Military Review

DARPA LongShot program. A drone to help a fighter

86

DARPA LongShot skin variant


DARPA launches a promising new program for the United States Air Force. To expand the combat capabilities of the fighter aviation it is proposed to create a medium unmanned aerial vehicle capable of carrying air-to-air guided weapons. The program was named LongShot ("Long-range shot").

Changing the paradigm


The modern concept of a fighter's combat operation is quite simple. The aircraft must detect an air target or accept a third-party target designation, then go to the line of launching an air-to-air missile and fire. The results of such combat work directly depend on the probability of detecting a fighter by the enemy's air defense and on the missile's flight range.

DARPA specialists propose a new concept of application, which is believed to be capable of increasing the basic combat capabilities of fighter aircraft, as well as reducing risks to humans. It is proposed to develop this concept within the framework of the new LongShot program. The official press release on the launch of the program was published on February 8th.

The new idea provides for the introduction of a new component into the aviation complex. The fighter should not carry missiles, but a special unmanned aerial vehicle, which is the carrier weapons... It is assumed that the manned aircraft will be able to launch the UAV from a safe distance, and the drone will go to the missile launch line - taking all the risks.

DARPA suggests that the LongShot program will change the very paradigm of air combat. The traditional way to increase the combat capabilities of fighters is to gradually improve certain characteristics. LongShot offers an alternative development path with great potential.

The agency launches the first phase of the program, which aims to conduct research and preliminary design. Phase 1 contracts were awarded to Northrop Grumman, General Atomics and Lockheed Martin. Soon Northrop-Grumman revealed its opinion on the new project and its significance. The cost of the work was not reported.

Appearance issues


DARPA and Northrop Grumman in their messages dispense with general phrases, without technical details. At the same time, drawings were attached to the press releases of the two organizations showing the possible appearance of a promising UAV. It is unlikely that off-the-shelf drones will be the same, but at this point even the illustrations available are of some interest.

DARPA LongShot program. A drone to help a fighter
Concept from Northrop Grumman

A drawing from DARPA depicts a tailless aircraft with distinctive fuselage contours and a folding wing. At the tail there are two bucket air intakes, which indicates the use of a turbojet engine. Also demonstrated was the launch of two air-to-air missiles, which outwardly resemble the Lockheed Martin CUDA product. Before launch, the weapon was in the internal compartments.

Northrop Grumman showed another version of the "fantasy on the topic". Their LongShot version is more like a normal aircraft with smooth fuselage contours, trapezoidal wings and V-shaped empennage. The power plant in the form of a turbojet engine receives one upper air intake. Two missiles are transported on pylons under the center section.

Desired benefits


DARPA believes the new concept has several important advantages. A couple of them are given in the official message, but there are others. Indeed, with due elaboration of the project, a radical change in the combat capabilities of fighter aircraft is possible.

First of all, we are talking about the next version of the concept, providing for the interaction of a manned aircraft and a UAV. Research in this area has been going on for several years and is already yielding definite results. Now this concept is proposed to be used to improve the combat qualities of a fighter.

One of the main advantages of the new concept is the ability to increase the combat radius of the entire aviation complex. The launch line for air-to-air missiles is removed at a distance equivalent to the combat radius of the UAV. Due to this, it is possible to increase the zone of responsibility of fighters and air defense, as well as to exclude the entry of enemy weapons into the zone of destruction. However, it is not yet clear how the return of the UAV from the remote area to the base will be implemented.

LongShot is capable of launching a missile at a shorter distance from the target. This means that during the flight to the target, the rocket will lose less energy and maintain a higher speed. This will leave the target less time for any reaction, and the likelihood of a successful hit will increase.

The LongShot UAV is likely to be discreet. This will allow the attack to be carried out with a lesser likelihood of its timely detection by the enemy. In addition, the stealth drone is able to dramatically improve the combat capabilities of 4th generation fighters, which are not distinguished by high stealth.


The experienced XQ-58Q from Kratos is one of the promising drones capable of interacting with aircraft. Photo by US AFRL

The missile carrier drone can be equipped with two-way communications. This will allow updating target designation or retargeting during its flight to the launch line. In addition, a UAV operating on external target designation will not unmask itself with radar radiation.

Fighters of various types, existing and promising, are considered as carriers for LongShot. However, in theory, such UAVs can be used by long-range bombers or even converted transport aircraft. A heavy aircraft with several drones in the cargo bay and under the wing can replace an entire division of fighters. Such capabilities will be useful in a major armed conflict.

So far, the new DARPA program is only about expanding the capabilities of fighters. However, in theory, nothing prevents "teach" LongShot drones to carry "air-to-ground" weapons and strike at ground targets. However, they will have the same benefits as in the original role. Similar ideas are already being worked out at the flight test level.

The new UAV will have to be developed taking into account rather strict restrictions on dimensions and weight. It will have to fit on the suspension of existing and future fighters and not interfere with flight. In this case, the device requires high flight characteristics and acceptable payload.

To fully assess the prospects of the LongShot program, it is necessary to know not only the general requirements, but also the specific characteristics. They have not yet been determined and will become known no earlier than the end of the first research phase of the program. At the same time, it is already clear that the development and production of new UAVs will significantly raise the cost of operating fighters.

It can be assumed that the development of a new project will not face serious problems. The organizations participating in the project, selected by the DARPA agency, have extensive experience in the field of unmanned aviation and have all the required technologies. This allows us to optimistically assess the prospects for the entire program.

Plans for the future


At the moment the LongShot program is in its very early stages. Three contracts have been awarded for the work, probably on a competitive basis, and the contractors will have to conduct research and design in the coming years. Real results of work in the form of experimental equipment should be expected no earlier than 2022-23. With the approval of potential customers in the face of the Air Force and the Navy, further development of the project is possible, according to the results of which the rearmament of military aviation will begin in the second half of the decade.

DARPA claims that the introduction of LongShot products will change the very concept of air combat. Such assessments do not seem overly bold, and they are sure to attract attention and cause a corresponding reaction. It is likely that other countries will have similar projects in the foreseeable future - and then the hypothetical air battle will change again.
Author:
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. credo
    credo 15 February 2021 18: 08
    +2
    Everything is good in this description, except for one - "And who will tell us about the shortcomings of the concept."
    1. mark2
      mark2 15 February 2021 20: 57
      +1
      You still don't get it? Disadvantages are found only in Russian technology. I have been on this site for the seventh year and there are so many "specialists" who will tell you about all the shortcomings of domestic analogues and how they say "no analogues", the reason for which is "stealing" and will tell you about all the advantages and superiorities of the Western that will never be embodied even in the concept. There have already been hundreds of times talking about the NATO wunderwales and the United States in particular, but somehow it doesn't work out.
      1. Quadro
        Quadro 15 February 2021 21: 10
        +1
        And they also amuse, you say Putin's cartoons - a ton of pluses, you say amerskie cartoons from darp - the minuses crawl and crawl out regular svarogs and empty bots.
      2. yehat2
        yehat2 16 February 2021 13: 51
        +3
        There are many disadvantages to this concept.
        firstly, drones - it is desirable to make arsenals at least close to the cruising speed of the carrier. And the carriers are motley and all have their own parameters.
        secondly, what is the advantage of such a chain in reality, it is difficult to understand
        because there are stupid long-range missiles. Thirdly, the hellish complication of the entire system as a whole and, accordingly, inevitable difficulties in use.
        1. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 15 2021 11: 01
          +1
          = firstly, drones - it is advisable to make arsenals at least close to the cruising speed of the carrier. =

          "It is assumed that manned aircraft will be able to launch UAV from a safe distance "

          = because there are stupid long-range missiles. =

          Stupidly weighing half a ton. And the appropriate maneuverability.

          = Thirdly, the hellish complication of the entire system as a whole and, accordingly, inevitable difficulties in use. =

          Those. joint flights of the Su-57 with the "Okhotnik" - drank? In fact, the technology "we hang something on a jet UAV, shoot / throw at the coordinates" will soon knock half a century.
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 April 15 2021 11: 17
            -1
            Which is better - a 600 kg rocket or a hunter-sized drone that still has to reach the area of ​​action?
            the first option is more stable.
            1. Alarmist79
              Alarmist79 April 15 2021 11: 44
              0
              = which is better - a 600 kg rocket or a hunter-sized drone, =
              He's not the size of the Hunter. It is a small apparatus with a mass of the same order of magnitude as that of a large bomb.

              = who else has to get to the action zone? =

              So the "stable option" against highly maneuverable targets is useless at all. The parade maximum of interception for the R-37 is a target with a maximum overload of 8 "same", for the F-15 9. The "Raptor" is the same plus a controlled thrust vector. Such prodigies against bombers, tankers, AWACS, etc.
              Well, plus.
              1. Generally speaking, a 500 kg rocket, and even rather slow in the final section, is not a non-intercepted vehicle. The idea of ​​shooting down V-V missiles with missiles is ancient.
              2. If the adversary is hiding somewhere near the fighter, then the missile caught by the UAV, and not by the fighter, is good.
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 April 15 2021 12: 53
                -1
                Quote: Alarmist79
                The Raptor is the same plus a steerable thrust vector.

                nothing will be the same
                9g is the limit for the pilot's overload. Any plus is guaranteed to knock him out or even kill him. Moreover, not every pilot wants to experience at least 7g.
                I agree that the maneuverability of long-range missiles is not the best, but what prevents the last stage from being made more maneuverable?
                1. Alarmist79
                  Alarmist79 April 15 2021 13: 07
                  0
                  = 9g is the limit for pilot overloads =
                  AND? Therefore. Does UHT increase maneuverability?

                  = Moreover, not every pilot wants to experience at least 7g. =
                  And he wants to experience death?

                  = I agree that the maneuverability of long-range missiles is not the best, but what prevents the last stage from making it more maneuverable? =

                  That it won't cost you nothing. As a result, either range, or the mass of the warhead. Those. the likelihood of defeat will decrease.
                  The drone / rocket system is elementary energy efficient. A funny picture with the specific impulse of different motors.



                  Plus two-stage, of course, but this can be done on a rocket.
                  1. yehat2
                    yehat2 April 15 2021 13: 54
                    -1
                    Something I do not see arguments for unconditional consent.
                    there is no fundamental difference in engines.
                    the only plus of a drone with missiles is the possibility of more accurate target designation and variability in the time of striking, but in my opinion the price of this is not justified.
                    The leading samik will be shot down, which is easy enough to filter out (for target designation, he simply must have active radiation) and all the drones are useless.
                    In my opinion, it is much more logical how a swarm of missiles works for us - there is a lead missile (or even a group) and there are slave ones. And no need to substitute the pilot.
                    And the tandem in the form that is offered now was relevant 30 years ago, when the UAV controls were not yet so developed.
                    1. Alarmist79
                      Alarmist79 April 15 2021 15: 04
                      0
                      = there is no fundamental difference in motors. =

                      Do you seriously think that rocket planes are capable of fair competition with jet planes?
                      Specific impulse is the momentum / momentum per certain amount of fuel. Roughly economical. So, the difference between the jet and the rocket in this sense is more than an order of magnitude.
                      As a result, whatever you wind on the rocket, with the drone "hand" strongly longer. Or more effective at equal range.

                      = The leading samik will be shot down, which is easy enough to filter out (he simply must have active radiation for target designation) and all the drones are useless. =

                      1.And on the rocket you have an ARSN with the parameters of the fighter's radar? No, it's very bad. If there is one AT ALL, it
                      but). weak
                      b) which is almost worse, with the millimeter range against which stealth works especially wonderfully.
                      2. Do you have one airplane?

                      = In my opinion, it is much more logical how a swarm of missiles works for us - there is a lead missile (or even a group) and there are slave ones. And no need to substitute the pilot. =

                      Uh ... Well, if the missile is from a MiG-15, and the target is from an aircraft carrier, it even worked. In Soviet manuals, although it is not a fact that even at the test site. For the rest, see above. You can, but the possibilities are very so-so.
      3. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 11 May 2021 08: 32
        0
        There is also "Military Parity" where everything is ours is bad, but what is more or less, we have stolen.
    2. vadim dok
      vadim dok 16 February 2021 16: 15
      0
      Disadvantages will come to light and will be corrected at the CONCEPT level! Next will be the design, construction and construction! Now only an idea!
      1. credo
        credo 16 February 2021 16: 23
        -1
        Quote: vadim dok
        Disadvantages will come to light and will be corrected at the CONCEPT level! Next will be the design, construction and construction! Now only an idea!

        It meant not design flaws, but shortcomings in the elaboration of the issue of application during the battle and interfacing with the actions of a manned aircraft.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 17: 40
          -1
          Quote: credo
          use during combat and pairing with the actions of a manned aircraft.

          This is a matter of implementation. Any good idea can be killed by execution.
  2. Grizli-666
    Grizli-666 15 February 2021 18: 10
    0
    It feels like the wings and engine were attached to the outboard stealth weapon container for the F-18.
    1. Proctologist
      Proctologist 15 February 2021 20: 23
      +2
      And what, this is already a well-trodden path of improvements - as earlier the bombs were modernized into planning the installation of a whale with folding wings and a primitive guidance system.
  3. OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 18: 12
    +5
    Probably the LongShot concept was previously tested on the F-15 with UTAP-22.

    The concept of a flying aircraft carrier is being worked out in the Gremlen program.



    In general, it is logical to create 3 different platforms
    1. Light type LongShot, launch from carrier aircraft or catapult. The same F-15EX will fit 5-6 pieces.
    2. Average, airplane takeoff and landing. Like Boeing's Loyal Wingman
    3. Heavy, carrying capacity of modern information security. Predator C or MQ-25 type.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 18: 18
      +5
      Interestingly, the CUDA rocket has surfaced again. She and the MSDM are ideal armament for the new LoyalWingman-class UAVs.



      1. Intruder
        Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 06
        +3
        She and the MSDM are ideal armament for the new LoyalWingman-class UAVs.
        Well, so it is one of the most promising types of kinetic interceptors with a gas-dynamic matrix of impulse (moment) control of the LM!
    2. Intruder
      Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 04
      0
      However, in theory, such UAVs can be used by long-range bombers or even converted transport aircraft. A heavy aircraft with several drones in the cargo bay and under the wing can replace an entire division of fighters.
      just the concept of an air data center in all its glory, which we discussed with you last year !? wink
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 12
        0
        The F-35 and F-15EX were originally created. They are data centers in the first place, planes in the second.
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 17
          +1
          I'm now, not really about them, but rather "about large types", based on: C-17 or P8, or Russian A-50U!
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 22
            0
            Large types for other purposes. LoyalWingman and LongShot are weapons / assistants specifically for these fighters. In the future for NGAD, maybe the F-22 will be upgraded, which is unlikely.
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 28
              0
              Large types for other purposes
              they themselves indicate that in theory it is possible to use and:
              However, in theory, such UAVs can be used by long-range bombers or even converted transport aircraft. A heavy aircraft with several drones in the cargo bay and under the wing can replace an entire division of fighters.
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 44
                -3
                One does not exclude the other, but these are the projects for fighters. If you need a result, you need to focus on a specific goal, and not spread over the plane.
                Their task is to make LoyalWingman and LongShot for fighters.
                The flying aircraft carrier is Gremlins, etc.
                1. Intruder
                  Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 51
                  0
                  Their task is to make LoyalWingman and LongShot for fighters.
                  intuition suggests that we have approached the conceptual limit in the field of self-defense and systems that provide this very self-defense, for fighters of 4-5 generations, so they rolled out the slave drones, while they are in a stable trend, while there is nothing else today, they have not yet become with laser systems bother, there are already enough problems ...
                  1. OgnennyiKotik
                    OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 23: 00
                    +2
                    Another problem is people. Pilot training takes 10 years. It is simply impossible to scale up the Air Force quickly and the cost of losing a man is too high. These drones can be stamped in the thousands. In terms of complexity, this is the Tomahawk of the last blocks. By the way, the engines are from them.
                    Previously, there was a link of 4 F-35s, now 4 fighters and 12 LoyalWingman, a total of 16 aircraft. Lost all wingmen during the breakthrough of the air defense? It doesn't matter at the base the newcomers are waiting.
                    They are planned at a price of $ 4 million, the price of the F-35A is $ 78 million.
                    1. Intruder
                      Intruder 15 February 2021 23: 05
                      0
                      Pilot training takes 10 years. It is simply impossible to scale up the Air Force quickly and the cost of losing a man is too high.
                      more expensive than $ 4 million, plus time - for economic reasons;
                      Lost all wingmen during the breakthrough of the air defense? It doesn't matter at the base the newcomers are waiting.
                      and the new ones are new supplies and tenders for manufacturers and all other subcontractors, again "loot" rules and in this matter still ...!?
                      1. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 23: 23
                        -2
                        Quote: Intruder
                        more expensive than $ 4 million

                        Nothing is expensive there. Tomahawk level 5 block, it costs $ 1,6 million
  4. evgen1221
    evgen1221 15 February 2021 20: 07
    +2
    Well, having developments in software, radars, engines, and everything from which the drone is made, the imagination is developing widely. So they try different options, sift it. The same hishnik, too, as an experiment, was born - now in which crocadilla it grew and blooms further. It's good if our electronic warfare is also developing as their UAV creativity.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 20: 15
      +2
      Quote: evgen1221
      It's good if our electronic warfare is also developing as their UAV creativity.

      Do they not develop electronic warfare? There is no such saturation of all troops with electronic warfare systems like theirs. Only the United States and Israel have real combat experience of using these systems against a comparable adversary.
      In addition, REPs do not work well against communication channels, they do an excellent job with radars.
  5. Usher
    Usher 15 February 2021 20: 31
    0
    The idea is interesting, but how will he return?
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 20: 44
      -1
      From what is now known, then in any way or by parachute to the ground. Their price will be small, for example BQM-167 570 000 $.
      They are now testing recoverable UAVs, but as a mystery to me. The flying aircraft carrier is moving in parallel.
      1. Intruder
        Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 11
        +2
        The flying aircraft carrier is moving in parallel.
        already testing, coming back on board for Gremlins:
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 18
          -3
          I wrote about gremlins above, here is another. How to return not to a special flying aircraft carrier, but to a fighter or UAV. A reentry drone is under the wing of MQ-9 and news reports that it is returning to MQ-9. Well, or it is planned to return. The question is how?
          1. Intruder
            Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 26
            +1
            A reentry drone under the wing of MQ-9 and the news indicates that it is returning to MQ-9
            no, well, it’s too fantastic to go back to the external suspension unit in flight, literally climb under the pylon and wing ...!? Somehow the idea is difficult to implement ...
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 35
              -4
              The joke is that they want to achieve this.
              On the other hand, you can use the same principle as on gremlins and not show off.
              A cable with a magnetic lock is released from the pylon, it is fixed on the UAV, approximately as when refueling, it is pulled to the pylon there is already mechanically fixed.
              Like that.
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 43
                -2
                I already wrote about something like that ... wink
            2. Intruder
              Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 41
              0
              if you think so, then you need to be minimal:
              a) a cable with a lock, a winch, a cone stabilizer + a manipulator, to bring the drone into the cargo compartment of the transporter, with a carrying capacity greater than the mass of the drone itself;
              b) on the drone itself - a boom with cleaning into the inner compartment (it must also have an optional stealth) + additionally, a lidar of precise orientation relative to the lock on the cable in flight;
              And how does it fit into the MQ-9 under the wing, even for the F-15, F-22 ???
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 22: 50
                0
                For visualization, instead of a 4 GBU-39 unit, we have a LongShot (not much larger in size). In the platform there is a thin cable with a lock, a winch on the platform and locks. Tighten with a magnet, fix mechanically.
                1. Intruder
                  Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 55
                  0
                  For visualization, instead of a 4 GBU-39 unit, we have a LongShot (not much larger in size).
                  you can arrange it, especially instead of GBU-nis, but again, catch how and at what speed to do it ... plus the winch itself with a platform, a cable and this all violates aerodynamics and additional mass on the structure, in short, somehow not very come up with an idea in a constructive way .., especially for the MQ-9 !?
                  1. OgnennyiKotik
                    OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 23: 05
                    -2
                    What we are talking about does not take up a large volume. Can be designed by typing without harm. The same cable is unwound on Spikes for tens of kilometers.
                    1. Intruder
                      Intruder 15 February 2021 23: 09
                      -1
                      The same cable is unwound on Spikes for tens of kilometers.
                      there is an optical fiber (fiber-optic datalink), and then a cable is needed to the cable, the mechanical loads are different, after all, it will have to be dragged to the suspension unit, in the last section ...
                      1. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 23: 15
                        0
                        And not for tens of kilometers the length is needed, tens of meters. Once air refueling seemed like a fantasy, now it is an obligatory routine.
                        Naturally, the whole process is automated, the pilot's resource should not be spent on this.
                        In general, a technically solvable problem, you need to design and experiment. Gremlins are for this.
                      2. Intruder
                        Intruder 15 February 2021 23: 21
                        0
                        In general, a technically solvable problem, you need to design and experiment. Gremlins are for this
                        I don’t argue that the solution to be solved, but for light aircraft and large UAVs, somehow it’s not very ..., it’s easier and cheaper to land them on parachutes, and then evacuate them with a turntable or pick them up by ground forces !?
                      3. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 15 February 2021 23: 27
                        0
                        Now they do it. Price question. You can just let them flow. They are themselves a rocket. If several hundred kilos at a speed of 800-900 km / h fall on a vehicle, it will not seem enough without explosives.
      2. Intruder
        Intruder 15 February 2021 22: 46
        0
        Well, or it is planned to return. The question is how?
        in short, either this is an obscene advertisement and Darpa's hype, or something "anti-material" is obvious, which we will not see publicly until the actual tests in flight ..
      3. VasYok
        VasYok 16 February 2021 08: 03
        0
        How to return not to a special flying aircraft carrier, but to a fighter or UAV.

        And why should they fence the garden with the return? (Why complicate the system?) If a 6th generation FX fighter with air refueling capability is being developed in a manned and unmanned version. The filling and load can be different.
        https://ria.ru/20200919/ispytaniya-1577443640.html
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 15 February 2021 21: 08
    +2
    What is it ? In Russia, the "Okhotnik" UAV is an assistant for the Su-57 ...; and in the USA LongShot ...?
    1. sen
      sen 16 February 2021 04: 53
      +3
      In Russia, the "Okhotnik" UAV is an assistant for the Su-57 ...; and in the USA LongShot ...?

      The United States has an unmanned wingman - XQ-58A Valkyrie
  • bars1
    bars1 15 February 2021 23: 18
    +4
    Quote: Nikolaevich I
    What is it ? In Russia, the "Okhotnik" UAV is an assistant for the Su-57 ...; and in the USA LongShot ...?

    In Russia, the analogue of LongShot is the IFRK DP (multifunctional missile system for long-range interception), the SNBE of which is considered to be K-77M missiles
  • mongol9999
    mongol9999 16 February 2021 00: 05
    +2
    Question. 1. And how will this combat crap after work will be put back on the pylon? 2. There is more likely not an increase in the combat radius, but the possibility of loitering in a safe zone before testing the drone. Until he reaches the launch line, until he returns ... In general, another epic crap.
    Wangyu. Ten years from now, one side will show off an incredible number of combat flying drones, and the other tactical nuclear anti-aircraft missiles.
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 16 February 2021 01: 32
    +4
    An airplane that carries a drone that carries missiles. The fighter detects the enemy, launches a drone, which flies closer and launches 4 light rockets, air and air .... Ingeniously "Gena, let me carry my suitcases, and you carry me." So, the drone is not weightless, and weighs more Air Air missiles. Just a trivial question. Instead of a DRONE and 4 light missiles on it, why not attach 4 long-range missiles to the fighter. I assure you that 4 Meteors will weigh LESS than the drone and 4 Sidewinder on it. Even if you create the equivalent of a PHOENIX and stuff it with modern engines and electronics, 4 such phoenixes will weigh less than one drone. A drone with dipole reflectors and IR traps is a bait for missiles, I understand. Although, too, can make better traps and hang them more? But hanging 4 short-range missiles on a HEAVY AND EXPENSIVE DRONE, when you can simply hang 4-6 long-range missiles on a fighter (and weigh less) will lead to the same result - the defeat of the enemy outside the reach of his weapon.
    It seems to me that this is all for the development of the budget. Of course, with "donations for the election campaign from some respected people, other respected people." Just test the effectiveness of the F15 hung with Meteors, against the F15 with a drone and 4 sidewinds and just check who will kill whom.
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 13: 31
      0
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      ... Just test the effectiveness of the F15 hung with Meteors, against the F15 with a drone and 4 sidewinds and just check who will kill whom.


      What if the other F-15 has 2 drones? Or 4?
      1. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 16 February 2021 17: 59
        0
        Who will raise how much. For example, just 6 tons of ammunition. One F15 has 6 tons of air-to-air missiles, while the other drones with missiles have air with a total mass of 6 tons.
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 18: 02
          0
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          Who will raise how much.


          Well yes. Here you need to calculate at least the total mass, but there is no data on the Long Shot mass.

          Quote: Baron Pardus
          One F15 has 6 tons of air missiles


          The same Meteor weighs ~ 200kg. 6 tons is 30 Meteors, there is simply nowhere to hang them (if the F-15 could carry them).
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 14: 59
      0
      You are considering a dueling situation which is impossible in practice. Such systems are needed for group tactics to gain air superiority or break through air defense. When quantity is important and there will be losses. Better that these losses were LoyalWingman or LongShot. Naturally, these UAVs will carry not only V-V missiles. The F-15EX will calmly raise 5-6 LongShot, 2-3 of them are equipped with radars, communication systems and electronic warfare. For the remaining 2-3 V-V or V-P missiles. A link of 4 F-15EX is already 20-24 drones.
      1. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 18: 09
        0
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        A link of 4 F-15EX is already 20-24 drones.


        One F-15EX is suspended by 6 drones? Where does the data come from?
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 18: 14
          0

          The 4 GBU-39 unit is comparable in weight and size to LongShot concepts. On the F-15, there is clearly still a margin of space and weight to compensate for the difference.
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 18: 23
            0
            4 GBU-39 weighs 4 * 130 == 520kg, the unit is, say, 4m x 0.5m. Valkyrie or UTAP-22 won't fit there. Is there data on the size and weight of the LongShot?
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 18: 58
              0

              LongShot is about 2,5 CUDA long, 1,8 * 2,5 = 4,5 meters... The UTAP-22 has a length of 6,1 meters and a maximum take-off weight of 930 kg. LongShot somewhere 75% of UTAP-22, respectively, weight somewhere 700 kg
              Quote: Eye of the Crying
              4 GBU-39 weighs 4 * 130 == 520kg, the unit is, say, 4m x 0.5m.

              The F-15 clearly has a margin of weight and size for the 5-6 LongShot. For example, transferring the PTB under the fuselage and hanging it under the wing by LongShot.

              UTAP-22 under the wing of the F-15.
              1. The eye of the crying
                The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 19: 06
                0
                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                LongShot is about 2,5 CUDA long


                By picture smile

                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                LongShot is about 75% of UTAP-22, respectively, weight is about 700 kg


                How official is this data? However, in any case, 700kg is more than 4 GBU39.

                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                UTAP-22 under the wing of the F-15.


                Here. With a fixed wing, I just don't see where to hang more than 4 devices. Even if there is a stock by weight.
      2. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 16 February 2021 18: 26
        0
        Dueling situations are possible, necessary and EXIST. Moreover, NATO is testing new aircraft on them. The flu was tested against both F16go and Rafal. The Greeks tested the Mirage 2000 against F16. It is in dueling situations. American squadrons "Aggressor" exist to test aircraft and tactics EXACTLY in duel situations. Do you think it's just that ours are buying up Soviet and Russian weapons wherever possible? It is for dueling situations and trials. Our Air Force may not be able to buy 100 Dryers, but with a dozen - easily. And more is not needed. Structures, of course, are at war, but the individual performance of EACH weapon is very important.

        Can you imagine how difficult it will be to communicate with all this shobla? In the conditions of electronic warfare. Electronic warfare is certainly not omnipotent as its adherents believe, but the more complex the system, the easier it is to break it. Are you absolutely sure that it will be better, even with an air defense breakthrough, than to hang long-range anti-radar missiles on the F15, and launch a flock of drones with radars and electronic warfare equipment launched from the ground in front of them?

        Each drone is not weightless, each drone is a reduced combat load, increased aerodynamic drag. I repeat, it’s all like "Gena, I will carry the suitcases, and you will carry me." That is, the combat load of the aircraft is reduced, the increased aerodynamic drag, the reduced range, speed and maneuverability. As for electronic warfare, this can be done by drones launched from the EARTH, and going in front of attack aircraft. Moreover, anti-radiation missiles can be mounted on the same drones. AGM88E for example, weight, 360kg, range 100km. Longshot is clearly heavier than 2-3 of these missiles.

        I am not an opponent of Drones, they have proven their effectiveness more than once or twice. But hanging a drone on an airplane and hanging rockets on a drone is idiocy. It is more practical to launch the same drones from the ground and have them go in the first shock wave when the air defense breaks through. Some drones with electronic warfare equipment. another part with missiles HARM, SHRIKE or something like that. And behind them are already attack aircraft. The Goblin project was closed for this very reason - each fighter that carried the bomber reduced the payload of the bomber and, due to aerodynamic drag, reduced both the range and speed of the bomber.

        Do you think two long shots will improve the aerodynamics of the F15go or not? Will two long shots increase wing loading or not? Two long shots will increase fuel consumption or not. Well, the defending side will have to constantly keep in the air drones hung with electronic warfare means, which will blind drones with radars that will carry electronic warfare that will penetrate electronic warfare that will ... and hell nauseum .... And this will escalate to the point of absurdity. And this absurdity will reach the point that in the conditions of electronic warfare, in the end, we will return to the F-5E and Mig21, which will be guided by radio from the ground :-) (Joking). Or maybe not joking. As many recently wrote, we are already returning to the concept of lightly armored light tanks with powerful weapons. Where have we seen this before? AMX-30 and Leopard 1.

        By the way, I read somewhere, fiction, that personal protective equipment (force fields) reached such a level that everyone returned to swords and bows, since these force (inertial) fields did not react to weapons that had a low speed :-). Such a shield calmly fought off a bullet from a railgun, but ignored the crossbow bolt: -)>
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 19: 14
          0
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          Can you imagine how difficult it will be to communicate with all this shobla?


          Where do you see the difficulty? These devices do not need control (in the sense of Reaper). They need target coordinates and possibly a weapon permit.

          Quote: Baron Pardus
          As for electronic warfare, this can be done by drones launched from the EARTH


          Maybe there will be such. Only they will be more expensive or much more expensive.
        2. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 19: 33
          -1
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          American Aggressor Squadrons exist to test aircraft and tactics

          That is exactly the squadron, in real training battles converge squadron to squadron. One on one this is for show or pilot entertainment.
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          Can you imagine how difficult it will be to communicate with all this shobla?

          I imagine, nothing supernatural, providing communications for 20 armored vehicles is much more difficult task.
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          Project Goblin was closed for this reason

          The Goblins project is not closed, on the contrary, it reached the test, 2 months ago the video from the tests in real conditions was rolled out.
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          Do you think two long shots will improve the aerodynamics of the F15go or not?

          Not two, 5-6 pieces, edge 4, if they are heavier than my calculations. Deteriorated, so after launch, their F-15s will go to a safe distance. Let me remind you that the F-15EX is not an air superiority aircraft, the USAF buys it as a carrier of bombs, missiles and other means.
          Quote: Baron Pardus
          It is more practical to launch the same drones from the ground and have them go in the first shock wave when the air defense breaks through.

          One does not cancel the other, part from the ground, part from IB. Naturally, they will all be in front of the manned aircraft, protecting and hiding them. Theirs is F-22, F-35 in the future NGAD.
          For air superiority missions, the USAF uses minimum 3 links + Awax. To overcome air defense, in addition to aircraft, helicopters, KR, OTRK, etc. are used. Fighter for fighter, tank for tank, soldier for soldier is an abnormal situation, in reality it is rarely received. The battle is a combined-arms battle where group tactics are important, and not the characteristics of a particular unit.
          Guess what they are aiming for:
          1. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 16 February 2021 20: 26
            +1
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            The Goblins project is not closed, on the contrary, it reached the test, 2 months ago the video from the tests in real conditions was rolled out.


            The Goblin XF-85 is a mid-century project: a fighter aircraft based on the B-36. And the Gremlins reached the test.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 20: 29
              -1
              Thanks for the amendment.
          2. Baron pardus
            Baron pardus 16 February 2021 22: 10
            0
            Project Goblin is CLOSED. Back in the late 50s. Read about Mac Donnell HF85 Goblin "Parasite fighter". Apparently we are talking with you about different Goblins.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 22: 13
              -1
              Sorted it out already, I'm talking about the Gremlins, the project of a flying aircraft carrier. Similar project with Goblin, it seems therefore consonant names.
          3. Baron pardus
            Baron pardus 16 February 2021 22: 16
            0
            So that you know, in these "Aggressor" squadrons "trophy" equipment is tested and opposed one-on-one too. Learn the material. There are several options for training battles. There are battles when F16s play the role of aggressors, using the tactics of Russian Aviation (before that, Soviet, and the role of Soviet fighters was performed by F-5E, in the role of Mig21. And F21 (Kfir C2), in the role of Mig-23. And there is also one-on-one. When the instructor gets into the "Trophy" MiG-29 or something else, the pilots on the F-16. They wrote about these tests / training battles more than once or twice.
    3. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 15 2021 12: 50
      0
      = Brilliant "Gena, let me carry the suitcases, and you will carry me" =
      The rocket engine is extremely inefficient. From where

      = Even if you create the equivalent of PHOENIX =
      You can only get into something with the maneuverability of a freight car.

      = I assure you that 4 Meteors will weigh LESS than the drone and 4 Sidewinder on it =
      The fact of the matter is that the plus-mine bast shoe is comparable. But fly is many times closer than a bunch.
      As a result, the "meteorological carrier" will quickly suffer.
  • bars1
    bars1 16 February 2021 01: 33
    +1
    Quote: mongol9999
    And how will this combat crap after work will be put back on the pylon?

    You do not.
  • sen
    sen 16 February 2021 04: 37
    +2
    The air-to-air missiles shown in the first image appear to be variations on the forward-looking Cuda. The development of the rocket is (did?) Lockheed Martin.
    Cuda is a short-range missile with an active radar homing head. It is about half the size of the AIM-120 AMRAAM.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 16 February 2021 14: 20
      +2
      Cuda is a short-range missile with an active radar homing head.
      it is worth adding that this type of missile URVV / MD is a kinetic interceptor, that is, it does not carry a warhead !!! This is one of the features of the project - CUDA, from LM! Second: high maneuverability in all sections of the trajectory (it is ensured by the gas-dynamic belt of impulse engines, which is visible in the image in the missile head ...), for the implementation of a combat kinetic effect when intercepting a target!
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 11 May 2021 08: 36
        0
        In the Russian Federation, a similar scheme (with gas-dynamic control) has so far only been used on missiles for the S-350 Vityaz. But she is not with kinetic interception.
  • sen
    sen 16 February 2021 04: 46
    +2
    Here recently, the UAV-interceptor "Wolf-18" for dealing with small UAVs was discussed. It may be worth developing a UAV interceptor similar to the DARPA LongShot, but only ground-based to combat attack drones and helicopters.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 16 February 2021 14: 22
      +1
      develop a UAV interceptor similar to the DARPA LongShot, but only ground-based to combat attack drones and helicopters.
      the Ottomans are already hanging on their drummers small airborne missiles of lightweight design and with less expensive GOS and warheads ...
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 16 February 2021 14: 31
      0
      Quote: sen
      It might be worth developing a UAV interceptor similar to the DARPA LongShot, but only ground-based to combat shock

      They are already ground-based, with a jet launch. You need to bring the project to mind, then develop it in different directions. We also had this experience.



  • bk0010
    bk0010 16 February 2021 21: 00
    +1
    Stupid idea. Instead of launching a long-range missile, they want to launch a drone from which to launch a missile. Or are they going to stick into a consumable AFAR drone from the F-35 (for guiding missiles)?
  • Alexey Zigalov
    Alexey Zigalov 17 February 2021 20: 24
    0
    Colleagues, and someone from our general staff reads .... This article is a dead end way of development. As correctly noted for the Hunter. Imagine the Su-57, and the Hunter is on the belly, our fathers-commanders will gladly master another ten billion. First of all, we defend and defend our air defense. Our task is to destroy everything that flies planes, helicopters, cruise missiles, UAVs, etc. Therefore, front-based. Air-to-air missiles and a cannon for air combat. ALBK (autonomous flying combat complex) fly in pairs, one, two, three pairs, can go accompanied by an airplane, helicopter or independently. As already correctly said, the Su-57 costs $ 100, the ALBK is $ 4-5, the main thing is to make the Su-57 for two months, the ALBK is 30 pieces a month. Takeoff 5 tons, useful 2 tons.
    1. Outsider
      Outsider 26 February 2021 05: 39
      0
      Colleagues, and someone from our general staff reads .... This article is a dead-end path of development. As correctly noted for the Hunter. Imagine the Su-57, and the Hunter on the belly ...

      - Yes, what a "Hunter" on the belly, these UAVs will be a little more than a cruise missile! Though thicker than it, of course ...
  • TANKISTONE
    TANKISTONE 19 February 2021 20: 17
    0
    "Ender `s game". All this was in the "concept" of still piston carriers. But things are still there ... Ryabov Kirill scribbles articles like a machine gun of the "Maxim" system, moreover, in order to "burden" the article, he repeats himself, rearranging the words in sentences.
    1. Outsider
      Outsider 26 February 2021 05: 37
      0
      - And what does Ryabov have to do with it if this is the "DARPA LongShot Program"? ..
  • Outsider
    Outsider 26 February 2021 05: 11
    0
    Quote: credo
    Everything is good in this description, except for one - "And who will tell us about the shortcomings of the concept."

    - There are no shortcomings, there are difficulties and difficulties. And the concept itself is not new at all. This idea has existed for more than a dozen years - to make the air-to-air rocket two-stage, and the first stage to be reusable. For all the decades, the question has been about the level of technology that would allow this idea, which is quite simple in design, to be put into practice.
    Now the developed countries have reached this level, the only question is to carefully think over and implement this, rolling up our sleeves ...
  • Outsider
    Outsider 26 February 2021 05: 35
    0
    Quote: bk0010
    Stupid idea. Instead of launching a long-range missile, they want to launch a drone from which to launch a missile. Or are they going to stick into a consumable AFAR drone from the F-35 (for guiding missiles)?

    - Well, what nonsense to grind? The drone will fly at speeds of 0.9M-1.3M, and the final URVV flies at a speed of 4M! And the price ?! And weight? And the number of targets hit? Each drone will be able to take at least 3 airborne missiles.
    1. The F-35 has an RTR ASQ-239 station, which is capable of detecting emitting targets - ground and air at a range certainly no worse than the RTR F-22 station - 460 km and very accurately give them an azimuth. With D = 180 km, the RTR station gives out both the azimuth and the range of emitting targets.
    2. AFAR F-35 APG-81 has a target detection range with RCS = 1 m² equal to 160 km. Aircraft Su-27, Su-30SM, Su-35S will be seen by this radar at a distance of 160 * √√ (15: 1) = 315 km. At the same time, the F-35 itself will not be visible to opponents, even with two such stealth UAVs suspended under the wing.
    3.The F-35 will calmly launch them from a range of ~ 300 km, and he will quickly turn back, continuing to use the RTR station to control the location of targets and by the telecontrol system will see that after 120-150 km they will already begin to see relatively small but perfect UAV radars ...
    4. Approaching a range of about 70-50 km to targets, the UAVs will launch and control the destruction of targets. At this range to the target for the AIM-120D missile, there will already be a "no escape zone", that is, the target will not be able to escape with the help of some energetic maneuver - at this range, the missile will always maneuver it in terms of energy, so the probability of defeat here will be range to 1.
    5. After the missiles hit targets, the UAVs, having transferred control to the F-35, return to their landing point, in the area of ​​their home airfield, and then prepare for reuse.