X-47B Makes First Arrested Landing on USS Bush

Bob wrote:I don't know about those fancy airplanes,  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around a ship named The USS Bush.  

p.s.  to Z.
I was passing by a magazine rack at the drugstore this morning.  I spotted a special edition of Time Magazine about robots.  And has a section devoted to drones.  It's a whole tabloid on the topic with text and lots of pictures and is selling for $16.99 so of course I didn't buy it.  But I did stand there for a while reading it.  Really mindblowing stuff.
When I got home I tried to find something about it on the internet but instead I found this NYT article.  You'll enjoy reading it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/business/new-wave-of-adept-robots-is-changing-global-industry.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

knothead wrote:In fifty years we won't have anyone to castigate at the Tailhook Convention!

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:[fl

The unmanned X-47B is the first step toward making the Naval Aviator obsolete. Instead we will have geeks sitting at computer consoles, and maybe not even on the carrier, but in some office building in the States.

I will have to read about this historical event in Aviation Week when they write their story on it. Supposedly, the X-47 incorporates autonomous landing technology that the Navy wants to incorporate into its manned aircraft. This way, the Navy will not have to waste fuel, wear and tear on air frames, and flight hours training pilots to land on carriers. The planes will instead land themselves.

Perhaps NoChain can comment on this, as I was not a fixed-wing aviator, and did not deploy much aboard ships.[/color]

nochain wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:[fl

The unmanned X-47B is the first step toward making the Naval Aviator obsolete. Instead we will have geeks sitting at computer consoles, and maybe not even on the carrier, but in some office building in the States.

I will have to read about this historical event in Aviation Week when they write their story on it. Supposedly, the X-47 incorporates autonomous landing technology that the Navy wants to incorporate into its manned aircraft. This way, the Navy will not have to waste fuel, wear and tear on air frames, and flight hours training pilots to land on carriers. The planes will instead land themselves.

Perhaps NoChain can comment on this, as I was not a fixed-wing aviator, and did not deploy much aboard ships.[/color]

There is certainly a place for systems like this, I don't think they will replace a carrier aviator entirely though. An on-scene pilot can react instantly to a suddenly changing situation whereas an unmanned A/C has layers of controls to negotiate before a response. You also have to consider both shipboard systems and aircraft systems. The stability of the shipboard system is influenced by weather (particularly moisture affecting sensors and the like), ship movement in multiple dimensions, and wind gusts. These factors are what carrier pilots fight constantly. If the ACLS is functioning properly with no delays between shipboard signals being received and processed by the landing A/C everything is cool. The current manned ACLS version is mature but it's nice to know there is a pilot sitting there ready to grab the controls should things go sideways. The unmanned A/C will have many uses that can reduce the number of manned flights (general recon, etc). I think overall the concept is timely and necessary.