• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Project Noctua & the Heron UAV - Interim capability to support Afghanistan Ops

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
A minimum requirement should at the very least be a Laser Designator.  If it isn't/can't be armed, at least give it the capability of indicating tgts for precision guided wpns.
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
20
Points
380
George Wallace said:
A minimum requirement should at the very least be a Laser Designator.  If it isn't/can't be armed, at least give it the capability of indicating tgts for precision guided wpns.

Excellent point...
 

Ecco

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
0
George Wallace said:
A minimum requirement should at the very least be a Laser Designator.  If it isn't/can't be armed, at least give it the capability of indicating tgts for precision guided wpns.

Why ask for a Laser Designator when JDAM is faster/cheaper and much more readily available, without the requirement for a laser?
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,040
MG34 said:
... if the UAV is not capable of destroying the tgt it sees it is of no value to the ground forces ...
You are right.  There is "no value" in the ability to see an ambush forward of a convoy, to observe an objective before the arrival of ground forces or to track enemy movement through the countryside.  ::)  You know that’s nonsense.

There is a very significant value delivered by having capable UAVs in the air contributing to the ISTAR process.  Sure, the ability to strike would be added value.  However, given the choice between a UAV that can only sense vs. absolutely nothing, are you going to suggest you would prefer the absolutely nothing?  
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
Ecco said:
Why ask for a Laser Designator when JDAM is faster/cheaper and much more readily available, without the requirement for a laser?

Because it can be used to guide in a JDAM, Excalibur, or any other type of Guided Wpn.  It would give a wide range of wpns that can be used or called in, as opposed to the one and only that it may carry.  A JDAM is a waste of munitions, money and overkill to use on a single man planting an IED, don't you think?
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,040
George Wallace said:
Because it can be used to guide in a JDAM, Excalibur, or any other type of Guided Wpn.  
JDAM & Excaliber require GPS location & not laser designator. 
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
MCG said:
JDAM & Excaliber require GPS location & not laser designator. 

I stand corrected.  Include that in the sensor package.

It really doesn't matter, what the UAV can carry as a wpn load, if the sensors are capable of transmittin tgt data to other wpns systems that can be used as required.  The most effective wpn can be called in, as opposed to the limited amount that may be carried on hard points on a UAV. 

Like I said, a JDAM is overkill for a single man laying an IED.  There are more economical means to tgt him that cause less collateral damage to pers and roads.
 

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
450
Points
980
Sperwer has been used in the direction of artillery and CAS.

A laser rangefinder is needed for more accurate target location. Sperwer lacks this, and therefore relies on computations involving GPS location of the AV and its altitude, the azimuth and elevation of the camera, and a digital terrain and elevation map. This gives pretty good information, but precision degrades with distance. The nice thing is that the error remains constant, though, and therefore the system works quite well for correction of artillery. A laser would tighten up the accuracy of the first round.

Correcting arty via Sperwer is actually rather slick, and unbelievably simple, quick, and precise compared to the traditional method.
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
20
Points
380
It is the same as a forward observer watching the artillery impacts and adjusting from there.....but you are right, it depends on where the first on lands... ;D

Like I said, a JDAM is overkill for a single man laying an IED.  There are more economical means to tgt him that cause less collateral damage to pers and roads
.  Yeah, but what overkill!!
 

Loachman

Former Army Pilot in Drag
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
450
Points
980
GAP said:
It is the same as a forward observer watching the artillery impacts and adjusting from there

Nope. I've done that, from the ground and my Kiowa generally not much higher than the ground, but this is completely different.

Ten-figure grid is sent to the guns. Round lands, ten figure grid of impact is sent to the guns and correction made from that. Whatever CEP error exists in the first grid, ie 3472.698 mils at 143.674 metres is true for the second, so the correction includes that and the second adjustment round should be pretty much right on, subject, of course, to all of the other factors affecting rounds in flight.

No bracketting.
 
M

MG34

Guest
MCG said:
You are right.  There is "no value" in the ability to see an ambush forward of a convoy, to observe an objective before the arrival of ground forces or to track enemy movement through the countryside.  ::)  You know that’s nonsense.

There is a very significant value delivered by having capable UAVs in the air contributing to the ISTAR process.  Sure, the ability to strike would be added value.  However, given the choice between a UAV that can only sense vs. absolutely nothing, are you going to suggest you would prefer the absolutely nothing?  

In the case of an unarmed UAV, yes I would rather rely on close recce and stealth than having a noisy camera orbiting the position.
Having the abilty to hammer a couple of Hellfires into the position and much less danger radius that artillery is an asset worth having .
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
20
Points
380
Which brings up the question....just how noisy is the Heron UAV?
 
M

MG34

Guest
Also brings up the question how does an unarmed vehicle fix an enemy in position to allow other assets to spool up?
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
MG34 said:
Also brings up the question how does an unarmed vehicle fix an enemy in position to allow other assets to spool up?

How does a FOO or a FAC or an OP fix an enemy?
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,040
MG34 said:
... a noisy camera orbiting the position ...
So, your complaint is that all unarmed UAV are of "no value" because the one we are retiring is too noisy?  If the same is not true of the Heron, then you are being dishonest in your arguments and situating the estimate to give the answer you want.  What happens if we pull out your assumption that Heron is another snowmobile in the sky?  Given the choice of a silent UAV that can only sense vs. absolutely nothing, are you going to suggest you would prefer the absolutely nothing?
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
6,817
Points
1,110
The issue is why chose to tie your arms behind your back?

Yes it is a capbility increase -- but having been around to see the advanatages of Mr Predator with Hellfire (some gomer was vaporized ahead of our MRAP) I would take being able to deal death rather than just sit around and watch.


  Like many decisions in the CF - it is being defended as a capabiltiy increase from what is currently in inventory - rather than being looked at as a deficiency from what is available to have.


Ecco -- as I said in my post -- sometimes you won't have a DA team around to go after the HVT's  - and no offence getting Osama's or whomever else's picture on camera does not make them any deader...
    There are places you cannot just launch a JDAM or 155mm strike -- the Hellfire is a much smaller payload. 




 
 
A

aesop081

Guest
The Heron UAV deal was made because it was available to us in the timeframe we needed IOT replace the Sperwer. This is NOT the final UAV for the Canadian Forces. For all of you in the "well theres much better out there " crowd....well....yeah we know. But we needed something that was deliverable now...not 2 years from now.

Noisy ?

This is a MALE UAV.....not the skidoo we had up until now.
 
M

MG34

Guest
MCG said:
So, your complaint is that all unarmed UAV are of "no value" because the one we are retiring is too noisy?  If the same is not true of the Heron, then you are being dishonest in your arguments and situating the estimate to give the answer you want.  What happens if we pull out your assumption that Heron is another snowmobile in the sky?  Given the choice of a silent UAV that can only sense vs. absolutely nothing, are you going to suggest you would prefer the absolutely nothing?

I only have experience with the current in service UAV, none of which are silent. If given the choice of a noisy flying camera or not, I will always take stealth, unless of course it can fire a Hellfire from 8kms away into the En ambush,compond,objective or whatever.
  I'm done here, no need to get into yet another pointless argument with you, have fun in your Ivory Tower.
 
A

aesop081

Guest
MG34 said:
  I'm done here, no need to get into yet another pointless argument with you, have fun in your Ivory Tower.

You would almost think this is a thread about kit........ ::)
 
Top