Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

The Unmanned Bomber - Have Raider II

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

The Unmanned Bomber - Have Raider II

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 13th Apr 2017, 06:06
  #1 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
The Unmanned Bomber - Have Raider II

The Air Force Turned a F-16 Fighter into a Drone

The U.S. Air Force turned an F-16 fighter into an autonomous combat drone capable of flying combat missions on its own and then returning to fly alongside a manned aircraft. The program, known as "Have Raider II," could lead to older U.S. fighters acting as semi-disposable wingmen for more modern planes, conducting missions too dangerous for manned aircraft to carry out.

The program was recently validated after a two week exercise at Edwards Air Force Base involving the Air Force Research Lab, the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School, Lockheed Martin, and Calspan Corporation, according to a press release by Lockheed Martin. During the exercises, the F-16 planned and executed an air strike according to "mission priorities and available assets." The F-16 also managed "dynamically react to a changing threat environment" while managing "capability failures, route deviations, and loss of communication".

The Have Raider program is part of the Air Force's Loyal Wingman project to create autonomous aircraft that are paired with manned aircraft and can take on delegated tasks. Have Raider I focused on having an F-16 autonomously leave its manned lead aircraft, conduct an air strike, then return to flying formation. Have Raider II went a step further, forcing the F-16's software make decisions based on operational parameters and then changing them as the situation was updated.

The program is broadly part of the Pentagon's Third Offset Strategy, which plans to use existing equipment in new ways to maintain a technological and numerical edge over countries such as China and Russia. The U.S. Air Force will shed more than a thousand F-16s as the F-35A enters service. While older, the F-16s have the advantage of being cheaper to fly and semi-disposable. In the future, Loyal Wingman could see a single F-35 accompanied by one or more autonomous F-16s on a strike mission. As the aircraft near the target, autonomous F-16s could be dispatched to take out advanced air defense systems. Survivors could then join up with the F-35 and proceed to strike the main target. Future wingmen could be purpose-built stealthy drones, but for now the Air Force has plenty of F-16s that are free, the only cost being to convert them to operate autonomously.

U.S. Air Force, Lockheed Martin Demonstrate Manned/Unmanned Teaming - Apr 10, 2017
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 06:31
  #2 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Dale Brown lives. Or should that be AV Roe's idea matures?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 06:45
  #3 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
I'm intrigued on how they find the F-35 to rejoin. Either the F-35 emits or has to fly an incredibly precise course and speed - which seems highly unlikely in the envisaged combat situation.

And flying with F-16 wingmen does seem to be like self-defeating for a stealth aircraft.
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 06:56
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,166
Received 48 Likes on 24 Posts
If you don't want the F-16 back after a mission, let alone carrying reserves, it will fly a heck of a long way until tanks dry. Having one or 2 as wingmen would be the ultimate 'towed' radar decoy too.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 07:00
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,166
Received 48 Likes on 24 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
I'm intrigued on how they find the F-35 to rejoin.
Tempted to say that rejoins are only difficult when FCs are trying to help.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 07:40
  #6 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
I'll settle for a £1 for every time I was asked "more help"......
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 08:17
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,568
Likes: 0
Received 46 Likes on 31 Posts
I'll settle for a £1 for every time I was asked "more help"......
So you didn't give enough first time?
Wensleydale is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 08:41
  #8 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
Somebody called Judy tended to tell me to keep my mouth shut until asked.
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 09:47
  #9 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
ORAC, are you sure that was always the fighter?
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 10:55
  #10 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
In my favour, I can proudly claim that during my all years as an IC/FA/MC I never lost a single controller....
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 12:44
  #11 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 81
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
ORAC, I heard that 360 got a soft kill on one, she fled to the T bar
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 13:10
  #12 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,622 Likes on 740 Posts
To be fair, pilots got a lot of "soft kills" on the girls. They didn't last long before departing as wives.
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 13:18
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 518 Likes on 216 Posts
Isn't a bunch of young Lieutenants much cheaper for this kind of duty.....except maybe for the autonomous decision making requirement?
SASless is online now  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 15:34
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: California
Posts: 349
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
ORAC,
"the only cost being to convert them to operate autonomously."
I can see that being another "porky" income stream for the lucky recipients of the Contract.
Me, sceptical?... nah!
f
fleigle is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2017, 15:57
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
I'm intrigued on how they find the F-35 to rejoin. .
F-35's have a secure, very low probability of intercept datalink. A single micro data burst would inform the drone where and when to meet the F-35 and once in the designated area, the drone could use passive sensors to formate on the F-35. For that matter, a third party (say an orbiting tanker or AWACS aircraft) could tell both the F-35 and drone where and when to meet, so neither the F-35 nor the drone would need to transmit.
KenV is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2017, 09:47
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: home for good
Posts: 495
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
KenV - not familiar with the F35 comms suite but think most LPI link are 'aimed' (tight beam) so you'd need to know where the receiver it to hit him. You then have the cost of a receiver and computer to interpret the data transmission in the F16. Not sure what 'passive sensors' you could use to join? I guess maybe an IR missile head once close enough to detect the F-35 low heat trace? Having an orbiting 'controller' would be a bit of a give away something is going on. If you have the air superiority to park a big target in the sky, why use the expensive F-35 / F-16 combo for the attack - you could use any old previous generation bomber (we've got a few we could sell you )
To me this 'buddy' system looks like a 'solution' looking for a problem. It is almost as though someone has said "we can't get out UAV to operate fully autonomously so we need a mother-ship nearby" and the salesmen have gone "we can sell this as a concept"... (just my cynical view from working in industry now)
Sandy Parts is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2017, 11:00
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Southwater
Age: 73
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
As a small aside could someone help. I've noticed that lots of USAF bombs and their associated equipment have the code/service words "Have" or "Pave" in front. Do these letters represent something or are they just code words?
RedhillPhil is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2017, 12:41
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,062
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by RedhillPhil
As a small aside could someone help. I've noticed that lots of USAF bombs and their associated equipment have the code/service words "Have" or "Pave" in front. Do these letters represent something or are they just code words?

The wiki page on Pave seems pretty good: seems like it was just a code word/program identifier for USAF electronic enhancements, although there are some references to several PAVE acronyms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAVE








Have seems to be code word for a range of USAF tactical exploitation (MiG's) and prototype programs.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2017, 12:46
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,062
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Wonder if this could be a new lease on life on several high hour, but well maintained F-16's? Recent news was that Norway was planning to scrap theirs. And with the QF-16 program ramping up, there might be a less bit desire to blow them out of the sky for testing. Might put an extra premium on used aircraft.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2017, 13:30
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
US Military Code Words & Nicknames - background
BossEyed is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.