http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/11/14/combathelmet1_wideweb__470x304,0.jpg

 

Australian pilots flying the new generation of fighter jets now under development will wear bespoke, high-tech helmets equipped with a feature that gives airmen simulated X-ray vision.

 

The cutting edge headgear, which looks like it's been sourced from a Star Wars costume department, is being tested by Royal Air Force (RAF) scientists at the Boscombe Down base south-west of London.

 

The RAF has just released a photograph of the so-called Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS), which will be used by pilots manning the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft.

 

Australia is one of eight partner countries - including Britain, Canada, Italy, and Turkey - that have signed up to the $US200 billion ($225 billion) US-led JSF project, the world's most expensive military aerospace program.

 

The helmet integrates a host of sophisticated electronic features including dashboard-type navigation, targeting and monitoring data that will be displayed on the inside of the helmet's visor, just centimetres from a pilot's face.

 

According to the RAF statement, the helmet will "integrate night vision capability and even superimpose infra-red imagery onto the visor which allows the pilot to 'look through' the ****pit floor at night and see the world below".

 

This is achieved with the use of six infra-red sensors on the aircraft that will relay a virtual see-through representation onto the visor display.

 

"The F-35 HMDS is new and nothing like it has been fielded," said Louis Taddeo, marketing director of Vision Systems International (VSI), the company developing the helmet. "It provides revolutionary capability."

 

Weighing approximately 1.5 kilograms, the new helmet will also incorporate "first look, first shot" technology used in earlier models that allows pilots to line-up targets simply by looking at them.

 

Previously, pilots would have to manoeuvre the aircraft so its nose was pointing at the target.

 

In order to see the visor visuals properly, every pilot will need to wear a made-to-measure helmet that's been shaped to the exact dimension of a person's head.

 

A spokeswoman for the Australian Department of Defence confirmed that the Royal Australian Air Force expects to acquire the same helmet as the other partners in the JSF program.

 

"Evaluation of the helmet system is one element of Defence's ongoing analysis of the total JSF air system," she said.

 

The Australian Government has chosen the F-35 JSF to replace the ageing fleet of F/A-18 Hornet and F-111 aircraft, allocating up to $16 billion to buy about 100 of the state-of-the-art jets.

 

Canberra will make a final decision next year on whether to stay in a program that is the most expensive undertaking in the country's history, or exercise its right to opt out.

 

The prime contract to develop and produce the stealth-capable JSF was awarded to Lockheed Martin in October 2001.

 

The fifth-generation fighter, which completed its maiden flight on December 15, 2006, is not scheduled to go into production until 2012.

 

Silicon Valley-based VSI already supplies headgear used by Australian pilots flying the Hornets.

 

It won contracts in 2003 and 2006 from Lockheed Martin to design and manufacture the new helmets for all of the aircraft maker's JSF customers in a deal worth $US156 million.

 

Given the state-of-the-art technology incorporated into the helmet, it would not come cheap.

 

VSI's Louis Taddeo declined to discuss the price. "These devices are in such a low rate of production that a true estimate is difficult to provide," he said in an email.

 

VSI is a joint venture between two military contractors: Israel's Elbit Systems and Texas-based Rockwell Collins.

 

Elbit Systems provides a key computer system containing advanced graphic processing and head tracking while Rockwell Collins supplies the technology behind the helmet-mounted display.

 

The UK company Helmet Integrated Systems provides the helmet shell and the system that ensures the headpieces fit snugly.

 

From here:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/xray-helmet-to-revolutionise-aerial-warfare/2007/11/16/1194766908490.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

Just a little more deadly, I can't wait to see what this thing can do in a combat zone.

I still dont think that it will be anywhere near as good as the russian Su-30 in a dog fight. These things can literally do backflips, balance on the tail, flat spin, just have a quick look here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYQJD87sKW4

And below is the Su-37 and a good doco showing the vector thrusting that these planes use to defy the laws of aeronautical physics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIkK4O5s0lE

 

Apparently the Russian have a standing invitations to the US for a 'mock' dog fight and the US wont have a bar of it.

 

The JSF is still an awesome piece of machinary

Edited November 16, 200717 yr by tritownsu

I still dont think that it will be anywhere near as good as the russian Su-30 in a dog fight. These things can literally do backflips, balance on the tail, flat spin, just have a quick look here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYQJD87sKW4

And below is the Su-37 and a good doco showing the vector thrusting that these planes use to defy the laws of aeronautical physics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIkK4O5s0lE

 

Apparently the Russian have a standing invitations to the US for a 'mock' dog fight and the US wont have a bar of it.

 

The JSF is still an awesome piece of machinary

 

Hmm 5th Gen stealth vs 4th Gen I can do back flips fighter. I'd put money on the SU-30 being shot down with little to no warning by the JSF escort. Even on it's own the JSF will get the first shot off as the SU-30 will get picked up by AWACS and send the JSF in for a missle kill. As the JSF will not have it's radar up it will not be spotted by the victim.

 

For the standing invite, I bet the Ruskies would love to get an idea of what the Raptor really can do.

 

Oh let's not forget how often Russians get to fly or how many of these aircraft are actually air worthy. My money is on the JSF.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-37

 

The Russian air force don't actually have any of these.

And it was Sukhoi's chief designer that challenged the US.

I wouldn't believe half the crap that circles the internet about the russian military anyway. I can't believe that people are stupid enough to think that they actually practice backflipping hatchet throws for real situations....

I'm sure they did a lot of that crazy stuff if for no other reason just to say they can and the Americans can't.

 

I'm glad we're going to get that jet. Too bad the Americans will not sell the Raptor, not that Canada or Australia could afford the things anyway. Actually, if they would sell them we would considering that the more you make the cheaper they are.

 

Oh well, we can dream.

Educate yourselves !

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s2070484.htm

Just got to love our govenment.

 

:hi:

I'm sure they did a lot of that crazy stuff if for no other reason just to say they can and the Americans can't.

 

I'm glad we're going to get that jet. Too bad the Americans will not sell the Raptor, not that Canada or Australia could afford the things anyway. Actually, if they would sell them we would considering that the more you make the cheaper they are.

 

Oh well, we can dream.

 

My thoughts exactly on that first sentence.

 

Oh and while we're on the topic of jets , it strikes me as weird that a goverment is so hesitant about a rifle replacement program when it's about the equivalent cost of a single combat jet???

My thoughts exactly on that first sentence.

 

Oh and while we're on the topic of jets , it strikes me as weird that a goverment is so hesitant about a rifle replacement program when it's about the equivalent cost of a single combat jet???

 

Yeah or replace/upgrade the other aged equipment that needs it. Realistically, we don't need the latest and greatest in fighter jets. We fight along side other nations who already have that. Instead, I believe, we should concentrate on training and sorting out simple problems like recruitment and dodgy boots. If we are desperate for AA measures what about surface-to-air missiles?

Neds got a good point there. Well said.

American planes are clumsy slow and rely on "I see you from 1000nm away I shoot you down at that distance". Relative the Russians. Who think, "completely eliminate the enemies electronic capability and rape them backwards with funky a/c."

 

 

Russian a/c a maneuverable as a dragon fly on steroids. Not to mention the Russians do have stealth a/c too. If the Russians jam the US a/c effectively. The US are sitting ducks in the air, no matter how good their pilots are at flying, the Russian planes can do ten times the amount of back flips.

This Su-47 uses a forward swept wing, In short it can't stall and can fly as slow as it wants or a fast as it can go. Also the canards on the front make it more agile then any other a/c. Add to that its a bomber/fighter on an aircraft carrier. This would have to be one of the best fighters out there. As for the electronics side of things and hardware side, *Russian accent* "I know nothing". But if the Russians are good at those too, then I'd be very concerned.

 

Imagine a Russian pilot being chased by an American. He could do a 180 WHILE flying FORWARD!!!! fire his 14 AA (compared to the F-35's 11) missiles and cannon and shoot the American down, while STILL flying backwards, turn around again and continue flying, I MEAN ****. It also has a higher g-loading! which is next to impossible with that forward swept wing design. (NASA experimented with it with the X-29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-29)) Only nothing came of it but more knowledge on stalling. The problem they have is the natural oscillation rips the wings apart. And so US said it be too expensive to make a production version fighter. Here the Russians are starting to build a fleet of them, if you ask me, the Russians know a **** load more about Aviation composites and aerodynamics then the EU and US put together.

 

This is a far fetched claim, but the design concept in Su-47 is years ahead of any US and EU military plane. Just hope their electronic technology out reaches the Russians cause thats all they got!

 

"The Su-47 has extremely high agility at subsonic speeds, enabling the aircraft to alter its angle of attack and its flight path very quickly while retaining maneuverability in supersonic flight. The Su-47 has a maximum speed of Mach 2 at high altitudes and a greater than 9g capability."

 

"The aircraft's performance has been so impressive that the Russian government has made funds available for further testing of the design"

 

Although these are wiki quotes *shivers*, Other pilots and I agree with them.

Porridge, the Americans have learned a lot about fighter combat from years of trial and error. I'm more than positive that close up the Raptor can match anything the Russians can throw at them and if it can't it will have tactics to maximise any advantage. They rather have a knack for that don't you think?

 

The Yanks built the F-22 to be ahead for the Russians for the next decade and I'm sure they have done just that. They didn't just throw away 70 years of experience, they tried that in Vietnam and what do you know; they put guns right back on their fighters.

 

All your Su-47 quotes are full of it (not that you are you didn't write them). It's not in production and most likely never will be. Furthermore, if it's so top notch why are they releasing details on it when the new Russia is just as seclusive and smoke screen as it always was when it was the USSR.

 

Lastly, you could not know anything about the F-22. It's classified and as you are not an American employed by Lockheed Martin or a pilot of an F-22 you have no clue what it's capable of and anyone who leaks anything will go to jail. It's made by the best and brightest of the USA and they do make some pretty good stuff other than cars. Built tough, fast and throw as much stuff on them as they can squeeze in to maximise pilot survivability.

 

Let's look at combat history between the two countries airframes, they speak for themselves. (Except the beginning of Korea )

 

This is not to say that the Russians don't build fantastic aircraft. They sure do look pretty rusting away on the airstrip as they can't afford to fly them.

Edited November 18, 200717 yr by Snazzy

If Russia did have any of these planes the Americans will have 10 for every 1 SU-47, plus a hundred sam missiles for each plane.

 

P.S what does a/c mean in your post dfa, i couldnt decide out of air control or air conditioning... im pretty sure its air control.

a/c = aircraft

I think he was being sarcastic

well as far as these new helmuts go.....we are stuffed.....i mean surely everyone knows.....those x-ray glasses are FAKE!!!! dont buyem....you cant see thru girls clothes....i assure you:( and with that computer technology stuff inside the lens???? they are gunna be riddled with pop-ups for sure...and thats gunna make flying very difficult?

 

Now in regards to all the other plane stuff.

 

Why the hell are we buying second hand planes from the U.S? Which cost more than those russian planes with the pretty pink smoke? Maybe The government plans to "PIMP-EM OUT" now that would be cool.....low rider Jets, loud techno music from da subbies, and a 20inch widescreen in da ****pit....we would be the coolest airforce in the world...which would attract the best pilots.....which would leave crappy pilots for other airforces, and thus we WIN da war!!!!

 

I would have to say.... have 1 jet less and buy some guns and boots....sheeeeez give our boys a fighting chance....cause if history has taught us anything....our wars are never won in the air, but in some dirty god forsaken ground combat in a smelly hot climate....guns with umbrellas would be good?? just a thought.

well as far as these new helmuts go.....we are stuffed.....i mean surely everyone knows.....those x-ray glasses are FAKE!!!! dont buyem....you cant see thru girls clothes....i assure you:( and with that computer technology stuff inside the lens???? they are gunna be riddled with pop-ups for sure...and thats gunna make flying very difficult?

 

Now in regards to all the other plane stuff.

 

Why the hell are we buying second hand planes from the U.S? Which cost more than those russian planes with the pretty pink smoke? Maybe The government plans to "PIMP-EM OUT" now that would be cool.....low rider Jets, loud techno music from da subbies, and a 20inch widescreen in da ****pit....we would be the coolest airforce in the world...which would attract the best pilots.....which would leave crappy pilots for other airforces, and thus we WIN da war!!!!

 

I would have to say.... have 1 jet less and buy some guns and boots....sheeeeez give our boys a fighting chance....cause if history has taught us anything....our wars are never won in the air, but in some dirty god forsaken ground combat in a smelly hot climate....guns with umbrellas would be good?? just a thought.

 

what?

Guys, the air force is extremely important to Australia. Considering we're an island nation, any enemy invasion will come from the sea and air.

 

We have the sea covered, with an extremely good Navy, and our Air Force is also extremely top-notch in terms of pilots, and up until about 5 years ago was great equipment-wise, but we're having some difficulties with the replacement gear.

 

Wars certainly aren't won or lost in the air, as Vietnam, and now Iraq have demonstrated. Air power is however a large advantage, and is crucial to the defence of Australia.

Guys, the air force is extremely important to Australia. Considering we're an island nation, any enemy invasion will come from the sea and air.

 

We have the sea covered, with an extremely good Navy, and our Air Force is also extremely top-notch in terms of pilots, and up until about 5 years ago was great equipment-wise, but we're having some difficulties with the replacement gear.

 

Wars certainly aren't won or lost in the air, as Vietnam, and now Iraq have demonstrated. Air power is however a large advantage, and is crucial to the defence of Australia.

 

I don't think Vietnam is a good choice for an example of Australian air power. That one was more of a crunchy's fight.

gotta get me one of those

#Porridge, the Americans have learned a lot about fighter combat from years of trial and error. I'm more than positive that close up the Raptor can match anything the Russians can throw at them and if it can't it will have tactics to maximise any advantage. They rather have a knack for that don't you think?

 

#The Yanks built the F-22 to be ahead for the Russians for the next decade and I'm sure they have done just that. They didn't just throw away 70 years of experience, they tried that in Vietnam and what do you know; they put guns right back on their fighters.

 

#Furthermore, if it's so top notch why are they releasing details on it

 

#Lastly, you could not know anything about the F-22. It's classified and as you are not an American employed by Lockheed Martin or a pilot of an F-22 you have no clue what it's capable of and anyone who leaks anything will go to jail. It's made by the best and brightest of the USA and they do make some pretty good stuff other than cars. Built tough, fast and throw as much stuff on them as they can squeeze in to maximise pilot survivability.

 

#Let's look at combat history between the two countries airframes, they speak for themselves. (Except the beginning of Korea )

 

This is not to say that the Russians don't build fantastic aircraft. They sure do look pretty rusting away on the airstrip as they can't afford to fly them.

 

All that learning a billions of dollars into new technology and 12 F-22 Raptors got owned buy the International Date line

LMAO

http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/004595.html

that should just not happen. Doesn't happen with

Boeing, Airbus, Fairchild, Bombaider, Ilyushin or SAAB to name a few.

A handfull of countries pumping BILLIONS into this, I can understand why some Countries are considering pulling out.

 

American fighters are like

lets build the world most advance plane that an advance ape could fly in less then a month and be the best pilot ever because of the computer systems. While making money off it.

Russians think

Lets build a simple plane thats cheap to run and train the pilots up to make a rock into a knife.

 

Secondly, I know more about the YF-22 then you'd care to like.

Both Russian and American a/c statistics are on the web.

Or you can look at an engines intakes and know within -/+ 50knots how fast it goes.

The wing design is enough to show how maneuverable an aircraft is, the weight, range, fuel captivity and speed.

The fuselage of an aircraft and general layout can tell you how stable the a/c is, design, range as well.

The bloody nose of an a/c can tell you its speed, purpose and design

Just by looking at a picture can tell you 1000's of things about a/c

heaven forbid the US should put me in jail for looking at their pics and documentaries of the Yf22, lol

 

Any country is just as capable of mass producing current prototypes if push came to shove. Just cause its not in production, doesn't means it can't be mass produced if the need arose.

 

Unlike the Americans if you knew your stuff, and knew about the Sukhoi family, you'd realise that all of them have features alike. They came out with the first Sukhoi and the pilots and engineers discussed what could be improved and then released another Sukhoi. So pretty much and entire family of them through evolution from the 1940's with the same engineer concepts. The Su-47 is the best part out of each family member, so to say.

 

While the Americans wave around a contract and say "we want this plane to do this, that and this. Show us a prototype that could work and we'll give you a trillion dollar contract" or whatever. Needless to say each country is different and have different ways of doing things, I am not debating about which country is better, because that would be stupidly pointless! What I am saying if you had a concept of aerodynamics you would understand the the Su-47 is a lovely aerobatic monster that could, given the chance outmaneuver the advance F22 for its monies worth.

oh god...here we go...

 

My uber sixth sense from doing so much recon and sneaking in PR detects a future slag war and subsequent lock.

Edited November 19, 200717 yr by hous_bin_farteen

Stats do account for a lot, just remember that not everything is on the net or for public eyes. The RAAF bought the F-35 from the plans based on 5% Top Secret capabilities. Now, neither of you have access to the top secret stuff so ultimately, you will both be wrong though no fault of your own. (no insult intended, I'm just saying)

 

All that said though, both countries approach the system differently. The Yanks prefer a more Capitalist approach by giving the contract to the best contender, this is common practice for 90% of Govt. contracts (certainly in the civil engineering field anyway, I imagine it would carry across to aeronautics) Usually this produces better results from the competition it produces.

 

The Russians prefer a more centralised approach, leading to more unified results but ultimately, they must do what the government wants where the other approach gives a little room to manoeuvre.

 

Re; Date Line stuff-up; No system is perfect. Hell, Microsoft didn't make my computer change to DST, doesn't mean the company is a failure, merely that there are flaws in the system, like everyone in existence

Just goes to show these things are designed and built by humans and I should know 98% of the human race are as dumb as monkeys...