-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
This is radical; Next Gen Drone
- Thread starter Lionheart
- Start date
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
It's a real Northrup-Grumman project. In the sense the video was a professionally produced rendering using an overlay of the design not really flying then yes, it is a fake. But, it was simply a concept video production.
A few years back I helped train the first cadre of Navy pilots to fly RPA's. Remotely Piloted Aircraft is the correct term. Drones imply targets and these are no longer targets. They are simply remotely piloted attack aircraft. They target others!
The Navy is very interested in using RPA's on their carriers because they offer greater range, vastly improved stealth options, and increased safety to personnel. I have said for a while now that the future of military combat aviation is RPA's. I firmly believe that within my lifetime the majority of pilots in the US miiltary will fly RPA's.
I had a brief discussion several months back with an FAA manager in Washington. When he tried to say that RPA pilots aren't really pilots and their aircraft aren't really aircraft I replied by pointing out that in the near future if the FAA refused to change their paradigm, that they would consider over half of all military pilots as no longer pilots by their rules.
He laughed and said, "I high doubt that!"
The very next month the USAF released the official word that for the first time in history, they ordered more RPA's than manned aircraft! There is no disputing the logic that says if you buy more RPA's than any other group of aircraft combined, then it means over time you will have more RPA pilots than "traditional" manned aircraft pilots.
I did not call back that FAA manager because it would be pointless. He is trapped in a paradigm of the past and the world will pass him by. Eventually, he will realize how foolish and myopic he is being. This misunderstanding he suffers from is a reason why US Border Control and DoD are both very upset with the FAA's foot dragging regarding operations and certification of RPA's.
Take the silk scarves and burn them! They are as much relics of a bygone era as Spads and Corsairs! The future of manned military aviation is likely going to be restricted to specialized aircraft such as transports that carry other people onboard. In fact, transports to carry equipment are already seriously under study. And even companies like Fed-Ex and UPS are seriously studying the concept!
Ken
A few years back I helped train the first cadre of Navy pilots to fly RPA's. Remotely Piloted Aircraft is the correct term. Drones imply targets and these are no longer targets. They are simply remotely piloted attack aircraft. They target others!
The Navy is very interested in using RPA's on their carriers because they offer greater range, vastly improved stealth options, and increased safety to personnel. I have said for a while now that the future of military combat aviation is RPA's. I firmly believe that within my lifetime the majority of pilots in the US miiltary will fly RPA's.
I had a brief discussion several months back with an FAA manager in Washington. When he tried to say that RPA pilots aren't really pilots and their aircraft aren't really aircraft I replied by pointing out that in the near future if the FAA refused to change their paradigm, that they would consider over half of all military pilots as no longer pilots by their rules.
He laughed and said, "I high doubt that!"
The very next month the USAF released the official word that for the first time in history, they ordered more RPA's than manned aircraft! There is no disputing the logic that says if you buy more RPA's than any other group of aircraft combined, then it means over time you will have more RPA pilots than "traditional" manned aircraft pilots.
I did not call back that FAA manager because it would be pointless. He is trapped in a paradigm of the past and the world will pass him by. Eventually, he will realize how foolish and myopic he is being. This misunderstanding he suffers from is a reason why US Border Control and DoD are both very upset with the FAA's foot dragging regarding operations and certification of RPA's.
Take the silk scarves and burn them! They are as much relics of a bygone era as Spads and Corsairs! The future of manned military aviation is likely going to be restricted to specialized aircraft such as transports that carry other people onboard. In fact, transports to carry equipment are already seriously under study. And even companies like Fed-Ex and UPS are seriously studying the concept!
Ken
N2056
Charter Member
While I agree with the majority of what you have said I must stand up and defend silk scarves!
They are a great symbol of early aviation. When my dad was seated in our Pietenpol Aircamper about to make the first flight in it I presented him with some essentials for flight in an open cockpit plane.
A leather flying helmet, goggles, and a scarf.
The video is cool. He took off, did a circuit, one flyby, another circuit, then he landed. On the flyby the scarf was clearly visible fluttering behind him. It looked really good. Later he was heard to comment that it was a pain in the neck!
Well, okay. Maybe they have no place in the technology being used now. For me there is always a place for them
They are a great symbol of early aviation. When my dad was seated in our Pietenpol Aircamper about to make the first flight in it I presented him with some essentials for flight in an open cockpit plane.
A leather flying helmet, goggles, and a scarf.
The video is cool. He took off, did a circuit, one flyby, another circuit, then he landed. On the flyby the scarf was clearly visible fluttering behind him. It looked really good. Later he was heard to comment that it was a pain in the neck!
Well, okay. Maybe they have no place in the technology being used now. For me there is always a place for them
Hey Ken,
Thats interesting info. I had heard that the Navy has already done carrier landings of drones.
I have seen the top down view of an identical design but is a bomber. It appears to be the center section of the B2 Spirit, but with winglets instead of wings. Very wild design.
I also saw this online while looking for photos on the BWB Boeing project. Beautiful design, though I think the nose is science fiction and not good for actual wind flow. The tail just looks awesome......
I found a top down of that bomber concept, added that to these attachments.
Bill
Thats interesting info. I had heard that the Navy has already done carrier landings of drones.
I have seen the top down view of an identical design but is a bomber. It appears to be the center section of the B2 Spirit, but with winglets instead of wings. Very wild design.
I also saw this online while looking for photos on the BWB Boeing project. Beautiful design, though I think the nose is science fiction and not good for actual wind flow. The tail just looks awesome......
I found a top down of that bomber concept, added that to these attachments.
Bill
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
While I agree with the majority of what you have said I must stand up and defend silk scarves!
They are a great symbol of early aviation. When my dad was seated in our Pietenpol Aircamper about to make the first flight in it I presented him with some essentials for flight in an open cockpit plane.
A leather flying helmet, goggles, and a scarf.
The video is cool. He took off, did a circuit, one flyby, another circuit, then he landed. On the flyby the scarf was clearly visible fluttering behind him. It looked really good. Later he was heard to comment that it was a pain in the neck!
Well, okay. Maybe they have no place in the technology being used now. For me there is always a place for them
Yeah, my statement is in context. Clearly, they are cool. But I bet few people even know why silk scarves came about in the first place. Strictly based on original use, they haven't been needed for a very long time.
The fact is they were used to wipe castor oil off goggles. Turns out that silk did a very effective job of wiping it off as it kept flinging off the engines in front of the pilots. So, it was a very practical method of recurrent cleanup used in the era of rotary engines of World War I.
Others have said it was to prevent chaffing from the wool collars. But, cotton could have done that.
Ken
T
tigisfat
Guest
Lionheart, or anyone for that matter, I want you to save those bomber conceptual models in a photo file somewhere you won't forget about them. Sometime in the next ten years you'll be glad you did. Trust me.
JorisVandenBerghe
Charter Member 2010
Besides, hasn't the USN or Boeing carried out tests with F/A-18's (can't remember which variant - think a twoseat one, so a -D, -F or -G), landing completely on their own, too ? Like the X-47 design, but isn't there something like a X-45 or so from the same manufacturer ?
Makes me think of the film 'Stealth'...I have never seen the film completely, though.
Makes me think of the film 'Stealth'...I have never seen the film completely, though.
T
tigisfat
Guest
There's been plenty of aircraft that can land themselves, I believe cat III requires autoland but I could be wrong.
Believe it or not, there was an automated carrier landing system, but noone liked it.
JorisVandenBerghe
Charter Member 2010
I know of the existence of ILS and all that, Tig. Guess nearly all airliners with jet engines can...and probably Dash 8s and ATRs etc, too. But on a carrier it's way more impressive!
Wing_Z
Charter Member 2011
I saw a snippet the other day, that over in Texas they were whooping with joy at being given some Predators at last...
It just makes so much sense, for so many missions, to have a UAV (sorry, RPV
) in the air.Next question is: does it need a highly-trained (=expensive) pilot to control one?
T
tigisfat
Guest
I saw a snippet the other day, that over in Texas they were whooping with joy at being given some Predators at last...
It just makes so much sense, for so many missions, to have a UAV (sorry, RPV
Next question is: does it need a highly-trained (=expensive) pilot to control one?
There are a few RPVs that require very little skill, and perform most functions autonomously, such as the ones non-rated enlisted use in the field. These are generally very small and can be launched and recovered anywhere.
Most of the larger RPVs in the spotlight are commanded by rated pilots, even when performing autonomous functions. The training for these pilots was the same as any other.
Just saw this in FaceBook.
Boeing is proposing this (the posts focus on this drone by Boeing) as being the 'actual replacement' for the FA-18 Hornet.
Hard to imagine.....
http://simflight.com/2010/05/17/successor-to-fa-18-hornet/
Ken, it seems your prophesy on this is coming true within 24 hours....
Boeing is proposing this (the posts focus on this drone by Boeing) as being the 'actual replacement' for the FA-18 Hornet.
Hard to imagine.....
http://simflight.com/2010/05/17/successor-to-fa-18-hornet/
Ken, it seems your prophesy on this is coming true within 24 hours....
cheezyflier
Charter Member
you guys know better than me, so i want to ask for opinions.
when i see that boeing is going totally out of pocket on this, my instict says that
a) they've been working on the tech long enough that they have it pretty much locked in
and/or
b) they feel the final product is a guaranteed, can't miss, sell.
is that the case here?
when i see that boeing is going totally out of pocket on this, my instict says that
a) they've been working on the tech long enough that they have it pretty much locked in
and/or
b) they feel the final product is a guaranteed, can't miss, sell.
is that the case here?
Matt Wynn
Charter Member
good grief! imagine stepping into the office and finding panther at the controls on approach, how many of us could bear to watch?!
lolololol.....
Ouch kah-bibles.
At least I could finally possibly qualify for UAV fighter pilot. :d
T
tigisfat
Guest
I don't know anything about this project, but with advanced research the source of funding, purpose for the project and timeline released publically are all to be met with skepticism.
cheezyflier
Charter Member
could you elaborate please? sometimes my cranial density requires more info than some folks might