Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/6/2005 11:52:08 PM EDT


www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1126010150760_5/?hub=SciTech

Canada ponders pilotless replacements for CF-18s

Canadian Press

HALIFAX — It is usually the stuff of science fiction and Hollywood, but Canadian defence researchers are debating the replacement of the trusty CF-18 jetfighter with a fleet of sophisticated, pilotless drones.

The concept was first proposed in an internal 2003 Defence Department research paper, but has now become the subject of discussion within the air force.

The CF-18, which is currently undergoing a $1.3 billion life-extending modernization, is scheduled to keep flying until 2017.

The idea of simply substituting one manned aircraft for another is something that should no longer be considered a fait accompli given the increasing complexity and relatively low cost of unmanned vehicles, said Thierry Gongora, a defence researcher.

In his study, one of the options Gongora suggested is replacing the CF-18 with a fleet of pilotless drones.

"It's in the realm of possibility," he said in an interview from Ottawa. "There are people thinking that much outside the box."

In an age of tight budgets, a defence policy review and U.S. resolve to extend its security perimeter to the whole of North America, the idea of switching to drones isn't that far-fetched, said Gen. Paul Manson, retired chief of defence staff and a member of the conference of defence associations.

Not having to risk lives attacking heavily defended targets makes them very attractive, said Manson.

Pilotless surveillance drones, such as the U.S. Predator, have seen military duty in Afghanistan with American and Canadian forces.

The growing popularity of the system, which combines real-time video and a host of other electronic surveillance, has led to the development of more sophisticated drones that can carry missiles and attack ground targets.

Unlike the completely automated attack fighter that goes haywire in this summer's Hollywood movie Stealth, the real-life drones are controlled from the ground by technicians.

In the spring, the U.S. successfully tested the latest version of a robotic combat aircraft, which is being designed to evade ground fire and carry out multiple assignments.

Whether technically savvy robots can replace flesh and blood pilots in all aspects of air combat is still a matter of debate, Gongora said.

For example, the technology does not permit drones to carry out air-to-air interceptions, such as tracking down enemy aircraft or escorting airliners that may have been hijacked.

He said it remains to be seen whether computer technology will leap ahead enough in the next decade to make interceptions possible.

A senior air force officer in charge of the squadron supporting the current CF-18 fleet is deeply skeptical.

"I'm not convinced the technology will be there," said Lt.-Col Carl Doyon in an interview from Bagotville, Que.

To this point, he said, there's been no effort to develop an air-to-air combat drone.

It's likely Canada will follow the U.S. and other European countries and develop a mix fleet of manned and unmanned aircraft, said Doyon, an engineer and 24-year veteran of the air force.

In 2002, Ottawa joined several other countries and invested $150 million in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter, a piloted craft that's being touted as the next generation of warplanes.

Manson said, given the huge expense of replacing the CF-18 and Ottawa's penny-pinching ways with the Canadian military over the last decade, the government could very well seize on the idea of a drone fleet.

"If you put this in front of the politicians and they think they can get away with a $1-billion system instead of a $3-billion system, then they'll be sorely tempted to go for it," said Manson, who oversaw the acquisition of the CF-18.

In the 1960s, the federal government purchased the C-5 jetfighter over the objections of the air force and when the aircraft didn't live up to expectations it was converted to a trainer, he said.

As the air force was casting around in the late 1970s to replace the CF-104 Starfighter, it looked at a variety of odd proposals, including a suggestion by a Winnipeg entrepreneur to build 7,000 prop-driven aircraft similar to the Second World War P-51 Mustang, said Manson.

Doyon said he doesn't believe cost will be the overshadowing factor.

"We need to base our selection on capabilities," he said.

If the unmanned aircraft are cheaper, but don't carry out the necessary roles "you're not any better off."
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 12:44:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/7/2005 12:44:36 AM EDT by MurdockTheCrazy]
[rimshot]I guess pilotless aircraft is an improvement over the balless aircraft they have now[/rimshot]

Seriously, it's stupid, drones are not capable of replacing pilots at this time... That day is coming, but it ain't here yet, they're grasping at straws.
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 1:13:56 AM EDT
------------------> insert gratuitous super hornet replacement joke
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 1:43:18 AM EDT
A drone won't ever have guts...or balls
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 2:28:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RABID:
A drone won't ever have guts...or balls



Neither has any other machine or tool, the operators on the other hand...

UCAVs are the future, the pilots in charge just feel threatened and don't want to admit it.
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 3:07:37 AM EDT
I wonder what they would think about thier UCAVs if they go against a foe that has the ability to take out their communictions to said UCAV. It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to disrupt the datalink to one of those things.
Link Posted: 9/7/2005 3:18:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By inzane123:
I wonder what they would think about thier UCAVs if they go against a foe that has the ability to take out their communictions to said UCAV. It doesn't seem like it would be too hard to disrupt the datalink to one of those things.



Doesn't seem to be any harder than jamming voice comm we use today huh? Without disclosing anything classified I can tell you our RF commo tech is extremely advanced and jam proof. Frequency agile encrypted datalinks are old hat. Look up link 16 if you want to read about the ones we use today. The biggest vulnerability today is probably our overdependance on GPS, an easily jammed low power signal, GPSII will take care of that problem in a few years though.
Top Top