Drone & counter drone technology.

To be honest it was not a major article,just a narrow column, and I was distracted by a pretty girl with nice hair and glasses, and a winning smile. Where did they all go and why could they not take me with them?
 
...Where did they all go and why could they not take me with them?
They preferred RAF aircrew...obviously! :cool:

Regards,
MM
 
I now occasionally fly a camera drone for work. It has normal and infra red camera capability. It can be set to fly at set heights, on predetermined courses, to locations by GPS or maps, it will also return to it's take off position. It has anti collision sensors and it stays in position against winds and other disturbances. It has a "Follow me" mode and other settings that I haven't worked out. This is a relatively inexpensive drone (or UAV or UAS) for about a grand. I also have a smaller drone that fits in a pocket, opens to about 12inch (300mm) diameter, also has lots of stability and setting features and will download and record to a smartphone real time video or stills on a high definition camera. The capabilities of thses little things amaze me. The capabilities of military technology must be astounding. (In the case of the MOD purchaser dept - possibly disappointing...)
 
They preferred RAF aircrew...obviously! :cool:

Regards,
MM
Hmmm!

Pointless story one: Not so long ago a female WAFU (a real FAA aviator) described me as a Gentleman.

Pointless story two: A few months back I was watching a Forces TV programme about Chinooks training in Norway. I thought the voice sounded familiar, and looked up to see a former guy from my unit, now in the RAF and flying the mighty Wokka. Back in 2007 he was among a group of Reservists aboard HMS Illustrious for a couple of weeks when she was doing fixed wing work ups.with IV Sqn. Anyway, we went for a run ashore in Newcastle. I cannot remember exactly what I was drinking but my mukkas kept asking me what my secret was, as they thought I had lipstick on my lips from being snogged by some lucky ladies. Sadly not.
 
Last edited:
I now occasionally fly a camera drone for work. It has normal and infra red camera capability. It can be set to fly at set heights, on predetermined courses, to locations by GPS or maps, it will also return to it's take off position. It has anti collision sensors and it stays in position against winds and other disturbances. It has a "Follow me" mode and other settings that I haven't worked out. This is a relatively inexpensive drone (or UAV or UAS) for about a grand. I also have a smaller drone that fits in a pocket, opens to about 12inch (300mm) diameter, also has lots of stability and setting features and will download and record to a smartphone real time video or stills on a high definition camera. The capabilities of thses little things amaze me. The capabilities of military technology must be astounding. (In the case of the MOD purchaser dept - possibly disappointing...)
What Make and Model are they?
 
Although the stuff of science fiction for a long while, drone ops have been an exponential development in warfare in recent times.The military role of unmanned aircraft systems has been growing at unprecedented rates with the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and the Middle East giving huge impetus to the expansion of USAF capabilities in this niche of arial combat.

By 2014, the US was already fielding huge numbers of UAVs or Unmanned Air Vehicles. Ravens Wasps, Pumas, T-Hawks, Predators, Grey Eagles, Reapers, Shadows, and Global Hawks with other newer and more capable following on

With possibly millions of hours flown in support of missions around the globe performing a multitude of missions. Dones have long departed from their initial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions, their roles have expanded to electronic attack, drone strikes supression and destruction of air defences search and rescue, and recently air to air combat.
MQ-9 Gets First Air-to-Air Kill in Training Exercise, Air Force Official Says
 
Although the stuff of science fiction for a long while, drone ops have been an exponential development in warfare in recent times.The military role of unmanned aircraft systems has been growing at unprecedented rates with the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and the Middle East giving huge impetus to the expansion of USAF capabilities in this niche of arial combat.

By 2014, the US was already fielding huge numbers of UAVs or Unmanned Air Vehicles. Ravens Wasps, Pumas, T-Hawks, Predators, Grey Eagles, Reapers, Shadows, and Global Hawks with other newer and more capable following on

With possibly millions of hours flown in support of missions around the globe performing a multitude of missions. Dones have long departed from their initial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions, their roles have expanded to electronic attack, drone strikes supression and destruction of air defences search and rescue, and recently air to air combat.
MQ-9 Gets First Air-to-Air Kill in Training Exercise, Air Force Official Says
Attempts at air-air engagements are nothing new and the USAF even tried it unsuccessfully in the Southern Iraqi NFZ about 20 years back when a Pred tried to engage a MiG-25 with a Stinger. The Foxbat won.

RPAS v RPAS/UAS engagement is a somewhat easier proposition than going against a manned type.

Regards,
MM
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
With the speed of developing technology in this area, probably wont be long now before it will be a viable option.
There's a lot of complicating factors that mean RPAS will be at a disadvantage in any sort of air-to-air barney for the visible future. Doesn't mean they can't at least have the means to annoy / deter enemy aircraft, or pick on other UAS, but they won't be air-dominance fighters any time soon.
 
There's a lot of complicating factors that mean RPAS will be at a disadvantage in any sort of air-to-air barney for the visible future. Doesn't mean they can't at least have the means to annoy / deter enemy aircraft, or pick on other UAS, but they won't be air-dominance fighters any time soon.
Awwww
 
With the speed of developing technology in this area, probably wont be long now before it will be a viable option.
For a whole number of reasons which have been discussed numerous times here, I’d say we’re at least 40 years from RPAS being able to approach the capabilities of manned aircraft in WVR air-air combat.

There’s a reason that every single 6th Gen fighter concept, designed to enter service from approximately 2035 at the earliest, is manned or optionally manned.

I can see some RPAS carrying AAMs for self-defence or occasional engagements of undemanding targets such as other RPAS/UAS, helicopters or light aircraft. Anything else is fantasy for the foreseeable future.

Regards,
MM
 
For a whole number of reasons which have been discussed numerous times here, I’d say we’re at least 40 years from RPAS being able to approach the capabilities of manned aircraft in WVR air-air combat.

There’s a reason that every single 6th Gen fighter concept, designed to enter service from approximately 2035 at the earliest, is manned or optionally manned.
While I would certainly agree that autonomous ‘killer’ drones are still a ways off, RPAS/UAV are ‘manned’, albeit remotely.

F-35’s right now have the ability to use ‘missile and bomb-trucks’ such as stand off 4th gen aircraft, ships and loyal wingmen, which are in essence UAV’s, the difference being that the operator is airborne instead of a station at Creech or Waddington.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
In the locked cupboard at my local Aldi, a camera drone for £49.99. A headsup for any ARRSER with a nubile sunbathing neighbour.
 
While I would certainly agree that autonomous ‘killer’ drones are still a ways off, RPAS/UAV are ‘manned’, albeit remotely.

F-35’s right now have the ability to use ‘missile and bomb-trucks’ such as stand off 4th gen aircraft, ships and loyal wingmen, which are in essence UAV’s, the difference being that the operator is airborne instead of a station at Creech or Waddington.
I fear you’ve been reading too many LM brochures.

Third party engagement capabilities by aircraft and ships are nothing new and I suspect the F-35 will follow in due course.

However, that will largely be merely target commit/allocation engagement via link and the pilot in the other aircraft will remain the ultimate decision maker; an F-35 pilot will not be firing another pilot’s weapons although doing so from a ‘loyal wingman’ is likely in the next decade or so.
Comparing remote enagagement using another manned asset to doing it from a remotely piloted type is also comparing apples and oranges...with added vulnerabilities.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
(...) There’s a reason that every single 6th Gen fighter concept, designed to enter service from approximately 2035 at the earliest, is manned or optionally manned. (...)
I imagine that for starters nobody wants to base tens or hundreds of billions of dollars/pounds/euros investment in a critical class of equipment on the assumption that satellites will be invulnerable to attack for decades to come.
 
I imagine that for starters nobody wants to base tens or hundreds of billions of dollars/pounds/euros investment in a critical class of equipment on the assumption that satellites will be invulnerable to attack for decades to come.
That’s one factor, although there are other ways to exchange data under certain circumstances.

Regards,
MM
 

A2_Matelot

LE
Book Reviewer
I imagine that for starters nobody wants to base tens or hundreds of billions of dollars/pounds/euros investment in a critical class of equipment on the assumption that satellites will be invulnerable to attack for decades to come.
I don't believe that is a key constraint. The USAF demonstrated some time ago the ability for co-operative UCAS sorties which could adapt in flight, whilst on task. in theory they could operate completely autonomously.

Not long after project Alpha demonstrated an AI engine that defeated an "ace" pilot time and time again.

These events were now some time ago. The need for continuous TCS control may well be long gone and it may only be our 'nervousness' and desire for a 'kill switch' that keeps us wanting the reigns. As M-M says there are alternate means to communicate and most people understand and accept the potential vulnerability on SATCOM access, even the protected military capabilities, which will be robust and existent until a finite kinetic event.

In sum I think its more a cultural resistance as opposed to a technological limitation which will inhibit complete autonomic operation. Where I look at AI in my own workstreams the 'man-in-the-loop' argument is prevalent until we point out the threats demand a machine speed reaction, even then wanting a pink floppy thing to take action is argued. In time it will be accepted and I suspect the capabilities will become smarter at an increasingly rapid pace.
 

Similar threads

Top