|
| 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
July 11th 03, 02:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new.../ghwk07103.xml
Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon By Marc Selinger July 10, 2003 Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial vehicle. But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized UAV fly in their airspace. .... [click the link to read the complete article] 
|
|
#2
July 12th 03, 04:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Larry Dighera wrote in message . ..
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new.../ghwk07103.xml Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon By Marc Selinger July 10, 2003 Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial vehicle. But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized UAV fly in their airspace. .... [click the link to read the complete article] I wonder if there are any plans to arm the stealthy UAV used in operation Iraqi Freedom http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/ch.../07073news.xml A stealthy UCAV would be an interesting SEAD/DEAD asset.
|
|
#4
July 13th 03, 08:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Eric Moore) wrote in message . com...
(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message . com... (Eric Moore) wrote in message . com... Larry Dighera wrote in message . .. http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new.../ghwk07103.xml Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon By Marc Selinger July 10, 2003 Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial vehicle. But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized UAV fly in their airspace. .... [click the link to read the complete article] I wonder if there are any plans to arm the stealthy UAV used in operation Iraqi Freedom http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/ch.../07073news.xml A stealthy UCAV would be an interesting SEAD/DEAD asset. Both current UCAV competitors are already stealthy designs. Brooks The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the stealthy UAV mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now. They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an IOC as early as 07. And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)? If it doesn't then say bye-bye to stealth if you want to strap a weapon on externally. Brooks
|
|
#5
July 14th 03, 03:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
om The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the stealthy UAV mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now. They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an IOC as early as 07. Last I heard for UCAN-V (the naval vehicle) was 2015. And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)? That's a reasonable question. But a bay designed for large reconaissance sensors might be adapted without too many problems. Or conformal carriage (especially for JSOW) might be possible. -- Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail "If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)
|
|
#6
July 14th 03, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message ink.net...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message om The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the stealthy UAV mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now. They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an IOC as early as 07. Last I heard for UCAN-V (the naval vehicle) was 2015. I am sure that various dates have been floated. I recall reading that 07 was the period the USAF was envisioning as service entry. DARPA seems to be showing the R&D effort being "complete" (within the spiral development plan, which of course means that continual refining and further R&D would continue) in mid-06, according to: http://www.darpa.mil/ucav/factSheet/...etProgram.html . And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)? That's a reasonable question. But a bay designed for large reconaissance sensors might be adapted without too many problems. Or conformal carriage (especially for JSOW) might be possible. Without the sensors it would likely be rather blind and of minimal use even as a UCAV, I'd think. Conformal carriage sounds nice, but from what I have read of stealth design it is a rather poor solution, unless you are willing to sacrifice a large degree of any current LO qualities already designed into the system. A fastener head out of place can ruin the stealthy quality; this vehicle has obviously been designed and manufactured, probably within rather stringent tolerances, to be truly stealthy. When you start messing around with the exterior geometry you will inevitably cause significant problems. I see conformal carriage as being a way of enhancing the stealth qualities of otherwise relatively non-stealthy platforms, not as a good solution to the issue of increasing the load carrying capability of an already stealthy platform. Brooks
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
