Military Review

CBARS project news (USA)

92
At the beginning of this year, the Pentagon decided to terminate one of the most ambitious projects of recent times, and also to create on its basis a new development. Some features of the new project have already been identified, a designation has been chosen and a circle of potential developers has been roughly defined. In the foreseeable future, a contractor will be selected who will have to create new equipment and later build it in the interests of the armed forces.


A few weeks ago, it was announced that in the foreseeable future, the US defense industry would develop a new unmanned aerial vehicle, which received the official designation CBARS (Carrier-Based Aerial-Refueling System - “Deck refueling system”). The aim of this project is to develop a promising UAV with equipment to perform refueling of aircraft and other UAVs in flight. The new program "comes" from the previous project UCLASS (Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike - "Unmanned Deck Shock Reconnaissance System"), which, in turn, was based on best practices from the older project J-UCAS (Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems - "Unified unmanned combat air system").

Despite plans to apply the existing developments, the Pentagon’s current intentions can be interpreted in a critical manner. It can be argued that the UCLASS project, which lasted for almost ten years, did not lead to any real results, although some of its achievements can be implemented in the CBARS program. Thus, the previous project can hardly be considered successful, even with the construction and testing of the prototype.


UAV X-47B UCLASS in a test flight. Photo of Wikimedia Commons


Not so long ago, the US Department of Defense announced the official designation of the aircraft of the CBARS program. Prospective drone-tanker called RAQ-25. At the end of February, new information appeared regarding the names of the new project. It turned out that the command of the US Navy did not approve the proposed name, which is why it decided to put its version into circulation. About the reasons for this wrote edition of UNSI News. So, the head of the Office of Naval Operations, Admiral John Richardson, commented on the proposed index as follows: “I’m not sure that I really liked the new name of the CBARS project, so we’ll offer something better.”

Soon there was evidence of a new name proposed fleet. It is reported that in the new Navy documents, including in the draft budget, there is a new name Stingray ("Scat"). Thus, in just three months, the project managed to change several names, and only the last designation was adopted in accordance with the wishes of the naval forces, which will operate new equipment.

According to some reports, the designation Stingray has not yet become official. UNSI News asked for comment from the spokesman for the United States Navy, Ray Mabus, whose duties include, among other things, working with project names. He did not confirm the information about the introduction of the new project name CBARS.

According to available data, the Pentagon and the naval forces are currently working on the formation of technical requirements for a promising project. Requirements for the new technology will be published in the near future, after which a competition is launched to develop a new project. Boeing, General Atomics, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are expected to attend. Who exactly will get a contract for work - while it is difficult to say.

Meanwhile, the defense ministry is making plans regarding the financial side of the project. Flight Global writes that in the period from 2017 to 2021 fiscal years, the Pentagon will spend about a billion dollars on a CBARS program. Thus, part of the funds previously planned to finance the UCLASS program will be redirected to pay for new works. Financing of the new project will start next fiscal year. In 2,2, 2017 million dollars will be allocated to the RAQ-25 project. Further funding will grow over the next few years: 89 million in 349-m, 2018 million in 544-m and 2019 million in 646-m. Last year funding will be reduced to 2020 millions.

In the 2017 fiscal year, full-scale work on the new project will begin. In the meantime, it is planned to carry out a number of final works within the framework of the UCLASS project. Recall that in the course of this project, which started in the middle of the last decade, the Northrop Grumman company built and tested the deck X-47B UAV, which was originally intended for solving reconnaissance and attack tasks. Not so long ago, it was decided to abandon the existing project in favor of the new one.

The goal of the new CBARS project is to create a UAV designed to refuel other aircraft in flight. The development of such equipment will allow the US Navy to get rid of the long-standing problem associated with increasing the combat radius of existing aircraft. The fact is that since the late nineties deck aviation It does not have a full-fledged tanker aircraft, which prevents it from fully fulfilling its tasks. In 1997, the specialized Grumman KA-6D Intruder tanker was withdrawn from service. Since then, in-flight refueling has been carried out only by F / A-18 fighters with outboard refueling units.

CBARS project news (USA)
UCLASS and CBARS budgets. Figure Flightglobal.com


The use of fighters, not only for its intended purpose, but also as tankers leads to specific consequences. First of all, this affects the distribution of tactical roles and the combat potential of the units. Depending on the tactical need, up to 20-30 percent of the total number of sorties can fall on fighter flights with refueling equipment. Such work significantly reduces the overall combat potential of a squadron or wing, because they are deprived of the opportunity to send all existing aircraft to the combat mission.

It is assumed that the promising drone tanker RAQ-25 Stingray will be able to fully solve the tasks and thereby release the F / A-18 fighters, allowing them to do only combat work. In this case, it can be expected that the use of unmanned tankers will lead to a certain increase in the efficiency of such work. A UAV with characteristics at X-47B or higher will be able to stay in a specified area for a long time outside the enemy’s air defense zone and refuel combat aircraft responsible for gaining air supremacy or attacking enemy targets.

A complete list of requirements for the new project RAQ-25 has not yet been determined, but some of the wishes of the military are already known. It is assumed that the application of the developments under the UCLASS program will allow the new Stingray apparatus to obtain some capabilities for conducting reconnaissance and strikes. What kind of means and possibilities this apparatus will receive is not yet specified. In addition, the new drone will allow to solve one of the most important tasks associated with the further development of carrier-based aircraft. It is supposed to be used for testing joint piloting and joint operations of various types of aircraft, both manned and unmanned.

The preliminary work, the purpose of which is to formulate the requirements for the promising UAV RAQ-25, is devoted to the entire current calendar year. In the last months of 2016, the US Navy and the Pentagon must post a request for proposals to create a new project. A sample list of potential participants in the program has already been determined, but it’s too early to speak about its exact composition. Next year, the companies applying for the contract will have to carry out a preliminary project development and submit the necessary documentation, after which the military will make their choice.

According to current plans, the results of the competition will be announced in 2018 year. At the same time, the winning organization will receive a contract to carry out full-fledged design work and the implementation of other stages of the project. Design, prototype testing and other program phases will be carried out before 2021. By the middle of the next decade, serial RAQ-25 CBARS / Stingray will have to go into service and begin their service in the naval forces.


On the materials of the sites:
http://news.usni.org/
https://flightglobal.com/
http://defensenews.com/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
Author:
92 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 2 March 2016 06: 53
    18
    You can ironize as much as you like about the failures of the Americans, but they have come a long way in creating the latest devices, created new technologies and materials that will not disappear, but will be used in new developments. And there will be developments because the topic is promising.
    1. Cruorvult
      Cruorvult 2 March 2016 07: 11
      +9
      This is yes, the main thing is that the Chinese do not hack again, otherwise they will again have to roar like with f-35.
    2. bracket
      bracket 2 March 2016 08: 31
      0
      right, I agree ...
    3. Lopatov
      Lopatov 2 March 2016 10: 58
      +7
      I agree.
      Somehow the Americans decided to replace their old self-propelled guns "Paladin" ...

      The Crusader ACS development program was started. They invested a lot of money, "went a long way", "created new technologies", the program was closed.
      But the latest technologies were not lost, but were used in a new program, FCS. Again they invested a lot of money, "went a long way", "created new technologies", the program was closed.
      But even here the latest technologies and materials will not be lost, but will be used in the upcoming new program ...
      1. Professor
        Professor 2 March 2016 11: 56
        -2
        Quote: Spade
        They invested a lot of money, "went a long way", "created new technologies", the program was closed.

        Quote: Spade
        Again they invested a lot of money, "went a long way", "created new technologies", the program was closed.

        They paid money to engineers, scientists, and purchased equipment. Moreover, all this money was spent in the USA and everyone paid taxes without exception. Well, about the barrel artillery ... (the article is not about her) they found a replacement.


        Deck, heavy, inconspicuous, jet drone - this is undoubtedly a breakthrough. good Soon we will see them in action.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 2 March 2016 13: 12
          +2
          Quote: Professor
          They paid money to engineers, scientists, and purchased equipment. Moreover, all this money was spent in the USA and everyone paid taxes without exception.

          That is, a vivid example of thoughtless "use of funds", that is, the official cut. The spending of taxpayers' funds on the process for the sake of the process.

          "It would be better if the pensions were raised" (c)

          Quote: Professor
          Well, about the barrel artillery ... (the article is not about her) they found a replacement.

          Yeah. We spent a considerable amount of money, and once again modernized the obsolete Palladin
          1. Professor
            Professor 2 March 2016 13: 58
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            "It would be better if the pensions were raised" (c)

            Tell you about the retirement benefits of US troops? You will cry. wink

            Quote: Spade
            Yeah. We spent a considerable amount of money, and once again modernized the obsolete Palladin

            Bourgeois found an alternative.

            Quote: Operator
            UAVs as a tanker, hovering over the controlled territory - this is definitely a flying joke and cut the budget.

            The cost of pilot training is more than $ 1, the drone operator is an order of magnitude less.

            Quote: Operator
            It’s hard for me to imagine why a pilot of a flying tanker can get tired for 8 hours of barrage in the air in an air-conditioned cabin sitting in a comfortable chair - probably from playing WOT

            Tell this to the owners of airlines that pay their pilots for 8 hours of barrage in the air in an air-conditioned cabin sitting in a comfortable chair a lot of money. wink
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 2 March 2016 14: 16
              +4
              Quote: Professor
              Tell you about the retirement benefits of US troops? You will cry.

              And where are the military personnel? There are no other pensioners in the USA?

              Quote: Professor
              Bourgeois found an alternative.

              Yeah, M109A6, which is now in the army. By the way, not for free. Although it is several orders of magnitude cheaper than it was spent on two closed programs to replace it.
              1. Professor
                Professor 2 March 2016 14: 19
                -3
                Quote: Spade
                And where are the military personnel? There are no other pensioners in the USA?

                I can and about the rest and almost first hand. wink

                Quote: Spade
                Yeah, M109A6, which is now in the army. By the way, not for free. Although it is several orders of magnitude cheaper than it was spent on two closed programs to replace it.

                Yeah, that's right. The number of trunks they have decreases, and the number of "alternatives" increases. But this is a separate topic. hi

                The drone sends Ahmed Jabil to Allah:


                Another air strike:



                Armored personnel carrier:
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 2 March 2016 16: 27
                  +1
                  Quote: Professor
                  The number of trunks they have reduced

                  This, to put it mildly, is not true.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 2 March 2016 16: 41
                    -1
                    Quote: Spade
                    This, to put it mildly, is not true.

                    More than, but I suggest not to clog the branch and wait for the corresponding topic. There, each of us will be able to show their numbers. You, as a senior in rank, will be able to provide them first. soldier
                2. Operator
                  Operator 2 March 2016 18: 51
                  +1
                  Israeli footage acts of sabotage using drones is not a topic at all - it’s better to eat video frames army operations bomber aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria to destroy entire enemy targets, together with all its contents.

                  Manned vehicles, "Hephaestus" and life-giving cast iron rule.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 2 March 2016 20: 18
                    -2
                    Quote: Operator
                    The video frames of Israeli sabotage acts using drones are not at all a topic at all - it’s better to taste the video frames of the army operations of bomber aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria to destroy entire enemy targets together with all their contents.

                    It was about shock drones. Carpet bombing is for another branch.



                    Quote: Operator
                    The cost of avionics of an aircraft is much more expensive than avionics of a manned aircraft.

                    No, it is not.

                    Quote: Operator
                    Pilots of civilian airlines do not barrage in a given area, but fly along a route, not with fuel, but with people on board.

                    I will tell you a terrible secret. The salary of the pilot depends on the cost of the aircraft and the cargo carried. The cost of passengers is also easily calculated by the insurance company. hi
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 3 March 2016 00: 09
                      0
                      Equating existing drones to serial tactical strike aircraft is only in advertising mills.
                      When they say "strike drone", they mean a reconnaissance UAV, which has about a couple of suspension points for small bombs and kadibra missiles of about 100 kg.
                      Ability to high-speed flight, on PMV, to perform maneuvers with overload in "shock drones" is zero. Their specialty is participation in reconnaissance and sabotage operations over territory with a no-fly zone and suppressed air defense.

                      Where did you see carpet bombing on the video you submitted? laughing
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 3 March 2016 07: 21
                        0
                        Quote: Operator
                        Equating existing drones to serial tactical strike aircraft is only in advertising mills.

                        Tell this to Ahmad Jabil, or rather to his relatives. They will be interested to hear about how the commercial sent this child to hell.

                        Quote: Operator
                        When they say "strike drone", they mean a reconnaissance UAV, which has about a couple of suspension points for small bombs and kadibra missiles of about 100 kg.

                        Who is talking? Where is he talking? No gag. Give a link.

                        Quote: Operator
                        Ability to high-speed flight, on PMV, to perform maneuvers with overload in "shock drones" is zero.

                        And from this they ceased to be shock?

                        Quote: Operator
                        Their specialty is participation in reconnaissance and sabotage operations over the territory with a no-fly zone and suppressed air defense.

                        You're kind of like a science fiction or strategist. Coming up with terms, the purpose of the technique. Or can you share about the sources of such deep knowledge? I am especially interested in "sabotage".


                        Quote: Operator
                        Where did you see the carpet bombing in the video you submitted?

                        No, I saw an unparalleled "mass point bombardment not with smart bombs". wink
                      2. Operator
                        Operator 3 March 2016 08: 50
                        0
                        I understand that English is not native to you, but not to the same extent - how did hunter kill suddenly become a strike? laughing

                        Personal killings behind the front line are called sabotage, regardless of how they are carried out.

                        It’s good that you suddenly saw the light and remembered that carpet bombing refers to the air operations of several hundred planes in one departure against settlements such as Dresden, Prague, Tokyo, Pyongyang and Hanoi.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 3 March 2016 08: 59
                        -2
                        Quote: Operator
                        I understand that English is not native to you, but not to the same extent - how did hunter kill suddenly become a strike?

                        My English is more than fine. wink

                        Quote: Operator
                        Personal killings behind the front line are called sabotage, regardless of how they are carried out.

                        Destruction of an enemy invading armored personnel carrier to our territory. We look carefully.


                        Quote: Operator
                        It’s good that you suddenly saw the light and remembered that carpet bombing refers to the air operations of several hundred planes in one departure against settlements such as Dresden, Prague, Tokyo, Pyongyang and Hanoi.

                        Yes? A few hundred? You are already here "have repeatedly shared links" to your gag. Maybe this time, share? laughing
                      4. Operator
                        Operator 3 March 2016 09: 15
                        +2
                        Why would you smile about the carpet bombing of Dresden by the British and US Air Forces in February 1945: 243 Lancaster ships participated in the first wave of the raid on the city, 515 Lancaster ships in the second wave, and 450 Boeings in the third.

                        Links to your gag in this thread about the "carpet bombing" in Syria with the participation of 2 (two) "Tupolev" Aerospace Forces of Russia can not share.
                      5. The comment was deleted.
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                      7. viktorR
                        viktorR 5 March 2016 14: 30
                        0
                        Young man to have a dispute, you must have intelligence and knowledge
                        Well, after all, how does it work out for you somehow ...)))
                        What can I argue with you

                        Of course, I understand that you have not been a young man for a long time, that's why you review the history of your own comments, maybe a couple of those that you argued with will come up in my memory.

                        PS In general, the comment was not addressed to you.
                      8. Professor
                        Professor 5 March 2016 15: 50
                        +1
                        Quote: viktorR
                        Of course, I understand that you have not been a young man for a long time, that's why you review the history of your own comments, maybe a couple of those that you argued with will come up in my memory.

                        With people like you, I do not argue, I poke them in the face ... materiel.
                      9. viktorR
                        viktorR 5 March 2016 17: 42
                        0
                        You can only be rude

                        By the way, judging by the number of warnings I and you have, you are a boor, not me.

                        Then I look, you stumbled into the "materiel" on this branch))).
                        Go in peace, good old man.
  • Operator
    Operator 2 March 2016 18: 35
    -1
    The cost of avionics of an aircraft is much more expensive than avionics of a manned aircraft.

    Pilots of civilian airlines do not barrage in a given area, but fly along a route, not with fuel, but with people on board.
  • opus
    opus 2 March 2016 15: 04
    +1
    Quote: Spade
    That is, a vivid example of thoughtless "use of funds", that is, the official cut. Spending money taxpayers to the process for the sake of the process.


    It never comes to me:
    WHAT ARE THE CITIZENS OF RUSSIA (well, let's say, topwar visitors) SO EXCITED THE AMERICAN BUDGET AND THE MONEY OF AMERICAN TAXPAYERS (AND THE AMERICAN PENSION NOW STILL)?

    Versions:
    1.All the green card patriots? And they care so much?
    2.All American taxpayers who are screaming about "sawing amemba"? Or were they and have not yet passed 3 years?
    3.All the agents of Surkov and the Kremlin who are screaming about "sawing ameramibabala" to hide OUR sawing?


    (I would like to sell lisapets at 235 000 rub apiece in 2014 recourse )
    4.All those who shout about "sawed-off ameramibabala" are the victims of the exam?
    5. Or are there no other arguments?

    Threat. it is necessary to rejoice that the Americans inflict material damage on themselves, engage in dummies, deprive pensioners, and indulge them (to praise) -FASTER BENT
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 2 March 2016 15: 57
      0
      Uh ...
      What was it?
      1. opus
        opus 2 March 2016 16: 11
        +2
        Quote: Spade
        What was it?

        Uh .... I'll translate well
        Well, I asked a SPECIFIC QUESTION FOR YOU (and co):
        that you are so worried about drinking the American budget, the money of American retirees ... you can add more health care and so on.
        ?
        Quote: Spade
        That is a vivid example thoughtless "use of funds", to say official cut. Spending taxpayers to the process for the sake of the process.

        "It would be better if the pensions were raised" (C)

        You write / bake about the USA?

        Quote: Spade
        But the latest technology did not disappear, but was used in the new program, FCS. They put in a bunch of grandmas again "have come a long way", "created new technologies", the program was closed.
        But here, the latest technologies and materials will not be lost, but will be used in the upcoming new program ...

        and here about the USA ?.
        Right?

        So it’s GOOD. We must not criticize (shhh) but strongly support
        Quote: opus
        Threat. you have to be happythat Americans inflict material damage on themselves, engage in dummies, deprive pensioners,and indulge them (to praise) -FAST BENT


        I ask

        Quote: opus
        WHAT CITIZENS OF RUSSIA (well, or say topwar visitors) SO EXCITES "SAW" AMERICAN BUDGET AND MONEY FOR AMERICAN TAXPAYERS (AND AMERICAN PENSION NOW MORE)?



        arranged a translation?
        Or else chew?
        ZY.2 excuse me for interfering in your dispute with your opponent, but mantras about cutting the American budget cut eyes
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 2 March 2016 16: 24
          0
          My friend, do not have tantrums ...

          Quote: opus
          what worries you so much drank the American budget, the money of American retirees ...

          I'm drummed. I just don’t like it, when some try to present a rather stupid American system for developing arms and military equipment almost as an ideal.


          Quote: opus
          but mantras about cutting the American budget cut eyes

          Turning into a hysterical girl? Are they forced to write huge footcloths with a minimum of facts in them and a maximum of emotions?
          Drink valerianochki, maybe damn it, let it go
          1. opus
            opus 2 March 2016 17: 21
            -2
            Quote: Spade
            My friend, do not have tantrums ...

            Quote: Spade
            Turning into a hysterical girl?

            Quote: Spade
            Drink valerianochki, maybe damn it, let it go

            Decent answer. The diagnosis is 100% (recently enlightened, just right)


            can add something else? wink
            Threat.
            I'm sorry that I intervened, will not happen again, otherwise I don’t have enough money for valerian.
            Farewell.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 2 March 2016 19: 53
              +2
              Dear, you have messed up something totally. There are purely political articles. So go there, if you, damn it, needed a meeting.

              Do not put your incompetent little hands in purely military technical topics. On the Main 20 articles. Of these, there are only three technical ones about modern weapons. And here some must be noted ... mark the territory.

              What places, damn it, is not enough in another place to establish a platform?

              Got it already, damn it.
        2. viktorR
          viktorR 5 March 2016 01: 15
          0
          Well, I asked a SPECIFIC QUESTION FOR YOU (and co):

          Because the article is about "drank the American budget, the money of American pensioners."
          Keep yourself in control of the cutest.
          And the corruption rating, of course, yes ... Do not tell me where it is drawn up? Unworthy American organizations?
  • Operator
    Operator 2 March 2016 12: 50
    0
    The drone is by definition intended to be used where there is a danger to the life of the pilot - for example, in solo reconnaissance raids over enemy territory (see various Global Hawks, Traitors, Repeaters, etc.), as well as false targets for cracking the system Air defense.

    UAVs as a tanker, hovering over the controlled territory - this is definitely a flying joke and cut the budget.

    Failure to develop a strike UAV means an epic failure in the program for creating a robotic striker, which has at least minimal chances of survival in aerial combat or during an air defense breakthrough.

    And do not console yourself with the illusions that the money invested in developed on-board electronics and software for shock UAVs (2 / 3 of its value) can be recaptured at the construction of stupid tankers laughing

    I understand that the decision to write off funds at a loss under the UAV strike program was made on the basis of information on the pace of equipping the RF Armed Forces with S-400 air defense systems and Su-35 aircraft, plus a positive forecast for the adoption of the S-500 and T-50.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 2 March 2016 13: 21
      0
      Quote: Operator
      The drone is by definition intended to be used where there is a danger to the life of the pilot

      Or pilots, by default, cannot perform their functions effectively due to their physiological characteristics. Tired, infections ...

      And if there are no special problems with ordinary tankers - it is possible to provide a place for rest of the replacement crew, a toilet, a place for eating, etc., then for the deck "size matters". Or to limit the time of duty in the air, and drain fuel before landing on an aircraft carrier. Or develop an unmanned tanker, whose duty time will be limited only by the availability of fuel.
      1. Operator
        Operator 2 March 2016 13: 42
        0
        It’s hard for me to imagine why a pilot of a flying tanker can get tired for 8 hours of barrage in the air in an air-conditioned cabin sitting in a comfortable chair - probably from playing WOT laughing
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 2 March 2016 13: 52
          +1
          Eight? For modern heavy UAVs, 24 hours of duty has not been an achievement for a long time. For example, the MQ-4C Triton is able to hang in the air for up to 30 hours.
          1. Operator
            Operator 2 March 2016 18: 30
            0
            This is a tanker, not a scout - in 24 hours of barrage, it will gobble up all the fuel on board.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 2 March 2016 20: 05
              0
              C'mon ... Enough is enough.

              Deck aviation has several unpleasant features. First, they need a lot more fuel to land. Secondly, an aircraft carrier takes planes much more slowly than a ground airfield. Thirdly, the reception of damaged aircraft, and even more so aircraft with wounded pilots greatly increases this time.

              If a large group of aircraft returns from departure, this can create problems. And the pilots will have to eject from perfectly operational vehicles simply because there was not enough fuel.
              And here the on-duty filler in the air will help. In extreme cases, it can be completely emptied. Losing it is cheaper than a combat plane.
              1. Operator
                Operator 3 March 2016 00: 14
                -1
                However, for some reason, now there is no simple manned tanker in the decked wing for the purpose you specified - most likely, the problem is solved differently.
              2. viktorR
                viktorR 5 March 2016 01: 19
                0
                Why not use ROM?
  • egor1712
    egor1712 2 March 2016 07: 33
    -3
    Another cut of the "attendants"
    1. Manul
      Manul 4 March 2016 03: 26
      +2
      Quote: egor1712
      Another cut of the "attendants"

      The most hesitant comments on the entire site. No.
  • Belousov
    Belousov 2 March 2016 08: 13
    +1
    Another F-35 and Zamvolt? They at least seem to pass the test, apparently they sawed them according to the foreign scheme and made the rest cheaply, and then they sawed them off according to the Russian scheme — first they steal them, but they did the rest. Not a ride laughing
  • FID
    FID 2 March 2016 08: 21
    +8
    I offer my project to the Americans ... An airship, no, it’s better to have a tethered balloon ... filling cones revolve around the balloon (you can select any speed) ... Fly up and refuel! A barrel can be a tanker, a ground-based fuel system, anything! Those wishing to invest in the project - please report to VO!
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 2 March 2016 10: 11
      +1
      Quote: SSI
      I offer my project to the Americans ... An airship, no, it’s better to have a tethered balloon ... filling cones revolve around the balloon (you can select any speed) ... Fly up and refuel! A barrel can be a tanker, a ground-based fuel system, anything! Those wishing to invest in the project - please report to VO!

      Good morning, Sergey Ivanovich. hi
      I heard the projects of airships very seriously being studied with us, but as a refueling officer, an airship and even more so an aerostat is a big target. Let's say somewhere above the Pacific Ocean it’s necessary to refuel, for example, and such a fool hangs 500 miles in all directions to see it ...
      I do not think that a balloon as a tanker is a good idea.
      But as a civilian carrier, the idea is not even bad.
      Best regards hi
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 March 2016 11: 02
        +3
        The question is about speed, not "big target". I'm afraid the maximum speed of the balloon is less than the stall speed of the plane.
      2. Bayonet
        Bayonet 2 March 2016 12: 15
        +2
        Quote: NEXUS
        Projects of airships we have heard very seriously under study.

        The last fifty years! smile
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 2 March 2016 12: 28
          +1
          Quote: Bayonet
          The last fifty years!

          I am talking about new developments in Russia ... I heard that several projects are being implemented.
          1. gjv
            gjv 3 March 2016 08: 07
            +1
            Quote: NEXUS
            about new developments in Russia ... I heard that several projects are being implemented.


            Airship Augur AU-12 at MAKS-2003


            Airship Augur Au-30 of Aeroscan Airlines, 2007


            The automated airship "AEROTELEMOST". Developer-manufacturer FSUE "DKBA". MAKS-2011
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. bk316
        bk316 2 March 2016 19: 56
        +2
        It can be seen, but only in optics, here you can definitely follow the airship 99.9% radiolucent
  • tchoni
    tchoni 2 March 2016 08: 40
    0
    Americans rummage! The future belongs to drones. And they are promoting their programs. As for the dough, these are jobs in the high-tech sector and insurance against brain drain. It is here that the military research institutes can disperse our stools and send a bunch of specialists to a citizen. And five years later, when people had already settled down and fit into civilian life, they thoroughly forgot what they were doing, running and shouting: well, come back at least whoever.
  • abrakadabre
    abrakadabre 2 March 2016 08: 40
    +3
    Based on the rejection of the shock drone, they did not master artificial intelligence for him. It’s one thing to teach an airplane to perform simple algorithms for takeoff, landing and maneuvering. They did it. A completely different full-fledged air battle or a difficult task in the face of enemy opposition. This part was not mastered. Therefore, the developments according to a simple version were clearly decided to be used in a relatively unintelligent refueling machine. Which does not need aerobatics and other bells and whistles.
    The Chinese and ours must then crack the identification codes of a friend or foe and also refuel with their drones.
    1. this
      this 2 March 2016 08: 54
      +1
      and then the US military will wonder why their UAVs are falling, and it turns out to their tankers a queue of Russians and Chinese drones lined up wassat
    2. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 2 March 2016 09: 17
      0
      This is not a refusal, just Wishlist have increased. And in order to avoid accusations of inflating the budget of the program, they simply launched a new soldier
      It is assumed that the application of developments under the UCLASS program will allow the new Stingray to get some intelligence and strike capabilities.
  • nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 2 March 2016 09: 33
    +1
    The name of the tanker amused: “Cancer-25” laughing
    But this is at least something. I would love to look at the heavy domestic UAVs, not just projects, but already flying ones. But, apparently, this is not expected in the near future. Of course, I would like to make a mistake ... winked
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 2 March 2016 10: 14
      +1
      Quote: nazar_0753
      . I would love to look at the heavy domestic UAVs, not just projects, but already flying ones. But, apparently, this is not expected in the near future.

      Several design bombs are working on a heavy strike UAV up to 20 tons: Sokol, Sukhoi, MiG and several more KB. Moreover, we use the experience of Skat, Clipper and even Buran. I think in the coming years we will have a heavy-class UAV. hi
  • sa-ag
    sa-ag 2 March 2016 10: 08
    0
    Well, what an interesting topic, on its basis you can even make an unmanned fireman to extinguish forests, a transport carrier unmanned mail there
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 2 March 2016 11: 08
    +4
    In principle, everything turned out with iron, the problem is only with software.
    Americans want to have a fully autonomous device. Reconnaissance-strike is not yet possible, the task is to fly to a given area, find and recognize a target, strike, and all this in real time. While this is too much for the computer, the machine needs an operator. Drones under the control of the operator, for Americans - yesterday, for the sake of a new one, no one will be writhing.
    Therefore, the drone was allowed for a simpler task - to fly to a given area, when approaching your plane, perform a series of maneuvers and actions, after the end of refueling, act according to the task.
    As soon as they create working software for a completely autonomous solution to reconnaissance and strike tasks, bombs and missiles will be hung on the same or more advanced device.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 2 March 2016 11: 12
      0
      I repeat, there is no failure
      It is assumed that the application of developments under the UCLASS program will allow the new Stingray to get some intelligence and strike capabilities.
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 2 March 2016 17: 30
        +2
        I write about the same thing. They took a kind of pause, without stopping the operation and financing.
    2. forumow
      forumow 5 March 2016 13: 40
      0
      Quote: chunga-changa
      Americans want to have a fully autonomous device. Reconnaissance-strike is not yet possible, the task is to fly to a given area, find and recognize a target, strike, and all this in real time. While this is too much for the computer, the machine needs an operator. Drones under the control of the operator, for Americans - yesterday, for the sake of a new one, no one will be writhing.

      Such an aircraft and without an intelligence component makes sense! As a reusable CD, allowing you to repeatedly reduce the cost of long-range strike. The reusability and dimensions of the impact UAV make it possible to equip its avionics far superior in capabilities and cost than what the KR stands for.
  • rubin6286
    rubin6286 2 March 2016 11: 26
    +1
    If we discard the irony and frank chatter about the "cut", we must admit that the idea of ​​creating a tanker based on an aircraft carrier-based UAV is not meaningless. An operator in New York controls a drone over Afghanistan through a satellite in low Earth orbit, the X-47s have already been taught to take off and board a ship even at night, which means that a number of problems that have arisen are still resolved. The presence of aircraft of this class on an aircraft carrier will increase the range of the long-range air patrol, the time spent in the air of rescue and anti-submarine AUG helicopters. It is possible that in the future there will be UAV hydroplanes that can be used in the fire and rescue version. The progress of American specialists is evident, Russia will achieve similar results in 30-50 years, and even then, if there are no other problems that require immediate resolution.
    1. bk316
      bk316 2 March 2016 20: 15
      +2
      Well, if you forget about the aircraft carriers, then probably more correctly not 30-50, but 3-5.

      And it may very well be that it will be a really shock UAV, because on the basis of the T-50
  • kotuk_ha_oxote
    kotuk_ha_oxote 2 March 2016 12: 08
    +1
    Quote: NEXUS
    Quote: nazar_0753
    . I would love to look at the heavy domestic UAVs, not just projects, but already flying ones. But, apparently, this is not expected in the near future.

    Several design bombs are working on a heavy strike UAV up to 20 tons: Sokol, Sukhoi, MiG and several more KB. Moreover, we use the experience of Skat, Clipper and even Buran. I think in the coming years we will have a heavy-class UAV. hi

    Heavy class because domestic microelectronics is heavy?
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 2 March 2016 12: 36
      +3
      Quote: kotuk_ha_oxote
      Heavy class because domestic microelectronics is heavy?

      Dear, sarcasm in this case is stupid and inappropriate. A heavy shock UAV of up to 20 tons is being developed by us and is being developed by all the world's leading players. The Americans created the X-47B, but so far this is a crude machine, although it was already landing on an aircraft carrier.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 March 2016 13: 27
        0
        Drums for us are not a priority at the moment. Intelligence, communications, long-range radar detection, geolocation ... All this is much more important.
    2. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 2 March 2016 22: 43
      0
      Quote: kotuk_ha_oxote
      Heavy class because domestic microelectronics is heavy?

      Your homeland, that is, Russia supplies chips to South Korea, China, and India. Master 28 nanometer.
      The factory in the suburbs begins with a design center.
  • Dargavs
    Dargavs 2 March 2016 13: 35
    +1
    as far as I remember we have already flown a cargo drone - "Buran" !!!
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 2 March 2016 18: 42
      0
      Quote: DargAVS
      as far as I remember we have already flown a cargo drone - "Buran" !!!

      Why only "Buran" flew and fly "Progress" in the same unmanned version of the cargo is dragged into orbit
      1. bk316
        bk316 2 March 2016 20: 23
        +2
        Yes, I also thought, the history of the creation of unmanned aerial vehicles, then we have more than the "partners".
        So you can make a big mistake in the timing of their creation with us.
        Of course, we are not talking about autonomous flight yet, AI really does not allow it, but it will probably appear with the operator soon.

        And AI research is not just being conducted, it has never stopped, as far as I know since 70 years.
  • serverny
    serverny 2 March 2016 13: 36
    0
    Quote: nazar_0753
    this is not expected in the near future

    No one, because the current level of development of AI does not allow to release such a device into autonomous flight and to obtain efficiency at least comparable to a manned vehicle.

    R&D on this topic is necessary, but until a realistic concept for the use of such super-expensive wunderwaffes is thought up, it is pointless to do anything other than prototypes, and for countries other than the United States it is also criminal from an economic point of view.

    PS IMHO is one of the problems of a drone as it is made by the United States - the scope of application intersects with cruise missiles too much, which against a serious enemy look obviously more profitable.
  • Dekabrev
    Dekabrev 2 March 2016 23: 41
    0
    An unmanned refueling machine - this, indeed, can be very witty. Combat pilots are too expensive to use for a rather primitive task that can now be fully automated. Someone will say that refueling is a very difficult task for the pilot, but this is for the pilot, not the computer.
    By the way, the very low speed of replacing aircraft with new types suggests that this is being done consciously. Why every 5 years to launch a new device in a series if there is no serious military threat? You can run out of new devices, but by the threatened period they will become obsolete and will have to be changed again. Suddenly the war, but I'm tired! It is best to conduct research and development all the time, to gain experience on experimental samples in local conflicts, move on to new generations, and when you need to deploy large-scale production. From time to time, of course, it is necessary to produce a not-so-large series (F-22 and F-35 for example) because without this it is impossible to maintain pilot training at the present level, and production capacities. However, launching into the series any device brought to mind, but not having cardinal advantages, is hardly advisable. So this is not a cut, but rather a competent scientific and technical policy, as it seems to me.
  • Operator
    Operator 3 March 2016 01: 42
    -1
    Russian response to the development of strike UAVs in NATO countries:

    - according to the statement of the General Director of PJSC "Sukhoi Company" Igor Ozar, this year the information andmanager the system as a "co-pilot", which from next year will be installed on the UAV as a "first pilot"

    http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20160302/1382896776.html
  • Operator
    Operator 3 March 2016 03: 52
    -1
    A previous attempt to create a strike UAV based on a manned aircraft was made in 2012-2014

    The American company Raytheon, which was the main developer of the High-precision Direct Aviation Support Complex (PCAS) program, has signed a contract with Aurora Flight Sciences to create an unmanned version of the A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft.

    AFS was supposed to create an aircraft by 2014 - a technology demonstrator, on which other PCAS systems were to be developed by Rockwell Collins and GE Aviation. The end result is unknown.
  • Operator
    Operator 3 March 2016 10: 02
    -1
    Quote: Professor
    Destruction of an enemy invading armored personnel carrier to our territory

    But from this moment in more detail - under what circumstances did the epoch-making breakthrough of the Hamas armored vehicles from the Gaza Strip into Israel take place in November 2012?
    1. Professor
      Professor 3 March 2016 10: 49
      +1
      Quote: Operator
      But from this moment in more detail - under what circumstances did the epoch-making breakthrough of the Hamas armored vehicles from the Gaza Strip into Israel take place in November 2012?

      Will circumstances change the facts? Oh well. lol

      In August 2012, a group of Arab terrorists from Islamic Jihad (an organization not banned in Russia) killed 15 Egyptian troops and captured an Egyptian armored personnel carrier. It blew up a truck stuffed with approximately 500 kg of explosives, making a passage in the border fence. An APC with terrorists entered this passage and tried to delve into Israeli territory. Terrorists fired on an Israeli patrol consisting of Bedouins. The Bedouins shot too. Tanks and paratroopers were urgently deployed to the place. What happened next we see in the video.
      1. Operator
        Operator 3 March 2016 11: 15
        -1
        You said it yourself - if they were terrorists, then the drone on the video, by definition, participated in the anti-terrorist, and not in the strike operation laughing

        Think for yourself: where will the irregular formations get anti-aircraft defense so that the opposite side has the need to engage the actual strike aircraft (in your case, F-16)?
        1. Professor
          Professor 3 March 2016 11: 30
          -1
          Quote: Operator
          You said it yourself - if they were terrorists, then the drone on the video, by definition, participated in the anti-terrorist, and not in the strike operation

          I don’t feed trolls at all. Occasionally I feed entertainment for the sake of. wink

          Quote: Operator
          Think for yourself: where will the irregular formations get anti-aircraft defense so that the opposite side has the need to engage the actual strike aircraft (in your case, F-16)?

          where will the irregular formations get anti-aircraft defense


  • Operator
    Operator 3 March 2016 12: 12
    -1
    You work as a troll - from a fly (single cases of using hunter kill against armored vehicles and the presence of MANPADS from terrorists), you make an elephant (strike-drones and an air defense system of irregular formations) bully
  • Lumumba
    Lumumba 4 March 2016 14: 47
    0
    Quote: NEXUS
    . Americans created the X-47B, but so far it is a crude machine, although there has already been landing on an aircraft carrier.


    The project is actually closed.