Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
c4isrnet.com
Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
1–10 of 58 posts
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#2This is nothing new. The USAF has had unmanned F-4 phantoms for decades that are used for target practice and live fire weapons testing. The F-4 fleet is being replaced with surplus F-16s.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#3This is nothing new. The USAF has had unmanned F-4 phantoms for decades that are used for target practice and live fire weapons testing. The F-4 fleet is being replaced with surplus F-16s.
I thought the aside in the article about unmanned "missile trucks" controlled by a latest gen manned fighter was interesting.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#4Are we expecting an alien invasion? (and by alien, I mean little green men)
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#5This is nothing new. The USAF has had unmanned F-4 phantoms for decades that are used for target practice and live fire weapons testing. The F-4 fleet is being replaced with surplus F-16s.
I thought the aside in the article about unmanned "missile trucks" controlled by a latest gen manned fighter was interesting.
This article is where those quotes come from:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pentagon-touts-lo...
The hard part is developing a strong enough AI to do what they want. Current uncrewed vehicles all have a remote human pilot. Air Force brass wants to do away with that bit. Maybe it's six years out but I would be extremely surprised.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#6Sort of puts our defense spending and progress in perspective when the USAF takes a $21M 4th gen fighter - when most of the world's air forces still have 4th gen fighters in development, mind you - and basically uses it like the cheap clay target shooting skeet you can buy at Walmart.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#7This is nothing new. The USAF has had unmanned F-4 phantoms for decades that are used for target practice and live fire weapons testing. The F-4 fleet is being replaced with surplus F-16s.
You are right for sure. But they have never had a 4th gen (fly by wire / designed to be aerodynamically unstable;) fighter with this capability.
In my (potentially uninformed) opinion, It is definitely a big milestone because it opens the door to 5th gen fighters becoming UCAVs - almost like making the GPS guided JDAM weapon out of a 1960s dumb bomb by "bolting on" the JDAM module as a cheap aftermarket kit.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#8"Initial operating capability or Initial operational capability (IOC) is the state achieved when a capability is available in its minimum usefully deployable form. The term is often used in government or military procurement."
Military MVP?
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_operating_capability
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#9Sort of puts our defense spending and progress in perspective when the USAF takes a $21M 4th gen fighter - when most of the world's air forces still have 4th gen fighters in development , mind you - and basically uses it like the cheap clay target shooting skeet you can buy at Walmart.
Probably used not for shooting at, but rather for detection, tracking and such. Being on par or a little better than upcoming adversary systems works best for this.
Re: Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
#10I kind of understand why they want to develop the capability, but also am dubious of its value for a plane designed around a human pilot.
So, if the plane is going to do anything useful, it needs to get to its target intact and ready, and to be honest that's more about logistics and geography than human or not pilots. Maybe it can stay on-station longer but that sounds more like a duty roster benefit than a tactical advantage
The real benefit of pilotless craft I assume will come from designing it to do things that would kill a human inside it - presumably speed, manoeuvres etc. But then that means rebuilding a whole aircraft with new wings and weapons that can withstand such strain. And is that actually a win?
So, I am not sure where inammgoing with this except it feels that a lot of military spend is not tied to political aims or military benefit. Air craft carriers sit in that weird zone for me too (the UK is without one right now and I am dubious it's worth getting another)