i know theres been so much discussion about the F35 and i agree its a game changer but i think the X47 is also a game changer, and will make our fleets so much more capable, the mixture of those two weapons systems in the fleet will be incredible. I also wonder why the AF doesnt go for alot of those type of bombers instead of a few massive new global strike bomber?
do you really think so Joe? i'm still wondering how its going to operate ON the carrier. taking off and landing will be easy but getting it to the cat, and off the wire seem to be the sticking points to me. to be honest i see this as being a us navy land based strike option. i don't see it working on the carrier.
UCAS-D, the X-47B, will impact carrier aviation more than the F-35C. The F-35 is a game changing strike fighter but UCAS-D is a class of aircraft the carriers have never had before.
It's really more about ISR than strike. That said for strike the UCAS-D has a lot more range and loiter than the F-35 and probably has a lower signature.
It's not going to be difficult to either tell it to taxi itself when required or do it manually from a laptop. Indeed if the program works out I suspect the present requirement for a 4-6 aircraft detachment will expand to a squadron.
everyone talks about the range of the plane but guess what? it doesn't out distance the old A-6's and its really not that much farther than the F-35. additionally you're talking about telling it to taxi on an aircraft carrier? think about it. that thing is going to be mixed in with manned fighters, still has to be hooked up by humans for launch and taxiing after landing must be quick and smooth or you'll have planes flying on fumes.
the USAF told the whole story when they canceled the Global hawk. UAVs have reached a roadblock. against a 1st tier opponent they'll be dog meat. low isr or not, if they can be spotted (by telescope or binos) then they're toast. and we haven't even thrown fighters into the mix and they don't have to be high speed high tech fighters either. if you can develop a radar on the ground to spot it you can vector a P-51 from ww2 to kill it.
uavs are just another fancy toy that won't make it to the big leagues.
i know theres been so much discussion about the F35 and i agree its a game changer but i think the X47 is also a game changer, and will make our fleets so much more capable, the mixture of those two weapons systems in the fleet will be incredible. I also wonder why the AF doesnt go for alot of those type of bombers instead of a few massive new global strike bomber?
ReplyDeletedo you really think so Joe? i'm still wondering how its going to operate ON the carrier. taking off and landing will be easy but getting it to the cat, and off the wire seem to be the sticking points to me. to be honest i see this as being a us navy land based strike option. i don't see it working on the carrier.
ReplyDeleteUCAS-D, the X-47B, will impact carrier aviation more than the F-35C. The F-35 is a game changing strike fighter but UCAS-D is a class of aircraft the carriers have never had before.
ReplyDeleteIt's really more about ISR than strike. That said for strike the UCAS-D has a lot more range and loiter than the F-35 and probably has a lower signature.
It's not going to be difficult to either tell it to taxi itself when required or do it manually from a laptop. Indeed if the program works out I suspect the present requirement for a 4-6 aircraft detachment will expand to a squadron.
everyone talks about the range of the plane but guess what? it doesn't out distance the old A-6's and its really not that much farther than the F-35. additionally you're talking about telling it to taxi on an aircraft carrier? think about it. that thing is going to be mixed in with manned fighters, still has to be hooked up by humans for launch and taxiing after landing must be quick and smooth or you'll have planes flying on fumes.
ReplyDeletethe USAF told the whole story when they canceled the Global hawk. UAVs have reached a roadblock. against a 1st tier opponent they'll be dog meat. low isr or not, if they can be spotted (by telescope or binos) then they're toast. and we haven't even thrown fighters into the mix and they don't have to be high speed high tech fighters either. if you can develop a radar on the ground to spot it you can vector a P-51 from ww2 to kill it.
uavs are just another fancy toy that won't make it to the big leagues.