The end of the manned fighter?

On 17 Mar 2004 19:02:45 -0800, (monkey) wrote:

Oops I did't mean to type "they can't do anything", I meant
"everything." Maybe they should replace us pilots. Sheeit.

It's okay. We'll keep you on, as long as you can correct yourself with
such grace!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:34:19 GMT, "Vaughn"
wrote:

I believe unmanned fighters are here to stay

Well, sure, but in the way that intercontinental bombers are here to
stay. It's just that we aren't building them any longer.

Huh? Are you saying that we are not building unmanned fighters any
more?

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:34:19 GMT, "Vaughn"
wrote:

I believe unmanned fighters are here to stay

Well, sure, but in the way that intercontinental bombers are here to
stay. It's just that we aren't building them any longer.

Ouch. Bad timing. I believe AvLeak recently noted that the USAF is making
noises about developing a (presumably manned) replacement for the BUFF a bit
earlier than was originally planned.

Brooks


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:34:19 GMT, "Vaughn"
wrote:

I believe unmanned fighters are here to stay

Well, sure, but in the way that intercontinental bombers are here to
stay. It's just that we aren't building them any longer.

Ouch. Bad timing. I believe AvLeak recently noted that the USAF is making
noises about developing a (presumably manned) replacement for the BUFF a
bit
earlier than was originally planned.

Sorry, but USAF already wasted their money on the F-22.

"John Carrier" wrote in message
...
The End Of Manned Fighters?

No doubt the UCAV will compliment the manned aircraft. Whether as the
majority of the force, or merely a significant supplemental to the manned
jets, remains to be seen. I think they'll arrive in number later rather
than sooner.

R / John

Kinda makes the manufacturers' top engineering brass cringe in amazement
when they have stop and think of some of the fighter pilots they've known in
their lives, :-))) that the one thing they're having trouble replacing is
the hand's on capability of the on site human brain when all their
electronic goodies decide to go down the crapper. :-)))
Dudley

We haven't built any yet. A couple RPVs have been converted to launch some
A-G missiles, but that's it. The only really significant role for UAVs
currently is recon.


"Vaughn" wrote in message
...
Huh? Are you saying that we are not building unmanned fighters any
more?

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
news

"John Carrier" wrote in message
...
The End Of Manned Fighters?

No doubt the UCAV will compliment the manned aircraft. Whether as the
majority of the force, or merely a significant supplemental to the
manned
jets, remains to be seen. I think they'll arrive in number later rather
than sooner.

R / John

Kinda makes the manufacturers' top engineering brass cringe in amazement
when they have stop and think of some of the fighter pilots they've known
in
their lives, :-))) that the one thing they're having trouble replacing is
the hand's on capability of the on site human brain when all their
electronic goodies decide to go down the crapper. :-)))

If the electronic goodies go down so does the airframe.

The bottom line is that UAVs will never proliferate until you can operate
them "hands off" in controlled airspace and not have to give them special
treatement (i.e. functionally equivalent to a manned vehicle). There are
too many operational hassles associated with them currently to allow a
really significant force in proximity to manned assets. So, for now, they
will fill a lot of niche rolls, but that's it. Let 'em do their thing, but
keep them out of the way.

I spent several years researching this problem. When I told the bosses what
we had to do and how much it would cost to pull it
off....."uhhh.....fugedaboutit".

Autonomy tech has a long, long way to go.

Pete

"W. D. Allen Sr." wrote in message
...
Just like the 1960s when the air-to-air missile was to make made machine
guns unnecessary. That lasted only until the fur balls started over North
Vietnam!

Some sort of unmannned freigher might work out fine though; which is what
the article was really about. Even the loiter weapons we have been
discussing at ram use a manned fighter to deliver them to the field.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:42:28 -0800, "W. D. Allen Sr."
wrote:

Just like the 1960s when the air-to-air missile was to make made machine
guns unnecessary. That lasted only until the fur balls started over North
Vietnam!

DUUUUH!!!

Or those fools who thought turbine engines would ever be worth it
despite their short ranges! Or the absolute morons who believed that
*helicopters* would ever prove useful despite their ability to only
carry one or two people.

Hindsight makes for good rhetoric, , but the simple fact is that not
every grand pronouncement is wrong, and hindsight doesn't emphasise
the right calls, just the bad ones.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster