[Zagadka]

At the moment I feel we are in the zone of the UAV's false dawn, remmember that missiles were going to replace aircraft several decades back, never happened and likely never will, till we see a big advance in automation and artificial intelligence the same will be true for the UAV.

Well,

1) Cruise missiles have taken place of most long range bombing missions, mostly outside of declared wars...

2) UAVs don't need advanced AI. They're unmanned, not uncontrolled.

[Typhoon]

Certainly valid points Zagadka, to which I would say...

1) Cruise missiles have taken place of most long range bombing missions, mostly outside of declared wars...

The bomber itself has recently had a renaissance with Iraq and Afghanistan after losing its deterrent and stratic bombing role to the ballistic missile forces. The Buff and the Bone in the USAF due to their ability to loiter for example have been very popular with commanders and are being upgraded with the Litening and Sniper targetting pods to improve performance. So in terms of general warfare I would say that the missile has complimented rather than condemmed the bomber.

2) UAVs don't need advanced AI. They're unmanned, not uncontrolled.

The problem with the UAV is the degree of seperation between the pilot and the aircraft, currently UAV's do not have the nessasary intelligence to compensate completely for the lack of a in-seat pilot. If something goes wrong during a flight its often terminal. For example in Sept of this year UAV related accidents accounted for almost 50% of all USAF attrition (3xMQ-1, 1xMQ-9A vs 2xOH-58, 1xTH-67A, 1xT-38C, 1xUH-60A). UAV have found a nice niche in the relatively undemanding roles of insurgency warfare and HALE/MALE recon but to progress into future combat roles such as what the USAF X-47 is heading towards there needs to be a big step forward so simple things like losing a sattelite link or a sticky throttle dont stop the show.

[Igor Antunov]

What use are remote controlled UAV's if your enemy starts knocking out your sattelite guidance network? And leaving deadly weapons in the hands of possibly glitchy AI is chronically stupid.

[JohnRawls]

If you played any pc games , you know that Bots < Humans .

[Zerogouki]

Well, the Predator certainly has its place, but I think the real reason is that the F-35 is just as advanced as the F-22 but far less expensive ($80 million versus $140 million). The F-35 is basically the fifth-gen equivalent of the F-16, which we were able to sell to a lot of third-world countries because they were so cheap.

Furthermore, I don't buy this bullshit about Russia and China. We're friends with Russia now, and China makes all of the shit that we buy at Wal-Mart. Also, there's that whole "Mutually Assured Destruction" thing. The USA will never engage in a war against a nuclear state. Period.

[Zagadka]

I agree that the diplomatic likelihood of a war between the US and Russia or China is laughably slim. What we need to focus on is taking out "rogue states" like Iran or North Korea could be (MAD aside). We need advanced fighters because while we won't go to war with Russia, Russia will happily sell things like Su-37s, if said rogue state could pony up the cash.

I agree about UAVs being vulnerable to attacks on com/sat networks, I have pointed this out, but there aren't very many countries that can actually wage that kind of campaign against the US, and I'm sure there US military has all kinds of failsafes (higher encryption, secret broadcast systems, bandwidths, etc).

The USA will never engage in a war against a nuclear state. Period.

Sure it will. Whether nukes are used is probably unlikely. Even if they did nuke the US, we could *conventionally* bomb the hell out of almost any country easily enough... though our lack of ability to locate Osama is troubling and probably will be funny in a hundred years.

[Typhoon]

What use are remote controlled UAV's if your enemy starts knocking out your sattelite guidance network?

This is a good question and it is one that has been given consideration (though nothing as such is implimented yet). In addition to using sattelites as nodes in the network to relay information a lot of thought has been given into using additional platforms like ships, ground stations and aircraft (even the UAV themselves) to form the nodes of the network to make it a lot more redundant to attack.

Whats evident at the moment though is despite operating in conditions where high-tech to the enemy is a mobile phone the UAV still suffers from high attrition due to technical reasons.

I think the real reason is that the F-35 is just as advanced as the F-22 but far less expensive ($80 million versus $140 million). The F-35 is basically the fifth-gen equivalent of the F-16,

Dont hold you breath of the F-35's eventual unit cost, it was initially stated to cost $80 but has seen rampent cost increases to a current figure of around $120m and this is almost garenteed to be pushed higher and could top well over $200 million a piece. Its a viceous cycle as the cost rises the number of aircraft gets cut back and the cost rises further. That and people still question the performance of the aircraft as a 5th generation strike aircraft.

[JohnRawls]

Eh , igor would say buy c-400 . 4 missile cost x20 < 1 f-35 or 1 f-22 .

[Zerogouki]

rampent cost increases to a current figure of around $120m

Sauce plz?

[Igor Antunov]

It's really simple. Give the russians the massive budget and let them design it for the US airforce. They make do with so little. With so much funding they could build you a fleet of space frigates armed with photon torpedoes and teleporting capabilities.

[Typhoon]

Give the russians the massive budget and let them design it for the US airforce.

I think this is the problem with the west in that they have a large budget...that and some very corrupt/inept companies. Russia builds its new project on a shoestring because thats all there is, for the west there is no cap on money so you get bloat and a slow motion crash for defence procurement. New big ticket items are overloading defence budgets which then impacts capability, the faliure of the MoD in recent years to maintain its Nimrod aircraft for example resulted in the deaths of service personel and is tied up with defence funding and prioritisation of resources as a core issue.

Sauce plz?

CDI has a good article and the recent JET report was pretty damning of the program.

[Igor Antunov]

To be fair though Russia has already blown $100 Billion on Mikoyan Project 1.44. They have little to show for it so far apart from a handful of prototypes/technology demonstrators. Indeed it was just a technology test.

[Typhoon]

I dont think there are any reliable cost estimates for the 1.44, RSK MiG financed the project during the 1990's till the aircrafts first flight and to date they have only incurred a debt of $1.2 Billion.

Update on the PAK-FA though, of the five development aircraft being built by KnAAPO the first static test model has been delivered to TsAGI for testing and the first flying prototype should be set for a maiden flight by the end of the year, though it will use Saturns 117C engine until Saturns new engine is ready.

[Zagadka]

I always liked the 1.44. The one plane that could compete with the F-22, and both get scrapped (or indefinitely on hold).

[Zerogouki]

The biggest use of the F-22 thus far has been in Michael Bay's recent movies that shat upon the name of "Transformers".

Not the best investment.

[Typhoon]

^ At least Starscream was unaffected by the weather, which is more than can be said for the Raptors he was copying!

[Zerogouki]

The Raptor is adversely affected by weather?

[killim]

Afaik the expansive stealth paint/cover is very vulnerable to various weather conditions, which greatly increases the maintaining costs.

[Typhoon]

Additionally during deployment to Guam the aircrafts cooling system pulled moisture from the air damaging the aircrafts electronic systems...

[Zerogouki]

Well, THAT was a smart idea...