Army "Future": Fewer Drones
The other day, Inside Defense broke the news that the Army was shaving billions off of its massive modernization program, Future Combat Systems. Now, we're starting to get some details. Turns out the drones are the ones getting the axe.
FCS originally envisioned four types and sizes of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, buzzing over soldiers' heads. The littlest ones would join platoons. Slightly bigger drones would be assigned to companies. Batallion commanders would supervise an even larger UAV. And the biggest of 'em all -- an armed, robotic helicopter -- would work for the brigade.
Those four classes of UAVs are now being trimmed down to two; just the tiniest and the most gargantuan drones will remain. There will still be other robotic planes in the Army's arsenal -- the hand-held Ravens, the Shadows, and the big, high-flying, bad-ass Warriors.
But the move is the latest in a series of efforts to scale down the once-grandiose FCS vision. First to go were the all-electric, laser-firing, next-gen fighting vehicles. Then, the requirement that those vehicles fit into a C-130 transport plane. And after that, the high-tech uniforms that were supposed to electronically tie the grunts to the larger Army. With the vehicles' designs still very much in flux -- and with the network connecting all of those drones and vehicles together still facing major roadblocks -- who knows what will be left, when FCS finally deploys?
UPDATE 3:55 AM: Speaking of those little Raven drones, it looks like the Marines will start using 'em, too. Inside Defense says that the Corps has given up on its own mini-UAV, the Dragon Eye. During the Iraq invasion, Marines found the drone "too flimsy," and didn't stay in the air nearly long enough. Some fixes were made. But the things still had a nasty habit of "break[ing] apart upon repeated landings." So it's out with the Dragon Eyes. In with the sturdier Ravens.
Stumbled upon here doing a search on lighter than air rigid envelope. Anyhow...
I'll also vouch for a rigid envelope lighter-than-air craft. The outside skin would be a hard, yet thin and lightweight carbon or kevlar composite. The inside would be mylar or urethane bags filled with helium. The entire shape would be an aerofoil, possibly symetric. The way to describe it is that it resembles a "pregnant" B-2.
Advantages? Unlike a conventional lighter than air craft, the hard outside is designed to not deform at higher speeds. Thus you should be able to surpass 100MPH without envelope deformation, so it will not peel like a bananna and self-destruct from resulting turbulence. (Something that seems to be an issue with typical soft-skinned lighter than air vehicles.) This thing could set lighter than air speed records that would embarass the Graf Zeppelin. Obviously, it will tolerate wind a lot better than conventional airships due to its profile and hard envelope.
The other advantage with a rigid composite envelope, is that by designing it as an aerofoil structure - it can do "buoyant gliding". That is when positively buoyant, you can shift the center of gravity back. The buoyant force will push it up, and displaced air is directed back. So it's gliding forward as it goes up without any additional propulsive means. (Think of buoyant force acting in the place of gravity in traditional gliding.) Then you can glide downward in the conventional manner by shifting the center of gravity forward and reducing buoyancy. Thus it would be possible to engage in forward flight by simple use of a buoyant/gravitational porpoising behavior. This would be a very stealthy way to approach, as it would make no more noise other than that of the air being displaced by the envelope. Also think of it as a really neat way to slow cruise efficiently. Then again, if you need it - use the props or fanjets and you can cruise at more conventional aircraft speeds.
Definitely not your typical blimp, nor your zeppelin either. Think of it more as a unique "airplane that floats".
Posted by: pauljs75 at January 4, 2007 2:41 AM