If it has greater range and speed than a sub-launched Tomahawk missle, then it could be kinda cool. Being recoverable too is a big thing, saves a lot of tax payer dollars! Woohaa! Go Lockheed Martin.
Now this is great technology. UAVs that can be launched from submarines. These aircraft would offer an immense tactical advantage. They're much more useful than the cruise missiles. I wonder when this technology will be implemented.
I don't agree with that comment about the Russians. These things are armpit weapons. They're not fully autonomous (as far as I know), any organized military could jam them into autonomous mode in which they become early 80's arcade game fodder. They are for use only against bearded AK wielding poor people. The exact people that don't pose any real threat.
@CmdrTobs Do you really think it is that easy to jam these aircraft. They are very well protected against cyber attacks. You would have to have a lot of info about it to manage to jam them. Info that is very classified.
@StiviGun1 Not really. You can't classify a set of carrier-waves. That's elementary to detect once any device is operational. Once you detect the wave simply transmit massive amounts of smart noise on that frequency. An organised military could retrofit this BASIC radio equipment into jeeps, AFV etc in weeks.
I think you are confusing usurping control or at least partial control of the device with simply jamming it, yes the former would extremely difficult to near impossible.
@CmdrTobs But you still don't make any sense. Getting into these aircraft control systems is impossible. Like I said, they are heavily protected against cyber attacks.
@CmdrTobs First you said that these aircraft can be jammed. Then you said that it possible to take control over them, but not to jam them. Does this make any sense to you? Explain to me what do carrier waves have to do with jamming or getting control over the aircraft. That's where you lost me.
@StiviGun1 As I suspected you actually just don't understand. I see your RO so I will explain again using simpler English.
1)This device receives it's combat instructions from the submarine.
2) Therefore by interfering with the radio waves between it and the submarine you force it to witch to its own onboard computer.
3)Now that the drone is in it's autonomous mode because of this interference it does not have an operator to fly it evasively and thus can be shot down like a pigeon.
@CmdrTobs And what if the drone is completely autonomous and it doesn't receive its mission parameters from the sub? What if if gets its info from a multitude if sources, including satellite and its onboard sensors? What if the aircraft is preloaded with its mission parameters before its being launched and the aircraft would just follow what it was programmed to do? You assume that the aircraft gets in info from the sub only. But what if it's completely autonomous and it doesn't need to be
@StiviGun1 "what if the drone is completely autonomous and it doesn't receive its mission parameters from the sub?" We have not invented autonomous learning computers yet, so it won't be able to peform well. It would be a pigeon shoot.
I actually assumed it would receive Manuel control from an aircraft as subs can't transmitter at high freq submerged. It does not matter the source, jamming a 0.9-5GHz signal is the same.
@CmdrTobs Well, the current drones that are used to perform strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan are piloted from land based control centers from thousands of miles away and they control the drones via satellite. So how can you interfere with that? How can you interfere with a satellite transmission?
@StiviGun1 The same way. Satellite frequencies aren't any safer. You can build a GPS jammer that can jam all local GPS units for $10 and GPS is a satellite based transmission.
@CmdrTobs Yeah, but if the aircraft is completely autonomous then you really have nothing to jam or interfere with. And this technology is already in development. It won't be long until it will be implemented in UCAVs.
@StiviGun1 "this technology is already in development."... It's been in development for decades. Since the first Chess programs were put in mainframes. Computers can't think creatively about a situation, go out and by a video game like "Civilization" that contain advanced AIs and see how bad they are. We just aren't there yet.
If we were close then AI's in computer simulations (or games) where ALL variables can be known to it should be performing well, but they're in fact rubbish.
@CmdrTobs OK, but a UCAV that can be programmed to find its targets based on coordinates given by GPS can be build today. It can also be programmed to return to base after it completes its mission. So in this case, again, there's nothing you can interfere with so you can't take control or jam the UCAV.
@StiviGun1 like said that's pointless. That offers nothing over artillery fire or cruise missile fire except extra expense.
The drones only become truely useful if they can't be jammed and therefore provide real time video intel and even close air support and for this to happen it would have to be against a disorganized military which was not nationally well backed.
@CmdrTobs Why would a pre programmable UCAV, capable of destroying multiple targets, not just one, like a cruise missile, would be pointless? Such a UCAV can destroy more targets and return to base, not just one target, like a cruise missile. Such a UCAV would certainly be more useful than a cruise missile.
@CmdrTobs They use Hellfire missiles, from what I know. But the UAVs today are controlled via satellite I believe, they can't be pre programmed to attack multiple targets and come back to base.
@CmdrTobs Also, don't forget that the technology is continuously evolving. By the time these aircraft would make it into service it's very possible that autonomous learning computers would exist. The US has already built such systems, like the MUEL. That vehicle has the ability to learn and it does it quite well. So how hard would it be to implement this technology on an aircraft?
@StiviGun1 It's autonomous mode will be little more than a GPS guided computer controlled flight plan, with perhaps some basic tasks that can be performed at way points. We don't have the technology for what you describe. If we did planes like the F22 would have no pilots so we could make them pull 20G's.
In a jam induced autonomous mode it couldn't provide real time surveillance or perform effective air-combat maneuvers. An EASY and expensive pigeon for an organised military.
@CmdrTobs Like I said, the technology for what I describe has already been implemented. Go check out the MUEL vehicle. That vehicle has the capability to learn and it chooses its own path based on its own analysis. This technology is already in development. How long do you think it will be before they can implement it into an unmanned fighter?
AI is still quiet far away. Even in computer games where the variables can be all know to an AI, AI's are very bad. The more variables the game has the worse it gets.
@CmdrTobs I'm saying that by the time the aircraft you see in this video will get into active service with the military, the technology to build totally autonomous UCAVs will be available.
@StiviGun1 I'm saying as a Physics post grad and programmer who's worked on montecarlo style algorithms, that are not too dissimilar to what is going on here, that what you say is not possible within 10years and that's me being extremely optimistic.
Figure out how to make a computer learn even to have a basic conversation then maybe 5yrs after that you could think about evaluating it in a full smart combat mission.
@CmdrTobs Maybe, but a UCAV that can be pre programmed like a cruise missile is very easy to built. So in this case you don't have any link to interfere with.
@StiviGun1 I think you are confused by the part when I say; 'Jamming will put it into autonomous mode...' It's a result of the deliberate interference on it's operating frequency that the drone itself will switch to autonomous mode. Do you understand that now? No breaking of encryption or 'Cyber attacks' necessary. Now reread. I hope it makes more sense.
@CmdrTobs Like I said before, I don't think these aircraft are designed to be piloted from the distance. I think they are completely autonomous. And may they will be capable of receiving info about its mission and target from a multitude of sources, like satellites or AWACS. In this case there's nothing you can interfere in. If the aircraft is not piloted from the distance, there's nothing you can interfere in.
@StiviGun1 "Like I said before, I don't think these aircraft are designed to be piloted from the distance." Yes, they can perform a pre planned surveillance flight path mission without Manuel piloting, but they will STILL need to relay that data back so that's a radio link that WILL be jammed by an organised military. All the combat work again requires manual control, computers can't do that yet.
With jamming it's less useful that satellite surveillance.
@CmdrTobs Well, actually, these aircraft are fighting aircraft, they're not used for surveillance. And even if they would be, the only thing you could do would be to interfere with the data they are trying to transmit back, but you wouldn't be able to interfere with is control systems and take over the aircraft.
@StiviGun1 These vehicles can't fight unmanned, they can't make effective decisions. They could be programed like cruise missiles to attack a preprogrammed targets based on GPS coordinates or fly to a set of coordinates and attempt to shoot at everything that moves with a certain heat signature etc.. but that's it, a waste of time.
If militaries want that sort of mindless destruction they use cheaper artillery and more versatile high altitude air strikes.
@CmdrTobs Well, the technology is still young, but they are working on it. I'm sure that it won't be too long before they could make a totally autonomous UCAV. Or at least one that acts just like a cruise missile. A UCAV that can be pre programmed, just like a cruise missile. But this UCAV can hit multiple targets, not just one.
@StiviGun1 Independent targeting sub munitions are easy. Even the drone in this demo fires such a weapon.
This comes full circle to my initial comment of it being simply a weapon against bearded AK wielding poor people. Even the tech demo showed them taking on a ancient Manuel AA gun and a 'scud' type missile. Both things competitive miltaries don't use.
They didn't show it taking on a BMP platoon with Hermes type air defense and ECM suite for a reason:)
@StiviGun1 You come full circle back to my first point, because they are now fighting and for the foreseeable future Gorilla type or poorly backed militaries which WILL NOT have the organisation and means to implement even basic jamming.
The same reason why they've cancelled the super artillery project and the Comanche helicopter project, those weapons are for use against a powerful organised military, so they got scrapped.
@CmdrTobs Look, even if an organized military could interfere with the link between the UCAV and the comand post that's controlling it, you said that that would take weeks. You really think you have that kind of time in a real war? You would get all your facilities that you could do this with destroyed before you would be able to do it. In a real war, you don't have weeks at your disposal. And I believe that the facilities that would enable an enemy to interfere with and jam the UCAVs would be
@StiviGun1 No I said it would take weeks to roll out jamming equipment accross ALL there forces. Read that as no time at all. At that is provided the drones are a suprise. Since drones are no secret organised militarys probably have UHF noise generators in all their C3 centers already.
You just took something I said again, and decided to not comprehend it.
@CmdrTobs "Roll them across their forces". It's still the same. They can be destroyed before they have the chance to implement this technology on their hardware. Like I said, in a war, you don't have weeks at your disposal.
@StiviGun1 Again your not comprehending, I was pretending that it was the BEST case scenario and drones were a secret development. Since they are not secret any reasonable military force that expects combat with Nato will already have all the equipment, in fact any force that is remotely modern will have wild weezel equipment already.
@CmdrTobs I never questioned the fact that they don't have the equipment ready. It's just that if it takes so long to implement it on vehicles or planes, they may not have that time. They would be destroyed before they got the chance to implement that equipment on vehicles or planes. And how would a military know what the frequency of the link between the UAV and it command post is before the war starts?
@StiviGun1 There is no time to 'implement it' the time I talk about was roll out time. The stuff to jam it is readily available home buildable. You will detect the frequency as soon as it transmits with a simple scanner. In fact anyone with any with knowledge can guess the frequency. For example I can tell that UAV here MUST be transmitting from ~900Mhz to 4Ghz tops.
@CmdrTobs Yeah, you may have the time too detect the frequency on which the UAV operates, but if you don't have the time to implement the necessary equipment to jam the UAV, then it's no use. You said that installing this equipment would take weeks. In a war, you don't have weeks. And if the enemy uses several hundreds UCAVs against you, how are you gonna jam them all.
And one other thing: what makes you so sure about what the UAV's frequency is?
@CmdrTobs There's nothing to explain. I already told you how things work. In a real war, you don't have weeks at your disposal. Unless you have that equipment that can jam the UCAV NOW, you will be destroyed before you have the chance to implement it on vehicles or airplanes.
@StiviGun1 Ok 1 last time.... a couple of weeks ******IF****** drones were a secret. Since they are not every serious non-nato country will have signal jamming ALREADY that means RIGHT NOW. Do you comprehend?
Serious countries have that kind of signal Jamming ready just to jam NORMAL battle field communication since the 70's.
@CmdrTobs Well, then this proves me when I say that US also needs to develop weapons systems that can be used in a conventional war, against major military powers, even more. If the weapons systems it develops now, that are used against poorly trained guerilla groups can't be used against major military powers, then the US also has to develop weapons systems that can be used against major military powers. Otherwise, it risks being surpassed militarily by China and Russia.
@StiviGun1 China has had the biggest army on average for the last 3000yrs along with the various hordes of the Russian Federations stepps. Seems like a return to normality to me.
@CmdrTobs Well, you're an anti-American. But just because you want so, doesn't mean that America has to fall. In fact, I prefer America's domination to any other big country's domination.
As for developing ONLY weapons that can only be used against poorly equipped groups, like the Taliban, that is a STUPID thing to do from the US. China and Russia are constantly developing weapons systems AGAINST the US and not responding to that is stupid and dangerous. I believe that the cancellation of the super artillery and the Comanche helicopter projects was a stupid thing to do. They're underestimating the Chinese and the Russians and that's
@StiviGun1 So you are begging to understand the US mindset. It's not that much of a stupid proposition really because China and Russia can never be direct combatants as they have nuclear weapons. A military must provide primary for the wars it's fighting. New advanced strike craft helicopters are arguably a waste of money when your troops are fighting militias on the ground and need Intel resources, armored cars etc....
@CmdrTobs I think you should go and do some research about what the Russians and the Chinese are developing AGAINST the US. Right NOW, the US is the most powerful so of course no one would openly say they're arming against US. But they're doing it in silence and the US is letting its guard down. The US, in today's context, needs to be ready to fight both large, conventional, wars and to have the capability to fight in asymmetrical wars. Ignoring two large military powers that are developing
@StiviGun1 Research? I don't have my own spy lab. Do i care? No. The fact remains they economically intertwined nuclear powers. Thus war is unlikely except in the mind of FPS gamers and military fantasy nuts.
@CmdrTobs Well, if war is not possible, then why are China and Russia arming against US? A war is possible and if America is attacked by one of these powers with conventional means, a nuclear response from the US is out of the question. It has to respond conventionally as well. And if the US is not prepared for that, then it will be in a big trouble.
@StiviGun1 Well when they attack and trigger nuclear was you will have proved me wrong. In the mean time stay out Jane's magazines, computer games and Hollywood fiction.
@CmdrTobs First of all, I don't read Jane's magazine, I don't play computer games and your Hollywood is sickening me more and more each day.
Like I said, you need to go a do more research. Many experts already anticipate that China will surpass America in military power in 20 years top. And economically, many experts say that China will surpass America by 2021. But what do you think China will do when it surpasses America militarily? They will definitely attack US. If US doesn't do something
@StiviGun1 "China will surpass America in military power in 20 years top." - So? who cares? why is that important? China has had the number 1# GDP for most of the last 3000yrs
Why is this your concern? Why is it my concern? Do you hate the Chinese race or something? Do you think Chinese flesh is nuclear proof? Do you think China want to attack it's biggest costumer state, the issuer of all it's currency reserve? THINK about what you're saying.
@CmdrTobs Who do you think China develops its weapons against? Why do you think they're spending 150 billion dollars a year in military development and the figures continue to grow? They wouldn't spend such amounts of money on weapons unless they wouldn't intend to use them. Trust me, when they will be strong enough, they will attack the US. Also, the US's nuclear arsenal will be much smaller in 20 years than it is right now. So, in 20 years, the US won't be able to use its nuclear arsenal
@StiviGun1 "Who do you think China develops its weapons against?" Nationalist China (Twain)
"They wouldn't spend such amounts of money on weapons unless they wouldn't intend to use them." Not really, arms building is this best way to take from the poor, build up diplomatic clout and stimulate high tech industry.
"n 20 years, the US won't be able to use its nuclear arsenal" - Absolute nonsense.
Are you some fear junky? You need to ease off US cable news.
@CmdrTobs You're nothing but a naive. If you don't realize who is China developing its weapons against, then you don't live in reality. No country develops weapons if it doesn't have the intention to use them.
As for the US' nuclear arsenal, go do some research to see what shape its nuclear arsenal will be in 20 years. It won't be able to use against China or Russia because it will remain vulnerable against the one it didn't use those weapons. In 20 years, the nuclear arsenal will PROBABLY only
@CmdrTobs serve as a guarantee that it won't be attacked with nuclear weapons, but in no way will it be an option in case of a conventional attack from Russia and China. It will have to respond conventionally. That's why it must develop conventional weapons that can be used against a major military power as well, not just weapons that can be used against poorly trained guerilla groups. Right now, the US has 2 major enemies and it has to react accordingly.
@CmdrTobs against China, because that will leave the US vulnerable to nuclear attacks from Russia.
As for why do I care? I actually don't, I-m not an American. But it should concern you, you live their. That's the problem with America's youth today. You don't even care about your own country. America doesn't have the adventurers, the pioneers that made it great anymore. Today's youngsters in America are nothing but sissies. This is one of the reasons why America is not sympathized in the world
@StiviGun1 "But it should concern you, you live their" - Do I ?
" America doesn't have the adventurers, the pioneers that made it great anymore?" Really? Who are they? All those heroes in the films who shot Indians clearing the Midwest?
I get the impression you have missed the lesson of the last 300yrs of history. Conquering the world through military means isn't possible, or even profitable any more.
@CmdrTobs No, I'm talking about those adventurers, pioneers and entrepreneurs that made it great. Of course, you couldn't recognize them, you're part of the newer generation of SISSIE Americans. America has lost its main resource: the man. And this will be the cause of its fall.
@CmdrTobs OK, then if you don't live in America, what nationality are you? Why don't show this on your profile? Are you ashamed with your nationality?
@CmdrTobs anymore. You have become a country that only promotes mediocrity. You know, all the great empires started to fall when the people inside them started to not care about their country anymore. This is exactly what's happening to America today.
@StiviGun1 Wait.... US has an empire? US is a country and is not in the business of imperialism. I don't think the US facing the obvious and always known demographic music a "fall".
Here let Napoleon school you in China: "Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." - China always has been the worlds largest power. It's people like you that incite to violence, who seed the idea in the American public's imagination that they are leaders of Earth.
@CmdrTobs And when did I say the US is an empire? It is a super power. But all great powers fell when the people inside them stopped giving a shit about their country. And this is exactly what is happening to the Americans right now.
And I don't "incite" to anything. I'm simply telling the TRUTH. China is developing weapons AGAINST the US and the US MUST DO something about it.
@CmdrTobs China had the number one GDP in the last 3000 years???? You've got to be joking. China TODAY has a smaller GDP than the US. Some analysts predict that by 2021 it will surpass the US in this chapter. But the future will be really dim for the US when China will surpass the US in military power.
@CmdrTobs "Historical fact"... Well, RIGHT NOW and in the last 50 years, the US has had a much bigger GDP than China. So how did China had the boggest GDP for the last 3000 years. Where did you get this BULLSHIT?
@CmdrTobs about China (and Russia) things are gonna end up really bad for the US. The US needs to develop weapons against major military powers as well, not just against poorly trained guerilla warfare groups. Otherwise, it risks being militarily surpassed and such a future is very dim for America.
Does anyone have any designs on US territory? NO so why will the future be dim? The future on the other hand WILL be dim if the US continue military spending it can't afford and putting there boot heals on countries that have rocketing populations of unemployed men who are angry and want someone to blow up....
@CmdrTobs You're blind. A LOT OF PEOPLE wants to see America attacked on its own territory and occupied. That bit military budget is actually the ONLY THING that prevents this from happening. I agree with you that America should stop occupying countries but reducing the military budget when Russia and China are continuously increasing their military budgets and build weapons specifically against the US is something that only a brainless liberal fool would do.
@StiviGun1 "A LOT OF PEOPLE wants to see America attacked on its own territory and occupied" - A lot of people also want to touch Megan Foxx with no clothes on. Wants don't translate into reality.
@CmdrTobs Well, "wants" can be translated into reality if China continues building weapons against the US and the US doesn't do anything about. And China and Russia are the main enemies that would like to see America attacked on its own soil and occupied. The only reason they didn't do it so far is because THEY COULDN'T. They didn't have enough military power. But if they obtain that military power, they will attack America. It's at least naive to believe that they won't. In order to maintain
@CmdrTobs its territorial integrity, the US MUST maintain its military superiority. And I know that anti-American morons like you that would like to see America fall make propaganda against the US' main security guarantee (its military). But you're nothing but pathetic losers who envy America for its power.
@CmdrTobs And you can do some research ON THE INTERNET about the weapons Russia and China are developing against the US. For instance, China is developing a submarine launched ballistic missile that can destroy a super carrier from 1500 km away. The Russians are developing 2 new more ICBMs, each capable of carrying 10 warheads and which can evade any US anti-missile system and a new class of a ballistic missiles submarine which will be more advanced and silent than the Ohio submarine class.
@007bond66 Yeah, right. It's funny how hyperpretentious your profile is and you're probably not even old and in bad health, let alone have any kind of PhD.
Your resume doesn't even fit within the frame of designing aircraft concepts. In fact, judged by your comments about your parents, you must be a mentally unstable kid. 'I can't explain, but it was very complicated'? If you knew anything at all, you'd be able to explain.; it's what science is all about. Simplifying things so we understand.
It's pretty pathetic as far as the complex deployment and retrieval goes. The more complex something becomes, the higher the chance something will fail along the way.
this is not much practical way, to collect them from depth and make ready to deploy for launching again. too much time and technical difficulties will be faced. But nice work.
Landing and take from carrier ops. more logical for uavs. you need a long wave antenna (for transmitting recon to the submarine, because it cruises deep water.) which technically hard to attach on to uav. But you can use relay antenna via carrier.
were those bombs in the film cluster bombs?? Oh I,m so glad they think about the human rights of those that have nothing to do with their stupid wars!!!!!
@RamTortoise What really hinders the US war effort is the media. If the US fought with a little less regard for collateral damage like the Israelis (or a lot less like the Russians) both Iraq and Afghanistan would have been wrapped up. However, that would have all sorts of secondary consequences. Personally, I don't think any islamic country is worth a drop of allied force blood. When first world nations move beyond oil, that region will become inconsequential and fade away of its own accord.
Very cool. I work at an aerospace manufacturer and make parts for some cool military craft but no UAV's. As for detection back to the sub I would assume it is at advanced skunk works for a reason and they have considered that part logically and have the best radar evading technology and design available. its deployed from a sub for a reason. its never supposed to be seen in the first place and is probably deployed plenty of distance from shore befor it reaches land.
@emerychandler well then again, it does not really hav to fly back to the sub and land vertically... it can hav a compartment that it can "sink" back into... that can be one way...
Usefull! enemy detect aircrat at sky try bomb it plane controllers knows this would be end of playn '' no problem lets do something damage before get destroyed and drops some high bombs to target '' very usefull
I'd like to see what ARVs we've been developing since the 1980's. ARV stands for Alien Reproductive Vehicle. I bet they're still trying to figure out how the ET technology works.
The only problem I see is the retrieval system, chances are they'll work out something else though, but the Idea is neat, using a submarine you could launch an aerial recon, and strike, without the enemy knowing what's happening until the next day when their SAM's and Radar arrays are lying in burnt crisps as the heavy bombers fly overhead unhampered by ground defenses.
The drone just needs to have a radar crossection the size of a pelican or smaller, which shouldn't be hard b/c of it's size...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Like accepting foreign interference in the "conflict" between baptists and episcopalians.....or some foreign interests dislike Benny Hinn and send a hit team to eliminate him.
Sunnis are in power in many places because they tend to be more secular than the somewhat more fervent and devout Sufis.
Saddam et al were a CIA asset (as is Osama, even if dead, they can still use his presence to good effect) and they were discarded when no longer useful.
I'm wondering, was the possibility that someone would, oh, fire back, factor into the design? I mean, its one thing to fly an armed UAV in Iraq, its quite another to do so over, say, Russia...
Try pull off this video with a non-desert terrain and chances are it gets popped before it reaches land.
So, finally when the people get tired of sending people to slaughter other people, the Mil-Ind complex will have a drone that can continue to expend ordnance and "enemy" lives....wonder who will make billions on this and its effects?
btw, anyone curious about how the Iraqis feel about letting themselves solve their own problems? (Like most other (defenceless/non-english speaking and christian) countries that don't have oil reserves...
Don't try to kill more efficiently, try to be more human.
Setting aside the motives for the invasion (I mostly agree with you), the Iraqis look set to "solve" their problems by eliminating the Sunni faction (about 20% of population). I don't like this "solution", but it's looking very hard to prevent.
Most updated weapon is let them build one to control and destroy themselves. Look at the sup-prime market in USA. We cannot blame them they demonstrated it on themselves first. Next would on you.
this is why i hope mccain gets elected. he willa llow this to take place, Obama will throw this in the trashcan. THis is a genious idea man! you should work fot the Air Force
Strykaas do you understand that the technology you see today is 9 years behind current military technological capability, do you understand how Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles work and are designed, do you know what kind of detection power these have, they include IO IE electro-optical targeting system, they take off and land by themselves with no human overwatch, systems and technology demonstrators include X-45A/B, J-UCAS, Dassault Nueron, X-47, etc etc. These are already outdated systems.
Hey I had a very similar idea! Mine was a submarine with a linear induction catapult (running trough it's length) of which ballistic or kinetic missiles could be launched as well as nukes (perhaps into/via space even) and I was also thinking about UAVs. Kinda the future replacement of carriers.
Somehow, I just can't get used to the idea of unmanned robotic aircraft raining down death and destruction on human beings, even if it is set to cool disco music. Yeah, I know that all of our enemies deserve to be unceremoniously exterminated, but this just looks like the beginning of the end of mankind to me, for some weird reason...
Yes, actually I would, and one step above that would be humans working out their differences. Robotic toys raining down death and destruction on humanity is my least favorite option.
Not until they understand difference needs a lot of scales to measure and combine things. What is a trust in British way? Documentation for anti-human is how they mean trust. They love to draw a line here and draw a line there for differences. I don't know why they need education if they are so ignorant.
Badass I like it, it's a good way to kill some more bad people. I want one
ctp94333 1 month ago
Nice... Yet another way for uncle sam to kill brown people and their children.
MiG2880 2 months ago
Hell ya
5835421 2 months ago
SORTI-E
Insurrgents go blewieee!!! YAY!
Curas1 3 months ago
can i toss it off a building and watch it glide down?
rcpowersfan101 5 months ago
If it has greater range and speed than a sub-launched Tomahawk missle, then it could be kinda cool. Being recoverable too is a big thing, saves a lot of tax payer dollars! Woohaa! Go Lockheed Martin.
kwmkc13 6 months ago
What a racist video !
rasetoi 7 months ago
The most expensive words in any language are, "All You Have To Do Is..."
1iNova 7 months ago
Now this is great technology. UAVs that can be launched from submarines. These aircraft would offer an immense tactical advantage. They're much more useful than the cruise missiles. I wonder when this technology will be implemented.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
I don't agree with that comment about the Russians. These things are armpit weapons. They're not fully autonomous (as far as I know), any organized military could jam them into autonomous mode in which they become early 80's arcade game fodder. They are for use only against bearded AK wielding poor people. The exact people that don't pose any real threat.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Do you really think it is that easy to jam these aircraft. They are very well protected against cyber attacks. You would have to have a lot of info about it to manage to jam them. Info that is very classified.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 Not really. You can't classify a set of carrier-waves. That's elementary to detect once any device is operational. Once you detect the wave simply transmit massive amounts of smart noise on that frequency. An organised military could retrofit this BASIC radio equipment into jeeps, AFV etc in weeks.
I think you are confusing usurping control or at least partial control of the device with simply jamming it, yes the former would extremely difficult to near impossible.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs In your first comment, you talked about jamming such a device, not about detecting it.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs But you still don't make any sense. Getting into these aircraft control systems is impossible. Like I said, they are heavily protected against cyber attacks.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 It made perfect sense, I'm not sure if English is your first language so I won't be judgmental.
I did not say it was easy or even necessary to "Getting into these aircraft control systems" please re-read.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs First you said that these aircraft can be jammed. Then you said that it possible to take control over them, but not to jam them. Does this make any sense to you? Explain to me what do carrier waves have to do with jamming or getting control over the aircraft. That's where you lost me.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 As I suspected you actually just don't understand. I see your RO so I will explain again using simpler English.
1)This device receives it's combat instructions from the submarine.
2) Therefore by interfering with the radio waves between it and the submarine you force it to witch to its own onboard computer.
3)Now that the drone is in it's autonomous mode because of this interference it does not have an operator to fly it evasively and thus can be shot down like a pigeon.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs And what if the drone is completely autonomous and it doesn't receive its mission parameters from the sub? What if if gets its info from a multitude if sources, including satellite and its onboard sensors? What if the aircraft is preloaded with its mission parameters before its being launched and the aircraft would just follow what it was programmed to do? You assume that the aircraft gets in info from the sub only. But what if it's completely autonomous and it doesn't need to be
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 "what if the drone is completely autonomous and it doesn't receive its mission parameters from the sub?" We have not invented autonomous learning computers yet, so it won't be able to peform well. It would be a pigeon shoot.
I actually assumed it would receive Manuel control from an aircraft as subs can't transmitter at high freq submerged. It does not matter the source, jamming a 0.9-5GHz signal is the same.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, the current drones that are used to perform strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan are piloted from land based control centers from thousands of miles away and they control the drones via satellite. So how can you interfere with that? How can you interfere with a satellite transmission?
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 The same way. Satellite frequencies aren't any safer. You can build a GPS jammer that can jam all local GPS units for $10 and GPS is a satellite based transmission.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Yeah, but if the aircraft is completely autonomous then you really have nothing to jam or interfere with. And this technology is already in development. It won't be long until it will be implemented in UCAVs.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 "this technology is already in development."... It's been in development for decades. Since the first Chess programs were put in mainframes. Computers can't think creatively about a situation, go out and by a video game like "Civilization" that contain advanced AIs and see how bad they are. We just aren't there yet.
If we were close then AI's in computer simulations (or games) where ALL variables can be known to it should be performing well, but they're in fact rubbish.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs OK, but a UCAV that can be programmed to find its targets based on coordinates given by GPS can be build today. It can also be programmed to return to base after it completes its mission. So in this case, again, there's nothing you can interfere with so you can't take control or jam the UCAV.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 like said that's pointless. That offers nothing over artillery fire or cruise missile fire except extra expense.
The drones only become truely useful if they can't be jammed and therefore provide real time video intel and even close air support and for this to happen it would have to be against a disorganized military which was not nationally well backed.
AKA poor people and poor countries.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Why would a pre programmable UCAV, capable of destroying multiple targets, not just one, like a cruise missile, would be pointless? Such a UCAV can destroy more targets and return to base, not just one target, like a cruise missile. Such a UCAV would certainly be more useful than a cruise missile.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 They already have independent warhead munitions.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs They use Hellfire missiles, from what I know. But the UAVs today are controlled via satellite I believe, they can't be pre programmed to attack multiple targets and come back to base.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Also, don't forget that the technology is continuously evolving. By the time these aircraft would make it into service it's very possible that autonomous learning computers would exist. The US has already built such systems, like the MUEL. That vehicle has the ability to learn and it does it quite well. So how hard would it be to implement this technology on an aircraft?
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs piloted from the distance?
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 It's autonomous mode will be little more than a GPS guided computer controlled flight plan, with perhaps some basic tasks that can be performed at way points. We don't have the technology for what you describe. If we did planes like the F22 would have no pilots so we could make them pull 20G's.
In a jam induced autonomous mode it couldn't provide real time surveillance or perform effective air-combat maneuvers. An EASY and expensive pigeon for an organised military.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Like I said, the technology for what I describe has already been implemented. Go check out the MUEL vehicle. That vehicle has the capability to learn and it chooses its own path based on its own analysis. This technology is already in development. How long do you think it will be before they can implement it into an unmanned fighter?
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 That's still a fair way off. I'm sure one day all these things and more will possible, just not right now.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Trust me, until these aircraft will be put into service, this technology will be long ago available.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 I'm not sure what you man by that.
AI is still quiet far away. Even in computer games where the variables can be all know to an AI, AI's are very bad. The more variables the game has the worse it gets.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs I'm saying that by the time the aircraft you see in this video will get into active service with the military, the technology to build totally autonomous UCAVs will be available.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 I'm saying as a Physics post grad and programmer who's worked on montecarlo style algorithms, that are not too dissimilar to what is going on here, that what you say is not possible within 10years and that's me being extremely optimistic.
Figure out how to make a computer learn even to have a basic conversation then maybe 5yrs after that you could think about evaluating it in a full smart combat mission.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Maybe, but a UCAV that can be pre programmed like a cruise missile is very easy to built. So in this case you don't have any link to interfere with.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 I think you are confused by the part when I say; 'Jamming will put it into autonomous mode...' It's a result of the deliberate interference on it's operating frequency that the drone itself will switch to autonomous mode. Do you understand that now? No breaking of encryption or 'Cyber attacks' necessary. Now reread. I hope it makes more sense.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Like I said before, I don't think these aircraft are designed to be piloted from the distance. I think they are completely autonomous. And may they will be capable of receiving info about its mission and target from a multitude of sources, like satellites or AWACS. In this case there's nothing you can interfere in. If the aircraft is not piloted from the distance, there's nothing you can interfere in.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 "Like I said before, I don't think these aircraft are designed to be piloted from the distance." Yes, they can perform a pre planned surveillance flight path mission without Manuel piloting, but they will STILL need to relay that data back so that's a radio link that WILL be jammed by an organised military. All the combat work again requires manual control, computers can't do that yet.
With jamming it's less useful that satellite surveillance.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, actually, these aircraft are fighting aircraft, they're not used for surveillance. And even if they would be, the only thing you could do would be to interfere with the data they are trying to transmit back, but you wouldn't be able to interfere with is control systems and take over the aircraft.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 These vehicles can't fight unmanned, they can't make effective decisions. They could be programed like cruise missiles to attack a preprogrammed targets based on GPS coordinates or fly to a set of coordinates and attempt to shoot at everything that moves with a certain heat signature etc.. but that's it, a waste of time.
If militaries want that sort of mindless destruction they use cheaper artillery and more versatile high altitude air strikes.
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, the technology is still young, but they are working on it. I'm sure that it won't be too long before they could make a totally autonomous UCAV. Or at least one that acts just like a cruise missile. A UCAV that can be pre programmed, just like a cruise missile. But this UCAV can hit multiple targets, not just one.
StiviGun1 8 months ago
@StiviGun1 Independent targeting sub munitions are easy. Even the drone in this demo fires such a weapon.
This comes full circle to my initial comment of it being simply a weapon against bearded AK wielding poor people. Even the tech demo showed them taking on a ancient Manuel AA gun and a 'scud' type missile. Both things competitive miltaries don't use.
They didn't show it taking on a BMP platoon with Hermes type air defense and ECM suite for a reason:)
CmdrTobs 8 months ago
@CmdrTobs So if the UCAVs are so useless, then why is the US military developing them?
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 You come full circle back to my first point, because they are now fighting and for the foreseeable future Gorilla type or poorly backed militaries which WILL NOT have the organisation and means to implement even basic jamming.
The same reason why they've cancelled the super artillery project and the Comanche helicopter project, those weapons are for use against a powerful organised military, so they got scrapped.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Look, even if an organized military could interfere with the link between the UCAV and the comand post that's controlling it, you said that that would take weeks. You really think you have that kind of time in a real war? You would get all your facilities that you could do this with destroyed before you would be able to do it. In a real war, you don't have weeks at your disposal. And I believe that the facilities that would enable an enemy to interfere with and jam the UCAVs would be
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 No I said it would take weeks to roll out jamming equipment accross ALL there forces. Read that as no time at all. At that is provided the drones are a suprise. Since drones are no secret organised militarys probably have UHF noise generators in all their C3 centers already.
You just took something I said again, and decided to not comprehend it.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs "Roll them across their forces". It's still the same. They can be destroyed before they have the chance to implement this technology on their hardware. Like I said, in a war, you don't have weeks at your disposal.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Again your not comprehending, I was pretending that it was the BEST case scenario and drones were a secret development. Since they are not secret any reasonable military force that expects combat with Nato will already have all the equipment, in fact any force that is remotely modern will have wild weezel equipment already.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs I never questioned the fact that they don't have the equipment ready. It's just that if it takes so long to implement it on vehicles or planes, they may not have that time. They would be destroyed before they got the chance to implement that equipment on vehicles or planes. And how would a military know what the frequency of the link between the UAV and it command post is before the war starts?
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 There is no time to 'implement it' the time I talk about was roll out time. The stuff to jam it is readily available home buildable. You will detect the frequency as soon as it transmits with a simple scanner. In fact anyone with any with knowledge can guess the frequency. For example I can tell that UAV here MUST be transmitting from ~900Mhz to 4Ghz tops.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Yeah, you may have the time too detect the frequency on which the UAV operates, but if you don't have the time to implement the necessary equipment to jam the UAV, then it's no use. You said that installing this equipment would take weeks. In a war, you don't have weeks. And if the enemy uses several hundreds UCAVs against you, how are you gonna jam them all.
And one other thing: what makes you so sure about what the UAV's frequency is?
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 ARGGGHH I'm not explaining again.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs There's nothing to explain. I already told you how things work. In a real war, you don't have weeks at your disposal. Unless you have that equipment that can jam the UCAV NOW, you will be destroyed before you have the chance to implement it on vehicles or airplanes.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Ok 1 last time.... a couple of weeks ******IF****** drones were a secret. Since they are not every serious non-nato country will have signal jamming ALREADY that means RIGHT NOW. Do you comprehend?
Serious countries have that kind of signal Jamming ready just to jam NORMAL battle field communication since the 70's.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, then this proves me when I say that US also needs to develop weapons systems that can be used in a conventional war, against major military powers, even more. If the weapons systems it develops now, that are used against poorly trained guerilla groups can't be used against major military powers, then the US also has to develop weapons systems that can be used against major military powers. Otherwise, it risks being surpassed militarily by China and Russia.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 China has had the biggest army on average for the last 3000yrs along with the various hordes of the Russian Federations stepps. Seems like a return to normality to me.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, you're an anti-American. But just because you want so, doesn't mean that America has to fall. In fact, I prefer America's domination to any other big country's domination.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "Well, you're an anti-American"
If so, better to be that than clinically insane.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs You know, your anti-Americanism makes you real stupid...
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs among the first to be targeted.
As for developing ONLY weapons that can only be used against poorly equipped groups, like the Taliban, that is a STUPID thing to do from the US. China and Russia are constantly developing weapons systems AGAINST the US and not responding to that is stupid and dangerous. I believe that the cancellation of the super artillery and the Comanche helicopter projects was a stupid thing to do. They're underestimating the Chinese and the Russians and that's
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 So you are begging to understand the US mindset. It's not that much of a stupid proposition really because China and Russia can never be direct combatants as they have nuclear weapons. A military must provide primary for the wars it's fighting. New advanced strike craft helicopters are arguably a waste of money when your troops are fighting militias on the ground and need Intel resources, armored cars etc....
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs I think you should go and do some research about what the Russians and the Chinese are developing AGAINST the US. Right NOW, the US is the most powerful so of course no one would openly say they're arming against US. But they're doing it in silence and the US is letting its guard down. The US, in today's context, needs to be ready to fight both large, conventional, wars and to have the capability to fight in asymmetrical wars. Ignoring two large military powers that are developing
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Research? I don't have my own spy lab. Do i care? No. The fact remains they economically intertwined nuclear powers. Thus war is unlikely except in the mind of FPS gamers and military fantasy nuts.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, if war is not possible, then why are China and Russia arming against US? A war is possible and if America is attacked by one of these powers with conventional means, a nuclear response from the US is out of the question. It has to respond conventionally as well. And if the US is not prepared for that, then it will be in a big trouble.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 You can think that, but that;s not reality.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Actually, facts, like Russia and China arming against US, show that that's the reality.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Well when they attack and trigger nuclear was you will have proved me wrong. In the mean time stay out Jane's magazines, computer games and Hollywood fiction.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs First of all, I don't read Jane's magazine, I don't play computer games and your Hollywood is sickening me more and more each day.
Like I said, you need to go a do more research. Many experts already anticipate that China will surpass America in military power in 20 years top. And economically, many experts say that China will surpass America by 2021. But what do you think China will do when it surpasses America militarily? They will definitely attack US. If US doesn't do something
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "China will surpass America in military power in 20 years top." - So? who cares? why is that important? China has had the number 1# GDP for most of the last 3000yrs
Why is this your concern? Why is it my concern? Do you hate the Chinese race or something? Do you think Chinese flesh is nuclear proof? Do you think China want to attack it's biggest costumer state, the issuer of all it's currency reserve? THINK about what you're saying.
Your views are STRAIGHT of a computer game.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Who do you think China develops its weapons against? Why do you think they're spending 150 billion dollars a year in military development and the figures continue to grow? They wouldn't spend such amounts of money on weapons unless they wouldn't intend to use them. Trust me, when they will be strong enough, they will attack the US. Also, the US's nuclear arsenal will be much smaller in 20 years than it is right now. So, in 20 years, the US won't be able to use its nuclear arsenal
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "Who do you think China develops its weapons against?" Nationalist China (Twain)
"They wouldn't spend such amounts of money on weapons unless they wouldn't intend to use them." Not really, arms building is this best way to take from the poor, build up diplomatic clout and stimulate high tech industry.
"n 20 years, the US won't be able to use its nuclear arsenal" - Absolute nonsense.
Are you some fear junky? You need to ease off US cable news.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs You're nothing but a naive. If you don't realize who is China developing its weapons against, then you don't live in reality. No country develops weapons if it doesn't have the intention to use them.
As for the US' nuclear arsenal, go do some research to see what shape its nuclear arsenal will be in 20 years. It won't be able to use against China or Russia because it will remain vulnerable against the one it didn't use those weapons. In 20 years, the nuclear arsenal will PROBABLY only
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "You're nothing but a naive...."
You're delusional and have poor understanding of communication and computer systems.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs serve as a guarantee that it won't be attacked with nuclear weapons, but in no way will it be an option in case of a conventional attack from Russia and China. It will have to respond conventionally. That's why it must develop conventional weapons that can be used against a major military power as well, not just weapons that can be used against poorly trained guerilla groups. Right now, the US has 2 major enemies and it has to react accordingly.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs against China, because that will leave the US vulnerable to nuclear attacks from Russia.
As for why do I care? I actually don't, I-m not an American. But it should concern you, you live their. That's the problem with America's youth today. You don't even care about your own country. America doesn't have the adventurers, the pioneers that made it great anymore. Today's youngsters in America are nothing but sissies. This is one of the reasons why America is not sympathized in the world
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "But it should concern you, you live their" - Do I ?
" America doesn't have the adventurers, the pioneers that made it great anymore?" Really? Who are they? All those heroes in the films who shot Indians clearing the Midwest?
I get the impression you have missed the lesson of the last 300yrs of history. Conquering the world through military means isn't possible, or even profitable any more.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs No, I'm talking about those adventurers, pioneers and entrepreneurs that made it great. Of course, you couldn't recognize them, you're part of the newer generation of SISSIE Americans. America has lost its main resource: the man. And this will be the cause of its fall.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 ....
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs OK, then if you don't live in America, what nationality are you? Why don't show this on your profile? Are you ashamed with your nationality?
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs anymore. You have become a country that only promotes mediocrity. You know, all the great empires started to fall when the people inside them started to not care about their country anymore. This is exactly what's happening to America today.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Wait.... US has an empire? US is a country and is not in the business of imperialism. I don't think the US facing the obvious and always known demographic music a "fall".
Here let Napoleon school you in China: "Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." - China always has been the worlds largest power. It's people like you that incite to violence, who seed the idea in the American public's imagination that they are leaders of Earth.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs And when did I say the US is an empire? It is a super power. But all great powers fell when the people inside them stopped giving a shit about their country. And this is exactly what is happening to the Americans right now.
And I don't "incite" to anything. I'm simply telling the TRUTH. China is developing weapons AGAINST the US and the US MUST DO something about it.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs China had the number one GDP in the last 3000 years???? You've got to be joking. China TODAY has a smaller GDP than the US. Some analysts predict that by 2021 it will surpass the US in this chapter. But the future will be really dim for the US when China will surpass the US in military power.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "China had the number one GDP in the last 3000 years???? You've got to be joking" If you think historical fact is a joke, you're the joke.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs "Historical fact"... Well, RIGHT NOW and in the last 50 years, the US has had a much bigger GDP than China. So how did China had the boggest GDP for the last 3000 years. Where did you get this BULLSHIT?
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Go to library. Read history.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs No, you need to read the recent 50 years history. Even now, China has a smaller GDP than the US.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs about China (and Russia) things are gonna end up really bad for the US. The US needs to develop weapons against major military powers as well, not just against poorly trained guerilla warfare groups. Otherwise, it risks being militarily surpassed and such a future is very dim for America.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 Why? THINK about what you're saying.
Does anyone have any designs on US territory? NO so why will the future be dim? The future on the other hand WILL be dim if the US continue military spending it can't afford and putting there boot heals on countries that have rocketing populations of unemployed men who are angry and want someone to blow up....
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs You're blind. A LOT OF PEOPLE wants to see America attacked on its own territory and occupied. That bit military budget is actually the ONLY THING that prevents this from happening. I agree with you that America should stop occupying countries but reducing the military budget when Russia and China are continuously increasing their military budgets and build weapons specifically against the US is something that only a brainless liberal fool would do.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@StiviGun1 "A LOT OF PEOPLE wants to see America attacked on its own territory and occupied" - A lot of people also want to touch Megan Foxx with no clothes on. Wants don't translate into reality.
CmdrTobs 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs Well, "wants" can be translated into reality if China continues building weapons against the US and the US doesn't do anything about. And China and Russia are the main enemies that would like to see America attacked on its own soil and occupied. The only reason they didn't do it so far is because THEY COULDN'T. They didn't have enough military power. But if they obtain that military power, they will attack America. It's at least naive to believe that they won't. In order to maintain
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs its territorial integrity, the US MUST maintain its military superiority. And I know that anti-American morons like you that would like to see America fall make propaganda against the US' main security guarantee (its military). But you're nothing but pathetic losers who envy America for its power.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs And you can do some research ON THE INTERNET about the weapons Russia and China are developing against the US. For instance, China is developing a submarine launched ballistic missile that can destroy a super carrier from 1500 km away. The Russians are developing 2 new more ICBMs, each capable of carrying 10 warheads and which can evade any US anti-missile system and a new class of a ballistic missiles submarine which will be more advanced and silent than the Ohio submarine class.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs weapons SPECIFICALLY AGAINST YOU, is STUPID AND DANGEROUS.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
@CmdrTobs stupid and dangerous.
StiviGun1 7 months ago
All it needs is a pilot
beowulf342000 9 months ago
@007bond66 Yeah, right. It's funny how hyperpretentious your profile is and you're probably not even old and in bad health, let alone have any kind of PhD.
Your resume doesn't even fit within the frame of designing aircraft concepts. In fact, judged by your comments about your parents, you must be a mentally unstable kid. 'I can't explain, but it was very complicated'? If you knew anything at all, you'd be able to explain.; it's what science is all about. Simplifying things so we understand.
cadabraa 11 months ago
It's pretty pathetic as far as the complex deployment and retrieval goes. The more complex something becomes, the higher the chance something will fail along the way.
PHeMoX 11 months ago
And I want one of those so fucking bad...
KiloByte69 11 months ago
I think this idea came from throwing a paper air plane from a desk :D
CyberdineModel101 1 year ago
my aircraft is on you tube!
but its only my dream ;'
mylucasd 1 year ago
this is not much practical way, to collect them from depth and make ready to deploy for launching again. too much time and technical difficulties will be faced. But nice work.
Landing and take from carrier ops. more logical for uavs. you need a long wave antenna (for transmitting recon to the submarine, because it cruises deep water.) which technically hard to attach on to uav. But you can use relay antenna via carrier.
fockewolf6 1 year ago
were those bombs in the film cluster bombs?? Oh I,m so glad they think about the human rights of those that have nothing to do with their stupid wars!!!!!
hoplite46 1 year ago
Affirmative!
IamJacksColon4 1 year ago
Neat, if only America could afford to buy such hardware.
CaptainPositron 1 year ago
LOL The Americans are still spending big bucks on conventional war techniques, while their enemies are using asymmetric warfare and winning.
RamTortoise 1 year ago
@RamTortoise What really hinders the US war effort is the media. If the US fought with a little less regard for collateral damage like the Israelis (or a lot less like the Russians) both Iraq and Afghanistan would have been wrapped up. However, that would have all sorts of secondary consequences. Personally, I don't think any islamic country is worth a drop of allied force blood. When first world nations move beyond oil, that region will become inconsequential and fade away of its own accord.
muttonbuster 1 year ago
@RamTortoise ... Hey, we need -some- kind of excuse to make these new toys, don't we?
17589 1 year ago
Looks good but the recovery seems a little too Dale Brown for my taste
pronto355 1 year ago
WTF is this? SyFy channel shit?
noodleninjaa 2 years ago
@noodleninjaa
future of uav warfare i say its stealing the job of fighter and bomber pilots but still its awsome
emerychandler 1 year ago
Are the warriors of the future! explosive!
DARIO8417 2 years ago
Very cool. I work at an aerospace manufacturer and make parts for some cool military craft but no UAV's. As for detection back to the sub I would assume it is at advanced skunk works for a reason and they have considered that part logically and have the best radar evading technology and design available. its deployed from a sub for a reason. its never supposed to be seen in the first place and is probably deployed plenty of distance from shore befor it reaches land.
SHISHAMCC 2 years ago
We all ready have cruise missles, having the UAV fly back to the sub gives it's position away.
gregrutz 2 years ago
@gregrutz That logic would make carriers and amphibious assault vessels obsolete aswell.
Dezorza 2 years ago
@Dezorza
They might be.
gregrutz 2 years ago
@gregrutz
it wont be able to fly back to the sub unless it has vertical landing but it will probably go back to the nearst air force/naval base run way
emerychandler 1 year ago
@emerychandler well then again, it does not really hav to fly back to the sub and land vertically... it can hav a compartment that it can "sink" back into... that can be one way...
DRaG0NREdZ 1 year ago
@DRaG0NREdZ hmm i did not think about that but your right
emerychandler 1 year ago
The sooner we have aircraft like this in combat, the better!
MondoMedia7 2 years ago
Usefull! enemy detect aircrat at sky try bomb it plane controllers knows this would be end of playn '' no problem lets do something damage before get destroyed and drops some high bombs to target '' very usefull
TraceurMikado 2 years ago
Bin Laden, the cia puppet, has been dead for years now you asshole.
biped19 2 years ago
and you know this how??
bullcurr 2 years ago
Hide in your hole Bin Laden we have your ass.
dimphil 2 years ago
I'd like to see what ARVs we've been developing since the 1980's. ARV stands for Alien Reproductive Vehicle. I bet they're still trying to figure out how the ET technology works.
polyrhythmic1 2 years ago
Dude, I don't give a fuck, why the hell should I care what you think
kirkmach32 2 years ago
Maybe you should.
TheBlitz1 2 years ago
It's not that bad? Absurd.
kirkmach32 2 years ago
They are eventually going to have sea launched drones whether you like it or not.
TheBlitz1 2 years ago
Yeah right, the launch and recovery is ridiculous
kirkmach32 2 years ago
Its not that bad, especially if the targets are high value and it has a large payload size.
TheBlitz1 2 years ago
Wow kinda reminds me of the Wraith from Starcraft except theirs no pilot in it
ReverantFaun 2 years ago
haha i can see the terminator story comin true. humans attacked by machines. hhehe lol
nixonvazz 2 years ago
to nixonvazz: Human are already being attacked by machines. Duh!
bullcurr 2 years ago
hmmm... paper airplanes much?
Shinhaquro 2 years ago 2
so when does Mr Stark segue into view and make the announcement this will no longer be his purpose in life?
if only...
only1too 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hahaha stupid american people,
bestamerica what you say? what is usa make ever for the earth, except wars and global warming?!
trebava 2 years ago
Oh yes! We are always the ugly Americans, aren't we?
wingnutwally 2 years ago
If it's a national secret just wait for the New York Times to publish it.
KJenkinsAF1 2 years ago 8
come on,,,
never never show video in here,,,
ussr russia / china can always copy steal from america
bestamerica 2 years ago
and the yanks always steal ideas from the british
even worse, they then claim all the credit!
92GH 2 years ago
The only problem I see is the retrieval system, chances are they'll work out something else though, but the Idea is neat, using a submarine you could launch an aerial recon, and strike, without the enemy knowing what's happening until the next day when their SAM's and Radar arrays are lying in burnt crisps as the heavy bombers fly overhead unhampered by ground defenses.
The drone just needs to have a radar crossection the size of a pelican or smaller, which shouldn't be hard b/c of it's size...
Eagle1Division2 2 years ago
this thing puts a submarine on a whole new level..
skink worls came up with a lot of legendary stuff..
theGoldenAgeOfBoredo 3 years ago
No clue what the guy below is talking about, don't care, this UAV is EPIC. I wanna see some real useage to blow some terrorists up randomly!
Octopi1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Like accepting foreign interference in the "conflict" between baptists and episcopalians.....or some foreign interests dislike Benny Hinn and send a hit team to eliminate him.
Sunnis are in power in many places because they tend to be more secular than the somewhat more fervent and devout Sufis.
Saddam et al were a CIA asset (as is Osama, even if dead, they can still use his presence to good effect) and they were discarded when no longer useful.
Sad, very sad.
Sueezedtight 3 years ago
I'm wondering, was the possibility that someone would, oh, fire back, factor into the design? I mean, its one thing to fly an armed UAV in Iraq, its quite another to do so over, say, Russia...
Try pull off this video with a non-desert terrain and chances are it gets popped before it reaches land.
dagnemrth 3 years ago
I'm sure it will fly NOE during approach, it's small, and probably has some stealth. It could probably penetrate.
jursamaj 3 years ago
Polecat UAV they would probably fly something closer to this.
destroyerdragon2002 3 years ago
So, finally when the people get tired of sending people to slaughter other people, the Mil-Ind complex will have a drone that can continue to expend ordnance and "enemy" lives....wonder who will make billions on this and its effects?
btw, anyone curious about how the Iraqis feel about letting themselves solve their own problems? (Like most other (defenceless/non-english speaking and christian) countries that don't have oil reserves...
Don't try to kill more efficiently, try to be more human.
Sueezedtight 3 years ago
Setting aside the motives for the invasion (I mostly agree with you), the Iraqis look set to "solve" their problems by eliminating the Sunni faction (about 20% of population). I don't like this "solution", but it's looking very hard to prevent.
jursamaj 3 years ago
Most updated weapon is let them build one to control and destroy themselves. Look at the sup-prime market in USA. We cannot blame them they demonstrated it on themselves first. Next would on you.
beancube2008 3 years ago
Which game is this?
spincarez 3 years ago 2
this is why i hope mccain gets elected. he willa llow this to take place, Obama will throw this in the trashcan. THis is a genious idea man! you should work fot the Air Force
crazycuntryboy 3 years ago
do you guys know what the music is the name of it and where I can download it??
hellgorama 3 years ago
So unrealistic
Strykaas 3 years ago
Wrong.
Helge129 3 years ago
Strykaas do you understand that the technology you see today is 9 years behind current military technological capability, do you understand how Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles work and are designed, do you know what kind of detection power these have, they include IO IE electro-optical targeting system, they take off and land by themselves with no human overwatch, systems and technology demonstrators include X-45A/B, J-UCAS, Dassault Nueron, X-47, etc etc. These are already outdated systems.
TheBlitz1 3 years ago
Hey I had a very similar idea! Mine was a submarine with a linear induction catapult (running trough it's length) of which ballistic or kinetic missiles could be launched as well as nukes (perhaps into/via space even) and I was also thinking about UAVs. Kinda the future replacement of carriers.
jpbalkenende 3 years ago
Difference was my catapult would not be launched submerged (or partly submerged) so super/hyper sonic speeds could be achieved.
jpbalkenende 3 years ago
This would go great with the new texas class subs
smartass1101 3 years ago
All Skunk Works need is a crackpot president to Fund all of this.
superzapper 3 years ago
or i'll become the president and we'll have alot more of that stuff
F22RaptorFF 3 years ago 2
Wow. We humans are just too good of destroying each other.
chuckshissle 3 years ago
Somehow, I just can't get used to the idea of unmanned robotic aircraft raining down death and destruction on human beings, even if it is set to cool disco music. Yeah, I know that all of our enemies deserve to be unceremoniously exterminated, but this just looks like the beginning of the end of mankind to me, for some weird reason...
n8glenn 3 years ago
would you prefer the idea of humans raining down death and destruction on each other than?
maniax342002 3 years ago
Yes, actually I would, and one step above that would be humans working out their differences. Robotic toys raining down death and destruction on humanity is my least favorite option.
n8glenn 3 years ago
agree, but the notion that humans can work out there differences is a fantasy.
maniax342002 3 years ago
I don't think so. The notion that conflict will never arise is a fantasy, but conflicts can and have been worked out peacefully.
n8glenn 3 years ago
Not until they understand difference needs a lot of scales to measure and combine things. What is a trust in British way? Documentation for anti-human is how they mean trust. They love to draw a line here and draw a line there for differences. I don't know why they need education if they are so ignorant.
beancube2008 3 years ago