US UAV and UCAV Technology

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/03/politics/drones-us-iran-middle-east

US sets up one-way attack drone squadron in the Middle East after reverse-engineering Iranian drone
9417772_a92041.jpg

US-LUCAS-SHAHED-136.jpg
9417768_4ccc23.jpg
​

Low-Cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS) drones are positioned on the tarmac at a base in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) operating area, Nov. 23. We see both configurations of the LUCAS drone in one frame here
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
And the Shahed-136 drone IIRC is an unlicensed copy of a German drone.
Click to expand...

I do not believe so. It does however use an unlicensed copy of a German engine. The overall design seems inspired by the Israeli Harop, though that is a much more complicated and capable system in comparison to most Shaheds.
 
Thanks for sharing. An interesting doc but...

(from the above document)
Conclusions:
UAS carrier airship is the next logical step in the deployment of UAS for military and civilian applications– Provides an operationally flexible airborne UAS operations base– Provides UAS range extension via OTH relay UAS and inflight UAS refueling– Offers potential as a cost effective means to operate large groups of UAS in coordinated tasks– Current technologies are in hand to develop the UAS carrier airship and its UAS support systems
Click to expand...

Even in 2018, this was the wrong conclusion. Space based charging is what should have been concluded even at that date where the math, sciences and engineering where already demoed. Direct Energy relive you of the constraints of having an operationally cumbersome vehicle as air tanker (a single point of failure) and robotic refueling with all the uncertainties that this involves as a repeated mode of operation.

Moreover the concept presuppose pairing a system that is weather constrained and tackle the problem by range (offset trajectory) with another that provide persistence at cost using airframe built nimble and lightweight relying on high efficiency that leaves little room for re-routing and delays. Those are fundamentally opposite domains of flight operations.

I am surprised NASA published this.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
I do not believe so. It does however use an unlicensed copy of a German engine. The overall design seems inspired by the Israeli Harop, though that is a much more complicated and capable system in comparison to most Shaheds.
Click to expand...
I think he tought of 1Drohne-Anti-Radar (DAR) which had an similiar shape and concept
 
Lessons learned in Ukraine.
I assume the main reason the fiber optic cable drum is attached to the drone is so that, in the event of a cable snagging, the drone can simply release more cable length to continue its flight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reddington777 said:
Boeing, northrop, LM, GA, anduril, Kratos, shieldAI, firestorm labs, mach industries, aeroenvironment...

Who else makes drones?
Click to expand...

Several of those do not make CCA sized drones, at least not yet. Not to say they are not in the running, just pointing out USAF must have cast a really wide net.
 
Forest Green said:

Future CCAs imagined as multirole platforms, Air Force official says​

Future CCAs imagined as multirole platforms, Air Force official says | InsideDefense.com

The Air Force is not envisioning its Collaborative Combat Aircraft as "one-trick ponies," a top service official told Inside Defense, but rather as multirole platforms able to complete a variety of missions.
insidedefense.com insidedefense.com
Click to expand...
One has to wonder how difficult it would be to do IFF against ground targets to avoid friendly fire on British infantry ...

Maybe CAS is out of the question and taken over by other assets. Instead we are mainly looking at SEAD, ground attack on more strategic targets, and maritime interdiction.
 
Reddington777 said:
One has to wonder how difficult it would be to do IFF against ground targets to avoid friendly fire on British infantry ...

Maybe CAS is out of the question and taken over by other assets. Instead we are mainly looking at SEAD, ground attack on more strategic targets, and maritime interdiction.
Click to expand...
You could probably solve that problem by specifying geographical boundaries* for attack without human authority, but yeah, SEAD and interdiction will probably be their bread and butter

*Could be dicey on a rapidly evolving frontline though.
 
Reddington777 said:
One has to wonder how difficult it would be to do IFF against ground targets to avoid friendly fire on British infantry ...

Maybe CAS is out of the question and taken over by other assets. Instead we are mainly looking at SEAD, ground attack on more strategic targets, and maritime interdiction.
Click to expand...

SEAD would be a natural role for unmanned platforms. High risk, and pretty hard to misidentify a friendly SAM site. Interdiction/strike also would be pretty easy. I assume that CCAs would be limited to fairly soft targets using mini/micro PGMs though.

CAS is probably far off, and in any case that likely is not an important mission in a Pacific war.
 
Last edited:

“It will be a different aircraft, but we’re going to leverage similar components, design philosophies,” said Jason Levin, Anduril’s senior vice president of Air Dominance and Strike, referencing Anduril’s YFQ-44 “Fury.”

Levin was among the Anduril and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems representatives at the Singapore Air Show 2026 exhibition this week. According to Levin, Anduril is not modifying the U.S. Air Force’s Fury – which is not aircraft carrier capable – to meet the Navy’s requirements but will use the development path already carved out by Fury. The programs sharing similar components, avionics, task architecture and software development could allow the Navy’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program processes to be carried out more quickly.

In Anduril’s development of Fury, the CCA went from clean sheet to first flight in around 500 days. Building a CCA for the Navy would require Anduril to look closely at the Navy’s concept of operations for the CCA and tailor their entry accordingly. Levin did not disclose more specifics of the Navy’s CCA requirements and program deadlines.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Regarding V-Bat, I am sorry but this thing is hardly operational. See the 30min of pre-launch procedure that monopolize the entire flight deck (I guess the ship crew just have to sunbath meanwhile), the cumbersome cradle with low roll over tolerance, the brittleness of all the component that need to be adjusted precisely to make it stand up and the noise... that awful lawnmower ICE noise that you can hear miles around as it has no muffler!!

Why Shield AI, why? if it is stated in your corporate name, at least, for God sake, shows proof of having a pinch of it. o_O

View: https://youtu.be/Mj5Q3bfYjjk
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom