Forum: Air Power

Are UCAVs really such a good idea?



Search Search  Register Register  Private Messages Private Messages
guidelines Forum Guidelines
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Previous  1, 2, 3
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
elp
PostPosted: Jan 20, 2006 - 03:45 PM Reply with quote Back to top
F-16.net Editor
F-16.net Editor


Joined: Sep 23, 2003 - 09:08 PM
Posts: 3147

Field commanders fighting the current war aren't asking for JSF. They need, ask and want persistent UAV support. UCAVs have already proven themselves with Predator etc Where you have one orbiting a airbase and baddys setup a mortar or whatever you spot them and kill them with a Hellfire.

Predator B ( assuming the icing issue is managed,) has even more use with a bigger payload. SPECFORS going out on patrols and hikes in Afcrapastan and Iraq have no business going out without persistent UAV/UCAV support. It helps stop ambushes and helps via NCW give the ground person better SI. Even if the payload is tiny, A few hellfires inside of a minute in response to an ambush or better killing off/upsetting the ambush before contact is even made is a good thing. If the baddies think their ambush failed within the first 1-2 minutes because the received some fire from above, anything that upsets it is good.


In the classic ALLIED FORCE 1999 scenario. J-UCAS would be a huge benefit. C2ISR, SEAD, DEAD, Jamming, PGM strikes on known targets. ( Many prime targets the first nights of a war are KNOWN and..... FIXED. ) Funny how we are willing to use one shot cruise missiles yet uninformed people mention jamming UCAVs being disastrous. NO. The jet has a flight plan that it executes. Period. Dot. You can't jam that. Also, I wouldn't want to be running the program that jams our data links ....or trys too, you won't live very long. J-UCAS shows up at the target and drops the weapons or the operator drops the weapons. Again, we have sent cruise missiles on one way missions where they would hit something regardless. All the sudden we have a problem with a UCAV? Bollocks. The weapon it drops is cheap ( JDAM ) and .... the jet comes back home for more missions. Seems the pilot lobby is worried about job security. Hate to say it. But what other conclusion can be drawn?.... when an excellent and progressive ( meat on the bones good progess in its fly testing ) program is canceled with in the bounds of a corrupt procurement system..... where politicians are bought and paid for and general officers that ran the airforce pull the golden parachute and work for Rolls Royce a few weeks after retirement? And of course the stupid pork programs of mediocre, dumb or dangerous weapon systems F-18E/F, C-130J, JSF, V-22 are fielded. Pretty sad. It isn't about war winning capability anymore. There was always a history of procurement stupidity. But now it has gotten worse. It is all about making the next sale and nothing more.
J-UCAS can't be put in front of a TV camera and tortured after it has been shot down or crashed. J-UCAS can be packed up and stored. ( You don't fly most of them they are a break glass when needed item ). After their mission use is done and the manned airframes don't need them, You pack them up and ship them home in a C-17. They are NOT a total solution. But a very big important team player for anyone with a brain. Pretty sad how the roulette table is so fixed now in procurement. Makes the Gambino crime family look normal.

_________________
- ELP -
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Sponsor
New postPosted: Jun 20, 2013 - 4:17 AM Back to top
F-16.net Sponsor





  Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic