Posted on 07/15/2007 11:32:19 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
I would even say that the human pilot was a weak spot in the last generation of fighters. I think the F-16 had limits in its computerized flight controls to protect the pilot instead of protecting the airframe. I don't know about the F-22, but I wouldn't be surprised if it has the same problem.
That’s the reaper,or the predator? It looks like the predator.
The is most likely a testbed platform. Yes it will need friends around to keep enemy aircraft away, but the Reaper has the ability to make life unpleasant for the enemy:
Capable of carrying maximum internal payload of 800 lbs, it will carry more advanced sensors at weight almost twice as the MQ-1. Furthermore, The Reaper can carry much more external stores, up to 3,000 pounds total – 1,500 on each of its two inboard weapons stations, or 500-600 lb. on the two middle stations and 150-200 lbs. on the outboard stations. In total, the aircraft can carry up to 14 Hellfire missiles, compared with two carried on the Predator. The Reaper can stay airborne for up to 14 hours fully loaded.Sounds like a nice piece of equipment to use to maintain continuous Combat Air Patrol around Fleet elements in case the Iranians try a swarm attack with a horde of small, missile-equipped boats
I wonder how many of these little Reapers a carrier can hold in one of their storage closets...
Reaper is the name given to the Predator B. Upgraded, more weapons-carry ability
That's because it's a propeller-driven plane
There's a jet-powered Predator C in the works, rollout sometime next year, that will probably satisfy your need for speed
I like how the development is happening here. Rather than taking 20 years to design it, they're making incremental improvements on a short development cycle.
They took the Predator A, originally developed purely as a recon drone, and put a couple of missiles on it. That worked out well, so they took the lessons learned and made the Predator B with better sensors and more weapons capacity. They will take the lessons learned from Predator B over the next year, and install the sensor and targeting systems into a faster chassis, the Predator C
I wonder what the endurance and range is for a predator B not carrying any weapons, but carrying external fuel tanks? It could make for a long distance picture-taker. It’s a shame they can’t get the speed up a little more...like 500MPH. It seems to me with the engine in the tail like that, the predator would be the ideal configuration for a ducted fan. I’m thinking counter rotating 7 blade props...shrouded in a duct.
Maybe that doesn’t make any sense with a turbine engine though...might as well upgrade to a turbofan.
Very impressive system. However, how come it’s a turboprop, which limits its performance? Why didn’t the builders opt for a pure jet?
Jets are overkill for recon/UAV ops.
You want it to be able to patrol for a long period of time;
these are built for loitering, not speed.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/systems/predator.htm
“Predator is a long-dwell UAV operating in excess of 24 hours. That’s equivalent to flying 400 nautical miles, hanging out for over 14 hours, and then flying home the other 400 nautical miles.”
What I am wondering about is why they dont have more of a ‘flying wing’ shape? you dont need a real fuselage on this, unless it is packed with fuel and/or armaments. Also it could be made incredibly light (again, unless loaded with bombs), so that it could stay up for literally days if designed right.
This indicates different predator versions, some with jets, some with long dwell-time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MQ-9_Reaper
The future will be a combination fleet of light, very long dwell UAVs for recon that are slow, plus attack UAVs that are bigger, faster and ready to quickly strike.
You could possibly have a large “carrier drone” that carries the much smaller drones to a destination/area and lets them all out.
these will work from 20,000 feet or more, but cannot stand up to a real air force.
Manned aircraft will be needed to stand up to enemy air forces.
A look at the future:
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002598.html
Build your own predator:
http://www.hobby-lobby.com/predator.htm
It does. I've been "into" the functional diagrams of the F-16s flight control system, in order to be able to simulate the overall aircraft control loop. It was the old analog one from the F-16A/B, but the digital was does the same, AFAIK.
It's not all that little. 36 feet long, 12.5 feet high with a 66 foot wingspan. Fairly light though, 10,500 lbs max TOW.
Compare to F/A-18E at:
Wing span over missiles 44.7 feet (13.62 m)
Width wings folded 30.5 feet (9.3 m)
Length overall 60 feet (18.31 m)
Height overall 16 feet (4.88 m)
Range most likely, remember it's really a Predator B, originally designed as a recon bird, not a shooter. With that long thin wing, and the more efficient turboprop, it can stay up a long time.
It's a trade-off between speed and endurance. Make it faster and it can't stay aloft as long.
In it's current configuration, it's an ideal ground support platform. It can patrol convoy routes and keep watch for IED emplacers. It can orbit the area where we have patrols and be immediately ready to drop a JDAM on any terrorist bunker the patrol encounters.
From Air Force Magazine
The Reaper can carry as much as 3,000 pounds of external payload. That payload typically is depicted as eight Hellfires, two 500-pound Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and two Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. However, the aircraft can also carry laser guided bombs and other types of ordnance.At present, USAF officials expect eventually to fit the Reaper with the 250-pound-class Small Diameter Bomb, giving it ability to hit 16 targets with precision on one mission. That is about where the B-2 bomber was during Operation Allied Force in 1999.
Each Reaper costs about $7 million, far less than the F-16, which cost more than $30 million each. However, the low cost of the Reaper isn’t the big attraction for the Air Force, Pennington said. The attraction is its persistence.
“An F-16 in the target area, assuming you have to penetrate, is going to be [there] five to 10 minutes, and then it’s going to leave,” explained Pennington, who added that, in the close air support mission, an F-16 could orbit the battlefield for perhaps 30 minutes before having to leave to refuel. The Reaper, though, could hang around above the target area for many hours, either in the “CAS stack” or “physically overhead if you think you know where the bad guys are.” The Reaper could act as a persistent forward air controller for other airplanes, too.
“When the bad guy shows up—in a vehicle, a person, or a tank—you take care of him, or ... act as an air FAC” and call in other strikers, Pennington said.
Too bad they won’t consider using these again Islamburg and the other al-Qaeda training camps in the US of A.
;-)
.....Pilot training is also 1/10th the cost.....
The plane stilll has a pilot that needs training. There will still be training cost, even for a larger percent of virtual training.
The plane is not a robot, it is remote controlled.
Well, the “internet” poker players seem to do quite well in the poker tournaments. I guess the “game” skills from behind a computer screen is nothing to scoff at.
Sorry, you are tilting up the wrong windmill... 
I never said the plane was one. Hoplite, by stretching things mightly, could be said to have imply that in his post #34. Maybe you need to tilt at his windmill.
Heaven knows... 
he could use the attention!
Interesting idea. It's what Churchill and the Brits did in Iraq in the 20s. They used the fledgling RAF to extend their control over wide areas of the country without sending out more than limited cavalry and armored car patrols. Events are given a good review in David Fromkin's book "A Peace to End All Peace".
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.