Article

2006-11-30 Science & Technology

Boeing Demonstrates UAV Automated Aerial Refueling Capability

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 3dc 2006-11-30 01:48|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Well alrightey kool then. Whens the UAV vs UAV Dogfighting beginna - let the UAV Bikini Babe Calendar Wars begin???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-11-30 02:50|| 2006-11-30 02:50|| Front Page Top

#2 I think the nose art on UAV's will be more on the lines of naked semiconductors, Joe.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-11-30 03:18|| 2006-11-30 03:18|| Front Page Top

#3 ...Does anybody remember in Tom Clancy's The Bear And The Dragon that the UAVs were named after 50's glamour queens - Marilyn, Jayne, and Mamie?

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2006-11-30 07:53|| 2006-11-30 07:53|| Front Page Top

#4 For a moment Mike, I thought you meant Mamie Eisenhower.

(Shudder)

Posted by GORT 2006-11-30 08:33|| 2006-11-30 08:33|| Front Page Top

#5 I thought you meant Mamie Eisenhower.

That's HOT!

Posted by Paris Hilton 2006-11-30 08:38|| 2006-11-30 08:38|| Front Page Top

#6 GORT,
LOL! That's Mamie van Doren, who's still happy, healthy and out there:
http://www.mamievandoren.com/

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2006-11-30 10:24|| 2006-11-30 10:24|| Front Page Top

#7 BTW, that link is NSFW....

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2006-11-30 10:25|| 2006-11-30 10:25|| Front Page Top

#8 LOL I would pay good money for a calender of UAV chicks. If the ground crews want to start a fund raiser with the squints (image explotation crew) that might be a winner. BTW a lot of the squints were female and most were mighty good looking. Heck they could even be fully clothed and in uniform.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2006-11-30 10:35|| 2006-11-30 10:35|| Front Page Top

#9 More good news from Boeing, even without any mention of Airbus.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-11-30 12:02|| 2006-11-30 12:02|| Front Page Top

#10 My only question: while they demonstrated the ability to fly a UAV simulator into the probe, what will the actual UAV do? There are an awful lot of funny air currents around the aft end of the KC-135 (or any tanker for that matter). And this doens't address the NAVY IFR protocol, which has the receiving aircraft fly a probe into a badmiton-shaped basket (just the opposite of the USAF). Carrier based tankers are not big enough to afford the luxury of a flying boom style system, and then there are all attendant logistical and maintenance issues of trying to maintain 2 completely different systems on the boat.

OK, so that was more than 1 question. Sue me.

Posted by USN, ret. 2006-11-30 15:03|| 2006-11-30 15:03|| Front Page Top

#11 All good questions, USN. And just the sort of problems that give engineers little mental woodies. The key word here is "demonstates". This is just one step in a proof-of-concept.

Your point about maintaining multiple systems is a good one. Over time, I would expect a feature like this would become part of the standard avionics package for naval aircraft.

Posted by SteveS 2006-11-30 17:08|| 2006-11-30 17:08|| Front Page Top

#12 Steve: I was referring more to the nuts and bolts systems: those other than avionics, since one computer can be electronically reconfigured for several type/model/series of aircraft. At PAX River we had about eleventeen versions of lawn darts (f-18) each with its own software version. if a computer went TU, we simply pulled one from the hangar queen and had it rebooted to match the broken one and stuck it in to make the flight schedule. it was a full time job tracking that however, as the wrong version would make the a/c do some interesting things, most of which were not at all fun for the guy in the seat.
the maintaining of multiple mechanical systems and all the associated bit piece parts, especially if they all 'kinda look the same' can be a real ball breaker. example for the non airdales: chevy engine parts from as far back as 1935 can be bolted on very late models; you cannot say that about fords (and i have blue ovals in the driveway) replacement parts configuration control is very particular.

OT: several of my engineer friends take offense at the little woodie snark. HAHAHAH

Posted by USN,Ret 2006-11-30 22:59|| 2006-11-30 22:59|| Front Page Top

#13 OT: several of my engineer friends take offense at the little woodie snark.

Heh. No offense meant! Merely a figure of speech to describe an interesting set of problems.

we had about eleventeen versions of lawn darts

Hmmm. I was under the obviously incorrect impression that all instances of a particular platform were configured as Block whatever. Thanks.

Posted by SteveS 2006-11-30 23:26|| 2006-11-30 23:26|| Front Page Top

07:34 Besoeker
14:10 Zenster
23:58 JosephMendiola
23:49 BA
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:45 JosephMendiola
23:32 KBK
23:30 Jan
23:26 SteveS
23:23 Icerigger
23:21 trailing wife
23:21 FOTSGreg
23:19 Icerigger
23:18 Icerigger
23:14 Icerigger
23:10 Ptah
23:09 Icerigger
23:08 BA
23:06 Icerigger
22:59 USN,Ret
22:54 Captain America
22:52 .com
22:46 Elmert Crosh5077
22:40 Mick Dundee