About Me

My photo
I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Air Force Plans for All-Drone Future

by David Axe for Wired

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Is the day of the hot-shot fighter jock nearly done? As of 2009 the Air Force’s robotic drone fleet stands at 195 Predators and 28 Reapers. An Air Force study, released without much fanfare on Wednesday, suggests that tomorrow’s dogfighers might not have pilots in the cockpit. The Unmanned Aircraft System Flight Plan. which sketches out possible drone development through the year 2047, comes with plenty of qualifiers. But it envisions a radical future. In an acronym-dense 82 pages, the Air Force explains how ever-larger and more sophisticated flying robots could eventually replace every type of manned aircraft in its inventory — everything from speedy, air-to-air fighters to lumbering bombers and tankers. Emphasis on “might” and “could.”

While revealing how robots can equal the capabilities of traditional planes, the Air Force is careful to emphasize that an all-bot air fleet is not inevitable. Rather, drones will represent “alternatives” to manned planes, in pretty much every mission category. Some of the missions tapped for possible, future drones are currently considered sacrosanct for human pilots. Namely: dogfighting and nuclear bombing. Drones “are unlikely to replace the manned aircraft for air combat missions in the policy-relevant future,” Manjeet Singh Pardesi wrote in Air & Space Power Journal, just four years ago. Dogfighting was considered too fluid, too fast, for a drone’s narrow “situational awareness.” As for nuclear bombing: “Many aviators, in particular, believe that a ‘man in the loop’ should remain an integral part of the nuclear mission because of the psychological perception that there is a higher degree of accountability and moral certainty with a manned bomber,” Adam Lowther explained in Armed Forces Journal, in June. Despite this, the Air Force identifies a future “MQ-Mc” Unmanned Aerial System for dogfighting, sometime after 2020. The MQ-Mc will also handle “strategic attack,” a.k.a nuke bombing. Less controversial is the conjectural MQ-L, a huge drone that could fill in for today’s tankers and transports.

But just because a drone could replace a manned plane, doesn’t necessarily mean it definitely will. “We do not envision replacing all Air Force aircraft with UAS,” Col. Eric Mathewson told Danger Room by email. “We do plan on considering UAS as alternatives to traditionally manned aircraft across a broad spectrum of Air Force missions … but certainly not all.” In other words, in coming years drones might be able to do everything today’s manned planes can do — technically speaking. But the Air Force still might find good reasons — moral, financial or otherwise — to keep people in some cockpits.

The Flight Plan represents a new twist in a heated debate raging in Congress over the Pentagon’s 3,000-strong fighter force. The legislature is split over whether to fund more F-22 fighters — a move that could draw a veto from President Barack Obama. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has long favored drone development over buying more manned fighters, and in May Joint Chiefs chair Admiral Mike Mullen predicted Gates’ position would win out, over the long term. “There are those that see [the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter] as the last manned fighter,” Mullen said. “I’m one that’s inclined to believe that.” General Atomics, which makes the popular Predator line of drones, underscored Mullen’s comment by unveiling its new, faster Predator C.

If Flight Plan proves an accurate predictor, it’s not just manned fighters (maybe) headed for extinction, but (maybe) nuclear bombers, transports, tankers … nearly all human-occupied military planes.

[Didn’t SkyNet operate the B-2 bomber fleet with 100% efficiency before it tried to destroy us? Another step towards the Terminator future I think…. Then again they’ve been saying that pilots are obsolete since the 1970’s so I’m not particularly holding my breath here.]

4 comments:

wstachour said...

Drones are cheaper, and can be configured for missions for which humans are ill-suited. Even if a single drone is less effective than a single piloted aircraft might be, for the same cost several drones can be dispatched. In some cases, this might reduce costs and increase the likelihood of success.

I feel my vitality draining from me as I type this...

Scott said...

I love the commercials that say the drones are "saving lives". You probably don't see them over there, but they're on here. Hilarious.

CyberKitten said...

wunelle said: I feel my vitality draining from me as I type this...

I certainly don't think that you'll be out of a job anytime soon because of this! Drones might also be able to do very basic stuff in the near future but it'll be a decade or more (I'm guessing more like 25-50 years) before they're anywhere good enough to engage in autonomous combat.

scott said: I love the commercials that say the drones are "saving lives". You probably don't see them over there, but they're on here. Hilarious.

Potentially saving *allied* lives anyway.... I don't think an advert saying "Killing innocent by-standers since 1999" would go down particularly well....

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.