Category Archives: Technology

Technology

Vehicle I-D: Iraqi Huey

Video

According to a 2007 Reuters report, the neighboring country of Jordan donated their old UH-1H helicopters to Iraq, but the U.S. taxpayers paid to rebuild the Hueys at a cost of $3.5-million, each! 

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Randy Redman, 18APR2011.

April 2011, Exercise Lion.

U.S. Army photo by First Lieutenant Jason Sweeney, 18MAY2011.

Air Assault training on Camp Mejid, photo by Staff Sergeant Tanya Thomas, 11NOV2010.

Prior to 2010, the Iraqis used a smaller flag on their Hueys.

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Michael Keller, 14JUL2009.

Here’s the smaller flag.

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Michael Keller, 17JUL2009.

Iraqi Bell UH-1H Huey take-off from Taji Air Base, July 2009.

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Michael Keller, 17JUL2009.

Their mission is to pick-up a soldier, who is considered recovered enough from being gut-shot, at the Air Force Theater Hospital at Balad Air Base.

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Michael Keller, 17JUL2009.

U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer First Class Carmichael Yepez, 31JUL2009.

The same Iraqi Huey (#206) is taking off from Forward Operating Base Diamondback in Mosul, at the end of July 2009.

USN photo by Petty Officer First Class Carmichael Yepez, 31JUL2009.

Video, pre-flight checks:

U.S. Army photo by Specialist Chuck Gill, 28SEP2008.

Al Taji Air Base, 11SEP2008.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Paul Villanueva the Second, 11SEP2008.

Flaming engine start.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Paul Villanueva the Second, 11SEP2008.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Paul Villanueva the Second, 12SEP2008.

Door gunner uses Soviet era PK-C machine gun.

Camp Taji, USAF photo by Senior Airman Julianne Showalter, 28APR2008.

Video, over-fly Taji:

Vehicle I-D: IRAQI ARMOR, AFTER THE INVASION

RECOVERING UH-1 SKELETONS

Technology

Mil 17 crash & burn

Image

In early May 2011, one of the U.S. taxpayer funded Russian built Afghan Mil 17B(V)-5 crashed in Nuristan Province, Afghanistan.  Nine people onboard were slightly injured.

The Hip was part of the first deliveries of U.S. taxpayer funded Russian made helicopters between 2009 and 2010.  NATO/ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) reported the Mil-17s sent to Afghanistan cost about $15-million each!  Dozens more were given to Afghanistan in the years after this crash, in fact the United States signed a new delivery contract with Russia about a week after this crash.

U.S. Army Pathfinders were ordered to remove ‘sensitive’ equipment from the  NATO reporting-name Hip, and then dismantle and burn it to the ground.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Brian Christiansen, 12MAY2011.

Parts of the Mi-17, that could be reused, were sling loaded away by CH-47 Chinook.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Brian Christiansen, 12MAY2011.

The fire was started using phosphorus grenades.  When aluminum gets hot enough it burns like paper, almost nothing is left but ash.

This was not the first time a U.S. taxpayer funded ‘Hip’ was blown-up by U.S. forces.

U.S. Army photo by Corporal Patrick Gleason, 23DEC2010.

On 23DEC2010, a contracted Mi-17 was blown-up by U.S. forces on Combat Out-Post (COP) Spera in Khowst Province.  The Hip actually crashed on COP Spera several years earlier.

The result of packing an Mi-17 with excess ammo, and then blowing it up. USA photo by Corporal Patrick Gleason, 23DEC2010.

The Hip was packed with ‘left-over’ munitions, which were detonated.  The destruction of the derelict Hip was an excuse to get rid of excess ammo, as COP Spera was being shut-down.

CH-47 CHINOOK LOVES COLLECTING MIL 8 ‘HIP’ BONES

MAINTAINING SATAN’S CHARIOT (Afghan Mi-24V)

AFGHANISTAN GETS MORE U.S. TAXPAYER FUNDED HELICOPTERS & GUNS!

TAXPAYER FUNDED AIRCRAFT ABANDONED THEN TURNED INTO SCRAP METAL! 

U.S. TAXPAYERS TO RESCUE “DONATED” C-130

U.S. TAXPAYERS DELIVER MD-530F CAYUSE WARRIOR TO KENYA

U.S. TAXPAYERS SEND AUSSIE PRIME MINISTER A MODEL BOAT!

U.S. TAXPAYERS FUND POLICE TRAINING & CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN VIETNAM!

Technology

U.S. Navy keeps old U.S. Army Boat-Truck afloat

Video

The Lighter Amphibious Resupply Cargo-5 tons capacity (LARC-V) was developed by the U.S. Army in the 1950s.  Just short of 1-thousand of the aluminum hulled boat-trucks were made, almost half being intentionally destroyed as the United States ended its occupation of Vietnam.  About 1-hundred are now privately owned.  Perhaps in response to concerns about climate change, the U.S. Navy ordered a SLEP (Service Life Extension Program) refurbishment of the versatile LARC-5, and since 2006 has accepted 42 of the upgraded decades old swimming trucks.

U.S. Navy photo by Senior Chief Mass Communication Specialist Brandon Raile, 17SEP2019.

In September 2019, the U.S. Navy used LARC-5 Duck Boats to transport equipment that would allow Navy ships to transfer fuel oil to Alaskan villages onshore.  It’s part of preparations for an expected major natural disaster that could cut-off remote villages along the U.S. Pacific coast.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class Jack D. Aistrup, 12JUN2019.

Landing Craft Utility (LCU) ship with a couple of boat trucks during Baltic Operations (BaltOps) 2019.

Video of boat-truck (Duck Boat) actions on Kallaste Beach, NATO-Estonia, during BaltOps 2019:

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Second Class Jacob I. Allison, 19OCT2018.

Vice Admiral Richard Brown, then Commander of Naval Surface Force-U.S. Pacific Fleet, inspects the increasingly relevant (despite their old age) LARC-5s in San Diego, California, October 2018.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jacob Owen, 14JUL2017.

Inside the Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2), July 2017.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jacob Owen, 14JUL2017.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Sabyn L. Marrs, 14JUL2017.

USN photo by Mass Communications Specialist Third Class Kenneth Gardner, 22MAY2017.

May 2017, launching a LARC-5 from astern the USNS SGT WILLIAM R. BUTTON during NATO’s Saber Strike 17, in Latvia.

U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Corporal Ricardo Davila, 22MAY2017.

Driver’s position.

USN photo by Petty Officer Third Class Jeanette Mullinax, 29OCT2016.

Entering the well deck of amphibious transport dock ship USS Green Bay (LPD 20), October 2016.

Video, LARC-5s coming aboard USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) via an LCU, October 2016:

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class Raymond Minami, 22MAR2016.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class Raymond Minami, 23MAR2016.

Entering USS Bataan (LHD 5), March 2016.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class Raymond Minami, 23MAR2016.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class David A. Cox, 13AUG2015.

In August 2015, LARC-5s were used to help survivors of Typhoon Soudelor, on the Marshal Islands.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Third Class David A. Cox, 13AUG2015.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist First Class Elizabeth Merriam, 02SEP2014.

Driving into the amphibious transport dock ship USS Green Bay (LPD 20), September 2014.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Second Class Tamara Vaughn, 30JUL2014.

Inside amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3), July 2014.

USN photo by Mass Communication Specialist Second Class Tamara Vaughn, 30JUL2014.

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Edward Gyokeres, 05JUN2012.

An abandoned and rusting (yes, aluminum does corrode) LARC-5 at Mackall Army Airfield, North Carolina, June 2012.

USN photo by Petty Officer First Class Brien Aho, 07JUL2010.

LARC-5s took part in a landing at Salinas Beach, Peru, July 2010.

USN photo, 17SEP2009.

September 2009, this boat-truck helped with the salvage of an abandoned and wrecked sailboat, near Coronado, California.

USN photo by Chief Petty Officer Daniel Taylor, 14JUN2009.

Fun in the sun at Camp Onslow Beach, North Carolina, June 2009.

Hurricane Harvey: MARINES USE AMPHIBIOUS COMBAT TANKS TO SAVE LIVES!

Bare Metal: NASA Trucks

1942 FORD FIRETRUCK RETURNS TO SERVICE WITH THE USAF!

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO MAINTAIN A FLYING MILITARY FIRETRUCK?

Technology

Bare Metal: NASA Trucks saving the Trucking Industry

Image

According to NASA, it was in 1973 that one of its employees became intrigued with how high speed tractor-trailer rigs created massive ‘suction’ as they drove-by slower moving vehicles.  In 1975 a study showed that big-rig trucks moving at 55 miles per hour (the national speed limit at that time) displaced as much as 18 tons of air for every mile traveled.  About half of the truck’s horsepower was needed just to overcome aerodynamic drag.

After leasing a cab-over tractor-trailer from a Southern California firm, Dryden (Edwards Air Force Base) researchers added sheet metal modifications that look very much like what you see on today’s big-rigs. They rounded the front corners and edges, and placed a smooth fairing on the cab’s roofs and sides extending back to the trailer. During the investigation of truck aerodynamics, the techniques honed in flight research proved highly applicable. By closing the gap between the cab and the trailer, for example, researchers discovered a significant reduction in aerodynamic drag, one resulting in 20% to 25% increase in fuel economy.

NASA estimates that its contribution to the ground vehicle industry has reduced fuel consumption by as much as 6-thousand-8-hundred gallons per year per vehicle!

Researchers also installed a boat tail structure on a passenger van.  During the tests, the vehicle’s sides were fitted with tufts, or strings, that showed air flow. The investigators concluded that rounding the vertical corners front and rear reduced drag by 40%, with at a  decrease in the vehicle’s internal volume by only 1.3%. Rounding both the vertical and horizontal corners cut drag by 54%, resulting in a 3% loss of internal volume. Adding a faired underbody helped reduce drag by about 15%.

In a kind-of control test, the passenger van was first covered with a sheet metal box with intentionally squared corners.

It was discovered that simply rounding the corners resulted in a huge reduction in aerodynamic drag.

One of the most effective, and simple, NASA discoveries is saving the trucking industry big money on fuel costs today; the ‘Airtab’.

Bare Metal: KC-135R GETS STRIPPED

NASA’S TUPOLEV 144 SST

Technology

Maintaining Satan’s Chariot

Video

U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sergeant Cecilio Ricardo, 09APR2007.

What does it take to keep what the Afghan’s call Satan’s Chariot in the air?

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Angelita Lawrence, 02OCT2009.

Video from September 2009, live fire prep, 12.7mm chin-gun and 57mm rockets:

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Angelita Lawrence, 02OCT2009.

Video from September 2009, the awesome sight and sounds of live fire training:

Loading the 12.7mm four barreled gatling chin-gun, May 2010.

Don’t forget the 57mm rockets.

These pics were taken at Kabul International Airport during a 100 hours inspection of a Mil 35 (Mi-24V, NATO Hind-E), in October 2011.

Video from June 2015, maintaining the Hind Legs of the Hind-E (and the front leg as well):

Before we go, live fire training 12.7mm chin-gun and 23mm under-wing gun-pods, from 2014:

Zombie ‘Copter:

Afghan Mi-24 Hind-D.

HOW THE HIND RETURNED TO AFGHANISTAN (with the help of the U.S./NATO), AND WHY IT WON’T DIE

Vehicle I-D:

NATO photo, 15MAR2018.

MIL 24 HIND ‘SATAN’S CHARIOTS’, in use by almost everybody including NATO

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO MAINTAIN A FLYING MILITARY FIRETRUCK?

Technology

NATO: Poland Sukhoi 22

Video

The Sukhoi 22M4 is the export version of the Sukhoi 17M4.  The NATO reporting name for both is Fitter-K.  Poland began using Su-22s in August 1984, when it was a member of the Cold War era Warsaw Pact.  Poland joined NATO in 1997.  Polish officials want to phase-out the Su-22 by 2026.

U.S. Marine Corps photo by Staff Sergeant Dengrier M. Baez, 07JUN2018.

Note the shark mouth painted external fuel tanks on this Polish Su-22M4, NATO Baltic Operations (BaltOps), June 2018.

U.S. Army video, by Sergeant Jacob Holmes, Su-22s over the Gora Hetmanska Range in Drawsko Pomorskie, 15FEB2017:

A Polish Su-22 now a museum piece. U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Lauren Harrah, 13AUG2016.

Swedwin, Poland, 08JUN2016. USA photo by Private First Class Antonio Lewis.

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

Polish Su-22M4s in Estonia, taking part in NATO’s Spring Storm wargames, June 2016.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

Tight formation break-away during Spring Storm 2016.  For kit builders, note the new larger blade antenna behind the cockpit.

Video showing Su-22M4s along with F-15s and SAM batteries:

USAF photo by Airman First Class Kyle Gese, 13JUN2014.

Polish Su-22M4s take-off from Lask Air Base during NATO’s Eagle Talon, June 2014.  Note the smaller original blade antenna behind the cockpit.

USAF photo by Airman First Class Kyle Gese, 13JUN2014

Video, Polish Su-22 during NATO Exercise Anakonda 2014:

Apparently there are only a handful of countries using the Su-22, with Poland being the only NATO member flying the Fitter-K.  Peru has less than a dozen Su-22s in reserve status.  In 2012 Peru signed a ‘codification’ agreement with NATO but is not considered a member, or partner, of NATO.

NATO MiG-21

Vehicle I-D: Sukhoi 24

Technology

Zombie ‘Copter: How the Hind returned to Afghanistan, and why it won’t die

Video

The first time the Afghan military used the NATO-reporting-name Hind was during the Soviet occupation (1979-1989).  It was during that occupation that Mujaheddin on the receiving end of the Mi-24D nicknamed it Satan’s Chariot.  After the Soviets left, Afghanistan managed to operate a few Mi-24s (NATO reporting-name Hind-D), some sources say right up until the 2001 U.S. invasion.

Apparently the Mil 35 is the export version of the Mil 24V (NATO reporting-name Hind-E), and apparently there’s wasn’t much difference between the Soviet version and the export version.   However, don’t confuse a Mi-35 with the newer Mi-35M (prototype Mi-24VM).  Along with many internal upgrades the basic visual differences between Mi-24/25 (another ‘export’ designation)/35 and a true Mi-35M are the landing gear, wings and chin-gun.  The Mi-35M has fixed landing gear (apparently in an effort to reduce weight and keep production costs down), shorter span wings and a twin barreled 23mm chin-gun.

Kabul International Airport/Air Base. U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sergeant Cecilio Ricardo, 02APR2007.

In December 2008, Czech Republic started deliveries of at least six refurbished Mi-24Vs (NATO Mi-35 Hind-E), along with several Mi-17s, to help build Afghanistan’s air power.

The push to build Afghan government controlled air power was seen as a way of reducing reliance on U.S./NATO forces, a way of avoiding getting stuck in a ‘Tar Baby’ the way the Soviets did in the 1980s.

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Edward Gyokeres, 27MAY2009.

Live fire at East River Range Complex near Bagram Air Base, May 2009.

June 2009 video of Czech technicians training Afghans for live fire exercise:

According to the exalted Wikipedia, it states the Czech Hinds were “purchased” by Afghanistan and training was done by technicians from India. Wrong!  Here’s an official NATO report from July 2009:

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Thomas Dow, 09SEP2009.

2009, U.S. Air Force video report explaining what the plan is for the Afghan Hinds:

USAF photo by Airman Brian Ybarbo, 15DEC2009.

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Manuel J. Martinez, 11MAY2010.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Oshawn Jefferson, 15MAY2010.

Quick live fire video from June 2010:

USAF photo, 26JAN2011.

Photo by Vladimir Potapenko, 05MAR2011.

USA photo by Staff Sergeant Elvis Umanzor, 18SEP2013.

In 2014, it was revealed that the United States supplied Afghanistan with 30 Russian built new model Mi-17B-5 helicopters. But the affair with Russia ended over the shenanigans in Ukraine and Crimea.  U.S. officials instead pushed for U.S. made helicopters to be given to Afghanistan.

In a 2015 New York Times article an Afghan colonel criticized the U.S. for forcing Afghanistan to accept MD 530F scout helicopters (at U.S. taxpayer expense).  The colonel pointed out the MD 530Fs were easily shot down saying “This plane is a total mess”, and expressed a desire to get more Hinds.

In 2019, the arrogant U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) stated the Czech gifted “…Mi-35s were removed from the authorized fleet in 2015, but the Afghans continue to attempt to sustain them. DoD has advised them against doing so….”, and seemed perplexed at Afghan military leaders wanting a more reliable and survivable gunship like the Mi-24.

Sensing an opportunity to make points with the Afghan government, India gifted four refurbished Hinds (originally purchased from Belarus) between 2015 and the end of 2019.  The Indian Hinds were denoted as Mi-25s and Mi-24Vs by the Indian news media and even Jane’s Defence Weekly, U.S. news sources refer to the Indian gifted Hinds as Mi-35s.

Moral of the story is; if you want to make Afghans happy just give them more Satan’s Chariots!

Update, 11AUG2021, Taliban capture Mil 24V (Mil 35):

VEHICLE I-D: ZOMBIE TANK T-55, THEY’RE EVERYWHERE!

Technology

Soviet era Armor used by NATO: Poland

Video

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Lauren Harrah, 19JUL2016.

Polish modified ZSU-23-4, known as ZSU-23-4MP Biała, July 2016.

Very quick video of Polish ZSU-23-4MP, a mine throwing TRI-Kroton (aka Opal, modified MTLB) and some 2S1 SP guns, in Romania for NATO wargames in 2017:

USA photo by Sergeant Justin Geiger, 18JUN2017.

Cold War era Warsaw Pact Czechoslovak designed/built 152mm Samohybná Kanónová Húfnica vzor 77 (ShKH vz. 77, or self-propelled cannon howitzer model 77), June 2017.  It’s also known as DANA (Dělo Automobilní Nabíjené Automaticky, or gun vehicle loaded automatically).

Video, 2S1 Gvodzika Self Propelled artillery guns, March 2017:

Polish designed MTLB engineer vehicle known as Opal or TRI, June 2017.

Quick video of TRI:

A PT-91(improved T-72) based WZT-3M recovery vehicle on public display in 2016 (note the Christian priest wearing the tanker helmet).

WZT-3M, June 2017.

Video of WZT-3M towing BMP-1, followed by BMP-1s, June 2017:

BMP-1 (known as BWP-1 in Poland), June 2016, NATO Exercise Anakonda.

Video from 2014, BMP-1 used to defend beach against wargame invasion:

Video, Poland BMP-1s invade Romania for NATO’s Noble Jump 2017:

The PT-91 is Poland’s version of a modernized T-72, this pic was taken in June 2018 during NATO’s Puma 2 Exercise-Saber Strike.

Here’s some PT-91 videos from 2017:

Video from 2016, 2K12 Kub (NATO code-name SA-6 Gainful) SAM launching, the 2K12 Kub is mounted on a highly modified MTLB chassis:

Video from 2014, S125 Neva SAM (Surface to Air Missile) mounted on T-55 chassis, with launch at the end of the video:

Soviet era Tanks used by NATO: BULGARIAN T-72

Vehicle I-D: UKRAINIAN ARMOR

Technology

Vehicle I-D: Ukraine’s BTR-4E +

Video

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau’s BTR-4 is a private venture that can be configured in many ways.  The BTR-4 in this article is armed with a gun system similar to the BTR-3DA (30mm gun, 7.62mm gun, anti-tank missiles).   

Yavoriv, Ukraine, a BTR-4E fires its 30mm gun. New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

BroneTransporteR=Armored Transporter

New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

Canadian Armed Forces photo by Corporal Andrew Kelly, 30NOV2017.

Video, Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau rep explains the BTR-4E features:

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Kyle Larsen, 26SEP2019.

USA photo by Private Joanna Gaona Gomez, 26SEP2019.

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau of some BTR-4 variants:

https://youtu.be/jltu95B9fRE

BTR-4KSH mobile command post.

BTR-4 Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV).

BTR-4 Recon/NBC.

BSEM-4K ambulance.

BTR-4MB1 heavy armor version.

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau BTR-4MB1 promo video:

https://youtu.be/77TM8UR_jog

To make nomenclature identification more difficult, every country that has purchased the BTR-4 applies their own designation.

  In 2009 Iraq purchased 420 BTR-4s, but in 2014 sent back dozens of vehicles due to break downs and high levels of corrosion.  As of 2018 Iraq had received 280 BTR-4s of differing configurations.

SOVIET ERA TANKS NOW IN USE BY NATO: SLOVENIAN M84

NATO MIG-21

CH-47 CHINOOK COLLECTS MIL 8 ‘HIP’ BONES

Technology

Vehicle I-D: F-8 Super-Critical-Crusader, father of modern airliner wing design

Video

“This thing is so different from anything that we’ve ever done before that nobody’s going to touch it with a ten foot pole without somebody going out and flying it.”-Larry Loftin, NASA’s Langley Research Center

NASA photo, 1971.

F-8A Bureau Number 141353/NASA tail number 810 with SuperCritical Wing (SCW) flies in its original paint-job in 1971.  On its first flight, on 09MAR1971 the SCW marking on the fin was made from tape.  Also notice the F-8 SCW lacks the bulges on the sides of the forward fuselage, as seen on the later pretty paint-job.

The F-8A Crusader was built by Vought (which has been known by several other names before and since, such as LTV), the SCW was built by North American Aviation (which became Rockwell International).  The wing itself cost U.S. taxpayers $1.8-million.

Richard Whitcomb with a F-8 wind tunnel model equipped with the Supercritical Wing. NASA photo, 19JAN1970.

The SuperCritical Wing creates higher lift-to-drag ratios, NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) boasted that it could save a silly-vilian (civilian) airline company with 280 airliners $78-million (1974 dollars) in fuel per year.   Look closely at airliners developed since the mid-1970s, you’ll see some SuperCritical Wing in them.  Thank the designer of the SCW, Richard Whitcomb.

NASA photo, 1973.

The SCW flying with the DFBW, over the San Bernardino Mountains in California, 1973.  F-8A SCW’s last flight was 23MAY1973.

NASA photo, 1973

VEHICLE I-D: F-8 DFBW, OR ANOTHER REASON WHY TODAY’S TECHIE GENERATION OWES THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!

NASA photo, 1995.

On 27MAY(the day I was born, not the year)1992, both SCW and DFBW were put on ‘gate guard duty’ at NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards Air Force Base, California.

Build your own:

By 1980, the SuperCritical Wing became know as the Aeroelastic Research Wing. NASA photo, 12JUN1980.

Can you recognize the SuperCritical Wing (renamed Aeroelastic Research Wing) on this BQM-34 Firebee II drone?