• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

And the bids are in.....

HeyJoe

HeyJoe

Fly Navy! ...or USMC
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
1884-27.gif
The two competitors for the Navy Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV) under the UCAS-D program have submitted their formal bids for next stage. Prior to now, the J-UCAS effort was orchestrated by DARPA with the USAF developing their X-45 airframe (Boeing as prime) and the Navy developing the X-47 (Northrop Grumman as prime). The Air Force backed out of the J-UCAS program recently leaving the Navy to go it alone. The Navy is considering carrier variants of both the X-45 and X-47 to perform combat missions currently performed by manned aircraft such as the F/A-18. So some of you may have a slightly different cockpit in your future.....
 
Gatordev

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
I guess Hal, Arnold, Johnny 5, or whoever is "driving" the thing didn't figure out it's taxiing the wrong direction. Pointy end goes that way! -->
 
HeyJoe

HeyJoe

Fly Navy! ...or USMC
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Mo better

gatordev said:
I guess Hal, Arnold, Johnny 5, or whoever is "driving" the thing didn't figure out it's taxiing the wrong direction. Pointy end goes that way! -->
Click to expand...

How's this view then?

X-47Pegasus_5.jpg
 
jarhead

jarhead

UAL CA; retired hinge
pilot
why not build an unmanned Flat-top to carry these UCAVS ... it'd be like a huge video game, and nobody would have to "heave out trice up" to start their day

S/F
 
The Chief

The Chief

Retired
Contributor
I have been led to believe that there is a cadre of folks within the Navy hiearchy that favor ditching the J-35C all together, moving to UCAV. Their proposal is in basic form, build upon the F/A-18E/F, that is; improve upon stealth, new generation of radar/flir and etc to allow time for the transition. Included in the debate is a CVE (like), far less costly than the CVN.

Of course I fully understand that some in the Navy still want to bring back the Battleships.:eek:
 
HeyJoe

HeyJoe

Fly Navy! ...or USMC
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
The Chief said:
I have been led to believe that there is a cadre of folks within the Navy hiearchy that favor ditching the J-35C all together, moving to UCAV. Their proposal is in basic form, build upon the F/A-18E/F, that is; improve upon stealth, new generation of radar/flir and etc to allow time for the transition. Included in the debate is a CVE (like), far less costly than the CVN.

Of course I fully understand that some in the Navy still want to bring back the Battleships.:eek:
Click to expand...

The "glue" for JSF is the Marine Corps advocacy for the B variant and the international buy-in so US "can't" not build it after getting all the partners to pony up so much cash, some of whom are banling on the B variant as well. OSD wants one JSF (with 3 flavors) so Air Force will be buying A variants (although they too are warming to taking some B models so they can be truly expeditionary like RAF and USMC) and Navy will be introducing C models. Unless LMCO runs into unforeseen technical difficulties and/or runaway cost inflation, JSF will be everyone's darling.

As to a CVE, those cost/benefit trades have been worked up one side and down the other and big decks are still the platform of choice. Trying to reduce manning is the challenge, which pays off handsomely in reducing the "hotel" load on the ship (and that isn't eliminating pilots by introducing UCAVS; it's substantially reducing the maintainer side of the equation and thereby reducing the TAD and other support on the ship itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top