Taking the pilot out of the fighter was supposed to make things easier – and cheaper. It’s time for the UCAV community to prove it
This week heralds a key event in the history of the US Air Force and Navy’s Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) project, as management of the multi-billion dollar effort moves from the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to military control. But the 1 November transfer of power will not be a smooth one, with the services yet to agree on what they want from an operational unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV).
To an outsider, the J-UCAS programme appears to be in disarray, following the recent loss of $1 billion in funding and continuous shifts to service perceptions of what a production UCAV will actually do. The USAF did little to dispel this impression last week, when a programme official revealed a projected $60 million price tag for an operational air vehicle, but added that perhaps three different designs will be required to satisfy current requirements. Put simply, the project – a forced marriage not only between the USAF and USN, but also between industry rivals Boeing and Northrop Grumman – cannot do what it says on the tin. The USAF wants an air vehicle capable of delivering suppression of enemy air defences, air-to-air combat and even close-air support like an airborne vending machine, while the navy wants a persistent surveillance and strike platform capable of operating from its aircraft carriers.
Taken at face value, J-UCAS seems to offer an attractive alternative to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), now the focus of numerous reviews among partner nations dissatisfied over its mission effectiveness and spiralling costs, expected to rise towards – and maybe even beyond – the $100 million per unit level.
Proponents argue that potential JSF buyers could skip a generation of fighter aircraft and move straight to operating UCAVs; stealthy platforms capable of conducting dull, dirty and dangerous tasks without threatening the lives of aircrew. The USAF’s current price estimate for an operational system looks tempting, but don’t forget that the F-35 started its life as an affordable aircraft offering three highly common variants – not the message being delivered by the air force for J-UCAS. The warning for anyone eyeing UCAVs is clear – if the cost of an aircraft with a clearly defined mission from day one has gone through the roof, why should you expect a different experience from a project as amorphous as J-UCAS?
While many have become seduced by the lethal promise offered by the UCAV, fundamental questions remain over whether an unmanned system can always do the job better, cheaper and more safely than a manned equivalent. UK planners have also voiced previous concern over the legality and proportionality of using UCAVs, with a senior Royal Air Force official describing such systems as potential “playground bullies”.
With the US services appearing to have vast and rapidly shifting demands for their UCAV – a matt black panacea for the demands of future aerial combat – how can they and industry assert that spending on the project will be half that of the JSF programme?
The unmanned air vehicle community appears no less seduced by the allure of UCAVs than Washington’s suitors ahead of launching the F-35 programmme’s system development and demonstration phase earlier this decade. The current rush of activity to develop combat UAVs is not the preserve of the USA, with Europe racing to keep pace by developing UCAVs potentially capable of joining coalition operations post-2020. Numerous programmes are in the pipeline, with company demonstrators already airborne and Dassault expecting to receive a contract before year-end to proceed with the six-nation Neuron technology demonstrator.
Neuron industry partners Alenia Aeronautica and Saab are currently advancing their fledgling UCAV technology demonstrator efforts, with Alenia’s Sky-X vehicle having recently resumed flight tests and Saab’s Filur platform to follow suit within weeks. European giants BAE Systems and EADS remain tight-lipped about their respective research activities, although the UK company is believed to be close to revealing details on its work into a variety of advanced unmanned system technologies.
Joined-up thinking is needed if potential operators are to enjoy the benefits of UCAVs without blindly turning their backs on the still considerable strengths of manned fighters.
Source: Flight International
