In der weitgehend bäuerlich geprägten Welt des frühen Mittelalters spielten die sich später spezialisierenden Handwerkstätigkeiten wie die Verarbeitung von Nahrungsmitteln, die Herstellung von Textilien oder das Fertigen von Geräten und Bauten aus Holz noch eine verschwindend geringe Rolle gegenüber der häuslichen Eigenproduktion. Spezielle Arbeitstechniken, wie Bronzeguss, Malerei und Bildhauerei waren an Klöster gebunden. Erst im Hochmittelalter und mit der Städtebildung verlagerte sich der Schwerpunkt in urbane Zentren. Die hergestellten Waren werden auf Märkten feilgeboten oder in Werkstätten und Läden ausgestellt und verkauft. Eine Ausnahmerolle spielen Baumeister und Steinhauer, die, von einer (Kirchen-) Bauhütte zur nächsten ziehend, über territoriale Grenzen hinweg Fertigkeiten, Innovationen und Stilentwicklungen verbreiten.

I just joined this forum and wanted to introduce myself. I look forward to learning and contributing.

Cheers

I just wanted to note on the contribution of this community here. It’s simply great.

I want to contribute my part to this forum as well

There is a site that has been excessively helpful to myself and some associates of mine. That site is OnlineComputerHelpers.com and they offer online help [url=http://www.onlinecomputerhelpers.com]computer repair[/url]

I hope that my offering has been substantial and you also are able to utilize their services just as I have.

• Multiple targets will be in the open for swarms to see/attack…instead of hiding and hugging civilians and our forces

• Searches will be somewhat random with many UA to cover a large area systematically…instead of cued to specific areas identified by CCIR and mission/IPB analysis and other intelligence reports.

• On board processing would identify, and make fratricide/collateral damage assessments/decisions…as opposed to a manned release authority and GCS operator

• Fewer/lighter weapons and sensors would be on board requiring closer proximity for sensing and attack…instead of having heavier weapons/sensor on larger UAS allowing greater standoff and more lethality

• The logistical and maintenance manpower would be available for more less-capable UAS swarms versus fewer, but more capable systems

• We could work out the airspace and launch/recovery problems of so many swarm UAS through some sort of see-and-avoid technology and automated launch/recovery of multiple UAS

• UAS will replace manned aircraft entirely instead of teaming with them

Swarm proponents probably would cite reduced bandwidth as an advantage by having multiple UAS interacting locally rather than controlled by a distant Ground Control Station (GCS). A “mothership” could be cued to conduct the ID and fratricide/collateral damage assessment with a GCS man-in-the-loop.

But the fact that the UA are communicating with each other is using bandwidth. The video still must go somewhere for analysis unless you can build a powerful micro-processor for a small UAS.

Seems like this is a microcosm of the flawed manned fighter argument that quantity has a quality all its own. Just don’t think a threat exists to justify swarms of manned OR unmanned aircraft. Fewer UAS that are more capable, would better utilize scarce/expensive manpower for ground control stations, launch/recovery, and maintenance, while presenting a smaller ground and airspace footprint.

Manned ground/air scouts and maneuver units will continue to perform reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisition (RSTA) functions teamed with UAS. Other UAS will team with manned fighters, bombers, and aerial tankers. UAS and UGV will augment and complement them providing means for cooperative engagements, station-keeping, and greater persistence on station. Stealth technology has got to be easier to achieve on a smaller unmanned system possibly placed in storage to that surface treatments don’t wear out, and using non-stealthy versions and possibly optionally piloted for bombers/UCAV) and simulation for training.

The dull, dirty, and dangerous is a good soundbite…but suspect UAS will replace and augment many other functions beyond that. But don’t perceive too many Infantrymen would want to be carried into a hot LZ by a fearless UAS pilot without a stake in the outcome, or transported over the ocean via unmanned C-17s.

“observant,” I’m assuming that by co-present managing of decision system you mean both on board processing and a man-in-the-loop sharing decisions? What is poly-linear?

I had seen those links before UAV PILOT, but I’m puzzled that they are calling that a C model when a more conventional prop joint C model is already planned? Seems like you don’t need a jet UAS for ISR so much as for lobbing small diameter bombs from greater standoff by exploiting the greater speed.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?id=news/AVENGER041709.xml&headline=Predator%20C%20Avenger%20Makes%20First%20Flights&channel=defense

Images:

http://images.google.com/images?q=predator+C+avenger&rls=com.microsoft:*&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=2RUxSrTMGJvotQO95IWtAw&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title

An enormous amount of the gear in a piloted fighter exists to protect the pilot, allow the pilot to sit safely in the plane (that whole oxygen thing) and to let the president control the plane. It’s true that an unmanned aircraft can’t make instant judgement calls as a pilot can, but a fair amount of the decisions a pilot makes have to do with surviving, which is not unreasonable. Swarms are in the future, but you can certainly have UAV pilots fly their craft in formation and/or build in software and hardware that can take care of basic guidance which a pilot supplements. A UCAV will be much cheaper, especially once the primes start using the latest manufacturing techniques to build them in bulk.

Airspace is a big problem for lots of lower flying manned and unmanned aircraft. Not sure how you continue to restrict small UAS flights to such an extent when tactical necessity dictates using the system now at an unforecast location and time. On board warning systems on manned helicopters and small UAS may be essential.

I’m still wondering how you ever get timely higher altitude (above coordinating altitude)UAS flights fitting the tactical situation of 15 minutes ago (not 72 hrs ago) when you gotta submit ATO information 48 hrs prior to execution day and airspace control measures for the ACO 24 hours out. Dynamic re-tasking helps but the whole Joint Air Tasking Cycle needs to be fixed.

UAS stacks like fighter stacks for Close Air Support? In OIF they had 4 CAS stacks on radials around Baghdad at one point. Maybe have 4 other UAS stacks 45 degrees from the manned aircraft stacks? Good thing about UAS is you could have the stacks at closer altitude intervals without danger to pilots. Multiple block altitudes for UAS also help substantially.

At the DefenseTech site you can link to Aviation Week for a great article talking about UAS. 9 cameras on future Reapers and 65 on future Hummingbirds?? See through trees?? Now THAT is bandwidth…and a task for many analysts somewhere. As the article mentions, it also may require on board processing to filter out the dull and cue about the dangerous.

Network capacity limits the number of UAVs we can throw into the sky at any one time (unless x number of them are completely autonomous and not transmitting/receiving any data).

Are there new tactics that will arise from cheap, massive UAV swarms?

The Iraq/Afghanistan(Pakistan) wars should put us years, if not a decade or more, ahead of our nearest competition in terms of the development and employment of UAV technology.