Ancient Advanced Aviation?

I'm not going to create a controversy here. It's already documented in fold of history that the first man control flight was by American Wright brothers. We can see this as the Wright brothers is living in the centered of where everything is going to be well documented. I'll think he's very lucky man indeed.

Off course there is others who claimed to be the first to fly like Richard Pearse (New Zealand), Gustave whitehead (US), Lyman Gilmore (US), Dr Wilhelm Kress (Austria), Karl Jatho (Germany), John Joseph Montgomery (US), Traian Vuia (Romania), Jacob Ellenhammer (Danmark)and Alberto Santos_Dumont (Brazil).

Is it that's how the history going on? Actually there is another most controversial point of view around, but I don't think this is gonna your cupa of coffee. This is not what we all learn about from our school.

Okay, I read this in Mr. Rene Noorbergen book. He wrote how advanced aviation exist in prehistoric times! One of the earliest preserved records of flight is in a Babylonian set of laws called Halkatha, which contain this passage:”To operate a flying machine is a great privilege. Knowledge of flying is most ancient, a gift of the gods of old for saving lives.”

The Babylonian 'Epic of Etana', describing a detail prehistoric flight in period between 3000 and 2400 BC.

Another Chaldean work, the Sifr'ala, dates back more than 5000 years decipher a detailed account of how to build and operate an aircraft. The text speaks of various parts such as vibrating spheres, graphite rods and copper coils; and on the subject of flight the writer comments on the wind resistance, gliding and stability. Unfortunately, many key lines of the text are missing, making any attempt to reconstructing the craft impossible.

Early Chinese annals also contain several references to the art of flying. Emperor Shun, reigned between 2258 and 2208 BC, reportedly not only constructed a flying craft but also tested a parachute- more than 36 centuries before Leonardo da Vinci.

References to flight also appear in ancient Nepalese and Poleynesians.

In 1898, a small model of plane was discovered in a tomb near Saqqara, and was dated at approximately 200 BC. At the time of its discovery, the birth of modern aviation was still several years away, and so, when the strange object was sent to Cairo, it was cataloged and then shelved to gather dust until 1969, when they open the box and to their surprised discovered when tested the bird model actually having characteristic of present modern airplane model and fourteen model has been discovered from various tomb.

In 1954 a US touring Colombian government collection of ancient gold artifacts, a wing animal artifact caught the eye of Ivan T.Sanderson, after he consulting a number of aerodynamics experts, he came to mind boggling conclusion that's the gold object is a model of a jet aircraft at least a thousand years old.

Among the remarkable description of flying machine found in the ancient Hindu sacred books, Samaranga Sutradhara. Here a short excerpts from the text:
'The aircraft which can go by its own force like a bird- on the earth or water or through the air – is called a Vimana. That which can travel in the sky from place to place is called a Vimana by the sages of old'.

Maybe we cannot be so proud with our civilization accomplishment in aviation, probably earlier people have done so although there is no concrete proved (like we can unearth one or build one). Off course they won't be any, except proved from story and description that come from every civilization, worldwide.

Scramjet a future aircraft power plant?

( A scramjet power rocket testing in Australian Outback in 2006)

A future looks bright when a successful scramjet tests conducted in the Australian Outback that saw a rocket exceed Mach 10 speeds of 11,000 kmh (6,800 mph) pose a potential revolution in air travel, making theoretically possible to connect anywhere in the world within three to four hours.

While this achievement is breathtaking in its commercial potential, the reality is that such capabilities are very unlikely to find their way to your nearest airport anytime soon.

More extensive tests need to be conducted before the engines and the airframes can be safety certified, since the technology offers tantalizing hypothetical speeds of up to Mach 24! But once the basics have been achieved with the prototypes, there is still another complicated process in the next stage of ensuring average passenger comfort.

In short, we're at the very least two decades away before the first commercial scramjet flight is ready to accept bookings. And chances are that when we actually reach this horizon, these flights will most likely be far from the envisioned fantasy.

Like the supersonic Concorde, which has been retired in 2003 after almost three decades of lording the skies, the commercial scramjet is very likely to run smack into overland flight restrictions with stringent controls on noise levels and now, possibly even carbon dioxide and other fuel-related emissions.

Take-offs and landings would probably need to be within existing speed limits to minimize noise
pollution; sonic booms resulting from speed transitions would be restricted to non-residential zones-most likely over barren seas, assuming there won't be further restrictions related to the protection of possibly dwindling aquatic creatures.

As a result, scramjets are a promise of faster travel speeds which still faces an uncertain future

Another Source Of Power For Aircraft Engine, A Reality?

(We still rely on this engine which gulping a fossil fuel)

Since the ever-increasing rate of air travel, there is clearly a need for more planes. Better if they're faster, pack more people, cheaper to run and economical to maintain.

New concerns on global warming warming intensifying so soon after sharp hikes in oil prices, coupled with shortages of available aircraft and congested airports, the issue of travel has never been so high in most people's minds.

Travel today is a basic necessity, be it on land, air or sea. It's has come under fire for the rapid consumption of fossil fuels and increasing pollution effects on global warming.

The main problem with air travel is that there are very few alternatives available, unlike eco-friendly options of bicycles and electric trains for land transport and wind-powered sailing maritime vessels.

Hence, all new aircraft like A380 and Boeing 787 Dreamliner are all being watched very closely for fuel emissions and the size of their carbon footprints.

Aviation carbon emissions calculated on the basis of per kilometer traveled are very closed to that produced by cars transporting single passengers. Since there are for more cars running compared to airplanes (plus manufacturing industries pollution), overall contribution by aircraft around the world currently make up only three percent of overall carbon emissions.

Research into more eco-friendly aviation technology is progressing rapidly, foremost with better engines and fuels. To conserve on fossil fuels, there is already much focus on bio-fuels that is very far from living up to its promise. Bio-fuels still don't fully address the issue of carbon emissions and there is simply no available alternative to the existing aviation fuels that packs enough power needed to send multi-tonnes aircraft aloft.

If better high-powered sources still can't be obtained then we may stuck with the kerosene-burning physics. Or is there another way forward?

The magic promise of clean electricity has been around for awhile, as has the lure of limitless solar energy supplies. Reality check has shown that such concept still remain far from a practical solution.

Get Off that F-16! we'll send the Drone instead..

Radio Control toys, whats once supposed to be a toys for all, in fact thats no wonder country like Sri Lanka ban on this toys because it can be apply for another unthinkable purpose by layman. Its no secret anymore thats what the military around the world up to, they secretly apply Radio Control technology as a strategic airborne device.

The military's reliance on unmanned aircraft that can watch, hunt and sometimes kill insurgents has soared to more than 500,000 hours in the air, largely in Iraq. The jump in Iraq coincided with the build up of U.S. forces this summer as the military swelled its ranks to quell the violence in Baghdad. But Pentagon officials said that even as troops begin to slowly come home this year, the use of Predators, Global Hawks, Shadows and Ravens will not likely slow.

The increased military operations all across Iraq last summer triggered greater use of the drones and an escalating call for more of the systems — from the Pentagon's key hunter-killer, the Predator, to the surveillance Global Hawks and the smaller, cheaper Ravens.

In one recent example of what they can do, a Predator caught sight of three militants firing mortars at U.S. forces in November in Balad, Iraq. The drone fired an air-to-ground missile, killing the three, according to video footage the Air Force released.

The bulk of the unmanned flight hours belong to the Army's workhorse drone, the Raven, which weighs just four pounds and is used by smaller units, such as companies and battalions, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Army has a total of 361 unmanned aircraft in Iraq alone — including Shadows, Hunters and Ravens. And in the first 10 months of 2007, they flew more than 300,000 hours.

According to a new Pentagon report, the Defense Department plans to develop an "increasingly sophisticated force of unmanned systems" over the next 25 years. The effort will confront some current shortfalls, including plans to improve how well the drones can quickly and precisely identify and locate targets.

That would also involve increasing the precision of the guided weapons that are on some of the unmanned aircraft. Those efforts are considered critical because it enables the military to hunt down and kill militants without putting troops at risk.

In addition, the Pentagon said it wants to improve the drones' reconnaissance and surveillance abilities, which are the top priorities of commanders in the field.

Bring in Russian Stealth Fighter Aircraft!

( MiG 1.44 a development program that originated in the 1980s, thats really never take off into a full service)

There is an eerie of what is going on behind the Russian veil. We've seen whats the America come out with. China, Japan and even Korea and Iran or probably other western country are trying hard to come out with some sort of stealth fighter of their own design for years to come although all this country for sure lacking experience and technology.

When the Russian come out with MiG-25 in 70s, to encountered it US come out with F-15. But then the MiG-25 is known for interceptor and reconnaissance role only with fastest Mach 3 record, surely not for dogfight as F-15 tend to do. In 1970s with the emerging of F-16 and F-18, the agile small fighter with fly by wire technology along with lerx (Leading Edge Root Extension) technology then MiG Bureau come out with MiG-29, also using lerx technology although we don't know whether they also using fly by wire technology ( now we know they did). Even, when most latest western fighter spotting a canard for agility then Su-30s family of aircraft started spotting canard for the same purpose (along with limited vectoring nozzle capability for added agility).

Russian aviation bureau is known to have conduct an abundance of research on all kind of aspect of stealth. This evident is strong with the concept sketches, wind tunnel model and mock up model, even certain bureau come out with a prototype of it. In fact in certain photo unveil a really fantastic designed, 2-D vectoring nozzle like F-22. A MiG prototype with air intake like European Typhoon, all this emerged as far back in 1970s. Some prototype in fact is really promising, like the MiG 1.44 prototype (above photo).

Its worth noted, its really sad to see them losing the race. When F-22, B-2 or even the old F-117 come out, there is a cold response from Russian Aircraft Bureau. There is no comparison aircraft come out to encountered any of them. Whats have they learned through their research seem just been wipe out from their mind and it means nothing!. All gone like a dust blown by the winds. At least, if the funds is their main problem (although they gain a lot export order to cover it!) then they should equipped a least one or two squadron with latest design stealth capability fighter, but the fact is there's none at all exist!.(Unless, there is one secretly entered their service)

Whats is really happening here? Why there's no new bomber or fighter with stealthy capability entering Russian service until now?. Why they'll still utilized an old work horses like Mig-29 variants and Su-27 variants that lacking all this capability?. All design dated back in 1970s!. Is it because stealth is not important? Or, are they come out with some kind of anti-stealth mechanism that render stealth an obsolete technology? There's no answer for all this questions. Only the Russian know the answer. If they can't closed the gap as soon as possible then surely they'll losing the technology race for good, I'm afraid. The US probably ahead of them for 10 years from now on or probably more!. So, Russian bring in your new Stealth Fighter!

Stealth Fighter Aircraft For Everyone?

(Japanese Stealth Fighter Mock-up)

(Chinese Stealth Fighter)

(Korean Stealth Fighter)

Since the emerging of the so called stealth fighter F-117 (actually its more bomber than fighter) and the now the real stealth fighter the F-22 Raptor, more and more country try harder to come out with their own version of stealth fighter.

Japan is set to develop its own next-generation stealth fighter jets to reduce its dependence on foreign technology and counter similar moves by China and Russia. Japan, which wants to replace its aging fighter fleet, has also made overtures to Washington on the possibility of purchasing the U.S. F-22 Raptor stealth fighter and other option the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the F-18 and advanced F-15s — as well as the Eurofighter Typhoon.

However, the U.S. Congress has repeatedly banned the sale of the plane to any foreign government,in an attempt to safeguard the country's advanced technology and Japanese navy computers' recent leak of data from a joint U.S.-Japan AEGIS radar system has also spurred U.S. concerns over sharing information with Tokyo.

Japan's Defense Ministry now aims to test its own prototype stealth jet — fitted with a domestic engine, advanced control system and radar-jamming device — within five years, the Tokyo Shimbun newspaper reported, citing a budget plan submitted Friday by the ministry.

A mock-up has already undergone preliminary ground tests in France, the report said.
Friday's decision by the ministry to push ahead with the multibillion-yen project means developers will start working toward flight tests, with production in about 10 years, it said.

Japan hopes that having its own domestic homegrown stealth fighter jet would mean it would not have to rely on foreign governments for key military technology and likely help Japan enhance its radar systems to counter regional rivals China and Russia, which are thought to be developing their own stealth jets, the paper said.

Its really good to see a healthy competition in building a next future stealth fighter. Lets hope we'll see a more innovative and creative design, probably hope to see more like whats in the japanese anime technology shown.

Aurora Aircraft a Myth?

(A computer rendered image a supposed look 'Aurora')

A very facinating and intrigue case of a 'so' top secret aircraft known as Aurora has been discuss in the internet forum. I couldn't help it to post it here although the the truth is still out there.
A wide range of reports of observations of mysterious aerial phenomena have been associated with the Aurora aircraft. These observations are also in many regards consistent with the suggested Exotic Propulsion Aircraft. Those reports relating to both possibilities are unique to the Exotic Propulsion Aircraft are discussed subsequently.
These unexplained phenomena have led some to conclude that: "...the US Government has secretly developed and deployed a hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft, probably as a replacement for the SR-71."
There are two classes of reports relating to Aurora: those that are consistent with a limited experimental test program; and those that are suggestive of the existence of an operational capability.
Edwards Air Force Base in southern California is the primary facility used by the American military for the flight testing of experimental aircraft. In addition, the Groom Lake facility at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada was used for developmental testing of the F-117A, and has been associated with reports of other advanced aircraft. Given this geographical concentration, it would not be surprising if secret aircraft undergoing flight tests were to be observed in the Southwestern United States.
In October 1990 Aviation Week & Space Technology published reports of:"A high altitude aircraft that crosses the night sky at extremely high speed.... The vehicle typically is observed as a single, bright light -- sometimes pulsating -- flying at speeds far exceeding other aircraft in the area, and at altitudes estimated to be above 50,000 ft.... Normally, no engine noise or sonic boom is heard."
More recently, a sighting by two British Airways pilots and other witnesses at Manchester Airport on January 6 1995 has been attributed to the Aurora aircraft. Probably the most compelling evidence for such flight tests are the series of unusual sonic booms chronicled above Southern California, beginning in mid to late 1991.
On at least five occasions, these sonic booms were recorded by at least 25 of the 220US Geological Survey sensors across Southern California used to pinpoint earthquake epicenters. The incidents were recorded in June, October, November, and late January 1991. Seismologists estimate that the aircraft were flying at speeds between Mach 3 and 4 and at altitudes of 8 to 10 kilometers. The aircraft's flight path was in a North North-East direction, consistent with flight paths to secret test ranges in Nevada. Seismologists say that the sonic booms were characteristic of a smaller vehicle than the 37 meter long shuttle orbiter. Furthermore, neither the shuttle nor NASA's single SR-71B were operating on the days the booms were registered.One of the seismologists, Jim Mori, noted:"We can't tell anything about the vehicle. They seem stronger than other sonic booms that we record once in a while. They've all come on Thursday mornings about the same time, between 6 and 7 in the morning." These "skyquake" are a continuing phenomenon, with the most recent report over Orange County, CA coming on 20 July 1996.
It is reported that the "quake" occurred around 3pm PST, fitting the "skyquake" pattern in the following respects:
1.It occurred in a coastal area.
2.Described as similar to an earthquake in some respects (rattling of loose objects, etc) but also like a boom (but no distinct double bang as far as is known).
3.Severe enough to light up government and media switchboards, but no known damage.
4.Not an earthquake (CalTech sensors saw nothing)
5.Local military bases deny any knowledge.
6.No known other source (eg explosion).
Intercepted radio transmissions are equally intriguing: "On Apr. 5 (a Sunday) and Apr. 22, radio hobbyists in Southern California monitored transmissions between Edwards AFB's radar control facility (Joshua Control) and a high-altitude aircraft using the call sign "Gaspipe."
The series of radio calls occurred at approximately 6 a.m. local time on both dates. "Controllers were directing the unknown Gaspipe aircraft to a runway at Edwards, using advisories similar to those given space shuttle crews during a landing approach. The monitors recorded two advisories, both transmitted by Joshua Control to Gaspipe: "You're at 67,000, 81 mi. out," and "Seventy mi. out, 36,000. Above glide slope."
Reported sightings of unusual high performance aircraft are not confined to the Southwestern United States. More recently, such observations have also been reported in other parts of the United States, as well as in Europe.
These reports are particularly intriguing because they are difficult to reconcile with an experimental test program, since there would be no reason for test flights to be conducted in Europe. Rather, these reports would have to be understood in the context of the deployment of an operational aircraft.
One unexplained set of observations was reported at Beale Air Force Base, the California facility that was long home to the SR-71. On two consecutive nights in late February 1992, observers reported sighting a triangular aircraft displaying a distinctive diamond-shaped lighting pattern, comprised of a red light near the nose -- similar to the F-117 configuration -- two 'whitish' lights near what would be conventional wingtips and an amber light near the tail. While the wing lights are reportedly much brighter than normal navigation lamps, they do not illuminate the aircraft's planform. Observers claim the vehicle's wing lights are approximately twice as far apart as those on the F-117, and nose-to-tail light spacing is about 50 percent longer than that on the stealth fighter.
Reports of "unusually loud, rumbling sonic booms" near Pensacola, Florida in November 1991 have also been associated with the Aurora program. At least 30 unexplained sonic booms have been reported in Southern California in late 1991 and early 1992.
By mid-1992 noted aviation observer Bill Sweetman concluded that, "The frequency of the sonic booms indicates that whatever is making them is now an operational aircraft."
In early 1992 it was reported that:"... RAF radars have acquired the hypersonic target travelling at speeds ranging from about Mach 6 to Mach 3 over a NATO-RAF base at Machrihanish, Scotland, near the tip of the Kintyre peninsula, last November and again this past January."
It was recently reported than on 27 September 1995 David Morris of Walsall, Cornwall UK took a picture of a triangular shaped plane being refueled by a KC-135, and flanked by a pair of F-111s. The unknown aircraft appeared to be about three-quarters the size of the KC-135. This picture has been widely distributed. However, the "refuelling" picture is a hoax .
In 1990, it was suggested that the Aurora (also reportedly designated "Senior Citizen") had been intended to be the SR-71's successor, but it had been canceled along with the "Blackbird" in 1989.
Above all this until now there is no concrete evidence to proved (The existing of Aurora) all this, there is no clear photo evidence.

Best Aircraft Maker- Airbus or Boeing?

(The latest Airbus A380)
(The Latest Boeing Dreamliner)

There is a biggest debate going on in the internet Forum that I watched for at the moment. The question is, who's the best aircraft marker?, Airbus or Boeing. Off course there will be two quarters,those who support Airbus and those who support Boeing. Each supporter gave their own opinion accordingly. But to my point of view both aircraft marker are the best in the world today, there is no doubt about it. And to built the best aircraft need a lot of effort, and both done it well.

Boeing added two plane orders in the past week, taking its year-to-date tally to a record 1,146 net orders, but the US planemaker still trails European rival Airbus in the race for 2007 sales.

The number of Boeing's firm orders is already well ahead of its record last year of 1,044, and means the company will break 1,000 orders for the third straight year.
But it still trails Airbus, which had 1,204 orders on its books for the year at the end of November, after a particularly successful Dubai air show. A full comparison will be possible at the end of the year, when Airbus adjusts its tally to take account of cancelled orders.

Between them, Boeing and Airbus look set to post 2,500 orders for the year, which would break the previous record of 2,057 net orders in 2005.

That was the first year both companies posted more than 1,000 orders each, marking the beginning of the boom in commercial aerospace, as travel demand surged after a slump caused by the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Airbus has already beaten its 2005 record for orders, and looks set to reclaim the title of biggest-selling planemaker after losing it last year to Boeing.

Its single-aisle A320 line is selling well, and in the last few months it has seen a rise in interest for its new mid-sized wide-body, the A350 XWB -- which rivals Boeing's 787 -- after several years of design setbacks. It is also taking orders for its new A380 superjumbo, which entered service in October.

Boeing's biggest seller is its single-aisle 737, with 651 orders so far this year. The new 787 Dreamliner, which is set to start test flights by the end of March, has 314 orders this year. Boeing has taken 129 orders for its 777 this year, and 16 for its 747.

The total year-to-date tally for Boeing includes a 55 plane order, worth about USD$4.5 billion, placed by General Electric's plane leasing unit last week, but only made public on Thursday.

In term of sale both equally got so much customer orders that they can handled it for quite sometime into the future. Healthy competition is good for both of them.

Big Transport Aircraft

Boeing Dreamlifter
Airbus Beluga

Beside the well known shape like a big whale the "Beluga" the European Airbus transport aircraft thats transport the body of an aircraft for assembly now Boeing come out with nearly identical modified 747-400 dubbed "Dreamlifter" used to transport the major assemblies of all-new Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Granted type certification on 2 June 2007 by FAA.
The certification recognizes that the Dreamlifter has successfully passed all of stringent testing and safety requirements required by the FAA. The Dreamlifter does not need to be certified by other regulatory agencies.
As part of the flight test program, FAA officials flew on board the aircraft as it delivered major sections of the Dreamliner from partner sites around the world to the Boeing factory in Everett, Washington for the final assembly.
The flights allowed the FAA to validate the overall delivery process and tools.The Dreamlifter is not certified to carry passenger beyond essential crew.
The aircraft completed 437 flight test hours and 639 hours of ground testing since its first flight on 9 September 2006. With certification achieved, operation of the aircraft fleet soon be assumed by Evergreen International Airlines (EIA) of McMinnville, Oregon.

Airplane Spotter -another hobby

If you love an airplane like me or others you might know the term "plane spotter". Its somekind of past time hobby like other hobbies. "Plane Spotter" is actually an individual or a group of people thats enthusiasticly and passionately like to hanging around near an airport at a strategic spot to have a glimpse of an airplane movements in their free time.
I'll think its a universal hobby thats every country got their own indivdual or groups existing to appreciate this activities.
Some of them sometimes equipped with binocular, SLR Camera, Video Camera or occasionally with Airband Scanner (while the latter is some time depend on where you are, I mean, in some countries possessing such radio is against the law, so must be careful if you bring it into such country).
Actually you must take precaution in handling such activities in high security area such an airport. You must adhered to any rules and regulation that is usually clearly shown in the area, carefully read the sign or signboard pertaining to any warning.
Such caution is to ensured that you will not be prosecuted by authority. Remember, there is a cases involving "plane-spotter" in Russia and China thats has been jailed for doing just that.
I'll think elsewhere like in Area 51 the famous place thats signboard warning is everywhere there is people been prosecuted or been warn by the guards. So beware such consequences. Happy plane spotting.

Jet Aircraft Noise - Ages of Problem

Noise of jet aircraft is not a new issue. In Europe, we heared a news how certain airport ban Russian aircraft because they breach the allowed limit of sound measurement. Certain western jet engine manufacturers starting to design engine with less or emitting sound that comply with European standard.
In US an already noise-conscious, busy Santa Monica airport (SMO) just north of LAX is set to adopt a city council ordinance prohibiting category C and D aircraft (those aircraft with approach speeds of 121 knots or more, but less than 166 knots) from using its sole 4,973-by-150-foot runway in spite of a letter from the FAA that calls the move "flatly illegal." With a Dec. 5 meeting set for SMO representatives and the FAA, the issue may yet end in court. Category C and D aircraft (Gulfstream IV, Challenger and Citation X aircraft (Piture Above), and the like) account for about 8,500 operations per year at SMO and half of its jet traffic. Violation of the ordinance, which the council says is proposed for safety concerns, would incur a $1,000 fine. The FAA has stated it will use "all available means" to prevent implementation of the ordinance. Proponents say the FAA's own guidelines call for runway safety areas of 1,000 feet at either end of runways accommodating category C and D aircraft. Santa Monica presently has none ... but it does have homes within 300 feet of the runway's ends.
There is no doubt there is noise problem moreover if you stay near a Military airbase.There is a report in newspaper that I read on how public who's home near an airbase complained about the noise when the Air Force conducting an exercise be it at day or night. But one thing that I'm notice is old jet aircraft like MD DC-10 or Boeing 727 or military jets contribute most of the noise pollution. New aircraft like Airbus 320 is most likely emitted less noise pollution.

Tupolev 214 Aircraft Will Do

With sanction cloud hanging over Iran by the western allies against the alleged nuclear enrichment project, Iran will do with Russian aircraft although it might be not up to western standard.

Iran's national airliner Iran Air will buy five Tupolev (Above Photo: Tupolev 214)passenger planes from Russia to meet high demand for domestic flights, Iran's state broadcaster said on Wednesday.

"Iran Air has various plans to complete its fleet and is to buy five Tupolev 214 passenger planes," Managing Director Saeed Hessami was quoted as saying on the web site of state broadcaster IRIB.

"The deposit has been prepared for transfer to the (Ilyushin Finance) company and they (the aircraft) will gradually join the fleet," Hessami said without giving any financial details on the deal.

Hessami did not mention any other plans to buy Tupolev planes from Russia.

In Moscow on Monday, a source with knowledge of the deal said Iran had started talks to buy 30 Russian Tupolev 204 passenger aircraft worth more than USD$1 billion.

The source, who asked not to be identified, said the deal was likely to be reached by the end of the year.

Government-owned Iran Air operates a fleet of Boeing and Airbus planes, while its Iran Air Tours subsidiary flies Tupolev 154 planes. Iran's airline sector has been under US sanctions for almost three decades, preventing it from buying new US planes or spare parts.

So, what else you can do if you're under that circumstances.

Flying and Radiation Risk

High flying and radiation risk is not a new feared topic. Its been circulated in aviation world for a long time.
Physicist Calls for Airline Industry to Educate Workers about Radiation At the high altitudes and latitudes commercial airlines fly, crews are subjected to higher-than-normal radiation levels from the sun and cosmic rays.
Physicist Robert Barish believes airline crew members are exposing themselves to more radiation than almost any other occupation and is calling for the airline industry to better educate workers about radiation.
Most careers have an occupational hazard, but frequent fliers may be exposed to cosmic radiation and not even know it. We all know the risks when we fly, but one risk we don't know about comes from what's in the sky.
Captain Joyce May, a commercial airline pilot, says, "By the time you're at normal jet cruising altitude of, say, 39,000 feet, the total radiation is about 64 times greater than what it is at sea level." May fears fellow crewmembers and frequent business fliers don't know the risk of cosmic radiation from solar flares.
She says, "Aircrew members, by-and-large, are unaware of this issue."Robert Barish, physicist and author of "The Invisible Passenger: Radiation Risks For People Who Fly," says, "The sun is really a big thermo-nuclear device." Barish believes airline crewmembers are exposing themselves to more radiation than almost any other occupation. He says, "People who work in the nuclear power industry on an average basis are getting 1.6. There are people who fly in airplanes who are getting 2 or 3 or 4 milliSieverts per year.
So they are truly radiation workers."Everyone is exposed to some radiation every day. The sun constantly emits charged particles that intensify during solar flares. Normally, the earth's atmosphere absorbs much of this, but at the high altitudes and latitudes airliners fly, crews are subjected to higher radiation levels and possibly are at higher risk for developing cancer.
In Europe, it is mandatory flight crews be educated about cosmic radiation, but that's not the case in the United States. The risk is not the same for everyone. Casual fliers have nothing to worry about. Only people who fly at least once or twice a week.
This is a bad news for a commercial flight, but what about military, a fighter pilot sometimes fly at a high altitude without any cover, only wind shield!.

Aircraft , the collision to avoid

As global air traffic expands at record rates, experts warn that near misses on the ground at overcrowded airports are becoming one of the most serious safety concerns in civil aviation.

Remember this back in 1978, although this is not happen on the runway.
At nine o'clock on the morning of Monday, September 25, 1978, the skies of Southern California were a clear blue, the visibility conservatively estimated at ten miles. Yet before two minutes more had passed, one hundred and forty-four people were to die as a result of two aircraft colliding in mid-air.
The lessons learned that the primary cause of the disaster was that the Captain of PSA Flight 182 lost sight of the other aircraft and didn't clearly tell ATC that had done so.
The controllers failed to appreciate that PSA 182 lost sight of the Cessna, or even that there was some confusion as to its position. This should have been obivious from the radio transmission from the aircraft.
The possible presence of a third, unidentified and unauthorised aircraft may have confused the crew of PSA 182 as to the position of the Cessna.
ATC procedures were confused and poorly cor-ordinated allowing the controllers to authorise visual separation procedures when a radar service was available. This would have been safer, giving lateral and vertical separation between both aircraft.
The controller failed to advise Flight 182 as to the direction of movement of the Cessna.
The pilot of the Cessna didn't stay on his assigned heading, or inform the controller that he could not do so. Had he maintained this heading the collision not have taken place.
San Diego Approach Control failed to react to the conflict alert. No warning was passed to either pilot.
SDAC did not restrict Flight 182 to a minimum height of 4,000 feet while it was within the Montgomery Field traffic area. Had it done so the collision would not have occurred.

Until now more lesson to learn.
The danger arises when airports try to alleviate bottlenecks by adding runways. That leads to more taxiways intersecting the runways, raising the risk of accidental incursions — where an aircraft or vehicle becomes a collision hazard by venturing onto a runway being used for takeoffs and landings. "Runway incursions are right at the top of our agenda," said Gideon Ewers, spokesman for the International Federation of Airline Pilots' Associations.
"They are happening more and more frequently as air traffic increases and older airport designs struggle to cope. Of course most incursions pass without incident, but when they do occur the results are very bad indeed," Ewers said.
The deadliest disaster in aviation history occurred 30 years ago as a result of such an encroachment. The ground collision in 1977 between two fully loaded Boeing 747s in Spain's Canary Islands killed 583 people.
Since then, numerous such accidents have ended in tragedy and experts are now racing to develop systems to prevent even deadlier disasters.
According to Eurocontrol, an average of two incursions take place each day at Europe's 600 civil airports. And in the United States — where reporting standards are different — 182 incidents have been recorded so far in 2007, compared to 158 last year.
The most serious recent accident occurred on Oct. 8, 2001, when a Scandinavian Airline System MD-87 on takeoff smashed into a Cessna Citation which had encroached onto the runway. A total of 118 people died.
More frequent are close calls like one in July at Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, where two jets missed each other by less than 10 meters (30 feet). A United flight with 133 passengers on board missed a turn on the taxiway and entered an active runway where a Delta jet was about to land with 167 passengers.
"In an ideal world you'd have no runway crossings at all," said Paul Wilson, head of Airport Operations at Eurocontrol, Europe's air navigation agency. "But the reality is that as an airport becomes busier, it also introduces more sophisticated guidance systems and procedures to prevent runway incursions."
A Federal Aviation Administration study found that the well-designed Washington Dulles airport in the United States had only four incursions during the period from 1997 to 2000, compared to Los Angeles Airport with a complex layout of multiple intersecting runways and taxiways — which had 29 incursions.
Experts say that when the volume of traffic — projected to double over the next 10-15 years — is taken into account, the potential for near misses and fatal accidents is growing fast.
"It is a problem that affects just about every airport," Wilson said.
The international pilots' union blames poorly designed airports as the primary cause of incursions. High traffic density, complicated operational procedures, nonstandard markings, and poor comprehension of English among cockpit crew add to the risks.
Although low proficiency in English — the standard language of aviation — plays a major role, foreign pilots also complain that air traffic controllers in the United States contribute to the problem by using confusing abbreviations or long and complex instructions.
As a result, the FAA now requires U.S. controllers to provide clear and explicit taxiing instructions to pilots, including the exact route to their designated runway and not merely which runway to use.
In order to minimize future risks, Eurocontrol, FAA and other national air safety agencies are looking into using advanced runway incursion alert systems that detect potential collisions on runways and give advance warning to controllers and pilots.
One such system developed by the National Aerospace Laboratory in the Netherlands and used at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport alerts controllers to potential collisions by flashing labels on their radar screens together with audio signals. All aircraft and vehicle movements are depicted in real time on an airport map, unlike conventional radar which has a lag of several seconds.
And when Schiphol added a new, sixth runway, multiple runway crossings were specifically avoided, said Bert Ruitenberg, the airport's operational safety expert. Instead, taxiways to the new runway were built around the perimeter of existing runways.
In addition, red lights embedded in the tarmac prevent planes from entering an active runway. Ruitenberg said such stop lights should become standard airport equipment.
"At some airports expansion is driven just by capacity," Ruitenberg said. "But designers will find it is better to plan with safety in mind (because) this could avoid a lot of the problems that may occur afterward."

There is no doubt the dangers of flying is enormous, we as human being what we can do is to minimise all possibilities.

China 'on' for aircraft carrier

When you watch how aircraft (Picture Above the retired F-14 Tomcat coming in for a landing)land and take off from an aircraft carrier it's pretty amazing choreography. It's took a decades of experince to fully utilised it. It's more avident in US Navy, other than the others. At least eight other countries have one or two aircraft carriers, including India and Thailand.

China remains the only major global power without aircraft carriers in its fleet. For years, military leaders have weighed the pride that such vessels would bring the nation with the costs and complexity of operating the giant ships, continually postponing a decision.

But now public sentiment is running strongly in favor of launching a program to build aircraft carriers, and some military experts say construction may be inevitable China already has three decommissioned aircraft carriers, all bought from Russia . Military engineers dissected two to see how they worked, then moored them as tourist attractions. The third, the Varyag, is at a secret military base in Dalian , on the Yellow Sea.

Meanwhile, mystery surrounds the Varyag. The huge ship was only 70 percent built— still without engines or rudders— when China bought it for $20 million , far more than its scrap value. The vessel was towed from the Ukraine around the Cape of Good Hope, arriving in Dalian early in 2002. Some foreign experts say China is restoring the flight deck.

"I . . . believe the Varyag will serve as a transitional platform to train pilots and to perfect doctrine— both how to use a carrier and how to sink one," said Fisher, who's the vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center in Alexandria, Va .

A Hong Kong -based publication, Kanwa Asian Defence, reported in September that some Chinese-built J-10 fighters now carry tail hooks needed for carrier landings. Kanwa said China would wait until the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games had passed to announce its plans to build aircraft carriers "due to concerns over its international image

While Soviet studies of carrier aviaton were commenced as long ago as 1952. At the time of Korean war still raging. But by then, the west had four decades of experinece. Even today, a further five decades on, they have still not caught up. But the gap has closed enormously.
Soviet have a flight trials commenced on Tbilisi in 1989 with an Su-27 Flanker, MiG-29 Fulcrum and Su-25 Frogfoot. All aircraft was extensively modified for the task.

Until now there is not much news off what really going on Soviet Navy. We haven't seen anything yet comparable to US Navy aircraft carrier or probably we won't.

USAF suspended F-15s flight

A well known McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle a front line fighter as it's known before acquired by Boeing is really a classic fighter. First flight 27 July 1972 and entered service in March 1974 in order to counter the emergence of the MiG-23 and MiG-25. Basically an old design of the 70's although always ugraded along with the development of latest radar, engine, missile system and avionics. Since it's replacement already in service that's Boeing F-22 Raptor. Now it's slowly phase out or upgraded and offer for sale to US allies.

The Air Force has suspended some F-15 flights, citing a possible structural failure discovered after one of the fighter jets crashed in central Missouri.
All "non-mission critical" flights were suspended Saturday, a day after the Missouri Air National Guard jet crashed in a wooded area about 120 miles southwest of St. Louis, the Air Force said in a release dated Sunday.

The pilot ejected and was released from a hospital Saturday after treatment for a dislocated shoulder, broken arm and minor cuts. No one else was hurt.
The Air Force described the grounding as a precaution, but said preliminary findings indicate the aircraft may have suffered a structural failure. It did not elaborate, saying the crash remains under investigation.

The Air Force said more than 700 F-15s are in its worldwide inventory, although they are being replaced by the F-22 Raptor. They have been in use since the mid-1970s.
The Air Force said it will ensure that mission requirements are met for operations normally accomplished by the fighter. F-15s fly from bases in the U.S., England, Japan and the Middle East.

Air Force spokeswoman Jennifer Bentley said Monday the F-15s will remain available for combat or anything requiring a combat response such as a terrorist attack, but otherwise they're grounded indefinitely.

"It's not a decision made lightly," Bentley said. "Until we can find out what the problem is, it's the safest thing to do."

Bentley would not speculate on how long the grounding would last.

Col. Robert Leeker, commander of the 131st Fighter Wing, said Friday the single-seat F15C Eagle that crashed had been engaged in one-on-one training fights, in which speeds of 400 to 450 mph are typical. There was no contact between the plane and its partner in the mock fight. The crashed plane was built in 1980.

The crash of an airplanes usually not depend whether it's new or old work horse, although old plane usually comprises of multitude of reason for failure, some time it's depend on luck either.

Low Cost fare that not really low

Around Europe cheap flights have transformed the continent's travel, and a rise in tourism has been seen. Nowhere in Europe has this been more important than the United Kindom, an island nation.

But now the writing is on the wall for low cost airlines operating out of the UK and other European countries as the Conservative Party - once a campaigner and implementer of lower taxes - has called for purchase tax to be introduced to domestic flights.

The tax would add up to 17.5 per cent on to the cost of a flight from one British city to another, but while flights to the European mainland and popular holiday islands such as Menorca aren't specifically mentioned, one travel company believes the new policy will inevitably lead to higher fares for flights not just within Britain, but elsewhere too.

Around Asia although cheap flight is not really cheap after all, after all kind of taxs that's usually won't be mentioned on the fares along with transport charges to the airport 50 miles away from city then the fares thats 9.99 (9.99 is a booking fares, not a normal fares that usually cost more)would than become 50.00 or more.

By the way low cost airlines boom still going on by intoducing new planes and new route, like the new Airasia (Picture Above New Airbus A320) KL-Singapore route, the most controversial route that at last open to them after years of lobby to the Malaysian Goverment,to be fair Firefly the low cost airlines, subsidiary of MAS now is allowed too.

Although what happen elsewhere might effected Asian Airlines industries along with oil price increasing and the hope to see totally low cost fares is there remain to been seen next year.

Aircraft and Luxury Stuff

How is it like to fly in the latest Airbus A380?. With luxury class that you can be sealed in your own private compartment to your own device, watching movies and listen to music, with luxury foods and drink. Is it to much comfort for the passenger?. Whatever happen to the 'feel' of you flying and watching the clouds and 'earth' scenery out of the windows. Well I'll think all this has been 'asked' for in airlines survey with their passenger. For the businessman or businesswomen that flying are all just a norm for them, there is not much to shout about it and privacy is a must, I think. With much 'relax' needed to avoid flight fatigue for next stop over, who else to be blame for so much 'luxury' the airlines can afford to offer them and no wonder passenger willing to pay for it. How far they can go?.

Okay in another scenerio, that off course it won't be happen, I'll think, let say if a fighter pilot demand the same thing, for their long journey in a mission they wanted a fighter with bigger cockpit to stretch their leg, with flight service food and drink. Listen to music and watch a movie, while autopilot take over toward pre-determined coordinates. Is it wonderful, isn't it. Lol..we can only dream or probably maybe in the future there will be one. Or probably not, just send the 'Drone' much more cost effective and less human life to spared.

For me I never fly before, so for my first flying maybe I like to be seated near the window and watch clouds passed by and see the land below become a lying carpet until they gone out of sight.

New Plane and Old Plane Crash

How modern the fighter aircraft is, it won't stop it from crashing that's a fact and also small Cessna that supposed to be safest light plane still crash although a 3 years old child did escaped from it. So here's what happen.

A Japanese fighter jet crashed an instant after takeoff and went up in flames on Wednesday and lightly injuring the two pilots.

The F-2B fighter,two seated version (Above Picture) a new Japanese fighter aircraft that design with a collaboration of Mitsubishi and Lockheed, no wonder its appeared more like Lockheed F-16 Falcon was being taken up on a test flight prior to delivery to Japan's air force when it crashed, said Hideo Ikuno, a spokesman for the Daiya public relations firm representing the plane's maker, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.
Mitsubishi had been conducting a regular inspection on the aircraft for the air force, top government spokesman Nobutaka Machimura said. The pilot appears to have aborted the takeoff, but the reason for this is not yet clear, he said.

Wednesday's accident was the first involving an F-2 fighter since Japan's air force began deploying them in 2000, air force spokesman 1st Lt. Yuki Shiiba said.
A total of 75 F-2s, including the one involved in Wednesday's mishap, have been deployed so far, he said.

The F-2 is Japan's operational support fighter.

While a Light airplane a Cessna 172 (Example Picture Above, not actual airplane that's invlove in the crash)carrying 3 passengers crash in Canada's Rocky Mountains. A THREE-YEAR-OLD girl survived and found hanging upside down in a safety seat for four hours before being rescued. She lost her grandfather who operated the Cessna 172 and also the co-pilot when the plane slammed into a icy creek bed, nose first.

When rescuers finally reached her in the treacherous mountain terrain, she told them her name, Kate Williams, and asked for her teddy bear, said the daily Globe and Mail.

"I had to brush off the teddy bear before she would take it."

Authorities said the 65-year-old pilot had left his home in Golden, British Columbia, on Sunday afternoon en route to Edmonton, Alberta, where he owned an engineering company.

An hour later, the aircraft began transmitting a distress signal.

Bad weather complicated the search, but a rescue helicopter finally landed on a nearby logging road just before nightfall, and rescuers seized her from the carnage.
The little girl was hospitalised overnight, and discharged late yesterday.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Sergeant Marko Shehovac said it was a “miracle” the little girl survived the crash.

Her grandfather likely saved her life by “buckling her in real good,” he said.

Yes, it's really a miracle for her to survived the crash although she lost he grandpa and another pilot. While the two pilot in the fighter jet are lucky because modern jet equipped with injection seat, that's probably save them.

Jet...New Big Boys Toys?

Are you rich and love big boys toys?. Rich guy owing a supercars is a norm this day. Then if you are aviation buff like John Travolta and can spend your millions on private aircraft, ex-military jet or executive jet or light propeller aircraft then so be it.

Now day if you can't spend million on jet then you can buy propeller type kit aircraft or cheaper used plane.
But if you like an aircraft like in the science fiction movie that do V/STOL than you can owned a Volantor. Built by Moller Technology, depending on the number of orders received, the prices could vary between $90,000 for the M200G (Picture Above) to $450,000 for the Firefly 3. It's also potential for military and/or para-military used.

If you can splashed millions than take a peek on F-16 or F-18 feel and look good alike, that is ATG Javelin (Picture Above) price around $3 million each.

This is what their ads said.

"Designed to Turn Heads, Built to Perform.
The way a high performance sports car awakens your passion for driving, the Javelin ignites your fervor for flying. Leading the new generation of general aviation aircraft, the Javelin is built to perform, engineered to exhilarate, and designed to handle with ease. Like no other aircraft in today’s market, the Javelin is the complete package, guaranteeing an arrival in unparalleled style.
Whether you’re a business executive, experienced pilot, or aviation enthusiast; the Javelin is the solution when “time is money.” With dual controls in pressurized comfort, the Javelin caters to pilots who love to fly fast and passengers who love to ride in luxury."

A 37ft in length, 25.1 ft wing span and 10.5 ft height a dimension more or less equaled to the 1954 small and agile famous British design by Folland Aircraft known as 'Midge' than later known as Gnat. Served in RAF, IAF and Finnish airforce.

The glaring differences between Javelin and Gnat is that, Javelin is twin engine (possible by small missile engine technology available today) and twin canted vertical tails and also twin tandem seated. Moreover Javelin is built with a new technology for a possible safest flight,with a "glass cockpit"and composite material.

Regards to a performance, Javelin cruise speed they called it, is 925 km/hr while Gnat max speed is 1150km/hr. Range, Javelin is about 1,852 km while Gnat max range 1,900km.

So, small jets is not a new offering its started long ago only now it's open to public to buy, thats if you're a millionaire so its really good news for you...erm..again ..unless you're a milloinaire.