Как сделать дроида из «Звездных войн» своими руками?

Используя роботизированный шар Sphero, управляемый через Bluetooth, можно сделать множество разнообразных гаджетов. Например, миниатюрную копию космического дроида BB-8 из «Звездных войн».

BB-8, впервые показанный в эпизоде «Звездные войны. Эпизод VII: Пробуждение Силы», имел шарообразное тело, окрашенное в белый цвет с небольшими оранжевыми вставками, и куполообразную голову. Передвигался он с помощью вращения тела, а на голове у него был черный окуляр.

Sphero представляет собой небольшой шар из прочного поликарбоната, внутри которого находится электромотор. Благодаря Bluetooth-интерфейсу вращением шара можно управлять на расстоянии до 15 метров. Аккуратно распилив шар ножовкой, нужно поместить одно кольцо из неодимового магнита на внутреннее шасси, которое прижмет его к внутренней поверхности сферы, а затем склеить шар обратно и покрасить его в цвет дроида.

«Голова» BB-8 моделируется в программе Rhinoceros по кадрам из фильма, а затем вырезается из пенополиуретана и красится. Второе магнитное кольцо приклеивается к нижней части «головы» дроида — и робот готов к использованию! Управлять BB-8 можно с помощью приложения Sphero для iOS.

Crazy-Efficient Rotary Engine Lands Million-Dollar DARPA Contract

GIF

We love when a tiny company does big things.

LiquidPiston, Inc., of Bloomfield, CT, recently signed an agreement with the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, better known as DARPA, to use the hyper-efficient rotary engine technology for military purposes. The advanced combustion tech could be used in weaponized UAVs, robotic soldiers, and generators that produce 3kW of electric power—but fit in a backpack.

Father-and-son team Nikolay and Alec Shkolnik say LiquidPiston can dramatically downsize combustion engines used in military scenarios. The Shkolniks say that their motor can be adapted to use only Jet Propellant 8 (JP-8), the fuel favored by the U.S. military, to produce power in a small, quiet, and efficient package.

"A diesel generator that's the size of a desk and weighs 300 pounds becomes a 2-foot-square engine that generates the same power," Alec Shkolnik tells.

A typical 3kW gasoline-powered generator—the type used at construction sites and as a stop-gap during power outages—weighs about 140 pounds and measures about 3 feet long, 2 feet high, and 2 feet wide. The military uses such generators in remote areas, but they are ungainly beasts. Shkolnik says LiquidPiston's equally powerful generator using JP-8 would weigh about 30 pounds (the motor itself would weigh just 8 pounds) and fit in a backpack. Used in drones, the LiquidPiston engine could be small enough to fit inside the envelope of the fuselage.

"We see a lot of potential military uses, including robotics," Shkolnik says. "We're going to work with DARPA to make hardware improvements to our motors, and model them for scenarios where full-size combustion engines could be replaced."

DARPA Project Manager Mark Gustafson, who has led high-profile projects for the military such as the $6 billion propulsion system for the F-35, sees great promise in the LiquidPiston technology.

"INSTEAD OF A PISTON ON A CRANKSHAFT YOU HAVE LIQUID PUSHING UP TO COMPRESS THE GAS-AIR MIXTURE."

"The nation would benefit greatly from the development of a high-power-density, energy-efficient engine that could operate on heavy hydrocarbon fuels," he tells. "We are excited about the plans to develop and test key technologies that could help achieve that goal, and look forward to LiquidPiston's efforts to accelerate progress in this important field of work."

LiquidPiston emerged two years ago as a novel alternative to conventional combustion engines. "The LiquidPiston engine fires like a combustion engine," Nikolay Shkolnik says. "But instead of a piston on a crankshaft you have liquid pushing up to compress the gas-air mixture."

LiquidPiston

A more extensive explanation of the LiquidPiston motor, and its benefits, was published by Popular Mechanics upon the introduction of the technology. You can read it here.

In addition to its collaboration with DARPA, the company plans to market power tools for home use, such as lawnmowers, chainsaws, and string trimmers. These products will be on shelves at your local Home Depot and Lowe's two or three years from now, Alec Shkolnik says

Покорители неба Стивена Чанга

Одна из работ Чанга - дизайн «Неуловимой тени», космического аппарата ученика Дарта Вейдера

©conceptartworld.com

Люди, механизмы и виртуальная реальность объединились в работах Стивена Чанга, одного из создателей концепта для саги «Звездные войны».

Стивен Чанг в свое время был старшим разработчиком концептов в компании LucasArts – известного разработчика игр, курируемого отцом «Звездных войн» Джорджем Лукасом. Чанг работал над такими игровыми проектами как «Человек-паук-3» 2007 года, а также двумя частями Star Wars: The Force Unleashed.

Кстати, именно Стивен Чанг стал автором дизайна «Неуловимой тени», космического аппарата ученика Дарта Вейдера, выпущенного в серии игрушек LEGO.  Сейчас Чанг работает в Magnus Rex Studio. «Моя цель – сформировать эстетику будущего, раздвинуть границы реальности. Я хочу объединить эстетику людей, машин и программ», – говорит Стивен Чанг.  

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

@Stephen Chang

The big players in aviation are pinning their hopes on twin-engine jetliners like the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which promise greater efficiency due to their groundbreaking composite designs. But with these planes set to take over more and more transoceanic routes, those two engines could be a problem. To follow the "great circle" routes that are the most direct routes between cities, which can save hours and lots of fuel on ultra long-distance flights, planes can fly far from land over remote stretches of ocean. With twin-engines planes, however, losing one engine could leave the jet searching for a place to make an emergency landing as quickly as possible.

And the closest airfield could be hundreds of miles away. Just this past weekend, a United Airlines flight from Honolulu to Guam diverted to the remote island of Midway, the site of an historic WWII battle, after the pilot reported smoke in the cockpit. This wasn't an engine failure; the cause was a malfunctioning equipment cooling fan, United said after it flew in a replacement plane to pick up the 348 passengers and crew. But this kind of problem isn't totally uncommon. Just two months earlier, a Delta 767 made an emergency landing on Wake Island, another WWII site with a rarely used runway left over from its days as a naval base. That time, the airborne emergency was caused by an engine problem, just the kind of scenario that's sparking worries about how far a twin-engine jet can stray from land.

We Recommend

THIS BOEING 777 MADE OF MANILA FOLDERS IS ALMOST AS DETAILED AS THE REAL THING

Just six weeks ago, the two-engine 787 won FAA approval to fly as far as five and half hours from the nearest suitable landing strip, the same as the 777. That was a major coup for Boeing, especially after the jetliner's much-documented troubles with its lithium batteries. In fact, after the plane was grounded in 2013, the FAA hinted that it might not even grant the Dreamliner a more conservative 180-minute certification for extended twin-engine operations (ETOPS). That would have ruled out many routes over the Pacific, where distances are so vast that airlines also depend on a network of far flung diversion airports like Wake and Midway to comply with ETOPS requirements.

Years ago, airlines were permitted to fly twin-engine planes no more than sixty minutes from the nearest airfield. Once jets like the 767, 777 and A330 started replacing 747s and DC-10s on the North Atlantic, Boeing and others argued successfully that twin-engine jets were so reliable that it made little sense to restrict them. The costs saved by flying twin engines on long stretches are so compelling that many airlines made the switch on the longest routes.

Of course, any plane—even one with four engines—can have a in-flight emergency. A Qantas 747 reportedly once had to land on deserted Johnston Atoll in the southern Pacific, a chemical waste site that was decommissioned as a working airfield in 2007. Midway, about 1,300 northwest of Hawaii, is a protected sanctuary for the albatross, which apparently are such a danger to planes that landings can only be made safely at night for a good part of the year. Others include Shemya and Adak, two treeless and tundra-covered islands in the Aleutians chain off Alaska where winter temperatures can dip well below freezing. Flights taking polar routes can also avail themselves of some landing strips in Siberia in an emergency, where conditions are even harsher. Farther south in the Pacific and near the South Pole, there are even fewer alternatives, which is why Airbus was recently reported by the Wall Street Journal to be seeking an ETOPS of 420 minutes, or seven hours, to make possible non-stops on routes like Australia to Brazil or New Zealand to South Africa.

To fly the super long routes under ETOPS, the specific aircraft has to get a special certification that requires extra maintenance and rigorous checks as well as enhanced fire suppression and emergency systems onboard the plane. Among things, the jet has to demonstrate that it can safely fly on one engine for the maximum number of hours approved.

John Cox, a pilot and head of an aviation safety consultancy, says the ETOPS program actually has made long-distance flying safer overall. The twin jets that get this rating "are actually more robust than the earlier generation three- or four-engine airplanes," he says, and the latter can effectively operate without any restrictions on their distance from land. "We are now routinely flying over vast oceans with a better safety record."

But what if an engine does conk out? "Nobody likes losing an engine," Cox notes, no matter where they are, but this isn't the doomsday scenario most people assume. With the lower power generated by just one engine, the plane would go into what pilots call "driftdown", or flying at a lower altitude at slower speeds. As fuel burns off, the plane would be lighter and could ascend to higher altitudes. There are few routes in the world where the plane would be so far from an airport that it would need to take advantage of the maximum time allotted under the expanded ETOPS rules, he says.

Aircraft manufacturers, the FAA, and many safety experts say the record for ETOPS operations is excellent. But the public may take bit more convincing. After all, the industry's inside joke is that ETOPS stands for "Engines Turn or Passengers Swim."

Army Faces Decisions About Airborne Radio

HuntaZeitung. — The US Army is studying two methods to improve communications between its helicopter fleet and soldiers on the ground.

The Small Airborne Networking Radio (SANR) program would instantaneously transmit ground soldier location information to maps in cockpits overhead to minimize fratricide. Soldiers would be able to transmit target coordinates quickly for better air support, whereas today, a pilot will listen to coordinates and write them on a leg pad.

"We've got to get out of that, that's old technology we have now and we have to be smarter," said Maj. Gen. Daniel Hughes, program executive officer for command, control, communications-tactical (PEO C3T). "What we do now has to make sense financially and technically."

The program is expected to draw offerings from more than a half-dozen radio manufacturers, some displayed at the Association of the US Army's convention here this week. Among them, Rockwell Collins showcased its TruNet, and Harris Corp. its Harris Airborne Multi-Channel Radio.

As envisioned, SANR would be a two-channel, software-defined radio that could carry voice and data via Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW), Wideband Networking Waveform (WNW) and the legacy Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS), which transmits voice but not data.

The Army is expected to issue an RFP in 2016 followed by source selection, flight tests and airborne integration and qualification, with a possible award in 2019, according to an industry source. It could take as long as 10 years to field all 7,000 aircraft.

SANR, which is funded in the president's proposed budget, will proceed in 2016. But the service is in the process of deciding on how to move ahead on its requirement for another data link for helicopters, Link 16.

Link 16 is a military tactical data exchange network used by the US and NATO nations. It supports the secure exchange of text messages and imagery, data, and provides two channels of digital voice.

The Army has already fielded an airborne radio that carries Link 16. Through a sole-source procurement in 2013, the Army selected a two-channel radio co-developed by ViaSat and Harris, the small tactical terminal, (STT) for the UH-60 Apache helicopter.

The Army launched a Small Airborne Link 16 Terminal (SALT) program, though an anticipated request for proposals for SALT was put on hold while the Army determines whether it needs SALT in addition to SANR. A decision about how to proceed should be made soon.

"Getting Link 16 into that aircraft is absolutely critical," Hughes said. "Whether we have Link 16 and SRW, the Army is looking at the requirement to make sure we have it right and we have a plan to go forward."

"You have SANR to all the helicopters and SALT to just the Apaches and you have solutions out there to give them the Link 16 capabilities," said Col. James Ross, project manager for tactical radios. "It's a matter of whether we go to the SALT program for that or another means the aviation community will be able to do."

The Army has been developing the SRW over the last few years, but has yet to field it in a wide variety of products or fulfill plans to deploy it across the Army, amid fluctuations in Army networking programs. At the same time, the Army has in recent years demonstrated in its Network Integration Evaluation exercises the use of its Rifleman Radio, which uses SRW, in helicopters.

As the Army proceeds with SANR, the players from the crowded radio market are expected to include BAE, Exelis, General Dynamics, Harris, Northrop Grumman, Rockwell Collins and Thales.

Rockwell Collins launched software-defined ground and airborne radios at the convention under the label TruNet. Rockwell, known for its airborne radio, the ARC-210/Talon, would offer a variant for SANR, company officials said.

Bob Esselborn, the company's account manager for ground tactical radios, said the company's edge is its expertise in porting software-defined radios, like the ARC-210. "Our engineers have been doing this for 10, 15 years and that allows us to be competitive," he said.

Ray Cerrato, Harris' senior manager for business development, showed off its prototype Harris Airborne Multi-Channel Radio at the convention, touting the company's experience with WNW, as the contractor for SRW and as the manufacturer of the Falcon III AN/PRC-152, which supports SINCGARS.

"We're ready to go, we're ready to compete, and Harris is very strong in the waveform arena," Cerrato said.

How it Works: F-35 Climatic Testing

Within the decade, the F-35 Lightning II will be deployed to all corners of the globe—from the icy mountains of Norway to the scorching desert of Australia—and we must ensure the aircraft can perform in these dynamic environments. To do this, we look no further than a structure straight out of the post-World War II era: the McKinley Climate Testing Laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.

Go behind the scenes in the climatic chamber with Lockheed Martin Test Pilot Billie Flynn in this video

The McKinley Climatic Laboratory, known simply as the “climatic chamber,” has been the home of climate testing for every aircraft developed since 1947. It has become a “rite of passage” for all aircraft on their journey to Initial Operating Capability (IOC).

As the F-35 approaches its IOC debut for the U.S. Marine Corps in 2015, it too must be put through the rigors of the climatic chamber. Only this time, the test is being performed differently than ever before.

To accommodate the swiveling engine nozzle and lift-fan system of the Lightning II, a 12-foot high “restraint and support” structure interwoven with a system of ventilation ducts was designed. This apparatus secures the F-35 and allows it to operate at high power in both conventional and Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing (STOVL) mode while inside the building.

Ventilation of the exhaust is vital to maintaining a stable temperature inside the chamber. Conditioned air is constantly pumped in to ensure the pressure in the building is always higher than the pressure inside the ducts surrounding the engine and other openings on the aircraft. This difference in pressure is a safeguard that maintains the jet exhaust is flowing out of the chamber through the ducts, allowing the facility to sustain a constant temperature. 

Water spraying from the ducting at the back of the engine absorbs some sound wave vibrations emitted from the engine that is capable of generating 40,000 pounds of thrust—thereby decreasing decibel levels in the chamber.

Now, it’s time to play Mother Nature.

Heating Things Up

To kick off climatic testing, engine runs are conducted at a precise set of temperatures. Over a series of days, the temperature is steadily and incrementally increased until it reaches the test maximum of 120 degrees. While the chamber itself is set to a pre-determined temperature, additional solar lamps above the aircraft recreate the intense heat of the sun on the surface of the jet.

In reality, air temperature does not remain constant throughout the day—it increases each hour the sun is up, reaching its apex in the late afternoon. In the chamber, engineers recreate the temperature fluctuation of a 24-hour day.

Much like a car bakes in the sun on a summer day, so can the F-35 Lightning. To recreate the environment in which a jet is left outside on the flight line at, say, Marine Corps Air Station Yuma in Arizona, the jet remains powered down in the chamber until it reaches the simulated day’s maximum temperature. Once temperatures peak, the test team fires up the aircraft—much like a pilot would on a typical, sweltering afternoon at Yuma.

Keeping It Cool

In a matter of days, the chamber transitions from a devilishly hot sauna to the Arctic Circle. Outside air is super-cooled using McKinley Lab’s refrigeration system and pushed into the chamber. In increments, the chamber walks its way down to -40 degrees while the jet completes test runs along the way.

At such frigid temperatures, aircraft fluids start to thicken and mechanisms operate slower—all points upon which test engineers keep a watchful eye as the temperatures dip dangerously low.

Successfully completing cold testing is another crucial step in the F-35’s journey towards IOC, because the F-35 would experience this type of environment while operating in Canada or Norway.

Let It Snow

Next, the Lightning II faces its harshest climate yet: a barrage of snow and ice that would have Santa Claus shaking in his boots. 

When the F-35 hurtles through the clouds at high speeds in freezing climates, large pieces of ice can form quickly on the aircraft’s exterior. These heavy chunks of ice may break off and damage the aircraft, errantly fly into the engine or create a Foreign Object Damage (FOD) concern. For this reason, icing is one of the most dangerous elements in climatic testing.

In front of the jet sits a large apparatus composed of three massive cylinders stacked in a pyramid, parallel to the ground. Inside these cylinders are a total of nine ducted fans that blow a huge amount of air through a single funnel in the front, like a giant hairdryer. Attached to the front of this funnel is a spray bar capable of producing “clouds” of various water droplet sizes. 

These droplets are blown toward the plane and freeze upon contact. While the lab cannot generate the precise wind speeds experienced by airborne aircraft, the unique setup inside the chamber is capable of producing sustained wind speeds up to 120 miles per hour—all while spewing precipitation at the F-35.

Snow and ice testing gauges the effectiveness of the aircraft’s Ice Protection System and the ability of the jet to perform in winter weather.

When It Rains, It Pours

For its final test, it is time to take the F-35 into the center of a hurricane—so to speak. To gauge how a Lightning II would hold up sitting uncovered on the flight line at a place such as Eglin AFB, the McKinley Climatic Laboratory is equipped with a system of “rain frames” that drench the jet with steady rainfall.

During rain testing, the F-35 is soaked in rainfall ranging from 1.1 inches per hour, all the way to 3.3 inches per hour. With driving rain inevitably comes gusty wind. Following the steady soak, a spray bar is placed at various positions around the aircraft. Behind this pole is a large industrial fan that generates sustained winds of 44 miles per hour in the direction of the spray bar and the F-35—creating a tropical storm-like environment that drenches the jet at that particular angle.

Whether soaring across the equator or over the tip of the northern hemisphere, the F-35 Lightning II must be ready to encounter any environment in its pursuit to defend our skies. The McKinley Climatic Laboratory helps us ensure we will be ready—no matter what Mother Nature brings.

US Army Leaders Make Case for AMPV Decision

HuntaZeitung — US Army officials shot down the possibility for a wheeled ambulance variant of the armored multipurpose vehicle (AMPV), just the latest chapter in a drama over the vehicle between industry, the Army and Capitol Hill.

In December, the US Army awarded a contract worth $1.2 billion to BAE Systems to begin building the AMPV. BAE was the only contractor still in the running after General Dynamics Land Systems pulled out of the competition in May, complaining that the Army's requirements unfairly favored the tracked Bradley fighting vehicle derivative that BAE was submitting.

BAE is signed to deliver 29 vehicles in five variants in a 52-month engineering, manufacturing and development phase that will lead to a contract to replace all 2,897 M113 vehicles in the Army's armored brigade combat teams (ABCTs). However, GD lobbied the Hill get its eight-wheeled Stryker vehicle in the running for an ambulance variant and another 1,922 M113s in use supporting echelons above brigade (EAB) the service eventually wants to replace.

In a brief at an Association of the US Army convention here, acquisitions officials strove to put the matter to rest, outlining why the BAE's tracked vehicle provided the best mobility, as compared with the Stryker on a variety of terrain, particularly for an ABCT, and defending the program's fairness.

BAE Systems received an engineering, manufacturing and development contract for the US Army's Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle program.(Photo: BAE Systems)

"The AMPV was about meeting the requirements, there was never a specification for a wheeled or tracked vehicle," said Col. Michael Milner, the AMPV project manager. "We provided industry a list of requirements, industry was able to provide feedback and eventually was issued an RFP [request for proposals] on those requirements. The proposal selected did happen to be a tracked vehicle."

Brig. Gen. David Bassett, the Army's program executive officer for Ground Combat Systems, said Stryker ambulances were "wonderful in their intended formations," but an ABCT's ambulances need to be able to go wherever the brigade's other vehicles go to retrieve wounded soldiers.

"We want to make sure we can get an ambulance to that point of need," Bassett said. "The arguments about the mobility being roughly equivalent are using analytical methods that don't represent the true traffic-ability of a wheeled versus a tracked solution."

The medical evacuation variant transports medics to troops on the front line, and evacuate them to a treatment variant, which is used to carry equipment for a battalion aid station.

Bassett said officials wanted to provide the best vehicle under a particular price, and "need to leverage" common components with the Bradley.

The aging M113 was terminated in 2007 because of it lacked required armor and was unable to accommodate modern electronics. The AMPV, with 78 percent more space and two, 400-amp generators, would include mortar carrier, mission command, general purpose, medical evacuation and medical treatment variants, all on a similar chassis.

Milner touted a common drive train, power plant, electronics and underbody across the five variants, all mature systems that would speed production and fielding. The drive train and suspension are common to the Bradley and the Paladin Integrated Management, a self-propelled howitzer.

The plan is to go to a preliminary design review this summer and a critical design review next summer, with first delivery in late 2016. From there, intermittent tests will lead to the limited user tests in late 2018. The fielding is not going to be complete until the mid-2020s.

The matter of wheeled versus tracked vehicles is not entirely settled, as other studies are ongoing.

The Army released one study to the House Armed Services Committee last month, and it found that the other units in the brigade had similar requirements to the AMPV, "but that's not to say those will be the requirements."

The Pentagon's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office is expected to complete its study soon that concentrates on medical variants, Milner said.

The Army is also conducting a formal analysis of alternatives for echelons above brigade at the behest of the Senate Appropriations Committee tat is expected to wrap in 2016.

Drive from Europe to the U.S.? Russia proposes world's greatest superhighway

Route as roughly interpreted by CNN. The proposed plan for a massive trans-Siberian highway would link Russia's eastern border with the U.S. state of Alaska.

It could happen if the head of Russian Railways has his way.

According to a March 23 report in The Siberian Times, Russian Railways president Vladimir Yakunin has proposed a plan for a massive trans-Siberian highway that would link his country's eastern border with the U.S. state of Alaska, crossing a narrow stretch of the Bering Sea that separates Asia and North America.

The scheme was unveiled at a meeting of the Moscow-based Russian Academy of Science.

Dubbed the Trans-Eurasian Belt Development (TEPR), the project calls for a major roadway to be constructed alongside the existing Trans-Siberian Railway, along with a new train network and oil and gas pipelines.

"This is an inter-state, inter-civilization, project," the Siberian Times quoted Yakunin. "The project should be turned into a world 'future zone,' and it must be based on leading, not catching, technologies."

"Are we there yet?"

The road would run across the entirety of Russia, linking with existing road systems in Western Europe and Asia.

The distance between Russia's western and eastern borders is roughly 10,000 kilometers (6,200 miles).

Yakunin said the road would connect Russia with North America via Russia's far eastern Chukotka region, across the Bering Strait and into Alaska's Seward Peninsula.

The road would likely enter Alaska some distance north of the town of Nome, where the famed Iditarod sled dog race ends.

How would drivers span the ocean gap between Siberia and Alaska? Ferry? Tunnel? Bridges?

The report didn't offer specifics on the route across the sea.

The shortest distance between mainland Russia and mainland Alaska is approximately 88 kilometers (55 miles), according to the Alaska Public Lands Information Centers.

The main route of the Trans-Siberian railway runs from Moscow to Vladivostok and covers 9,258 kilometers.

A theoretical drive (as fancifully calculated by CNN) from London to Alaska via Moscow might cover about 12,978 kilometers (8,064 miles).

Relatively isolated even by Alaska standards, no road connects Nome with the rest of the state's road system.

About 836 road-less kilometers (520 miles) across desolate terrain separates Nome from the closest major city and road network in Fairbanks, the unofficial northern terminus of the Alaska Highway.

From Fairbanks, Canada and the 48 contiguous U.S. states can be reached by road.

Assuming a road to Nome were ever built (the idea has been studied by the state of Alaska), a fantasy road trip from London to New York might cover a grueling but presumably photo-op-laden 20,777 kilometers (12,910 miles).

Facebook posts from forlorn Siberian rest stops might alone make the trip worthwhile, though the journey would also easily establish irritating new records for "Are we there yet?" gripes from the kids.

Who's gonna pay for this thing?

Yakunin has been described as a close friend of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Some sources have speculated that he could be Putin's likely successor as president.

TEPR would reportedly cost "trillions of dollars."

According to Yakunin, however, massive economic returns would more than make up for the massive cash outlay -- about which the report also included no details.

Why military wants to spend billions on new Air Force One

(Photo: AP)

Boeing 747 planes become Air Force One when the commander in chief is aboard. The current planes are getting old, and the Pentagon wants to buy new ones. CBS News' Mark Albert reports from behind the scenes on how for the first time the military may buy three 747s to replace the current two.

Air Force One is the most recognizable aircraft in the world: six stories tall, two-thirds of a football field long and carrying immeasurable prestige.

More than "Hail to the Chief," more than the ubiquitous Secret Service agents, even more than the famous seal, there is no more identifiable symbol of the mobile presidency than Air Force One.

"It has come to represent the power of the American presidency, the reach of the American presidency," author Ken Walsh said. "It's come to symbolize American technology and America's technological prowess."

Walsh wrote a book on Air Force One and has covered the past five presidents for U.S. News and World Report. He's flown on Air Force One about 300 times, which begs the question, what's it like to fly on the presidential aircraft?

"For a president, it's fabulous," Walsh said with a laugh. "When they left office, the four who've left office say the thing they miss the most is Air Force One."

But under their polished exterior, the two aircraft that commonly serve as Air Force One are aging, now a quarter-century old. Even though both Boeing 747-200s have only flown a fraction as much as a commercial 747 of the same age, the Air Force says it's time for a new generation of presidential wings.

"We've got a pretty good size team working on it," Air Force Col. Amy McCain said.

McCain is in charge of ordering the new Air Force One.

"The current airplane was fielded in 1991," McCain said. "It's the only 747-200 left in the United States that is flying. So it costs a lot more time and money to keep that airplane flying than it used to. It's actually cheaper in the long run to replace it."

McCain's team has grown from 20 people to 80 in just the past year. It will soon expand to 100.

In January, the Air Force announced its intention to use Boeing's 747-8 airframe.

The long-range, wide-body aircraft is made in Everett, Washington. It comes with a longer fuselage, greater wing span and new engines and avionics. It will be heavily modified with all of the latest technological and security gear. But this symbol of America doesn't come cheap.

Updated budget documents show its request to Congress starts with $102 million this year, and the numbers quickly gain altitude to more than $3 billion in total in the next five years. And that's not counting the final three years of the project.

Some say that the aircraft does not need to be replaced and that the taxpayers simply can't afford to buy a new presidential plane.

"The top priority is an affordable aircraft that will meet the presidential requirements," McCain said. "We're buying up to three. It depends on all the availability of having two airplanes available for the president at any one time."

If the deal takes off, the current Air Force One will likely land in the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton, Ohio, home to nine presidential aircraft.

The museum's historian, Jeff Underwood, said the history of the presidential aircraft is filled with triumph and turbulence.

Franklin Roosevelt was the first to fly while in office. The plane the president took to Yalta in 1945 had an electric-powered elevator.

The four-engine Douglas plane, code-named "The Sacred Cow," was modified for the president, who was stricken by polio at age 39.

Roosevelt flew on the plane only once before his death. Harry Truman then used it, signing the act that created the Air Force.

The Boeing 707 that took the first American president to China is at the museum. It carried eight presidents over 36 years.

Jackie Kennedy approved the now-iconic blue and white design still in use today.

The 707 also flew the Kennedys to Dallas and President Kennedy's successor back to Washington.

The original log book from that date shows the one flight with two presidents, after Lyndon Johnson took the oath of office in a packed, sweltering cabin.

The headwinds of history buffeted George W. Bush aboard Air Force One on 9/11 as the plane became an airborne refuge after the terror attacks.

In 70 years of presidential flight, Underwood said the unique set of aircraft we now know as the Air Force One has taken the country to new heights.

"This is not just the president's plane," Underwood said. "This is the plane that belongs to the people of the United States. When you look on the side of the airplane, it tells you, United States of America. This is a symbol of the United States, and we are the people of the United States."

The Air Force hopes to sign the first contract with Boeing later this year for the next Air Force One. The goal is to have the new 747s flying the president eight years from now in 2023.

Loss of Control In Flight, Runway Excursions Are Top Bizav Safety Concerns

Loss of control in flight (LOCI) and runway excursions were the uppermost concerns in the NBAAsafety committee’s third annual list of top safety focus areas, released today. In addition, the committee highlighted several other safety hazards, including airspace complexities; birds and wildlife; distraction and technology management; fatigue; ground handling collisions; procedural non-compliance; and single-pilot task saturation.

The list is intended to promote safety-focused discussion and advocacy throughout the business aviation industry, as well as to help the safety committee prioritize NBAA’s resources to help improve safety industry-wide. In developing this year’s list, the committee took a data-driven approach to determine the biggest risks. Thus, the top safety priorities were identified based on an objective analysis that combined data trends, survey results and qualitative input from other NBAAcommittees, industry and regulatory partners and members.

“The results of our data-driven approach to identifying the biggest opportunities for improving business aviation safety are definitive,” said committee chairman Steve Charbonneau. “Loss of control in flight and runway excursions are the deadliest and most frequent business aviation accidents, and also of highest concern to NBAA members. The association is committed to working with industry partners and will dedicate significant resources to develop tools and programs designed to help operators mitigate these risks.”

In the last decade, no type of accident has caused more commercial and business aviation fatalities than LOCI, NBAA noted. The NTSB also targeted the issue on its 2015 “Most Wanted” list of safety improvements, citing it as a possible factor in more than 40 percent of fixed-wing general aviation accidents from 2001 to 2011. Compounding business aviation’s challenge in addressing LOCI is the sector’s wide range of aircraft types and operating parameters, which work against any single solution for reducing LOCI occurrences.

According to the report, runway excursions are the most common type of business aviation accident. Despite efforts to reduce the runway excursion rate, the frequency of this type of accident has changed little over the last decade, hovering around 3.6 per one million flights—some 60 percent higher than the corresponding commercial aviation rate. “While runway excursions are often survivable, they are also preventable, based on well identified risk factors, aircraft performance considerations and recommended defenses, making this type of mishap a logical target of a focused risk-reduction effort,” NBAA said.

“Our analysis elevated the hazard list items as issues that all operators should be vigilant about in their day-to-day operations,” Charbonneau said. “The safety committee is committed to providing information, resources and tools to help the industry mitigate these hazards, and we will be introducing these products throughout the year.”

In developing its 2015 safety advocacy strategy, the safety committee also identified five basic safety elements—dubbed “foundations for safety”—that operators need to support. These include professionalism, safety leadership, risk management, fitness for duty and technical excellence. The committee said each is critically important to address the complex business aviation environment and should form part of an overall systematic approach to safety risk management.

“The foundations for safety should be seen as exactly that: the base that supports all meaningful, beneficial safety efforts,” Charbonneau said. “While NBAA is committed to providing tools and resources to help operators strengthen these foundations and mitigate risk in the areas we’ve identified, we urge everyone to take steps today and examine how they can improve safety in their operations. The most effective safety efforts are proactive. Identifying and acknowledging the risks in your operations is the first step in preventing the next accident.”