Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon

[Larry Dighera]

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/ghwk07103.xml

Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon
By Marc Selinger
July 10, 2003

Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will
try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what
would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial
vehicle.

But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The
DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air
Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm
Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized
UAV fly in their airspace. ....

[click the link to read the complete article]

[Eric Moore]

Larry Dighera > wrote in message >...
> http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/ghwk07103.xml
>
> Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon
> By Marc Selinger
> July 10, 2003
>
> Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will
> try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what
> would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial
> vehicle.
>
> But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The
> DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air
> Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm
> Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized
> UAV fly in their airspace. ....
>
> [click the link to read the complete article]

I wonder if there are any plans to arm the stealthy UAV used in
operation Iraqi Freedom

http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/07073news.xml

A stealthy UCAV would be an interesting SEAD/DEAD asset.

[Eric Moore]

(Kevin Brooks) wrote in message >...
> (Eric Moore) wrote in message >...
> > Larry Dighera > wrote in message >...
> > > http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/ghwk07103.xml
> > >
> > > Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon
> > > By Marc Selinger
> > > July 10, 2003
> > >
> > > Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will
> > > try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what
> > > would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial
> > > vehicle.
> > >
> > > But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The
> > > DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air
> > > Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm
> > > Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized
> > > UAV fly in their airspace. ....
> > >
> > > [click the link to read the complete article]
> >
> > I wonder if there are any plans to arm the stealthy UAV used in
> > operation Iraqi Freedom
> >
> > http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/07073news.xml
> >
> > A stealthy UCAV would be an interesting SEAD/DEAD asset.
>
> Both current UCAV competitors are already stealthy designs.
>
> Brooks


The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the stealthy UAV
mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now.

[Kevin Brooks]

(Eric Moore) wrote in message >...
> (Kevin Brooks) wrote in message >...
> > (Eric Moore) wrote in message >...
> > > Larry Dighera > wrote in message >...
> > > > http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_aerospacedaily_story.jsp?id=news/ghwk07103.xml
> > > >
> > > > Idea Of Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon
> > > > By Marc Selinger
> > > > July 10, 2003
> > > >
> > > > Army Gen. Tommy Franks said July 9 that the Defense Department will
> > > > try to weaponize the Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, marking what
> > > > would appear to be a major policy reversal for the unmanned aerial
> > > > vehicle.
> > > >
> > > > But Air Force officials disputed the general's comments, telling The
> > > > DAILY that the service has no plans to put weapons on Global Hawk. Air
> > > > Force officials have indicated in the past that they would not arm
> > > > Global Hawk because some countries would object to having a weaponized
> > > > UAV fly in their airspace. ....
> > > >
> > > > [click the link to read the complete article]
> > >
> > > I wonder if there are any plans to arm the stealthy UAV used in
> > > operation Iraqi Freedom
> > >
> > > http://aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/07073news.xml
> > >
> > > A stealthy UCAV would be an interesting SEAD/DEAD asset.
> >
> > Both current UCAV competitors are already stealthy designs.
> >
> > Brooks
>
>
> The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the stealthy UAV
> mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now.

They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an
IOC as early as 07. And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy
UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized
weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)? If it doesn't
then say bye-bye to stealth if you want to strap a weapon on
externally.

Brooks

[Thomas Schoene]

"Kevin Brooks" > wrote in message
om

> >
> > The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the
> > stealthy UAV
> > mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now.
>
> They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an
> IOC as early as 07.

Last I heard for UCAN-V (the naval vehicle) was 2015.

And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy
> UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized
> weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)?

That's a reasonable question. But a bay designed for large reconaissance
sensors might be adapted without too many problems. Or conformal carriage
(especially for JSOW) might be possible.


--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

[Kevin Brooks]

"Thomas Schoene" > wrote in message t>...
> "Kevin Brooks" > wrote in message
> om
>
> > >
> > > The UCAV competitors won't be in service for years, the
> > > stealthy UAV
> > > mentioned in the link is in (very) limited service now.
> >
> > They are not all that far off; last I heard the plan was to have an
> > IOC as early as 07.
>
> Last I heard for UCAN-V (the naval vehicle) was 2015.

I am sure that various dates have been floated. I recall reading that
07 was the period the USAF was envisioning as service entry. DARPA
seems to be showing the R&D effort being "complete" (within the spiral
development plan, which of course means that continual refining and
further R&D would continue) in mid-06, according to:

http://www.darpa.mil/ucav/factSheet/factSheetProgram.html .


>
> And what are the chances that thesurrent stealthy
> > UAV has a suitable weapons bay capable of handling a decent sized
> > weapon (this presumably is not a Hellfire class weapon)?
>
> That's a reasonable question. But a bay designed for large reconaissance
> sensors might be adapted without too many problems. Or conformal carriage
> (especially for JSOW) might be possible.

Without the sensors it would likely be rather blind and of minimal use
even as a UCAV, I'd think. Conformal carriage sounds nice, but from
what I have read of stealth design it is a rather poor solution,
unless you are willing to sacrifice a large degree of any current LO
qualities already designed into the system. A fastener head out of
place can ruin the stealthy quality; this vehicle has obviously been
designed and manufactured, probably within rather stringent
tolerances, to be truly stealthy. When you start messing around with
the exterior geometry you will inevitably cause significant problems.
I see conformal carriage as being a way of enhancing the stealth
qualities of otherwise relatively non-stealthy platforms, not as a
good solution to the issue of increasing the load carrying capability
of an already stealthy platform.

Brooks