DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Drones » Unmanned Future Plotted

Unmanned Future Plotted

The Defense Department’s “Unmanned Systems Roadmap 2005–2030″ is a pretty cold-eyed document, detailing in no uncertain terms what the pilotless planes of the world can and cannot do. But there is a part of the Roadmap where the Pentagon’s planners let their imagination run wild, where they consider the flying robotic equivalent to concept cars. Here are a few models
dp5x.jpgDP-5X
length: 11 ft. weight: 475 lbs. endurance: 5.5 hrs. 0 delivered/TBD planned
The DP-5X is planned to be a VTOL [vertical take off and landing] UA [unmanned aircraft]. The program has successfully completed development and test milestones and is planning to enter initial flight demonstrations. The vehicle is modular and will facilitate reconfigurations to include or remove subsystem components. The modular design allows the aircraft to be separated into distinct modules that are man-transportable. The DP-5X has an ample payload capacity and is designed to fit into a common HMMWV system. The unique construction allows it to be rapidly launched by two operators. The vehicle can serve as a tactical Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition (RSTA) and Communication Relay platform to the Army small unit commanders at the Battalion and below level.
Long Gun
length: 12 ft. weight: 720 lbs. endurance: 30+ hrs. 0 delivered/TBD planned
The DARPA Long Gun program will evaluate and develop a re-useable, long endurance, low cost, joint, unmanned/armed missile system combined with a tri-mode long wave infrared/near infrared/visible (LWIR/NIR/VIS) sensor with laser spot targeting. Ducted fan propulsion will provide efficient thrust for long endurance. The missile will be launched from a canister carried on a sea or ground vehicle, will fly to a specified target area, and use a tri-mode sensor operating at visible, long, and near-infrared wavelengths to search for targets. If a qualified target is found, the missile will attack the target with a self-contained munition. If no targets are found, the missile could be commanded to return to base. The missile will include a data link back to a human controller/ operator to confirm target characteristics, approve engagement, and perform battle damage assessment.
A-160 Hummingbird
length: 35 ft. weight: 4300 lbs. endurance: 18 hrs. 4 delivered/10 planned
The A160 Hummingbird is designed to demonstrate the capability for marked improvements in performance (range, endurance, and controllability), as compared to conventional helicopters, through the use of a rigid rotor with variable RPM, lightweight rotor and fuselage structures, a high efficiency internal combustion engine, large fuel fraction, and an advanced semi-autonomous flight control/flight management system. The patented Optimum Speed Rotor (OSR) system allows the rotor to operate over a wide band of RPM and enables the A160 rotor blades to operate at the best lift/drag ratio over the full spectrum of flight conditions. First flight occurred in January 2002. In flight testing, using a 4-cylinder racing car engine, the A160 has achieved 135 knots speed, 7.3 hour endurance on an 18% fuel load, 7,000 ft altitude, and wide variation in rotor RPM. Autonomous flight achieved for take-off, waypoint flight, landing, and lost-link return to base. Current plans are to test with a 6-cylinder engine, then migrate to a turboshaft engine, and ultimately to a diesel engine, to achieve high endurance (24+ hours) and high altitude (30,000 feet). The DARPA contract ends in 2007.
crw.jpgX-50 Dragonfly Canard Rotor/Wing (CRW)
length: 17.7 ft. weight: 1485 lbs. endurance: 30 mins. 2 delivered/2 planned
The CRW concept combines the VTOL capability of a helicopter with the high-subsonic cruise speed (as high as 400 knots) of a fixed-wing aircraft. CRW intends to achieve this by stopping and locking the rotor and using it as a wing to achieve high speed forward flight; the canard and tail provide additional lifting and control surfaces. For both rotary and fixed-wing flight modes, the CRW is powered by a conventional turbofan engine. The X– 50 is a technology demonstrator designed to assess and validate the CRW concept. Hover tests were conducted in December 2003 and March 2004, but a hard landing resulted in significant damage to the first air vehicle. The second X-50 is now being readied to continue the flight testing, planned for summer 2005.
Cormorant
Length: 19 ft. weight: 9000 lbs. endurance: 3 hrs
The Cormorant project is currently conducting a series of risk reduction demonstrations for a multi-purpose UA that is immersible and capable of launch, recovery, and re-launch from a submerged SSGN [guided missile] submarine or a surface ship. Such an UA could provide all– weather ISR&T, BDA [battle damage assessment], armed reconnaissance, or SOF and specialized mission support. In particular, the combination of a stealthy SSGN submarine and a survivable air vehicle could introduce a disruptive capability to support future joint operations. If the current demonstrations are successful, follow-on efforts could involve building an immersible and flyable demonstrator UA.
It’s interesting to see, too, what’s not on the Roadmap’s list. For example, Future Combat Systems, the Army’s gazillion dollar modernization program, is supposed to have at least four new kinds of flying drones by 2008, from backpack to mini-helicopter sized. But, according to the Roadmap, two of those four robo-planes will be ones that G.I.s are already flying. Instead of the UFO-buttplug hybrid that the Pentagon had originally been pushing to put in soldiers’ packs, the model airplane-esque Raven will get the nod, at least initially. Although there are hopes for the DP-5X to become the Army’s two-man portable drone of the future, the rail-launched Shadow 200, which first flew in 1991, will be drone of choice, for now.
THERE’S MORE: Aviation Week looks at the Roadmap and notes that UA missions “will be quickly expanding into the more exotic areas of electronic jamming, communications interception, pulling imagery from obscure portions of the electromagnetic spectrum and the measurement of faint signals that could betray enemy activity.”

The Roadmap has several chronological buckets for the appearance of specific capabilities. In 2005-10, some UAVs are to be inaudible from 1,000 ft. or less, detect targets under trees, distinguish facial features from 4 naut. mi., and automatically recognize target vehicles. By 2010–15, UAVs are to be capable of automated aerial refueling and employing a 100-band hyperspectral imagery sensor. Capabilities added in 2015–20 are to be the ability to map sea mines in real time and increased endurance (of 40%) without an increase in fuel load. The period 2025–30 is to produce 1,000-band hyperspectral imagery and human-equivalent processor speed and memory in a computer small enough for airborne use…
One big obstacle to expansion, particularly among the most sophisticated of these aircraft, appears to be the recruitment and training of qualified pilots and sensor operators to fly and fight them. Possibly the most sought-after and overworked units are the U.S. Air Force’s three Predator squadrons stationed at Nellis AFB and Creech AFB in Nevada; only the aircraft and small launch and recovery teams operate in Afghanistan and Iraq. Crews flying the overseas missions are actually operating from “cockpits” at Nellis.
For example, the Predator training squadron flying from Creech will produce only 15 pilots and 15 sensor operators per class during the next year, and perhaps double that in the following year, say USAF officials. There are plans to establish a second flight training unit, possibly operated by the Air National Guard. But demands of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq will make it a slow process.

Share |

August 15th, 2005 | Drones | 1229 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2005/08/15/unmanned-future-plotted/Unmanned+Future+Plotted2005-08-15+20%3A20%3A32noahmax You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Mag: Tehran’s Iraq Moves “Rival Those of U.S.” | Phone Book: G.I.‘s Best Friend? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. sr20de says:
    August 15, 2005 at 4:59 pm

    This has “Skynet” written all over it. Eek.

    Reply
  2. jaspreet says:
    August 16, 2005 at 5:36 am

    long gun = step towards “brilliant” from smart weapons smart weapons hit the target brillant weapons can pick the highest value target.
    Does seem to asking for increased fractide

    Reply
  3. Byron Skinner says:
    August 16, 2005 at 2:19 pm

    I just love these articles about the limitations of “UAV’s” and autonomous weapon systems in general.
    This is just more fear and lothing out of the folks that want to build big deck 100ton. Aircraft Carriers forthe F/35 (CV 77 the George H.W. Bush will be the last carrier to cone in under $10 Billion, maybe?) and sink another $150 Billion in to amphabious warfare ships to accomodate the VC-22 and to build aircraft with out any known mission the F/A-22.
    Let’s face it the F/A-22’s have broken the $200 Million a copy barrier, the VC-22 who knows, but surely it has passed the $150 Million mark and the F-35, which is still in development has passed $100 per airplane, average.
    While UAV’s are still struggling to with add on’s hit $10 Millionper airframe. It doesn’t take a U.S. Congressman to figure out what the defense industry wants to make.
    And I don’t think it’s by pure chance these same Aero Space Companies are now in ship building business.
    Can anyone see a simularity here, Northrup Grumman after buying out Litton Industries who make LPD’s for the U.S. Navy have bumped up the price from $835 Million to $1.8 Billion. Of course the new San Antiono class is needed to support the VC-22. Next the VC-22 will need a new LHA’s, the LHA ®. The twelve barely used LHD’sand LHA’s in the fleet are unsuited for the VC-22 and AV-35’s, surprise!
    Chig ching, another $100 Billion bucks.
    UAV’s are the future, I just hope we can aford to get there.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner
    “Stewart’s Platoon”

    Reply
  4. Yvgeny says:
    August 17, 2005 at 1:12 am

    Not so sure LHDs and LHAs are “barely used.” It may seem so to the laymen but they are quite busy.
    Also, the LHA® seems unlikely due to its complete lack of surface amphibious capability. I would have to agree that it seems like an added expense that we could probably do without. However, it doesn’t solve the fact that LHA/Ds lack the space for the extra maintenance and logistical supplies required for the MV-22 and JSF.
    However, can’t argue with the complaint about acquisitions. It’s business as usual to go over budget.
    And consolidation with aerospace companies was inevitable with all the crossover in technology. Take a look at how much overlap there is in aerospace companies making equipment for land weapons. That doesn’t take any detective work.

    Reply
  5. Byron Skinner says:
    August 17, 2005 at 1:59 pm

    Good Morning Yveny,
    I’m not so sure about your perdiction on thr LHA®‘s. Yesterday President Bush selected Donald C. Winter to replace Gordon R. English as Secretary of the Navy. Mr. Winter is currently President of Northrop Grumman Millile Systems in Los Angeles.
    It seemsbusiness as usual at the Pentagon.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner
    “Stewart’s Platoon”

    Reply
  6. organic says:
    August 17, 2005 at 9:33 pm

    > This has “Skynet” written all over it.
    Yes it certainly does:
    http://​deoxy​.org/​m​e​m​e​/​R​o​b​o​t​A​rmy

    Reply
  7. Byron Skinner says:
    August 17, 2005 at 10:51 pm

    Good Evening “organic”,
    Never heard of “Skynet”, please educate me.
    Everything I post is my “Own” opinion. I even use my “Real Name”, no some cute lttle handle.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner
    “Stewart’s Platoon”

    Reply
  8. organic says:
    August 18, 2005 at 7:09 pm

    This links explains the reference:
    http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​S​k​y​net
    An interesting coincidence:
    http://​www​.space​-technology​.com/​p​r​o​j​e​c​t​s​/​s​k​y​n​et/

    Reply
  9. brock says:
    October 9, 2005 at 10:36 pm

    how much will is cost a person

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
    • Rise of the Cyber Arms Dealers
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
    • More Vehicle Digital Camouflage
    • Chinese Digi-Camo
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
    Recent Comments
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      I agree. We are the only nation that...
      Jeff Fraser
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      Why? Taiwan's military needs to...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      If we're going to help them, I...
      Jeff Fraser
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      Logistics: If you only have to hump 1/10 the number of...
      toad
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      Exactly what committment have we made to...
      TMB
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      "This analysis does not take into...
      Steve B.
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
      For all the budget grips about entitlement programs, they...
      ohwilleke
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
      "[G]ive the military full control over their...
      ohwilleke
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage