The Unmanned Air Force

[Zachstar]

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?...23225&from=rss

'Next year, the Air Force will procure more unmanned aircraft than manned aircraft,' the general said. 'I think that makes a very pointed statement about our commitment to the future of [unmanned aircraft] and what it brings to the fight in meeting the requirements of combatant commanders.'"

Game, Set, Match! We have a winner here!

Unmanned in the future, period..

[JALU3]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?...23225&from=rss

Game, Set, Match! We have a winner here!

Unmanned in the future, period..

Man, hate to be the one who has egg on their face when the network connection to these A-UAVs are disrupted or used by an OPFOR against us.
The Air Force has gotten taken for granted that they have been using these UAVs against non-technologically advanced OPFORs.

[August]

Originally Posted by JALU3

Man, hate to be the one who has egg on their face when the network connection to these A-UAVs are disrupted or used by an OPFOR against us.
The Air Force has gotten taken for granted that they have been using these UAVs against non-technologically advanced OPFORs.

That's my thinking as well. The network link is definitely the UAVs Achilles heel.

[baggygreen]

And regardless of how securely you encrypt the radio channel you use to control the UAV, if the enemy were to throw enough electrical energy in its general direction, you'll lose control. they need to keep a manned fighter and bomber force going.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by baggygreen

And regardless of how securely you encrypt the radio channel you use to control the UAV, if the enemy were to throw enough electrical energy in its general direction, you'll lose control. they need to keep a manned fighter and bomber force going.

Well, there's a way around that. All you have to do is use frequency-hopping coupled with an autopilot system that just keeps the thing from crashing.
You have to put out a lot of energy to jam a freq-hop signal, and the second you do, your position can be triangulated by RDF and will be a very bright beacon to an anti-radiation missile.
I'm not too concerned about the crypto being compromised, either. The U.S. the best crypto systems in the world, coupled with extensive measures meant to minimize a breach if one did occur. The one thing I can tell you is that the hopsets and crypto keys are changed very frequently. I wish I could say more, cause' it's pretty amazing stuff.

In any case, an unmanned airforce is still many years away, if it ever comes at all. UAVs are great, and a definite asset on the battlefield, but they aren't ready be the primary aerial platforms yet.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I wonder if there were so many Luddites voicing opposition 20 years ago before the Tomahawk missile saw its first combat use.

PD

[Zachstar]

Against fighters they suck. That will not change until they can put a railgun blast or high power laser downrange.

However, F-22s and F-35s will have easy done that by then. In a shooting war all manned aircraft that can carry a missile will be used to keep fighters at bay while stealhy drones blast their airfields, support into shreds.

Afterwords who cares about jamming? Drones are programmed with missions ahead of time and like it is said above. Jamming makes you a BIG HARM target.

Hell I bet most of the time the connection will only be used to report back on how the hellfires are ripping a new hole into the enemy. Drones work better in flocks.

The flock way is the best way. A flock of UAVs means mission success period. Kill one UAV and within moments the sam launcher is tagged and blown to shreads by the others.

And when they get the ability to use Bofors and 20mm? Win..

With all this it is obvious the days of manned military aircraft in the USAF are coming to an end. Some give it 50 years. I give it 15-10.