X-47B Heads For Final Tests
...........Navy officers are very clear on a distinction between the Navy and the Air Force, which insists on talking about remotely piloted aircraft: Navy "unmanned air systems" have operators, not pilots. Of course, the Navy hasn't been forced to divert a large number of qualified pilots into UAVs, as the USAF has been (Predators and Reapers are the USAF's second-largest pilot force after the F-16), and will not have to do so for a long time. But the fact remains that flying a UAV with a stick and rudder or any semblance thereof is (to quote an Airbus guy's comment on the Boeing 777's back-driven yoke) like putting a steering wheel on a horse. "Pilot" is a bit of a misnomer.
Speaking of pilots, the Navy's attitude towards adopting the X-47B's automatic landing technology for manned operations is quite positive. The potential benefits -- less wear and tear on airframes and less training time for the air group, along with improved safety -- are substantial.
Navy Drone’s Next Test: X-47B Will Land, Sort Of; China Unveils Similar Drone
...........What’s subtly remarkable about the X-47B is how much more autonomous it is than other unmanned aircraft, not just in take-off and landing but in flight as well. Most drones, such as the famous Predator, are really “remotely piloted aircraft” or RPA: There isn’t anyone on board, but there is a human being somewhere at a ground control station, sitting at a control panel with a joystick, throttle, and other controls, flying the aircraft by remote control, much like a video game. Without constant input from a human operator, an RPA will just keep on going in a straight line or, if its onboard computer realizes it has “lost link” with ground control, it will automatically go into a holding pattern and wait. If the humans can’t get back in contact with the drone, it will keep flying circles in the air until it runs out of gas and crashes. (Or it may self-destruct).
The X-47B is in constant communications with a human on the ground or on the carrier, but they don’t have a joystick – they use standard computer mice, or, for landings, a specialized hand controller – and they’re not flying it by remote control. They’re giving it commands to perform certain tasks, such as land, abort the landing (a “wave off” in Navy parlance), or fly to a specified point. The robot handles the details – just like a human pilot following instructions from flight control.
“The air vehicle operator always has direct control, always has a direct link to the air vehicle, and always has the ability to direct it to do a certain task, [e.g.] to discontinue an approach or wave off, to turn or climb or to execute another round,” said Engdahl, “[but] the aircraft is always autonomous. It is always thinking about the commands that are given to it and reacting to the commands in one sense or the other.”..............