X-47B Completes First-Ever Carrier-Based Arrested Landing

USS GEORGE H. W. BUSH, at sea (NNS) — The X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System (UCAS) demonstrator completed its first-ever carrier-based arrested landing on board USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) off the coast of Virginia July 10.

“By evolving and integrating new technology like the X-47B and the unmanned aircraft to follow, carriers will remain relevant throughout their 50-year lifespan,” said Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus.

Today’s demonstration was the first time a tailless, unmanned autonomous aircraft landed on a modern aircraft carrier.

This test marks an historic event for naval aviation that Navy leaders believe will impact the way the Navy integrates manned and unmanned aircraft on the carrier flight deck in the future.

In May 2013, the X-47B successfully completed underway carrier deck operations aboard USS George H. W. Bush to include a first-ever catapult launch and nine touch-and-gos.

“We have certainly come a long way in the 102 years since Eugene Ely made the first arrested landing aboard an aircraft carrier. Naval aviators have always been at the forefront of operational and tactical innovation, and today was no exception,” said Mabus. “People make unmanned aviation possible and it is people who will provide the fresh thinking and new ideas so crucial to successes like the X-47B program and the unmanned aircraft of the future.”

The Navy will continue to update this story as more information from today’s demonstration is made available.

Modern active terminal homing missiles like AMRAAM, MICA, Meteor, and R-77 use a datalink for mid-course updates, not semi-active homing. The only operational active terminal homing missile that used semi-active midcourse guidance was the AIM-54 Phoenix, though it used a somewhat advanced form of SARH, which did not require constant updates like most contemporary SARH missiles, so it could be time-shared and allowed the aircraft to guide multiple missiles.

Interestingly, the late-model AIM-7P Sparrow is a bit of a hybrid: it uses SARH for terminal homing, but a datalink for midcourse updates. This allows nearly “silent” BVR shots with the Sparrow since illumination is not required until the terminal phase.

Most surface AA systems use two different radars: a large search radar, possibly shared among multiple guns/launchers, and a smaller fire control radar dedicated to each gun/launcher. The search radar initially detects the targets, then cues the fire control radar to engage it once it is in range. The most effective search radars use longer wavelengths, which require larger antennas, and large amounts of radiated power. Fire control radars, on the other hand, work best with short wavelengths and only need a range that matches the weapon they are guiding. In general, fighter aircraft radars are much more similar to fire control radars than to search radars in all of those respects.

The “Tomcatters” existed long before there was such a thing as an F-14 Tomcat.

Those are not live AIM-9s. Note the blue stripe, which denotes an inert warhead. Also, the missile does not have rollerons at the corners of the fins, indicating that it is a CATM (captive air training missile).

I have the same edition as you and you are correct.
it says LINE, ok so i missed it. And they where inside the No-Fly Zone then. But if they where not heading back out of the No-Fly Zone, where were they then heading? Further inside the No-Fly Zone?

According to the radio calls the UH-60s were en route from Zakho to Irbil, so heading east-southeast.

But as for the record, i did not catagory state they was flying outside the No-Fly Zone eighter, it was a mere slipp on my quoting, so no big deal anyway.

:rolleyes:

Oh please. Now I know what the problem is. Either you are deliberately misquoting the book, or you are looking at an old version of it.

I just looked in my own paper copy of F-15 Eagle Engaged. Your quote is incorrect, at least compared to my edition (2007). On page 211, it states (emphasis mine):
[INDENT]
The F-15 pilots failed in a fundamental fighter pilot responsibility — to be able to correctly visually identify an enemy aircraft from one in their own nation’s military — and miscommunicated the ID. Despite the fact that the squadron commander was the wingman (as was often the case in these normally dull and boring missions, the flight lead responsibilities were alternated to give the younger pilots more flight leadership experience), he set the tone in the squadron, he failed to communicate his true (if later testimony is accepted) appreciation for the situation and, if he himself was truly unsure of whether the targets were friendly or Iraqi, he failed to call off the flight lead until the issue could be resolved with certainty. At 130 knots the Black Hawks were still 40 miles from the No-Fly Zone line and were not headed there anyway. There was plenty of time to be sure, but no time was taken.[/INDENT]

Notice the difference — 40 miles from the No-Fly Zone line. What he is saying there is that the UH-60s were inside the NFZ, and were not heading out of the NFZ, so there was plenty of time to verify their ID before they could “escape” out of the NFZ.