Ten years ago, it seemed to the whole world that manned combat aircraft were coming to naught, and their place would very soon be taken by unmanned aerial vehicles. Which will perform not only reconnaissance and strike missions, but also be used as fighters, strategic bombers and attack aircraft. "The F-35 could be the last manned fighter jet," the British Discovery broadcast.
These predictions have a solid foundation. Back in 2014, the US military operated more than a thousand medium and heavy UAVs, which in many respects were not inferior to manned aircraft. It seemed just a little bit and the final change of eras would come.
In 2013, the heavy American multipurpose X-47B took off for the first time from the deck of the aircraft carrier George W. Bush, and also successfully boarded it. In addition, the UAV showed the whole world the possibility of refueling in the air. But soon the program was closed, finally demonstrating its experimental nature and building only two samples. At that time, its price exceeded $ 800 million.
Having abandoned their own fifth generation, the Europeans also really wanted to have a heavy, unobtrusive strike UAV. However, the fate of the French Dassault nEUROn differs little from the fate of the X-47B, despite the seemingly acceptable characteristics (earlier, Dassault engineers even confirmed the stealth of the UAV). In fact, this is just a flying stand - an experimental machine on which the French work out certain solutions.
And what about the British counterpart in the face of the Taranis UAV? In 2016, BAE Systems equipped the promising attack unmanned aerial vehicle Taranis with improved software, which allows it not only to take off and land, but also to perform autonomous flight along the route. Since then, almost nothing has been heard about this device.
It is worth recalling, however, that in accordance with the terms of the Anglo-French contract, announced in 2014, the experience gained in the design of the Taranis will be combined with the developments on Dassault nEUROn as part of the program to create the future European heavy multipurpose UAV.
But these are only plans. We will remind, last year Great Britain announced to the whole world about the beginning of development of the manned fighter of the sixth generation Tempest. Even if we proceed from very optimistic forecasts, Foggy Albion will not have enough resources for two mega-projects. As, however, and the French from Dassault, now engaged in the development of the sixth generation fighter New Generation Fighter. The planned exit of the UK from the EU does not add the chances of creating a future strike UAV, although this is a separate topic for discussion.
Lonely "Hunter"
Russia has lagged far behind the West in terms of creating its own UAVs, especially heavy and multifunctional ones. The "deceased" and never born "Skat" and the new "Hunter" only confirm this thesis: if the X-47B made its first flight in 2011, the Russian S-70 - only in 2019. "The bulk of flight tests are planned to be performed in the period 2023-2024, including in the shock version with various aviation weapons," TASS told TASS in August 2019 at the office of Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov. At the same time, serial deliveries to the troops, as stated in the office of the deputy chairman, should begin in 2025.
It is difficult to comment on this kind of statement: most likely, they simply do not correspond to reality. After all, now "Hunter" is also just a demonstrator of technologies, on the basis of which a prototype can be created, and then a pre-production and production apparatus.
As we can see from the example of the fifth generation fighters, it can take about fifteen years from the moment of the first flight of the device to the moment it is put into service. So by 2025, we can, at best, expect the first flight of the prototype of the future UAV, but not the appearance of a serial version.
Wrong concept?
Finally, we come to the most important thing - is it really worthwhile for Russia to create a large, unobtrusive UAV? The main problem is that it will most likely never replace manned fighters.
There are several reasons for this. First, UAV operators are faced with control delays: even if they are seconds, this can become a critical drawback in real combat. Do not forget about the "information hunger", when the spectrum of the UAV operator's visibility is limited by the display in front of him and is incomparable with the spectrum of the pilot's visibility and sensations.
It can be argued that the UAV operator does not face overloads and does not risk being killed. However, as practice shows, a modern pilot has a relatively low chance of being killed or injured during a combat mission. And aviation weapons allow you to operate outside the zone of action of enemy air defense, reducing the role of the human factor to a minimum.
There is another, more significant problem. Recall that in 2011, the Americans lost their newest UAV over Iraq, the Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel, after which the Iranian authorities showed it safe and sound. This gave rise to a stream of discussions in the media about the impossibility of effectively protecting UAVs from electronic interception, even if the enemy is seriously inferior in technical equipment.
If someone takes over control of the MQ-9 Reaper, it will not be a big problem for the US (although, of course, this is not good enough). But if the enemy gets the technology of the latest stealth, it can turn into big problems. Up to the loss of technological leadership in certain industries. Such a risk is completely unnecessary.
You can try to make the drone as autonomous as possible. However, the use of neural networks to control UAVs, which experts have been actively talking about in recent years, can turn into even greater difficulties. Nobody wants to see the "machine uprising". And even think about such a development of the situation. And in general, whether it is possible to entrust the killing of people to automation is a complex and debatable issue.
An interesting situation turns out. Such devices as X-47B, nEUROn, Taranis or "Hunter" have excessive potential for counterinsurgency warfare: especially since their price can be comparable to that of a fighter. If not the fifth, then the fourth generation. At the same time, probably, no one will dare to use such an apparatus in a virtual big war. For fear of losing control over it, unnecessary technical complexity, or simple non-compliance with the price / efficiency criterion.
There are many examples in history of how directions that were once considered promising, in the end, showed their complete failure. It is appropriate to recall the North American XB-70 Valkyrie super-high-speed bomber and the Soviet Sotka.
This, of course, does not mean that you need to abandon the creation of drones. It's just much wiser to follow the proven path, in particular, to develop analogs of the MQ-1C or MQ-9. Which have long been proven to be effective. And they will really be in demand for many years, if not decades.
