Even with the long-delayed F- 35 Lightning II still in development, industry players and the Pentagon are already looking at the next-generation warplane.
The forthcoming F-35 is considered a 5th generation aircraft; it's highly networked with sensors and stealthy to evade radar. This naming system dates back to the jets that first appeared after World War II, which were the first generation. Second-gen warplanes were equipped with radar; the third generation carried long-range missiles, enabled by better radar and guided ground attack missiles. Fourth-generation warplanes swapped direct control for digital fly-by-wire systems (starting in the 1970s but really making a mark in early 2000s). The fifth generation includes not only the F-35 but also the F-22.
What the 6th generation fighter looks like ultimately will depend upon what the Pentagon wants it do to. Here are 4 defining questions—and our best guesses at the answers.
1) Will human pilots be optional, or eliminated?
Putting a human in the cockpit of your warplane carries some serious disadvantages. It means the aircraft can't stay in the air as long as a drone could, costs more to build and operate (because of that pesky pressurized cabin), and are limited in maneuverability because the plane can't experience G forces that would make a pilot blackout. Still, don't write off fighter jocks just yet. Even at long ranges, pilot brains can process information and adapt in combat better than artificial intelligence. AI is getting better at this to be sure, but when it comes to life-and-death decisions, the government likes to have a human hand on the trigger.
Optionally manned airplanes could offer the best of both worlds, from many standpoints: good for long-endurance or high-risk missions, but suitable for tasks like dogfighting that require the human touch. Also, pilots can't be hacked.
Our pick: optionally manned
2) Will it be a stealthy loner, or a mothership of drones?
Okay, so the new warplane has a pilot, but don't count out the drones. A future fighter could carry semi-autonomous robotic wingman controlled from the cockpit, sent in in advance of a warplane to collect surveillance, disrupt enemy defenses via electronic warfare, or even drop weapons.
If the plane doesn't have robotic helpers in tow, then it must enter areas protected by radar and surface-to-air missiles along. That means developing new stealth techniques, which would drive up research and maintenance costs. It makes more sense to keep a warplane at a distance and let the drones take the risks.
Our pick: mothership of drones
3) Will it take of vertically, or from short runways?
EXPECT JUMP-JETS TO BECOME MAINSTAYS OF THE U.S. MILITARY
The F-35B can off vertically like a helicopter does—which is an engineering headache. It increases weight, makes maintenance more complex, and costs a fortune. Still, the advantages they bring—the ability to operate from ships, and not needing long runways—might make the tradeoffs worthwhile. Runways are missile magnets, enemy missiles are only getting more accurate, and fewer allies offering oversea bases. So expect jump-jets to become mainstays of the U.S. military.
Our pick: vertical takeoff and landing
4) Will it have one mission, or many?
A fighter plane is not just for dogfights anymore. They are expected to provide surveillance, bomb air defenses, and supply close air support for troops on the ground. It's possible that the future will bring new weapons like smart cruise missiles and ground-controlled drones to fulfill some of these tasks. But chances are, we'll still want a fast-moving fighter. There will always be unexpected events in combat when a jet can supply the firepower needed, on time and on target.
Besides, with the hundreds of billions needed to develop this thing, it better do more than dogfight. The F-22 Raptor, suited mainly to air-to-air combat, is an amazing airplane with no peer—and few real-world uses.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий