UCAV aircraft carrier.

[chrisonord]

I have had this idea rattling around the sawdust box for a while now after seeing that UCAV take off and land on an aircraft carrier.
What about them having their own carrier? The UCAV's can be stored in a magazine whilst not in use or when not being serviced, and lifted up one by one as needed for arming and launching.
As the carrier will be much smaller and compact, the deck won't need to be overly long nor will it need a steam catapult system.
The UCAV's can be launched using a MAGLEV system like that used on the trains but will be able to move the craft quicker to launch them.
When the UCAV's come back in to land, the same system can be used to slow and stop them.
Fewer crew would be needed, and twice as many UCAV's could be carried compared to a conventional carrier.
Any ideas would be interesting
Cheers,
Chris.

[PR19_Kit]

As the carrier will be much smaller and compact, the deck won't need to be overly long nor will it need a steam catapult system.
The UCAV's can be launched using a MAGLEV system like that used on the trains but will be able to move the craft quicker to launch them.

At one stage there were plans afoot to fit out the two 'Queen Elizabeth' class carriers with an electro-magnetic rail catapult, and they may being built with that still possible as an upgrade. And I think there were similar plans to re-fit one of the big USN carriers with similar systems. Perhaps one of our more informed American members may know a bit more on this?

[PR19_Kit]

Ahah, see here. All sorts of useful gen, and even a piccie of a UCAV above a carrier!

http://frn.beedall.com/cvf1-25.htm

[GTX]

To anyone interested in UCAV Aircraft Carriers, may I suggest the SEA ARCHER: Distributed Aviation Platform done back in 2001 under the Total Ship Systems Engineering Program at NPS.

Regards,

Greg

[Hobbes]

The UCAVs that have been shown so far aren't all that small. They also don't look like their takeoff speed will be much lower than manned aircraft, so you'll still need a pretty significant ship to get enough deck space for the catapult and arrestor system.

A useful UAV carrier would need new, smaller UCAV designs, but smaller UCAVs mean less payload. Make the aircraft too small, and it can't carry enough to be useful.

[GTX]

Ah, but with precision weapons do you really need large payloads?

Regards,

Greg

[chrisonord]

The UCAVs that have been shown so far aren't all that small. They also don't look like their takeoff speed will be much lower than manned aircraft, so you'll still need a pretty significant ship to get enough deck space for the catapult and arrestor system.

A useful UAV carrier would need new, smaller UCAV designs, but smaller UCAVs mean less payload. Make the aircraft too small, and it can't carry enough to be useful.

But would you need all that if you used a magnetic field launch and arrestor system?
Chris

[Hobbes]

Ah, but with precision weapons do you really need large payloads?

Well, the smallest smart bomb in use today is the 250 lb SDB. Missiles are in that weight range as well if you want any range at all. Of course it's possible to design smaller weapons, I wonder what the smallest effective weapon would be?

But would you need all that if you used a magnetic field launch and arrestor system?

You still need enough runway length to accellerate/brake the aircraft to more than stall speed without breaking it. Unmanned aircraft can be made to take higher G loadings, but there's a weight penalty to that.

[GTX]

Ah, but with precision weapons do you really need large payloads?

Well, the smallest smart bomb in use today is the 250 lb SDB. Missiles are in that weight range as well if you want any range at all. Of course it's possible to design smaller weapons, I wonder what the smallest effective weapon would be?

It really depends upon your target - the GBU-39/GBU-40 SDBs are designed to be equivalent to much larger weapons such as the as the 2000 lb BLU-109s and equiv.  If you wanted something that could say, enter through a window and take out a single room in a building, you could get by with something much smaller. 

Regards,

Greg