It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Think tank calls for stealthy carrier based UCAV

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
In the "No Kidding" release of the year, the think tank Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments has released a white paper calling for a carrier based strike UAV, potentially capable of flying up to 2,000 miles, in a single role. They envision carrier groups consisting of 2 carriers, flying up to 110 aircraft, including the envisioned UAV,and a manned platform optimized for the air to air mission.

This would be in addition to the CBARS platform the Navy plans to acquire, but unlike that aircraft, the new platform wouldn't be capable of being anything but a strike platform. The Center says in the paper that current carrier groups would be inadequate by 2030 without fairly significant changes.

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

What would they use as the carrier?

A modified Wasp class?



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: grey580

No, the Ford and Nimitz classes. There will be a mixed air wing, using manned and unmanned.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   
I just pictured a new class of small carriers with a slot in the bow and stealth UAV's launching out of the slot, and landings taking place simultaneously on the flight deck.
I know it is all wrong, but that is what popped in my ..... carrier ops in the future.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

It would cost too much. Since they're building the Ford anyway, it's easier to change the air wing rather than develop a new class of ship.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Talking of manned aircraft from any type of a carrier seems like old WWII thinking to me. I don't see much success in ship-based aircraft doing significant damage to scattered land facilities nor do I see those aircraft being sent to destroy another carrier and aircraft as in WWII.

How can ships of war be a major factor in WWIII when relatively cheap missiles falling out of the sky at thousands of miles per hour will rule the day? Such, the Navy will love the idea of new carriers, but that little brat in North Korea would love to lob a missile or two at such an expensive target.

My concerns would apply to either the situation of a nuclear war or conventional weapons. Who can ships survive attacks from space whether from space-based weapon platforms or lobbed missiles from a continent away?



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
How much to dustoff and uparm the X47b program again?



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Not exactly stretching the bounds of imagination, are they? These outfits actually make money doing this?? How strange and wondrous is free enterprise.

Folks in and out of the military have been envisioning this for at least two decades--probably longer. They even did research on this back in the late 50's, I'm almost certain I read something about this sort of thing being tested then...

Might be thinking of the US versions of the German V1's--Regulus, I think it was called...



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

These ships are not exactly helpless to defend themselves, y'know...

Carrier battle groups are more than just a carrier, lots more. More than one of those ships can burn down a small country, not to mention what the carrier can do.

Don't be too hasty sounding the death knell of the aircraft carrier just yet.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

An American CSG in its most powerful configuration can still be reasonably called the most powerful force ever put forth on the earth.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Kinetic missiles raining down at several thousand of miles per hour could only be stopped by very strong and quick lasers, nothing less. And if not direct strikes to metal, air blast with nukes could take out a whole battle group. It would be like shooting fish in a barrel if you are the one with the gun.
edit on 1-3-2017 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Zaphod58

Not exactly stretching the bounds of imagination, are they? These outfits actually make money doing this?? How strange and wondrous is free enterprise.

Folks in and out of the military have been envisioning this for at least two decades--probably longer. They even did research on this back in the late 50's, I'm almost certain I read something about this sort of thing being tested then...

Might be thinking of the US versions of the German V1's--Regulus, I think it was called...


Yep call me when this is finishedyoutu.be...

youtu.be...



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

Yep! Movies and misinformation are one thing, then reality bits.

The only thing to be left safe in the sea will be subs that run fast, deep and stealthy.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Nothing to add other then 'duh'.

I should be opening a think tank with the great ideas coming out of the ones around now



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 06:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: 727Sky

Yep! Movies and misinformation are one thing, then reality bits.

The only thing to be left safe in the sea will be subs that run fast, deep and stealthy.


Yep in a real shooten tooten nuclear war a fast attack sub might be the safest place... Let us hope we do not live to see this ever happen..



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

I told a buddy of mine about it and he came up with a million dollar idea.

"You know what the Air Force needs? Some sort of small UCAV with a long loiter time, that could circle around over the battlefield - like a kind of... predator?"



I told him the check was in the mail.



posted on Mar, 1 2017 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

True. Now then, who has these wondrous weapons?

In reality, I mean...

The US might have something like this hidden deep down in a black project somewhere... I doubt anyone else does.

Lobbing missiles from a continent away, you said earlier... Lots of time to track. Lots of time to shoot 'em down. You actually think that CBG isn't going to be shooting back?? Defending themselves??

Space based weapons? Which country, other than the US, possibly Russia back in the Soviet days, has both the technological ability, and the industrial wherewithal, not to mention the launch capability to put something of this sort into orbit? China and India could, maybe, do it. But these weapons platforms are going to be fairly large

Not to mention, orbits are extremely predictable and said space-based weapons platform is rather an easy target...not as easy as they once were, but still fairly easy. I would venture to guess that the US Navy has the means at hand to reach out and touch targets, even in orbit, in fact they've been testing such weapons for the better part of the last thirty years.

No, CBG's are hardly sitting ducks.




top topics



 
4

log in

join