The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 25, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: USAF CoS Prefers F-35, UAS and NGB. Also say USAF has enough TACAIR capability
DarthAmerica    5/27/2009 10:45:26 PM
U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz said increasing production rates for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and developing the next-generation bomber are at the top of his wish list of projects to fund if the service had more money.

SOURCE:
h*tp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/SCHWARTZ052009.xml&headline=Schwartz%20Wish%20List:%20Boost%20F-35,%20Plan%20NGB


Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on the Air Force?s $160.5 billion fiscal 2010 budget request May 19, Schwartz said service leaders felt they had enough tactical aircraft capability despite Defense Secretary Robert Gates? plans to halt F-22 Raptor procurement at 187 aircraft.

The Air Force chief said the service?s leadership believed it was a ?prudent opportunity to accelerate the retirement of older aircraft.? The FY ?10 budget calls for retiring 250 F-15s, F-16s and A-10s, enabling the Air Force to redistribute more than $3.5 billion over the next six years to modernize combat air forces into a ?smaller but more capable force,? Schwartz and Air Force Secretary Michael Donley told lawmakers in joint written testimony.

Schwartz did say more money would make it easier and faster to upgrade remaining legacy aircraft and make modifications to the F-22 until the F-35 starts rolling off the line in large numbers.

Schwartz said the Air Force would like to see F-35 production boosted to at least 80 aircraft and perhaps as many as 110 per year before the F-16s start retiring in large numbers.

Committee members, including Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and Rep. John McHugh (N.Y.), the senior Republican on the panel, worried about producing and flying an aircraft while it was still being tested.

Donley conceded budget constraints compelled the Air Force to make some difficult calls. If there was more money ?we might have made some different choices,? Schwartz added. But both leaders insisted the Air Force was not short-changing itself.

The chief of staff said his wish list also included developing plans for the future long-range strike capability. ?We need, through the QDR [Quadrennial Defense Review] and the NPR [Nuclear Posture Review] to get our secretary of defense comfortable with the parameters of what we propose for that platform.?

Gates canceled funding for a next-generation bomber study, which Schwartz said was of concern to the Air Force ?Once we get him comfortable with the parameters ? range, payload, manned, unmanned, nuclear, non-nuclear, low observable, very low observable ? then we need to proceed aggressively with that program.?

Schwartz said the Air Force also needs to explore using additional automation in unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to reduce manpower. He noted that currently one crew operates a single UAS.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15   NEXT
gf0012-aust       6/10/2009 3:53:20 AM

Such issues happen and are more often than not isolated and subsequently fixed. 

-DA 

fixed is when you can replicate and isolate the problem.

a number of these issues and faults are in isolation.

quite frankly, if I had a software engineer or geek come to me and say that a problem was fixed when it was isolated and unable to be replicated - I'd sack him/her  faster than a newborn bay could draw oxygen...  I certainly wouldn't let him roll out the product in an active state and into complex conditions.

the people at the fighting end would back me up every time.  bugger the contractor. 

 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/10/2009 10:00:08 AM

Such issues happen and are more often than not isolated and subsequently fixed. 

-DA 

fixed is when you can replicate and isolate the problem.

a number of these issues and faults are in isolation.

quite frankly, if I had a software engineer or geek come to me and say that a problem was fixed when it was isolated and unable to be replicated - I'd sack him/her  faster than a newborn bay could draw oxygen...  I certainly wouldn't let him roll out the product in an active state and into complex conditions.

the people at the fighting end would back me up every time.  bugger the contractor. 


Let me elaborate and put this in plain speak. The F-15 had a structural problem due to age that caused a crash. The USAF grounds the fleet, conducts analysis, finds the problem, since it's not isolated to just that aircraft and it could affect the whole fleet, the manufacturer has to apply a fix. This is done and the issue is resolved. If the issue is related to software. Data is collected, studied analyzed and perhaps we find that a 1 should have been a 0 and that is causing the problem. Again, it affects the whole fleet problem solved after patch. With a UCAV, strangely, one goes of on it's own and crashes. Cause unknown. All data is collected and no cause if found. What then? Well, if this happened to ONE single UCAV, then perhaps there was a problem unique to that particular aircraft. You try as much as possible to simulate the conditions in order to reproduce the problem. We run stress test on the platform in order to re-create the problem. Chances are if there really is a design flaw with HW or SW, you will see it. Fix and solve. Otherwise, logically there was something unique to that particular scenario that caused the crash and you may never know. What you do know is the frequency of the occurrence. From that you can make a decision on if the problem is likely enough to warrant more investigation. I deal with this everyday and this is how it's done. And this is not specific to unmanned aircraft. Manned commercial and military aircraft have crashed and people to this day have no idea why. You cannot engineer a perfect system. Nor can you always know if something will work. This is why you have to determine probability and decide what is acceptable. If I lose 30 UCAVs every 500,000 flight hours, is that ok? How about 10 in the same period. These are the decisions that must be made.

Can't make a perfect machine. But we can make them good enough to fight with. Look at missiles. Even when they have .8 or .9 pk some still miss. But men rely on these machines everyday to do their job. This is no different except that the platform comes back.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/10/2009 10:39:28 AM
RE: Ant Code
Something like 2.5 terabytes?

And we go whoopee over 25 gigabytes in a telemetry system? 

Somebody has been smoking that hemp.





Two things. First, it's a good thing all we want to do is attack SAMs, shoot missiles at stuff and fly rather than simulate the life of an ant. And it seems like that task is well on it's way...

Boeing X-45A Unmanned Aircraft Demonstrates Autonomous Capability

"The X-45A proved it could autonomously react to a dynamic threat environment while engaging a priority target," said David Koopersmith, Boeing J-UCAS X-45 vice president and program manager.

St Louis MO (SP) Jun 28, 2005
A Boeing X-45A unmanned aircraft completed its 52nd flight recently, demonstrating its ability to adapt to a realistic and changing wartime operational environment.

During the test flight, a Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) X-45A departed from NASA¿s Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., climbed to 29,000 ft. and entered the base¿s test range.

While flying the mission, several simulated Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) emitters were activated and the unmanned aircraft autonomously created its own flight plan to remain out of lethal range of the simulated SAM sites.

Always managed by the pilot-operator, the X-45A then attacked its simulated priority ground target and showcased the ability to suppress enemy air defenses. Once the aircraft had conducted a simulated battle damage assessment, the X-45A safely returned to Edwards.

"The X-45A proved it could autonomously react to a dynamic threat environment while engaging a priority target," said David Koopersmith, Boeing J-UCAS X-45 vice president and program manager.

"Onboard planning and decision capabilities like these will make our next unmanned system, the X-45C, a highly survivable platform for the warfighter."

The first X-45C will be completed in 2006, with flight-testing scheduled to begin in 2007.

It will be 39 feet long with a 49-foot wingspan, cruise at 0.80 Mach at an altitude of 40,000 feet, carry a 4,500 pound weapon payload, and be able to fly a combat radius of more than 1,200 nautical miles.

The software used and tested on the X-45A may be offered as a candidate for functionality in the development of the J-UCAS Common Operating System.

Boeing began its unmanned combat aircraft program in 1998. The following year, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Air Force chose Boeing to build two X-45A air vehicles and a mission control station under the J-UCAS Advanced Technology Demonstration Program.

Winner of a 2005 Flight International Aerospace Industry Award, the J-UCAS X-45 program is a Boeing/DARPA/Air Force/Navy effort to demonstrate the technical feasibility, military utility and operational value of an unmanned air combat system for the Air Force and the Navy.

Operational missions for the services may include persistent strike; penetrating electronic attack; suppression of enemy air defenses; and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. 



As far as bandwidth and throughput, C'mon you can do better than that. Consider how long it would have taken to load this page over the air 10 years ago. The technology is improving all the time...

Converting Aircraft For Broadband Data Transfer Capability

AESA Datalink - HyPer-1553
link ">AESA RAdar Datalink

Following research into the past two years, an industry group including Northrop Grumman Corporation, L-3 Communications Inc. and Lockheed Martin Aeronautics demonstrated the use of active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars for high-bandwidth communications. 

In the demonstration, electronic signals generated by the AESA radar were used to transmit imagery data transmission to an L-3 Communication's Common Data Link modems, at a speed of 274 megabits-per-second, twice and four times the basic
CDL data rate.

Northrop Grumman's Electronic Systems sector is producing the AN/APG-77 AESA for the F-22 aircraft. The Common Data Link (CDL) modem is used to transmit and receive high-data-rate, line-of-sight communications over long distances for both air-to-air and air-to-ground applications.

This demonstration is part of the F/A-22 Non-Traditional Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (NT-ISR) missions, considered for for possible spiral application into F-22 and F-35 aircraft programs, allowing them to transmit and receive large, uncompressed data packages, such as synthetic aperture radar images and other data, within seconds. According to Maj. Gen. Tommy Crawford, commander of the U.S. Air Force Command and Control, and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Center, "Radar CDL (R-CDL) is a needed capability to support near-real-time NT-ISR. R-CDL complements the tactical data-link capability of tactical targeting
network technology to complete networking the battlespace."


link ">DSL-like Wiring Enhances Aircraft Databus Capacity

A recent demonstration by Boeing Phantom Works, Data Device Corp. (DDC) and Honeywell enhanced the data transfer capability of aircraft at least 40 times faster than standard 1553 bus, utilizing existing aircraft wiring. Application of this technology will allow aircraft systems to be efficiently upgraded for future combat environments.

Designated HyPer-1553, the new technology developed by DDC utilizes Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) techniques, similar to the technology used to expand the data-carrying capability of ordinary telephone lines. According to Steve Wilson, Boeing Phantom Works lead engineer for the project: "(HyPer-1553) operates in parallel with existing MIL-STD-1553 data buses, upgrades can be done incrementally, which further expands the options for upgrading the war-fighting capabilities of current and future aircraft.

During the test, Boeing engineers used HyPer-1553 data bus to transmit imagery between a rugged computer mounted in the forward equipment bay of the F-15E and a modified Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) mounted on a wing pylon station. The results showed that HyPer-1553 transferred data at 40 megabits per second in parallel with MIL-STD-1553 data being transferred at 1 megabit per second. The team also transferred data at 40, 80 and 120 megabits per second on a second bus dedicated to the higher speed data.

 
Boeing Satellites

Transformational Wideband Communication Capabilities for the Warfighter

WGS Mission

The Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS) satellites are the key elements of a high-capacity system that will provide a quantum leap in communications capabilities for the warfighter.

WGS will support the DoD's warfighting information exchange requirements, enabling execution of tactical command and control, communications, and computers; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR); battle management; and combat support information. WGS will also augment the current Ka-band Global Broadcast Service (on UHF F/O satellites) by providing additional information broadcast capabilities.

Each WGS can route 2.1 to 3.6 Gbps of data -- providing more than 10 times the communications capacity of the predecessor DSCS III satellite. Using reconfigurable antennas and a digital channelizer, WGS also offers added flexibility to tailor coverage areas and to connect X-band and Ka-band users anywhere within the satellite field of view. The system provides tremendous operational flexibility and delivers the needed capacity, coverage, connectivity and control in support of demanding operational scenarios.

Boeing was awarded the WGS initial contract in January 2001 for the first three satellites plus the associated ground-based command and control elements. Integrated logistics, training, and sustaining engineering support are also provided by Boeing. The procuring agency is the U.S. Air Force Space Command's MILSATCOM Systems Wing at Los Angeles AFB, California.

The WGS space segment will initially consist of three geostationary satellites operating over Pacific, Indian and Atlantic regions. Under a Block II contract, a fourth and fifth satellite are being procured to meet the warfighter's evolving SATCOM bandwidth requirements. The Block II satellites will be similar to the three Block I satellites already in production and will add a radio frequency bypass capability designed to support airborne intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms requiring ultra-high bandwidth and data rates demanded by unmanned aerial vehicles.

The first Wideband Global SATCOM satellite was launched Oct. 7, 2007 aboard an Atlas V Launch Vehicle. The second was launched Apr. 3, 2009 also on an Atlas. WGS is providing transformational capabilities supporting government objectives for the Transformational Communications Architecture in the next decade and beyond.

Boeing was awarded the WGS initial contract in January 2001 for the first three satellites plus the associated ground-based command and control elements. Integrated logistics, training, and sustaining engineering support are also provided by Boeing. In 2006, Boeing was authorized to produce two additional WGS satellites. The procuring agency is the U.S. Air Force Space Command's MILSATCOM Systems Wing at Los Angeles AFB, California.

WGS is providing transformational capabilities supporting government objectives for the Transformational Communications Architecture in the next decade and beyond.

Capacity:

WGS supports communications links within the Government's allocated 500 MHz of X-band and 1 GHz of Ka-band spectrum. The WGS payload can filter and route 4.875 GHz of instantaneous bandwidth. Depending on the mix of ground terminals, data rates and modulation schemes employed, each satellite can support data transmission rates ranging from 2.1 Gbps to more than 3.6 Gbps. By comparison, a DSCS III satellite will support up to 0.25 Gbps.

Coverage:

The WGS design includes 19 independent coverage areas that can be positioned throughout the field of view of each satellite. This includes eight steerable and shapeable X-band beams formed by separate transmit and receive phased arrays; 10 Ka-band beams served by independently steerable, diplexed antennas, including three with selectable RF polarization; and transmit/receive X-band Earth coverage beams.

Connectivity:

The enhanced connectivity capabilities of WGS enable any user to communicate with any other user with very efficient use of satellite bandwidth. A digital channelizer divides the uplink bandwidth into nearly 1,900 independently routable 2.6 MHz subchannels, providing connectivity from any uplink coverage area to any downlink coverage area (including the ability to cross-band between X and Ka frequencies). In addition, the channelizer supports multicast and broadcast services and provides an effective and flexible uplink spectrum monitoring capability to support network control.

The figure below shows how the X-band and Ka-band antenna suites are interconnected via the digital channelizer to provide the unique flexibility and connectivity of WGS.

Command and Control: Control of the WGS communications payloads is accomplished from four Army Wideband Satellite Operations Centers (WSOCs), using ground equipment hardware and software developed by Boeing, ITT Industries, and Raytheon Corp. Each Global Satellite Configuration and Control Element (GSCCE) has the capability to control up to three satellites at a time, via "in-band" (X-band or Ka-band) telemetry and command links. Spacecraft platform control is accomplished by the 3rd Space Operations Squadron (3 SOPS) at Schriever AFB in Colorado Springs, using WGS mission unique software and databases provided by Boeing, hosted on the Command and Control Segment Consolidated (CCS-C) systems that are being fielded by Integral Systems, Inc. The satellite is designed for compatibility with the current S-band SGLS TT&C capability, as well as the planned Unified S-band (USB) formats and frequencies.

Boeing 702 Platform :

The Boeing 702 satellite is the industry leader in capacity, performance and cost-efficiency. Enabling technologies for the advanced 702 design are the xenon-ion propulsion system (XIPS), highly efficient triple-junction gallium arsenide solar cells, and deployable radiators with flexible heat pipes.

XIPS is 10 times more efficient than conventional bipropellant systems. Four 25-cm thrusters remove orbit eccentricity during transfer orbit operations and are used for orbit maintenance and to perform station change maneuvers as required throughout the mission life. Deployable radiators with flexible heat pipes provide substantially more radiator area, resulting in a cooler, more stable thermal environment for both bus and payload. This increases component reliability and reduces performance variations over life.

Summary

As the leading provider of advanced satellite communications systems for broadcast and packet-switched satellite communications, Boeing has leveraged a wealth of Government and commercial experience and technology for WGS. This includes the company's extensive investments to develop the Boeing 702, as well as prior work on phased array antennas and digital signal processors. Together these technologies enabled the tremendous capacity and operational flexibility sought for the WGS space segment. Additionally, these core capabilities can support WGS evolution to satisfy additional transformational requirements of the warfighter, such as improved connectivity for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms and network-centric communications architectures.




I understand there is a resistance by some towards unmanned aircraft but some of these arguments are just throwing out random comments without regard to the fact that we are talking about progress over the next decade and what the actual intent is. COmparing a UCAV to an Ant without context is a huge strawman.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Ant Simulation Context...   6/10/2009 10:53:20 AM
It can take 2.5 TB, OR MUCH LESS. It just depends on what we are trying to simulate and level of detail. An Ant's life is probably far more complicated than what we need UCAVs to do which has been demonstrated.

Speaking of robot versions of animals...

link width="425" height="344">  

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       6/10/2009 5:54:59 PM
I understand there is a resistance by some towards unmanned aircraft but some of these arguments are just throwing out random comments without regard to the fact that we are talking about progress over the next decade and what the actual intent is. COmparing a UCAV to an Ant without context is a huge strawman.

-DA 

Personally, I don't give a flying ferk about the manned vs unmanned argument.  Each has niche relevant capabilities as complimentary assets  - they're both part of the fused battlespace that we're striving to reach.

I do however have great difficulties with what I see as a slavish defence of private companies and the technical promises made in the public arena when I know first hand that its crap.  I've worked both sides of the fence.  I deal with vaccuous promises every day, and every day I get to point out why material presented as proof of life is just colour and movement and regularly fails when put into real world situations.  Keep sales away from engineers.  Keep sales away from stars, keep sales away from the operators.  

my only focus is to make sure the warfighter gets the best possible gear they can - if I believed half the nonsense that we got from vendors I'd be failing to do my job.

this is my last on this.  irrespective of all the spin generated by companies on what they promote on the internet and media about what capability can be delivered - the test is the rubber meeting the road.  Invariably, if we accepted half of the crap promoted by the vendors as gold release, we'd be up to our arse in crocs.

my point about the 25gig bandwidth future was not about volume of data.  The US has made it clear that time and time again they can get data out - the issue is filtering and getting the right data to the right prosecution asset in a timely manner.  As you would/should be aware.  Tac comms does not chew gobs of bandwidth.  weapons release does not require gobs of bandwidth, hell even getting images back from UAV's does not require gobs of bandwidth (now that Australia has happily released some CSIRO developed capability to the US) - that means that it aint the volume of data thats the issue - its the handling and distribution of it.  We're not looking at micro management manipulation of an AI developed combat system - the issue of bandwidth gets back to smarter distribution and management of detail to the right warfighter at the right point in time.  In a fused battlespace thats critical. You'd be surprised at how slow any system becomes once you have over 1500 conurrent events being managed and watched in real time.  Let alone 100,00 discrete tracks.  When you have 100,000 current tracks and a UAV with a nuke goes AWOL, then you have problems.  I wouldn't want to do that today.

I get back to a very specific point - there is no way that the US is going to field a nuke on a UAV with the field demonstrated reliability of UAS in its fleet - and across a number of agencies.  Ignore the media and public commentary - the real deal is how they perform operationally, and supposedly safe, electronically unimpeachable UAS are getting compromised today. In the future- maybe.  Today or within the next 10 years?  I highly doubt it.

 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    this is my last on this.   6/10/2009 10:21:33 PM
title was not meant to be dismissive, just that I don't want to get stuck in a loop of differences of opinion.

 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    gf0012 reply   6/11/2009 1:22:28 AM

title was not meant to be dismissive, just that I don't want to get stuck in a loop of differences of opinion.




 I didn't take it that way at all. You have way more class than that even when I know you disagree. This is the way a professional writes and I respect that. In fact, the differences of opinion are good as I know we both have valid points for all to consider.

 

-DA 

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    He's a professional, you are an amateur.    6/11/2009 9:30:02 PM
despite your claims to the contrary. Robo-snake has nothing to do with this kind of discussion. it doesn't even approach within the magnitude of the type problems covered inn this topic.

When you confuse the land simple for the aviation complex and reach desperately for examples that have no bearing oin discussion then you are not knowledgeable.
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/12/2009 2:12:52 AM

despite your claims to the contrary. Robo-snake has nothing to do with this kind of discussion. it doesn't even approach within the magnitude of the type problems covered inn this topic.

What claims to the contrary? And coming from the person who referenced Robot-Ants? LOL you are hilarious.


When you confuse the land simple for the aviation complex and reach desperately for examples that have no bearing oin discussion then you are not knowledgeable.
Herald

You are the only one confused. I gave you context. It's YOU who mentioned Robot Ants. I actually showed an autonomous UCAV demonstration. So what I claimed already exist. If you spent as much time actually reading and participating in the discussion instead of trolling behind my post you wouldn't make such a public spectacle of yourself.  Who cares though. Feel free to continue another one of your own self to self strawman arguments. You will look equally silly as you did when you tried to convince people civilian merchants should practice EOF/Security with rocket launchers.

-DA
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Ants are the representation of a hive mind.or how an robot air offense would really work.....   6/12/2009 11:38:29 AM




despite your claims to the contrary. Robo-snake has nothing to do with this kind of discussion. it doesn't even approach within the magnitude of the type problems covered inn this topic.



What claims to the contrary? And coming from the person who referenced Robot-Ants? LOL you are hilarious.







When you confuse the land simple for the aviation complex and reach desperately for examples that have no bearing oin discussion then you are not knowledgeable.


Herald




You are the only one confused. I gave you context. It's YOU who mentioned Robot Ants. I actually showed an autonomous UCAV demonstration. So what I claimed already exist. If you spent as much time actually reading and participating in the discussion instead of trolling behind my post you wouldn't make such a public spectacle of yourself.  Who cares though. Feel free to continue another one of your own self to self strawman arguments. You will look equally silly as you did when you tried to convince people civilian merchants should practice EOF/Security with rocket launchers.




-DA

That's more or less the Herald Trap I wanted you to trip. Your done poster, you don't even have a clue as to what you discuss. For the rest of us, do I need to describe swarming as to how it overloads an IADS? We've used it twice against the Iraqis and blanked them. In its UAV version, the data net, shares a distributed intelligence across the entorte package so that eaxch machine doesn't have to xcarry the whole burden of the attack, just like each ant (or bee) doesn't have to carry the burden for the hbive or colony mission.
 
Anyway, I really just wanted to drive home the point that there are those who know what they discuss and there are those who don't. Make up your own minds. I'm satisfioed that I know which class set. where the poster belongs.
 
Herald
 
   
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica    Stuck on Stupid   6/12/2009 12:48:18 PM
There is no Herald trap so stop fooling yourself. You don't have the composure or patience to do that. You referenced falsely how much memory it takes to code an Ant...

Herald12345    How many lines of code to program an ant?    6/10/2009 2:41:22 AM
Something like 2.5 terabytes?

And we go whoopee over 25 gigabytes in a telemetry system? 

Somebody has been smoking that hemp.
 
...and I told you that it is false and a strawman without any context as it depends on what you are trying to emulate. Then I went on to show you two UCAVs demonstrating an autonomous engagement against threat IAD. So you can try and twist and manipulate words as much as you like. If you were thinking about hive minds and such then just say what you mean and dispense with all the nonsense and personal BS. Again, if you want to keep looking like a fool then go right ahead.

The only thing trapped is your brain with this childish grudge you carry on. In other words...

link width="425" height="344">


...now if you have something to say about IADs or tactics then do that. But don't try to derail the thread because EVERYBODY can see and some have even written that you are in a strawman circular argument with yourself. Amateurs are people such as yourself who haven't worked in or studies long enough defense issues to know that if you ask 5 experts about a thing you will get 5 different answers and when those answers differ the amateur gets indignant and hostile most often because he can't support his argument on merit. Unlike you, when I disagreed with another professional, there was no anger and we simply settled on the fact that our opinions differ. Control your emotions Padawan and then maybe you wont seem like such an amateur.

Meanwhile, in the real world, more Unmanned Systems keep coming and coming. P.S. rather than riding in my shadow, why don't you get some guts, man up and post something original. ANYBODY, can be a critic.

-DA 

" target="_blank">link
 
 
Quote    Reply

Y. pestis       6/13/2009 12:02:28 AM
Darth,
 
Did I miss something here?  I thought I only saw 1 demonstration of a UCAV against simulated IADS.  Sorry if I missed a post or missed something in a post.  A few questions concerning the 2 UCAVs demonstration/demonstrations that was not clear to me:  Was this one demonstration with 2 UCAVs or two separate demonstrations with 1 UCAV showing the capability to strike IADS?  If the demonstration was with 2 UCAVs -were the UCAVs operating independantly of each other or were they working in concert with each other (ie sharing, analyzing, and developing a shared strategy from jointly collected data, autonomously)? 
 
Apologies again if I'm asking questions that have already been answered.
 
Thanks
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Did you read the title on that Youtiube, poster.    6/13/2009 12:26:39 AM
Unstick yourself so that it no longer applies to you. Quit springing Herald traps, quit pretending., and realoize  I don't bully. I don't take orders from you, and its obvious again that you don';t even begun to understand what I discuss.
 
How in heck's name can you claim to be knowledgeablein artifical intelligence if you don't even know how a distributed information , memory and processing network works? Hmmmmmm?
 
I forgive you your usual other crap, since its obvious that aside from some book learning you don't know a damn thing about aircraft and rockets, but if you claim to be familiar with artilects or artificial intelligence logics or how telemetry works you haven't written one word that shows that you even know how such logics and systems work, much less what is involved.
 
Please don't claim that you do. Asode form point and clicl on a menu driven aid program that may have task assisted you, you really have no idea.
 
Herald
     
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    Did you read the title on that Youtiube, poster.    6/13/2009 12:32:40 AM
Unstick yourself so that it no longer applies to you. Quit springing Herald traps, quit pretending., and realize  I don't bully.or succumb to bullies, I don't take orders from you, or your worthless advice, and its obvious again that you don't even begun to understand what I discuss.
 
Example;
 
 
How in heck's name can you claim to be knowledgeable in artificial intelligence if you don't even know how a distributed information , memory and processing network works? Hmmmmmm?
 
I forgive you your usual other crap, since its obvious that aside from some book learning you don't know a damn thing about aircraft and rockets, but if you claim to be familiar with artilects or artificial intelligence logics or how telemetry works you haven't written one word that shows that you even know how such logics and systems work, much less what is involved.
 
Please don't claim that you do. Aside from point and click on a menu driven aid program that may have task assisted you a few times, you really have no idea at all.
 
Herald
     
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       6/13/2009 12:41:48 AM

Move over, Buck Rogers

X-45 is showing it has the mettle to fly toughest missions

BY WILLIAM A. BARKSDALE

An X-45 aircraft releases an inert Global Positioning System?guided bombThe night is eerily calm, the darkness foreboding. A U.S. pilot pulls on a G-suit and helmet and climbs into an aircraft not knowing what the future holds. As the jet climbs over the desert skies, adrenaline is pumping because this is for real.

The highly trained airman has entered another world, one where thousands of lights dart up from the ground with no warning, each one seemingly aimed his way. This would be the greatest fireworks show ever witnessed if it were not deadly. It's no game. It's warfare, it's dangerous, and there's nowhere to hide.

Known as Suppression of Enemy Air Defense, the mission is simple. Fly into harm's way and become human bait, a target for air defenses. Once the ground missile site turns on its radar and prepares to launch a strike, the chaos begins. If the threat can't be destroyed, other pilots will die.

SEAD takes a unique breed, a special type of warrior--and Dick Ewers fits that description. As a U.S. Marine Corps aviator in Vietnam, he flew the mission in his F-4 Phantom and still remembers it well.

"When you fly SEAD, you're the first guy in and you're getting shot at. I'd say 90 to 95 percent of the airplanes we lost were due to a ground threat," Ewers said. "SEAD was and is a very lethal mission in which you can lose a lot of people if you don't plan it right. It's not something you want to do without a lot of friends helping you."

Retired from the Marine Corps since 1989, Ewers now works as a NASA research pilot at Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. One of his assignments is to "fly chase" on an advanced experimental aircraft known as the X-45, and it takes him right back to some very harrowing moments in Southeast Asia.

"When I was in Vietnam, I lost three of my closest squadron mates due to enemy ground fire," recalled the fighter pilot. "If we'd had an unmanned combat vehicle like the X-45 flying then, a lot of pilots might have been saved."

* * *

As the first unmanned air vehicle designed specifically for SEAD, and with the potential to deliver a revolutionary improvement in effectiveness, the Joint Unmanned Combat Air System X-45 is being watched closely by many in the defense industry.

The X-45 is a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and Boeing Integrated Defense Systems program that also involves NASA. Boeing developed and built two X-45A demonstrators and is working on an X-45C demonstrator. The program's purpose is to demonstrate the technical feasibility, military utility and operational value of an unmanned combat air system for the military.

"This is a revolutionary aircraft because it is designed to think and act like aviators do without having an aviator control it," said U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. James "Pee Wee" Wertz, 452nd Flight Test Squadron commander and Global Vigilance Combined Test Force director at Edwards. "No one has to move a stick and throttle to tell this airplane what to do. As a matter of fact, its autonomy will allow an operator in the future to monitor four unmanned vehicles at once, each with a separate mission plan."

Flashing a huge grin, Wertz used his hands to describe a possible scenario. "Imagine a four-ship formation of X-45s making their way to a heavily protected area. Vehicle One is loaded with weapons and is primary to strike the target. Vehicle Two will blind the enemy's radars buy using its electronic combat capability. Vehicle Three will gather photos after the strike for battle damage assessment, and Vehicle Four will have a different munitions load as a backup to the first aircraft. As they are flying along, out pops a change in targets and the weapons in Vehicle Four are now the best ones available to execute the mission."

Wertz took a huge breath and leaned forward. "All four vehicles understand and react to the change real-time, deliver the munitions on target and bring back the evidence. Now that's truly amazing. That's Buck Rogers-type stuff."

As exciting as Wertz's description is, an important question comes quickly to mind. How long will it take to deliver such a transformational capability to the U.S. warfighter?

In the past, the development, operational testing, evaluation and fielding of a new weapons system could take decades. But Boeing has listened closely to its customers and plans on delivering aircraft before the end of the decade.

artist?s rendering of three X-45 aircraft conducting a SEAD missionThat might sound impossible, but a small band of innovators is making it happen by flying two technology demonstrators at Edwards. Interestingly enough, Edwards has hosted more than its share of historic events, none perhaps more famous than when a young test pilot named Chuck Yeager became the "fastest man alive" by breaking the sound barrier on Oct. 14, 1947, in the Bell X-1.

Making its own history, the X-45A demonstrator already has achieved a first in aviation by dropping a 250-pound inert Small Smart Bomb from an internal weapons bay on March 21 over a remote Southern California desert test range.

Rob Horton, Boeing IDS chief X-45 operator, is proud of this aircraft and is not shy about singing its praises. "The X-45 is a force enabler because it allows the human to be a top-level battle manager, a commander, rather than someone who just physically flies the airplane," he said.

When confronted with the criticism that unmanned aircraft are inherently dangerous and hard to control, Horton, a former U.S. Air Force test weapons system operator and navigator, replied quickly: "There is always a human in the loop. I give the command consents that allow the vehicle to taxi, take off and drop weapons. If there is an emergency, the aircraft's reaction has been preprogrammed through intelligent software that allows it to handle almost anything. It can either deal with the problem or return to base without help. We can even override the autonomous reactions and keep it flying toward the target."

That level of control and the ability to interoperate with manned aircraft was clearly demonstrated in a March flight when the X-45 was returning from a test mission. A nearby T-38 pilot declared an in-flight emergency when the unmanned vehicle was on final approach with gear down. The Boeing mission team successfully sent the X-45 around the pattern to allow the other aircraft to land quickly.

So what lies ahead? The program's most recent success took place April 18 when the X-45A dropped an inert precision-guided weapon on a ground target. With that accomplished, the team must now face a critical milestone: coordinated flight operations. The first step will be to demonstrate cooperative flight and inter-vehicle operations between the X-45A and a manned T-33. On another flight, a ground operator will control both aircraft. And finally, both X-45A aircraft will fly together and demonstrate autonomous coordinated flight.

While the X-45A flies numerous test missions and rewrites aviation history, Boeing IDS Vice President and Program Manager Darryl Davis and his 600 teammates in Washington, Arizona, California and Missouri will develop an advanced version, the X-45C, for an early operational assessment for the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy. The X-45C will be much larger than the A demonstrator.

The C will be 39 feet long with a 49-foot wingspan. Despite being only a few feet thick, its maximum payload will be 4,500 pounds and it'll be able to carry eight Small Diameter Bombs--Boeing's newest near-precision 250-pound weapon. This revolutionary combat vehicle will cruise at 0.85 Mach and fly at 40,000 feet with a mission radius of 1,300 nautical miles.

As far as its purpose, the U.S. Air Force has expressed its intent to use the X-45C for SEAD, and that makes Dick Ewers glad. "I easily expect the X-45 to be 10 times more accurate than I ever was in an F-4," the combat veteran said.

Lieutenant Col. Wertz sums up the value of the program best. "If we send a pilot on a dangerous mission to a highly defended location, we run the risk of killing him. With the X-45, we may lose an aircraft to that same mission, but that's far better than sacrificing a human life," he said. "With this system, the mission operator can execute the tasking from a computer station here in the United States and return home in time to tuck his children into bed and have dinner with his wife. That is why this is so amazing."

Move over Buck Rogers, indeed.


 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy