In the near future?

Bruggen 130…..Nice “Move”. 😉

Jim.

Lincoln .7

man

[QUOTE=hampden98;1893701]
Depends if we are talking quick win or attrition of course.
Man will never be outwitted by a computer, he’s far too cunning and nasty.[/QUOTE

I take it you don’t play chess then?

If the battle field goes high tech then man and machines will go low tech to combat them.
Hightech = expensive. Low manned tech may just have a chance.
A small manned low tech aircraft may be able to slip past radar, attack, evade. Saturate the enemy with many low tech combatants. High tech, you can only afford so many.
Depends if we are talking quick win or attrition of course.
Man will never be outwitted by a computer, he’s far too cunning and nasty.

We had several shoot themselves, they have a minimum range to cease fire or they get what they reap back as they fly over the target. We had one Jag with a perfect round shape crease under a wing, another put rounds through it’s intake and grazed the canopy by his head…. Thing with ranges though, you are trying to hit it and not worried what or who are shooting at you, the crews tried I believe to ID the units in te ground but couldn’t.

Tony. I have spent many a happy hour in the observation tower at RAF Holbeach Bombing range(It was a T stop for me), and it’s surprising how slow they can fly, frintance when they shot at a target, they banked right, very slowly, I seem to remember an American Sabre shot itself down on the range because it didn’t pull up and bank away quickly enough, I think there have been several more prior to these.
The Range was in use in WW1, so one can imagine the amount of ordnance buried within the ground, and some have been downed by a ricochet, which in the circumstances, is understandable.I live 10 miles away from the range, but when it was a nice wind free day, you could hear the “Gatling gun” firing short bursts.In a strange way, I miss their very distinctive engine whine.
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Remember they did have war weary B17’s operated by remote.

An A-10 is a different matter than a Predator, the Predator tends to fly in a benign manner, and A-10 on the other hand you would need a pretty quick uplink time or it would be a smoking hole while you are waiting for the signal to tell it to pull up to arrive.

How long before pilotless aircraft attack crewless tanks or crewless ships?

Perhaps one day we can have a war where no-one dies…….

Baz

Air to air isn’t what the current, or about to enter service drones are meant to do.

But air to ground, yes. As well as reconnaissance, and other “support” tasks. Northrop Grumman is developing the X-47 for the US Navy. A carrier capable UCAV.

Already in service are drones like the MQ-9, which is armed. For a short overview, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper

It’s completely feasible, actually it’s been feasible for quite a long time. The only problem is you get some lag with satcoms, but other than that it’s nothing groundbreaking really. The cutting edge work at the moment is in algorithms to automate the aircraft, traffic avoidance, target identification and things like that.

You will always get accidents and I can understand it happening, having flown at low level and been thrown around pulling G in a fighter it is like trying to spot something whilst riding a big dipper, couple that with all that is going on on a battlefield and tragic accidents will happen, even giving everyone individual transponders and IFF would still not stop these things happening, as with all things in life nothing involving humans will ever achieve 100% safety.

Tony, God help us if they use the A10 Warthog for what you posted.
Wasn’t it in the Desert Storm, one of them that WAS manned, shot up and killed one of our Tanks,and crew?, Blue on Blue?.
Jim.

Lincoln .7

I forgot the link about the A-10

http://aviationintel.com/2012/02/21/unmanned-a-10-warhog-to-be-tested-with-new-jtac-interface/

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/07/airforce_closeair_073110/

Already looking at unmanned A-10….

Lincoln it was later mentioned in the news that the police drone crashed because they hadn’t charged the battery. Unfortunately out over the river lol.

Bruggen 130……..Don’t you mean “The place that does not exist, according to the USA…Area 51?. How the heck Google got one of it’s cars in there for Google Earth I will never know, perchance it was a Google Stealth Car 😮
Jim.
Lincoln .7

TonyT. Thats just got to be one for the, “You couldn’t make it up Post”
And they are some of the ones who today gave the H.S. Theresa May a rough time regarding Police Pay and conditions, Now they know :rolleyes:
Jim.

Lincoln .7

UAVs

You can bet it’s already being tested out in Navada, I think that what you
see is about 5 years behind what they’ve got.

Just don’t let the Liverpool police anywhere near them..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8859806/13000-police-drone-lost-after-crashing-into-River-Mersey.html

We are at the stage now where unmanned ‘bombers’ are being used to strike ground targets….

Not that far off IMO, although I would like options to be kept open and not do another Duncan Sandys white paper.