![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Chad Irby" wrote in message m... In article , "Keith Willshaw" wrote: Attack helos dont go in much for air to air combat as I recall But if you're using autonomous UCAVs, they have to be able to detect incoming threats, and decide which ground targets to hit. Therefore, you either have IFF or a very restrictive set of rules of engagement that the machine won't be able to break. Since a part of the "new" battlefield is going to be IFF for ground forces, that's going to be an issue, too. Restricting the question to air-to-air is a mistake. There's no doubt in my mind we NEED IFF for ground forces even with conventional manned platforms. We have seen far too many blue on blue incidents in recent conflicts IFF spoofed, UCAV hunts down friendly targets. IFF is easy enough, but "robust" IFF is a real pain. As is recognition by human pilots in the heat of action Still a couple of orders of magnitude better than any UCAV IFF we're going to see in the near future. We can't even build the suckers to fly reliably under non-optimal conditions yet, much less deal with threats while doing so. I have no illusions that we will see UCAV's flying CAS in the next decade but it is the way of the future with low level aviation becoming increasingly hazardous as MANPAD's and other weapons become increasingly common. Keith |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SWR meter Alternatives | c hinds | Home Built | 1 | June 2nd 04 07:39 PM |