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.

 

UCAV's Fly in Formation for the first time

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 08:52 PM
link   
According to AWST (August 9th) Boeing recently flew 2 X-45A UCAVS in tandem for about 40 minutes in a ramp up to start trying coordinated attacks. The vehicles communicated through data links to maintain thier loose formation and even completed a coordinated turn. The X-45 is competing aginsts the X-47.

Both will have a celing of 40,000 feet and carry 4500 lbs in internal bays and have a range of 3500 miles.

These represent the future for the armed forces. The stealth UCAVS will be able to perform SEAD and other high risk missions as spare our manned planes any unnessesary risk.




posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   
I Like Both the X-47B and the X-45C. So I don't care who wins, cause both designs are cool and we could definiatly use them on the war on terrorism.

BTW, I think I read that article and it said that both of them were controlled by a single person. That would really help out during a war with another country but I doubt it would mean anything for the war on terrorism.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
BTW, I think I read that article and it said that both of them were controlled by a single person. That would really help out during a war with another country but I doubt it would mean anything for the war on terrorism.


Yeah, but I think two would be the max unless you were a great multitasker. I agree the UCAV is not going to do much with the war on terrorism. However, that armed Predator in Yemen made an impression with its Hellfire. I think they found an axle and some brown stains.

These are open projects, you kind of have to wonder whats flying around that black in the UCAV realm.

Hey you probably know, who heads up the Skunk WOrks these days.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:01 AM
link   
''Both will have a celing of 40,000 feet and carry 4500 lbs in internal bays and have a range of 3500 miles''

Thats some impressive stats for a UAV. What type of bombs will they use 2 x2000lb bombs or more smaller ones?

Its cool that they have already flew in formation I wonder how the Data link works between them?



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
''Both will have a celing of 40,000 feet and carry 4500 lbs in internal bays and have a range of 3500 miles''

Thats some impressive stats for a UAV. What type of bombs will they use 2 x2000lb bombs or more smaller ones?

Its cool that they have already flew in formation I wonder how the Data link works between them?


Not that big. there looking at 250 and 500 pounders.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:29 AM
link   
I like Northop's plane it looks more sexy!



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
I like Northop's plane it looks more sexy!


I like Northrops versions better too they are indeed sexy
But I have to admit I am bias on the sudject as I have a family member who works there.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 12:57 AM
link   
I personally like the X-47 it looks futuristic like something out of star wars. If you have 10 of these UAVs flying in to do a stealth bombing mission in a well defended air space, you have 20 JDAM's and ten 500 pound bombs. That is some impressive firepower. You could eliminate a target or multiple targets without putting humans at risk.


[edit on 10-8-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I personally like the X-47 it looks futuristic like something out of star wars. If you have 10 of these UAVs flying in to do a stealth bombing mission in a well defended air space, you have 20 JDAM's and ten 500 pound bombs. That is some impressive firepower do you could eliminate a target or multiple targets without putting humans at risk.



Your assuming that they will be able to fit two 2,000 lb bomb into it, which is very very unlikely. They will use 250 lb'ers. maybe be modified later to hold a 500 lb'er.

and when you say that the X-47 looks futuristic, You must be referring to the A version and not the C version. Because there isn't much of a difference between the X-45C and the X-47B, except of couse the wings look a little different.

But if ya have to pick one I would go with Boeing's X-45C, Because it looks more streamlined, and not like they just slaped the wings on at the last minute.

[edit on 10-8-2004 by Murcielago]



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Your assuming that they will be able to fit two 2,000 lb bomb into it, which is very very unlikely. They will use 250 lb'ers. maybe be modified later to hold a 500 lb'er.



With rising concerns about access to distant landlocked theaters, J-UCAS increased the previous UCAV program objectives to now include a combat radius of 1,300 nautical miles with a 4,500 lb payload and the ability to loiter for two hours over a target 1,000 nautical miles from base. This will enable the vehicles to carry, for example, two 2,000-lb Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs).
www.compositesworld.com...


Nope it looks like the X-47a can carry 2 JDAMs after all.


and when you say that the X-47 looks futuristic, You must be referring to the A version and not the C version.


Yes I am referring to the X-47A Pegasus. The C version looks like the wings don't belong. But the X-47A is more stream line and better looking than the X-45 IMO.
Isnt she a beauty.




[edit on 10-8-2004 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   
its nice but the X-45C is better looking.

What would you rather have? two 2,000 lb, OR eight 250 lb bombs.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
its nice but the X-45C is better looking.
What would you rather have? two 2,000 lb, OR eight 250 lb bombs.


I agree with you on the looks of the X-45C...

Bomb choice would depend on the mission. If two Ucavs were flying, maybe on with the SDB loaded and one with the bunker busters. Maybe a third for SEAD?



posted on Aug, 11 2004 @ 10:25 PM
link   
agreed. the right tools are needed for the right job. but having one of these with a heap of 250s flying around an infantry platoon or company for support would be great. id like to see how they would be able to
co-ordante the attack of one of these things.
nice pics



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Die Trying
agreed. the right tools are needed for the right job. but having one of these with a heap of 250s flying around an infantry platoon or company for support would be great. id like to see how they would be able to
co-ordante the attack of one of these things.
nice pics


Thats a good idea actually. Have an organic force of Close support UCAVS attached to a an infantry brigade. Little Tiltrotor UAV's could provide intel, scouting, precision strike etc etc. for each unit. Coordinating all those aircraft and deconflicting them would be an issue though.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 12:38 AM
link   
That is a good idea of having some UCAV's to a infantry unit. They could fly ahead and if they spot something just use the hellfire real time. You don't have to call in an air strike and wait for it to come you can control your own air strike form the round.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Its cool that they have already flew in formation I wonder how the Data link works between them?


The article did not eloborate. But with one pilot controlling two, I wonder if tehy can dial in a separation idstance, and while in cruise, one will shadow the primary commands to another? Then when in attack formation the pilot switches back and forth as the attack progresses.

Better yet, a two seat F-22 with an escort or two. The backseater could say use one for SEAD, and the other for strike or defence. If a missile locked on, maybe the UCAV could alter its radar return tio attract the missile to it? The number of G's the UCAV could pull during evasive manuvers is pretty impressive.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Sure UCAV's can pull a lot of G's but the one limiting factor in UCAV's today is Speed. The fastest one I think is the Global Hawk around 500-600 MPH, in order to evade a missile UCAV's will have to become supersonic around mach 2. So far they haven't been able to make one go mach two, maybe its because of the size of the UCAV's the engine is not powerful enough.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 02:53 AM
link   
I'm sure they have supersonic UCAVS, but there still in the Black.



posted on Aug, 17 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Sure UCAV's can pull a lot of G's but the one limiting factor in UCAV's today is Speed. The fastest one I think is the Global Hawk around 500-600 MPH, in order to evade a missile UCAV's will have to become supersonic around mach 2. So far they haven't been able to make one go mach two, maybe its because of the size of the UCAV's the engine is not powerful enough.

A pilotless version of the F-16 was experimented with a few years back - so technically you are incorrect. Even Iraq was working on MiG's that were pilotless - and lets not forget the D-21 Recon drone that piggybacked on the SR-71. All these aircraft are supersonic.
(Pilotless = UAV)

[edit on 17-8-2004 by bios]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join