Posted on 07/10/2013 3:15:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Today, off the coast of Virginia on the USS George H.W. Bush, the U.S. Navy successfully landed an X-47B drone aboard an aircraft carrier for the first time.
"It isn't very often you get a glimpse of the future," Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus said in an official Navy release.
The landing of the fighter jet-sized drone, which is larger than the Predator drones common in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen, represents a watershed moment in the wielding of unmanned aerial vehicles.
"The operational unmanned aircraft soon to be developed have the opportunity to radically change the way presence and combat power are delivered from our aircraft carriers," Mabus added.
Drones are an incredible weapon because of their ability to project power. Without ever actually putting a person in peril, the U.S. military has expanded its kinetic and reconnaissance reach to previously unseen limits....
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Apparently the author is not familiar with Global Hawk
Interestingly, I just saw on the local news that an F4 Phantom Drone had to be purposely destroyed over the Gulf of Mexico today.
I guess that is a different kind of drone tho.
What makes you say that. The Global Hawk is an ISR platform and doesn't land on carriers.
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
X-47B Completes First-Ever Carrier-Based Arrested Landing
US Navy | 7/10/13 | NA
Posted on 07/10/2013 11:12:31 AM PDT by Daus
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3041258/posts
Today’s Drone Test Changes Everything About Unmanned Aerial Warfare (Launched from Drone Carrier USS Drone)
Today, off the coast of Virginia on the USS Drone, the U.S. Navy successfully landed an X-47B drone aboard a drone aircraft carrier for the first time.
It`s the first time no humans were on board a receiving warship for a humanless aircraft. Lunch will be served for guests on the flight deck at 0900 by the robot crew.
Probably a drone-carrier could be a much smaller ship.
Or a very large number of drones could be carrier on an existing carrier.
Global Hawk has been mothballed.
Eventually, somebody is going to figure out how to build extremely cheap drones, for about the cost of a small car.
Even if they cost $1 million each, 150 can be made for the same price as a single F-22 Raptor. If $500,000 each, 300 aircraft. If with mass production, the price can be reduced to just $100,000, 1,500 cheap, expendable drones.
The Russians figured out how to avoid damage to their electronics from radiation or electronic countermeasures by using tubes instead of integrated circuits. Most of the mission would still be flown with a cheap, off the shelf computer, and the other stuff would sit idle unless the computer was knocked out.
Such an air armada would be incredibly hard to defeat and would severely damage their enemies capabilities.
1,500 drones, each equipped with a 500 pound iron bomb could cause an impressive amount of destruction, with “brute force” penetration of defenses, and the assumption of 100% losses. They could be fired from an inexpensive and expendable cargo ship, from simple wooden launch ramps, etc.
the next step is aerial combat. with the right programming, a drone can react instantaneously to any manned aircraft and launch air to air missles accordingly.
the days of manned fighter jets are numbered.
They're going to need a lot of them to throw at the Chinese missiles.
We already did - a cheap, expendable, armed drone is a cruise missile.
Close, but still $1.3m a pop, with the current model. What I imagine is a beer-can body, a cheap engine and fuel tank, with literal wire guidance, an integrated tube back up brain and a plug in off the shelf computer brain. Optimally, about $50k a production unit.
The first attack is a coordinated launch of about 200 drones. Maybe four F-16s are scrambled when the slow moving air armada is detected. The F-16s hit a bunch with their AESA radar, to fry their electronics, which does, but then their tube backup takes over for the last leg to target.
Each F-16 can engage six targets, so scratch 24 drones, assuming all hits. The F-16s are empty and have no choice but to head home. This leaves 176 flying 500 pound bombs en route to target. SAM batteries take out maybe 76, leaving 100 to hit near their targets.
The second salvo has 400 drones, attacking degraded enemy defenses. This still leaves hundreds of drones in reserve.
If the price was down to $50k each, 2400 more drones, all for the cost of a single F-22 Raptor.
Industry has field-tested those too - pitched by Lockheed to the USN after USAF backed away but wasn’t purchased. Check out the LOCAAS.
I see the problems there. The first is that its warhead was too small at 17 lbs, designed to be an antitank, equipment and personnel weapon, rather than a stationary target attack weapon. Too specialized.
By comparison, the V-1 Buzz Bomb carried close to a 2,000 lb bomb.
In modern terms, the gliding Small Diameter Bomb performs more a role of what I am talking about, carrying a 500 lb bomb, but its heavy bomber delivery system is way beyond the budget of most nations who would want it.
So what I am describing is a ground launched SDB, with some primitive guidance, most of them carrying 500 lb bombs, a larger class carrying 1000 lb bombs, and peaking out with some carrying a 2000 lb bomb.
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.