Quoted: Quoted: Skynet, anyone? Beat me to it.  The PLANE decided the best direction to go??

The pilot on the ground approved the plan ..............

.............Once the pilot authorized the attack, the unmanned aircraft simulated dropping weapons on the target

Quoted: Quoted: Skynet, anyone? Beat me to it.  The PLANE decided the best direction to go??

... It was programmed by human logic to take the most effective route.

... You naysayers really need to see one up close. It won't bite you. It's not alive. When shut off it's still just organized aluminum, wiring & silicon like your beloved, old F14 Tomcat. Some of you folks make it sound like the UCAV is completely autonomous - it ain't.


... And for those of you making innuendo of fighting a war unfairly, I say "meh", there is no such thing.

Quoted: Quoted: Skynet, anyone? Beat me to it.  The PLANE decided the best direction to go??

It has to be able to. See, even if we keep a guy on the ground (or in another aircraft) is in total control you can still lose that data link. So the plane has to be able to take care of itself. Also, it's battle management. Does a Col tell a Squad exactly how to move?


This is WAY better than a cruise missile. For one thing, I've yet to see a cruise missile that you can call back. Now, it seems like the primary combat mission of this thing will be Wild Weasel and deep strike. Both because the thing is damn stealthy. Now, if it's a Weasel, it's flying in front of a strike package killing SAMs. Because it has a limited ability to "think" and be generally told what to do, it can be adjusted as the real world environment changes. With a cruise missile, the intel that cruise missile has is at least as old as when you fired it.  

This is the next thing, and we must go with it. Not because it doesn't risk pilots. Pilots would happily continue to risk pilots. It's that with technology as it is, the pilot has become the limiting technical factor. A plane can only turn so hard, dive so hard, etc. because of the pilot.  With this that all goes out the window.

Basically, team a well programmed air to air version of this up with F-22's (using the Raptors where you need a bit more "thought") and I bet you could wipe out the Chinese Air Force without losing an aircraft.

Has anybody heard lately about the UCAV Northrop Grumman was building, that focused on the Navy?

Quoted: During the test flight, the X-45A unmanned aircraft faced a simulated "pop-up" threat, used evasive maneuvers to avoid it, and autonomously determined which vehicle held the optimum position, weapons and fuel to attack the higher priority simulated target. Once the pilot authorized the attack, the unmanned aircraft simulated dropping weapons on the target. After engaging and destroying a second simulated target, the two X-45As completed their mission and safely returned to Edwards.

Not like Airbus software that couldn't give two shits whether the human in the loop approves of its decisions.

Quoted: Quoted: During the test flight, the X-45A unmanned aircraft faced a simulated "pop-up" threat, used evasive maneuvers to avoid it, and autonomously determined which vehicle held the optimum position, weapons and fuel to attack the higher priority simulated target. Once the pilot authorized the attack, the unmanned aircraft simulated dropping weapons on the target. After engaging and destroying a second simulated target, the two X-45As completed their mission and safely returned to Edwards. Not like Airbus software that couldn't give two shits whether the human in the loop approves of its decisions.

Ouch.

Quoted: The future.

Rise of the machines

Quoted:  Unmanned machines should not ever be used to kill human beings,  period. CJ

whaaa?  You know we have been using armed predators to take out terrorists for quite awhile now?

Quoted: There is no honor in UAV.

War is NOT about honor or any other bullshit.  It is about killing the other guy without getting yourself killed.  This is a great tool for just that.

Quoted: Remember!! UCAV's are utterly fearless!

Quoted: 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.........

+1!!!

Quoted: Quoted:  Unmanned machines should not ever be used to kill human beings,  period. CJ whaaa?  You know we have been using armed predators to take out terrorists for quite awhile now?

Go back one more step, would a hellfire missile in general not be considered and unmanned machine?  

I think what he means is that no machine should be allowed to make that decision.  I think I agree.

Does it have a monniker yet?  Other than "Cyclon"?  (that sounds awfully French)

They should call it...  the "Liger"

Quoted: Does it have a monniker yet?  Other than "Cyclon"?  (that sounds awfully French)

It's not French it's 'Geek'.

and I LIKE it!  Now we just got to add a red LED that sweeps across the front - back and forth...

This things will probably be pretty cheap too, once we sell them to Israel and production can begin in China.

Quoted: This things will probably be pretty cheap too, once we sell them to Israel and production can begin in China.

expect a cheap copy that only works once in 3 weeks.

Quoted: (Sadly they do not look like Number 6 or Boomer.) Two Boeing X-45As Complete Graduation Combat Demonstration www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q3/EC05-0129-02.jpg ST. LOUIS, August 10, 2005 – Two Boeing [NYSE: BA] Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) X-45A unmanned aircraft successfully completed a graduation exercise when they flew their most challenging simulated combat mission today at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. "We pushed the X-45As to their limits and they responded brilliantly," said Darryl Davis, Boeing Global Strike Solutions vice president. "This incredible X-45A program made aviation history and laid the foundation for our X-45C, which will become a critical weapon in our military's arsenal." For test flights 63 and 64, the X-45As departed from the base, climbed to altitude, and autonomously used their on-board decision-making software to determine the best route of flight within the "area of action" or AOA. The pilot on the ground approved the plan and the two unmanned vehicles entered the AOA, a 30 by 60 mile area within the test range, ready to perform a simulated Preemptive Destruction-Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses mission. The mission involved identifying, attacking and destroying pre-identified ground-based radars and associated missile launchers before they could be used to launch surface-to-air missiles. During the test flight, the X-45A unmanned aircraft faced a simulated "pop-up" threat, used evasive maneuvers to avoid it, and autonomously determined which vehicle held the optimum position, weapons and fuel to attack the higher priority simulated target. Once the pilot authorized the attack, the unmanned aircraft simulated dropping weapons on the target. After engaging and destroying a second simulated target, the two X-45As completed their mission and safely returned to Edwards. The next step for Boeing is to build and flight test three X-45C aircraft, two mission control elements, and integrate the J-UCAS Common Operating System (the software used and tested on the X-45A may be offered as a candidate for functionality in the development of the J-UCAS Common Operating System ). The first X-45C will be completed in 2006, with flight test scheduled to begin in 2007. It will be 39 feet long with a 49-foot wingspan, cruise at 0.80 Mach at an altitude of 40,000 feet, carry a 4,500 pound weapon payload, and be able to fly a combat radius of more than 1,200 nautical miles. Winner of a 2005 Flight International Aerospace Industry Award, the J-UCAS X-45 program is a DARPA/U.S. Air Force/U.S. Navy/Boeing effort to demonstrate the technical feasibility, military utility and operational value of an unmanned air combat system for the Navy and Air Force. Operational missions for the services may include persistent strike; penetrating electronic attack; suppression of enemy air defenses; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q3/DVD-1186-137.jpg www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q3/DVD-1186-080.jpg

Don't worry, the F-18 Super Hornet will replace the X-45 when the X-45 hits LRIP.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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

Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

Quoted: Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

And if this doesn't discribe the islamofacists to a T, I don't know what does.

Quoted:    An unmanned fighter could easily be designed to sustain 20Gs or more in maneuvering.    They could literally outmaneuver air-to-air missiles.

brother, don't take this the wrong way, but you have a lot to learn about the way inertial acceleration bears on flight generally, and air combat specifically.

google will give you a pretty good understanding of general g effects, so let's narrow it down a bit and talk about the concept of "available G".  available G, for lack of a better definition, is the amount of inertia an aircraft has at any given airspeed.  there's a formula for it, but let's not worry about that.  suffice to say that at 200KIAS, an airplane is absolutely incapable of pulling a 9G turn, because air is compressible.

think of a sharp turn in your car--the G builds until the car exceeds it's capacity to turn, at which point it loses it's grip, begins to skid, and the G lessens.  well, because air is compressible, an airplane in a turn is always skidding.  because it travels in this compressible medium, an airplane in a high G turn does not carve an arc in the sky.  it reorients in a new direction, skids for a bit while the turn develops, and then powers off along the new vector.  (this would be even more pronounced in space, where there is no medium to "grip")  

an airplane gets into a full 9 G regime at or around 380KIAS, and a pilot couldn't even think about a 20G turn until very close to mach1, where other things than aerodynamics come into play.  this is for traditional aircraft with aerodynamic attitude control.  after all, aerodynamic controls lose their efficiency at high angles of attack--they stall, and cannot effect enough course deflection.  but even now, i can hear the term "vectored thrust" coming to you, and you are correct--vectored thrust can increase an attitude change beyond what traditional flight controls can, and therefore increase inertial effects.  to figure out why this is not the most effective means of defeating a missile shot, let's look at intercept geometry, also known as pursuit.

there are 3 kinds of pursuit--lead, lag, and pure.  we all know whay lead is--aiming out front of a moving target.  lag is aiming behind, and pure is aiming precisely at.  each has a role in ACM, but missiles use pure pursuit--they continuously adjust their trajectory to aim precisely at the target.

back to cars.  imagine that you are driving a ferrari and chasing a dump truck.  easy enough, right?  there are a couple of problems, though.  

1--he has a 1 mile head start on you.  

2--you only have 60 seconds of gas.

3--you only have 1 eye, and you have to look through your riflescope.

4--your scope is out of focus, so all you see is a blob.

now, the dump truck driver, being a former combat pilot and current arfcommer, will run you out of energy.  how?  the first thing he'll do is to turn 90deg away from you.  you won't know this, because he's only a blob and all, but you will notice that you have to continuously turn to keep him in sight.  you have to keep the pedal floored to catch up, but because you're turning, your speed keeps decreasing.  the problem is that he doesn't have to turn as hard as you do, so while your speed is decaying, his is staying constant.  to exacerbate things, as your speed drops, your ability to turn is also being degraded, so you have to turn the wheel more, thus losing further speed, thus making you turn the wheel more, and so on.  you'll never get close, because he never had to make a hard turn that killed his speed (energy), and you run out of gas.

now let's imagine the same exercise, only he's in a pink miata, which is almost as maneuverable as you.  this time, he's going to try to defeat you with hard turns.  as soon as he spots you, he makes a hard, high-G turn to the left.  remember, high-G means skidding, and what does a skid look like through your riflescope?  nothing, at first--he just gets bigger.  then he starts to turn quickly, but not so quickly that you can't follow through the scope.  what he did do is to help you close a lot of distance by losing a lot of speed, which he now has to recover.  by the time he gets his speed back up (which he MUST do in order to have enough available G) you are almost on top of him.  you're still much faster for the simple reason that you didn't have to turn as hard, because you cut the corner of his turn.  

he makes 1 more hard turn, surprising you, and as he skids left, you just barely miss.  he whoops in celebration!

unfortunately for him, the proximity fuse on your ferrari blows all the claymores you have taped to the fenders, and he dies anyway.

i apologize for this long-winded (and imperfect) description, but you've mentioned "outmaneuvering missiles" before, and the idea is just flat-out wrong.  no 20,000lb UCAV is going to "outmaneuver" a 350lb 3d vectored-thrust AAM with a proximity warhead.  it's going to beat it with energy.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Skynet, anyone? Beat me to it.  The PLANE decided the best direction to go?? ... It was programmed by human logic to take the most effective route. ... You naysayers really need to see one up close. It won't bite you. It's not alive. When shut off it's still just organized aluminum, wiring & silicon like your beloved, old F14 Tomcat. Some of you folks make it sound like the UCAV is completely autonomous - it ain't.

I'm not naysaying, I'm being snarky.  There's a difference.  

I think it's pretty cool.  Will the new recruiting methods be the same as used in The Last Starfighter?  'Cause I'm a pretty badass pilot in Tie Defender.    Load up with heavy space bombs and take out some MonCal MC-80s.

Quoted: Quoted: It would make a lot more sense to just create a robot that can fly Super Hornets.

+

Quoted: 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.

Another sweet part is that conceivably these could be handled the same way drones are now - multiple aircraft controlled by a single pilot.
Have a string of them inbound to the battlespace on autopilot from launch, the live pilot takes control as each one reaches the threat zone, do his thing / drop the ordnance, then egress. Pilot could switch into the next inbound, already loitering, and hammer the targets again before they can recover. A HUGE force multiplier.

Quoted: 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

Are you mixing 'unmanned' with robotic / autonomous?  What's the difference between a man sitting in a trailer at an airbase shooting your ass down via datalink, vs one actually sitting in the plane that does it?

Quoted: 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.

No more pilot corpses to drag through the street.

It's easy to imagine something like this with a very long loiter time. They just circle above the unit they're supporting with a load of SDBs; our guys lase the target and upload the GPS coordinates, UAV drops bomb. Constant close air support, vastly reduced tanking requirements, don't have to worry about pilot fatigue. You can probably get by with something even smaller than a SDB, maybe something in the 100 lb range.

Quoted: Quoted: 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. 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.

Helloooo. A cruise missile costs something around $1.4M.

A human being pilots a UCAV. it's meant to return / survive. And more importantly, a cruise missile only has a range of ~600mi.

You're 'point' is badly flawed.

Quoted: Not like Airbus software that couldn't give two shits whether the human in the loop approves of its decisions.

Well said!

Quoted: Not like Airbus software that couldn't give two shits whether the human in the loop approves of its decisions.

Well said!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 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 Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

+1

I am getting a mental image of a small number of manned fighter-bombers flying in formation with a swarm of UCAVs.  And while I know it's not entirely realistic (at least at this point) but I can only imagine the carnage that would visit upon an enemy air force, air defenses, or ground targets.

I believe i read somewhere the next generation apache is being designed so the gunner can control 2 UAvs...

Quoted: I am getting a mental image of a small number of manned fighter-bombers flying in formation with a swarm of UCAVs.  And while I know it's not entirely realistic (at least at this point) but I can only imagine the carnage that would visit upon an enemy air force, air defenses, or ground targets.

It's better than realistic - you will have your unmanned buddies cruising on the mission, and telling you what they can see, improving your own situational awareness.  We laid the foundation for this in the 80's.

I'm still a little partial to giant dreadnoughts on the other hand - armed with death rays, big cannons, enormous bombs, and swift missiles - if anyone shines their radar on you, you blow them up, and the next site down the road, too, just because you can.

Quoted: Quoted: Does it have a monniker yet?  Other than "Cyclon"?  (that sounds awfully French) It's not French it's 'Geek'. and I LIKE it!  Now we just got to add a red LED that sweeps across the front - back and forth...

Damn, and I'm a chemist.  I think my geek license is now under review...

Quoted: Quoted: Does it have a monniker yet?  Other than "Cyclon"?  (that sounds awfully French) It's not French it's 'Geek'. and I LIKE it!  Now we just got to add a red LED that sweeps across the front - back and forth...

Quoted: I believe i read somewhere the next generation apache is being designed so the gunner can control 2 UAvs...

Block III Apache will have this capability.

Quoted: It's better than realistic - you will have your unmanned buddies cruising on the mission, and telling you what they can see, improving your own situational awareness.  We laid the foundation for this in the 80's. .

So freakin' cool.

[quote=mcgredo], don't have to worry about pilot fatigue

Another EXCELLENT point.  

...At precisely 02:45.34 the fleet of X-45s became 'self-aware'.

So far, we've talked about the X-45 UCAV's ability only in ground attack. But what about air to air roles?

I would imagine that if a squadron of SU-30's were inbound, a group of these little small, stealthy, highly maneuverable aircraft could easily sneak into the kill zone and lay waste to them, even if limited to IR missiles.

Hell, as maneuverable as they are, they could probably avoid missiles fired at them if detected anyway. Regardless, there would be little risk, since all you'd stand to lose is the UCAV itself, no pilot.

Anybody know how the comms work?

Is it a satellite link?

Quoted: Anybody know how the comms work? Is it a satellite link?

www.airforce-technology.com/projects/x-45-ucav/

CONTROL

The sensor suite allows detection, identification and location of fixed and mobile targets in near real-time. The battlefield situation and target data is downloaded via secure datalinks to the ground control operator station, to aircraft or to satellite datalinks. The operator station is equipped with artificial intelligence decision aids to assist the operator in the assessment of the battlefield situation and in his decision to authorise UCAV weapons release.

The taxiing, take-off and landing are fully autonomous but a pilot-operator has the option of controlling these manoeuvres. The UCAV Ground Control Station has been designed by NASA. BAE Systems Controls has been contracted to supply the computerised air vehicle management system. The air vehicle is fitted with a Milstar satellite communications link.

Quoted: Quoted: Anybody know how the comms work? Is it a satellite link? www.airforce-technology.com/projects/x-45-ucav/ CONTROL The sensor suite allows detection, identification and location of fixed and mobile targets in near real-time. The battlefield situation and target data is downloaded via secure datalinks to the ground control operator station, to aircraft or to satellite datalinks. The operator station is equipped with artificial intelligence decision aids to assist the operator in the assessment of the battlefield situation and in his decision to authorise UCAV weapons release. The taxiing, take-off and landing are fully autonomous but a pilot-operator has the option of controlling these manoeuvres. The UCAV Ground Control Station has been designed by NASA. BAE Systems Controls has been contracted to supply the computerised air vehicle management system. The air vehicle is fitted with a Milstar satellite communications link.

cool!....so its running on 802.11b then

Quoted: Skynet, anyone? . I hope they have off buttons.

It doesn't matter , the computer will re-route another way to stay alive when, WHEN it becomes sentient.
What they didn't put in the press release was how both planes took over thier own controls and without waiting for the pilot on the ground to give his ok, they proceeded to wipe out the command center and half the population of the nearest city before righting themselves and comming back to land. All this was with simulated weapons and no damage was avtually taken.

Quoted: Quoted: Skynet, anyone? . I hope they have off buttons. It doesn't matter , the computer will re-route another way to stay alive when, WHEN it becomes sentient. What they didn't put in the press release was how both planes took over thier own controls and without waiting for the pilot on the ground to give his ok, they proceeded to wipe out the command center and half the population of the nearest city before righting themselves and comming back to land. All this was with simulated weapons and no damage was avtually taken.

Better call Art Bell!

When the value of human life reaches zero,

the machines become the heroes