Omakase

Amazon Search
«  
  »

Skynet Update

By lex, on September 30th, 2011

It now comes with a launch bar and hook, set to a house/trance theme.

And soon it will launch off electromagnetic catapults.

Share
September 30th, 2011 | Tags: , , | Category: Navy, Tech Lust

22 comments to Skynet Update

  • virgil xenophon
    September 30, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Waiting for Mike of the UAVs to weigh in here, but look at the size and complexity of the thing–a stealth F-111, ok, but only at night, otherwise it’s a sitting duck. And NOT cheap–OR “simple” i.e., we ain’t gonna be turning ‘em out off the assembly-line like sausages. So what are we going to use in the daytime for deep-strike penetration or Alpha Strikes? (Notice the size is big enough for a pilot, btw.) And it’s not like we’re looking at some Mach 6 turn-on-a-dime-without-pilot-limitations-air-to-air-capability here, right, sportsfans? That’s a lot of money for a niche capability. And lets not forget what happens when the jamming starts and the PLAN knocks out all our comm satellites. Color me unimpressed..

    We’d get a lot more bang for the buck if we did up a bunch of Bongos and resurrected the old Martin P6M SkyMaster loaded down with long-range AGMs in an “arsenal-ship” configuration for first-strike deep penetration. Cheaper, more flexible and can cover more tgts–night OR day.

    • virgil xenophon
      September 30, 2011 at 11:04 am

      (PS: Yes, I know I’m channeling Dale Brown, but, hey..)

    • Edward
      September 30, 2011 at 11:58 am

      VX,

      These are the UAV equivalent of WWI Sopwith Camels. Who would have thought at that time that they would engendered F22s? As AI becomes smarter and more compact and hands-off, their descendents are going to become truly scary opponents, launched from small ships rather than floating cities. Think possible hypersonic killers that can take the stress of 30Gs in a turn.

      The 22nd century (if we make it to there) is going to be something out of science fiction.

      In the closer time frame, take a look at this article and worry about the workers in the near future:
      http://www.slate.com/id/2304445/
      It is rapidly becoming a different world.

      • Mike M. (of the UAVs)
        September 30, 2011 at 2:26 pm

        Edward, the problem is that taking the man out of the cockpit (and parking him on the ground with a very expensive control station) does not give you an exemption to the laws of aerodynamics.

        Modern TACAIR performance is NOT limited by the pilot, but by the ability of the wing to generate lift, the ability of the engine to overcome the drag induced by that lift, and by the ability of the structure to handle the loads while remaining lightweight enough to allow an adequate payload of fuel, weapons, and sensors. An F/A-18E is good for 7.5g. An Unlimited aerobatic pilot can do 11g – without a G-suit. Show me an airplane that can do 12+ Gs while carrying a significant warload, and you might be able to start the argument.

        The biggest problem with unmanned aviation is that people unfamiliar with the technology oversell it – and taint the entire field. Missile technology saw the same sort of thing in the late ’50s and early ’60s, and suffered from it for decades.

    • Mike M. (of the UAVs)
      September 30, 2011 at 2:17 pm

      Yup. UCLASS (X-47 is a carrier suit/operations testbed) will be a good deep strike/recon asset, but the all singing/dancing replacement for manned aircraft it is NOT.

      The biggest advantage is that you can be callous about losses. View risk purely in cost-benefit terms. It’s a lot easier to sleep after sending a UAV on a high-risk mission.

      As I understand it, UCLASS will be as much of a recon asset as a strike asset. And there are uses for deep penetration recon systems, especially if they are LO.

  • SK1
    September 30, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    OK…They are showing you this on a “info-mercial” – Do you think this is the “newest” piece of kit we have – NO.

    Just like anything, this is for public consumption, so there is much, much more that is classified and NOT being shared.

    Technology is the one advantage we have over the feckelss b@stards who think they can hide out in the shitewilds…American-born radical Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki found that out today. Rot in hell f%cker.

    I am not interested in giving these new ” Top Guns” the ability to carry out autonomous missions but as long as we can put these platforms up in the air over the places the bad guys dwell, then I say rock on ! Keep sending the “special deliveries” to them where they hide with their minions.

  • NaCly Dog
    September 30, 2011 at 1:34 pm

    I for one welcome our new Droid overlords. As long as they are controlled via a fragile link and not autonomous fire & forget. These can bust open a few new threat axis on a potential foe.

  • Oldschool
    September 30, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    The final approach configuration – both spoilers/whatevers deflected up; sink rate controlled with power (?) .. perhaps slight pitching … VERY positive touchdown (Navy style, eh?). What say ye from on vulture’s row?

    • SpazSinbad
      September 30, 2011 at 3:40 pm

      Navy UCAS Achieves Milestone Aboard Eisenhower Patuxent River, MD – 5 July 2011
      http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm/fa/viewstory/story_ID/23048
      “The Navy is one step closer to demonstrating the first carrier-based recoveries and launches of an autonomous, low-observable relevant unmanned aircraft. Aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) July 2, a team from the Navy Unmanned Combat Air System program office (PMA-268) accomplished the historical first carrier touchdown of an F/A-18D surrogate aircraft emulating an unmanned vehicle using systems developed as part of the Unmanned Combat Air System Carrier Demonstration (UCAS-D) program….
      …Since a UAS cannot reliably respond to voice and visual signals, the LSO’s equipment communicates directly with the aircraft through the digital network via a highly reliable interface. Similar digital communication capability has been integrated with the ship’s primary flight control (“tower”) and Carrier Air Traffic Control Center (CATCC) facilities. Most importantly, the UAS operator’s equipment, installed in one of the carrier’s ready rooms, is integrated with the very same network.
      In addition to communications, an unmanned system requires highly precise and reliable navigation to operate around the ship. Today’s first arrested landing of the F/A-18D surrogate aircraft aboard the Eisenhower was enabled by integrating Precision Global Positioning System (PGPS) capabilities into the ship and the aircraft….”

      • SpazSinbad
        September 30, 2011 at 3:49 pm

        F/A-18 Shows UCAS-D Can Land On Carrier Jul 8, 2011 By Graham Warwick
        http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/asd/2011/07/08/05.xml&headline=F/A-18 Shows UCAS-D Can Land On Carrier
        “…The tests included 28 straight-in, or Case 1, instrument approaches where the unmanned system took over control 8 mi. behind the ship. The other 30 were visual, or Case 3, approaches where the system took over control as the F/A-18 passed the carrier on the downwind leg & then turned the aircraft on to its final approach, says Capt. Jaime Engdahl, Navy UCAS program manager. Flights were conducted using precision GPS & Tactical Targeting Network Technology high-speed data links to navigate relative to the carrier and send commands to the aircraft.
        Engdahl says the tests demonstrated the Navy’s distributed control concept, in which a mission operator on the carrier always has positive control of the aircraft, but the ship’s air traffic controller, the air boss in the tower and landing signals officer on the flight deck can send commands to the unmanned vehicle as they would to a manned aircraft. “You send basic commands to the aircraft and the system calculates all the paths itself and puts together a profile,” says Don Blottenberger, deputy program manager. “The carrier exercises oversight and override, everything else is automated….”

        • Spencer
          September 30, 2011 at 3:55 pm

          I wonder how the “passenger” felt during the approach and if he kept a finger or two on or very near the yellow and black handle….

          “The tests included 28 straight-in, or Case 1, instrument approaches where the unmanned system took over control 8 mi. behind the ship.
          The other 30 were visual, or Case 3, approaches where the system took over control as the F/A-18 passed the carrier on the downwind leg and then turned the aircraft on to its final approach”

          Pretty scar if you ask me.

        • SpazSinbad
          September 30, 2011 at 3:56 pm

          Navy One Step Closer To UAV Carrier Ops July 7th, 2011
          http://defensetech.org/2011/07/07/navy-one-step-closer-to-uav-carrier-ops/
          “…this jet simply received a command from the carrier’s air traffic control to enter the landing pattern and execute the landing all on its own; the same way a piloted jet would. “Once he’s on his approach, we actually take control of the aircraft via the systems we have installed as part of the demo and actually the aircraft is controlled by flight [rules] we put in place, all the way down to trap,” said Don Blottenberger, Navy UCAS-D Dep. Principal Program Manager during a phone call with reporters this morning. “There is no remote control of the aircraft, there is no pilot control of the aircraft; we’ve given it instructions and it executes those instruct-ions.” Just to make it clear, Blottenberger added: “There is no remote control, meaning there is no joystick, there’s no one that’s flying this aircraft from the carrier, we give it commands via the network we have in place… tying in with existing carrier systems & then the aircraft executes those commands.”

          The system, which uses precision-GPS navigation data transmitted over Rockwell Collins’ Tactical Targeting Network Technology (which I thought was defunct), allows the air traffic controllers, air boss and landing signals officer to tell the plane to enter the approach and perform all the necessary adjustments in heading, altitude and speed necessary to perform a trap. In the final phase of the approach, the LSO can even order the jet to wave off using his terminal that has been modified to communicate with an unmanned jet, according to NAVAIR officials. According to the Hornet’s pilot, Lt. Jeremy DeBons, the landing felt no different from when an F/A-18 lands using the Automated Carrier Landing System, although. Still, he kept his “hands very close” to the controls during the ‘hands-off’ landings….”

  • Busbob
    September 30, 2011 at 2:23 pm

    The side number got me. NG 501. Flew NG 501 many times, but it was an A6 then. Kind of an odd thing, looking at the future without a crew. The dang thing even has the approach attitude of an A6 and the outboard speed brakes make it look more like an ugly.
    Sigh. There goes the neighborhood…..

  • Byron
    September 30, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    I guess this is the question to ask: Lex, if you found one of these tooling around in your oparea and it was flagged as a bad guy, would it be a furball or meat on the table?

    And yes, it’s a rhetorical question :)

  • Spencer
    September 30, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    “Northrup Grumman”

    “The leader in unmanned systems”

    Hmmmm. Really?

  • MadMarine
    October 1, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    Is EMCON just a cold-war nostalgia thing now? I’m guessing the systems required to let an autonomous a/c operate near a carrier are broadcast, and without them, pilots can still land but UAVs can’t? Is that correct? So to get autonomous air ops we have to live with being easily DFed? Is that worth it?

    • mojo
      October 2, 2011 at 2:41 pm

      Well, since they’re remotely operated anyway, I’d sit the pilot ashore and control via sat link, with the carrier being just a launch/recovery point. No comm between carrier and vehicle needed, or route over the sat link.

      • MadMarine
        October 2, 2011 at 2:59 pm

        The article stated its not remotely piloted, but autonomous. Hence my question. It would seem there is more required than just a TACAN beacon to get an autonomous aircraft “situated” around the carrier, and the end goal is to have multiple autonomous craft conducting flight ops from the carrier – that seems like a lot of supporting RF energy that is simply not required for human-piloted aircraft.

  • Navig8r
    October 2, 2011 at 11:15 am

    I saw a couple deadload EMALS launches, and talked to a couple of F-18 pilots who had done manned launches from the LBTS in Lakehurst. Having only done cats in the back of a COD I have no frame of reference, but they tell me it starts slower than a steam cat and finishes faster. Result is same flying speed with less whiplash.
eXTReMe Tracker

View My Stats