| Submit your comments on this article |
| Great White North |
| Canada Considers Robotic Fighters |
| 2005-09-13 |
| September 13, 2005: Canada, which will have to replace its fleet of 122 American built F-18 fighters by 2017, is seriously considering buying combat UAVs (UCAVs). The United States already has several UCAVs in development, and so far, the testing has gone well. Recently, one UCAV design, the X45A, even carried out a bombing raid, after first finding the target, without any operator intervention. The production version of this aircraft, the X45C will be 39 feet long (with a 49 foot wingspan.) weigh 19 tons, and have a 2.2 ton payload. The X-45C has a combat radius of 2,300 kilometers, or can go out 1,800 kilometers, hang around for two hours, and return. The X-45C can stay in the air for about six hours on internal fuel. The X-45C will also be able to perform in-flight refueling. Since it doesn’t carry a pilot, aerial refueling can be done several times if there’s a need to keep the aircraft up there, and there are no equipment problems. The 20 ton F-18 used by Canada (as the CF-18) has less range than the X-45C, and is not as maneuverable. While there’s little doubt that UCAVs can carry out recon and bombing missions, the big unknown is air-to-air combat. The software guys believe this will be no problem, the pilot community is less sure. However, tests with remotely controlled fighter aircraft in the 1970s showed that unmanned aircraft had an edge over those with pilots aboard (because many aircraft maneuvers are limited by the physical limitations of the human body, not the aircraft. ) American military pilots are not looking forward to the first air-to-air combat tests between piloted aircraft and UCAVs. At the moment, the air power generals (nearly all of them pilots) insist that such tests won’t take place any time soon. But if Canada expresses interest in buying the X-45C, but only if it can handle air-to-air combat, Congress can pull rank on the air force generals, and the Canadians will get their flying killdroids. The U.S. Air Force will get heartburn. So if a foreign power is to adopt UCAVs, it might as be our closest ally (although we have lost one war, and several battles, to the Canadians in the past). The main reason the United States is spending so much money on UCAVs is because it is obvious that someone out there will eventually have these aircraft. If the U.S. cannot match foreign UCAVs, America will no longer rule the skies. The UCAVs are 20-30 percent cheaper than comparable manned aircraft, but their biggest selling point is their potential to have a significant combat edge over manned aircraft. |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #11 By 2017, CA will be a sharia government. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-09-13 20:54 |
| #10 So they do get the Anime Network in Canada ... |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-09-13 18:38 |
| #9 "Canada Considers Robotic Fighters" Heh... They need robots to do the fighting cause they don't have the will to do it themselves.... |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2005-09-13 17:49 |
| #8 The first test pilot to be "shot-down" by one of these is going to hear "you're terminated" FOREVER more. Unless they are VERY clever an AI pilot will never have a hope against a real pilot (even if the pilot isn't IN the plane). Why? The planes will consistently make the same mistakes (unless there is a Error feedback/group mind system that noone can write yet!) |
| Posted by: Huposing Phaitle9864 2005-09-13 17:14 |
| #7 Sarah... Connor? |
| Posted by: The Terminator 2005-09-13 15:41 |
| #6 Flying Bolos from the skies - Metal men who do or die... |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-09-13 15:29 |
| #5 Resistance is Futile.... |
| Posted by: john 2005-09-13 15:14 |
| #4 I can see UCAVs having an edge in manuvering but I question the situational awarenenss of a piece of software much less an operator sitting in a remote location someplace. With computerized systems, it's not the single unit that needs situational awareness, but the entire network. While each plane would have a brain flying it, they'd be getting orders from a "master" brain back on an AWACS. The "master" would be able to use data not just from the AWACS sensors, but also the individual fighters; human input would consist of grading targets as to their value and acceptability. The result would be very nasty to face; a fighter unit that is fully coordinated. Plane A may have an easier angle on a target than plane B, but since the target is "below" its sight line, a human pilot wouldn't see it in time. The "master" brain, though, could determine that A has an easier hit and shift its orders. Plus IMO UCAVs will cost enough that there will be a certain amount of trepidation about putting them at un-nessecary risk. That's a non-issue; it's still cheaper than a trained pilot, particularly one trained to the degree necessary to be effective. I don't recall anyone worrying that the first jets were too expensive to be used in combat. Also, the UCAV won't retire and doesn't have a family fearing the "we regret to inform you" letter. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-09-13 13:00 |
| #3 Oh I'm sure the training/operating costs are one thing they are looking at. IMO UCAVs will have an enormous in the realm of tactics but they won't be the be-all end-all |
| Posted by: Cheaderhead 2005-09-13 12:48 |
| #2 The Canadians may well be looking at the cost of UCAVs in comparison to fielding a trained, equipped and supported pilot, especially given how difficult it is to get funding for their Armed Services now. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-09-13 12:38 |
| #1 I can see UCAVs having an edge in manuvering but I question the situational awarenenss of a piece of software much less an operator sitting in a remote location someplace. Plus IMO UCAVs will cost enough that there will be a certain amount of trepidation about putting them at un-nessecary risk. |
| Posted by: Cheaderhead 2005-09-13 12:14 |