is still without some cruical systems).
Essentially, the F-125CB is basically used when someone wants to attack my capital city and decides to sneak their Mach 3-4 bombers or their HyperSoars (bombs without shieldings from 300,000ft will just burn up at best, unless you sacrifice explosives for shieldings) and thinks that their 1000 EMP-warhead AAMs activated at random points (EMP warheads still need specific activation points) would work against the F-125Cs in the sky.

ATD-1 Harmonica, official rollout, models 'A' and 'B'

As previously noted, the ATD-1 program was begun with the intention of providing a transport with U wings. The biggest problem was to design an aircraft with such a feature, yet keep it agile enough. Further, AGI mandated a 'rough field' performance, at least with the smaller versions. The first issue, was the U wings.

At first, it was unsure how to create a viable (and strong enough) wing to lift such heavy loads. The U wing was a challenge, requiring AGI to pretty much go back to the drawing boards and learn all over again the dynamics of flight. What AGI found was to treat the U wing as a system, not as two wings, but as one.

Although there is a fair gap between the wings, the use of the forward mounted engines between the wings (so when viewed from the side, it becomes an 'A' shape), the aerodynamics are different. The entire U wing section becomes one large wing, while internally, both wings add their aerodynamic lift together.

Currently, the ATD-1 line consists of the 'A' and 'B' variants presently. The 'A' is roughly 10% bigger than the C-17, except with the U wing and slightly less 'rough field' performance. The 'B' model is similar in size to the C-5 though is actually smaller, somewhat squatter and shorter. Both of these were designed to the specific requirements.

The final version, the 'C', has been delayed. The large stategic version requirement is too great and no wing design has yet been able to handle such a massive load (or, for that matter, the airframe) without severe structural cracks.

Because of the specific paradrop requirement, a new Adejaani patented design has come into being. It is called Fireman's Pole™ and is exactly like those in fire stations where the firefighters slide down them to reach their engines. Four such devices (at each corner of the cargo hold), combined with a flush mounted, door like chute (to protect against the initial air gust) allows for paratroops to deploy four times faster than most other aircraft, which usually have only one exit for them.

Internal Military Ministry memo, carrier air wing compositions

Although our AFD-7 Starfury aircraft was built using the most advanced technologies, the AFD-7 has proven only marginal in service, particularly as far as carrier operations are concerned. However, the arrival of the AFD-14 Skyfire and AFD-12 Matador has changed matters. The former is now acting as the main fighter, light strike role, the latter as the heavy attack role. The AFD-7 has been relegated to the "swing" role, being a mixture of both.

From now on, all Adejaani carrier air wings will be composed of thusly (for our slightly larger than Nimitz type carriers):

36x AFD-14 Skyfire
24x AFD-7 Starfury
36x AFD-12 Matador
6x EA-6C Prowler
6x S-6 Sea Intruder
4x E-55 Lander
2x C-55 Lander
6x SH-60R Seahawk

[Uh, I will point out the Pelican can easily transport five companies of troops. Five companies is, after all, only 925 men. This (http://aero.stanford.edu/CWing.html) aircraft manages 650 passengers, I'm sure if you modified the design to accomodate a U-Wing you'd come out fine.]

OOC: I was trying to add some RP difficulties... :p In a realistic sense, though, I was figuring out the tank thing more than the passenger thing. Since the C-5 can actually handle two Abrams tanks (the C-17 can only haul around one), I'm wondering how to fit that requirement in. The passengers, no problem. It's trying to get the tanks in without the wings literally snapping off. ;)

As I've done the numbers, your tank is smaller, but heavier... As I said, I'll figure something out, I might be able to cram in two of your tanks (either one)... I'll tell you when I figure it.

[I assume you're speaking of the Vampire? While its height and length are smaller, its width is not; that is why it has double the internal volume of the Abrams.

The Jackson is quite a bit larger is dimensions in the Abrams and it is also a bit heavier the the M-1A2 as well.]

OOC: Well, all I can say is that we can expect some updates soon. Finals aren't exactly so soon, and just got through a crapload of homework, so its all well :)

If you are interested SS, I might develop three transports: two "tactical" (well, they are technically strategic) and one "strategic". For the tactical one, one will be a stealthy, supersonic design, while the other one will use the C-Wing. Thanks for the link btw (not too informed on non-"warfightng" transport designs).

AVD-1 Broom Closet

The AVD-1 (Adejaani Vehicle Design One) seems out of place here, but nevertheless, it is an important design. While it is dependent on the Air Force (or its equivalent) to provide air support, to sweep the skies of enemy fighters, the simple fact is that it is near to impossible to achieve a 'completely' clear sky. Not impossible, it would simply require a significant advantage in numbers and technology to achieve air superiority.

The Stinger missile provides 'adequate' defense against attack helicopters and CAS (Close Air Support) aircraft, while fixed SAM (Surface to Air Missile) batteries like Patriot or Hawk are hampered by the fact that they are fixed and are thus vulnerable to attack.

So, AGI (Adejaani Government Industries) went to the drawing board. A vehicle to provide adequate air defense against medium and longer range threats (Stinger was still adequate in the short range role), but was mobile... It also had to be fully self contained (except for supply) and self propelled. To make the requirements even tougher, it was mandated that this vehicle would be capable of being lifted by a C-17 Globemaster (the most common airlift aircraft and rough field) and be rugged and relatively fast, to keep up with armored and mechanised infantry formations.

It was the airlift requirement which became a problem, though the rest was met with ease. The heart of the AVD-1 is the vehicle itself. Essentially a MLRS vehicle base, though strengthened considerably, with a significantly more powerful engine. With this tried and true technology, the AVD-1 has the same mobility as offered by the M1A2 Abrams, although not as fast, but is capable of the distances and ranges as these tanks.

On the back of this vehicle, where the MLRS launcher once was, is actually a small VLS (Vertical Launch System), almost identical to the ones aboard naval vessels, though considerably smaller. Made of strengthened aluminum (the steel protection and seawater proofing of the naval version being redundant), this small version VLS mounts ground launched versions of the legendary AIM-120 AMRAAM and is configured in a 6x6 (for 36 missiles) cell arrangement.

As mentioned before, the airlift part is a problem, generally dictated by the length of the AMRAAM, as well as the overall requirement that this vehicle, if not whole, at least be modular. So modular was the direction taken, requiring two C-17 airlifts. One for the vehicle chassis, the other for the VLS launcher assembly (which just fits into the C-17 cargo hold) and the missiles already inside. It takes only a skilled crew, plus a few helpers only half an hour for the mating of the two primary components. Recalibration can be done 'on the go', mostly for launch testing and radar calibration.

The radar is actually more of a 'sphere' and is just that, mounting a miniature version of the ARS-5 radar system. However, because of the advanced data links and communications system, orbiting AWACS aircraft can provide targeting data or even fighter aircraft, if they have it locked on.

In service, the AVD-1 has rapidly become a favorite among Commanding Officers. With their (relatively high) speed and mobility, they can keep up with armored formations and mobile HQs (Headquarters), supply dumps or key lines of advance can be relatively protected against air attack, especially when coupled with 'conventional' SAM systems and their radars (which can provide target data). The Air Force has also asked for quite a few, to protect its air bases or temporary commandeered air strips.

There are currently two hundred (200) AVD-1 vehicles in service, with about another thousand (1,000) on order.

Stats:
AVD-1 Broom Closet
Roles/Missions: Mobile Surface to Air Missile (SAM) vehicle (medium/long range)
Length: 44.1 ft
Height (chassis): 6.0 ft
Height (VLS assembly): 12.0 ft
Height (total): 18.0 ft
Width: 17.0 ft
Crew: 3
Armament: 36x AIM-120 AMRAAM

Price per AVD-1 Broom Closet is 38 million each.

OOC: First of all, I know AMRAAM is an air to air missile, but the US (all four services), successfully test fired a ground launched version. While nobody has any specifics, the AMRAAMs as per the AVD-1 are modified in a similar way for ground launching.

IC: Supplemental program initiation, AVD-1B

The original AVD-1 (now modelled "A") has a payload of AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles dictated by the size constraints of the C-17's cargo hold, which was itself an attempt to rapidly deploy anti air defense in rough field situations. While the AVD-1A provides adequate medium and relatively long range anti aircraft defense, there needed to be something more powerful and more versatile.

The AVD-1B was designed to be without the C-17 specification and thus can only be carried by oversized cargo aircraft like the C-5, or the preferred method, by cargo ships. The AVD-1B is an enlarged version, being equipped with SM-2 Standard, RIM-162 ESSM (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile) and even the RIM-156 SM-2 Block IV Navy area defense missile, which provides protection against ICBMs and IRBMs, thus also replacing Patriot batteries as well.

AVD-1B will not have the same levels of mobility as its smaller A version, but has a far wider range of missile choices and the use of Standard missiles gives it an anti missile defense as well (which extends to the defense of its assigned station).

OOC: Well, as for the anti-ICBM capability, neither the ESSM and the SM-2 Block IV are designed for engaging something like an ICBM, though the SM-2 Block IV does have an anti-tactical BM capability. Instead, they designed the SM-3, but neither is the SM-3 designed to be launched from a non-specialized AEGIS-equipped ship.

With various factors in consideration (especially when the SM-2 Block IV is pretty much designed to fired from AEGIS ships) that while you could upgrade SM-3 to perhaps for engaging ICBMs of a limited number, you'd need very specialized systems that must be able to track something like an ICBM warhead in the mid-course stage, and help to engage it.
Similarily, perhaps you could use a modified SM-2 on the ground, and it would get interesting if the seeker is an active radar one. However, at best, you could consider to ditch the anti-ICBM capability completely, since not only you'd need a big missile to at least intercept it in the mid-course stage, but you'd also need a huge and specialized systems such as a radar to provide targeting and tracking.

OOC: It was just me bantering around some stuff. In hindsight, I remembered my programs. Patriot PAC-3 and the Navy's TBMD are just for IRMs and similar, with only the Air Force's programs actually capable of ICBM defense. Once again, I should note that I'm trying to create versatility, but this ICBM thing will probably go and go down to just IRBM defense.

OOC: It was just me bantering around some stuff. In hindsight, I remembered my programs. Patriot PAC-3 and the Navy's TBMD are just for IRMs and similar, with only the Air Force's programs actually capable of ICBM defense. Once again, I should note that I'm trying to create versatility, but this ICBM thing will probably go and go down to just IRBM defense.
OOC: Probably. I'd imagine something like nothing short of a MRBM-sized missile if you want a solid capability against larger ICBMs in the NS world.

Really though a modified SM-3 or THAAD (though still not Patriots) could have very solid capabilities against ICBMs or even maybe low-orbit satellites, provide that you upgrade it perhaps with a larger size, heavier weight, and more specialized targeting systems.

OOC: Okay, I did some thinking while I was away... One vehicle chassis, slightly uprated engines, slightly strengthened. There could be two or three versions, but mostly for the VLS package:

"A" version, armed with a ground launched version of the AMRAAM, transportable by C-17, in two loads, typically for high mobility, rapid deployment forces
"B" version, armed with Standard (anti air version) or ESSM or even RAM, for slower deployment forces, providing anti air and anti missile defense, carried by cargo vessels
"C" version, armed with either SM-3 Standard or Patriot (anti ICBM), or HAWK or SM-2 Standard (anti IRBM), carried by cargo vessels

With a common vehicle chassis, we only need to build three versions of the VLS launchers and stick missiles inside them. Small, medium and large, depending.

Lookes fine, though for C keep in mind that the SM-3 itself is still not fully capable of intercepting an ICBM (a modified one, perhaps with a bigger booster and propulsion assembly along with more fuel, could). You could forget about the Patriot as it doesn't even have the ceiling necessary for ICBM warhead interception, let along capability.

Another note however, while the Hawk has been tested against tactical ballistic missiles, it is already an obsolete system IRL, and will be like a WWII Me-109 compared to a F/A-22 when you put it in NS. The ground-launched AMRAAM's capabilities are already marginally better, if not vastly exceeds, the Hawk's capability.

If you want anti-MRBM or even anti-IRBM capability, look at the PAC-2 and PAC-3. They all have solid anti-aircraft capability, and the PAC-3 is also smaller compared to the PAC-2.

OOC: Well, systems architecture isn't my thing... I'm just figuring out how 'big' to build the systems and then install the missiles as needed. For the HAWK, I only did it because of this: http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/hawk.htm

Any chance I could convince you to build me a few missiles of your (our?) own design to slot in to each version, to simplify costs? :rolleyes:

OOC: As for the missiles, I might have some more time next week (or even shorter time if we want to work together), so perhaps that could be a possibility. What I'm thinking about are basically two missiles: one longer-ranged anti-aircraft missile, an one medium-range missile designed for ballistic missile interception and medium-range air defence. The anti-ICBM version I'll consider, but it's highly unlikely that one complete system of that type could be transported by anything less than a whole fleet of C-17s.

In the meanwhile, if you want, I can adapt a version of my NLRAAM missile (which itself is a radical upgrade of the AMRAAM) for ground launch for you if you want, which will most likely feature a range of 50-80km, a more powerful rocket booster, and a datalink.

OOC: Uh... Well basically, no... The original C-17 requirement was originally "the whole vehicle" and failing that, modular. The VLS module had a mandated height of 12 feet and maybe two inches max, because the C-17's max cargo height was 12'4", I believe (thus I was forced to use AMRAAM, which topped in at about 11'9", add in the hatches, some upper and lower stuff). For the larger "B" and "C" versions, I completely dropped the airlift requirement.

I guess I don't really know what I was doing... The more I think about it, the more the tactics of this versus aircraft are changing my way of thinking. I'm even now doubting my "B" and "C" requirements... But the "A" could definitely use a better missile...

OOC: Okay, sorry for the harsh tone...

I've decided to drop the "C" model. Little to no use. You couldn't fit an anti-IRBM or anti-ICBM package into a vehicle that size anyway and it sound be pretty redundant.

If we were up against cruise missiles, the full sized SM-2 Standard in the "B" vehicle could handle that, as well as "heavy" anti air defense.

What I really need now is something better than AMRAAM for the "A" model. The only main requirement is, that it be no longer than 12', a number dictated by the height of the C-17's cargo hold, in order for the vehicle to remain pretty rough field airlift capable.

What I really need now is something better than AMRAAM for the "A" model. The only main requirement is, that it be no longer than 12', a number dictated by the height of the C-17's cargo hold, in order for the vehicle to remain pretty rough field airlift capable.
OOC: Well, as said, I am offering you a ground-launched version of my NLRAAM (with a 80km range) if you want, although it will be pretty much used against aircraft in the medium range air defence role only.

OOC: Is it longer than twelve feet? :rolleyes: :p

Can it also engage in the same range envelope as the original AMRAAM?

OOC: Is it longer than twelve feet? :rolleyes: :p

Can it also engage in the same range envelope as the original AMRAAM?
OOC: It will, though the ramjet engine does need a booster and it is geared more towards medium-high altitude defence (low altitude is best left to the somewhat better short-range IR SAMs such as something like a lengthened Stingers or Iglas). Even if it is longer than the AMRAAM, you could still have the missile easily carried horizontally instead of vertically if it is not operating in combat conditions. Heck, the length difference is even shorter than a standard 30cm ruler.

[Hey, where's my bomber? For that matter, where're my transports?]

[Hey, where's my bomber? For that matter, where're my transports?]
OOC: Well, my apologies if this gets a bit slow, but despite the spare time I have, not too much time when it comes to actual research, although as for the B-105 I've already posted the final stats (just need the descriptions though). As for the transports, I'm considering a C-Wing and that's probably what I will go for, but still haven't worked out the stats yet considering that I want something that is big yet not too An-225-like.

However, there could be potentially new stuff coming in February when a new semester starts and I have more time as there would be less projects squeezed in and less midterms and finals to study for.

F-125E Hyper Rapier Ultra-High Speed and Altitude Interceptor

Length: 26.2m
Height: 6.32m
Wingspan: 17.63m
Crew: 2 (Pilot and Radar Interception Officer)
Propulsion: Two Honjak Electrics HEK-22C1 hybrid PDE-turbofans engines with 3D thrust vectoring, 55,000lb thrust each
Empty Weight: 21,200kg (46,737lb)
(Normally) Maximum Loaded Weight: 47,000kg (103,617lb)
Ceiling: Above 83,000ft
Speed: Mach 3.72 at ceiling, Mach 1.9 supercruise
Range: 6000km ferry, 2300km combat radius (air interception)
Armament: 1x 27mm cannon, two main weapon bays and two side weapons bays, plus two pylons for special fuel tanks ONLY (no missiles to be carried externally)
--2x Main Weapons Bays: Three pylons each, each holding one AIM-315A Spear (or SS AAM-3 Longbow) or two AIM-120P NLRAAM (or SS AAM-3 Shortbow)
--2x Side Weapons Bays: One pylon each, each holding one AIM-120P NLRAAM (or SS AAM-3 Shortbow) or three AIM-317 Air Snake SRAAM (or SS AAM-1 Crossbow)

Cost: Available to selected allies at $108 million.

This version of the Rapier interceptor, dubbed the "Hyper Rapier", is a modified F-125C designed to excel in the fields of speed and high-altitude performance. Geared towards interception roles against today's high speed bombers and larger tactical fighters, this aircraft uses a PDE-turbofan engine to achieve its unopposed speed, each providing a thrust of 54,000lbs. Improved electronics and a powerful dedicated radar is also installed, designed to reduce the threats of enemy radar jamming, and low-observabable aircraft. All ground targeting equipment are removed, though the F-125D still retains its IRST suite, along with its powerful ECM and other countermeasures system.

However, a more important change is a modified fuselage, which is now a more "clean" and streamlined fuselage with reduced drag, and a pair of larger intakes (while sacrificing stealthy). Constructed of new lightweight materials, these advanced titanium alloys and other composite materials allows the aircraft to reduce the negative effects of heat buildup at high speeds, while armour are sacrificed for a lighter airframe, and to make up for the use of some heavier materials (including some special ceramic plates in key areas). The capability to mount weapons externally (along with its ground attack capability) is also lost and the aircraft's weapons bays are also reduced in size, though the aircraft could mount special fuel tanks (of a stealthy and heat-resistant nature), and a variety of air-to-air missiles in its internal weapons bays. In exchange however, a larger fuel tank is installed, allowing improved range, endurance in interception roles, and to compensate for the somewhat higher fuel consumption rate of the PDE-turbofan engines.

OOC: Omz... :confused: The whole point of the length requirement was that the whole VLS unit (excluding the vehicle base) is self contained and capable of C-17 airlifting. For the "A" model, at least. The C-17 can hold, from memory, items up to 12'5", meaning the maximum height of the "A" VLS system is maybe 12'4", with the missiles being no more than 12' in length. Which is why I was forced to use AMRAAM as opposed to say, Standard. I guess it's not really an issue anyway, the mobility requirement means fast deploy, which typically means fast unit mobility... The longer ranges can go on the slower ship-deploy "B" version...

For the "B" version which doesn't have such a height restriction, I'll use NLRAAM...

OOC: Well, I know that this thing is based on a VLS system, but what I still don't understand is, why can't it be at least placed diagonally when in transit? It still doesn't make a lot of sense to me that it always stays vertically, and it isn't so hard to make the cells/launchers to at least stay diagonally on the launch vehicle, nor would it be hard to place it horizontally when it is detached from the vehicle base.

OOC: Because this thing is meant to be simple. They're designed as just two units, a vehicle (which can be serviced easily enough by the units it deploys with) and the VLS system, which is pretty much self contained. The launcher is literally a squat cube, "one piece". Basically, this thing is designed with minimum support in mind, if any. Which is why this thing is only in two units, "whole". I didn't want any assembly or mass connecting wires or a team of maintenance. Just vehicle, VLS assembly, lock them together, plug in the power and a few command circuits and off they roll.

As a consequence, I had to make the tubes vertical for maximum missile (and launch tube) density. If I put the missiles in at an angle (like say, on the Slava class Russian missile cruiser), that would A, lengthen the vehicle and make it less maneuverable, not to mention heavier, thus less capable of dashing forward with the tanks; and B, the vehicle would have to turn to launch and considering its length then, they might be hit before then.

Replacement missiles aren't a problem, as I envision the replacements to be in the form of a "wine rack", with each missile in a sealed tube container. For unloading, take it to the vehicle, pop the canister, slide in the missile, close the hatch and off you go.

OOC: Still, one thing is certain is that it will not (at least, not effectively) dash with tanks in an all-out assault, but instead will be stationed at various locations near the primary force to provide medium-range air defence, as they are simply not suited to go side by side with tanks in a large-scale assault, nor can they fire on the move (imagine a vehicle with some AMRAAMs firing when the vehicle's still moving at a speed similar to those of a tank, even without additional targeting support from dedicated radar vehicles). If you want serious fire on the move capability with enough speed and rough field operation capability (in addition to armour), I'd suggest something like a self-propelled anti-air artillery system with both gun systems and short-medium range IR/radar guided missiles, considering that they will be designed to provide the advancing forces with sufficent capabilities to protect them against low and medium altitude aircraft (the major threat) and possibly even aircraft at higher altitudes, while high altitude aircraft will be dealt with the medium-long range air defences at the back (although very few nations with effective close air support capabilities will prefer using F-16s and LGBs to destroy tanks rather than something like an A-10 or an Apache with Hellfires).

Overall, the A variant itself will still be very far from being a bad platform (being both cheap and very flexible, but it would still perform better if you put them into a role in which they will perform to the best of their ability (such as in this case, front line air defence).

OOC: I did originally think of that. I should've clarified it, in launch mode, the vehicle is meant to "dead stop", lock and fire. Five seconds or so. The speed thing was mostly meant for it to keep up with the formations (relatively), so the "protection umbrella" is pretty far forward.

I should note the "five seconds" figure includes radar lock, which is pretty instantaneous, as long as it's not a stealthy detect and considering the ranges we're talking about, stealth wouldn't work well. I can easily imagine the AVD-1 being an "ambush" vehicle. An orbiting AWACS sends the target data down via data links and up come the missiles. Little to no reaction time.

It seemed like a good idea, I'm not effectively getting the concept across...

OOC: Actually, Omz, think of the AVD-1 as being exactly like the M270 MLRS. Dashes about, finds a nice place and then fires off a volley. Except the AVD-1 is air to air, not surface to surface.

I am glad, though, you're helping me with this process.

[You know what, I want to purchase the production rights to both versions of the F-109. Unfortunately I don't know how many would be produced, so payments would have to be per aircraft royalties.]

OOC: Well, that'd be fine, and I would imagine a royalty similar to those of the F-125C. However, as I will have a break next week, expect major updates in terms of both those of the thread (aka "new thread is coming", since this one is too cluttered and unorganized, and I have no desire to expand on a year and a half-old thread anymore), and new products such as aircraft and munitions.

OOC: How about this becomes just R&D, as well as offering our services as an Aerospace/Manufacturing provider (like Boeing), but we offer our expertise and services to anyone who can pay. Or if they can't pay, we take some royalties out of whatever products become available.

I'd actually been doing this slightly, with the development of a new interceptor, that any technologies that come out of this become my property, even if the design is something I don't get to keep.

OOC: Well, what I'm thinking about is to abandon this thread somewhat completely (unless you have objections), in which information about both mine and your stuff will be transferred into a new thread. The new thread will be a combination R&D and "service offering"/storefront thread, though not all aircraft will be sold as liberally as many other nations. While I understand that our two companies are still pretty separate, since we already reached a deal to promote our aircraft jointly, the new thread will still be a OMASC-AGI thread.

OOC: I really don't know. There was actually a comment someone made, that they didn't think this was a storefront. I think this thread should become our technical thread.

The other should just be storefronts and R&D announcements, but the "technical" stuff should stay. There's a lot of posts here, dammit! :p We just bant around ideas in here. This is basically just for OOC discussion, or "technically inclined IC"...

B-105A Skyhammer Heavy Bomber Aircraft
Length: 89m
Height: 25.2m
Wingspan: 54m fully swept, 85.5m Extended
Propulsion: Six Omzian Automobile Factories P-557N turbofans rated at 86,000lbs each (derived from civilian series)
Empty Weight: 280,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 645,000kg
Crew: 4 + 3 accompanying personnel
Ceiling: >58,000ft
Range: 9000-10,000km with max load, 15,000km with standard load
Speed: Mach 1.42 max
Payload: 95,000kg (209,439lb) maximum, 50,000kg (110,231lb) standard "light" load, within four bomb bays and nine hardpoints (three fuselage, six under wing gloves). Six self-defense turrets (SDS) including one tail SDS turret.
Cost: $900 million (Export is Restricted)

Produced by OMASC as one of the longest and biggest aircraft projects ever, the B-105A, as a result of the ambitious OMASC project initated years ago, is a massive bomber aircraft with a size exceeding any other aircraft OMASC has previously built. Combining an advanced airframe construction with a degree of simplicity in design, yet sporting a massive size and a full array of advanced avionics and other equipment, the B-105A is destined to be one of the major heavy bomber that will enter Omzian service. Even though it bears a high cost, it offers unsurpassed capabilities and capacity that makes it not only a superb "heavy hitter" aircraft, but also a form of an "airborne heavy artillery", capable of delivering a payload that is several times those of the smaller bombers.

Airframe Design

The airframe of the B-105A, despite of being a massive size, is of a "conventional" format, with a pair of the massive variable geometry "swing wings", one vertical tail, and a pair of horizontal tails. The airframe also bears a stealthy "streamlined" shape and surfaces, with the six massive engines mounted close to the fuselage, with various designs to allow excellent subsonic low level flying capabilities. The cockpit is located forward of the fuselage, with four massive bomb bays along the length of the aircraft; There are three fuselage hardpoints located forward of the bombbays, with an additional six large hardpoints located on the massive wing gloves. The airframe also features a construction of advanced lightweight titanium alloys and composite materials, with a degree of application of radar signature-reducing RAM and RAS materials. An armour scheme composed of lightweight kevlar, carbon nanotube-based materials, titanium, ceramic plates, and various lightweight composites is also used to protect the bombbays, fuel tanks, and other important locations from shrapnel and low to medium calibre cannon rounds. Additionally, there are also six of the stealthy SDS turrets installed around the aircraft, which are discussed later.

The aircraft is painted with a standard light blue scheme, with the paint featuring various heat buildup-prevention and heat dissipation properties, therefore lowering the aircraft's IR signature over long ranges. Also as standard, advanced electrochromic panels are also installed across the aircraft, which is linked to the defensive avionics (discussed later), provides the aircraft a mean to protect itself against IR-guided missiles by generating and "manipulating" (adding on) the aircraft's IR signature to confuse the computerized seekers of late-generation IR guided missiles.

Flight Control and Control

There is a crew of four to control the aircraft, with a pilot/aircraft commander, a copilot/navigator, a bombardier/offensive avionics operator, and a defensive avionics operator. Situated in a cockpit at the front of the fuselage, each person sit side by side in a 2x2 configuration, with a passageway in between linking to a storage/resting room. All crew faces a series of multifunctional displays and emergency gauges, with an unique but advanced HUD system for the pilot, and special helmet-mounted sights for all crew members to improve situational awareness and work efficency by allowing them to retrieve necessary data by various innovative features, including a "lip-biting" switch, a voice command system, and a "pressure button" system on the comfortable ejection seats. The pilot also controls the aircraft with a special hands-on throttle and stick system instead of the traditional "wheel" system, and is linked to an advanced fly-by-optic system, which is also linked to the massive EMP-hardened flight computer modules. The use of such flight control system not only allows improved flight characteristics and responsiveness, but also allows a smoother low altitude flight. There are also both radar and LADAR altimeters along with nightvision-capable naviation cameras, allowing excellent stealthy low-level navigation in various weather conditions and time periods.

Offensive Avionics and Weapons

The aircraft features a diverse variety of offensive avionics systems, for use against both ground and sea targets, and for self protection against air targets. It includes a precision ELPI radar system, an powerful air search/long range IRST system, and a pair of the special Integrated Attack/Reconnaissance Avionics Modules, known as the INARAM. Each INARAM incorporates a powerful LADAR (LAser Detection and Ranging) system for precision ground mapping and ground targeting, a MMW radar system, a series of FLIR systems, and a variety of daylight camera and nightvision systems. Each pod can be used to target multiple ground targets at once for special missions, and the use of a pair of these pods offers the bomber a powerful "close-in" real-time attack capability. These pods can also serve as special reconnaissance pods, with a special datalinking system and video recorders, allowing the real-time uploading of video captures. Furthermore, the aircraft also features various advanced and secure communications and two-way datalinking systems for not only improved situational awareness, but also the transferring of targeting information and parameters in real time during flight.

To pair up with the advanced offensive avionics, the weapon carrying capabilities of the B-105 is impressive as well. There are a total of four bomb bays and nine hardpoints for the carriage of weapons, which includes but is not limited to a variety of bombs, anti-ship and land attack missiles, air dropped mines, and even small UAVs. The bombbay is also of a modular nature, allowing the installation of various different rotary and rack-based launchers to hold a diverse variety of both Omzian and foreign munitions alike. The hardpoints can also hold a variety of ground attack munitions, fuel tanks, and even air-to-air missiles. Because of this, in a standard profile, bomb bays would hold surface attack munitions and small UAVs, while the hardpoints will hold specially designed fuel tanks, and air-to-air missiles, including the "stealthy" NLRAAM medium-range missiles.

Defensive Avionics and Countermeasures

The bomber also features a sophiscated array of various defensive and countermeasures systems, for use against enemy ground air defences and interceptors in the air. The overall defensive avionics system, dubbed the COWS-IX, is a development of the original COWS system with a much improved data processing capabilities, and increased capabilities against well-known threats around the NationStates world. Aside from the standard array of radar jammers, it also features a special active radar cancellation system for use against active radar-guided missiles attacking from key aspects around the aircraft. As well, various IR countermeasures are also installed, along with a special "smoke" generator to degrade LADAR systems and confuse the enemy (especially manual AAA gunners) in low altitude attacks. For threat detection, an advanced radar warning receiver system, linked to a powerful processing computer, is used, which has improved capabilities against LPI and other frequency-hopping radars. A LADAR warning system, composed of laser-detecting sensors around the aircraft linked to central processing computers, is also used to detect various laser-based detection and tracking systems. Finally, an advanced series of missile launch warning systems based on infrared and pulse-dopplar radar systems, is also used to warn the crew of missile launches.

The bomber also features various "Active" defensive suites. The centerpiece of the defensive armament however, is the Self-Defence Turret system, or SDS for short. Composed of a large stealthy dome, each system incorporates LADAR or radar sensors (depending on where the turret is placed and mission requirements, and is interchangable) coupled with IR sensors. These sensors are linked to a central computer, which is linked to an internal 27mm gun system, along with a special 7-round rotary tube launcher for the special Minisnake missile. The Minisnake missile, a smaller devirative of the OMASC Air Snake short-range air-to-air missile, is designed for the destruction of large enemy long-range air-to-air missiles, in addition to large surface-to-air missiles. These special missiles feature special IR seekers for targeting (in which targeting data is first fed from the defensive avionics suite and the sensors of the SDS turret), and small thrust vectoring nozzles for excellent maneuveribility for short-range flights. These missiles also packs a small explosive charge, in which it could be detonated either upon contact with larger targets, or in proximity with smaller targets, disabling these missiles and making them unable to attack the bomber.

Other defensive systems used also includes a series of smaller countermeasures dispensers, including chaff, flares, and small free flight or OMASC "floating" or parachuting decoys for use against various missiles. Smaller bursting flare and chaff "boxes" are also used for various situations to confuse enemy missiles, and the flares can also be replaced with small pallets of WP for low altitude attacks to confuse enemy low altitude air defence and closely-chasing fighter aircraft. Additionally, the aircraft can also make use of OMASC-designed "burst bombs" for use against low altitude air defences and chasing enemy fighters. These burst bombs often consists of a parachute-slowed containiner consisting of an explosive charge, and dispensable chaff, flare, or pallets of WP. Though overly simplistic, these timed "burst bombs" are used against low altitude air defence, chasing fighters, and attacking missiles, as a bomber in a normal attack mission would be able to drop these parachuted bombs. As these "burst bombs" then bursts open as a result of the detonation of the explosive charge, the chaff, flare, or WP pallets then are released, forming a cloud of chaff, flare, or WP smoke to confuse missiles and disorient enemy low altitude air defence and the pilots in closely chasing fighter aircraft.

Finally, a pair of special PM/15 "LADAR jammers", similar to those on the B-106, are also used, which are turrets that emits powerful pulses of laser to "jam" and blind enemy laser-based detection systems (in most of the cases, dedicated enemy LADAR systems) and IR-guided weapons.

OOC:

SS - If you still like the royalty system for this also, I'm guessing somewhere around 4% if that is ok with you. The bomber's price is high is still because it requires a lot of materials to construct aside from the electronics systems, but is also partly because of the possible danger posed by the bomber's payload.

Adejaani - Well, actually, I'll actually agree with your idea, though I'll actually prefer the other thread to a storefront and R&D announcement/close ally and frequent customer request thread, whereas this is the technical stuff and the "real" R&D thread, aside from being a reference to some of the aircraft we both have produced.

I might be able to get the thread up in the second part of next week (still have an annoying band test to do) along with hopefully some stats of the transports SS'd like.

[Er, um, consider those royalties previously paid. I've kinda already used the B-105 in a war.]

I'll have 2 AHD-1B Commanchero's :sniper:

Endless Destruction, how are you intending to pay for your purchase? :)

Using my country's Defense Funds. :sniper:

Very well. Two Commanchero helicopters are being shipped to you upon confirmation of sale and the wiring of $50 million.

Helicopters shipped, money has been transferred. Have a nice day.

OMASC Releases Information on the Next Generation Maneuverable Aircraft Project (NEGMA)

Following the near completion of the two major transport aircraft projects within OMASC to fill requirements in both Omzian and foreign air forces, OMASC officials today has announced the existance of a new project, codenamed NEGMA. Standing for NExt Generation Maneuverable Aircraft, it is said that this project will produce a new, maneuverable air superiority aircraft in response to the growing number of advanced next-generation aircraft in air forces around the world.

Taking advantage of various new research being done, especially those on control surfaces and propulsion systems, it is believed that such aircraft will service as a dedicated air superiority aircraft designed for close-range maneuver-based combat ("dogfighting") against other next-generation aircraft, augmenting the existing force of other air superiority aircraft designs, though the Omzian Navy has shown little interest. However, the aircraft will also act as a "functional testbed" for several other new technologies, including a new photo cell-based system for camouflage, various new situational awareness systems, and a set of new flight and mission control systems, including the deletion of a HUD for an integrated helmet-mounted system.

"Our goal is simple: to provide the Omzian Air Force with a new aircraft that is extremely capable of maneuver combat against aerial targets, while still being a potent system for obtaining air superiority and supermacy also through the use of BVR combat systems and ground attack systems," stated an anonymous OMASC official, believed to be working in the project. "Because of the nature of the aircraft, we will be primarily focusing on maneuveribility coupled with RCS reduction features, coupled with additional capabilities allowing the carriage of various new weapons for achieving air superiority, to allow the aircraft to function as a complete weapon system for the achievement of air dominance."

OOC: A small bump for whoever's interested and to keep the thread still new with posts. With spring break coming, expect some changes and additions soon. Depending on whether I have the time or not, I might do a "version two" of the thread (as mentioned some times before), along with a loosening of the currently tight export policies.

OMASC Introduces Two New Transport Aircraft

C-115 Fastrider Supersonic Tactical Transport Cargo Aircraft
Length: 56m
Height: 17.2m
Wingspan: 54.2m
Propulsion: Four Omzian Automobile Factories P-630C turbofans rated at 82,000lbs each
Empty Weight: 142,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 310,000kg
Crew: 3 (2 Pilots, 1 Loadmaster)
Speed: Mach 1.7
Ceiling: >54,000ft
Range: 5800km full load
Payload: 85,000kg max, 260 troops, or 190 paratroops
Production Cost: $240 million (Allies only)

The C-115 Fastrider is a new, stealthy, and supersonic medium transport in the class of the C-17, but utilizes several new technologies that makes it the next-generation medium transport for a variety of airlift, combat, and other duties. Taking advantage of a pair of large delta wings "blended" into the fuselage, in addition to a total of four powerful turbofans, it is able to lift either over 80 tons of cargos, or alternatively a full company of airborne infantry. In addition, the high speed capability of the aircraft allows it to deliver important cargo at speeds much higher than those of its subsonic counterparts, while its stealthy design allows it to function as a survivable paratroop-carrying aircraft in enemy airspace.

[More descriptions to come]

C-116 Loadmaster "C-Wing" Heavy Strategic Cargo Aircraft
Length: 130m
Height: 26.8m
Wingspan: 145.9m
Propulsion: Ten Omzian Automobile Factories P-820C turbofans rated at 116,000lbs each
Empty Weight: 480,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 1,100,000kg
Crew: 8 (2 Pilots, 1 Engineer, 5 Loadmasters)
Speed: Mach 0.76
Range: 4600km full load
Payload: 340,000kg max, 1040 troops
Production Cost: $800 million (Allies only)

This is a new and massive transport aircraft recently devised by OMASC, and is currently being built in a total of three facilities throughout Omz, with more being converted to manufacture this massive aircraft. An alternative to large aircraft designs such as the ULTRA concept and the An-225, the C-116 utilizes the C-Wing design to provide a larger cargo capacity while still retaining the same size and fuel capacity. Though its large size prohibits operation from smaller bases, its design and landing systems allows easier operation from smaller airbases and airports, thus expanding its capability. With a large series of cargo compartments in the fuselage and the wing root areas, in addition to another series of pressurized personnel-carrying compartments, it has a cargo capacity of over 30 tons, allowing the carriage of three to four heavy battle tanks, or five companies of airborne infantry. As well, using composite materials for construction to avoid weight issues, a massive rear ramp has also been added, allowing ease of operation, though the side doors has been kept.

[more descriptions to come]

OOC: It's alive!

IC: C-34 Speedhawk redevelopment program

In light of previously raised concerns, the C-34 Speedhawk is being further developed into a new variant, the "B". The biggest concern was, of course, the SCRAMjet engines, which, in a Modern Tech (era) aircraft, posed difficulties. The consolidation of the "B" version, with production SCRAMjets and improved airframe will form the basis of a significantly large near Post-Modern transport arm of the Adejaani Regime Air Force (ARAF).

However, with these refined technologies which are still somewhat experimental, production C-34B supersonic transports will cost in excess of $400 million once full production is reached.

OOC: Well, at the current moment, I'm revamping the whole page to a storefront format, which includes the link to your stuff. Hopefully I can import the revised format to a new thread sometimes soon (not mentioning that its easier to do so than just starting a completely new thread).

[Excellent, excellent. So you've knocked out the tactical and the strategic transports, do you plan on doing the heavy?]

[Excellent, excellent. So you've knocked out the tactical and the strategic transports, do you plan on doing the heavy?]
OOC: Actually, I planned the above to be a cross between the tactical and strategic, while the latter one is the heavy one (aka the one that can transport five companies of airborne infantry and heavy battle tanks) to mainly increase ease of logistics and replacement parts. But if you want one, I'll try to formulate a box wing design sometimes soon, I think I have the basic stats a while back (so need to search my HD then).

With that, the revamping of the front page is a bit harder than I thought, so hopefully it will be available some hours later - but in a much more organized and easier-to-use format :)

[Well, if you could I'd be grateful. Now that you pointed that out I took a more in-depth look at it and realized something; it can't carry any of my tanks. That's fine for a tactical transport, mind you, but I'd like something that isn't so huge as the strategic transport but can still manage to carry one or two units of the heavy armour around.]

OOC: Well, here it is. Come to see the new front page :D More about the export policies will appear as I get around to it, but for now, enjoy!

[I have an idea, but I'm not sure how possible it would be to implement. Basically what I want is a helo without any rotors, at all. The primary rotor would be replaced with a thrust-vectored interal setup and a NOTAR setup to replace the rear rotor. First and foremost I want to know if it can be done, after that we can work out the details.]

[I have an idea, but I'm not sure how possible it would be to implement. Basically what I want is a helo without any rotors, at all. The primary rotor would be replaced with a thrust-vectored interal setup and a NOTAR setup to replace the rear rotor. First and foremost I want to know if it can be done, after that we can work out the details.]
OOC: I'm not too sure myself, considering that I'm far from well-versed in helicopter design (not mentioning that such concept is relatively unheard of anyways), so I'm afraid that I can't answer the question in regards to whether such design could be a replacement for the main rotor system on existing helicopters. However, what I can add is that while the NOTAR part can be completely possible, the problem is that the concept of the helicopter is built on the basis of the rotor (don't get what you mean by "interal" though) to provide it with thrust, lift, and it's ability to hover and rotate in the air, thus replacing it with something like a jet engine, even if it is thrust-vectoring, would result in the loss of such maneuveribility that the helicopter has exclusively. Even if this is possible, it wouldn't be worth the effort when considering that a rotor would be able to provide better performance at a cheaper cost (not mentioning with less complexity, and takes less space considering that with something like a jet engine you have to mount it 100% interally, thus resulting in loss of valuable space) anyways.

Omz is right. This no rotor helicopter seems right up my alley (remember the AFD-7 multi thrust vectoring fighter)... What you're basically proposing is a V/STOL fighter and I'm sorry to say those use a lot of fuel getting airborne. That's why the F-35B JSF only has a V/STOL mode for takeoff, and a conventional out-the-back engine for horizontal flight.

As far as I can imagine, a thrust vectoring helicopter would waste a lot of fuel and would end up worse than the Harrier overall, it would be too inefficient.

You can try and make a slim and light airframe, but there wouldn't be enough surface area for thrust vectoring nozzles or enough fuel to do anything worthwhile after it gets airborne. And with a larger airframe, it's too heavy to get up and out.

Of course, I'll think about it, but it seems extremely unlikely at this point, though i do have ideas.

[Well, if you can't pull it off, then I should just drop the idea. *sigh* To have small fusion reactors...]

I'm not saying I can't do it, I'm saying it would be extremely impractical. It would be a technology demonstrator, not a full "military" aircraft. I think I broached something similar a while ago (see previous pages), where I stripped a C-130, put in something like two or three conventional jet engines and piped the stuff out through V/STOL vents. It worked, but it was basically filled with engine and nothing else.

I've just got an idea. Might be extremely impractical... But it might work.

[If you can't manage to create a helo that at least matches the Commanchero in performance, and do so with some practicality, I can't say I'd be terribly interested in using it.]

OOC: What I can imagine for an attack VTOL is basically similar to a "hybrid" layout of both the A-10 and the V-22 (so try to imagien in your mind that they are merged together), with two engines that will be able to thrust vector (e.g. hover in the air them switch), but also with the speed advantages. Compared to something like an A-10 or a Harrier, it'll be better armoured, better armed, slower (to help the targeting process easier without having your jet flying too fast to engage ground targets), and more rugged.

OOC: Okay. I do have an idea. Ungainly as hell, but it might just work. You'd need to read about the AFD-11 Saucer (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7683231&postcount=826) as a primer first.

But anyway, my idea is simple. I've seen a helicopter/UAV design that looks like a donut, with the main rotor in the middle. My idea is to modify an AFD-11 to have a hole in the middle, with some sort of cold/hot air exchange system to create a region of air pressure, which basically results in a lift effect.

There are VTOL nozzles on the bottom, so the thing could hover like a helicopter (though at high fuel cost); and the thing has a conventional aft pointing engine, so it has speed as well.

Thoughts, gentlemen?

OOC: The problem with this design is that the different number of engines will take up a huge amount of space, thus there wouldn't be too much space for things like avionics & electronics, fuel, and weapon systems. In addition, in regards to the AFD-11 design in general, even with a "rounded shape", since this is /not/ a helicopter, you'd still at least need a wing constructed with an airfoil (along with flight controls such as ailerons) that will at least allow the aircraft to travel at a reasonable speed and to actually have it fly, so I'm not too sure about the statement about it flying sideways.

With the "donut shaped UAV" thing, I think I also saw the image, though keep in mind that it's still only an UAV and not a full-fledged manned aircraft where you have to worry much more about the availability of internal space for avionics and fuel. Thus, I would personally say that this design would be more suitable for something like an unmanned VTOL strike aircraft rather than manned aircraft (where you also have to worry about the placement of a cockpit and a human).

[I truly wish I could find a picture to convey what I have in mind, but I've only ever seen it a couple of times, and then it was in something to do with sci-fi.]

[I truly wish I could find a picture to convey what I have in mind, but I've only ever seen it a couple of times, and then it was in something to do with sci-fi.]
OOC: I think in regards to the UAV, what Adejaani was talking about was this (http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/images/drgn_small.jpg) or this (http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/images/micro1.jpg) or this (http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/images/cypher.jpg). Could be wrong though.

OOC: It was just an idea. I get what you're saying, though. But the "sideways" comment was the fact that while the engines point front-aft, I also put in some massively large thrust-vectoring type nozzles, pointing port-starboard, which are smaller versions of the nozzles pointing aft. I realise in hindsight it wasn't the smartest thing to do. Also, the AFD-11 wasn't meant to be a high performance fighter, more like literally, a powered frisbee.

I'm still thinking about it, I keep getting drawn back to a circular thing with some sort of "air pressure pocket". Think of it like a life buoy, except airborne. For some reason I'm convinced this will work. Not effectively, but it should work.

OOC: I'm actually thinking of something more conventional (See my "A-10 and V-22" comment), which will serve as a hybrid between an attack helicopter and a VTOL/STOVL attack aircraft such as the Harrier. The problem with conventional design is that there's a clear limit, while the problem with unconventional designs are that it's best suited for smaller (read: unmanned) systems only, and that they are more complex in general (resulting in reduced ease of maintenance, and the increase of complexity in manufacturing these systems).

OOC: Let's go with Battlestar Galactica tech where we can have inertialess drives which warp the fabric of space time. :p

And Omz, I was thinking of the first and third links you posted when I was referring to the "donut". Good man. ;)

I think the big problem we have here is the original terms of design. If we have a rotorless helicopter, we're going to end up with a VTOL/VSTOL aircraft. So we have to make a decision which way to go. We can try having smaller rotors and offset this to still make it a helicopter, but if we remove the rotors totally, we stop thinking helicopter and make it an aircraft. Until we do that, we can only scratch our heads. The two are mutually exclusive.

OOC: It's either there's isn't any rotors or there is, but I much favour the latter; with a jet engine, there's simply no need for a rotor, so the necessarity of such is void, though the jet option is obviously much more complex thus is far from being worth the effort. The reverse is also true, as even if it's feastible, it simply doesn't worth the effort. The exception of this is NOTAR, but then it is used as a replacement for the tail rotor only. I'd like keeping the way it is, and make a conventional design-based vehicle if anyone wants a manned aircraft that will serve a role that is between an AH-64 and a fixed wing aircraft such as a Harrier or a A-10 (though even those two's missions are still quite different)

With the UAV, I think I saw the images before somewhere. It isn't surprising though that they are turning to some newer designs, but then again, given the small size of the UAVs, adding an unconventional design would be more beneficial anwyays.

Future space tech sounds nice, but then again, with FT space tech we probably wouldn't need anything such as "aircraft" anyways ;)

[Omz, I just realized that if I'm going to replace my old transports I'm going to lose mid-air refueling capability. Would you mind making a KC variant to the C-116 or the larger strategic transport?]

[Omz, I just realized that if I'm going to replace my old transports I'm going to lose mid-air refueling capability. Would you mind making a KC variant to the C-116 or the larger strategic transport?]
OOC: Well, I think that there still a bit of confusion regarding the transport... the C-115 is the one that corresponds to the first requirement (Tactical transport), while the C-116 will be the largest, thus corresponding to the requirement for the third requirement (ultra-heavy "go over the top" transport). The new box wing transport, C-117, is much smaller than the C-116 although still being larger than the C-115. However though, I wouldn't recommend a tanker the size of the C-116 (or bigger), as for tankers you'll want to aim for greater operational flexibility (considering that something over 100m would not be suitable for anything short of an ultra-large International Airport) and versatility, thus you want a smaller one the size of a C-5 at most. With the current transport (the C-117), I think I might get it done the week after next week with the descriptions (I just had 2 exams and I will have the same number again), and a tanker variant of the transport is above the possibility. I already have the basic stats down, so it's simply a matter of the descriptions and adding the tanker version.

[Sorry, I mean the medium one that you haven't done yet.]

OOC: As well, to Adejaani, in case he/you noted the serious mistake on the front page, well, it's corrected. Otherwise, if you don't, things are all fine and well :P

OOC: Er... I'm still tinkering with my "flying saucer" V/STOL rotorless helicopter thingy...

But uh... There's another big mistake there, Omz, my man. Adejaani Aerospace Inc folded a long time ago. It's Adejaani Government Industries. :p What mistake? o.O

Oh yeah. The real C-117. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-117.htm) It was heavily used during Korea. :p Now you know why I started up my AXD (Adejaani X Design) numbering system so I wouldn't clash. :p

OOC: Regarding the mistakes, I'll fix that too. The previous one, if you want to know, had to do with placing the wrong link under my nation's name in the product index ;)

In regards to the link you brought up, pretty interesting indeed; however, I have already taken note of the fact that many of my designations does clash with those of the Americans. But, keep in mind that the US designations for aircraft aren't too common, so the "three digit" format will be the most common. Originally I also kept an O in front of each designation (as in "OF-125" or "OB-106"), but that got scrapped over a year ago I think.

Press release, AGI memo: AFD-14 Skyfire program future

The Triumvirate Leadership of Adejaani has formally decided to continue development of the AFD-14 Skyfire fighter project. The current "A" model (the original design) will be replaced on production lines by a newer "C" model, though it is not yet sure what technologies will be utilised. One senior AGI engineer has noted that the difference between the "A" and "C" models will be somewhat similar to a comparison between the "A/B/C/D" and "E/F" versions of the F/A-18 Hornet/Super Hornet.

The AFD-14B will be a lesser developed version solely for export purposes, incoprorating simpler and less advanced technologies. The "C" will not be generally sold to the market.

OOC: Apologies for the late delivery. /OOC

C-117 Skytruck Box Wing Strategic Cargo Aircraft
Length: 91m
Height: 24.7m
Wingspan: 94.3m
Propulsion: Four Omzian Automobile Factories P-892 turbofans rated at 85,000lb each
Empty Weight: 322,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 740,000kg
Crew: 7
Speed: Mach 0.89
Range: 5400km full load
Cargo Payload: 210,000kg
Production Cost: $450 million

KC-117 Skycamel Box Wing Refuel Aircraft
Length: 93m
Height: 24.4m
Wingspan: 95.8m
Propulsion: Four Omzian Automobile Factories P-892 turbofans rated at 85,000lb each
Empty Weight: 322,000kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 740,000kg
Crew: 7
Speed: Mach 0.89
Range: 17,500km without cargo
Fuel Capacity: Up to 390,000kg, or 160,000kg cargo
Refueling Methods: Boom; hose and drogue
Production Cost: $490 million

The C-117 series of aircraft, the C-117 "Skytruck" and the KC-117 "Skycamel", are large nmultipurpose aircraft designed for a variety of missions. Taking advantage of the versatility and flexibility of the box wing design, the cargo variant is designed to be complement for the C-115 and C-116, with a large cargo capacity and a basic tanker capability, being able to refuel up to two aircraft at a time with its enlarged internal fuel tanks (though external fuel tanks can also be attached on special side-mounted stations, at the cose of cargo capacity). The tanker variant, however, is designed to be a large sized, dedicated tanker with some cargo-carrying capability, capable of complementing or even replacing small tanks such as the KC-10 and KC-135. With a capability to refuel three to five aircraft at a time using both boom and hose/drogue systems, it utilizes various computerized systems for automation of the refuel process, to reduce the workload of the onboard crew. In addition, both aircraft also has extensive capabilities to suit it for relief and airborne operations, where an air delivery of loads (from pallets and paratroopers, to light air-dropped AFVs and MOAB-type munitions) is necessary.

The verdant Archipelago Unified Armed Forces would like to negociate the purchase of AGM-122C Sidearm Turbo ARMs. We have been working on developing a short range ARM for some time, but the AGM-122C seems to fit the role almost perfectly. If possible, we would like to aquire production rights to the system since it is going to be one of our main ground attack munitions.

Further, were are interested in collaberating with OMASC in the development of a larger short range ARM and short/medium range ship launched ARMs. The larger aircraft launched ARM would provide the next generation in defence supression. Given the proliferation of IR guided MANPAADs and AAA, it is no longer certain that a radar will stay active long enough for an ARM to score a hit. To that end, the new munition will be able to download the suspected position of the launcher or sensor platform from the launch platform. The weapons operator of the aircraft couild even input a visual estimation of the location of the target. Once launched, the missile flies towards the target area, searching for IR and radar signitures. If it detects one, it uses that information to refine it's attacki path, if not, it continues to the location specified by the launch platform. Once at the target area, it will deploy a pattern of fragmentation submunitions that will damage any launching vehicle, shred radar, and kill any infantry in the open. Given the improved programability of the weapon, it could be fitted as a secondary weapon to be used on targets of opertunity, ranging from defence supression to a vehicle convoy suprised on a road.

The two ship launched missiles would fill a percieved need in the Unified Navy for a cheap way to nutralize the massive warships that seem to be the trend today. While ineffective costwise, it is unlikely that the Archipelago can currently field a fleet capable of sinking one of those monstrocities in a fair fight. So, first we blind the beast. We require a medium range, low obeservable ARM with the same basic performence envelope as a Harpoon, and a very short range, high speed, heavy warhead missile somewhat smaller than a harpoon.

Should you decide to work with us on these projects, may we ask that Scramjets not be used? Not only do we not have the infrestructure to maintain those fragile engines, we have severe reservations about their performence in the thick air of lower altitudes, since scramjets only function at speeds above mach 4 or 5

Both the OMASC and the Omzian military's Military Materiel Procurement Board are highly interested and delighted in the proposals set forth by the armed forces and contractors of Verdant Archipelago. Seeking business cooperation with other allied nations beyond our current customers, we are most certainly willing to address the concerns and requests of the Verdant Archipelago Unified Armed Forces:

1. In regards to the request for the AGM-122C anti-radiation missile, such procurement by an ally is more than possible, and it is also expected that a production license could be granted at an estimated cost of $500-600 million dollars. However, it must be also noted that the new AGM-329B "Snakearm", though only slightly heavier and more sophiscated, has a larger warhead, better survivability, and better attack capabilities. Based on the current OMASC Air Snake SRAAM, the $153,000 per unit missile is much more capable than the Sidearm Turbo in terms of engagement of small air defence and radar systems. Thus, we urge the Verant Archipelago military to reconsider, though it is also possible for us to offer the AGM-122C instead should the VA military prefer such missile over the Snakearm.

[OOC: Note that in regards to the projects outlined below, to be very honest I have to consider, considering that I will have a lot of work in the upcoming weeks. However, if you have an IM and would like to TG it for better coordination for these projects, that wuld be excellent.]

2. Additionally, OMASC shows a strong interest in the possibility of a joint project for the two models of anti-radiation missiles, though the Omzian military is more or less interested due to the availability of a faster ARM for their needs. As the requirements (especially the reattack and submunition deployment capabilities) suggests such missiles to have a subsonic or low-supersonic speed, we estimate that such missile would be around the size of 500-1200lb, along with sporting a low supersonic speed in order to make the reattack and submunition dispensing capabilities possible.

However, if such project is to proceed, we must also urge our VA counterparts to combining such requirements into one type of missile and one airframe, in hope for a greater degree of both logistical and technical simplicity (as two types of missiles would not only lead to technical complications, but also logistical difficulties). If VA agrees, we hope that the missile will not only combine the capabilities of both (large size, and ship launched), but will also hopefully meet the requirements of the Omzian military, utilizing several advanced computer technologies and propulsion systems.

3. In regards to the third requirement for two "low observable" ARM, though we have to once again apply our suggestion above (of combining both requirements into one missile, as opposed to two), this is indeed possible to develop these missiles. According to our estimation, it will resemble the performance of a low supersonic speed, stealthy anti-ship missile. Such missile should have seaskimming and low level flight capabilities, along with the utilization of multiple precision targeting systems (passive radar and imaging IR might be possibilities), and stealthy airframe characteristics.

Also as requested, the Omzian design teams are also considering alternatives to scramjet designs. Though scramjet systems has appeared in some of the newer OMASC weapon systems and munitions, we simply feel that such performance yielded by scramjet engines is unnecessary for missiles that will take a role as anti-radiation missiles. Thus, among the various other types of propulsion systems, likely contestants will include ramjets, turbojets (though turbofans are also possible), or even the newer hybrid PDE-turbofans.

OOC: No problem with the work, I'm in a similar situation.

The reason why I want to use an alternative to scramjets and avoid the SIDEARM is that I have problem with small moderntech scramjets. I don't necessarily ignore them, but I never use them, and certainly not at the low altitudes that CAS aircraft who need ARMS work at. A scramjet simply won't work at low altitude, the air is too dense.

But a Hybrid PDE-turbofan would be lovely =)

IC

We appriciate your concern about our choosing an inferior missile, however the Union Air Force's doctrine relies heavily on the widespread use of short ranged unsophisticated ARMs. For that mission, the cheaper and less sophisticated, the better. Lack of sophistication may make the missile less versitile and less lethal, but it also renders it less likely to fail or be spoofed.

We actually do only wish to develop one air launched ARM, we apologize for the confusion. What we wish is one reattack capable air launched ARM, one short range heavy warhead ARM, and one long range low observable ARM, three in total. However, after reviewing your suggestions, we have come up with some modifications to our eariler requirements.

Air Launched Suppression Munition-
This will be the generic short range strike munition of the Unified Airforce, mass produced and hung on every aircraft in our inventory, regardless of mission. Going to intercept bombers? Take a suppression munition, just in case… you can always jettison it if need be. It is also likely that in future the same airframe will be used for a varaiety of other roles, from standoff bunker busting to engaging light surface combatants. But that is for the future.

Passive radar/GPS/remote guidance
It should be able to home in on radar/radio transmissions to act in an ARM capability, however, given the proliferation of MANPAADs and LIDAR guided systems, it is no longer certain that a launcher will be given away by active radar emissions. Therefore, it is important that a weapons officer be able to input the estimated co-ordinates of the launcher, or even a range and bearing from the aircraft for GPS guidance, and possibly even steer the missile remotely, though that would be difficult without TV guidance.

In Mission Programmability
Given the multiple roles the missile will find itself performing as a generic munition of the Unified Air Force, it is necessary for the missile to be programmable to perform simple missions such as 'fly over hill, scan for active emissions, and engage them'.

Submunition dispenser
While the standard fragmentation warhead of most ARMs is sufficient to deal with anything up to a frigate, to engage and destroy MANPAAD teams requires less killing power, but a larger footprint. To that end, it is suggests that the munition carry a submunition dispenser full of fragmentation munitions capable of both killing infantry and shredding radar arrays, even if they are incapable of killing the vehicle outright.

Reattack Capability (rolling airframe?)
We are asking a lot of this airframe, and it would be best if it is as maneuverable as possible, so as to be able to perform complicated search/attack patters effectively. A rolling airframe may be be best solution to this problem.

Relatively short range
This is a 'defensive' and 'target of opportunity' weapon designed to provide pilots with a way to engage a variety of highly dangerous and vulnerable threats and targets easily. As such, range is not as great an issue as it might be with larger standoff and strike munitions. 20km, which is longer than most MANPAADs, would be more than sufficient range.


Light Attack Craft Guided Rocket
This is the smaller of the two shiplaunched ARMs we requested, but after some rethinking, we have decided that it will not merely be an ARM. This will be the standard missile of all our light combatants, and will give our fleet of low observable attack craft a chance to engage and destroy much larger ships, much like how torpedoes gave torpedo boats the same ability in the late 1800s early 1900s.

Modular Sensor Package
We would like to have the ability to, given different situations, install different sensor packages into the missile. This would be done in a machine shop in a supply vessel, not on the light combatant itself (except in dire circumstances). Potential packages would be anti-radiation, IR, TV, and radar/lidar.

Heavy Warhead
This is perhaps the most difficult of the requirements despite the ease of developing a heavy warhead. The difficulty is that we need the heavy warhead (1000kg with an AP cap) in as small a package as possible, given that we need out light craft to carry between 4 and 8 of these missiles.

Short Range
Once again, range is not an issue. It is assumed that the vessels using this weapon will be able to get within 10-15km of the target before being detected, so a range of 20km would be more than sufficient. It is because of the short range that we are tentatively labeling the weapon a ‘guided rocket’ rather than a true missile. If possible, the weapon should fast, but this is not a requirement as surprise and the short range should restrict the enemy’s ability to respond before they begin terminal attack maneuvers.


Long Range Missile – Anti-radiation
This missile will be a dedicated ARM, for use by fleet escorts in preliminary skirmishes with the hostile line-of-battle ships. The purpose of these weapons is not to kill, but merely blind the enemy. A superdreadnaught that has lost its fire control and search radar is simply an enormous target unable to defend itself. By launching a large number of passive homing missiles along with active missiles, the enemy will be forced to leave their radars on to engage the active missiles, while the low observable passive ones slip through the net and smash their systems.

Low Observable
The missile should be as low observable as possible. Either seaskimming with conventional stealth or a high altitude missile using plasma stealth would be optimal.

Warhead
Modular if possible, we may want the capability to deliver anti-radiation submunitions to a large target, but plan for a 100-200kg frag/HE warhead

Range
Midrange, anywhere from 200 to 300 km with a short minimum range.


We thank you for your assistance. Would you be interested in co-developing a heavyweight short range ASROC as well?

Strategos Algernon Swansen, Office of Naval Procurement
Strategos Jacques Gaillard, Office of Aerospace Procurement

[*frowns* I don't think PDEs are any less advanced than scramjets, and in fact one could argue that they're a lot more prone to breakage than scramjets are. After all, scramjets have fewer moving part to break. But I degress.

Omz, I have a couple missile requests of my own.

1) An ASM with a range of 200km in a sea-skimming profile. The missile should have a PDE, or some variant thereof, and a low RCS. It should have a 1,000 pound warhead.

2) A "tactical" ASCM with a range of 400km sea-skimming or 1,200km semi-ballistic. Same engine and RCS requires, but this time with a 2,000 pound warhead.

3) A "strategic" ASCM with a range of ~3,000km semi-ballistic and a 4,000 pound warhead. Repeat engines and RCS requirements.

For all missiles the maximum acceptable width is 1.2 meters. I'll have to ask Jim about the dimensions of his Mk72 VLS to get height specs that you can work with.

OOC: And this missile stuff is out of my scope, so I'm just going to go back to my own thing.

IC: AFD-14 "B" and "C" Skyfire heavy (multirole/strike) air superiority fighter (carrier capable)

The original AFD-14 Skyfire (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7779572&postcount=865) was intended as an F-14 Tomcat replacement in those roles as long range strike fighter and interceptor, but with the F/A-18 Hornet/Super Hornet style maneuverability, versatility and advanced systems. The original AFD-14, the "A" version did that, but it was still a relatively conservative fighter, based on old fashioned tried and true. The "B" and "C" versions are slightly more radical and is intended to be Adejaani's top air superiority fighter and interceptor, both on land and aboard aircraft carriers.

First of all, the reason there are two versions is thus: The AFD-14B is an export version, with less advanced systems. The AFD-14C is the domestic version, which is intended to be pitted head to head against the best other nations have to offer, or come very close in quality. The main differences are in the engines, outer armor skin, avionics, flight and radar software.

Note: Unless specified, the following notes are in relation to the "C" domestic model.

The biggest change in regards to the AFD-14C has been in regards to the maneuverability factor. Although the overall physical shape of the aircraft was ungainly (and not the least bit stealthy), the design was found to create a 'wind vortex' effect. While all aircraft operate on the same principles, the sharply tapered nose and the stocky body essentially creates a null air cone. The 3D thrust vectoring engines then 'brute force' push the aircraft, but with the 'wind vortex' effect, parasitic drag tends to be overall slightly less than with other aircraft. Overall, the original AFD-14 comes a slight second to the F-16 Falcon in terms of maneuverability, despite its massive size.

To further add to the maneuverability, the old 'multi thrust vectoring' systems from the AFD-7 Starfury fighter program were incorporated, though on a far less ambitious scale. In the AFD-14, additional thrust vectoring nozzles are included next to the engine pods, both on the upper and lower side, massively increasing the maximum roll rate of the fighter.

Test pilots have developed a new tactic called the "Flying Corkscrew", which is a continued roll (thus the corkscrew shape), eventually converting the kinetic energy into a steep dive to avoid a missile strike. The best pilots can perform the "Flying Corkscrew" without pitch movements, only lateral and roll movements.

The other pioneering technology incorporated is a second generation Hardhat™ armor system (called the unflattering name Hardhat II™. Although classified, rumors of everything from organic Carbon-60 ("Buckmasterfullerines") and even artificial diamond has been mentioned in the new armor system, which now stops roughly 85% of all warhead blast fragments up to AIM-120 AMRAAM sized missiles.

Unclassified aspects of Hardhat II™ have noted that the composition now contains more ceramic and the whole composite armor is layered in a manner similar to the armor on an M1A2 Abrams battle tank. Though with a slightly higher ceramic content, heat tolerance is slightly better, although the stiffer composition has led to less wing flexing ability, which tends to accelerate structural fatigue at join areas.

In addition, more advanced radar software for the ARS-5 radar system (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7708455&postcount=828), as well as operating software and other avionics improvements are standard, as are slightly more efficient engines. The fuselage has been strengthened a little to account for the increased weight, as well as carrying capacity.

The above technologies only apply to the "C" model. The "B" has a somewhat simplified ARS-5 radar system (after the upgraded software), generally only in the forward arc, the original Hardhat™ armor system and no additional thrust vectoring save the original 3D sets. The avionics and other flight upgraded flight control software is also included.

Stats:
AFD-14 Skyfire
Missions: Air superiority, interceptor, multirole strike fighter (carrier capable)
Length: 14.9m
Height: 3.7m
Wingspan: 14.3m
Propulsion: Two AED-21 turbofans at 44,000 lbs each
Max weight: 42,000 kg
Range: 650nm
Max Speed: Mach 2.4
Crew: 2 (Pilot; Radar Intercept Officer)
Payload (represents maximum of each type of weapon, which is not recommended under any circumstances.):

* 10x AIM-54 Phoenix
* 10x AIM-120 AMRAAM
* 8x AIM-9 Sidewinder
* 8x GBU-31 JDAM (2,000 pound version)

Typical mission loads:

* Interceptor: 8x AIM-54, 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9
* General air superiority: 2x AIM-54, 8x AIM-120, 4x AIM-9
* Strike: 6x GBU-31, 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9

Price per AFD-14B Skyfire is $50 million each. The "C" version is not for sale.

OOC: Woah :O I never expected so much activity, and it definately looks like an interesting aircraft there, Adejaani, as a fancy but still capable replacement for the F-14. Still a fairly conventional layout when compared to the other products of yours through.

In regards to the proposals set forth by VA and SS, I'll probably get onto it with a full post either tomorrow or the following days, though munitions are more or less easier to deal with. SS, by "semi-ballistic", do you mean that the missiles should fly at a high altitude profile, then eventually hit the target with a sharp descent and dive? After all, a ballistic profile is essentially letting gravity guide you down. As well, in regards to VA's request for a heavy short range ASROC, I think I have something that you might want to see. Its buried under the newer threads in the OMP forums, but its here (http://s7.invisionfree.com/OMP/index.php?showtopic=229&st=20).

OOC:
Yes, exactly what I wanted, though it would need to be modified to take my 500mm and 750mm torpedos rather than your conventional sizes. Further, I wouldn't mind a cut down version with a range of only about 20-30km, again, for my fast attack craft.

SS, I know pure PDA is more advanced than scramjets, but I saw a projection putting hybrid PDA-turbofans in flight tests in 2007. I'm willing to bend my rules a little for them because they don't represent a fantastical increase in performence and, while more complex than scramjets, have fewer moving parts than normal turbofans, and don't need to take the stresses of scramjets.

My problem with scramjets isn't so much that they are used... it's that they're missused. You CANNOT use a scramjet on anything traveling under mach 4, and it doesn't make sence to use one until you get to mach 5 or 6. And even then it needs to be at high altitude, and must be build with fairly exotic materials that I certainly wouldn't waste on a disposable missile. And while they are relatively efficient at those speeds, they are still FAR less efficient than turbofans running at subsonic speeds at lower altitudes.

OOC: It's probably not as good as some others' air superiority fighters. I just wanted one big one to replace the F-14 and F/A-22. Well, I do admit it's not as radical, but those were more experimental testbeds than anything. Of course, having said that, my next one's going to be yet another unique one. :p

I just have one sideways comment with the SCRAMjet missiles. An ultra-large standoff missile. VA mentioned mini scramjets... So imagine a detachable booster (like on a Titan V space rocket) where the bottom engine bits fall off after those engines/boosters have done their stuff, then conventional engines. I figure we can use scramjets to raise the missiles to terminal velocity from a ballistic profile (see Omz's post just above), then nose dive and pick up additional speed, with only backup engines steering the missile for minor corrections.

OOC: For that role, I tend to use airships and drones... there's no point in wasting a fighter pilot on glorified mobile SAM duity =) Save the pilots for the knife range dogfighting and CAS, computers can't do that. As for the armour, it's going to be ungodly heavy, and the pressure wave from large missiles will likely still cripple you. Admittedly, you'll be able to survive Sidewinder hits now with ease=)

Yeah, you practically need to use multistage engines to get the most out of scramjets... I really only see them useful as high altitude interceptor missile... for anything else, a ramjet or turbofan/turbojet is better.

OOC: Actually, I was thinking of this scramjet missile as being an updated *GM-109 Tomahawk cruise missile, in both land attack and anti-ship versions. As I said, my field is aircraft theory and unconventional design, so I'll respectfully bow out now. Just was a suggestion.

I'll take the following

x50 F/A-40A Carrier Based Variants

x50 FV-109C Skyfire STOVL Fighter Aircraft

x500 AC-78 Fire Pelicans

I can assure you we can be trusted with Skyfire.

$23,600,000,000 wired upon completion.

OOC: Woah :O I never expected so much activity, and it definately looks like an interesting aircraft there, Adejaani, as a fancy but still capable replacement for the F-14. Still a fairly conventional layout when compared to the other products of yours through.

In regards to the proposals set forth by VA and SS, I'll probably get onto it with a full post either tomorrow or the following days, though munitions are more or less easier to deal with. SS, by "semi-ballistic", do you mean that the missiles should fly at a high altitude profile, then eventually hit the target with a sharp descent and dive? After all, a ballistic profile is essentially letting gravity guide you down. As well, in regards to VA's request for a heavy short range ASROC, I think I have something that you might want to see. Its buried under the newer threads in the OMP forums, but its here (http://s7.invisionfree.com/OMP/index.php?showtopic=229&st=20).


[Yes, exactly that. Btw, I forgot to mention, would it be possible to use a bending-body design so I can utilize a thrust-vector effect?]

If you have ever played Ace Combat 4, the second to last unlockable aircraft is the F-15ACTIVE, which is a F-15 with advanced avionics and thrust vectoring. You might want to check it out.

I'll take the following

x50 F/A-40A Carrier Based Variants

x50 FV-109C Skyfire STOVL Fighter Aircraft

x500 AC-78 Fire Pelicans

I can assure you we can be trusted with Skyfire.

$23,600,000,000 wired upon completion.

To: Velkya Authorities/Military
From: OMASC, Export Control Board

As a brief background check has been done to ensure the credibility and reliance of your nation, though OMASC still has several reservations, we regretfully announce that such order cannot be processed. The reason for such is not our distrust, but rather the economic status of your nation, as various calculations (basing very roughly from here (http://nseconomy.thirdgeek.com/nseconomy.php?nation=Velkya)) has shown that such purchase, numbering to a total of $27.25 billion in total, will produce a strong and negative effect on your government's budget and other funds (and especially considering the sum of money your government has used for other purchases).

However, this does not mean that other path could not be taken, as the OMASC is investigating the prospect of offering a lease-to-own program for the Velkya military, involving a reduced number of these aircraft (especially the AC-78 Fire Pelican model).

As we regret the fact that we must refuse to further process your order, we also hope that the Velkya military can understand our stance, and consider our offer for the "Lease-to-Own" program.

OOC: Further concerns/comments -

VA / Adejaani: Interesting concepts, but I'll probably have to agree with VA on the matter. Additionally, for a missile designed for subsonic flight, flying at high speeds would make targeting difficult, especially when you are really considering to use a ballistic profile (which has an accuracy that is pretty much limited to nuclear weapons only).

In regards to the aircraft, it still depends on how the armour is being used, though titanium bathtubs - for example - are unusually huge (I'd recall the weight is in the four-digit figure for the armour placed on the Su-34). I personally use some degree of armour, to protect the avionics bay, major fuel tanks, and the cockpit against fragmentation effects of shrapnel. Further, being hit still doesn't necessarily mean that the aircraft will just blow up and begone. In the end, airframe strength will still be one of the major factor when it comes to the aircraft's survivability against fragmentation warheads on SAMs.

VA: That sounds interesting. Perhaps a redesign of the original one could do, though to be truthful I still don't see how you could mount more than a few or several of these on FACs that has a displacement in the three-digit range. However, such joint development might also be beneficial for my military, as currently we are stuck with depth charges only with this thing (imagine a "regular" depth charge tagged with a simple guidance package consisting of a short-range LIDAR array).

SS: By blended body, you mean the design that the Americans were going to use on the Fasthawk and some other hypersonic missile concepts? That would be certainly interesting.

Velkya: I think I have heard of the ACTIVE in RL too. Interesting testbed. However, for combat, it is still best to use newer aircraft (specifically designed for combat) that features the newer technologies tested on a testbed. In addition, just for reference, my personal policy is not to base my designs on other games, so some of those non-RL stuff and the "closer-to-game-than-RL" aircraft are otu of my hand's reach.

[Bending body. But yeah, just like that. I already use them in my current missiles, simply because anything else is going to really f*ck up the missile in-flight.

Also, I've been diving through Google and I've found some indicators that if one wanted to use a solid fuel rocket motor in, say, an ICBM or commercial rocket, one could expect a substantial spike in performance compared to current rocket motors. Trouble is, to get that performance one has to either be relatively unconcerned with post-launch safety or has to make sure the workers/soldiers are well protected. See, Beryllium is seriously toxic, but it's the kind of toxic that's going to make one's life miserable instead of just killing one outright. It's a cost-benefit paradox.]

Well, I go by my GDP, but hey, your the producer. Ill take 250 Fire Pelicans instead.

7.5 Billion total

Make em' snow camo if you can.

[GDP is merely the value, in a monetary figure, of the value of the goods your nation produced. It isn't your actual budget.]

Well, I go by my GDP, but hey, your the producer. Ill take 250 Fire Pelicans instead.

7.5 Billion total

Make em' snow camo if you can.

To: Velkya Authorities/Military
From: OMASC, Export Control Board

The OMASC Export Control Board still raises serious concerns, as the price for 250 Fire Pelican gunships, totaling $9.95 billion (not $7.5 billion), is just barely beyond 2% of your nation's GDP, thus such purchase would have an adverse effect on your nation's finances. Thus, coupled with the fact that your nation has made other purchases and orders numbering in the billions, we would strongly advise against such purchase. In addition, such high number of gunship aircraft, by out standards, is deemed unnecessary considering the requested number of aircraft is already almost exceeding the number of aircraft in our forces. Coupled with additional costs (including maintence equipment and documentation), the price of the order will greatly exceed what your nation can afford without seriously affecting your government's finances and budgets.

Once again, we advise Velkya to reduce the number of aircraft for the order, or/and to consider the "Lease-to-Own" program, where a number of aircraft can procured at a much reduced price for ownership in active service of your military. (However, the downside is that, although the price will be reduced by a major fraction, the loss of such aircraft will result in fines, and that when they are retired from military service, an additional contract must be signed in order to continue to own them outside of military service)

Ok, ok. 50 AC-78s.

1.6 billion

OOC:

SS - Interesting, if you are talking about newer solid fuel rocket designs. However, for a medium-range missile, probably jet engines are the solution, while rockets should be good for long-range (aka ICBM or any other inter-continental weapons) weapons and short-range weapons (think short range AShM with a huge warhead).