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.

 

X-47B. Northrops big bad beast! Amazing piccies!

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by st3ve_o
looking wise, it looks like a carbon-copy of what the 'Neuron' program is going to look like...

I don't want to come across as hypersensitive or anything but the X-47 has been around far longer than the Neuron, it would therefore seem that the Neuron is a carbon copy of the X-47.




posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Canada_EH
I'm also wondering what type of control system would be used for the N-UCAS? Like would you have the swarm idead with a queen ie a fighter jet/awacs controlling the swarm or would you have a controller say on the ship for each plane?


Generally, non-fully-autonomous UAVs have 1 op per every 4-6 vehicles in the air. Autonomous systems will call you when it's time to make a decision (do I pull the trigger or not) - or you can instruct the autonomous vehicle on new coordinates while it is in flight.

Control pathway options include:
fiber > line of sight > bird
fiber > sat > line of sight > bird
fiber > sat > bird
direct sat > bird
direct RF > bird
airborne RF > sat ground station > bird
airborne sat > bird
airborne line of sight > bird

there are others, but you get the idea...

Operators can also hand off control of a UAV from one station to another.
For instance an Op at Nellis or Creech may be in control of a UAV over Iraq, (fiber to Turkey then sat to bird) but if it is needed in a hot zone then a ground station in Iraq may get the hand off until the dirty deed is done and then the UAV is handed back to the original Op for baby sitting or calling it home.

Regarding "swarming" ucav's being controlled from the air by a weapons officer on a fighter jet or AWACs type aircraft, is certainly something that is being explored. Again however, autonomy keeps the op from being a militarized RC aircraft hobbyist with his/her hand on a virtual joystick 100% of the time. The UCAV flies itself, the op just gives it occassional instructions.

[edit on 7-28-2006 by intelgurl]


GSA

posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   
combine this UCAV with the RATTLRS strike missile from lockheed ( mach 4 capable missile system for fast precision long range strikes) and you have a US navy that is looking to be extremely potent in its force projection with out even sending a man into a war zone.

Read here for more lockheed goodness and beauty! The missile looks like a ramped and vamped D-21 drone from the blackbird era!

Link is here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And this explain much more about RATTLRS total sweetness!

www.popularmechanics.com...



posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 04:21 AM
link   
Does anyone have an answer to the question I asked earlier ... Why would a northrop plane be being RCS tested at a Lockheed facility?


GSA

posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Thats a very very good question GFAD.

There seems to be no answer to that, but I have a theory, and it is just wild speculation on my part.

The project has gone Navy, so maybe they have a preference to where it is tested for security reasons maybe? Lockheeds testing ground looks very able to hide such a huge aircraft from sight ie the sunken roads, completely covered radar test areas ect ect... So maybe (IMHO) its all down to how well it can be hidden and secured? Or possibly northrop don't have a big enough or strong enough radar testing rig.


GSA

posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 07:30 AM
link   
GFAD,
heres your answer to your question. Lockheed are working with northrop on the design. They are 'team mates along with Pratt and Whitney'.

Here, read this press release, its all in there for you.


www.irconnect.com...

[edit on 29/7/06 by GSA]



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:15 AM
link   
The X-47 is a beutiful design! I think it would be idea for the tactical strike mission. Shape wise it has a lot in common with earily B-2 concepts that never left the drawing board (that we know of).

Tim



posted on Aug, 5 2006 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by intelgurl


Originally posted by Catalytic
I have an open mind on advanced propulsion systems on the B2 but to be honest, I think it's probably just wishful thinking. Intelgurl has done some excellent threads on 'spooky' B2 electro dynamic propulsion and now she works for Northrop on UAV's!!!!, maybe she knows... but unfortunately she wouldn't be able to say anything even if she did lol.

The B2 does not use electrogravitics or electro-aerodynamics. I know I have participated in a research thread that supports that claim but I was incorrect in my assumptions and humbly acknowledge that now - and "no" this is not an attempt at deception or misinformation.


I live with the durn things - they are jet engines, alright. Unless they have some cool 'voodoo' special effects mastering (which, I guess anything is possible if you REALLY want to beleive).

Although, there was one day, back in 2001, I beleive (6th grade for me, about late winter or early spring) - it was a very thickly overcast day. I was outside, walking to the car so that my dad could drive me to school, when I just happened to turn around for reasons yet unknown. I've always had a 'sixth sense' when it comes to moving objects in my proximity. I can sense when anything is moving around me. Perhaps it's some subconscious reaction to a non-audible frequency - or an instinctive reaction to sound prior to my mind's perception.... but either way - it's there in some form (maybe it's normal - I have no idea). Anyway - I catch, in the center of my vision (not corner), a 'triangle' (from what I could see of it below the cloud cover) shoots back up into the cloud cover. There wasn't much perceptable air movement - nor any sound.

It was odd - and convincing enough that I know I saw SOMETHING. It would fit the profile of the left wing of a B-2. But the fact that there was no noise or perceptable disturbance in the air leads more credibility to an illusion. I would think there are better places to test 'stealth mode' of the B-2 (assuming it's got some cool little gadgets on it of some sort) than over Ohio street in Sedalia, Missouri...... pretty much downtown...... but people here don't pay much attention to it other than it's there and doesn't look like a normal plane. I can analyze it into the ground... and it still gets nowhere.

Lockheed and Northrop working together....... this should be interesting.....

The concept of the X-47 being Navy is rather interesting. The deep strike missions would probably be much more suited to a computer. White-knuckled runs through the old valley, trying to avoid that pesky tracking radar are quite exciting (both in a good and bad way) - but in the case of a computer - it doesn't have to return home to a family through a net of hostile radars and potential anti-air threats.

However, this would seem to bring up questions regarding the F/B-23 and the validity of its rumors (unless something has changed and I'm not aware of it). Although, nothing says that the interim bomber would even be considered for naval operations due to weight and size.

Although history shows that the Airforce is a fan of Lockheed - and why not get the matching set of raptors?



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Catalytic
Sure is a big beautfiul beast.

I'm guessing this is a full size mock up for RCS measurements??
If not... where is the engine exhaust? Has Northrop further developed the mythical electro-dynamic system which may be used on the B2. those leading edges look very B2-ish and you can almost see a conductive copper track around the underside if the aircraft!!! lol




no engine exhaust? it must be northrops newest stealth glider, hope there are some good thermals on the battlefield.



posted on Oct, 19 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: SabreOne
And now, 10 years later, a full demonstration of the X47B Navy UCAV in action! Takeoff from a carrier, flight, refueling in flight, and landing.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join