I presume, it is much difficult to refuel a UAV / UCAV with Navy/Nato system than with the USAF system. The pilot of the aircraft, which is being refueled, is in charge with the Navy/Nato system. The “flying boom”- operator on the refueling aircraft (KC-135/ KC-10) is in charge with the USAF system.
And while a Navy UAV / UCAV is uninhabited, who would be in charge?
fightingirish
wrt who’s doing what…. for a boom system the ‘boomer’ does the ‘poke’ to establish contact. From that point it is up to the receiver to maintain the proper position (I have to fudge a little here in that for smaller aircraft the boomer can actually move the aircraft around a little; not the preferred technique).
For a boom-receptacle approach I’d think it would be an autopilot kind of thing with the UCAV getting into proper position and maintaining ‘green/green’ thru a datalink to/from the tanker.
Probe and Drouge would be tougher to get initial contact, but not impossible
I don’t think it would work if it depended on the UCAV operator ‘hands-on’ flying the AAR. Actually think a closed-loop autopilot data link system would be easier to make work. Maybe throw in some kind of differential GPS???
Heck if the Russians can get an unmanned Soyuz to dock on the ISS, you’d think this could be done as well 🙂
What do you other aerospace engineers think?
Mark
Sign In
