MAV vs UAV

[raptor10]

last manned combat aircraft

There is a lot of public talk about UAV's and UCAV's and the like and about how the last manned combat aircraft will be the F-35 Mako:icon_wink and the F-22 Raptor. And being the guy all the freshman ask about aviation questions, I'd like some solid answers to give them. So here are a couple questions.

1. Has anybody out there operated with them? If so what are your experiences with them?

2. Do you really think they will phase out manned aircraft, i've heard conflicting views a show of hands would be nice.

3. What sort of flexibility do UAV's give Naval forces?

I sort of know the types of responses to these questions but I'd like to hear more discussion on the topic.

 

[Lawman]

Ok Im just gonna offer up the info I have being somebody who isnt in the community and when they show up they can take it further.

1. The F-35 isnt the Mako (where did you get that?) its the Lightning II

2. You'll see a lot of crap on the discovery channel about UCAV's being the wave of the future and how "were on the verge of a pilotless Air Force" yadda yadda yadda. Notice something about that though, most of the people that keep saying that work for the companys that are trying to sell UCAV's to the DOD and Congress. There are robots and future warfare plans out there for everything from Casualty Evac to Scouts to Motor-T, UCAVs are no differnt in they are a product somebody built to make money.

3. Flexability, one nothing is proven till some actually get out there into the fleet. Two it might be a pretty restricted topic since it would involve a detailed look into current tactics and that gets into OPSEC however any tool that shows up is bound to give the planners something new they can do with it. Right now there are Armed UAV's operating in theatre in the War on Terror, so yes there are missions out there for them. What those missions are will be decided by people well above my and your paygrade however so anything at this point would just be laymen speculation.

 

[mmx1]

2. You'll see a lot of crap on the discovery channel about UCAV's being the wave of the future and how "were on the verge of a pilotless Air Force" yadda yadda yadda. Notice something about that though, most of the people that keep saying that work for the companys that are trying to sell UCAV's to the DOD and Congress. There are robots and future warfare plans out there for everything from Casualty Evac to Scouts to Motor-T, UCAVs are no differnt in they are a product somebody built to make money.

Also note that it's a product built by people who have been forced out of the manned fighter business due to the slow consolidation of acquisitions programs. There just isn't room for 3 or more fighter contractors, these days. Cheaper UCAV's means more players get a shot at the pie.

However, part of the speculation is based on the fact that the F-35 will be in service until at least 2030, barring any tremendous paradigm shifts. 25 years is a long time for technology to mature, and indications are that UCAV's will be shortly ready for primetime. They're already part of the Navy's CVX fleet air arm composition projections. Given the recent blossoming cost of manned fighters, it's not an unjustified prediction that the cost/benefit factors will swing in favor of UCAV's by the time we need to purchase the JSF's replacement.

 

[Zilch]

Take this for the layman's opinion that it is, but it reminds me of that time they said, "Hey, with all these long-range missiles, we won't even need to dogfight anymore. Hell, let's take the guns out of our fighters, even."

 

[Brett327]

I know you're asking specific questions, but hasn't this topic been hashed and rehashed ad infinitum on here? You'll find most of your answers there.

I've operated with Predators, but they don't bring anything to my mission, so they're really more of a nuisance to me than anything else, although I know they do serve their intended purpose well. For me, it's just one more aircraft I have to deconflict with and another block of frequencies that I have to be careful to not jam.

Brett

 

[HH-60H]

I know you're asking specific questions, but hasn't this topic been hashed and rehashed ad infinitum on here?

Oh no, ad nauseum.

 

[Brett327]

Oh no, ad nauseum.

Yeah, I'm feeling nauseous as well.

Brett

 

[STLEngineer]

To add some nauseum...

The only benifit of a UAV is taking the pilot out of the aircraft, but is that always the best idea?

- Someone still has to make the decision on when and where a UCAV will drop bombs. (OK, no more U-2s)
- Someone will have to tell it where to go. It may have some autonimous capability, but I'd still rather put the final decison at a humans discretion.
- Costs for development are just as high if not higher. For some reason, everyone thinks that UCAVs are going to be great because they'll be cheap and replaceable. If you want to build a stealth UAV it will cost $. If you want it to have range and endurance it will cost $. If you want to network the aircraft and have them communicate/fly in formation/coordinate attacks, it will cost a lot of $. The engines will be the same. The technology will be the same. It will be like an F-22 flying around with no-one inside (sure you take out the human support elements), and the technologies built into the aircraft remain the same. So if you replace a broken one, it will cost $.

I would certainly rather to still have a human in the loop (and the cockpit).

 

[AppleCello]

just because its unmanned does not necessarily mean it has to be automated. All these systems today are fly by wire. Im sure that the engineers could make them all fly by wireless from a virtual cockpit on the ground. that might make our fighters even more deadly--no G limits because your body isnt actually in the aircraft. that way the human is still in the loop... i dunno just thinking out loud.

 

[STLEngineer]

Agreed, that is the thought I think at this time, or at least you control them "warcraft" style and let them go to waypoints on their own.

But the aircrafts themselves will still be expensive. They won't be easily replaced unless you build them crappier. So a "swarm" of high tech UAVs is probably a daydream.

 

[BurghGuy]

It's a half decsent idea. Taking the man out of the cockpit, for the reasons stated elsewhere. (Higher G limits, lost aircraft = lost $$, not lost $$+lost life, etc.). But I'm sure theres alot of liberal types that say it takes the humanity out of war. It turns it into a "video game". Sure, you might be at your little UCAV kiosk, about the bomb some chemical weapons lab in the middle east, but how do you know for sure that the picture your seeing is real? How do you know it's not a school for blind puppies who are bottle fed by Jerry's Kids, in the middle of say, downtown Chicago? It's hard to trust a computer program that was written and assembled by the lowest bidder.

That's my "I have no real experience at this stuff" thoughts on it.

Edit: Plus... didn't anyone see Terminator? Or the Matrix. Or to a lesser extent, Stealth? I mean, if Hollywood says computers can have intelligent thought, who's to say it's not real?????

 

[AppleCello]

It's a half decsent idea. Taking the man out of the cockpit, for the reasons stated elsewhere. (Higher G limits, lost aircraft = lost $$, not lost $$+lost life, etc.). But I'm sure theres alot of liberal types that say it takes the humanity out of war. It turns it into a "video game". Sure, you might be at your little UCAV kiosk, about the bomb some chemical weapons lab in the middle east, but how do you know for sure that the picture your seeing is real? How do you know it's not a school for blind puppies who are bottle fed by Jerry's Kids, in the middle of say, downtown Chicago? It's hard to trust a computer program that was written and assembled by the lowest bidder.

That's my "I have no real experience at this stuff" thoughts on it.

Edit: Plus... didn't anyone see Terminator? Or the Matrix. Or to a lesser extent, Stealth? I mean, if Hollywood says computers can have intelligent thought, who's to say it's not real?????

Is that any different from what you see on the Multi-function displays in a cockpit? you just have to trust it. It wouldnt make a difference if you see the target from your VR cockpit or up in the air, either way its the same picture coming from a targeting system on the aircraft... It's never foolproof.

 

[BurghGuy]

Is that any different from what you see on the Multi-function displays in a cockpit? you just have to trust it. It wouldnt make a difference if you see the target from your VR cockpit or up in the air, either way its the same picture coming from a targeting system on the aircraft... It's never foolproof.

Very good point. Never fool-proof indeed. I was more or less speculating on the desensitizing effect it could potentially have.

I mean, you'd essentially be flying a simulator, which are relatively low stress (since you can't kill yourself in a sim), which could be good or bad. A relaxed pilot can be a dangerous one. If you fall out of the sky in a sim, you can just hit reset. If you fall out of the sky in real life, you've got your life on the line. If a UCAV does the same, you live, but the people your plane just fell on probably didn't. And you'd never know. Theres not the same urgency of situation when it's not your life thats in jeopardy.

I really can't speak from experience though, since I'm still a stud, but I would assume it would have the same effect when taking munitions into account. Being off target a bit in a sim... oops, reset, bad grade. Being off target in real life, suddenly it's all over CNN when the blind bottle-fed puppies die.

Edit: Granted its the same for alot of things in the military... push the right button on a submarine and suddenly it's nuclear winter. I think my main thought is, there will be an adjustment period when alot of UCAVs will be crashing early on.

 

[pdx]

I hate to tell you guys, but zero of the statements in this thread are new.

Search, read, learn

or speculate.

 

[STLEngineer]

Granted, but discussion is much more enjoyable than searching for conversations long since dead... How do you "involve" yourself in a discussion that took place 2 years ago?