Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

UCLASS the grey elephant in the room

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Astr0
 


It's not a PSC-3, it's an SM-3 with an AMRAAM seeker.

China has the ballistic missile designed to hit carriers well off shore, so the focus on ABM technology makes sense.




posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Astr0
 


It's not a PSC-3, it's an SM-3 with an AMRAAM seeker.

China has the ballistic missile designed to hit carriers well off shore, so the focus on ABM technology makes sense.


well, I still think along the lines of 'the USA has an urgent need and cannot wait long so are pressing to get any unit they can off the carriers to perform over the horizon sensor duties'.

Time will tell. Oh and there was that little snippet of the USN needing an urgent electronic warfare need fuffilled ASAP too.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
And the truth comes out. The White House (although they deny it), and JROC wanted a platform that could hunt terrorists in a permissive environment without having to rely on basing permissions.


Those missions—currently flown by Air Force MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)—focus on tracking and eliminating so-called “high value” terrorism targets as part of the United States’ ongoing antiterrorism campaign, responsible for the deaths of several senior terrorist leaders.

But the ability for the United States to fly those missions is contingent on permission from foreign governments.

“Operating from a host country gives them the ability to put whatever restrictions they want on your operations. I’m talking about policy restrictions that they want you to follow,” retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Charles Dunlap, told USNI News. “In terms of policy there are a lot fewer restrictions from a seabase.”

Several sources told USNI News the White House was keen on continuing to fly counterterrorism missions without the need for foreign basing—including using carriers.

Winnefeld spokeswoman Air Force Lt. Col. Catie Hauge told USNI News the White House had no input into the UCLASS requirement and White House national security staff spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden declined to comment.

news.usni.org...



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
news.usni.org...


Work said he disagrees with the focus on counterterrorism. “The carrier is a $10 billion asset with a $6 billion air wing,” he said. “I don’t see you plopping that off the coast of Africa reaching out and trying to find a high value [terrorist] target.”


Then


The Navy anticipates the maximum $150 million cost of the orbit will buy at least two airframes.
The change in direction also muted the initial goal to have UCLASS integrated into the air wing as an equal combatant.

The current plan for UCLASS is to have the aircraft fly from the carrier during the hours the manned air wing isn’t flying


Northrop, after all that work and research must be unholy pissed right now. The USN is back to 1950s attack radius distances, which frankly, is laughable.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by astr0
 


Oh, I can think of a couple that are probably losing it right now. They've pretty much said they want the Avenger with this change, and told the others to piss off.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Zaphod58
reply to post by astr0
 


Oh, I can think of a couple that are probably losing it right now. They've pretty much said they want the Avenger with this change, and told the others to piss off.


Un'freaking'believable.

I know the Avenger had a rush job for Afghanistan

www.wired.com...

It sounds like some one has a new toy and the capabilities are a bit more impressive than we are led to believe on this one. Time will tell, but boy oh boy, the X-47B team must seriously be tempted to shred every damn piece of info that's not USN / DoD property and say 'wowser, what an accident!



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by astr0
 


To be fair, the X-47 was always planned on being a tech demonstrator. But the SeaGhost, and the official NG entry (which was never named) were both going to go big on stealth, and fifth gen technologies. Boeing and GA were planning on payload and loiter time, and less stealth.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
www.aviationweek.com.../article-xml/asd_08_16_2013_p01-01-607382.xml

I still have this thought rattling around my noggin - Ballistic Missile defence.



“We still have a little ways to go to get to 65,000 feet,” Matlock said of the UAV options. The Global Hawk, designed to fly higher than the Reaper, typically orbits under 60,000 ft. when fully loaded. It has not yet been used to carry such a payload or operate in this application in tests, he acknowledged.


...then Avenger. Has a 50 Thousand ceiling. More efficient engine and / or wing modification and you are looking at a platform that could be protecting the USN fleet from the Chinese ASBM threat.
edit on 30-8-2013 by astr0 because: Height added






top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join