Why I Don't Take the "age of drones" Seriously

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Dayton3, Mar 10, 2018.

  1. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Everyone it seems these days loves to promote the idea that "drones" will replace manned combat aircraft and for that matter make it less necessary to use actual soldiers in many combat roles.

    I do not take it seriously. For one I remember reading about the (in)famous 1957 British White Paper

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1957_Defence_White_Paper

    That strongly suggested that surface to air missiles were going to replace manned fighters as the key to air defense and surface to surface missiles would replace manned aircraft as the primary means to attacking surface targets.

    Needless to say, none of that came to pass.

    Also it seems to me that lots of the "drone enthusiasm" is based in no small part on the desire to save money rather than because of the belief that they are the best means of accomplishing military objectives.
     
    Mushroom, Robert and Battle3 like this.
  2. Mrbsct

    Mrbsct Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2013
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Technically the paper is kinda correct with missiles threatening aircraft and reduced the number of manned aircraft types. Modern surface to air missiles and air-air missiles, air-ground have reduced many manned aircraft requirements. Back then there was many different classes of aircraft, F-100, F-101, F-104, F-105, F-106, F-4, A-4, A-5, A-6 etc. All of these aircraft were made redundant by new aircraft like the F-15 and F-16 or the F-18 series for the Navy.(soon all to be supplemented by the F-35 Lighting II)

    Back in the 50s the F-100 was the premire air superiority fighter, but to stop bombers you had scramble dedicated intercetors ie the F-106 and F-101 to have the speed to catch up to bombers and shoot them down at close range. However nowadays a F-35 can do that job by detecting the enemy aircraft farther away with it's advanced sensors an attacking at 100 miles with it's AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles(Mach 4.5). Fighters today have become "flying surface-to-air missiles", basically which was an actual given to the F-15 in the Gulf War. Fighters like the F-35 can also guide Surface-to-Air missiles with their advanced radars and datalinks, such as the SM-6 missiles thanks to modern communications allowing fighters giving target information for the ground. Same thing with ground-attack, back then you needed A-10s or Harriers to fly close to their targets and bomb them(since fighters were too fast, and couldn't loiter close to the ground as well) but now due to modern munitions, a fighter like the F-35 can strike at high altitudes. The paper is also correct that aircraft companies will become smaller(ie. Lochkeed and Martin becoming Lockheed Martin, Northrop and Gruman becoming Northrop Gruman, Boeing buying Mcdonald Douglas etc)

    Fighters of course have not become obsolete to SAMs and cruise missiles for they are still useful flying to long distances in the sea or enemy territory where ground radars/SAMs simply cannot cover and find not only assets in the air to attack, now with advanced missiles, but also spot ground targets to call in cruise missiles and drop their own missiles as well. Like the role of WW1, fighters always provide a god's eye on the battlefield.

    I think drones will replace large part of manned aircraft. The problem is that modern crew training is expensive and also that there are very expensive life support systems on aircraft like oxygen systems. A drone replaces a lot of the functions of pilots. There will likely still be pilots for electronic warfare/cyber command aircraft in the air close by to control the drones in case of hacking. There is talk on giving the F-35 the ability to control a swarm of drones.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2018
    Robert likes this.
  3. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Not so much in Australia

    [​IMG]
    Our Wedge Tailed Eagles will happily bring a drone down

    Mind you they have also been known to attack paragliders and parachutes

     
    Tim15856 likes this.
  4. Chester_Murphy

    Chester_Murphy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    7,503
    Likes Received:
    2,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If there is a need to take land, there is a need for humans to take it. The next revolution my well be to integrate the human brain with technology that will coordinate with supercomputers/AI, who will be calling the shots.

    They are already working with computers that work on the atomic level. One electron is a 1 or not 1. They will be so quick, AI will grow faster than we can stay relevant.
     
  5. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Russians have been investing heavily into AI of late. Consequently, their new 'Armata' tanks are designed to operate in a 'virtual battlefeild' where all vehicles, drones and even infantry are coordinated in real time by predictive and logistical algorithms that mazimize tactical efficiency relative to known and likely enemy movements.
     
  6. SMDBill

    SMDBill Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,715
    Likes Received:
    260
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Outside the fighter/bomber role, they can be of great value in autonomous roles, such as intelligence gathering, communications relays, and could be used to drop supplies to predetermined locations where careful crew coordination isn't necessary. We still have huge need for manned aircraft where human intelligence is needed for decision making, communicating events in real time, targeting decisions where events change, etc., but that isn't the sum whole of military aviation. As eyes in the sky, they can be of huge value because they have no need of restrooms, they don't take breaks, they don't need sleep or rest, and they can be stuffed with sensors instead of creature comforts. They've even made successful launches and recoveries from aircraft carriers, so they're becoming smarter as technology and experience increase.

     
  7. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, of course they do!

    Everything, everywhere is dangerous in your country. If you swim, you get eaten by crocs or great whites. If you take a walk, you die from snake bite because you have some of the most venomous snakes in the world. There are funnel web spiders in urban areas, so staying at home is not an option. Even your eagles are unfriendly!

    "Though just 1.5-3.5cm big, the Sydney Funnel-web has fangs larger than a brown snake's and so powerful they can even pierce through nails and toenails. Their venom has a compound that can attack the human nervous system and alter the functioning of all organs and, when coming from a male, can kill."



     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2018
    Bowerbird likes this.
  8. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    You should see one of them on top of a road kill bullock screaming " its mine back off!!" And staring down on coming road trains Lols!! They are BIG!!

    [​IMG]
    Yep could not resist! :p
     
    APACHERAT and Seth Bullock like this.
  9. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Drones will become the mainstay of the US Air Force by 2030 if not sooner. Drones can already out fly human pilots in simulations and we are at the beginning stages. Drone AI is only going to get better and better and ever increasing rate. Drones can fly further, pull more Gs, carry more payload and best of all if you lose a drone you just pop another one up that is just as good. If you lose a pilot you lose years of training and experience. The future battle sphere will be composed of manned air and ground units quarter backing various drones to complete tasks or to kill enemies.
     
  10. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I absorbed a lot of information there above. Thanks for the lessons.
     
  11. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Being able to "pull more Gs" is not everything when it comes to maneuverability.

    And where do you get the idea that drones (at least that we have now) can carry more payload than manned combat aircraft or have more range?
     
    Mushroom likes this.
  12. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Predator drones routinely fly more than 24 hour at a time with the record being in the 40s and the newer Reapers have more range. Not having to carry the life support for the pilot means you can carry more missiles. I believe the new Reaper drones carry six missiles while the F-35 is limited to only 4 missiles. Pulling more Gs is literally the definition of maneuverability. Any acceleration causes G-forces. Drones are the future, as I said they will probably keep humans as QBs but most of the heavy lifting will be done by drones in the air and then eventually on the ground. They use those little robots all the time for bomb inspection and scouting out a location and those are just glorified RC cars.

    Interesting trivia some local national Air Guards have dumped their human pilots and older aircraft and instead of getting the new ones have converted to drone fleets.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2018
  13. Mrbsct

    Mrbsct Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2013
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Take the pilot out and replace the cockpit space with more fuel. Or simply reduce plane size and add more wing size.
     
  14. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,312
    Likes Received:
    6,672
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    F-35s can carry 4 missile INTERALLY. Up to 6 more IIRC externally for a total 10 IIRC.

    And the ability to sustain more "G's" is NOT the definition of maneuverability. Otherwise it would be impossible for manned combat aircraft to evade SAMs and AAMs all of which can turn with more G's than a manned fighter or bomber.
     
  15. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That has nothing to do with maneuverability. That has to do with losing tracking. The entire reason that 5th generation fighters are stealth to begin with is because current gen fighters are extremely vulnerable missiles. Missile technology is only getting better and better while fighter technology will always have the human factor as a limitation.
     
  16. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Technically, many Navy planes have the ability to land autonomously on a carrier. The F-14 was designed in the 1960's and it could do it.

    As you wrote, drones have their place, and as technology changes that role will change. One day, all aircraft might be unmanned. But there is enough trouble with driverless cars, and that's a much simpler problem than a pilotless autonomous fighter, so I'm not holding my breath.
     
    Dayton3 likes this.
  17. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have never taken drones very seriously, other than as recon systems. Simply put, they are to easy to interfere with.

    Remember, it was not that long ago that A Sentinel drone was diverted off course and landed (and captured) by Iran.

    Let that sink in, Iran did this, through signal intercept and hacking.

    Does anybody really think that China and Russia don't have capabilities that are much higher? Or that we do not?

    Drones are simply to vulnerable to such attacks. This is not a worry when you have a human piloting an aircraft.

    A lot of that is also due to advances in technology.

    During and after WWII we were in an arms race with the Axis then Soviets, and each side was rushing out new aircraft almost as soon as the ink was dry on the plans. This caused huge overlaps in aircraft design, both in mission and capabilities. And frequently they were already obsolete by something that was already being designed.

    By the 1970's, that had largely ended. All fighters had advanced to jets, and the same with bombers (other than some legacy ones that were still used for specific purposes). In the 1970's the first attempts were made in combining both land and sea aircraft, in the F-18 and the F-111. The F-18 was ultimately a success, and still operates to this day. The F-111 not so much, but much of it was used in the design of the F-14.

    Ultimately, by the 1970's most of the large advances had already been made in aircraft, so instead of making a new model every few years, the effort was placed into advancing and extending the capabilities of existing aircraft.

    But even then, what we use today is still not unlike the earlier redesign and replace technique. A modern F-15 or F-18 bears little in common with the original versions other than basic shape.

    Actually, the F-35 has 2 internal hardpoints, and 6 external hardpoints for a total of 8 mounting points for missiles. Not 4.

    And the Air National Guard during the last 20 years had it's mission changed, as has the National Guard as a whole (and the Reserves of all branches). As such, much of the former Combat Roles that used to be in NG has been moved instead to the Active Duty and National Reserve forces. And the NG has been pushed more and more into a support role.

    But that has nothing to do with drones at all, it was part of a long term program started a decade ago.
     
    Tim15856, APACHERAT and Dayton3 like this.
  18. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why would you use the external hardpoints on a stealth fighter? It can carry 4 missiles internally which is how the vast majority of sorties will be armed. Only after the enemies AA has been neutralized are they going to risk using external missiles. The entire point of the fighter is to be as stealthy as possible and using external pods reduces that factor.
     
  19. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because not every mission requires stealth.

    Perfect example, if it is operating in Afghanistan, doing air-to-mud operations in support of a battalion of ground pounders. Of course it is going to want to have as much ordinance as possible.

    There is absolutely no air or ground to air threat in Afghanistan, so why would you even care about stealth?

    One dimensional thinking.
     
    APACHERAT likes this.
  20. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's like most internet memes, not very accurate.

    American bald eagle is only a bit smaller than the Australian wedge tailed eagle (which is among the biggest eagles).

    American bald eagles are much more variable. In the American South, they are pretty small, but in Alaska they are pretty large.

    An Alaskan bald eagle (average weight 6.3 kg, average wingspan 2.44 m) is about the same size as the wedge tailed eagle (average weight 6kg, average wingspan 2.33m).
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018
    Bowerbird likes this.
  21. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Birds of prey are awesome and I'm using the original definition of awesome...something you fear but respect.

    I was at my sisters house and watched hawk from nowhere swoop down and stop in the air with one flap of the wings and grasp my sister's cat with its claws and was gone, out of sight.

    Saw an owl once swoop down and grasp a squirrel with its claws never touching the ground and off to dinner time.

    Once saw a falcon at the beach in the air go into a dive and captured a seagull that was flying by, grasped it with its claws and with the seagull in its claws flew off towards Palos Verdes I assumed to eat its lunch.
     
    JakeJ and Bowerbird like this.
  22. reallybigjohnson

    reallybigjohnson Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    8,849
    Likes Received:
    1,415
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL One dimensional thinking is believing that stuff should be built for current wars. The reason they built them stealthy was because we are going up against enemies that are getting more well armed as time goes on. Russian fighters have been shot down in Syria just recently. The next war will be against someone much more well armed.

    Second, drones are doing more more of the airstrikes than manned-fighters are, drones are doing 70% of the strikes for the Syrians and Kurds versus manned aircraft. In the last few years drones have flown more and dropped more bombs than manned aircraft in Afghanistan as well.

    I am guessing that you are just rigid and unchanging in your views regarding technology or that you are/were a pilot or know someone who was and are just bitter and resentful because everyone but you seems to believe that drones are the future and in many areas including national defense at home, close air support in Afghanistan and Iraq, and targeting individual ISIS members drones are now doing more than fighters are.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018
  23. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Did I mention Syria? Did I mention Iraq? No, I did not. Stay on target. I did not mention these countries specifically because there is an active ground to air threat. There is a moderate one in Syria, a very small one in Iraq, an almost insignificant one in Afghanistan (maybe a handful of MANPAD and ground based gunfire uses in the last decade).

    And that "air strikes by drone" number was only true during the Obama administration in Iraq. It is no longer the case, and has not been since the US got involved in Syria and the current President took off the gloves in Iraq. By 2015 the percent of attacks by drones had dropped to 45%, and has shrunk even more in the over 2 years since then (most estimates are now in the 35% range or less).

    And targeting "individual ISIS members" is no longer the priority like it was from 2008-2014. That phase of operations is long over with, we have returned to an active footing in our operations. A drone is good for going after a small group of enemies. It is not so good when the target is a larger concentration like say a Battalion or larger sized force.

    And trust me, I am far from rigid, I simply keep very close track of these kinds of things. And in fact, I am actually the opposite of what you seem to think. My career for years was Air Defense, and I still keep a close eye on this field since it is possible that I might be returned to it at any time.

    And in my current MOS of IT-Communications, I am aware of how vulnerable such systems are from being intercepted-disrupted by outside means. Such as the 2011 incident where Iran took control of, landed, and captured one of our RQ-170 Sentinel drones. Just last month Israel shot down an Iranian Saegheh drone, a backwards-engineered copy of the Sentinel built by Iran.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2018
  24. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    32,222
    Likes Received:
    12,253
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe most drones are built with stealth because many are for recon and support only
     
  25. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, there are different kinds of "stealth".

    For our recon drones, they generally rely upon size and speed to accomplish this. Of course, they are not intended to be used over a high intensity conflict area. Low and slow moving, these small drones have no weapons, and are largely ignored by the discrimination software in most RADAR systems, and hard to impossible to spot by the naked eye.

    The Predator is our oldest active attack drones, and is not stealthy at all. It is slow, and easily detected by RADAR systems. But it was also originally made as a recon drone which has since been updated to carry weapons.

    The vast majority of our drones are recon purposes only, roughly the size of a hobby RC unit. Our attack ones are generally all variants of the MQ-1 Predator.
     

Share This Page