![]() |
| 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 |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Keith W wrote: Can be any of these or their combination. Or just maybe its harder than you think. Somehow I doubt when they were overflying the tanker in daylight, they still thought they are attacking an aircraft carrier. :-) A UAV with realtime video image recognition and IR sensors is unlikely to be especially cheap Realtime video image recognition needs a source of video (probably a wide-angle search camera + narrow angle scope with some decent magnification for examining the suspicios contacts), Problem 1 ) You have to process them to decide if they are suspicious There are not so many big things floating in the ocean, just examine them all. While the waves move and provide clutter, in half-decent weather a 100m+ ship tends to stick out as a sore thumb from quite afar. And it is quite unlikely there will be third party merchants sticking around a US carrier group in time of armed conflict.... a decent CPU to do the number crunching and a software to do the analysis. The first two items are not particularly expensive. The software might take real pains to develop, but afterwards the copies are free. Understatement of the year Yes, if you want to be able to do it in all weather, from 50km+ afar, your target hidden among the merchants, in few moments of ultrasonic flight. In fair weather, from less then 15km, with closing speed of 200km/h, I am not so sure. Warships do look quite differently then merchants/oil rigs, and they also tend to radiate differently. With real time image recognition systens cheap will be quite a trick. The cost might be high for initial development, but there is not reason the cost should be high on per-unit base. Cameras/CPUs and copying software is cheap. Cooled IR sensors and other fancy sensor stuff might rise the cost - the question is how much of it is needed, especially if you don't ask for all-weather capability. All of it or it wont work See above. Fair weather, no clutter. You want sensors from different spectra to work together, but they can be the cheap stuff... On the other hand RAM is IR homing and the IR signature of a 100hp piston engine is negligible compared to the IR signature of a rocket/jet engine of the current antiship missiles. But not small enough to be invisible Nothing is invisible. But if its signature is there with seagulls and sun reflections off waves, the locking/homing task is so much harder. Seagulls dont have 100 hp engines. Even cheap IR sensors have no problem with people let alone IC engines With the engine tucked at the back (like Predator) and with good mixing of the exhaust gas, you are mostly looking at cold front face. Seagulls/people tend to present warm bodies. Moreover, those cheap sensors are not mounted on supersonic missiles screaming to intercept you (the heat of the supersonic air alone might wash out your meager IR signature). Phalanx (or other gun-based CIWS) should be effective, but has rather short range (and not THAT much reloads, if you are dealing with a huge swarm). I suspect it is also looking at targets with much higher radar signature and very different characteristics. Thats just software and rather easier to do than deciding if that 1000 ft long ship is a carrier or VLCC An attacking UAV can make its decision to attack close enough - when it can actually see the island/aircrafts on deck of the carrier. First it has to decide to get close enough, then it has to survive the transit First is not that tough - with enough endurance reserve. Second is the matter of identification distance. And if the suspected target is illuminating me with targetting radar, I don't really have problem to identify it as a target, even if I am relatively far. And has a lots of frames to base its decision on. It might even send some info to the controller and ask whether to attack or not (again, tradeoff between how much you send and how reliable you want your communication channel to be). Comms are BAD things for an autonomous UAV , they can be jammed Yes - but low bandwith intelligently designed comms are tough to jam. Earth Calling Planet Esteban - a UAV with 200kg warhead and 8-12 sub missiles will be neither small nor cheap. Such an UAV will not be small: it will be Predator size, powered by a Rotax, Jabiru or more likely cheap copy of them. None of which carry 8-12 sub missiles. Useful load of Predator is about thousand pounds. A hellfire is more useful for predator then 8-12 short range anti-radar missiles. Note that controlling Predator involves 3 operators in a 30ft trailer packed with electronics Predator does a lot more, and the operators/electronics are there to analyze/evaluate what it sees, in a much harder to analyze environment, and with much higher expectations. Ultralight aircraft kits are essentially hand-made and sell for 10-20k. Indeed but of course they fly a around 70 knots with a max gross weight of around 300 kg, not much room there for 200kg warheads Ultralights with 100hp engines are limited to cca 500kg and 100knots by law, not by physics. Predator uses the same 100hp Rotax and has 220km/h max speed, around 1000kg takeoff weight of which cca 500kg is dry weight (200payload, 300 fuel). That 500kg of dry weight also includes lots of sensors you will do without. Replace the cabin with the warhead(s), give it faster wing (no need for low stall speed, this is on one way mission) and the sensors/brains/communication kit and mass produce it. Real easy huh , when do you plan to start production ? The tough part is really the sensors/data analysis, not the airframe.... That's why you are better of launching submunitions from out of range of the gun CIWS. Those subminitions need to be reasonably smart (once qued by the sensors of the main craft, they need to be able to lock on their target and hit it), but not necessarily pack a lot of punch (hitting radars, aircraft on deck and so on). Hint CIWS reach a long way , the sort of missile you'd need would be stinger sized at a minimum and you need a control system smart enough to know WHEN to fire, sensor fuzion is harder than you seem to think Stinger missile proper weights 10kg, plenty of room in my 200kg allowance for 8 of them. Somehow identifying the range to the target (when you are within line of sight and less then 10km away) does not seem too hard to me. Knowing that I am being illuminated by targeting radars also helps in making my decision. Once the radars have been damaged, the second wave can then just press on with large warhead bringing general destruction. (Or, to keep it simple, they all go together. If the radars are switched off, the large warheads will arrive and do the damage, if the radars are on (likely), the submunitions will home on them.) So you now rely on a new development of small fast radar homing sub munitions as well, and all this a grad student technology , yeah right ! No, being India/China/Iran, I already have those - maybe a bit larger, but no significant new development needed. Keith |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| GAO: Electronic Warfa Comprehensive Strategy Needed for Suppressing Enemy | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 27th 05 07:23 PM |
| CRS: V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | October 14th 05 09:14 PM |
| Air defense (naval and air force) | Mike | Military Aviation | 0 | September 18th 04 05:42 PM |
| Naval air defense | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | September 18th 04 05:42 PM |
| Showstoppers (long, but interesting questions raised) | Anonymous Spamless | Military Aviation | 0 | April 21st 04 06:09 AM |