The U.S. Navy has quietly added a capability to its future carrier-launched unmanned warplane that has the potential to tilt the Pacific balance of power. On November 2, the Navy announced it would add equipment and software for aerial refueling to one of its two in-development X-47B armed drones built by Northrop Grumman.
The change could extend, by thousands of miles, the useful striking range of the Navy’s nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, starting in around seven years’ time. That could put them beyond the effective range of the fast attack vessels, diesel-powered submarines and anti-ship ballistic missiles that China is developing in order to create a defensive perimeter around the Western Pacific.
The first X-47 took off on its inaugural flight in California in February. The roughly 40-foot-long pilotless warplane, which is largely autonomous but can also be controlled remotely by a pilot sitting in front of a computer screen, is scheduled to begin carrier tests sometime in 2013.
According to last week’s announcement, the X-47B will follow the carrier tests with in-air refueling trials in 2014. The modified X-47 will be compatible with Navy- and Air Force-style refueling gear, lending it maximum flexibility.
The Navy and Air Force use flying tankers to extend the range of their warplanes. But even with aerial refueling, traditional manned aircraft are limited by the endurance of their human pilots. A typical sortie by a Navy F/A-18 Hornet fighter travels no more than 450 miles and lasts just a few hours.
The approximately 450-mile striking range of today’s carrier air wings could force the Navy to sail into China's main defensive zone in order to launch strikes on Chinese targets, thereby placing the carriers at risk.
But an unpiloted aircraft could fly as long as its equipment functioned and its onboard supply of lubricants and other fluids held out – ranging potentially thousands of miles over several days of flight. Carriers with armed, aerially-refueled drones could strike targets anywhere in the Pacific from mid-ocean safe zones.
It’s for that reason that a small contingent of analysts and officials fought to save the $1.5 billion X-47B development effort during a time, three years ago, when it was threatened by budget cuts and opposition from the Navy’s deeply traditional senior pilots. In 2008, analysts from the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments gave the X-47 a 50-50 chance of being canceled in the next budget.
So CSBA analysts Robert Work and Tom Ehrhard produced a hard-hitting report extolling the X-47’s virtues. And in early 2009, the Barack Obama administration tapped Work to be the Navy’s new undersecretary. Work’s growing influence guaranteed the X-47’s survival, and the decision to add refueling gear ensured it would meet its maximum military potential.
The Navy aims to equip its carriers with an operational, X-47-style drone warplane beginning in 2018.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
dr.venkat .s.k
i am very happy to know ex-47b drones n its commissioning in to US NAVY and air force.i want the america and NATO should have a strong deterrence force in pacific,in Asia n in the world for a peace in Asia and the global peace.better to install TMS,DMS N MC in close proximity to china and a strategic alliance with India will stop the Chinese aggression and its evil tetrad like pak,north Korea n Iran.better to destroy the devil before it destroys other free nations in Asia.china should change in to good free n friendly democratic nation or the red china should be trimmed of its wings.china should be DETTERED to prevent its aggressiveness.
Brad
Yang Zi and John Chan are just upset that by making a simple upgrade and adding extra fuel tanks and a line boom, we have extended the range of our these drones beyone the range of their “carrier killer.”
I would also say to Yang Zi that these drones are not slow and if you will notice they have similar characteristics to a B-2, but smaller. B-2s are also sub-sonic and we have never lost one in combat.
Im excited to see if they are able to refuel a manned plane such as a B-1 or B-2 with these. China’s plans are to go after our refuelers and soft easy targets that even their poorly trained piolts have chance of hitting. It would be funny to change things on them and make our refuelers stealth.
Brad
It would be interesting to see the total fleet wide (once we have a fleet) cost of the refueling upgrade versus the cost of the DF-21 missile program. This upgrade makes the DF-21 a highly capable paper weight and is obviously much less costly per unit.
We just beat China at its own game.
Now these drones will be able to take out DF-21 sites and then the carrier will move in closer for the kill with F-35’s and our surface fleet.
Yang zi
Sure Brad, you are right. I am upset China is not as advanced as it should be, that is to be the world leader for science and innovation. But congrats for America’s success.
pierre
Unfortunately China’s goals of world leadership in science and innovation can only be achieved via an elaborate façade; and “face”, my friend, so deeply ingrained in Chinese culture, can never substitute the real thing.
Brad
China couldt not build a water gun if they didnt reverse engineer it from the U.S or Russia first.
applesauce
dr.venkat .s.k, your thinking is exactly why china will continue to develop its “wings”
as for the x-47, the carriers may now be outside of effective strike range of a majority of china main maritime defenses but refueling means that a new weakness exists, that is the un-stealthy, slow tankers, though of course the loss of a couple of tankers will be much cheaper than the loss of a single carrier.
Yang zi
Drones are easy to shoot down because of its slow speed. It is far too early to be effective. The refilling is a gmick to save the program. Beside, the pacific mil
Balance is still in US favor, not changed.
a_canadian_observer
@Yangzi: Agreed! they are no match for the so-called ‘DF21D & J20s’ plus ‘Shilang’, et cetera.
yang zi
candian-observer, you are a school kids, you guys and some posters like venkat, are so juvenile. Chinese DF21 is not a carrier killer, at least not yet. J20 is just a testing platform, the existing US mil machine is overpowering Chinese machines. no body denies that.
a_canadian_observer
@yangzi: “Chinese DF21 is not a carrier killer, at least not yet. J20 is just a testing platform, the existing US mil machine is overpowering Chinese machines. no body denies that.”
Really? You should check out what your comrades such as John Chan, boasted about these machines.
John Chan
@a_canadian_observer,
What else one can expect from a guy’s forte is creative revisionist history writing, it seems you have fabricated so much that you even can’t remember what you have created thru thin air.
ASBM is an USA Naval Intelligence creation to put more oil on the fire of China Threat which was another creation of USA in conjunction with the Fascist Japan.
Putting words in other people’s month than attack against that fabrication relentlessly as fact is what you have been doing since you appeared.
Dave
Perfect! Together with Laser, rail guns, F35B etc. , the so-called ‘DF21D & J20s’ plus ‘Shilang’ will be taken care of far more better!
Steve Gee
So, how long before the X-47B becomes self-aware?
Yang zi
This is the key, but very hard to trust a machine’s judgement. I guess it will be long before it self aware. I am wondering how easy it is to jam these things. These are glorified missiles, effective on terrorist, not air combat or against air defence, of course these are my guesses, it all depends on the software.
The fundermantal question is, is war fighting a creative work or routing work? To drone advocate, it is a routing work, this is wrong IMO. Drones are not ready for prime time yet.
JohnMc
The real power of the x-47B is its nature. Adding refueling just extended its range. The 47 becomes essentially a fire and forget kind of weapon, albeit somewhat expensive. That it can be recovered and used again is just icing on the cake. With the 47 kamakazie is not a moral issue.
Were I the Navy I would look into a possible retrofit of tankers to also be pilotless if need be.
Voyager
Given that he Navy used drogue and probe type refueling, the hard part is done on the receiver’s end. If the drone can receive the refueling drogue, then it is relatively simple to set up a drone to deliver the fuel.
I would strongly expect a buddy tanker loadout for the X-47B to be developed not long after they’ve gotten it refueling automatically.
Mr.Observer
Most of use will witness a nuclear world war in our lifetimes.
Why doesn’t mankind learn from its past mistakes? Interesting.
Leonard R.
@David Axe: “…future carrier-launched unmanned warplane that has the potential to tilt the Pacific balance of power.”
Tilt the balance of power from what to what? I thought China was not a threat in the Pacific.
That’s what the peaceniks at Rand & the 5 RMB’ers keep telling us.
This is a good development. but a clear military doctrine is needed. And I think China wants that too.
It keeps asking for America’s intentions. The US should spell it out to the little emperors.
I suggest this for starters:
1. To chase, attack or collide with a US airplane in international airspace is an act of war.
2. To damage a US vessel is an act of war. This includes acts by so-called ‘fishing boats’.
3. If Pyongyang attacks the US, America will view it as an attack by Beijing.
4. Any cyber attacks on US telecom or satellite interests that appear to originate from Chinese
facilities will be viewed as acts of war by Beijing. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt will not be required.
The drones are good developments. But some US carriers need to stay close-in anyway
during peace time to show the flag. It gets the little emperors all riled up.
Reason
@Leonard R
It’s the 5 Jiao or wǔmáo – Not 5 RMBers. Even I would write good comments for the CCP if they were paying 5 RMB a pop
Hahaha
Leonard R.
@reason thank you for correcting me on that.
How should one say it, 5 Jiao’ers?
@John Chan
JC always has the US interest close at heart.
I personally value doctrinal clarity. I don’t want the US government to have very much flexibility
if China attacks a US ship or downs a US plane. I want the US to respond with overwhelming force.
Reason
wǔmáo
Wooo-Mao-ers
Leonard R.
Woo Maoers.
I like it!
John Chan
@Leonard R.
Please make some sense, if USA spells out as you suggested, the USA will paint itself in the corner, and loses all the flexibility to play while keeps its pretence of world leader. Gee, I have never seen such insidious attempt to put USA in such draconian jeopardy, and only Indian and Vietnamese can figure out such dire fit for the USA.
PapaJohn
@ Leonard R.,
I agree. America has been so nice for too long with the cowboy China. This could be seen as a paper tiger for some Chinese bloggers here. It is right time to get touch. I myself love to see the US Seventh Fleet humble the entire Chinese South Sea Fleet for the world to see.
a_canadian_observer
@Dave:
Please keep your voice down! these are no match for the so-called ‘DF21D & J20s’ plus ‘Shilang’, et cetera!
Reason
Anyone who is mildly interested in aircraft has probably been fascinated with planes since they were knee high to a grasshopper –
So, when new generational stuff comes out, the mind just twinkles at the possibilities.
The X-47 has this in spades- think Battle Star Galactica – Star Wars Tie-fighters and Sidewinders without the pilots
This is the future of air combat – if you’re a US Navy pilot you may hate this, likewise if you’re a China nationalist.
When I look at the J-20, I don’t see the future of air war. I see an old design, still rooted in the technology of canards, pilots and limited sortes – so it really isn’t credible that the Chinese stealth program is going to be anything other than a “also ran”
If China rolls out some X-47 derivative and completely scraps the J-15 Shark – jumping straight to UCAV for the Varyag…. then it will be time to really take notice that “Leap Frogging” is actually working.
But in reality, the PLA is stuck playing catch up on 20thC tech, while the competitor is defining the 21stC
Linh Viet
Gentlemen, I’m sure China has various models like the X-47B Drones and even better looking ones; one thing though, they are all in plastics!
John Chan
@Linh Viet,
Yes, China’s planes are made of nano carbon tubes, a kind of plastic in according to your level of technical knowledge. I bet you that X-47B is made of stainless steel, shinny and every lasting.
yang zi
John Chan, I wouldn’t bother with this kind of school yard taunting posts, especially from posters from Vietnam, which is much poorer and backward technologically and has a GPD smaller than some Chinese cities
a_canadian_observer
@yangzi: “John Chan, I wouldn’t bother with this kind of school yard taunting posts, especially from posters from Vietnam, which is much poorer and backward technologically and has a GPD smaller than some Chinese cities”
Nobody is surprised about your attitude here. The irony is “rich” and “forward technologically (although most are stolen)” china with people like you having “school yard taunting posts”. Go ahead, do a poll and see if people respect china and people like you.
Cam Ranh
China is lacking of both leadership and self respect. Kept stealing other countries’ IP and shamelessly copy everything in order to make fake products. Just look at china’s dangerous high speed trains as an example. I would never get on a plane made in china, if they would ever could made one by themselves. For a manned spaceship, please do us a favour, dont crash it on people house.
John Chan
@Cam Ranh,
The only possibility that you would never get on a plane made by China is you are dirt poor and can never afford to travel by air, because every plane in the world contains parts from China, particular planes from Boeing and Airbus.
a_canadian_observer
@John Chan:
1. Can you educate us which parts from china are in Boeing and Airbus?
2. Are these parts, chinese designs and builds? or are they actullay parts designed in the West which china is contracted to manufacture?
John Chan
@a_canadian_observer,
Things that Vietnamese, Filipino and Canadian cannot do doesn’t mean others are as incapable and incompetent as they are. These nations are warehouse economy, China’s industrial capabilities are beyond their scope of mind, in order to hide their jealous and resentment of China’s achievement they are smearing China relentlessly.
a_canadian_obsever
@John Chan: As predicted, you could not come up with a single fact/link to substantiate any of your statements. You just have to dance around the issue. Good job!
James_001
This UCAV is small glorified RC aircraft How much bomb can it carry to begin with. It is like mosquitos try to bite a buffalo. If it ever can reach the mainland before getting shot to pieces
Completely irrelevant. It will be a long time until UCAV replace the manned aircraft
Reason
And don’t forget the 800 B-52s with “stand-off” cruise missiles
Reason
@ James_001
Erh…. all the life support systems that need to go into supporting a pilot are taken out and the significant weight loss can be substituted with payload, fuel etc… So in essence the plane can be smaller lighter but have equal or even more payload than a conventional plane.
Admittedly, the plane may look like a mosquito, but they’ll be packing for sure.
These are the bad boys that will be taking down all of PLA’s over the horizon radars and frontline defenses, so that expensive SAM web is left in tatters for the F-22 and the B-2s to finish off… oh, and then you’ll get the F-35s, the F18s and the F-15s to really close down the show.
The PLA boys are gonna have to have a miracle to even know where the enemy is – probably why the nuclear option is so close to hand for them cus even now, the PLA is, in all honesty, is no match for a concerted effort by the US and its allies?
Oh, and did I mention the unfettered US sub fleet as well cus they’d be wreaking havoc too.
Like I said, there’s 20thC war and there’s 21stC war
China only ever mastered People’s War, they flirted with mechanized war and left with a nasty taste… and now China wants to conduct Informationized War – well we’ll see how that works out for them
yang zi
@Reason, you are right about Chinese trying to win information wars. on the future wars, don’t count China out, there are projects just look at what war looks like 30 years out.
on the drones and subs etc, you have to think what happens after the first shot is fired. it betrays your position! of course what China can do about it is another question, it may not able to do anything.
nuclear option should be considered and pursued by China aggresively, it is the cheapest and quickest way to prevent war.
vendor
china needs to work hard to catch up in U.S weapons and technology.. but in their ambitous dream of dominance is stupidly enough to fight U.S, hope they get lucky when they try..
Cuu Long
Most of the weaponry technologies in China are stolen or copycat. Both commercial and military products quality are still very low. Along with that, they also had a bad corruption problem which caused their products performance unpredictable… BAD.
John Chan
@Vendor,
Physical means to deter an imperialistic militarism adventurist from wondering into China’s territory is just carrying out law and order of a nation’s sovereignty. It has to be done regardless the weapons the thug carries.
james001
Right as if UCAV is magic wand well. It might strike a fear in terrorist clad in pyjama and sandal but against well armed foe it is nothing but irritant. China has thousand of Bistatic pole radar that can easily detect UCAV.
China is no slouch when it come to UCAV
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzA2OTg3NzQw.html
Failing that the close in weapon like LD 2000 can make minch meat out of UCAV
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/antiaircraft/ld2000.asp
Reason
@James – your first link crashed my Safari
The second link – the LD 2000 is a field weapon – not a theater weapon. It has an operation range of just 6km for the missiles and 1.5km for the guns – how is this thing gonna shoot down a UCAV?
In the words of The Untouchables
“Typical XXXXX, turns up to a gun fight with a knife.”
a_canadian_observer
@Reason: In the first link, youku is just a copy of youtube.
T W Fishane
It’s the economy stupid. Build new weapons and brag all you like but if you can’t run an economy then the Soviet Union is an important lesson but somebody couldn’t be bothered.
SCdad07
Another weapon!
With so much superior weapons, what did they do for US in Iraq and Afghan?
Bwest
Considering how bad the Russians got Mauled by the afghans, Id say alot.
DownRedChina
China is so strong. Exxon is partnered with Vietnam for oil exploration at coastal of Danang. Chinaman go ahead and cut Exxon’s cables. Cowards China!
LungShaShou
That Chan fellow seems to think that he knows all sees all understands all but the wuality of his argument is about at the level of a 1st grader’s “IS NOT” “BECAUSE I SAID SO”.
Intellectual lightweight in a bully boy uniform.
Regime Sausage produced by indoctrination and ignorance.
An original thought or a moral perspective would shatter his tiny mind.