5 ms·
That was really just a question of time. Wait a few decades, and see the first warships specialised for carrying drones and missiles (which are essentially kami
by _0ffh 6y ago
That was really just a question of time. Wait a few decades, and see the first warships specialised for carrying drones and missiles (which are essentially kamikaze drones) exclusively.
- rrmm 6y agoThey have them basically just missile frigates with new dispensers.
- _0ffh 6y agoThey will probably need a runway, for landing at least.
- rrmm 6y agoI can think of ways around that, but depends on what sort of missions you want to optimize for I guess.
- _0ffh 6y agoWell, yeah, you could do vertical landing or water landing. Both have precedent, but water landing probably implies craning the drones on board, which is slow. Vertical landing on the other hand might work well. You'd still need a flight deck for that, but a much smaller one.
- rrmm 6y agoI guess something helicopter-carrier sized? I would think the main thing would be to avoid supercarrier sorts of ships. Smaller ships with similar capabilities would mean you'd be able to field more groups.
- jerrysievert 6y agoI would think that the salt from a water landing (ocean) might be prohibitive.
- PeterisP 6y agoLaunch and landing does not necessarily need to happen in the same platform. It could be reasonable to have a delivery mechanism for drones that's close to where the action might be (so that the drones can reach the target quickly) but the surviving drones have to go way back somewhere else to land and be refurbished/refueled/rearmed for another mission.
- krisoft 6y agoNo need to wait decades, we have them. They are called missile destroyers. Look at the Arleigh Burke-class, or the converted Ohio-class submarines.
- _0ffh 6y agoThose are too small for a sizeable contingent of drones the size of small fighter jets. I was thinking along the lines of small aircraft carriers.
- krisoft 6y agoI know you were. What makes a small fighter jet the optimal size for these drones? Or what mission do you imagine for them? And about the "sizeable contingent". The Ohio class can launch 144 Tomahawks. That is probably enough to suppress the air defences of most countries. Sorry that I'm picking on these details, it's just people have a tendency to shriek in horror about the future of autonomous weapons, as if we wouldn't be living with them already.
- _0ffh 6y agoOf course I don't know what the optimal size is. Yet, to be competitive in terms of speed, range, and payload, "small fighter jet" sounds about right to me. At least, if you want to convincingly fill most of the roles that manned aircraft fill in a conventional carrier strike group. That'd include not only things like reconnaissance and weather observation, but also air-to-air and air-to-surface missions over sea and land. So, a kind of hierarchical scheme where the carrier deploys the big drones, which close onto the target before deploying the secondary, disposable missiles/drones. You want to be able to stand off any opposition forces well away from your naval group.
- nostrademons 6y agoWhy specialize them? If SpaceX can land a rocket on a drone-ship, the next step would be to land a drone inside a 20-foot shipping container. Then every container ship becomes an aircraft carrier, capable of carrying thousands of drones. The merchantmen become their own escorts.