Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 607

Thread: General UCAV/UAV discussion - A New Hope

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    334
    Excellent stuff BlauerMax, I can't wait to see it in the air.

    Edit:

    I also like this article:
    http://australianaviation.com.au/201...ry-capability/

    Basically a UAV that can land on any unprepared airfield. Pretty big, and also very interesting for any manned aircraft.
    Last edited by Sanem; 9th February 2012 at 17:50.

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    delhi
    Posts
    421
    Very amazing video, who are they marketing this to? (with the video)

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,555
    Israeli drone to Indonesia? via Philippines company.

    Don’t Worry About Drones’ Source, Indonesia Defense Ministry Says
    Last edited by Tango III; 12th February 2012 at 08:54.

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,555
    -The CIA is worried that the RQ-170 that crashed in Iran may have failed to dump sensitive data before it went down.

    US data in Iranian hands after downed drone?

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    334
    the 70mm APKWS missiles; a Hellfire alternative?

    new video
    Wiki
    BAE site
    Globalsecurity article

    I think this is huge, for manned aircraft, but especially for UAVs and UCAVs

    Hellfire (Wiki):
    - $68,000
    - 50 kg
    - range 8 km

    APKWS
    - $10,000
    - 8 kg (estimate)
    - range 6 km

    against most modern targets (insurgents, truck mounted regular army, speed boats; anything but tanks or bunkers) you get six times the hitting power for the same cost and with equal performance to the Hellfire

    especailly for UAVs and UCAVs this is vital, as they have a much longer loiter time and often engage "soft" targets, so the increased munitions are a huge advantage

    in the future I would also see them making it air-to-air compatible, giving manned and unmanned aircraft the ability to launch a large number of missiles at short range, Gundam style

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by insomnia.delhi View Post
    Very amazing video, who are they marketing this to? (with the video)
    It is a tech demonstrator at the moment like the X-47B and Taranis.

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    12,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanem View Post
    the 70mm APKWS missiles; a Hellfire alternative?

    new video
    Wiki
    BAE site
    Globalsecurity article

    I think this is huge, for manned aircraft, but especially for UAVs and UCAVs

    Hellfire (Wiki):
    - $68,000
    - 50 kg
    - range 8 km

    APKWS
    - $10,000
    - 8 kg (estimate)
    - range 6 km

    against most modern targets (insurgents, truck mounted regular army, speed boats; anything but tanks or bunkers) you get six times the hitting power for the same cost and with equal performance to the Hellfire

    especailly for UAVs and UCAVs this is vital, as they have a much longer loiter time and often engage "soft" targets, so the increased munitions are a huge advantage

    in the future I would also see them making it air-to-air compatible, giving manned and unmanned aircraft the ability to launch a large number of missiles at short range, Gundam style
    There's a range of such missiles around. Thales UK makes the 13kg LMM (in production for the Royal Navy & British Army for use on helicopters, flown on UAVs). Roketsan in Turkey makes the Cirit, a laser-guided 70mm rocket in production for Turkish army helicopters. There are at least three others, with Israeli & S. Korean firms involved in a couple of them. One has an IIR seeker.

    If you want a UAV-launched AAM, then you can buy Mistral or Stinger, both of which are already in service in the AAM role. Stinger has been flying on UAVs for at least 10 years.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088

    more ways to operate in contested airspace

    As the US starts to think about what they will face after Afghanistan, here is a piece on UAV operations in contested airspace from Aviation Week:

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...&headline=UAVs Need To Adapt For Contested Airspace

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,555
    -NATO will spend 3.0 billion euros ($3.9 billion) to buy and operate five U.S.-built drones over 20 years in an effort to fill a gap exposed in the Libyan air war, an official said Feb. 15.

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Tango III View Post
    -NATO will spend 3.0 billion euros ($3.9 billion) to buy and operate five U.S.-built drones over 20 years in an effort to fill a gap exposed in the Libyan air war, an official said Feb. 15.

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE
    So, NATO is buying the version of Global Hawk that USAF recently canceled because it doesn't work?

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    875
    No.

    The USAF is binning the Block 30 (ELINT & EO/IR sensors) and retaining the Block 40 (radar). NATO is Block 40.

  12. #222
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088

    anglo french ucav

    So today's news suggests that once the UK and France have flown their technology demonstrators they are aiming to move very quickly (next year) towards defining what the joint UCAS (announced today) will be able to do...

    I think this project has massive potential, particularly now the sovereign interest is to be shared between the 2 countries...

    Any thoughts?

    It looks like they have said they are going to make damn sure that the F35 is not the end of European fast jet manufacture...

  13. #223
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,555
    -Beijing-based Yotaisc Science and Technology Development Co. unveiled the X200 vertical take-off/landing (VTOL) UAV for the first time at the Singapore Airshow.

    http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE


  14. #224
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by mrmalaya View Post
    So today's news suggests that once the UK and France have flown their technology demonstrators they are aiming to move very quickly (next year) towards defining what the joint UCAS (announced today) will be able to do...

    I think this project has massive potential, particularly now the sovereign interest is to be shared between the 2 countries...

    Any thoughts?

    It looks like they have said they are going to make damn sure that the F35 is not the end of European fast jet manufacture...
    They are not building a fast jet so I don't know where you get the idea that this threatens the F-35 from. They're two totally different platforms with very different roles. Also the Euro nations that will order the F35 will order it well before this joint UCAV is anywhere near the factory floor.
    As for the potential of this project, well if you include the potential to be late, over budget, lacking in capability and "built for but not with" then it would be following the European style of botching up aircraft and UAV programs.
    Last edited by Nopia; 18th February 2012 at 10:38.

  15. #225
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088
    dear nopia,

    How do you suppose they will power this UCAS? And how fast do you suppose it will fly?

    I suppose you are right in so far as jet propulsion may not be the answer (but that is a bit far fetched).

    With regard to the F35, the UK will use the F35 alongside whatever comes from this project, but I would suggest to you that an airframe operating in the 2030-40 time frame is less likely to be permanently manned (if at all) and as such will be a UCAS, and will therefore be the future of French/UK fast jet manufacture with little or no US input.

    This last point is vital to the survival of both French and British aerospace success in a domestic and export sense.

    Oh and have you even read the announcement? Your angry little answer suggests not....

  16. #226
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3
    Hi,
    This is my first messege to this forum, first of all, I want to say that I found very useful with lots of pretty nice information.

    I wonder if there is a list, study covering the possible ammos that can be applied to UCAVs.

    Ammo types, names, and their detailed information(weight,range,vs. maybe)?

    Thanks.

  17. #227
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    5,369
    They would preferably be small, so i would start with SDB 2 & Brimstone on that list, and it's a very good bet some even smaller munitions will be produced.
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

  18. #228
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    12,023
    Weapons carried to date include Hellfire & Stinger.

    Weapons proposed include LMM, APKWS & Cirit.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  19. #229
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,365
    Quote Originally Posted by Nopia View Post
    As for the potential of this project, well if you include the potential to be late, over budget, lacking in capability and "built for but not with"
    That description of yours can be easily aplied to the following programs, JSF, ATF, JVX, and a few others that clearly are not "European".
    On the other hand that description clearly doesnt aply to the French ACX or the Swedish JAS 39. And may i ask what European UAV was ordered by an European Government that was "late, over budget, lacking in capability"? The only one that springs to mind was the (very) small BAE Systems Phoenix...

  20. #230
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    12,023
    Ah yes, the Phoenix. Accurately described on spyflight.co.uk as "a UAV that looked like the losing entry, by a bunch of failed YTS graduates, in a 'design your own Heath-Robinson UAV competition' using components found in the nearest scrapyard. The old adage - if it looks right, it probably is right, certainly applies to Phoenix, which looks wrong and usually didn't work.

    ... Sadly even to this day there remain some misguided and rather deranged individuals who believe that Phoenix was a good system and worth the money - despite all the evidence that the whole system should have been strangled at birth." :diablo:

    I understand that in Iraq in 2003 the RA sometimes deliberately kept them in the air spotting targets until it was too late to bring them back, then crashed them. This was officially for operational reasons, but I suspect the very high crash rate on landing contributed to the decisions. Worth trading a UAV you have a good chance of losing anyway for some good imagery.

    13 years from first flight to service entry (ten years late), retired 7 years later.

    But Watchkeeper (2 years late on what was originally a 5 year schedule) is pretty normal by US standards, & Falco, Camcopter, Luna, Aladin, Crecerelle, & KZO all appear to be successful. CL-89 & CL-289 (both multinational) were perfectly good for their time. Sperwer has had a mixed history, but some users seem content with it.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  21. #231
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by acozcan View Post
    Hi,
    This is my first messege to this forum, first of all, I want to say that I found very useful with lots of pretty nice information.

    I wonder if there is a list, study covering the possible ammos that can be applied to UCAVs.

    Ammo types, names, and their detailed information(weight,range,vs. maybe)?

    Thanks.
    When I said UCAVs, I mean the ones like x-47A/B/C, Predator C, Phantom, Taranis vs. vs., the stealth combat ones.

  22. #232
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088
    Predator sense and avoid radar testing underway:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-radar-368731/

  23. #233
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glarus/ Switzerland
    Posts
    236
    General Atomics Tests 2nd Predator-C Avenger UAV



    General Atomics announced Feb. 7 that it has test flown a second unmanned Predator-C Avenger combat aircraft.

    The aircraft was first flown on Jan. 12 at the company’s Gray Butte Flight Operations Facility in Palmdale, Calif.

  24. #234
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    11,555
    RQ-4 Global Hawk variant designed for the US Navy's requirement for broad area maritime surveillance (BAMS) closer to first flight.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...flight-368853/

  25. #235
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088

    US Navy 3 way general UAV competition bidders chosen

    Story from Flightglobal:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...gramme-368972/

    Bidders include 2 prop and one rotor driven design.

  26. #236
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088

    EADS reawakens advanced UAV work with Barracuda reactivation

    Barracuda to be sent to Canada for sense and avoid tests, plus news of EADS interest in advanced UCAV design features:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...esting-368968/

    Duly amended with thanks
    Last edited by mrmalaya; 1st March 2012 at 12:42.

  27. #237
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    12,023
    Same link in both posts.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  28. #238
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glarus/ Switzerland
    Posts
    236
    European Industry Calls for UAS Regulatory Framework



    A representative from the European defense industry came out strongly in favor of the European Union developing a regulatory framework for unmanned aerial systems (UASs) at a workshop on research and development into UASs here Feb. 9. 2012

  29. #239
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26
    Althoughs the first aplications are will probably be for civil use like wifi, 4g broadsband, this may also solve the military:diablo: uav/ucav bandwith problems:
    http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/14/3/033001/article

  30. #240
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    3,088

    EADS moves away from Talarion ?

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...entId=blogDest

    So are they saying that they are going to move towards developing the technology for future UASs but not push the Talarion?

    I'm not sure i agree with him on the UK and France not affording Telemos. I personally believe the fewer partners the better when it comes to European aerospace projects...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES