Thoughts on potential and development

delcyros · 01-06-2006, 04:02 PM

What are Your ideas about next generation offensive and defensive air weapons?
My favourite in the offensive would be a remotely controlled or independent acting warhead in a stealthy environment (think of a small size semi ballistic stealth missile with either EMP warhead or conventional one with high preciseness). This could be developed quite soon.
A good defensive system must have ability to either attack low orbital targets (sattelites) or disrupt orbital communication by means of EMP-forces.
Is there any place for human pilots in next generation designs?
What about a revival of advanced armor/material tech?

R988 · 01-08-2006, 03:27 PM

The next generation of aircraft are supposed to be 'pilotless' according to offical policy of the RAF who consider the Typhoon and F-35 to be their last fighter aircraft. But then the RAF said that about 50 years ago as well

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-08-2006, 06:34 PM

I dont see that happening in the very near future. Atleast another 30 years or more.

the lancaster kicks ass · 01-09-2006, 10:50 AM

giving plenty of time for annother generation of manned fighters, sub orbital's the nest step........

delcyros · 01-09-2006, 12:59 PM

Agreed.
What do you think is more important for the next step: mask the origin or superior performance?

the lancaster kicks ass · 01-09-2006, 01:29 PM

well the way things are going they're likely to get an extremely effective combination of both...........

Chris_G · 01-10-2006, 01:58 PM

Stealthy UAV's are gonna be the next step imo. Probably not too far off of the Stealth film ideal.

FLYBOYJ · 01-10-2006, 02:02 PM

Manned fighters with several UAVs as a support flight

the lancaster kicks ass · 01-11-2006, 11:12 AM

yes it'll be a while before unmanned vehicles are used as all out fighters, although in the recon role i believe they're already being used..........

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-12-2006, 09:18 AM

Yes they are already in use in the Recon role and even in the Attack role. While we were in Iraq we used images for our Air Assault flights to plan the mission taken from UAV's and in Afganistan they have fired missles at ground targets from UAV's.

HealzDevo · 04-11-2007, 12:08 AM

I expect that we shall be seeing stealth aircraft go naval. It is a pity that it didn't happen with naval aircraft such as the F-117N Seahawk which was originally intended to be an improved F-117A Nighthawk. It was intended to be a naval version of the F-117B Nighthawk which never really went into service. The true one though is the A/F-117X Seahawk which never saw service even though it would have really been a winner in terms of naval attack. Sadly though it has been killed off by US politicians who would automatically get in a knot if this technology was proposed to be sold to anyone else other than them...

FLYBOYJ · 04-11-2007, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HealzDevo

I expect that we shall be seeing stealth aircraft go naval. It is a pity that it didn't happen with naval aircraft such as the F-117N Seahawk which was originally intended to be an improved F-117A Nighthawk. It was intended to be a naval version of the F-117B Nighthawk which never really went into service. The true one though is the A/F-117X Seahawk which never saw service even though it would have really been a winner in terms of naval attack. Sadly though it has been killed off by US politicians who would automatically get in a knot if this technology was proposed to be sold to anyone else other than them...

Once again you're talking out of your @ss. The naval versions of the F-117 was never bought by the US Navy simply because they didn't need it and wanted aircraft like the super hornet and the F-35 which will have a stealth capability.

Stealth technology is now no secret - it the black boxes that go into the aircraft that are subject to scrutiny.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 04-11-2007, 08:57 AM

I really dont think the F-117 would have been ideal for Carrier Operations anyhow...

timshatz · 04-11-2007, 10:56 AM

Guess this thread isn't dead...

Think putting a pilot in there is something of a waste of space. Also, affects the whole design of the aircraft. You can make an automated aircraft do wonders without putting a pilot in there. G forces are not limited to the human frame. Big advantage.

Also, the data links are getting better. Not perfect, probably not even good. But getting better. Easier to have a crew of 3 or 4 on the ground running an air strike than having them in the aircraft.

Instead of thinking in terms of pilots, we should be thinking in terms of systems operators. The cockpit of the future is going to look more like the computer room of a large company than a stick and rudder cockpit. With sensors, cameras and multiple sources of info, a crew located in a location with ability to use an analyse all the sensor data will the flight crew of the future.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 04-11-2007, 11:36 AM

With Healz around no thread is dead...