It took more than six months, but the Air Force coughed up some details yesterday on a laser program it’s developing to plink drones and other flying objects from the sky.
Out at China Lake in May, a joint team sponsored by the Air Force Research Lab that included the engineers from the Naval Air Warfare Center fired a 2 Kilowatt class laser at a series of five UAVs, tracking them and shooting them down “at long ranges and using relatively low laser power,” according to a release from the laser maker Boeing. The so-called Mobile Active Targeting Resource for Integrated eXperiments beam rides on a trailer and is tethered to a fire control radar that helps it zero in on the drone and track the intruder before zapping it with laser precision.
The Mobile Active Targeting Resource for Integrated eXperiments (MATRIX), which was developed by Boeing under contract to the Air Force Research Laboratory, used a single, high-brightness laser beam to shoot down five UAVs at various ranges. Laser Avenger, a Boeing-funded initiative, also shot down a UAV.
During the same test, the AFRL fired their Laser Avenger prototype at another drone, downing it and giving the engineers a chance to blast the 25 mike-mike the Avenger wields as a “hybrid directed energy/kinetic energy” air defense system.
We’re still looking to get more information on how high these lasers were able to deal their lethal energy. But this, combined with other news coming out about directed energy weapons quietly making strides, goes to show that lasers may be a lethal addition to modern platforms sooner than we think.
This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.
Three companies are vying to secure an unmanned air vehicle demonstrator contract at the heart of the British Defense Ministry’s so-called Novel Air Capability Vision, but details of their respective proposals for the program are being treated as classified.
BAE Systems, missile manufacturer MBDA and Cranfield Aerospace are understood to have submitted proposals at the end of October. The contract for the selected concept could be awarded early in 2010.
The overall program is intended to run for around three years with the aim of providing a flying vehicle, along with the possibility of an “experimental operational capability” by 2015.
Neither MBDA nor BAE Systems were in a position to discuss their respective submissions beyond confirming them.
The novel effort is being pursued alongside more “conventional” Defense Ministry UAV and unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) projects, its Mantis and Taranis technology demonstrator programs, respectively. BAE Systems is leading the Taranis UCAV and Mantis medium-altitude long-endurance programs, while its Herti tactical system is once again undergoing operational evaluation in Afghanistan.
One aim of the air capability vision is to drive innovation and technology exploration to meet what is a challenging set of “essential and highly desirable requirements.” These include system survivability, maneuverability, payload integration and transit speed.
In discussing the general aims of the capability vision initiative, the ministry describes the effort as intended to “tackle … high-risk, high-return” opportunities offering a “step change in planned or future capabilities.”
The program could be of particular significance to MBDA. Expanding into the UAV sector using its guided-weapons expertise is a clear growth path for the European company, though it could place it in direct competition with its parent companies, BAE Systems, EADS and Finmeccancia
MBDA is teamed with Selex Galileo and GKN, with its proposal dubbed Black Shadow.
The outline requirement for the Novel Air System program is to look at development of a reusable long-range strike platform capable of penetrating and operating in defended airspace. A target range of more than 600 mi. is called for; another design driver is that the air vehicle be capable of being launched and recovered from a frigate-size ship. The last requirement would suggest a vertical take-off and recovery design.
The design should also have a loiter capability in the target area to engage the target, carry out damage assessment, and to reengage if needed. The ability for the system to be operated in an urban environment is also required.
Novel Air Capability is one strand of the U.K.’s Defense Technology Plan that was unveiled last February. The driver behind the novel air capability element of the overall research effort was to examine a “more cost-effective means of achieving the effects currently provided by manned aircraft and cruise missiles by using new concepts in [UAVs and] unmanned combat air vehicles,” according to the technology plan.
Discussing the concept further its adds: “The specific effects under consideration are the delivery of novel payloads over remote hostile territory and, specifically, within the urban environment.”
Well, I’m sure it’s not a mystery to some people, but when I saw this video on Military.com, I scratched my head wondering: “Is this a new SkunkWorks project or am I having Terminator flashbacks?”
Let’s put it this way…when the JSF gets canned, at least Lockheed has a fallback.
Not that many years ago if you wanted to hear a lecture on how wars will be fought by remotely controlled or increasingly autonomous machines you’d probably have to go to a sci-fi convention and sit next to someone with paste-on Vulcan ears.
Not anymore.
Peter Singer, author of “Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century,” presented the futuristic scenario in a very matter of fact way at the Air Force Association this month in Maryland. And he made it clear that it’s not all that far into the future.
If technology continues to develop in the same timeframe it has historically — with the number of transistors per square inch on integrated circuits about doubling every two years — then the world of 2034 will be one in which a today’s computer and weapons systems will a billion times the power they have now. The generally accepted view of technological growth is called Moore’s Law, named for Intel co-founder Gordon Moore.
“If you gave your spouse a Valentine’s card or birthday card that played music or sounds when you opened it up, that card had more computer power than the entire Air Force had in 1960,” Singer said. “So what happens, projecting forward [25 years] … then our computers, our unmanned systems, will be a billion times more powerful than today.
“I don’t mean ‘billion’ in that amorphous way people talk about it — but literally,” he said. “Take the power of that device or that computer, of that Predator, and multiply it by 1 with nine zeros behind it.”
By that measurement, he said, today’s unmanned vehicles are the equivalent of the Wright Brothers’ plane or the Model T.
The boys from DoD Buzz are all over the Air Force Association’s 2009 annual conference outside DC for the next few days and I thought I’d preview one of the videos they shot.
Bryant Jordan shot a quick floor video of Aurora Flight Sciences’ Scate, or what we like to call the “drone in a bag.”
It looks like a pliable, foldable mini-drone that is perfect for urban reconnaissance and small unit employment.
I’m sure Bryant will have a post on this at DoD Buzz, but for now, I thought I’d post the video for your enjoyment.
Be sure to keep a close eye on DoD Buzz for more technology innovations and policy pronouncements at this year’s AFA.
We posted a pretty interesting video over at DoD Buzz yesterday that I wanted to bring to your attention.
It’s fairly detailed look at a Predator/Reaper strike simulated by what looks like company officials, though I’d bet this is what a CIA strike might look like.
The video is both fascinating and at the same time disturbing.
For one, it’s amazing the control and detailed view available to the “pilot” and “sensor.” It just blows me away that two people can control several drones from an air conditioned trailer 2,000 miles away — or 100 miles away. The ability for the operators to distinguish targets, coordinate with controllers in theater and speak with spotters on the ground is just surreal and a real testament to America’s technical capabilities and adaptation.
Of course, the video is also creepy in the almost clinical way in which the pilot and sensor deliver their lethal blow. Calm, collected — and totally detached from any impact of what they’ve done. It’s one thing to launch doomsday out of a Minuteman missile tube — talk about detachment! …it’s another to launch a missile at a pickup truck you’ve never seen with your own eyes and have no real sense of the impact of that death on your daily life. A pilot returning to an air base safer because there’s one less SVBID on the road has more of a sense of his strike’s impact than the contractor in the trailer at Langley.
This is clearly the way aerial warfare is going — I get it. But it’s going to raise many ethical dilemmas along the way.
The Los Angeles Times’ Julian E. Barnes reports that the Air Force “is preparing to graduate its first pilots of unmanned drones from the elite U.S. Air Force Weapons School — a version of the Navy’s Top Gun program — in a bid to elevate the skills and status of the officers who fly Predators, one of the military’s fastest growing aircraft programs.“
The article goes on to state that “until recently, pilots would work on the Predators and Reapers, then return to their assigned aircraft. But the Air Force would like officers to make a career out of flying unmanned craft and become experts at operating the drones.”
Nothing like a new fork in the career matrix to keep a military career interesting. But what kind of self-respecting fighter jock would voluntarily take off his speed jeans and strap on a laptop for the rest of his time in uniform? No more Gs? No more sucking back the O-2?
The article also quotes a couple of future generals:
“It is safe to say most pilots will always miss getting back in the air,” said Lt. Col. Daniel “D.J.” Turner, who leads the Predator and Reaper training at the weapons school. “But we see where the Air Force is going. We understand we are adding to the mission in a crucial way.“
“I would love to go back and fly,” said Maj. Geoff Fukumoto, a F-15 pilot nicknamed “Admiral” who was one of the first to go through the Air Force Weapons School for the Predator and Reaper. “But I think I have found the place the Air Force needs me. Right now, I am committed to this job.”
Okay, DJ and Admiral. The Chief of Staff and SECAF thank you … along with your fellow Eagle drivers who will be flying those sorties (in a jet, not at a console) you opted out of. We’ll be seeing you in the movies. Er, maybe not.
A prototype for an unmanned aerial vehicle that may one day insert special operators, kill bad guys or fly a wounded Soldier from the battlefield to a base hospital gets a try-out sometime over the next several weeks.
The Excalibur will be tested in a proof of principal flight at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland under contract from the Army’s Aviation Applied Technology Directorate at Fort Eustis, Va. Don’t expect the robot plane to be carrying anyone — at just around 700 pounds the prototype is intended only to give the Army a demonstration of its vertical take-off and landing capabilities.
Patti Woodside, a spokeswoman for the company, told Military.com that Excalibur-maker Aurora Flight Sciences of Manassas, Va., “will be looking for customers and funding” to continue the UAV’s development.
She believes the test flight probably will happen in early July, but after July Fourth.
The test version will only be about 13 feet long, have a wingspan of 10 feet and weigh in at just about 700 pounds. The company envisions an operational Excalibur to be 23 feet long, with a wingspan of 21 feet and weigh 2,900 pounds. Though Excalibur’s dimension’s would be shorter than the RQ-1 Predator, it would weigh more than twice as much.
Aurora says Excalibur would fill a gap between weapon-toting UAVs such as the Predator, which can carry Hellfire missiles, and manned strike aircraft used for tactical air support. The Excalibur would be able to carry any of several types of ordnance, including Hellfire, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System missiles, Viper Strike laser-guided glide weapons and other small, precision-guided munitions developed or under development by the Pentagon, according to Aurora’s Web site.
Company officials at the Air Force Association’s symposium in Washington last fall said the UAV also could be used to insert special operators into an area, as well as carry wounded troops out of a combat zone. In addition to its VTOL capabilities, the UAV would be able to take off and land using short runways.
Unlike other UAVs, the Excalibur will not be remotely piloted by someone manning a computer, the company says. The plane will have a high level of autonomy, it says, which means officials can concentrate on mission planning, including finding and designating targets.
The company says Excalibur will reach speeds in excess of 400 knots, but with the ability to loiter at 100 knots.
Its six feet long, has seven foot wings, comes in its own launching case and weighs 135 pounds. Commanders will be able to fly eyes well over the horizon at sea or land without a pilot or even a runway with a new, portable unmanned aerial vehicle called the Neptune under development by DRS Technologies. The battleship gray bird with collapsible wings for easy storage can be set up for pneumatic launched within minutes, says Jeff Singleton, business development communications manager for Ft. Walton Beach, Fla.-based DRS.
In the air, its powered by a two-stroke, 15 horsepower engine and can stay up for about three-and-a-half hours before it drops to the surface via parachute for recovery. Singleton says it has an operational range of about 50 nautical miles, with an ISR platform that is able to note distinguish vehicle or ship details from about five kilometers away.
At about 1 1/2 kilometers it can recognize people, and can tell from about 600 meters what theyre doing, he says.
While the UAV is capable of being flown remotely and even landed on skids, typical missions would include a programmed flight and recovery after parachute drop, Singleton said.
Just when you didn’t think things could get any more nonsensical, here’s a story that makes you just shake your head with frustration.
Now, I’ll caveat this by saying I’m welcome to be convinced otherwise, but it strikes me as downright stupid that the Air Force insists on having Airmen pilot their Predators all the way to touchdown.
Now, I can understand having a close-tethered “man-in-the-loop” for weapons releases or snap recon taskers, but my reporting on automatic landing systems leads me to believe that there’s no reason whatsoever to have pilots landing drones from Nevada (or wherever else they’re remotely piloting those drones) every time.
Colin reports in his interview with outgoing AT&L chief John Young that the Pentagon purchasing czar was miffed that the Air Force declined to retrofit their Predators with autonomous landing systems. He cites dozens of crashes that might have been avoided had the service embraced the system.
Youngs spokesman, Chris Isleib, later sent an email to reporters slightly changing the numbers. “Since 1994 the Air Force has procured 195 Predators. 65 have been lost due to Class A mishaps,” he said. Isleib added that of the 65 mishaps, 36 percent are laid at the door of human error and “many of those attributable to ground station problems.” About 15 percent of the total was destroyed during the landing phase, Isleib clarified in his email.
The Army, on the other hand, typically uses ALS for their Warrior drones and has a lower casualty rate, Colin reports.
Is this a direct causal relationship? I’m sure there are mitigating circumstances and opinions on the matter with some of the mishaps. But it seems to me a needless attempt to cling to the Red Scarf mentality of a service that’s evolving more and more into a digital force of systems operators than the swashbuckling zoomies of yore — and that’s really not a bad thing at all.
Let’s hope there’s some other logical and practical reason than tradition here, but I’m worried Occam’s Razor is at play.
Recent Comments
Yeah, I don't get it. The "Dragon...
Ptsfp
Should wikipedia Ned Kelly.He used armour that worked in...
Nick
Marines win agin hoo rur
greg
To the poster "batvette" : You wrote:...
freefallingbomb
gee lets forget about winning a war as long...
greg stocks
Time to bring military clothing into the 21st century. I...
bobbymike
Part IV : …………...
freefallingbomb
Part III : …………...
freefallingbomb
Part II : But beam-riding isn't used by bombers...
freefallingbomb
To the poster "Charles" : Part I :...
freefallingbomb