4 ms·

> If a small craft could be self reliant, then we would already be building homing missiles that provide their own radar. We don't because it makes them too bi

> If a small craft could be self reliant, then we would already be building homing missiles that provide their own radar. We don't because it makes them too big, slow, heavy and expensive! I don't see this comparison is valid. Drones with radar already exist (http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com/articles/2015/06/ias-reaper-radar.html http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com/articles/2015/06/ias-re...). They are worth it because they're cheaper than manned aircraft, with better loiter times, and potentially better maneuverability in unmanned fighter drones. That they're substantially more expensive or slower than a use-once missile doesn't matter, because the comparison is to a manned aircraft. And with small-drone radar, if they're in a swarm, what's ruling out aperture synthesis approaches? They don't need a single big radar if they can collectively act as one...

alkonaut 10y ago
> Drones with radar already exist The MQ-9 is 11x20m and has a flyaway cost comparable to some previous gen fighters, so while it's certainly a "drone" (I hate that term), it goes all the way there and all the way home, and is much too expensive to be an expendable target or part of a "swarm". You can't make a drone that you can field dozens of to provide "security in numbers", and afford to lose a couple of. If "swarm radar" (see my last paragraph) is a possibility that lets small aircraft with small radars cooperate like a large aircraft with a large radar, then it's certainly a possibility that we can se "swarms" of <$2m aircraft used without help from the launching crafts radar. They still need to be carried to the area of operation though because of small range. > That they're substantially more expensive or slower than a use-once cruise missile doesn't matter, because the comparison is to a manned aircraft. Whether their speed matters depends on what you want to do with them. It wouldn't be money well spent to use loiter-type surveillance craft as fighters. You could build unmanned craft that are fast enough to attack fighters, but it's a numbers game - once they get big enough to have speed and range, they are already very expensive and then you may need them to have high survivability which adds even more cost etc. If you make a "fighter drone" it will likely end up looking like an unmanned fighter plane (Unless: advances in radar tech or power generation). You might save some money because it's unmanned so it doesn't need cockpit, oxygen system, and is slightly more expendable, but you still can't afford to lose a lot of them. I obviously have no idea apart from what I read on gossip sites, but I believe there will also be be common with a "companion" type unmanned aircraft that are built for forward reconnaissance and attack together with "big" fighters and bombers. They must be fast and stealthy and able to operate within heavily contested airspace. They will simply take over where the expensive large plane (manned or not) can't go any longer. When you think about it, the MBDA meteor and other air-breathing long range missiles are already a kind of fast autonomous planes that are launched from other planes. The line between "missile" and "plane" will blur even more. Quoting the US Air Forces chief scientist Mica Endsley: "We see unmanned vehicles being used for a much wider variety of missions. Today they are primarily used for ISR, long duration missions where we want to collect information. In the future, they will be moving cargo and more manned-unmanned teaming where they are acting as extensions of a manned aircraft." > what's ruling out aperture synthesis approaches? They don't need a single big radar if they can collectively act as one... That's a good point, I don't know what the state of the art is in "swarm radar". How much better does a pair of current fighters compare to one current fighter?

alkonaut 10y ago

> Drones with radar already exist The MQ-9 is 11x20m and has a flyaway cost comparable to some previous gen fighters, so while it's certainly a "drone" (I hate that term), it goes all the way there and all the way home, and is much too expensive to be an expendable target or part of a "swarm". You can't make a drone that you can field dozens of to provide "security in numbers", and afford to lose a couple of. If "swarm radar" (see my last paragraph) is a possibility that lets small aircraft with small radars cooperate like a large aircraft with a large radar, then it's certainly a possibility that we can se "swarms" of <$2m aircraft used without help from the launching crafts radar. They still need to be carried to the area of operation though because of small range. > That they're substantially more expensive or slower than a use-once cruise missile doesn't matter, because the comparison is to a manned aircraft. Whether their speed matters depends on what you want to do with them. It wouldn't be money well spent to use loiter-type surveillance craft as fighters. You could build unmanned craft that are fast enough to attack fighters, but it's a numbers game - once they get big enough to have speed and range, they are already very expensive and then you may need them to have high survivability which adds even more cost etc. If you make a "fighter drone" it will likely end up looking like an unmanned fighter plane (Unless: advances in radar tech or power generation). You might save some money because it's unmanned so it doesn't need cockpit, oxygen system, and is slightly more expendable, but you still can't afford to lose a lot of them. I obviously have no idea apart from what I read on gossip sites, but I believe there will also be be common with a "companion" type unmanned aircraft that are built for forward reconnaissance and attack together with "big" fighters and bombers. They must be fast and stealthy and able to operate within heavily contested airspace. They will simply take over where the expensive large plane (manned or not) can't go any longer. When you think about it, the MBDA meteor and other air-breathing long range missiles are already a kind of fast autonomous planes that are launched from other planes. The line between "missile" and "plane" will blur even more. Quoting the US Air Forces chief scientist Mica Endsley: "We see unmanned vehicles being used for a much wider variety of missions. Today they are primarily used for ISR, long duration missions where we want to collect information. In the future, they will be moving cargo and more manned-unmanned teaming where they are acting as extensions of a manned aircraft." > what's ruling out aperture synthesis approaches? They don't need a single big radar if they can collectively act as one... That's a good point, I don't know what the state of the art is in "swarm radar". How much better does a pair of current fighters compare to one current fighter?