"Will the Navy’s New Killer Drones Hunt Terrorists .." Topic

…Or Fight China?

"America's ship-launched X-47B killer drone prototype took off for the first time from the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush sailing near the Maryland coast on Tuesday morning — the first step in proving that a high-performance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle is compatible with the Navy's fleet of 10 gigantic nuclear-powered flattops.

But that doesn't mean the sailing branch will definitely be purchasing similar jet-powered drones for frontline use. According to Bob Work, until recently the Navy undersecretary and a big supporter of armed UAVs, the sea service must choose between X-47B-style ‘bots and a simpler, propeller-driven drone similar to the Air Force's Predator.…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

The X-47B is going to happen. The Navy's not interested in hunting insurgents with slow prop-driven drones in low-tech threat environments. The X-47B is being developed with an eye toward countering China and Iran; both have developed so-called anti-access/area denial weapons that can pose a threat to our flat-tops.

I think the long-ranged X-47B and the UCLASS will be true 'game changers,' unlike the F-35 boondoggle.

Okay saw the film footage. If it was unmanned why was the flight deck giving hand signals?

And Hello! It is a jet drone? What the heck loiter time will that have over targets?

Seems it would be better to scrap the carriers and have tube launched fire and forget missiles.

VR
James Mattes

James,

But a tube launcher just doesn't have the same gravitas as having a CVBG parked offshore!

Mike

I bet it ends up being a good dog fighter too. 20 g turns

The guy on the other end of the control system is still a pilot and in need of the hand commands.

missiles can't find targets to attack

I wonder if these aren't supposed to supplement the manned aircraft on CVNs. In fact, I could imagine smaller "jeep" carriers tricked out with these providing protection for the supercarriers, surface action groups, or invasion forces. I coulds also see them used to enforce No-Fly Zones.

As far as fighters and any sort of Air To Air combat goes I think the Air Force and Navy are going to fight that battle to the death. Last bastion of manned flight will be fighter jocks. Bombing, Reconnaissance, ECM and and CAS are not glamorous. Dog Fights are a different story.

VR
James Mattes

Dog Fights are a different story….

nope the first time a maned fighter faces a dog fighting drone that can have 5 guys working weapons and battle awareness, pre-programed moves, and it can pull 20+ G turns all day and is about half the size of the maned fighter and faster. and lets not leave out 25% of the cost per unit and and super cheep training costs. Fighter jocks don't stand a chance.

There you go Ron putting logic in a macho hoopla machismo argument. Every want-to-be Baron von Richthofen and Eddie Rickenbacker will fight this one to the very end or at least until there is not a single pilot left in the higher chain of command of the Naval Aviation and Air Force. JUST too engrained to root out without a complete change of life experience. Heck there are still those who think the U.S. Army should still have horse mounted cavalry.

VR
James Mattes

So manned combat aircraft, like aircraft carriers, will stick around long past their obsolescence for 'romantic reasons.'

I see no reason you have to choose between the two types of drones.

Seems to me a mix of both would be a reasonable deployment strategy, especially given the prop-driven drones' longer loiter times.

Carriers field more than one type of aircraft already, so I really don't see the need to have only one type of drone, or the other.