- Just as full-size robot planes are starting to become
mainstream platforms for military surveillance and communications relay,
it seems that they,ll soon be packing bombs as well. Plans are seemingly
well underway to provide a combat-capable, unmanned aircraft for the US
Navy. The machine is likely to be used as cannon fodder in the early days
of an air war, or as an economical way of beefing up the striking power
of manned missions.
-
- Both Boeing and Northrop Grumman are vying to build the
aircraft, currently known as the Uninhabited (or Unmanned) Combat Air Vehicle
(UCAV). Testing of prototypes could begin as early as next year. Initial
research is designed to prove the technological feasibility of multiple
UCAV's performing extremely dangerous and high-priority combat missions
in an autonomous manner. The main role envisioned is the suppression of
enemy air defenses (SEAD).
-
- But why would we want fully-armed robots flying over
our heads?
-
- Butcher's bill
-
- The answer, of course, all boils down to money. Their
smaller size, lack of pilot interfaces and training requirements, reusability
and long-term storage capability all mean that UCAV's are projected to
cost up to 65 percent less to produce and then up to 75 percent less to
operate and maintain than future manned fighter aircraft..
-
- And then there's the fact that if one gets blown out
of the sky, you don't end up losing the pilot.
-
- "The development and deployment of UCAV's could
significantly increase the effectiveness and survivability of manned fighter
aircraft while lowering the overall cost of combat operations," says
George Muellner, vice president-general manager of the Boeing Phantom Works,
where that company's entry is being cooked up.
-
- The focus on SEAD-type mission epitomises the thinking
behind UCAV systems. Attacking a fully-functioning enemy missile and radar
network is one of the most perilous duties an aircrew can be assigned,
and most pilot casualties occur in the first few days of such a campaign.
In the Kosovo conflict, jittery NATO chiefs allocated many SEAD strikes
to be carried out by cruise missiles; a safer, but imperfect and extremely
wasteful tactic. Missiles can't fly back to base after their mission is
over or has been cancelled either.
-
- With no need to carry a pilot, a UCAV can be built smaller
(typically about 60 percent smaller) and stealthier than today's fighters.
That means it's harder to detect and shoot down. The robo-planes could
also loiter for hours longer than a human pilot could endure, waiting for
the enemy radar to switch on and reveal itself. Finally, if it did come
under fire, a UCAV could accelerate and maneuver in ways that would snap
the neck of a human pilot.
-
- Who's flying this thing?
-
- The UCAV concept sees them flying sorties either autonomously
or as robotic wingmen for human pilots. For example, a manned fighter could
be surrounded by a box of UCAV's acting as decoys or else armed with cluster
bombs to keep enemy heads down whilst the humans perform a more surgical
strike.
-
- At this stage it doesn't seem likely that the UCAV will
be flying entirely off the leash though. Controllers will keep an eye on
each aircraft, either from ground-based facilities or an AWACS plane flying
a safe distance away. The commanders won't literally 'fly' the UCAV's.
Rather, they will oversee a robo-plane's performance without actually participating
very directly; much like the way a civilian airline pilot keeps an eye
on his aircraft's automated systems, only stepping in if he feels there's
a problem.
-
- With direct control not constantly required, one controller
can be in simultaneous command of a number of UCAV's, some of them perhaps
flying totally different missions. Experiments have simulated a controller
coping with up to six unmanned vehicles.
-
- Arms control
-
- On its own, the UCAV will be perfectly capable of taking
off, flying to its target and then returning to base. However, human oversight
will still be mandatory for "weapons release", and maybe more
of the flight, depending on the particular conflict. US Defense officials
are adamant that a human will always be required to authorise the use of
lethal force. At this stage, nobody foresees a machine empowered to make
an autonomous decision to launch weapons.
-
- The remote operators also represent a big saving over
contemporary flight operations. To train a real pilot, you need to put
him in a real plane from time to time and let him get used flying it. No
matter how advanced it is, a simulator can never really give a true representation
of flying at Mach 2 right on the deck. UCAV controllers don't need that
real-world feeling though. Since their combat flying will be done sitting
in an office chair in front of a computer screen, that's all they need
to train. Virtually all of their instruction can be carried out with virtual
cyber UCAV's flying simulated missions. The actual aircraft can then be
mothballed away and only broken out when needed. Storage periods of up
to 10 years are envisaged. That's a big saving on maintenance bills.
-
- Design wars
-
- When in 1998 the Pentagon first announced its need for
a UCAV system, the concepts and graphic art came thick and fast. Most of
the usual American aerospace players tendered their own version and some
were pretty far-fetched. Lockheed Martin even came up with the idea of
a UCAV launched from a submerged submarine that could be used to carry
out a devastating surprise attack. It's unlikely that idea will ever see
daylight though, since if a sub is going to launch aircraft, it may as
well put up a lighted billboard to advertise its presence.
-
- The Northrop Grumman design looks like a baby stealth
bomber. Boeing's effort is slightly more unconventional in its appearance.
It has a stealthy, tailless, 9-meter-long airframe with an 11-mter wingspan.
Empty it weighs about 3 1/2 tons and can carry an additional 1,360 kilos
in payload. Both companies' prototypes carry their weapons in internal
bays for added stealth.
-
- Official testing of the two UCAV aircraft, with them
performing a simulated suppression of air defenses mission, is scheduled
to begin in mid-2002. The winning design could then be in production and
front-line service sometime after 2010.
-
-
-
- MainPage
http://www.rense.com
-
-
-
- This
Site Served by TheHostPros
|