User Panel
Simply outstanding. I read somewhere they'll be in low rate production by 2007.
|
|
It would make a lot more sense to just create a robot that can fly Super Hornets.
|
|
|
|
|
That is some funny shit! LOL! |
|
|
Having a 1200 mile range and the ability to carry 4500 lbs of ordnance will give these little boogers a lot of punch. It will be nice to have something like this to use against the most heavily defended targets and not have to place a pilot in danger. Also, being pilotless should make these much cheaper. So we should be able to buy a bunch of them. That will mean the X-45 will become a nice force multiplier.
With many sensing coming problems with China, I for one am glad to see these aircraft coming along well. They could be very effective in such a war. |
|
|
An unmanned fighter would have the potential to be far more maneuverable and survivable than a manned one. Human limits won't allow a pilot to accept more than 12 Gs, and that only in a very brief transient pulse. An unmanned fighter could easily be designed to sustain 20Gs or more in maneuvering. They could literally outmaneuver air-to-air missiles.
With no human pilot to risk, if the planes are designated as expendable, then their odds of hitting heavily defended targets grow dramatically as the plane won't have a self-presevation instinct that would make it possibly throw bombs early or shy off the most heavily defended target. That being said, I think it will be a bad day for human history on the first day that an unmanned aircraft is used to kill a manned one or live ground targets. Unmanned machines should not ever be used to kill human beings, period. CJ |
|
I doubt this. They would be as maneuverable, if the UCAV was without stores. |
|
|
you mean a big box that sits where the ejeection seat is and you just wire up the hardware? sounds good to me. |
|
|
BAN AIR TO AIR AND SURFACE TO AIR MISSILES!!! |
|
|
And torpedoes, and surface to surface missiles... |
||
|
Sorry, you are a little late. In November 2002 in Yemen, a Predator UAV was used to drop a Hellfire missile which destroyed a civilian vehicle carrying suspected terrorists. |
|
|
but, but, he said period. didn't you see it. this isn't right!!!! oh moral outrage!!!! |
||
|
What's the difference between this and say a cruise missle or an ICBM, or any other 'smart munition'. There really is none, other than the fact this delivery system is reusable. In all cases the weapons are launched by a human, and target selection is done by a human. |
|
|
They have to land. This isn't that shitty movie "stealth". |
||
|
Boeing could if the customer could decide what they want in the vehicle. After a story I heard across the fence today, we need new management over there, too. |
|
|
Sure there is! It's just a pimply faced gamer, not Tom Cruise. |
|
|
|
|
|
Besides...Predators with Mavericks arleady did it in Afghanistan. That hallmark day in history has come and gone. The world didn't split on any seams. |
|
|
Ever seen the original Star Trek "A Taste of Armageddon"?
That is a cautionary tale. When man cedes CONTROL of warfare to machines, it will be a bad day. The Predator that was used to kill civilians on the ground was under human control. I make a distinction between an autonomous machine that acts against humans and all other cases involving the use of missiles, smart bombs, and so on...which are given a specific target by humans. Something bad will happen on the day when the first unmanned, AI-operated vehicle makes a decision that kills humans without a man in the control loop. Right Now, the design limitations on fighter aircraft (in terms of maneuverability) are what the pilot can handle. It has been shown that even an old F-86 is mechanically capable of performing 10 G outside loops by remote control. (Q-86 target drones have been put through this and many other absolutely wild maneuvers.) No man inside means no need for pilot comfort, life support, or informational awareness equipment. The weight savings is considerable, and alllows the plane to be built to perform well beyond a pilot's ability to survive or compete. Given super strength-to-weight synthetics and composits that are available now, such as carbon fiber and aerogels, if we WANT to build a 20-G capable unmanned figher, we CAN build a 20-G capable unmanned fighter. CJ |
|
Are you finished? I didn't see PERIOD! |
|
|
That was one of the best Star Trek original series episodes they made. I'd recommend even people who aren't fans watch that ep because of the message. |
|
|
Hope so! RAF & Royal Navy are buying these things too! PRESS NOTICE: Joint U.K. - U.S. Collaborative Programme Announced for Unmanned Combat Air Systems Press Notice: 047/2005 16 March 2005 PRESS NOTICE: Joint U.K. - U.S. Collaborative Programme Announced for Unmanned Combat Air Systems The Ministry of Defence and the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) today announced a collaborative programme to determine the military benefit of Unmanned Combat Air Systems for future coalition operations. The Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) programme will include experimentation in a real-time simulation environment centered at the U.S. Air Force's Simulation and Analysis Facility at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, and integration with assets in both countries. The MoD's Defence Science & Technology Laboratory and DARPA, working in concert with U.S. and U.K. Service personnel, will develop appropriate coalition concepts of operation, assess interoperability issues and risks, and determine measures of effectiveness in addition to developing and managing the simulation environment. Minister for Defence Procurement, Lord Bach, said: "This is a crucial step in the development of our knowledge of the capabilities surrounding Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles, a potential key component of future air capability for our Armed Forces. Our collaboration with the US on this Project Arrangement when taken together with the use of cutting-edge UK research and dynamic operational input will provide us with a better understanding of the potential employment of UCAVs in future coalition operations." The programme will culminate in an effectiveness demonstration involving live and virtual manned and unmanned assets from both nations operating in a networked coalition warfare scenario. The information generated by this unique collaboration will aid both nations in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of unmanned combat air vehicles as components of a future coalition offensive air capability. The program will begin this month and is scheduled to conclude in July 2009. Ends http://news.mod.uk/news/press/news_press_notice.asp?newsItem_id=3168 |
|
|
Actually they did it in Yemen first. |
||
|
Technically dont cylon raiders have a pilot built into the craft? Thats why Starbuck was about to go inside of one and take over the controls and pilot it back to the Galactica. The raider had hole that allowed the atmosphere to escape the dude inside died and leaked out the hole. She had to patch the hole to fly it.
|
|
And some of us have been training for UCAV combat our entire lives. Fighting Falcon 4.0 X-Wing vs Tie Fighter Mechwarrior 2,3,4. Many others......... |
|
|
I guess the term "Fire and Forget" will be on the buzz word list any second now. Fuck em....... Build MORE ! If it saves the lives of more good service folks, I'm all over it ! Terminators...... FUCK YEAH ! |
|||
|
CJ We can build all sorts of shit, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense. Also, you don't know squat about the practical application of composite materials - it ain't what you've read in Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, or any other commonly available magazine, it's not a miracle material, and a practical laminate sure as hell does not have superior strength over metallics. I would guess that 99.9% of the publicity about the high strength of composite materials refers to the basic strength of a single fiber, and it's true, but you can't make jack with that product form. The payoff is in stability critical structure where the thickness squared effect coupled with the moderately low density (~0.06 lbf/in^3 vs. 0.10 lbf/in^3 for aluminum) provides good buckling resistance. You couldn't pick a worse material in a strength driven application - think about it, carbon fiber/epoxy is burnt string and glue, and the joints require massive dimensions to transfer the loads, which negates the low density. Aerogels are good insulation. Period Dot, as my friend from the .gov likes to say. The trouble is, they cost too much and no one can figure out how to make anything practical with the stuff. |
|
|
His machines sought out life itself, no matter what the form, bacteria, animals, plants, germs, viruses, aquatic or aerial, fish or fowl, intelligent or not, and destroyed it. |
||
|
|
||
|
I read those so long ago......I believe the human race wow in the end. So long as we dont supply our UCAVs with a neverending power source and the ability to procreate, I think we'll be ok. One more thought, I really like the effect UCAVs could have on the enemys moral, even if they shoot one down, they know the pilots just going to have a snack, maybe a coffee, and then be right back at it with another UCAV. It would suck to be them. |
|||
|
Spot on!!! In a report I read some years ago this was a key feature of UCAVS, the absolute remorslessness they demonstrate in an attack and the psychological effect that has on an enemy. The people on the receiving end know that no matter what shit they throw at it, no matter how much tracer fire they throw into the sky, that sucker is coming to get you and won't flinch or blink… A hi tech Kamikaze. ANdy |
|
|
We already do have something like this... its called a cruise missile. We didnt need to waste money on this... it was better spent else where. We want 4500 lbs of bombs dropped on a target, drop 10 cruise missile on it and save the billions that didnt need to be spent on this. |
|
|
You really need to some research about what the X-45's capabilities are and how much they are projected to cost and than compare that to what the capabilities of cruise missiles are and how much they cost each before you bitch about the cost of developing the X-45. There is a huge difference between the two. |
||
|
Regarding 'something like this... its called a cruise missile", I can't agree with ya glockguy. Use once versus re-use, real-time recognition and avoidance with defensive capabilities, etc. etc. etc. I do agree with CJ though - sure is getting spooky. I guess it's smart to do for now but the future could get ugly - sky-net (tinfoil on). |
||
|
You can't fly a combat air patrol off someones coast with a cruise missile… a squadron of these things doing a bit of coat trailing will get peoples attention. ANdy |
||
|
No we don't have something like this. Cruise missiles are a one shot wonder. Even with the targeting on the go capability of the Tactical Tomahawk, you don't have the flexibility of an UCAV. For instance, with T-Tomahawk, if you don't find a target then you just wasted a cruise missile, one you will never get back. With a UCAV you can recall the vehicle and recover not only the vehicle, but the ordinance as well. Let's say you want to bomb 4 targets with 1000lb bombs. You can either use four cruise missiles or you can use one UCAV. Now let's say you want to bomb 8 targets with 500lb bombs, to avoid civilian casualties. You can't use 4 T-hawks. You would have to use 8 and wast 500lbs of explosive each and possibly cause unwanted civilian casualties. You can, however, use one UCAV. As AeroE pointed out UCAVs are not meant to be thrown away after every use, and survivability of the platform has been a design consideration from the get-go. Why? Because the military wants the UCAV to be resuable. In the long term that will save money over a cruise missile AND it allows for greater mission flexibility. |
|
|
Beat me to it. The PLANE decided the best direction to go?? |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.