Slashdot Mirror
Robot Plane Makes Unaided U.S.-Australia Crossing
PenguinRadio writes: "Yahoo Australia is reporting an unmanned U.S. aircraft recently flew from the US to Australia, smashing an endurance record for remotely controlled aircraft. The Global Hawk reconnaissance jet arrived in Adelaide 14 minutes ahead of schedule after a non-stop flight of more than 23 hours. The Air Force has some pictures and more news on their site as well." Update: 04/24 7:26 AM by michael : This is a follow-up to our story a few days ago.
I suppose I'm a pedant, but "endurance" means time aloft, not distance flown. This plane set a record for distance flown by a robotic plane, not the record for time aloft.
I can't see how less than 24 hours en route qualifies for an endurance record, since a small (10 foot wingspan) robotic propeller-driven plane called an "Aerosonde" crossed the atlantic in August 1998, taking about 26 hours 45 minutes. In fact, I seem to remember that /. carried that story, though
I don't find it in a quick search.
I did find a few other stories from that time, though, at ABC and EXN, and you can always visit Aerosonde Robotic Aircraft if you are interested.
I think, but do not know, that there have been robotic flights longer in duration than that, but I don't have time to look for them now. :-)
-- "Ever wonder why the SAME PEOPLE make up ALL the conspiracy theories?"
Honestly, just flying unrefueled is fairly trivial, and as for guidance, does the term "cruise missile" ring a bell?
I wonder how it's programmed to respond to other aircraft in the same airspace?
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
With a name like Tandem Thrust, you'd think this was part of a raunchy 80's metal band, not a military operation. What's the follow-on to this, Turgid Probe?
--
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
What's interesting is that Global Hawk represents the fulfillment of the original goal of the old Teledyne Ryan Compass Cope project from the 1960's: a very high-altitude unmanned reconnaissance drone.
However, with access to GPS signals plus a real-time satellite link, Global Hawk can precisely controlled to fly over areas of military interest, unlike the Compass Cope drone, which was flown on a pre-programmed route.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Actually, Global Hawk has a built-in satellite communications antenna, which does allow for real-time monitoring and adjustment of flight route.
This makes it much more flexible than the old Teledyne Ryan Compass Cope RPV from the 1960's, which was designed for a fairly similar mission to Global Hawk but flew on a pre-programmed profile. Also, the nice thing about Global Hawk is that you don't need a dedicated launch aircraft like what the Compass Cope RPV's required, which saves a lot on operational costs.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
However, no public source has published what is the radar cross section (RCS) of Global Hawk.
If Global Hawk's shape has been tuned for low RCS with a combination of designing the shape to be naturally low in RCS and the plane's skin uses radar-absorbent materials, then even that new Chinese SAM will have great difficulty trying to shoot it down, especially when you fly it at over 65,000 feet altitude.
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
You know the earlier attempt is still sitting in a hangar, waiting for its compliment of lemon-soaked napkins...
Kevin Fox
--
Kevin Fox
Yeah, but it doesn't have to not hit anything, does it?
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
"Aiight Wang Wei, you wanna play Chicken? I'm flying this plane 5000 miles away, sitting on an Aeron chair and sipping Mountain Dew. Let's show you who's gonna be Chicken now!"
Remote controlled planes have already existed for a long time (called drones), but have the disadvantage of not being radio-silent (have to permantently transmit back instruments reading, camera view, etc) to the base station, which makes them unfortunately easy to detect...
smashing an endurance record for remotely controlled aircraft
I guess this does say aircraft, but I would think that Voyager (or V'ger) would have to hold the endurance record for a remotely controlled anything.
- passion
Chances are that the raw data are NOT being sent anywhere in real time. This is mostly conjecture, but I have some experience with a related weapons system. Some data may get processed and sent out over a tactical or theater datalink, but most of it is analyzed right on the platform. So the mission crew is analyzing the sensor data and providing that digested information to the theater commanders. This includes voice comm intercepts, radar analysis, etc. So the guys on the EP-3 can tell the commander "we have x many aircraft of y type at location z, and we just heard the flight leader say 'foo', so we know what their intentions are."
Keep in mind that the variety of sensors on an EP-3 probably greatly exceeds that on the Global Hawk. The EP-3 has all manner of RADAR and radio intercept gear. Trying to push all of that data off the aircraft in realtime would likely overwhelm the available satellite bandwidth - your average satellite channel has less throughput than a modem, remember.
Long term the goal is to replace a lot of the surveillance/airborne C2 assets (E-3, EP-3, RC-135, etc) with UAVs, but the bandwidth availability is going to have to improve before that becomes possible.
Neutron
I get my kicks above the
Since Vietnam, it seems that the primary political barrier blocking the military from entering the war of it's choice is the threat of loss of lives.
It's my (unproven) theory that with each military invention that allows the military to strike without reduced risk of loss of life, there is a proportional increase in the willingness to go to war. "Go to war? Why not? All we have to do is hit this button here and an army of robot tanks and planes will raze country foo to the ground. Unless someone trips on carpet and bangs thier head on the sharp metal corner of the control panel, thus dying from a serious head injury, the risk of loss of life is zero." Doesn't that sound like something Congress would be more willing to do than, "We can have a hundred thousand men on thier shores in less than 24 hours. Our analysists guess that the foo counter-strike will cause about a 10% level of casulties for our side, somewhere around ten thousand casulties. Shall we attack?"
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
It's a cool achievement and all...it just seems a little low-key compared to the other interplanetary adventures that remote-piloted machines have these days.
drop bombs to kill friendly troops (without consequence)?
sink the occassional fishing vessel (without consequence)?
piss off Chinese fighter pilots (with the consequence of a slight delay in travel plans)?
guide foreign military powers in their endeavors to shoot down those obnoxious missionary planes (no admission = no consequence)?
Maybe our galoots in green should spend more time working with their human capital than with these nifty machines. Or maybe these robo-planes will be just as good at mistaken-maiming once they've gotten Uncle Sam's healthy dose of "kill 'em all and let the tradewinds sort 'em out" training.
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
>Does anyone know why the USAF would fly it to RAAF Edinburgh
>in Adelaide, rather than RAAF Townsville or RAAF Williamtowm?
The US military discovered that a Japanese fishing trawler was located offshore of Townsville. For unknown reasons, the flight was mysteriously diverted to Edinburgh...
Shaun
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
Oddly enough, the robotic pilot demanded 3 quarts of alcohol for... "fuel" before it would make the flight.
---
They actually do..
There was a robot, name of Dante II, which was tested in the Redoubt, Spurr and Erebus volcanoes, which are near Anchorage, AK.
Brant
Brant
Argle. Bargle.
I wonder if Austrailia is going to refuse to give the plane back until we apologize for landing it in there country?
... that the US will supplement its ICBMs with inter-continental cruise missiles? These would have the advantage of flying in under the radar, so to speak...
What I wonder is why space-robot designers don't practice by sending autonomous probes to mountain tops, into deserts, to the bottom of the sea, etc.
The specifics are all different, but the principle is the same: this thing has to work on its own, outside the lab, for long periods of time with nobody to replace the battery or change the oil. You could easily build 50 earth-exploring robots for every space-explorer.
So much experience to be gained... it just seems a waste to send up these amateurish space probes with millions worth of rocket and fuel.
--