DARPA’s Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS) program aimed to make optionally manned A-10’s controllable by soldiers in the field
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_Close_Air_Support

the idea of making it optionally manned has since been dropped, but the program has survived as a way for soldiers to use modern technology to guide in air strikes, rather than use just voice radio and maps as it has been since WWII. first live fire tests are said to take place this month, operational fielding as soon as May

even if it’s not optionally manned, it still brings the idea of unmanned legacy aircraft and JTACs controlling UCAVs a step closer

There is no one other than you that thinks that the USN can replace the F-35C with the UCLASS therefore the UCLASS is absolutely no threat to the F-35 acquisition program given that they need a minimum number of new fighters to replace the outgoing F/A-18’s by a certain point in time.

there are plenty of people who believe this, many high ranking within the USN, who’ve had the F-35 forced upon them and know it will not satisfy their needs

this bureaucratic battle between the services has been going on for ages, and many a good idea and more Dollars have been wasted because of it. as with its predecessors, the F-35 is here to promise all and deliver little, at much inflated cost and in much lower numbers (F-111, F-22, F-35, B-2… to name but a few recent examples)

the UCLASS will have the potential to fly out, detect and kill stuff, and as such it is a direct threat to the F-35’s budgets. for most realistic missions you don’t need the F-35, and you don’t want the F-35, when you’ll be able to field multiple long range expendable UCLASS’s with the latest plug-in sensors that were not designed 20 years before

the forces at play here know this, which is why the USN is struggling to get requirements for the UCLASS right. the F-35s defenders want to keep it small, so it can’t carry as much weapons as the F-35 (a moot point in today’s world of miniature weapons) or make it too big and complicated so it’ll fail (I’m guessing that’s what the USN did to the F-35)

so the USN has to balance off actual capability with perceived capability, in an effort to keep the program alive and able to replace the F-35 when and if needed, without being perceived to do so

E-2D is and ISR asset.
UCLASS is an ISR asset.

the MQ-9 is an ISR asset
but you put an F-16’s worth of weapons under its wings, and you get the most-used attack aircraft in decades

if they were to put the UCLASS with the attack wings, then a number of pilots would be reduced to sitting behind a screen, using a mouse to point and click stuff to death, rather than flying around on a rocketship
the Air Force has encountered this problem but has refused to accept it. as a result it’s losing RPV pilots, even as demand is increasing (so much for all those who said UAVs would be useless when the West leaves Afghanistan)
the Army found an easy solution: just let NCO’s do it, you don’t need experience pilots. the UCLASS will take this a step further, as it’ll be completely automated from take off to landing
so the Navy is taking the middle road: use its E-2D people

the other thing is that by putting the UCLASS with ISR, you’re saying its an ISR asset, completely different from the F-35
if you put it with the attack wings, you’re saying active combat pilots will be reduced to playing Hawx, and more importantly you’re saying it might take over roles from the F-35. then you’re suddenly getting in the way of a $300 billion program
by hiding with the ISR wing, the UCLASS is a wolf in sheep’s skin. and probably the only way for it to reach operational status alive

It’s a good news (by the way) for the 35 and all USN over stick addicted Pilots. The robot Joe are still one block away 😉

the MQ-9 was only a block away from the F-16
then they started closing down F-16 squadrons, or replacing them with MQ-9s
if the F-35 slips up, you can be sure the UCLASS’ builder will suddenly reveal that it can take over a large number of the F-35’s missions, even as the F-18I/J takes over the other missions

The US Federal Aviation Administration has teamed up with news network CNN to explore the integration of sophisticated unmanned air vehicles into newsgathering.

funny how the FAA is limiting private UAV use, but the big propaganda generators can still use them
I guess they don’t want private people to find an easy way to film stuff the government doesn’t want us to know
I remember the story of an environmentalist who used a drone to film illegal activities by a firm. the guy then gets fined and his proof is illegal in court, because the FAA says you can’t video a crimenal act without their approval :p

USN receives first MQ-8C
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/northrop-grumman-delivers-first-operational-mq-8c-fire-scout-to-the-us-navy-300004328.html

anyone know how these UAVs compare in cost and performance to say a Seahawk?
considering the USMC’s succes with the K-MAX (which btw would be great on ships, with their smaller footprint)
I read about them being used for recon and what not, but I imagine they can be used for a lot of roles

The U.S. Air Force Was Not Fond of the Next-Gen Predator Drone (excerpt)

correct link:
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-u-s-air-force-was-not-fond-of-the-next-gen-predator-drone-77cb9a3d10b8

The Reaper is currently the U.S. Air Force’s main armed drone, but in its standard version it suffers the same inadequacies that plague the original, 1990s-vintage MQ-1 Predator A. It can’t fly in bad weather and its satellite-relayed control signal tends to lag, which can cause crashes when operators sitting in trailers in the U.S. can’t respond fast enough to problems.
It’s also possible to hack the Reaper’s video stream … and jam its GPS.

The Air Force desired a “hardened” MQ-X airframe, the history states—an airframe that could “withstand significant battle damage, while the on-board systems detected, avoided and countered both physical anti-air and electronic communications and GPS jamming threats.”

I call bogus

on bad weather, I’ll bet GA installed de-icing systems, but more importantly with greaters speed and I’m guessing altitude, the Predator C can simply fly above or around bad weather, not always an option with the older models
on satellite signal, that’s a matter of programming. modern UAVs are programmed to fly in loops or return to base if the datalink is lost

hacking the video stream and jamming GPS can certainly be done. just as it can be done with every technology with a data link (satellites, F-35) or that uses gps (most aircraft, most air-to-ground weapons)
more importantly modern UAVs are equiped with INS technology, making GPS blocking a lot harder. and their data links use the same encryption as every other advanced weapon system

what seems the most absurd is the “withstand significant battle damage” argument, considering the F-35 probably can’t survive a few bullet holes

another USAF bureaucratic victory to protect the historic failure that is the F-35, the Windows Vista of aircraft