Possible deployment of RSAF UAVs in Afghanistan. Good practice on live missions/objectives/targets?

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_...eb09_speech.htm

“We are also exploring additional operationally useful contributions, within our capabilities and resources, to the UN-mandated, NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (or ISAF) in Afghanistan. We are working on the details of a 3-month deployment of a KC-135 tanker aircraft in the later part of this year to support coalition operations over Afghanistan. We also know that intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities are a priority need in Afghanistan. We are thus exploring the deployment of such assets, for example the deployment of an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Task Group to Afghanistan to enhance ISAF's situational awareness and security.”

Good training opportunity in "live" circumstances with relatively lower risk as UAV support are rear elements.

Also helps to enhance inter-operability with friendly "allies".

Links for US need for UAVs in Afghanistan...
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=50747

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49896

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=210

""There has really been a growth in the understanding of what you can use a UAV for, both tactically on the battlefield and strategically," Renuart said. "As we have seen the proliferation of miniaturization and the quality of the technology, you find battlefield commanders want more."

The general pointed out that unmanned aerial vehicles have been helpful in joint operations. "We're beginning to collaborate much more on our integration and use of information that comes from these systems," he said.

For instance, in the rugged mountains of Afghanistan, U.S. Army and Navy special operations forces use the Air Force Predator to feed information back to their component commanders, so they can monitor the battlefield situation and respond accordingly, he said."

Definitely good training practice – considering that insurgents are harder to spot, compared to conventional warfare units. But deployment is not officially confirmed yet. Afghanistan is still a dangereous place – I wish for a safe return for all our guys deployed there.

I wonder which will be deployed? Hermes or Searcher?

In Afghanistan, I think one can rarely say that anything is rearline and hence safe, as long as it is related to combat support. UAV teams are on the ground, and they will be exposed to risks, even though much less than actual infantry patrols.

Still, I believe that they will do their best and come home safe.

Yup, anywhere also got risk. Even storeman can lose life in a crash by a foreign aircraft.

But not to devalue the contribution, I don't see this as any less risky as compared to the medical and engineering teams sent to Afghanistan earlier. The risk of IEDs, rocket/mortar attacks in rear lines is very real.

But it is relatively lower risk.

the malay storeman was my friend in JC...its a really sad incident...i'm still not quite over the whole thing yet...

anyways, if they do deploy, where will they most likely be sent to? Oruzgan? Khandahar?

Guess we will know when the time comes...

and my condolences to the loss of your friend and the other victims.. may they RIP.

It's not the first time our UAVs have been used operationally. More than a decade ago, the RSAF t-loaned a Malat scout detachment for deployment in the Irian province in Indonesia at the behest of TNI. This was to help the Kopassus mount a raid against local insurgents there

This incident is obliquely referenced in a photo montage inside the latest RSAF 40th anniversary coffee-table book.

And also, ahem, the hunt for Mas Selamat

what about the BH used against the Abu Sayaf?

Just wanted to highlight that the trial of the scan-eagle UAS included both Endurance class LPD as well as the Formidable frigate....

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2009/q1/090302a_nr.html

More info on the scan eagle...

These include comms relay, ship-shore interoperability...

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/milita...agle/index.html

there's another book you should look at about UAV (new one from RSAF) they actually shows RPV's equipment being transported by an old rusty RPL (ramp powered launch, which looks civilian) along rivers and all the crew are in civilian....go to woodland library and central library reference sections, they have it.

lets hope the RSAF can use this as a chance to learn more about armed UAV ops...

Oh, so this was the incident where UC (then known as TASC ) was awarded the "TIMIKA 1997" Streamer.

I have been searching around for the related info for the streamer ... hehe. Thanks.


BTT, i guess that our Hermes are still too 'new and prized' to be deployed. Probably the Searcher will be deployed, while i guess our Hermes will make its overseas debut at this year Wallaby or on other similar scale exercise... ...

Yes, i believe i got those two books mixed up (i borrowed both of them from the Jurong Regional Library at the same time)

That's the RSAF UAV commemorative book which also prominently featured the previous UAV command CO, Col. Sarbjit Singh right?

Yep, i think so, Col. Sarbjit Singh photo is also inside....what? can borrow? i went to Woodland and Central library and it's only for reference....

Good news bro, copies at Jurong West and Central Lending are for loan

http://catalogue.nlb.gov.sg/cgi-bin/cw_cgi...02+13066831+1+1

Reserve one online and pick it up at the branch of your choice

IMHO, it's a bad idea. We should stay far away from this theatre as far as uavs are concerned.

Medical teams and re-building efforts are good.

But uavs....dropping bombs into compounds...across borders! Collateral damages etc. I don't think we want to be near this in any form, ever!

But it's just my uninformed biased opinion.

I certainly don't think RSAF is contemplating the use of UAVs with the intention of sending them beyond the borders into Pakistani territory. I think it is almost certain that use of the UAVs would be within UN sanctioned limits, and therefore be operated within Afghanistan. As for the dropping of bombs from UAVs, there is no such demonstrated capability yet revealed for the 450s in RSAF service, only the possible potential to do so.

I'm not saying RSAF will do all these.

But the way media can be manipulated, better to be not there at all. Uavs, I mean. :blink:

As we further mature, these are issues we have to face. Sometimes, the privileged access we get in terms of equipment or training area, especially with NATO nations, they do not come for free.

ISAF is a politically charged mission, but I believe that gradually, we will be called upon to assist in more of such missions. And I believe that the policymakers will want to take this opportunity to test our operational capability.

For e.g, UAVs can help patrol areas to spot for insurgents planting IEDs. This is a positive role we can play.

I agree. It is as close as SAF can get to testing out a warfighting capability without placing people under fire. The only danger is misdirecting fire onto civilians, but that is a risk we must accept, and hope their training keeps them from making such mistakes. This is a golden opportunity for SAF to gain real operational experience, learn from the best and contribute to the war on terrorists at the same time. Even if the media misreports, either intentionally or unintentionally, that is not good reason enough to forsake this opportunity.

It's a great opportunity to demonstrate our capabilities and more valuable, discover shortcomings. Agree.

Binocular caps off! No free lunch.

as long as we're not shooting anything, I think that's pretty okay...but just wondering, we'll have to feed in our info to the coalition battlenet as well...will there be any difficulties?

Russia makes 1st foreign purchase (and that of UAVs from Israel incl searcher 2s)

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4027134&c=EUR&s=AIR

Work on reduction of UAV noise. DSO mentioned.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...channel=defense

Maritime patrol UAV. Capable of AIS recognition.

Will this play a role in RSAF F-50 replacement?

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/...-heron-uav.html

Links to official website & brochures.

Heron TP:
http://www.iai.co.il/18900-37204-en/default.aspx

EL/M-2022U MP radar
http://www.iai.co.il/21269-27596-en/default.aspx

http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/2393/myster...in-afghanistan/

Mystery UAV operating in Afghanistan

April 09, 2009

Afghanistan maybe the testing ground for a new, advanced but as yet undisclosed UCAV programme.

Pictures shown exclusively to Unmanned Vehicles magazine and taken at an airbase in the war-torn country reveal a large flying wing-type design, adopted by UCAV designers, but not yet seen on an operational type.

The image shown in the link below has been drawn directly from the photograph but none of the experts consulted by UV had any concrete idea of what the system might be.

The image shown to UV was taken from a long distance, as the aircraft taxied in on a hazy day, but the image was clear enough to show that this UAV’s design is like no other UAV in current operational service.

Amongst the distinctive features of the type is the ‘fat’ wing chord, and a large central fuselage fairing. The aircraft engine nozzle is the same half moon shape as the Lockheed P175 Pole Cat, but the wing is not cranked on its trailing edge like the Pole Cat is.

The fuselage fairing could support a large squared off intake, but is more likely to house a large satellite communications and sensor mix. Two large blisters either side of the central fairing are likely to the intakes for a single turbofan engine. These features probably won’t help the aircraft’s radar cross-section, although this probably isn’t important considering the theatre of operations in which it is flying.

The large doors inboard of the main landing gear may be bomb bay doors, indicating a strike capability for the type.

There are clearly the technological capabilities to build something like this inside Northrop Grumman, Boeing or Lockheed Martin. Looking at the shaping, our analyst said he would be inclined to think this comes from either Northrop or Lockheed.

The shaping is also suggestive of UCAV concepts around the start of the 2000s.There is a whole raft of wing design work that has gone on since 2002 in terms of how the X-47B has evolved, and the sorts of designs that Boeing was working with prior to the ending of that effort.

An artist’s impression of the aircraft can be viewed by clicking here.

By Darren Lake, Editor - Unmanned Vehicles

i remember those DarkStar rumours. have always been hoping they'd kept working on it. stealth UAV fulfils a very important niche.

An interesting and logical progression. Now is the growth period for UAVs, afterall. You gotta figure that programmes like the X-47 and Bird of Prey would result in an operational stealth UAV.

ah, i remember the dark star, and its horrific testing crashes...nonetheless I felt it would add a whole new dimension to UCAV ops...i mean this time, you don't really hear a drone, no lingering giveaways; in fact its probably like a that of a jet engine, it comes in loud, before you know it, you're gone...

Well, I'm not sure about not shooting anything. The information provided can be used as targetting info as well especially if the designator on board is used.

The video downlink is on a secure downlink. But there are receiving stations that can be attached to the end user. Some of these are nearly laptop portable and can control payload on board.

A little bit more about Project Liberty from Strategypage:-

Manned UAV!

manned UAV? such an oxymoron :P

Actually, I did not realise the US needed these additional ISRs so urgently!

If they can insert Boeing's Little Bird technology into the Beechcraft King Air airframes....then it should be called more appropriately "Optionally Manned UAV" instead.

Anyways, using the Beechcraft airframes affords the operator to choose and mix a variety of payloads onboard. Electrical power permitting.

Which is a plus over current MALE uavs. :ph43r:

this new one is big, well-armed and stealthy. exciting!



Predator C 'Avenger' makes first flight



By David A. Fulghum and Bill Sweetman

"A new, reduced-signature, unmanned aircraft—the long-rumored, 20-hr.-endurance, pure-jet Predator C Avenger—has emerged from General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ workshops after a 3½-year gestation period paced by massive growth in UAV production and the use of unmanned designs in combat.

The UAV’s undeniably stealthed-up exterior offers several clues about how the aircraft could be employed.

A weapons bay allows internal carriage of 500-lb. bombs with GBU-38 JDAM tail kit and laser guidance. Given the aircraft’s 41-ft. length (which will expand by at least 2 ft. in the second test aircraft), the weapons bay appears to be 10 ft. long.

The weapons bay doors can be removed to allow installation of a semi-submerged, wide-area surveillance pod, says Tom Cassidy, president, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ Aircraft Systems Group. Cassidy has earned a unique reputation by using company funds to develop what he believes the military needs rather than chasing Pentagon requirements that shift with disheartening regularity to produce cost increases and production delays. The result is a family of Gnat and Predator designs that are used by all the services and intelligence agencies.

The Predator C, like the B-variants, is designed to carry about 3,000 lb. of weapons and sensors. In a non-stealthy environment, weapons could also be attached externally on the fuselage and wings. For an additional 2 hr. of flying time, fuel tanks can be installed in the weapons bay. Normal fuel storage is split 50/50 between the wings and fuselage.

The Avenger’s electrical power is expected, at least initially, to be less than the 45 kva. available on Predator B variants. A long, featureless underside provides a low-distortion design for carriage of a wide-area surveillance sensor such as an all-weather, active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. The wide-area surveillance system—to be provided by the Air Force—has yet to be defined. However, it would be carried by a specialized all-reconnaissance version of the Avenger. A Lynx SAR is likely carried in the lower part of the nose. Absent from the prototype is the EO/IR sensor turret used by the Predator family. A retractable installation may have been developed.

The vertically-oriented V-tail both deflects radar and shields the 4,800-lb. thrust Pratt & Whitney Canada’s PW545B engine exhaust’s infrared signature. Predator C has two all-flying tail surfaces with two servos each for flight-control redundancy. The humpbacked design of the engine compartment offers room enough for a serpentine exhaust that eliminates radar observation of the engine. Pratt & Whitney has been developing an S-shaped exhaust that offers protection from radar observation and cooling to reduce the IR signature. The engine is expected to provide an airspeed of at least 400 kt., but Cassidy says envelope expansion tests may produce speeds “considerably greater” than that. Its operational altitude is up to 60,000 ft.

The Avenger’s 17-deg. swept wing (66-ft. span) and tail edges are all parallel in plan view with one or the other leading edges. It is the same shaping discipline used on classic stealth designs like the B-22 and B-2. The cranked trailing edge provides the aerodynamic and structural benefits of a tapered wing and helps shield the engine inlet from radar. Canted upper and power body sides meet at a sharp chine line, continuous from nose to tail, thereby avoiding the radar cross-section hot spot caused by a curved side.

The thickness and curvature of the inboard wing are noteworthy, pointing to an effort to achieve laminar flow over as much of the wing as possible. The prototype carries tufts over the left wing/body junction that allow engineers to visualize airflow in that area.

General Atomics Aeronautical’s parent company includes a division that produces materials for controlling radar, optical and infrared signatures. Adjacent to the company’s Rancho Bernardo, Calif., facility are the world’s largest indoor radar cross section testing ranges. Likely challenges would have included building a “bandpass” radome for the satcom antenna above the nose. It must be transparent at the Ku-band used by most airborne satcoms, but opaque at lower frequencies used by fighter and missile radars. Again, that capability mimics the F-22 and F-35.

The aircraft was designed so the wings can be folded for storage in hangars or aircraft carrier operations if a naval customer is found. Cassidy, a retired admiral, has talked about a possible Navy role for Predator C since 2002. The Navy was interested in the Predator B’s capabilities, but didn’t want to introduce any new propeller-driven aircraft onto carrier decks. The UAV also comes with a tailhook, suggesting that carrier-related trials are planned. The inner section of the cranked wing is deep, providing structural strength for carrier landings and generous fuel volume while maintaining a dry, folding outer wing. Right now, the U.S. Air Force and Royal Air Force are considered the most likely users.

The Avenger has landing gear from the F-5 aircraft and anti-skid brakes. It uses a laser altimeter and a vertical indicator has been added to the head-up display. At 100 ft. the laser altimeter comes on. If the pilot puts a “caret” in the middle of the indicator it will keep the aircraft at a proper pitch for the landing and eliminate pilot-induced oscillations caused by the parallax effect between a pilot’s vision from a manned aircraft cockpit and that of the UAV’s onboard visual sensor.

The Avenger made its first flights Apr. 4, 13 and 14 in a test program that is slated to last 2-3 months. With customer funding, in 10-12 months operational aircraft could be rolling out of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ new, expanded production facilities in Poway, Calif., that opened four weeks ago, Cassidy says.

Predator A and B production had been occupying the company’s Rancho Bernardo facility, but two factors have left plenty of room for manufacturing the Avenger and what’s being described as a highly modified Predator B-plus design. First, Predator A production is being phased out as more advanced models are fielded. Second, six buildings have been acquired at the new Poway facility with 1.2 million sq. ft. for manufacturing, about three times that at Rancho Bernardo. The research and development facility at Adelanto has also doubled in size. The composite fabrication facility remains in Sabre Springs.

While company officials won’t discuss their investment in the Avenger program, they will say it is about twice what they spent to develop the Predator B, primarily because it took longer.

The piston-engine Predator A (MQ-1) first offered long endurance and a weapons-firing capability. The turboprop Predator B (MQ-9) greatly increased the weapons payload, speed and operational altitude. The Predator C now adds additional speed for quicker response and rapid repositioning for mission flexibility and survivability.

With first flight of the Predator C and plans to start cutting the manned aircraft force structure, opponents are gearing up to object.

In a roundtable for reporters, Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, revealed a vision for a new tactical aircraft force structure that includes a high, medium and low cost and performance mix of aircraft wrapped around the F-22 Raptor, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and armed UAVs like the turboprop-powered Predator B Reaper. However, the Reaper, unlike the manned Raptor and JSF, is not low-observable. In contrast, the Avenger’s signature has been reduced through shaping and elimination of a propeller.

The tactical force structure would be supplemented with F-16Cs, F-15Cs and F-15Es upgraded with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars that increase radar ranges by 2-3 times and allow detection of small, even stealthy objects including cruise missiles, stealth aircraft and very small ground targets.

Opponents see a threat in the decision by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Cartwright to include armed UAVs within the fighter force structure. Critics view this as a first, false step driven by economic rather than military considerations that will lead to the substitution of “Reapers, and later Predator Cs, for F-35 JSFs,” says a long-time fighter pilot, acquisition official and senior Air Force leader.

However, this does overlook a basic planning element in the JSF program from the start: that the stealthy strike aircraft would be pitted—for competitive reasons in later production lots—against unmanned combat aircraft."

looks super promising...equally well suited for recce and for combat summore...really hope this one doesn't get binned by the higher-ups...

Won't be cheap. Last year, Germany bought 5 MQ-9s at US$41m each + 4 ground stations and only 1 yr maintenance support. Italy bought 4 MQ-9s at US$82m each with 3 ground stations and 5 yrs maintenance support.

just wondering, remembered reading somewhere that the C variant may have been designed with carrier operations in mind,

would unmanned aircraft be useful on a SLOC baby/escort carrier ? what are the tradeoffs in comparison to a F35B ?

Eh... not really. Ask the OV-1 Mohawk :lol:

UAVs are Robert Gates pet project... as long as he is around I don't think they will suffer for lack of funding.