RAF Reaper Drones to be controlled from the UK
PFMG
I have worked and do work in EW and Defensive Aids, and I can see no issue with Mr Grim's aspiration for a "simple DAS".
A simple automated MWS linked to flares or a DIRCM would be reasonably simple - pretty much a switch on and leave running like it is on many helos and AT aircraft.
An automated Towed Radar Decoy that is controlled by the operator for the scenario - simple but probably expensive.
A RHWR that reports back identified threats, frequency, PRF, bearing a recieved strength via the beyond line of sight SATCOM - yet again simple as most modern RHWRs have digital outputs to link to other systems in manned aircraft; you just need to feed this output through SATCOM to the operator and display it.
Would you care to explain your reservations?
iRaven
I have worked and do work in EW and Defensive Aids, and I can see no issue with Mr Grim's aspiration for a "simple DAS".
A simple automated MWS linked to flares or a DIRCM would be reasonably simple - pretty much a switch on and leave running like it is on many helos and AT aircraft.
An automated Towed Radar Decoy that is controlled by the operator for the scenario - simple but probably expensive.
A RHWR that reports back identified threats, frequency, PRF, bearing a recieved strength via the beyond line of sight SATCOM - yet again simple as most modern RHWRs have digital outputs to link to other systems in manned aircraft; you just need to feed this output through SATCOM to the operator and display it.
Would you care to explain your reservations?
iRaven
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bottom 50% Of The List
Age: 50
Posts: 9
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect the current 'pilot' system was selected more to appease aircrew and ensure there was less resistance to the introduction of RPAS than any other reason.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doze for a while until children's party. Dream about that live shot < 7 hours ago. Wake up and wrap present. Enjoy party. Kiss children, wife and dog, get into flying suit and go back to work.
Another lonely drive - this time with a slight tear in the eye. - miss his family already.
Another lonely drive - this time with a slight tear in the eye. - miss his family already.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJR,
Heard about the problems you've listed a lot over the last fee years, so what is being done about it?
The obvious solution for me would be to put you guys on a 4 month operational 'det'. For that period you are flying missions, but going to the mess to live after work. No leave, no leaving the base. All the usual welfare trappings of being on ops. This might sound crass and thats not the intention, but the wife and kids can do without you for 4 months, same as the rest of the armed forces. Surely that would stop the crew- duty rest and emotional issues you boys and girls are experiencing.
I'm not having a go, you don't make the rules and I've seen firsthand on the ground the awesome job you guys do, I just think the problems have been evident for too long and could be easily fixed.
Heard about the problems you've listed a lot over the last fee years, so what is being done about it?
The obvious solution for me would be to put you guys on a 4 month operational 'det'. For that period you are flying missions, but going to the mess to live after work. No leave, no leaving the base. All the usual welfare trappings of being on ops. This might sound crass and thats not the intention, but the wife and kids can do without you for 4 months, same as the rest of the armed forces. Surely that would stop the crew- duty rest and emotional issues you boys and girls are experiencing.
I'm not having a go, you don't make the rules and I've seen firsthand on the ground the awesome job you guys do, I just think the problems have been evident for too long and could be easily fixed.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leave.... Cant wait to see the responses!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Nomadic
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Unchecked - The 'average' crew in an RPAS Sqn DOES spend 4 months in their tour to Nevada 'In Theatre' - as the Launch Crew.....So most are very aware of all the things that you offer as a remedy.
...and as many of them are previous FJ, they too have done many dets to various places in the Gulf (and elsewhere) PRIOR to going to Creech. Most of them have done some 'years' total away from family....
.....all of which does NOT prepare for the onslaught of fighting a war amongst the family.
.....as for 'Leave' - I won't comment - but thanks.
...and as many of them are previous FJ, they too have done many dets to various places in the Gulf (and elsewhere) PRIOR to going to Creech. Most of them have done some 'years' total away from family....
.....all of which does NOT prepare for the onslaught of fighting a war amongst the family.
.....as for 'Leave' - I won't comment - but thanks.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry mate, didn't realise that. I can fully imagine the leave issues you guys face too!
My main point is finding a way to stop you from going home after a shift. Believe me, I think you understand too, that I'm not having a dig at this way of life - if there was an option for us to do it I'd be at it like a shot ! It just seems that going home to the family after a day of your work seems to be a problem and a solution to that would be to completely separate the two.
My main point is finding a way to stop you from going home after a shift. Believe me, I think you understand too, that I'm not having a dig at this way of life - if there was an option for us to do it I'd be at it like a shot ! It just seems that going home to the family after a day of your work seems to be a problem and a solution to that would be to completely separate the two.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Where The Sun Sets
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The obvious solution for me would be to put you guys on a 4 month operational 'det'. For that period you are flying missions, but going to the mess to live after work. No leave, no leaving the base. All the usual welfare trappings of being on ops. This might sound crass and thats not the intention, but the wife and kids can do without you for 4 months, same as the rest of the armed forces. Surely that would stop the crew- duty rest and emotional issues you boys and girls are experiencing.
Not enough crews for this option either. All the RPA crews are working up to their monthly flying limits already. The USAF Sqns are currently working a 7 on - 1 off shift and that includes swapping from days to nights. Brit crews are not at that level yet, but not far behind. As soon as one person goes sick then a leave ban kicks in.
All that said...the job is fantastic! The aircraft is amazing. Thats why most experienced aircrew are reluctant to return to manned platforms. The operational effectiveness they experience and the feedback from the guys on they support on the ground far outweighs the constant attempted belittling by the Why are you wearing flying suits crowd. All the guys on 39 Sqn are experienced so the've all been there on previous tours. The RPA crews are working very hard, they are saving lives, they don't complain and they are every bit as focused, determined and in the fight as any other platform.
Not enough crews for this option either. All the RPA crews are working up to their monthly flying limits already. The USAF Sqns are currently working a 7 on - 1 off shift and that includes swapping from days to nights. Brit crews are not at that level yet, but not far behind. As soon as one person goes sick then a leave ban kicks in.
All that said...the job is fantastic! The aircraft is amazing. Thats why most experienced aircrew are reluctant to return to manned platforms. The operational effectiveness they experience and the feedback from the guys on they support on the ground far outweighs the constant attempted belittling by the Why are you wearing flying suits crowd. All the guys on 39 Sqn are experienced so the've all been there on previous tours. The RPA crews are working very hard, they are saving lives, they don't complain and they are every bit as focused, determined and in the fight as any other platform.
Last edited by roush; 18th May 2011 at 15:07.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guessed manning would be the issue. Cheers.
Having seen what the Reaper brings to theatre, yeah, wearing a flying suit is neither here nor there. You could all rock up in clown suits, as long the awesome job you're doing remains so, that's all that matters.
Having seen what the Reaper brings to theatre, yeah, wearing a flying suit is neither here nor there. You could all rock up in clown suits, as long the awesome job you're doing remains so, that's all that matters.
The shoot down of a Georgian Hermes 450 by a Russian MiG29 shows why we should use aircrew rather than operators to fly RPAS. The operators watched the MiG position itself and then tracked the missile all the way to impact on itself - no manoeuvre, no attempt to throttle back to cool the IR signature (it looks like an Archer AAM shot) and no attempt to find a cloud to go hide in. The first rule of air combat for any aviator is 'never, ever, give up'; these Georgian operators were obviously not aviators! You can also find this footage on YouTube.
How many people when they first sit in a seat of a Tutor instinctively know how to defeat an AAM being shot at them? None, I'd wager. They learn how to through training.
Why can't the people sitting behind the controls of a UCAV/UAV/UAS/whatever we're calling them this week be given the same training and advice that would be given to anyone flying in a manned asset?
The only thing that anecdote gives real evidence for is rubbish training.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: lincs
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A simple automated MWS linked to flares or a DIRCM would be reasonably simple - pretty much a switch on and leave running like it is on many helos and AT aircraft.
An automated Towed Radar Decoy that is controlled by the operator for the scenario - simple but probably expensive.
A RHWR that reports back identified threats, frequency, PRF, bearing a recieved strength via the beyond line of sight SATCOM - yet again simple as most modern RHWRs have digital outputs to link to other systems in manned aircraft; you just need to feed this output through SATCOM to the operator and display it.
Would you care to explain your reservations
An automated Towed Radar Decoy that is controlled by the operator for the scenario - simple but probably expensive.
A RHWR that reports back identified threats, frequency, PRF, bearing a recieved strength via the beyond line of sight SATCOM - yet again simple as most modern RHWRs have digital outputs to link to other systems in manned aircraft; you just need to feed this output through SATCOM to the operator and display it.
Would you care to explain your reservations
MWS not cheap. the current system of choice is AAR 57 which is not currently a DIRCM system. Real estate for IRCM turrets? Software loads stabilised nav feeds. Testing? Hopefull none of that is required because personally I wasn't thinking IR threats anyway bearing in mind the conops for a RPAS.
RF threats?
RWR - antenna placement - real estate again.
Off the shelf or new system? If new - training from programmers, PFMG, validation rig, post mission replay for MDD improvements. TG and TRD programming. Countermeasures hot rig. Testing again. RCS measurements. The list goes on.
I'm not saying it can't be done but anyone who says it's cheap or quick to impliment is living in dream world and clearly hasn't read the AWC policy on such things.
PFMG
Firstly, "AWC policy", are you having a laugh!
Secondly, please take a look at
http://www.teledynedefence.co.uk/pdf...ght_Weight.pdf
LR-100 RWR/ESM/ELINT Receiver System
Best you tell the AWC to get their policy squared away then...
iRaven
Firstly, "AWC policy", are you having a laugh!
Secondly, please take a look at
http://www.teledynedefence.co.uk/pdf...ght_Weight.pdf
LR-100 RWR/ESM/ELINT Receiver System
For self-defense, the Global Hawk is equipped with an AN/ALR-69 radar warning receiver and AN/ALE-50 towed decoys
iRaven
Muppet
I couldn't agree more, none of us are born as aviators and all have been trained to become an aviator (unless of course you believe Harrier mates!). The only problem is that if you train UAS/RPAS "operators" for all the skills they need then they will become as expensive to train as aviators (with a lengthier timescale to become productive) and by all but name become de-facto aviators.
I agree and we could call them pilots and WSO/WSOps and give them brevets and flying pay to retain them because of their expensive training (and the likely lure from the civvy world when they start doing Police/Customs surveillance, pipeline/power line inspections, etc...).
I believe, we are in violent agreement.
LJ
How does that reflect the need to have 'aviators' behind the controls, rather than just better training?
Why can't the people sitting behind the controls of a UCAV/UAV/UAS/whatever we're calling them this week be given the same training and advice that would be given to anyone flying in a manned asset?
I believe, we are in violent agreement.
LJ
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: lincs
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iRaven.
Blah Blah sales blurb blah.
These are new systems to the UK and I stand by all I said about support costs. Buying the kit is less the 1/3 the overall cost to the MoD.
Re ALE-50....ahh that'll be the TRD that worked a treat on MRA4 and does a great job on Sentinel. No issues there then. I bow to your superior knowledge and step back from the debate before my DV becomes fragile.
Blah Blah sales blurb blah.
These are new systems to the UK and I stand by all I said about support costs. Buying the kit is less the 1/3 the overall cost to the MoD.
Re ALE-50....ahh that'll be the TRD that worked a treat on MRA4 and does a great job on Sentinel. No issues there then. I bow to your superior knowledge and step back from the debate before my DV becomes fragile.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Meadows
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PFMG I think that I may have confused matters by using the TLA "DAS". This conjures up an all singing, all dancing integrated system that tries to do everything. The whole philosophy around aircraft like Reaper is, despite what the tabloids say, Keep It Simple Stupid (although the whole satellite thing is quite clever!)
So you match capability to threat as required. At the moment, no threat so no self defence. If there is a little threat then maybe no self defence as the expense isn't worth it, but if you want to embarass a low SA MiG-29 pilot some strap on chaff/flares might be handy (I would see chaff as easy, flares a little more difficult) and maybe 9X/ASRAAM (more cost, may be worth it, may not). Next step up is a simple RWR but as you say that starts to get a little more tricky, difficult and therefore expensive. A simple active jammer may be relatively straightforward but not if you want to integrate it with other stuff such as a RWR. TRD I would say is going a little far but unintegrated may be worth it.
Bottom line is that you don't do what we try to do with the FJs and have an all singing all dancing (ASAD) solution to everything, you take the 80% solution at 20% cost and you can do that with a UAV because noone dies. Of course, as you say, you would have to get this past the AWC Ivory Tower. Already there are signs that for the next generation people want the ASAD solution then complain when it comes out at nearly the same price as a manned aircraft.
Finally on "DAS" if you take Reaper into a full spectrum war (China, say) then it will be useless because it will get blown up, so don't.
On the manning det v permanent point, you could do it that way but it would be far more expensive on manpower. One of the big advantages of Reaper is the extremely small manpower requirements compared to any other aircraft - a footprint of 2 in theatre and far less crew back "at home". About 2 operational hours flown per week for every single person on Reaper including support, training etc etc. Not even the FAA could claim that (where is Tourist?)
So you match capability to threat as required. At the moment, no threat so no self defence. If there is a little threat then maybe no self defence as the expense isn't worth it, but if you want to embarass a low SA MiG-29 pilot some strap on chaff/flares might be handy (I would see chaff as easy, flares a little more difficult) and maybe 9X/ASRAAM (more cost, may be worth it, may not). Next step up is a simple RWR but as you say that starts to get a little more tricky, difficult and therefore expensive. A simple active jammer may be relatively straightforward but not if you want to integrate it with other stuff such as a RWR. TRD I would say is going a little far but unintegrated may be worth it.
Bottom line is that you don't do what we try to do with the FJs and have an all singing all dancing (ASAD) solution to everything, you take the 80% solution at 20% cost and you can do that with a UAV because noone dies. Of course, as you say, you would have to get this past the AWC Ivory Tower. Already there are signs that for the next generation people want the ASAD solution then complain when it comes out at nearly the same price as a manned aircraft.
Finally on "DAS" if you take Reaper into a full spectrum war (China, say) then it will be useless because it will get blown up, so don't.
On the manning det v permanent point, you could do it that way but it would be far more expensive on manpower. One of the big advantages of Reaper is the extremely small manpower requirements compared to any other aircraft - a footprint of 2 in theatre and far less crew back "at home". About 2 operational hours flown per week for every single person on Reaper including support, training etc etc. Not even the FAA could claim that (where is Tourist?)
iRaven.
Blah Blah sales blurb blah.
These are new systems to the UK and I stand by all I said about support costs. Buying the kit is less the 1/3 the overall cost to the MoD.
Re ALE-50....ahh that'll be the TRD that worked a treat on MRA4 and does a great job on Sentinel. No issues there then. I bow to your superior knowledge and step back from the debate before my DV becomes fragile.
Blah Blah sales blurb blah.
These are new systems to the UK and I stand by all I said about support costs. Buying the kit is less the 1/3 the overall cost to the MoD.
Re ALE-50....ahh that'll be the TRD that worked a treat on MRA4 and does a great job on Sentinel. No issues there then. I bow to your superior knowledge and step back from the debate before my DV becomes fragile.
A compelling argument from you then? How an earth would your DV "become fragile"? What a load of bolleaux...
...and while your at it I watched ALE-50 work very nicely on F-16 over Iraq (whilst the RAF had similar on F3 that was first fielded over Bosnia) and it is fitted successfully to B1-B and F-18E/F. Just because we have so-called superior experts (like yourself, so it would seem) that cannot integrate it on anything British properly, doesn't mean it's sh!te. What's the common denominator for your argument? - a company beginning with B and ending in Systems!
Best you get back to your "AWC policy" whilst the real operators on the Front Line and real policy makers in MoD get on with proper business. I haven't seen anything useful come out of the AWC in years, the UTM is a joke, it took over 12 months to get Athene on DII, the PFMs are a mess because all the good people have left and most of the OA could be written by a frontline operator in 30 minutes flat - self licking lollipop comes to mind. No wonder your notional support costs are so high when the AWC has over 1,000 people mostly shining their @rses doing diddly squat for the Front Line effort.
Rant off
Good night
iRaven