4 ms·
I think the idea is that UAV operators/pilots might not even attempt landings. There's a future where assume control of UAVs as they approach station, and relea
by icegreentea2 9y ago
I think the idea is that UAV operators/pilots might not even attempt landings. There's a future where assume control of UAVs as they approach station, and release as they return to base.
In that scheme, they were probably expecting the UAVs to land automatically on the carrier, with something like ATARI being the backup.
This way they can leave their operators focusing on mission tasks instead of recovery.
- goldenkey 9y agoSeems like a small gain for a small chance of the loss of a $100 million asset. Wouldn't it be good to give pilots practice landing in adverse conditions just in case this "autoland" fails similarly to how Tesla and Uber's autopilot screws up fatally when the road lines are a bit faded? On the other hand, landing probably is an easier task than driving given the small amount of ways it can go right versus wrong.
- Gravityloss 9y agoIs the actual hardware so expensive? I've heard it's the systems, and increasingly, in them, the software. So mostly the number bandied around might be just development and for total cost, upkeep costs, divided by the number of airframes. So losing one isn't so hard, if it's unmanned.
- JackFr 9y agoThat's why they really need to eliminate on board pilots. How much of the hardware is devoted to keeping the pilot alive? Once you remove that, the hardware might be a whole lot simpler and cheaper.
- toomuchtodo 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_X-47B https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_X-47B Unmanned, with autonomous carrier take offs, landings, and aerial refueling.
- kirse 9y agoThat's why they really need to eliminate on board pilots. There's always going to be a need for humans in the loop. In any sort of major wartime scenario countries will be shooting, disabling, and jamming any form of comms and guidance they know about.
- goldenkey 9y agoWhat about autonomous drones that fallback to using stars and the moon positions for navigation if comms/guidance are jammed? I know this wouldn't work during sunny daytime hours but it's an interesting technique isn't it?
- castle-bravo 9y agoWe're at the point now where you could put all the software required to control such a thing on a single-board computer the size of a credit card.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago> I know this wouldn't work during sunny daytime hours It would; you just need to filter out the sun. Apparently this is already a thing: http://www.trexenterprises.com/Pages/Products%20and%20Services/Sensors/opticalgps.html http://www.trexenterprises.com/Pages/Products%20and%20Servic....
- goldenkey 9y agoWow, I was not aware that we could do such a feat with small(ish) equipment. Thanks for the link.
- x220 9y agoIf communication or guidance is disabled, aircraft still need to function in a complex combat environment: they need to be able to intelligently identify targets, follow rules of engagement, engage correctly, and weigh the costs and benefits of different courses of action. An automated system will never be able to both practically do these things and also emotionally satisfy the humans in charge of militaries (you will never be able to convince a human officer that a drone will be able to autonomously follow rules of engagement and correctly discriminate friend from foe).
- icegreentea2 9y agoI mean maybe it's too much of a reach, and they need to use ATARI or something like ATARI on every landing. In any case, the idea is that maybe your mission operators don't have to be your recovery specialists. Having options and fallbacks are good. I can't imagine the Navy not looking at all their data in 5 years and figuring out a reasonable plan. We're all just armchairing it. Engineering data is really all that matters at the end of the day.