Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Sundowner on December 05, 2009, 03:23:35 PM
-
<snip>The U.S. Air Force has confirmed to Aviation Week the existence of the so-called "Beast of Kandahar" UAV, a stealth-like remotely piloted jet seen flying out of Afghanistan in late 2007.
The RQ-170 Sentinel, believed to be a tailless flying wing design with sensor pods faired into the upper surface of each wing, was developed by Lockheed Martin's Advanced Development Programs (ADP), better known as Skunk Works. An Air Force official revealed Dec. 4 that the service is "developing a stealthy unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to provide reconnaissance and surveillance support to forward deployed combat forces."....<snip>
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/BEAST120409.xml&headline=USAF%20Confirms%20Stealthy%20UAV%20Operations
Regards,
Sun
-
No more room for the testosterone in the cockpit anymore.
The best AI algorithm win.
-
Nice picture, is it a butterfly? :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0FmWSmIJ0M
-
Better picture
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_kandahar_uav.jpg)
-
Now imagine squadrons of biggers ones, armed to the teeth, being launched against an enemy. Able to pull insane "G"s and able to defeat any known AA defense. The future.
I dont think we'll see a totally unmanned USAF strike air force in our lifetimes but it definitely is the future.
-
Now imagine squadrons of biggers ones, armed to the teeth, being launched against an enemy. Able to pull insane "G"s and able to defeat any known AA defense. The future.
There will always be countermeasures being developed hand to hand with weapon advancements.
-
yeah like just lobbing up high something that creates a big arse EMP to interfere with the signals and adios drone craft.
though 98% of the planet cant do that so pilots will be kept for that 2% that can.
-
Its funny they use a controller for the uav that looks like a ps2 controller.
-
That's why they were so interested in recreating that German Arado jet in the National Geographic program!
-
That's why they were so interested in recreating that German Arado jet in the National Geographic program!
That was a Horten design. Thou the wing of the Handley Page Victor was based on Arado design work
-
I was once on a visit on a US base. SQN of F-15E's, and I was with the SQN leader. I asked him if he thought it possible that RC or/and AI fighters would take over in the business. He said NO, the public would never accept it. And on top of that, what if the link got severed, intercepted or scrambled.
I said okay and thanks, while thinking what if YOUR link was cut, or your electronics.
AH'ers, better boost up yer scores, so the finest can really fly online :devil
-
yeah like just lobbing up high something that creates a big arse EMP to interfere with the signals and adios drone craft.
though 98% of the planet cant do that so pilots will be kept for that 2% that can.
And exactly how is that going to stop an F-22 from falling out of the sky? Just as dependent on computers to fly.
-
Electromagnetic shielding is the process of limiting the penetration of electromagnetic fields into a space, by blocking them with a barrier made of conductive material. Typically it is applied to enclosures, separating electrical devices from the 'outside world', and to cables, separating wires from the environment the cable runs through. Electromagnetic shielding used to block radio frequency electromagnetic radiation is also known as RF shielding.
The shielding can reduce the coupling of radio waves, electromagnetic fields and electrostatic fields, though not static or low-frequency magnetic fields (a conductive enclosure used to block electrostatic fields is also known as a Faraday cage). The amount of reduction depends very much upon the material used, its thickness, the size of the shielded volume and the frequency of the fields of interest and the size, shape and orientation of apertures in a shield to an incident electromagnetic field.
-
yeah like just lobbing up high something that creates a big arse EMP to interfere with the signals and adios drone craft.
though 98% of the planet cant do that so pilots will be kept for that 2% that can.
What kind of EMP? And who's going to need an uplink? The drone fighter will be programmed for a function and will be able to do it without a constant uplink. Besides that kind of EMP, to knock down an EMP hardened drone, isnt that easy to come by. Its not like you can shoot a nuke off. We have been sheilding airplanes from EMP for decades. I was at a base in NM where they would put a huge bomber onto a huge wooden platform just to test EMP and shielding. There isnt going to be any surprises from EMP.
If we can program a space ship to land on Mars, and then send little robots out on their own, then we can pre-program attack aircraft. Heres another example of the future. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/warrior.htm or http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ucav.htm
We will be coming to the point where we wont risk a pilot on an opening night strike package. Like I said we wont live to see a pilot-less air force. But eventually somebody will.
-
yeah like just lobbing up high something that creates a big arse EMP to interfere with the signals and adios drone craft.
though 98% of the planet cant do that so pilots will be kept for that 2% that can.
Or, you can get a really big gun with a very high rate of fire, and shoot the plane out of the air. Seriously, why make it more difficult than it needs to be?
-
If we can program a space ship to land on Mars, and then send little robots out on their own, then we can pre-program attack aircraft.
Yeah ummm look at the success rate before you get too confident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars#Timeline_of_Mars_exploration
-
Haven't these people watched The Terminator??????? :furious
*cough* SKYNET *cough*
-
Yeah ummm look at the success rate before you get too confident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars#Timeline_of_Mars_exploration
The distances involved are *cough* quite impressive vs short missions.
And there is no flying through space.
There is practically no lag in communications.
The AI can take over if the link is cut as well as taking care of procedures.
Really, I think this is going to be it. Unmanned aircraft will take over. They'll be cheaper to build, and able to deliver payload or strafing into incredible areas without any risk to the pilot. The next generation may be anti-aircraft drone :D
-
Well you know what that means. Since they are telling us about this then they have something to replace it.
-
Already...... :noid
-
they are already using unmaned planes that can takeoff, fly a mission and land without outside control.
-
so the question .. how do you shoot down a drone?
Hit it with something it's not programmed for.
(example: .. over North Vietnam .. kept losin firebees to one route package, couldn't figure it out so an F-4 was sent to get eyes on as the Firebee went along its merry way ..
..well ..
..seems Charlie had built a bridge across a ravine the Firebee was supposed to fly thru .. it was hitting the bridge, taking it out .. .. Charlie was rebuilding it before the next mission went up there apparantly .. ROFL)
-GE
-
I dont know what a firebee is. And Vietnam was a long, long time ago.
Future attack drones will have sophisticated terrain following radar, "if its even used due to their stealth". The difference in computing power put in airplanes then and now is astounding anways. The technology is already here.
-
So what's new? The Royal Navy was operating a radio-controlled pilotless drone back in the 1930s - the de Havilland Queen Bee, a derivative of the Tiger Moth - and the bloody AA gunners couldn't usually hit that either.
:cool:
-
I dont know what a firebee is. And Vietnam was a long, long time ago.
Future attack drones will have sophisticated terrain following radar, "if its even used due to their stealth". The difference in computing power put in airplanes then and now is astounding anways. The technology is already here.
Removing a human from the decision to kill is something I doubt we'll ever see. Destroying these drones is fairly easy for a manned aircraft right now. The drones don't have the bandwidth to provide the same resolution and visual fidelity a guy 'in the cockpit' gets.
As for sophisticated terrain following radar... how'd those tornado's go in iraq ;)
-
I doubt we'll ever actually see our military force go without some manned aircraft. Chances are they will sit on the sidelines in many conflicts though.
-
yeah like just lobbing up high something that creates a big arse EMP to interfere with the signals and adios drone craft.
though 98% of the planet cant do that so pilots will be kept for that 2% that can.
nice joke but totally flawed idea... an EMPs gonna stop a piloted craft as easily as a drone...and we'd lose a pilot in the process... and most EMPs take out too large of a circumfrence to be able to only affect the aircraft targeted alone... aka the emps hitting the ground also and knocking out the EMP firer's systems that arent shielded
-
What kind of EMP? And who's going to need an uplink? The drone fighter will be programmed for a function and will be able to do it without a constant uplink. Besides that kind of EMP, to knock down an EMP hardened drone, isnt that easy to come by. Its not like you can shoot a nuke off. We have been sheilding airplanes from EMP for decades. I was at a base in NM where they would put a huge bomber onto a huge wooden platform just to test EMP and shielding. There isnt going to be any surprises from EMP.
If we can program a space ship to land on Mars, and then send little robots out on their own, then we can pre-program attack aircraft. Heres another example of the future. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/warrior.htm or http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/ucav.htm
We will be coming to the point where we wont risk a pilot on an opening night strike package. Like I said we wont live to see a pilot-less air force. But eventually somebody will.
what do you mean? we definitely all live in fallout 3 where a normal person can shoot a mini nuke off 500 yards away from you and live through the radiation afterwards!!! although its not the year 2072 and there arent 2 story tall super mutants running around eating people huh?
-
So what's new? The Royal Navy was operating a radio-controlled pilotless drone back in the 1930s - the de Havilland Queen Bee, a derivative of the Tiger Moth - and the bloody AA gunners couldn't usually hit that either.
:cool:
In the late 1960s, the Navy studied the possibility to convert the BQM-34A Firebee target drone to a remote-controlled anti-ship missile. In several test flights, BQM-34As equipped with a TV system in the nose, were successfully flown by remote "pilots" watching the TV image. Precision low-level flight above the sea was made possible by the Ryan-developed RALACS (Radar Altimeter Low Altitude Control System). In September 1971, successful tests of Model 248 missiles (called "BQM/SSM") against ship targets showed the validity of the basic concept, but the project was terminated due to lack of funding.
In the same year, the USAF showed interest in a development of the Firebee I to be used for enemy air-defense suppression, because of the high loss rate in these missions. In March 1971, Teledyne Ryan received a contract to convert four Model 147S drones to BGM-34A (Model 234) configuration. Like the Navy's BQM/SSM, the BGM-34A was piloted by an operator watching a TV image transmitted from the drone's nose. In tests during 1971/72, the BGM-34As successfully launched AGM-65 Maverickair-to-surface missiles and electro-optically guided glide bombs against simulated SAM sites. Interestingly, almost 30 years later a firing of an AGM-114 Hellfire missile by an MQ-1L Predator UAV was much hyped as a breakthrough in armed UAV technology.
Following the successful BGM-34A tests, Teledyne Ryan developed the BGM-34B (Model 234A) operational strike RPV. This featured the higher-rated J69-T-41A engine, a modified tail, larger control surfaces, and improved operational capabilities. Eight BGM-34Bs were built, and tested in 1973/74. The tests included the modification of some of the drones with a new nose containing a LLLTV (Low Light Level Television) camera and a laser designator, to act as a "pathfinder" for weapon-carrying RPVs.
(http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/bgm-34b.jpg)
Whats old is the new new...
-
Yeah ummm look at the success rate before you get too confident: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars#Timeline_of_Mars_exploration
i read this and i need to say that there hasnt been a failure since 1999 and that spirit and opportunity worked for an entire YEAR longer than thought... one even survived a martian winter with little sunlight to be reactivated in the spring... 2nd, youre all taking mathematics that MUST be precise to the .000000001 degree or there will be failure and putting it into a perspective with much more simple drone aeronautics that has nothing to do with flying a probe billions of miles across our solar system to another planet... and then landing them! :rolleyes:
-
The landing gear on the aircraft look awfully familiar. I'll bet there are bits of the old F117 incorporated into that UAV.
-
<snip>The U.S. Air Force has confirmed to Aviation Week the existence of the so-called "Beast of Kandahar"..
LOL, what a pompous name. :rofl
Back in 1975, "Beast of Saigon" was needed badly. But there was only one UH-1...
(http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090515-saigon-van-es-hlarge2-7a.hlarge.jpg)
-
Its funny they use a controller for the uav that looks like a ps2 controller.
Depends on the UAV, the smaller field operated one used console controllers for the most part but the USAF ones like the Predator or the larger ones operated by the USN use in many cases the same joysticks we use. I saw a photo of a Predator control center and they had what looked like Logitech sticks.
ack-ack
-
:noid Maybe AH is involved with the goverment in a secret plan to train future pilets and we are all being trained for the future of UAV's :noid :bolt:
-
LOL, what a pompous name. :rofl
Back in 1975, "Beast of Saigon" was needed badly. But there was only one UH-1...
(http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090515-saigon-van-es-hlarge2-7a.hlarge.jpg)
there were whole squadrons just off shore, but the democrats would not allow them to launch. Thats not political, thats history.
-
Depends on the UAV, the smaller field operated one used console controllers for the most part but the USAF ones like the Predator or the larger ones operated by the USN use in many cases the same joysticks we use. I saw a photo of a Predator control center and they had what looked like Logitech sticks.
ack-ack
yeah I have seen saitechs being used. I read somewhere that the british where using xbox 360 controllers (dont know if thats true)
-
I talked with a uav contoler. I live right next to Northrupt Grumman Unmanned facility. Unless they have controllers close to the action. They are having to much trouble in tests with lag. Same as in AH. To fight air to air He said seconds count. Air to ground is different and will be the primary roll for years to come but they will have pilots also for different rolls. Unless they create and AI that is better than a human we will always have human pilots.
-
AH has players from all across the world, but yet the lag is not that bad. light speed is after all some 7,5 circles around the globe in a second....
-
AH has players from all across the world, but yet the lag is not that bad. light speed is after all some 7,5 circles around the globe in a second....
Yes, but we aren't uplinking to something in the air, which has to transmit by some wireless protocol. Also, we aren't being jampacked through a few cluttered fiber optic lines.
-
AH has players from all across the world, but yet the lag is not that bad. light speed is after all some 7,5 circles around the globe in a second....
I think most of the data you see on your screen in AH is generated by your own computer.
UAV must transmit ALL the data from the plane, from all the systems, real time TV-image, data from the sensors, etc. Possibly many orders of magnitude more data.
Just guessing of course.
-
Real time TV travels at the speed of light.
All my data must go from me to HTC and back, while of cource simulation calculations are done with my front-end. But all control input as well as the status and coordinates of everything else around basically goes front and back. So, I have a guy in Japan firing at me in Iceland, and it could be thousands of bullets...all calculated.
The UAV will require a link with image/images, readouts and control input. The rest is the real world. No CG scenery. Of course an on-board computer could perhaps compile some data to make things more simple.
In theory, it is just a question of time when a RC aircraft becomes the ultimate RL dogfighter. No human body limitations you see....
-
All thats gonna happen is...
Some Afghani is gonna get a hold of a remote control NIK and fly it into it....mess up the stealth skin and all youll hear back at HQ is....
FRIKIN HO COLLIDE TARD AFGHANI.....CRAP...now we gotta spend 100k to fix the skin.....LEARN SOME ACM YA GOAT HERDER!!!!! HOW THE HELL DID YA GET THIS HIGH ANYWAY....FRIKIN ALT MONKEY AFGHANI TWIT!!!!
:joystick:
-
I dont know what a firebee is. And Vietnam was a long, long time ago.
Future attack drones will have sophisticated terrain following radar, "if its even used due to their stealth". The difference in computing power put in airplanes then and now is astounding anways. The technology is already here.
Not my problem that your education is sadly lacking. (Firebee is a drone, used for all kinda neato gee-whiz stuff ..I have seen more than my share on a trailer after being recovered from a mission that did not go as planned
..-evil grin-)
Stating the obvious is not really adding to the discussion.
'Future' attack drones will still go down when hit by something they are not programmed for.
All the stealth in the world doesn't do any good if bullets go through the airframe. (oops, sorry .. stated the obvious .. my bad)
-GE
-
Real time TV travels at the speed of light.
It's not real time TV, it's a heavily encrypted, serialized data stream being passed over what's basically an IP network. Try streaming multiple webcams at the same time, on the same pc, on the same link, and see how well your bandwidth holds up :) Now, do the same thing, with even more data, 2 way communication, error correction, and a wireless router flying around at 30,000 feet.
Our military bandwidth has always horribly lagged commercial bandwidth. It's being fixed, but it's not a fast process. It's marginally standardized at best right now. LINK4, LINK11, LINK16, ATDL-1, IJMS, PADIL, LINK22...
-
Well, since a cam can be linked to a bomb, why not a drone?
The basic image could also be compiled into a simpler image....
-
All thats gonna happen is...
Some Afghani is gonna get a hold of a remote control NIK and fly it into it....mess up the stealth skin and all youll hear back at HQ is....
FRIKIN HO COLLIDE TARD AFGHANI.....CRAP...now we gotta spend 100k to fix the skin.....LEARN SOME ACM YA GOAT HERDER!!!!! HOW THE HELL DID YA GET THIS HIGH ANYWAY....FRIKIN ALT MONKEY AFGHANI TWIT!!!!
:joystick:
I DIDNT SEE IT ON MY END ONLY SAW TEXT THAT YOU COLLIDED>>DWEEB>>> YOU OVERSHOT YOUR POSSITION>>SKILLESS DWEEB>DANG AMERIKANS :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:
-
It looks like some of the video feed wasn't encrypted.
"Senior military and intelligence officials said the U.S. was working to encrypt all of its drone video feeds from Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, but said it wasn't yet clear if the problem had been completely resolved."
On a side note... the guys that come up with these system names are talented.
"Gorgon Stare" indeed. :lol
The Pentagon is deploying record numbers of drones to Afghanistan as part of the Obama administration's troop surge there. Lt. Gen. David Deptula, who oversees the Air Force's unmanned aviation program, said some of the drones would employ a sophisticated new camera system called "Gorgon Stare," which allows a single aerial vehicle to transmit back at least 10 separate video feeds simultaneously.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html
Sun
-
Gorgon is the same as Medusa. id guess they called it that, since 10 vid feeds could
represent the multiple snakes on her head.
-
Gorgon is the same as Medusa. id guess they called it that, since 10 vid feeds could
represent the multiple snakes on her head.
Yep, that would make sense.
I keep hearing the voice of Dr.Morbius from Forbidden Planet:"Use the mirrors gentlemen. One cannot behold the face of the gorgon and live!" :cool:
-
It's not real time TV, it's a heavily encrypted, serialized data stream being passed over what's basically an IP network.
Heavily encrypted ahhh huh... wooooooops :D
-
This statement is a mind blower:
WASHINGTON -- Militants in Iraq have used $26 off-the-shelf software to intercept live video feeds from U.S. Predator drones, potentially providing them with information they need to evade or monitor U.S. military operations.
Sun
-
They pick up fast. Guess they have to compile it and code&send for the navigation/steering, and have the drone return with a tape :D