F-18 is now a UAV

[PT20J]

Looks like the Navy has figured out a solution to the pilot shortage. From today’s AIAA news feed.:
 

US Navy, Boeing Conduct Growler UAV Flights While Using Another Growler As A Flight Controller

FlightGlobal (2/5) reports that the US Navy “flew two Boeing EA-18G Growlers as autonomous” UAVs, while “using a third Growler as a flight controller.” The Boeing Company indicated on February 4 that “in total, four flights were conducted at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, with tests starting in September 2019.” The “flights are a forerunner to using the EA-18G as a mission-controlling platform for autonomous Loyal Wingman UAVs.” DoD is investigating using uncrewed-crewed “teaming” in “aerial combat where some work would be offloaded to UAVs, especially dangerous missions.” Tom Brandt, “Boeing manned-unmanned teaming demonstration lead,” said, “This demonstration allows Boeing and the Navy the opportunity to analyse the data collected and decide where to make investments in future technologies.” He added that the technology “allows the Navy to extend the reach of sensors while keeping manned aircraft out of harm’s way.”

        C4ISR & Networks (2/4) reports that the demonstration was part of the Navy’s effort to increase its reliance on “networked weapons and drones commanded by manned aircraft operating forward” in order to “extend the service’s fighting range and sharpen the teeth of its air wing,” a “concept of operations that was detailed in a recent study by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.” In the study, “senior fellow Bryan Clark called for an unmanned combat air vehicle, or UCAV, with a range of up to 3,000 nautical miles without refueling and the ability to perform missions from anti-submarine and electronic warfare to anti-surface and strike.” However, the study also “called for retaining a manned fighter for command-and-control capabilities in environments where communications are jammed or nonexistent.” Clark said that a retooled F-35 fighter jet, one that would “switch out internal payload space for fuel,” should be able to handle those tasks.

[steingar]

One could hope that the next big war is fought between drones...

[Ftlausa]

22 minutes ago, steingar said:

One could hope that the next big war is fought between drones...

That might take away an important disincentive against waging war in the first place.  I would describe this as a two edge sword type of issue.  

[bob865]

34 minutes ago, PT20J said:

networked weapons and drones commanded by manned aircraft operating forward

I know how this ends.  I've seen Battlestar Galactica!

[steingar]

2 minutes ago, Ftlausa said:

That might take away an important disincentive against waging war in the first place.  I would describe this as a two edge sword type of issue.  

True, but there is another disincentive against waging war.  It's bloody expensive, especially if you're doing it with drones.  I'm recalling the HBO miniseries Chernobyl.  At one point they have to get highly radioactive graphite (part of the fuel control rods) off a roof and into the still smoldering reactor.  They try robots, which are immediately fried by radiation.  In the end they sent out guys in as much protective clothing and a shovel.  They had 90 seconds to shovel some graphite off the roof.  Odds are they all died of some sort of cancer, though not the radiation poisoning that claimed others.

People are cheap, robots are expensive.

Edited February 5, 2020 by steingar

[Volare]

11 minutes ago, bob865 said:

I know how this ends.  I've seen Battlestar Galactica!

Also, Terminator.

[rbridges]

one plane controlling two drones.  That's 3X the PIC hours!

[MB65E]

53 minutes ago, steingar said:

True, but there is another disincentive against waging war.  It's bloody expensive, especially if you're doing it with drones.  I'm recalling the HBO miniseries Chernobyl.  At one point they have to get highly radioactive graphite (part of the fuel control rods) off a roof and into the still smoldering reactor.  They try robots, which are immediately fried by radiation.  In the end they sent out guys in as much protective clothing and a shovel.  They had 90 seconds to shovel some graphite off the roof.  Odds are they all died of some sort of cancer, though not the radiation poisoning that claimed others.

People are cheap, robots are expensive.

Omg, Was it not an Insanely well done series!? Highly recommended!!

-Matt

[PT20J]

1 hour ago, bob865 said:

I know how this ends.  I've seen Battlestar Galactica!

Or this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

True, but there is another disincentive against waging war.  It's bloody expensive, especially if you're doing it with drones.  I'm recalling the HBO miniseries Chernobyl.  At one point they have to get highly radioactive graphite (part of the fuel control rods) off a roof and into the still smoldering reactor.  They try robots, which are immediately fried by radiation.  In the end they sent out guys in as much protective clothing and a shovel.  They had 90 seconds to shovel some graphite off the roof.  Odds are they all died of some sort of cancer, though not the radiation poisoning that claimed others.

People are cheap, robots are expensive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_disaster

They are not on the official list, so they didn't die any time soon afterwards.

BTW the graphite is the moderator, not the control rods. Control rods are made of boron.

[Tim Jodice]

Are they truly autonomous? As in they make all of their decisions on their own. 

[Ftlausa]

I took a FEMA radiation exposure class and during the class we were told that the amount of radiation at the Chernobyl reactor was at non-survivable levels and that the people that went in received fatal exposures.  Supposedly it was volunteer only -- basically a suicide mission.  As Spock said, “Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”

[GeeBee]

Here is the thing. the current generation of professional pilots will be the "Last of the Mohicans". By mid century we will have autonomous airplanes. It will actually happen sooner than cars because the environment is more regulated in aviation.  A plane can easily land itself on 10,000 of internationally standardized runway. In cars that standardization does not exist. The Navy is already to deploy autonomous tankers MQ-25. Next stop is autonomous combat. After that flying paying passengers.

 

[GeeBee]

1 minute ago, Ftlausa said:

I took a FEMA radiation exposure class and during the class we were told that the amount of radiation at the Chernobyl reactor was at non-survivable levels and that the people that went in received fatal exposures.  Supposedly it was volunteer only -- basically a suicide mission.  As Spock said, “Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”

Yeah, two phrases that do not go together is "volunteer" and "Soviet Union".

The robots at Chernobyl could have worked if the Soviet Union had not lied tot he German manufacturer about the level of radiation the unit would experience. The manufacturer said they could have built a unit robust enough but that was not the specifications they were given.

 

[steingar]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

Yeah, two phrases that do not go together is "volunteer" and "Soviet Union".

The robots at Chernobyl could have worked if the Soviet Union had not lied tot he German manufacturer about the level of radiation the unit would experience. The manufacturer said they could have built a unit robust enough but that was not the specifications they were given.

Actually, I doubt any circuit could have survived that level of radiation with the technology available in the 1980s.  Not without a metric crapload of shielding.  But it is true that the Soviets were very opaque about the scale of the disaster for as long as were able to be so.  I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Chernobyl disaster, and not Reagan's defense spending, that spelled doom for the Soviet Union.

 

[tmo]

Well, do remember that in the early days of the Soviet Union starving millions to death was SOP.  So no, I don't think Chernobyl did jack to hasten the transformation of the Soviet Union into Russia.  SSDD.  But let us not stray into politics.

[GeeBee]

3 hours ago, steingar said:

Actually, I doubt any circuit could have survived that level of radiation with the technology available in the 1980s.  Not without a metric crapload of shielding.  But it is true that the Soviets were very opaque about the scale of the disaster for as long as were able to be so.  I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Chernobyl disaster, and not Reagan's defense spending, that spelled doom for the Soviet Union.

 

Actually there was and they were working at Three Mile Island. However at that time frame, laws preventing sensitive tech transfer made it impossible for the Soviet Union to obtain those robots.

 

[steingar]

13 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Actually there was and they were working at Three Mile Island. However at that time frame, laws preventing sensitive tech transfer made it impossible for the Soviet Union to obtain those robots.

I suspect the radiation released at Chernobyl was orders of magnitude greater than that released at the 3 Mile Island accident.

[ilovecornfields]

18 hours ago, steingar said:

I suspect the radiation released at Chernobyl was orders of magnitude greater than that released at the 3 Mile Island accident.

I fact checked Dr. Steingar and he appears to be correct:

https://comb.io/MzCeQz

 

Edited February 7, 2020 by ilovecornfields
Edited to reflect Dr. Steingar’s academic accomplishments.

[GeeBee]

Yes, but the operative word is released. What was the radiation exposure at TMI where the robots were working inside the containment vessel? Same as Chernobyl but for the mass of the core. When you are inside the reactor next to the core, we are not talking about "released radiation" we are talking about radiation exposure at the core. The only difference between TMI and Chernobyl is there was indeed less radiation "released" into the atmosphere because one was a contained reactor and the other was not. Chernobyl was nothing more than a reactor with a bunch of carbon bricks loosely surrounding it inside a Butler building. It was not a contained reactor. However once you put something inside the containment vessel, you are in Chernobyl exposure territory and that is where the robots where working. The lesson of TMI, Chernobyl and Fukushima is containment works and lack of containment leads to disaster. Reactors will always get compromised now and in the future. The only thing that changes "released radiation" is containment. Nothing however will change the radiation of an exposed core, at the core.

 

[RobertGary1]

3 hours ago, steingar said:

I suspect the radiation released at Chernobyl was orders of magnitude greater than that released at the 3 Mile Island accident.

Only a minimal amount of radiation ultimately was released from 3 Mile Island. Early reports of more were a result of mis-calculations. 

-Robert

[PT20J]

This must set a new standard for thread drift — from UAVs to a comparison of radiation from Chernobyl and TMI. 

The radiation released to the surrounding area from TMI was indeed minuscule compared to Chernobyl. But... the radiation encountered within the containment during cleanup operations by robotic devices is a different matter altogether. 

Skip

[Guest]

Far more people have died as a result of gunpowder, lead and high explosive bombs than by all of the radiation leaks world wide.

Clarence

[GeeBee]

10 hours ago, PT20J said:

This must set a new standard for thread drift — from UAVs to a comparison of radiation from Chernobyl and TMI. 

The radiation released to the surrounding area from TMI was indeed minuscule compared to Chernobyl. But... the radiation encountered within the containment during cleanup operations by robotic devices is a different matter altogether. 

Skip

True enough but let me see if I can tie it together. Sooner or later someone is going to get stupid and release the nuclear genie in the form of a weapon. The nation with sufficient AI in a hardened form will win the war because it will require delivery of an airborne weapon in a way no ICBM can. AI will have to navigate to the target, identify the precise point to deliver the weapon and end the war. IOW no Luke Skywalker to throw a weapon down the garbage chute, it will be a robot.

Equally so, right now, the use of autonomous tankers overnight will double the strike range of our aircraft carriers. When the AT's come on line there will be no missile launched from ship or shore what will be able to strike a carrier battle fleet. Note I have not even discussed autonomous strike aircraft off of carriers which will changed the game again.

 

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

Far more people have died as a result of gunpowder, lead and high explosive bombs than by all of the radiation leaks world wide.

Clarence

Medical mistakes is one of the biggest killers but nobody seems interested in reforming that.    Apparently it's more important to suppress the cheapest form of energy there is in the universe.