The problem for any drone is whose hand is on the trigger, human or the machine.
I would disagree. With long rang cameras, radar, IFF, and other sensors; why would a human need to be in the area so long as they are in the loop? The purpose of a drone fighter would be to remove the human life risk potential from an engagement. In a fight involving multiple drones, the human will simply hit an 'engage' command and the drone goes weapons free. A human could not authorize each and every target in that situation and so, why even put them in harms way?
Because:
I am in full agreement with your point of view!John Fedup said:
Could it be possible to run operations using a converted B1-B, B-2, or B-52' s with possible ecm or outer shell similar to stealth aircraft (I know the B-2 is stealth) as a flying carrier/mothership/coc for recon and/or armed strike drones? I know parasite aircraft were tested and failed in the '50s but UAVs could possibly fair better in the deploying and recovering stage of UAV ops, once aboard they could be "debriefed" or rearmed without having to fly back to an airbase. If I posted this wrong I'm sorry its my first time doing this.
Well yeah I've worked with UAV's and I wouldn't trust them unless there was someone in control 100%, I read about this idea in some of Dale Browns books. The basic idea I was getting at was his fictitious aircraft the EB-1C Vampire and Vampire 2 which use the FlightHawk(similar to the boeing X-45 UCAV and StealthHawk(basically the same but armed with hellfire AG missiles) drones, I think you guys would like the idea. These and the advanced drones and systems coming out now really can be amazing force multipliers
all the dev docs I've seen re hive management by either ground, small shooter or something like an awacs/compass nn etc has been about triaged control
Its not autonomous, from the book I'd imagine in real life the cockpit of these strategic bombers turned arial battleships would be redesigned allowing 1 or more personal than usual. 1 station for the UCAV controller to monitor/pilot/complete its mission to and from the plane and take manual flight control if weapon systems needed to be used, another station in charge of docking, refueling, rearming, preflighting "turn-around". The documentary I saw on the early jet age parasite aircraft with the little jet that dropped from a B-29's bomb bay flew around then attempted to dock again we were obviously just not technologically sophisticated enough at that time, but now I'm sure you could have a crewman who could coordinate the mission and liason to ground troops like a FAC then retrieve the UCAV like using a refueling boom/mechanical arm hooking in with a much firmer lock and pulling it up in to the planes UCAV bay. There's a lot of possibilities from time on station, enemy GCI interference/enemy ground forces engagement or comm disruption and surveillance lots of possibilities because the human lives are miles away but don't need to fly 15 hours back because of fuel or mechanical issues.
I know that and I understand why an integrated battlefield between grunts like me calling in air and being able to give them the best possible understanding of the battlefield is paramount, it was just a cool idea I found in a book that used high tech coupled with older but still lethal aircraft. Not sure why but I'm a big fan ofcold war era aircraft like your old hawker hunters, A-4 and A-1's, F-8 crusaders and Israeli Nesher's all the way up to modern A-10A's and F/A-18's which have gotten me out of harms way a few times. Now a serious question in regards to UCAV capabilities, would it be possible to not only jam a radar but radiate back to that reciever a different image like send a signal to them that shows their screen a different aircraft or object? Or could they take over the "Wild Weasel" roll taking down SAMS?
are you asking about UAS ability to do the role or about general capability?
When it comes to suppression of enemy air defense for SAMS yes, I'm sure they could smoke a zsu-23 type AAA emplacement. But do you think this next generation they're coming out with could take over that responsibility allowing our fighter bombers to focus on say coc bunkers, runways, critical infrastructure etc. And thebother question I had might sound ignorant but I've never used radar to track targets so I only know the basics of jamming a frequency, I was wondering if you could electronically give them different looking returns by broadcasting radar signals in a certain way
Like having a UCAV emmiting a "counterfeit" return of a helo or an other slow moving aircraft to draw attention away from a strike package
they've used UAS for spoofing returns in the past...but not autonomous. ie no AI on the UAS, its just tasked to do that job
Again I apologize if my question are a little on the elementary side like I said I was artillery and infantry so my experience with aircraft has only been shooting SEAD missions with the howitzers or calling in airstrikes, I do appreciate you answering my questions. On your topic about drone air to air combat are you talking about a ground operator controlling a UCAV in a traditional interceptor vs bomber from an airbase or carrier or along the lines of flying "top cover" for attack planes? I definitely don't want any part of combat to be without a person under control of the final decisions
Dale Brown assumes no communications issues and obvious military targets segregated from civilian areas. Not terrible realistic in most modern situations.