Empty F-16 jet tested by Boeing and US Air Force

reply to post by boymonkey74


Nope... it's all about dollars.. the cost of training a pilot is expensive just to take a chance he'll get killed.
plus the drones are equipped with Artificial Intelligence Programing that actually interfaces with the pilot to assure "no pilot error' missions. And no morals either.

reply to post by F4Driver


Then why do they need pilots in the first place if they have AI programming? And how have so many been lost to pilot error?

Zaphod58
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

Won't see it happen for a long time. Right now there is as much as a one second delay between the input, and the reaction by the airframe with UCAVs. That's deadly in air combat. The control system for these are fairly short ranged so they don't have the lag.

The lag is for satellite control. Ground control stations or even control from an airborne operator doesn't have the lag problem. That said, I doubt we will see F-16s in combat as drones.

Note the other problem with satellite control is the slewing of the dish as the plane is turned. That is a problem at Predator speeds!

For most of the wars in the sandbox, GCS did drone launch and recovery, then Creech or whatever base did operation via satellite. They now have self launching and landing Predators, so the GCS element may not be as critical in the future.

There is a lot of work these days on secure digital comms with low latency. They could be doing it in the DoD, but the big push is in financial services. As everything goes what they call "high frequency" in the financial world, latency is a real problem. There is an investigation going on regarding how someone got a 7ms advance notice on the Feds latest money supply decision.

Zaphod58
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

Won't see it happen for a long time. Right now there is as much as a one second delay between the input, and the reaction by the airframe with UCAVs. That's deadly in air combat. The control system for these are fairly short ranged so they don't have the lag.

Why I used eventually. Programs in R&D are striving to overcome many obstacles.

ANALOG-TO-INFORMATION (A-TO-I) LOOK THROUGH
MICRO PNT

Are two of the programs that can help overcome some of those hurdles. Wider bandwidth and a self-contained positioning chip will propel our remote capabilities into the stratosphere in my opinion. Now will we see air-to-air combat drones on the scale of a F-16 any time soon? Probably not, but we might see a roll out (I think that is why our Government was itching to get into Syria) of QF-16s on bombing runs.

If we control the skies, we can make that happen. Sending them into enemy airspace without close support from a ground-controller or even an airborne one, wouldn't be effective.

reply to post by ownbestenemy


The QF-16 has one mission in life, and that's to die. Like the QF-4, they only exist to allow live fire training against a realistic opponent. You won't ever see a QF-16 on a bombing run, anywhere.

Zaphod58
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

The QF-16 has one mission in life, and that's to die. Like the QF-4, they only exist to allow live fire training against a realistic opponent. You won't ever see a QF-16 on a bombing run, anywhere.

I am not really arguing that we will as I know what its mission is. So really the rest is speculation in part as I thought I was making clear. I threw in the last part because I wouldn't doubt a mission planner somewhere or somewhere wanting to see if it is effective.

Grimpachi
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

There was a thread on this a month ago. I think ZAP did it and the purpose of them will be for live fire exercises. They are target drones to be shot down. Not the other kind of drone. They are getting old and outdated that's all.

Wellll... hate to tell ya but most current UAV's can carry Air To Air Missiles. USAF already deploying mods to AWACS type aircraft that use their Radar to lock and launch from the UAV standoff. In the Future F-22 and F-35 Aircraft will be able to do the same thing. Drones out front while relying on the Advanced Radars on F-22 and F-35's at stand off range while drones in close. More than that but tired of typing =0.

reply to post by Xeven


No they can't. Even with an AWACS datalink they require a fire control radar and system. No UAV out there has an air-to-air FCS installed yet. The lag is too long for any kind of A2A system on a UAV.

reply to post by Xeven


What A2A systems do you think our UAVs are carrying? I think you are getting some misinformation regarding the capabilities of that UAV.

Wired.com -- Drones Suck At It (Air-to-Air)

There is always the problem of someone reading about an experimental device under test versus something that has been deployed. It wouldn't surprise me if they are working on ways to have a drone target an aircraft once it has been given the signal to engage. But it would probably target autonomously once told to do so. And I doubt any prop based drones will be able to engage a jet.

Matt Martin's book called "Predator" goes into how Predator drones target, what type of warheads they use on the Hellfires, etc. It is a pretty fast read. You can check out the comment section on Amazon. Some people wanted a manual on drone warfare, and some of the book is spent on his er um personal problems. Martin was a drone operator at Creech AFB. The bottom line though on drone is they are really only good for attaching poorly defended ground targets. Other wise, use them for ISR.

If you want less sanitized Predator action, the LA Times FOIAd a trascript of radio traffic for a drone/gunship attack on a family convoy in Afghanistan.
LA Times "data desk"

Zaphod58
reply to post by Xeven

 

No they can't. Even with an AWACS datalink they require a fire control radar and system. No UAV out there has an air-to-air FCS installed yet. The lag is too long for any kind of A2A system on a UAV.

The FC is on the AWACS. AWACS provides initial target information Semi active A2A Missile takes it from there only using AWACS for update if needed. It's out there trust me. It is currently what we call strap on mod. Meaning it works but is being tested and the mod is basically strapped in the AWACS.

Drone does not need anything more than a launch signal.

reply to post by Xeven


That won't work. The AWACS has enough on its plate to worry about having to control a UAV and fire missiles from it. Eventually other fighters like the F-22 will be able to do it, but the AWACS can't currently do it. No UAV is capable of engaging in A2A combat. Again, the control latency is just too great right now.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Xeven

 

That won't work. The AWACS has enough on its plate to worry about having to control a UAV and fire missiles from it. Eventually other fighters like the F-22 will be able to do it, but the AWACS can't currently do it. No UAV is capable of engaging in A2A combat. Again, the control latency is just too great right now.

A direct link from the AWACS to a drone would not have significant latency issues. The comm is line of sight. It would be like a drone fed from a GCS. Note that some drone operation outside of launch and recovery has been done from the GCS in theater. The "predator" book goes into this in some detail.

Further, how can you state the AWACS has too much on its plate? This seems to be a statement that can't be backed up since you would have to know all aspects of the AWACS, including those in development. When I walked through an AWACS, I was impressed at the sheet number of stations inside, and that is strictly for manpower. Who knows what they can do via computer?

All that said, I don't think we have any air to air drone capability worth a damn, but it is more of a problem with prop driven UAVs rather than comms. Latency is only a satellite issue.

reply to post by gariac


Why do you think they HAVE so many stations? That way they can limit one area to one controller, and reduce his workload. In a major engagement, they'd be hard worked to keep up with everything going on, and if one controller was working 4 or 5 flights, he'd be swamped. Even working one flight sometimes mistakes happen, such as the two Blackhawks that were shot down in a blue on blue.

I'm not aware of a single time that an AWACS has guided an A2A missile to target. They've talked about doing it, but I don't think it's ever been done, at least not in a real world situation.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I agree this is not real world, but the AWACS part of the air to air missile deployment is very doable from an engineering perspective. Just think of it as a GCS in the sky. If anything, it would work better than if on the ground.

I am told (but have no way to verify) that both the Red and Blue forces are on the AWACS for Red Flag. So clearly they have a lot of capacity. This does seem a bit weird, but even Red and Blue forces use the same tankers. While they try to make Red Flag as real as possible, apparently chores like going to the tanker can be less than real life.

Remember, on the list of UAV goals is having them swarm, so air to air control (UAVs controlling other UAVs) is on the drawing board.

reply to post by gariac


Eventually yes. But we aren't there yet, and we aren't at the point AWACS is firing air to air missiles from them.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Currently the UAV are not controlled from the AWACS though I is not hard to imagine. Mostly what AWACS with this mod onboard does is provide target tracking with Radar to the missiles on the drone AND the AWACS can tell the drone to fire the missiles and provide guidance, lock and tracking data to Semi Active A2A missiles. The missile seeker uses its own semi active radar and also returns from the AWACS. In other words the missiles follow the Radar beam created by the AWACS and it's own system.


Basically the UAV is acting only as a launch platform and controlled by normal means.

This technology will eventually allow a F-22 to have additional missiles to launch and if the UAV is forward of the F-22 provide additional Range to the F-22 Pilot to fire missiles at enemy aircraft from standoff. In this case the Primary Radar "beams" and launch will come from the F-22.

You see the missiles have a max Range but modern Radar way exceed the Range of the missiles. By placing a UAV with Radar guided missiles way out front you keep the F-22 Pilot a safe distance from the enemy aircraft but allow him to fire the UAV's missiles that are in Range of enemy. The UAV could be set to fly automated or be controlled from a ground station while the F-22 Pilot uses it's missile payload.

Now if all those UAV missiles don't take care of the Enemy the F-22 pilot can close and use his own Payload...

What allows them to do this is the very powerful Radars equipped on modern US aircraft.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Xeven

 

That won't work. The AWACS has enough on its plate to worry about having to control a UAV and fire missiles from it. Eventually other fighters like the F-22 will be able to do it, but the AWACS can't currently do it. No UAV is capable of engaging in A2A combat. Again, the control latency is just too great right now.

You obviously lack knowledge of modern weapon system capabilities. What? you think a semi active missile needs a internet connection to follow a Radar beam??

reply to post by Xeven


Except for the fact that I've never heard of an AWACS guiding a missile to the target. They've talked about it, but as far as I know they've never upgraded their radar to act as a fire control radar.

reply to post by Xeven


Why do you think its called SEMI active? It rides the radar of its launch platform and uses a passive receiver in the missile until the final phase of the flight.