that’s the frustrating part with the cope — the focus is on the air dominance drones from the 9/3 parade when there are two other drones displayed that look inexpensive and relatively attritable.
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
So is our focus. It is understandable for fanboys like us to focus on the more prestigious halo projects and flagship platforms. These "lesser" things often make a greater contribution to a military.
The two (actually three since we know of the other ugly CCA they pulled from the parade) CCAs appear to be higher performance CCAs than the American programs (not including Lockmart's Vectis and Northrop's). They are slightly larger and have larger engines, hinting at being powered by engines in the 30KN to 60KN category. I posted a summary of the US CCA programs in the drones thread and they were all 7KN to 30KN.
I suspect China knows this CCA (this one's a mockup) below is basically the limit of usefulness for a CCA before you go down to some drone swarm platform that is capable of air to air. That implies drone swam type of UAVs would be launched from some heavyweight aircraft like H-6, GJ-x or H-20. Maybe even carried by larger missiles. Either way, in terms of individual platforms, this is as small as you go before the platform is close to useless in a peer conflict. It barely carries enough fuel and PL-16 sized missiles for air to air.
Air to ground is another matter and what I think the American CCAs are focusing on. They can't keep up with manned fighters in speed. So essentially we have these American (or allied) CCAs like Ghost Bat, Kratos, Anduril's YFQ-44 are actually more suited to A2G missions since range and loiter time is halfway decent. In this case you should be comparing the in service now and probably second block GJ-11 to the not yet in service Ghost Bat, Kratos and YFQ-44.
The GJ-11 is roughly 60KN max military/dry thrust (no afterburner) vs all these US drones with between 8KN and 20KN. The GJ-11 is also far more stealthy than the YFQ-44 and likely more stealthy than the tailed Ghost Bat and Kratos.
If you want to talk air to air, these things barely can be a match for this ~10m length, ~5m wingspan CCA. Thrust I estimate would be no less than 30KN given its size relative to the 140KN WS-10X powered UADFs.
This CCA is not that much smaller than a GJ-11 and it's clearly more of air to air focused. Why have this as A2G when GJ-11 has better range and loiter time (time in air) with flying wing configuration and superior stealth. This CCA clearly has higher top speed than GJ-11... unknown if supersonic but wing sweep angle and fuselage to wingspan ratio does suggest supersonic. Supersonic A2A missile launch. What is a Kratos or Ghost Bat or YFQ-44 in front of this? Like comparing a superbike with a scooter.
Honestly the American CCA programs like Ghost Bat, Kratos and YFQ-44 is quite confounding. Was thinking they are going in the wrong direction until Lockmart and Northrop announced they have proper heavy CCA/ UADF programs. These three (Ghost Bat, Kratos, YFQ-44) are glorified target drones. They need to be at least 1.5x larger and bring >30KN engines unless they're mostly doing ISR and A2G. A2A demands far more energy, energy density and size for at least 2x AMRAAMs.
Last edited:
all the 'target drone' stuff flying right now falls under cca increment 1, so yeah, they're just platforms to work out the logistics and control of ccas for integration into the force structure. they're not any good for actual warfighting, but that's not their purpose either.
increment 2 which is like the vectis is where they intend to bring on actual capabilities.
increment 2 which is like the vectis is where they intend to bring on actual capabilities.
Correct.
All their talk of Increment 1 and Increment 2 indicates their desire to produce UADFs.
On this front, Lockmart and Northrup Grumman have only recently started working on their Increment 2 CCAs which we should consider as UADF class aircraft.
By the time they get theirs into service, PLAAF's would be approximately 7-10 years old. We'll see China's second generation of UADFs flying in testing/evaluation by the time USAF receive their first gen UADFs.
Yup, looks like it has wings & other protruding surfaces as you'd expect. Wouldn't they make it probably less stealthy than even smaller flying wings like GJ-11 though? Not ideal for a nuclear cruise missile, though I suppose kind of unavoidable (as long as you're going with subsonic).
... And the most triggered award goes to...
Clearly triggered by discussions on this forum. Except, where did anyone here make the claim/statement that the US will never produce UADF class drones? Every conversation even those that disparage and mock the US efforts specifically focused on the level of Increment 1 CCA drones which the US have not even been able to field into service yet.
No doubt the US is looking to develop and eventually field UADF class drones as part of Increment 2 which BTW aims to have flying prototypes around 2027. Lockheed Martin's own words and goals, not mine.
So we have China with at least 2 UADFs in service today vs US aiming to produce equivalents and flying prototypes of said equivalents in 2027. Even then, the Northrop Grumman Increment 2 Lotus UADF is not aiming to produce a tailless aircraft. Nevermind that, there are distinct disadvantages surely with going completely tailless - cost, complexity and kinematic performance.
NAFO copium and cries of frustration are getting out of hand. They will double down on anger and denial until some great event. Even then, I suspect they will be as delusional and out of touch with reality as the most hyper-nationalistic Indians.
If anyone checks out that thread and reads up on the X-47B and the claim that it's the most advanced combat drone to have flown. How does anyone possibly know that. All that statement and belief does is signal an amazing degree of bias and unwillingness to assess things logically. The X-47B may well be the most advanced drone to have flown but it numbers exactly 0. Someone else could quite easily claim UADF A and B are the most advanced drones to have flown. At least those two are in active service or at least with the PLAAF in training and doctrine development.
Increment 2 is 7-10 years behind UADF A and B if they are producing similar level performing aircraft. Something coming out that much later does have several inherent advantages provided the industrial and technological base between the two sides progress at the same rate and offer the same level of capabilities in a certain timeframe. The issue with feeling good about Increment 2 UADFs for the USAF is that China is also working on next generation UADFs. It'll be China's second gen when the Increment 2s become the USAF's first gen. Recognising these things separate the blowhards with those simply biased but still capable of critical and rational thought.
All the Mr. Muh Murica Bigly Bestest online are never going to wake up but the world simply moves on. The US is about to collapse under the greatest economic bubble ever created in human history and they still believe the US MIC can be fed the usual feast.
Clearly triggered by discussions on this forum. Except, where did anyone here make the claim/statement that the US will never produce UADF class drones? Every conversation even those that disparage and mock the US efforts specifically focused on the level of Increment 1 CCA drones which the US have not even been able to field into service yet.
No doubt the US is looking to develop and eventually field UADF class drones as part of Increment 2 which BTW aims to have flying prototypes around 2027. Lockheed Martin's own words and goals, not mine.
So we have China with at least 2 UADFs in service today vs US aiming to produce equivalents and flying prototypes of said equivalents in 2027. Even then, the Northrop Grumman Increment 2 Lotus UADF is not aiming to produce a tailless aircraft. Nevermind that, there are distinct disadvantages surely with going completely tailless - cost, complexity and kinematic performance.
NAFO copium and cries of frustration are getting out of hand. They will double down on anger and denial until some great event. Even then, I suspect they will be as delusional and out of touch with reality as the most hyper-nationalistic Indians.
If anyone checks out that thread and reads up on the X-47B and the claim that it's the most advanced combat drone to have flown. How does anyone possibly know that. All that statement and belief does is signal an amazing degree of bias and unwillingness to assess things logically. The X-47B may well be the most advanced drone to have flown but it numbers exactly 0. Someone else could quite easily claim UADF A and B are the most advanced drones to have flown. At least those two are in active service or at least with the PLAAF in training and doctrine development.
Increment 2 is 7-10 years behind UADF A and B if they are producing similar level performing aircraft. Something coming out that much later does have several inherent advantages provided the industrial and technological base between the two sides progress at the same rate and offer the same level of capabilities in a certain timeframe. The issue with feeling good about Increment 2 UADFs for the USAF is that China is also working on next generation UADFs. It'll be China's second gen when the Increment 2s become the USAF's first gen. Recognising these things separate the blowhards with those simply biased but still capable of critical and rational thought.
All the Mr. Muh Murica Bigly Bestest online are never going to wake up but the world simply moves on. The US is about to collapse under the greatest economic bubble ever created in human history and they still believe the US MIC can be fed the usual feast.
Im not even sure about that... If they follow US projects process of the past 30 years, these cheap CCA will become so overpriced that they will stop building them at a third of the production and switch to another money sinkhole after that.
Regardless of spin and hype, I trust these will ultimately cost an arm and a leg.