Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 30 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 883

Thread: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,273

    UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015

    The USN will be controlling its UCLASS units from embedded E2Ds:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-fleet-407693/

    Perhaps has implications for the way other UCAV operators might run their fleets?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by mrmalaya View Post
    The USN will be controlling its UCLASS units from embedded E2Ds:?
    an interesting bureacratic choice, as it keeps the UCLASS clear of the F-35 and its defenders, as at least on paper it's not in the same game

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    Iran’s Hama new drone makes maiden flight.

    http://www.tasnimnews.com/English/Home/Single/614703


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    The second Israeli-made UAV-Heron of Indian Air Force crashed in Rajasthan.

    http://www.deccanchronicle.com/15011...shes-rajasthan

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,273
    Great to have your input Tango III , thanks!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    The Netherlands and aerospace services company Strat Aero have signed a letter of intent for the establishment of an unmanned air vehicle training facility focused on the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...cility-407808/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanem View Post
    an interesting bureacratic choice, as it keeps the UCLASS clear of the F-35 and its defenders, as at least on paper it's not in the same game
    And one keeps on wondering when the USN would actually get off the A-12 phobia and try to frame requirements that actually try to produce something in line with the technology capability that exists today. But then again, you can keep de-risking the $hit out of technology and wait till the adversary fields a system you wished you had
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,189
    E-2D is and ISR asset.
    UCLASS is an ISR asset.

    Why do you believe combining two platforms with the same mission requirements into a squadron is illogical? ISR guys know ISR requirements and how to plan/execute ISR missions.

    It would be illogical to combine and ISR asset into an attack squadron. Attack guys don't have the slightest clue about ISR.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,453
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross View Post
    E-2D is and ISR asset.
    UCLASS is an ISR asset.

    Why do you believe combining two platforms with the same mission requirements into a squadron is illogical? ISR guys know ISR requirements and how to plan/execute ISR missions.

    It would be illogical to combine and ISR asset into an attack squadron. Attack guys don't have the slightest clue about ISR.
    You take a VLO aircraft
    Put passive radar sensor on it (Conformal AESA)
    Ping the sky overall in its direction with an E2 through "VHF" Signal
    Boom, you get an anti-pakFa/J20 solution


    oooooh. Wait. That's what Su had also in mind
    You are absolutely right. It makes sense.

    It's a good news (by the way) for the 35 and all USN over stick addicted Pilots. The robot Joe are still one block away


    Source:
    None other than me some very month ago. Ok Ok modesty is still...
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 12th January 2015 at 20:32.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    5,189
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    You take a VLO aircraft
    Put passive radar sensor on it (Conformal AESA)
    Ping the sky overall in its direction with an E2 through "VHF" Signal
    Boom, you get an anti-pakFa/J20 solution


    oooooh. Wait. That's what Su had also in mind
    You are absolutely right. It makes sense.

    It's a good news (by the way) for the 35 and all USN over stick addicted Pilots. The robot Joe are still one block away


    Source:
    None other than me some very month ago. Ok Ok modesty is still...
    You do realize E-2 spends a large percentage of its on-station mission time listening? Don't you?

    If an E-2 is radiating, everybody knows its there and they also know the CSG is within XXX miles. That defeats the CSG's primary defense - getting lost in the big blue ocean.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,273
    Netherlands to open UAV training centre for Europe:

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...cility-407808/

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,453
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross View Post
    You do realize E-2 spends a large percentage of its on-station mission time listening? Don't you?

    If an E-2 is radiating, everybody knows its there and they also know the CSG is within XXX miles. That defeats the CSG's primary defense - getting lost in the big blue ocean.
    Yes, poor posting from myself. Stand now corrected, Thx.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    The US Federal Aviation Administration has teamed up with news network CNN to explore the integration of sophisticated unmanned air vehicles into newsgathering.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...avs-in-407844/

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross View Post
    E-2D is and ISR asset.
    UCLASS is an ISR asset.
    the MQ-9 is an ISR asset
    but you put an F-16's worth of weapons under its wings, and you get the most-used attack aircraft in decades

    if they were to put the UCLASS with the attack wings, then a number of pilots would be reduced to sitting behind a screen, using a mouse to point and click stuff to death, rather than flying around on a rocketship
    the Air Force has encountered this problem but has refused to accept it. as a result it's losing RPV pilots, even as demand is increasing (so much for all those who said UAVs would be useless when the West leaves Afghanistan)
    the Army found an easy solution: just let NCO's do it, you don't need experience pilots. the UCLASS will take this a step further, as it'll be completely automated from take off to landing
    so the Navy is taking the middle road: use its E-2D people

    the other thing is that by putting the UCLASS with ISR, you're saying its an ISR asset, completely different from the F-35
    if you put it with the attack wings, you're saying active combat pilots will be reduced to playing Hawx, and more importantly you're saying it might take over roles from the F-35. then you're suddenly getting in the way of a $300 billion program
    by hiding with the ISR wing, the UCLASS is a wolf in sheep's skin. and probably the only way for it to reach operational status alive

    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    It's a good news (by the way) for the 35 and all USN over stick addicted Pilots. The robot Joe are still one block away
    the MQ-9 was only a block away from the F-16
    then they started closing down F-16 squadrons, or replacing them with MQ-9s
    if the F-35 slips up, you can be sure the UCLASS' builder will suddenly reveal that it can take over a large number of the F-35's missions, even as the F-18I/J takes over the other missions

    Quote Originally Posted by Tango III View Post
    The US Federal Aviation Administration has teamed up with news network CNN to explore the integration of sophisticated unmanned air vehicles into newsgathering.
    funny how the FAA is limiting private UAV use, but the big propaganda generators can still use them
    I guess they don't want private people to find an easy way to film stuff the government doesn't want us to know
    I remember the story of an environmentalist who used a drone to film illegal activities by a firm. the guy then gets fined and his proof is illegal in court, because the FAA says you can't video a crimenal act without their approval

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    A single US Air Force General Atomics Aeronautical Systems MQ-9 Reaper unmanned air vehicle has surpassed a record 20,000 flight hours to date, following a 17h combat sortie in support of the US military's operations in Afghanistan.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...estone-407863/

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) experts at BAE Systems are developing an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) sensor payload able to look for submerged enemy submarines by detecting small variations in the Earth's magnetic field.

    http://www.militaryaerospace.com/art...ing-drone.html

    https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportun...tabmode=list&=

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    India
    Posts
    108
    .


    From Reuters ..

    An industry source familiar with U.S.-India discussions on the defense initiative said Kendall aimed to finalize two pilot projects, one involving unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and the other involving systems for the C-130 military transport aircraft built by Lockheed Martin Corp.

    The source said the drone project involved the RQ-11 "Raven" built by AeroVironment Inc, a small U.S. firm. Raven is the world's most widely used unmanned aircraft, a lightweight plane that can be used manually, or for autonomous operations.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/...0UT4P820150115
    To be a Free Nation in our own Land. The Land of Zion and Jerusalem My Blog

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,273
    According to bbc the UK will deploy more UAVs in the Middle East:

    "Mr Cameron also said Britain would deploy more unarmed drones to help ground forces tackle Islamic State."

    Unarmed? Watchkeeper or Reaper?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,200
    Well... Reapers can't go back to UK due to regulations. Some would be very welcome in Niamey

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,410
    What regulations?

    Flying here is very restricted, but AFAIK there's no regulation preventing them from being brought here.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,202
    the other thing is that by putting the UCLASS with ISR, you're saying its an ISR asset, completely different from the F-35
    if you put it with the attack wings, you're saying active combat pilots will be reduced to playing Hawx, and more importantly you're saying it might take over roles from the F-35. then you're suddenly getting in the way of a $300 billion program
    by hiding with the ISR wing, the UCLASS is a wolf in sheep's skin. and probably the only way for it to reach operational status alive
    The USN is still debating whether to up_arm the UCLASS and seek a more technically challenging vehicle. While it is frustrating, for I myself agree with some of what Bob Work has said on the matter, I cannot fault the USN for sticking to a long range ISR vehicle with light strike for starters. Given that the X_47 vehicle had a 3-4 year delay in accomplishing its testing and the fact that USN has already lost about a year from its planned IOC one would be sympathetic to them if they seek a relatively low risk solution for their 6- Billion dollar program. In fact, if one took the RQ-180 news stories seriously one could really come up with why the USN is insisting on the UCLASS for ISR since much of that capability form a sensor and integration point of view is/was most likely validated with that program anyhow. They could then in the post 2020's begin to work on version 2 and version 3 of the program just as the USAF went about upsizing their Unmanned aircraft in capability. Putting the UCLASS in the ISR net along with the E-2 is a strong indication that the USN would successfully hold on to its own plans of fielding a primarily ISR driven vehicle with light strike.

    There is no one other than you that thinks that the USN can replace the F-35C with the UCLASS therefore the UCLASS is absolutely no threat to the F-35 acquisition program given that they need a minimum number of new fighters to replace the outgoing F/A-18's by a certain point in time. What the USN seems to be avoiding is to go crazy with the UCLASS requirement and enter into a 10-15 billion dollar program, only to have it go out of control (which high risk programs have a tendency to do) and jeopardize their FA-XX program which they also need by a certain point in time to replace the Super Hornet, unless they volunteer to remain an F-35 only force well into the 2050's (which they won't agree to). Put that with their ship building plans, which suggest a gap between their goal and their funds - one can easily understand why they do not want to spend a whole lot of money on the UCLASS in a relatively short amount of time through sequestration in order to get a mini - unmanned B-2. A time for that vehicle would no doubt come, but not through a program that sees a bulk of its investments/development in a sequestered budget where the Navy is trying desperately to meet its shipbuilding targets.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 17th January 2015 at 12:16.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    18,040
    The German military intends to revive its controversial Euro Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle program after it was canceled in 2013 due to spiraling costs and airworthiness issues.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...uas-/21799109/

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    559
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on View Post
    There is no one other than you that thinks that the USN can replace the F-35C with the UCLASS therefore the UCLASS is absolutely no threat to the F-35 acquisition program given that they need a minimum number of new fighters to replace the outgoing F/A-18's by a certain point in time.
    there are plenty of people who believe this, many high ranking within the USN, who've had the F-35 forced upon them and know it will not satisfy their needs

    this bureaucratic battle between the services has been going on for ages, and many a good idea and more Dollars have been wasted because of it. as with its predecessors, the F-35 is here to promise all and deliver little, at much inflated cost and in much lower numbers (F-111, F-22, F-35, B-2... to name but a few recent examples)

    the UCLASS will have the potential to fly out, detect and kill stuff, and as such it is a direct threat to the F-35's budgets. for most realistic missions you don't need the F-35, and you don't want the F-35, when you'll be able to field multiple long range expendable UCLASS's with the latest plug-in sensors that were not designed 20 years before

    the forces at play here know this, which is why the USN is struggling to get requirements for the UCLASS right. the F-35s defenders want to keep it small, so it can't carry as much weapons as the F-35 (a moot point in today's world of miniature weapons) or make it too big and complicated so it'll fail (I'm guessing that's what the USN did to the F-35)

    so the USN has to balance off actual capability with perceived capability, in an effort to keep the program alive and able to replace the F-35 when and if needed, without being perceived to do so

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,127
    I wonder to what extent the UCLASS could fill some of the roles of the hawkeye. The hawkeye is not stealthy at all so it would be detected from very far and would give away the approximate location of the carrier group.

    A stealthy UCLASS would also have the capability of entering enemy airspace with a strike package and give 360 degrees situational awareness during the attack.

    Wouldn't it make sense for the USN to reduce the number of E-2s and focus more on a stealthy design for the UCLASS?

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,073
    makes no difference, what is seen first of the E-2 is the emission, long, long before E-2 is seen,
    stealth means nothing if you have to emit.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,273
    I have noted that the UK is talking up the reconnaissance potential of the F35B, so this is a similar approach I suppose.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,127
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    makes no difference, what is seen first of the E-2 is the emission, long, long before E-2 is seen,
    stealth means nothing if you have to emit.
    Well, that's the question, can the EASA radar use LPI modes to detect targets at long range.

    The E-2 has a very large RCS, so probably it will be detected by any large surface active radar in LOS.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,202
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    makes no difference, what is seen first of the E-2 is the emission, long, long before E-2 is seen,
    stealth means nothing if you have to emit.
    As DJC mentioned, one big role of the E-2 is to listen, and this is only possibly in certain areas if you practice EMCON or do not emit at all. You do not emit irresponsibly and give away the likely location of a CVN.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,073
    for listening, low rcs UAV makes perfect sense,
    anyway not having the aew active is also risky biz,
    once within striking range, i'd rather have the E-2 active

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