what were the 5 biggest aviation events in 2021? what major events do you expect to see in 2022?

helmutkohl

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
29 November 2010
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
3,373
Happy new years everyone.

Now that 2021 ended and 2022 has begun
in your opinion
what were the 5 biggest aviation events in 2021?
and what major events do you expect in 2022?

my 5 for 2021
  • Unveiling of the KF-21
  • Unveiling of the Checkmate
  • Major F-35 victories with Finland, Switzerland, etc
  • Major Rafale orders with Croatia, UAE, Egypt, etc
  • The role UCAVs played in the Azeri-Armenian war
Expectations for 2022
  • First flight of the KF-21
  • an order by UAE of the F-35
 
Also, first flights of the X-59 and XB-1 are planed in 2022.
 
Last edited:
2022 = FLRAA down select and FARA cancellation.
FTUAS down select
Germany buys AH-64 or CH-53K
AW-609 FAA certified

Okay, the last one is more of a wish than a prognostication.
 
AW-609 FAA certified

Okay, the last one is more of a wish than a prognostication.
Click to expand...

Consider the following argument. This year the space program saw launches of the Russian Nauka ISS module and NASA Webb telescope.
Both had been in "development hell" since 1996: exactly 25 years, half a century together. Frack, I was in high school when they started the two damn things.

So there is still hope AW-609 to be FAA certified. :p
 
I think in retrospect the flight of a future usaf fighter test article speeded up by digital engineering will be tops for 2021. right now its all secret so its not in anyone's radar.... Surprised no one mentioned this. I suspect like the b21 when its unveiled it'll be production ready to roll

Aim260 and b21 will be for 2022
 
I'd like to see Stratolaunch get competitive with Space X and Virgin, and they look like they'll be flying again this year... That they've apparently recovered from Alan's death is a good sign.
 
Ainen said:
Deino said:
H-20 unveiling! ;)
Click to expand...
That thing seems to be "just a few months away" for several years by now.
Click to expand...


According to such special informed and close to the military sources like Minnie Chan and the SCMP yes for sure, but hey what do we really know in comparison to them? ;)
 
the J-20AS as the first twin-seater stealth fighter.
Click to expand...
Took me a little to realize and then... my mind was blown.
Have Blue: single seater
F-117, single seater
A-12 (did not flew) single seater - whatever, it's a bomber !
Tacit Blue ? single seater
Bird of prey: single seater
YF-23, single seater
F-22, single seater
F-35: single seater
Su-57: single seater

How about that ?!!

This mean that it took 45 years since Have Blue to get a backseater on a stealth aircraft.

I nearly said "B-2 !" but gosh damn it, it's a freakkin' BOMBER.

Deino you surely know your stuff !
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I'd like to see Stratolaunch get competitive with Space X and Virgin, and they look like they'll be flying again this year... That they've apparently recovered from Alan's death is a good sign.
Click to expand...
Stratolaunch next flight with landing gear extension/retraction and continued envelope expansion. B-21, H-20, PAK-DA unveilings, KF-21 and Checkmate first flights?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I'd like to see Stratolaunch get competitive with Space X and Virgin, and they look like they'll be flying again this year... That they've apparently recovered from Alan's death is a good sign.
Click to expand...
They won't compete in space, hypersonics for now is their niche. FWIW back in the day I flew with their CTO, who's definitely a hypersonics guy. A successful hypersonic vehicle in 2022 would be newsworthy.
 
stealthflanker said:
my expectation
-Maiden flight of KF-21
-Unveiling of B-21
-Unveiling of H-20
-Checkmate maiden flight
-Indonesia finally made decision between Rafale or F-15EX.
Click to expand...
whats your guess to which plane Indonesia will choose?
I am leaning towards Rafale
 
I dearly love the checkmate already and am looking forward to seeing it fly. Also the j-20 won me over and the two seat variant is pretty graceful.
 
Archibald said:
the J-20AS as the first twin-seater stealth fighter.
Click to expand...
Took me a little to realize and then... my mind was blown.
Have Blue: single seater
F-117, single seater
A-12 (did not flew) single seater - whatever, it's a bomber !
Tacit Blue ? single seater
Bird of prey: single seater
YF-23, single seater
F-22, single seater
F-35: single seater
Su-57: single seater

How about that ?!!

This mean that it took 45 years since Have Blue to get a backseater on a stealth aircraft.

I nearly said "B-2 !" but gosh damn it, it's a freakkin' BOMBER.

Deino you surely know your stuff !
Click to expand...
Ehhhh what about sr71? The bkackbird as there first plane designed around minimizing the rcs and had a back seat.
 
SR-71 was NOWHERE near being designed around minimizing RCS. It was accidentally less blinking that would've been expected for aircraft of that size, but it wasn't particulary stealthy - radars of time had little problems picking it up at working ranges.
 
I would not say that... RCS reduction was *definitely* a major consideration during design. So much so that the combination of stealth and performance in the initial specification was found impossible to meet. Eventually the CIA relaxed some of the performance requirements to facilitate RCS reduction, and Lockheed's proposals gained a number of signature Blackbird traits. These were the chines (designed to reduce fuselage slope against specular RF reflection), the twin inward-canted fins and the construction of the aforementioned chine and wing trailing edge as radar-absorbent structures.

It certainly wasn't stealthy by today's standards, and even at the time you could have designed something with a lower RCS by further compromising on performance. In combination with its high speed and operating altitude however, the RCS reduction was felt to significantly increase its survivability. Tracking it on radar did not automatically mean being able to shoot it down - the effective footprint defended by air defences was much reduced.
 
GARGEAN said:
SR-71 was NOWHERE near being designed around minimizing RCS. It was accidentally less blinking that would've been expected for aircraft of that size, but it wasn't particulary stealthy - radars of time had little problems picking it up at working ranges.
Click to expand...
Woah dude. Rcs reduction was a huge part of design. Its exhaust plumes had a larger signature than the airframe.

It even at one point involved plasma stealth technology installed on some tail numbers.

The USA has already done everything China is just now doing 50 and 60 years later. :)

Besides, the USA hasn't rolled out for press pictures everything we've built. Remember the Dorito over Kansas....
 
Last edited:
Trident said:
I would not say that... RCS reduction was *definitely* a major consideration during design. So much so that the combination of stealth and performance in the initial specification was found impossible to meet. Eventually the CIA relaxed some of the performance requirements to facilitate RCS reduction, and Lockheed's proposals gained a number of signature Blackbird traits. These were the chines (designed to reduce fuselage slope against specular RF reflection), the twin inward-canted fins and the construction of the aforementioned chine and wing trailing edge as radar-absorbent structures.

It certainly wasn't stealthy by today's standards, and even at the time you could have designed something with a lower RCS by further compromising on performance. In combination with its high speed and operating altitude however, the RCS reduction was felt to significantly increase its survivability. Tracking it on radar did not automatically mean being able to shoot it down - the effective footprint defended by air defences was much reduced.
Click to expand...
Just because by today's standards of what's possible but it certainly was the first 2 seat stealth aircraft. Would you say the skipjack wasn't a nuclear submarine because today we have the Virginia class?
 
To me one major event would be the maiden flight of the Eviation Alice. As the world's first clean sheet electric airliner, if it makes it into service it will earn its place in aviation history.

Also, a launch decision on the Embrarer turboprop project would be amazing to see. But I think they still need to find a partner as well as a launch customer before they commit to such an ambitious undertaking.

Would also love to see a launch of the Boeing NMA to counter the A321XLR, but that likely won't happen until at least 2023 or later.
 
rooster said:
Woah dude. Rcs reduction was a huge part of design. Its exhaust plumes had a larger signature than the airframe
Click to expand...
I served on a destroyer in 1989-1991. At that time, the SR-71 was still flying along the Soviet borders. I confidently declare to you that coastal radars accompanied him throughout the flight and transmitted coordinates in real time to every ship of the Northern Fleet
 
There was "Lockheed stealth" and "Lockheed stealth". Let me explain. The entire SR-71 family plus their drone offspring called the D-21B, had limited, early stealth.
And then they crossed path, circa 1975, with "Hopeless diamond", Have Blue early studies.
Clarence L. Johnson also retired and was replaced by Ben Rich.

Johnson staunchly believed the D-21B drone RCS could not be beaten by anything.
Ben rich argued about Have Blue and Hopeless diamond.

So both were put on a RCS test range and surely enough, "new" stealth bet "old stealth" by an order of magnitude in the hundred.

Bottom line: "old stealth" had no facet and flew at Mach 3.5. "New" stealth slowed down to subsonic, added facets, and beat that soundly.

Ryan AQM-91 is also part of "old school stealth".

Ben Rich in his memoirs made the difference between the two pretty clear.

"Old school stealth" was achieved through "random tweaking of the shape".

"True stealth" was computerized RCS with facets, starting with Have Blue.

The main breakthrough happened when Ufimtsev equations were poured into a computer program.
 
Archibald said:
There was "Lockheed stealth" and "Lockheed stealth". Let me explain. The entire SR-71 family plus their drone offspring called the D-21B, had limited, early stealth.
And then they crossed path, circa 1975, with "Hopeless diamond", Have Blue early studies.
Clarence L. Johnson also retired and was replaced by Ben Rich.

Johnson staunchly believed the D-21B drone RCS could not be beaten by anything.
Ben rich argued about Have Blue and Hopeless diamond.

So both were put on a RCS test range and surely enough, "new" stealth bet "old stealth" by an order of magnitude in the hundred.

Bottom line: "old stealth" had no facet and flew at Mach 3.5. "New" stealth slowed down to subsonic, added facets, and beat that soundly.

Ryan AQM-91 is also part of "old school stealth".

Ben Rich in his memoirs made the difference between the two pretty clear.

"Old school stealth" was achieved through "random tweaking of the shape".

"True stealth" was computerized RCS with facets, starting with Have Blue.

The main breakthrough happened when Ufimtsev equations were poured into a computer program.
Click to expand...

That computer program was called Echo 1 for those who do not know, and had to be run on a mainframe that had less power than modern calculators and mobile phones and also filled an entire room.
 
rooster said:
Just because by today's standards of what's possible but it certainly was the first 2 seat stealth aircraft.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what I said?!

paralay said:
rooster said:
Woah dude. Rcs reduction was a huge part of design. Its exhaust plumes had a larger signature than the airframe
Click to expand...
I served on a destroyer in 1989-1991. At that time, the SR-71 was still flying along the Soviet borders. I confidently declare to you that coastal radars accompanied him throughout the flight and transmitted coordinates in real time to every ship of the Northern Fleet
Click to expand...

These statements are not mutually exclusive.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom