Sharp-eyed Nick Cook of Janes has spotted a new classified UAV program. He refers to this Pentagon budget document which says “the J-UCAS program to split into two separate programs: one Air Force classified program and a navy UCAV [unmanned combat air vehicle] program”. Some $1.7 billion is to be spent on these developments over five years.
The new craft is referred to as Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHAE), and is thought to be able to cruise at 70,000–80,000 ft, similar to the U-2 (Global Hawk has a ceiling of 65,000 ft). Penetrating means operating over defended territory, so unlike Global Hawk high degree of stealth will be essential. Being derived from the armed J-UCAS program, strike missions and SEAD are also possible. Cook says:
One report refers to the aircraft using engines from an inventory that has been in storage since the 1970s. This almost certainly refers to the General Electric J97-GE-3 engine for the Teledyne Ryan AQM-91 Compass Arrow UAV (a project terminated in 1971). In 1998, a NASA paper reported that 24 J97 engines were in storage at the agency’s Ames research centre…the J97 was rated at around 25 kN and the new UAV is probably a twin-engine design.
Compass Arrow, otherwise known as the Ryan Model 154 Firefly, weighed in at 5,000 lbs with a wingspan of 48 feet and carried a payload of over 300 lb. It was very stealthy for its day, with rounded fuselage and inward-canted tailfins, with a coating of RAM (radar absorbing material) to reduce radar returns. The engine was mounted above the fuselage to minimize the infrared signature.
Compass Arrow could cruise at 80,000 feet, and was intended to be used over China. For political reasons it was mothballed without ever being used.
Compass Arrow Arrow was single-engined, so a twin-engined PHAE is likely to be somewhat bigger.
The PHAE concept has been studied before , with a view to roles including countering WMD, attacking fixed and mobile targets, and suppressing air defences. Its not clear what weapons might be used from this sort of altitude, though a guided kinetic penetrator would make quite an impact from sixteen miles up. A stealthier approach would be for PHAE to act as a mothership for smaller UAVs (such as the 100 lb Dominator) killer UAV or miniature munitions. The US Navy has already experimented with launching the FINDER UAV from a Predator drone for close-in reconnaisance, as well as the miniature CICADA Close-in Covert Autonomous Disposable Aircraft which would be dropped in large numbers for electronic attack.
The endurance of PHAE will be limited by fuel supply; serious long-endurance drones with mission times measured in weeks or months will be solar powered. High-altitude long-endurance drones will find many more applications in both the civilian and military worlds — theres more on this topic in my book Weapons Grade.
– David Hambling
UPDATE Check out the new Special Report on Weapons & Warfare on the New Scientist magazine website, a feast of dozens of weapons tech articles with an instant expert overview by a DefenseTech regular.
Air Force’s Secret Drone Program Revealed
Previous post: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb Detectors
Next post: Squishy Sacks of Goo …
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Digging into the Skunk Works book again (ugh, at the risk of sounding dull) indicates that they’d tested shooting drones into China for the purpose of monitoring their nuclear program. Of course, the drone was supposed to be picked up before it dropped into the ocean and this rarely worked out, thus the project got canned. There was also use of the SR as a mothership to launch drones, with the loss of one SR during testing (leading to the project being canned).
Lots of stuff that we’d tried before and are looking at again, armed with better tech than the last time around.
Let’s not switch it to full auto until we’re sure it can’t think for itself, OK? (With apologies to James Cameron)
pictures pictures PICTURES. we want some PICTUERES OF THIS THING!
Sounds interesting, and a UAV of this nature would certainly be exceedingly useful. South Africa’s Denel has been working on something similar, called Seraph, for a number of years, but a lack of funding appears to have stalled development of late.
how to go stealthy misleading the observers ?
just make your top-secret a/c looking like an
ordinary / known aircraft !!
-giant B-2 Vs normal B-2
-giant F-117 Vs normal F-117
also…
why should U.A.V.’s always be big craft ?
the smaller the U.A.V.’s the more difficult it is to detect.
and…
what about an aircraft with the entire skin of
MIRRORtiles !
it would be practicaly invisible since only the reflections of passing scenery in all directions
would show on the aircraft. (clouds,ground…)
for sur…
whe have seen nothing yet :))
its a little off topic, but i have a few questions–
1. does the B2 bomber look at all, made by humans? because i have scoured the internet and have found some dickhead conspiracists saying that aliens helped develope the B2. im not saying it is but if you look at it, it does look a little science fiction(the B2)
2. why the hell havent the US started creating a full on UCAV fighter (like the one off the movie STEALTH) that can do anything the F35 can do.
3. following up HEXJUMPER, i cant see why they create the UAVs, and the UCAVs as big as a damn 737! wouldnt it be stealth-ier to make them small and sleek, not big and bulgy!
Hexjumper:
Mirrors reflect specific wavelentgths of EMR (i.e., visual light). They don’t help at all in the radar spectrum.
boeing777:
Yes, it does. It looks like it was designed using sound scietific principles, measured on Earth, by humans, using theories developed by humans after the traditional evidence-hypothesis-test-revise-repeat technique that is at the core of the scientific process.
While it would be nice to have long-range, highly sensative UAVs that were small, the technology isn’t there yet.
UAVs have to be large enough to carry their sensor payload and an energy supply. Their size, then, is based on being large enough to create enough lift to carry the payload and fuel for a long endourance mission.
Radar and electro-optical cameras with sufficient power or clarity aren’t small enough for a small UAV yet.
Energy sources would either be batteries (heavy) or aviation fuel (also heavy in sufficient quantity for a long mission). Even if solar power was used to power the craft, a sufficient number of “solar panels” would still make for a larger aircraft.
So, micro, stealth, long-range UAVs sound perfect, be we ain’t there yet.
Just two cents….
the b2 WAS in fact, "inspired" by a close encounter had by Kelly Johnson, a lead aircraft designer. Documents of said encounter have been uncovered.
I believe Kelly Johnson had a UFO sighting once, but to say it inspired the B-2 is rather absurd, especially since Northrop Grumman and not Lockheed was the company that got the B-2 contract.
Both Lockheed and Northrop, when competing for the B2 program had similar designs. The Lockheed one was smaller and had a tail, but otherwise was the flying wing. William C got it first regarding who won the B-2 contract in the end.
Getting back onto topic…is there a possibility of bringing back nuclear reactors on aircraft? I know they had prototypes in the works a long time ago, and the concern was radiation shielding to protect the crew. I imagine it would be easier to shield electronics, but could be wrong.
If fossil fuels still have greater energy density, the best way to deploy these things might be to tether multiple UAVs to a "carrier", which could be an aerial tanker with multiple refuelling tethers. Fly out to a safe distance from your target and release all UAVs, with full tanks and ready to go. Tethering might also work if you have a battery powered craft as well, if you fly the UAVs separately to meet up with the carrier.
While we're at it, I wonder if aerial recharging from a giant flying battery (modified air tanker) would be safer than aerial refuelling…
who cares lets turn inward and screw everyone we got enough here