UAVs & Naval Aviation

DARPA announces new X-plane programme

The aircraft, one of the rare formally designated X-planes, is meant to both hover and fly at high speeds with efficiency equal to dedicated platforms. Specifications call for an aircraft capable of more than 300kt (555km/h) maximum airspeed; higher than conventional helicopters can achieve, and the ability to hover with greater efficiency than current rotorcraft.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/darpa-announces-new-x-plane-programme-382691/

For what possible purpose?

Export to, say, India.

Rii

I am wondering how much you could scale up a ScanEagle-type system with a vessel designed in accordance with the concept as a core capability.

There was a concept called RITS (Runway In The Sky) that was being developed for the USCG. Dont think it went far and the last heard seems to be that the developing outfit was busy sueing Boeing over ScanEagle, but, description of the system as below:

A Saint Louis, Missouri, company named Advanced Aerospace Technologies Incorporated (AATI) has come up with an alternative scheme for launching and recovering a Dragon Drone or other small UAV from small vessels. The scheme involves the use of a parasail and is referred to the “runway in the sky (RITS)”. In AATI demonstrations, a Dragon Drone is attached to a piggyback frame that harnesses the drone to the parasail. The parasail is reeled out into the wind until it reaches an altitude of about 250 meters (800 feet). The drone is then released, diving until it builds up enough speed for the operator to pull it out of the dive and sent it on its mission.
In recovery, the parasail is used to lift a tow line into the sky, with the tow line trailing a series of recovery lines hanging between the parasail and the ship. The drone is flown into the recovery lines, and a snaplock mechanism on the drone’s wing grabs onto a line. The drone is then reeled back down to the ship. The tow line has more “give” to it than a recovery net, reducing the likelihood of damage.
The current RITS scheme can handle UAVs weighing up to 180 kilograms (400 pounds), but AATI thinks it can be scaled up to handle larger aircraft. AATI claims the system is inexpensive and easy to use. They also point out that the parasail could also be used to loft an antenna to allow over-the-horizon communications with a UAV. Whether the Coast Guard intends to use this scheme or not is uncertain, but it certainly is an interesting concept.

That 180kg limit puts the system capable of launching vehicles up to RQ-7 and Hermes 90 size…so quite a bit of an advance on Scan Eagle. Cant imagine it would be an easy system to employ in adverse weather conditions though!

I think Israel already has a sufficient number of missiles and UAV products that it could relatively easily create a UAV/missile carrier to use for fleet support as a force multiplier.

For what possible purpose?

The Israeli Navy is (with the exception of its submarines) purely a coastal defense force operating along its own coast (or for short periods along the Lebanese or Egyptian coast)… and will therefore always be operating inside the air cover provided by the Israeli Air Force operating from bases in Israel.

I wonder what a vessel with the (modernised) capabilities of a WW2 escort carrier would look like. Would it look like a carrier, or just a container ship with the mission fit UAVs containerised and varied to suit the specific role(s) the UAV carrier was tasked with, like the LCS?

AEW, ASW, ASUW, recce, ground attack and maybe interceptor UAVs.

I guess defensive anti-air warfare would be easier with containerised onboard SAMs but would you have small swarming fighter UAVs to swamp enemy fighter defences?

Might offensive roles against land targets be better carried out by the likes of Jumper and LORA, which are, to some extent, already containerised?

Would a containerised missile/UAV carrier be useful to larger navies as auxiliary vessels or as primary combatants for smaller nations?

I think Israel already has a sufficient number of missiles and UAV products that it could relatively easily create a UAV/missile carrier to use for fleet support as a force multiplier.

I am wondering how much you could scale up a ScanEagle-type system with a vessel designed in accordance with the concept as a core capability.

Also in mind is possibility of mobile sonobuoys for ASW work, augmenting helos.

Am I alone in thinking that AWs Project Zero is a step towards offering AEW for CVFs?

Very interesting..I fully expect the Navy to back this as they figure out what use to make of the LCS 🙂 ..

IMO the VARIOUS concept is too small. The payload is less than half the required 600 lbs and radius-of-action/on-station endurance is far less than DARPA’s requirement. The fan-in-wing doesn’t help because it dispaces too much fuel volume. A major redesign is needed if it is to become TERN.

I’d not be sure of that b_i_o if you look at the LM footage for VARIOUS all the components are there. LSD, ISTAR, light strike. As dj notes 600lb and high endurance/900nm range means a big air vehicle…one too big for simple ScanEagle style launch/recovery.

Realistically that does mean VTOL in some description so ducted fan, tilt-rotor such as an EagleEye variant or AD-150 (http://adflightsystems.com/public/documents/AD-150.pdf?), autogyro or something equivalent on a substantial airframe. One thing this isnt going to be is cheap!.

Looks like thats a spec written neatly for LockMarts’ VARIOUS concept!

I do not think this is what they are looking for but it appears to be a neat little concept..A UCAV built around the F-35B propulsion concept will more than capable of hauling 600-1000lb ISR and attack mission systems, although it would probably be too complex and expensive..and i think the USN is looking for a cheaper sollution rather than an ultra survivable one..

An LPD is lucky to make 18 knots and there is lots of dirty air from the superstructure. This makes operation of a big wing/low stall speed UAV tenuous. VTOL is the obvious solution. But 600 lb payload and long endurance requires a big vehicle. It will also need to fold to fit in the hangar.

I guess that is why DARPA is leading here..

An LPD is lucky to make 18 knots and there is lots of dirty air from the superstructure. This makes operation of a big wing/low stall speed UAV tenuous. VTOL is the obvious solution. But 600 lb payload and long endurance requires a big vehicle. It will also need to fold to fit in the hangar.

Looks like thats a spec written neatly for LockMarts’ VARIOUS concept!

http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/products/various.html

I think DARPA is still asking for proposals for such a vehicle, so i assume that different contractors would provide slightly different solutions…

What is the recovery method of TERN ?

This looks interesting, although i am not sure what ships it will fly off of (LCS? )

http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2013/03/01.aspx

I saw the Brits has developed a new battlefield missile with loiter capability,
as long as it fits a Mk41 VLS you could have a link back with info.
Wonder if a recovery net or a parachute would be feasible for recovery ?