Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Northrop picked to build pilotless [comabt] plane [for USN]
Valley Press on ^ | Monday, August 6, 2007

Posted on 08/06/2007 1:23:34 PM PDT by BenLurkin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last
"The Navy has awarded a $635.8 million contract to Northrop Grumman Corp. to build a pilotless combat plane, called the X-47B, at the company's facility at Air Force Plant 42. The plane is part of the Navy's Unmanned Combat Air System Carrier Demonstration program, which was developed out of the former Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems program. Above is a rendering of a J-UCAS plane launching from an aircraft carrier." Northrop Grumman Corp.
1 posted on 08/06/2007 1:23:41 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

How long will it take the Dems to say this may save some pilots but it increases the carbon footprint of the Navy by being able to stay up longer. This must be stopped - this plane makes too much sense and might increase the U.S. defense capabilities while lowering costs associated and increase the flight/benefit ratio.


2 posted on 08/06/2007 1:29:35 PM PDT by MarkT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

X-47B Pegasus

2 years ago

Northrop Grumman Starts Construction Of Its X-47B J-UCAS UAV

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/uav-05zv.html

Bombs Away!!!


3 posted on 08/06/2007 1:33:48 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Welcome to FR. The Virtual Boot Camp for 'infidels' in waiting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

http://www.is.northropgrumman.com/systems/nucasx47b.html


4 posted on 08/06/2007 1:34:39 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Welcome to FR. The Virtual Boot Camp for 'infidels' in waiting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Looks like a Cylon fighter.


5 posted on 08/06/2007 1:36:48 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Fred Thompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

YA, but can it say, “I’ll be back”?


6 posted on 08/06/2007 1:40:01 PM PDT by 11th Commandment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Didn’t the Marine Corps try out an essentially “pilotless plane” in the Harrier...???

Maybe they had so many ejection over the years that’s just the way it seems...


7 posted on 08/06/2007 1:45:19 PM PDT by Bean Counter (Stout Hearts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkT
I’m sure they will be quick to claim it’s their doing at every success and it’s Bush’s fault, a quagmire, miserable failure, Vietnam, story when there is negative news. They’re Democrats, don’t expect less.

Just remember, when the major ground campaigned finished after 21 days of combat Newsweek proclaimed this was only possible because of “Clinton's Army.” Everything following is Bush’s fault!

8 posted on 08/06/2007 2:09:41 PM PDT by Red6 (Come and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Title should be Navy pisses away $635.8 million plus 1 billion in over runs. The air force has already developed a plane, why not use it instead of more development money thrown away.
9 posted on 08/06/2007 2:16:32 PM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Oh, this is great. Now we’ll get to listen to artifical intelligences bragging about how hard it is to land on a carrier.

Then again, that will be a step up, compared to what we have to listen to today.

//running//


10 posted on 08/06/2007 2:16:59 PM PDT by Tennessee_Bob ("Those who "abjure" violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I’m sure they’ll just dust-off their ill-fated A-12 and sell it...pilotless...to the rustpickers as something new and different.


11 posted on 08/06/2007 2:21:05 PM PDT by paddles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

ping


12 posted on 08/06/2007 2:24:05 PM PDT by Vroomfondel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; Bean Counter; investigateworld; ...
SONOBUOY PING!

Thanks for the ping, Vroom.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
This is a medium volume pinglist.

13 posted on 08/06/2007 2:40:12 PM PDT by magslinger (Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors. And miss. R.A.Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
The article makes its sound like a global hawk, but it's powered by an F100-220, so basically it is an unmanned, stealth, carrier capable F-16.

I'm pretty sure I would not want to mess with one, especially being flown by a kid with 30,000 hours of video game experience.

14 posted on 08/06/2007 2:44:07 PM PDT by UNGN (I've been here since '98 but had nothing to say until now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

“Title should be Navy pisses away $635.8 million plus 1 billion in over runs. The air force has already developed a plane, why not use it instead of more development money thrown away.”

You could be correct about the Navy pissing away all that money but it won’t be because the AF has already developed a plane.

There have only been rare occasions where one aircraft could properly serve both the AF and Navy. The F-4, being one.


15 posted on 08/06/2007 2:55:47 PM PDT by ryan71 (You can hear it on the coconut telegraph...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I have this feeling that this project needs to be rushed...


16 posted on 08/06/2007 2:57:51 PM PDT by mcshot (Liberals and RINOs spend our money foolishly and represent but themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

sweet. unmanned aircraft could take off and land on shorter runways. This could make for smaller aircraft carriers. It will certainly change aircraft carriers in some way.


17 posted on 08/06/2007 2:59:49 PM PDT by farfromhome (What does this button d.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UNGN
I think my daughter exceeds the 30,000 hour experience.
18 posted on 08/06/2007 3:02:50 PM PDT by mcshot (Liberals and RINOs spend our money foolishly and represent but themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

The aircraft has to have two engines and a sturdy landing gear to take the “controlled crash” of a carrier landing.


19 posted on 08/06/2007 3:08:59 PM PDT by rbosque ("To educate a person in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society." - Teddy Roosevelt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I think this is an effort for the Navy to remain relevant, to stay in the fight, to get their share of the budget.

The Super Hornet does not have very long legs.

If I’m the Navy and I see new aircraft like the Reaper UAV being deployed, I start to wonder if I’m becoming obsolete.

No, the Reaper is not a jet but does it need to be? It can carry 8? Hellfires, 2 500lb. GBU’s and fly for some 20 hours at 50K feet? The Navy can’t keep weapons over the battlefield like that.

I think the Navy is trying to go a step beyond the Predator and current piloted attack aircraft.

20 posted on 08/06/2007 3:10:41 PM PDT by ryan71 (You can hear it on the coconut telegraph...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson