Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

[natehale1971]

With the development of UAVs having started during the 1980s (well, acutally earlier than that... the Soviets had alot of Recon Drones back in the 1950s and 1960s... and the Kregismarine had television guided rocket bombs back during WW2) what UAVs would have been used during the Twilight War?

During Desert Strom UAVs were still new and being used (and actually had some Iraqis surrendering to UAVs) in combat for the first time in modern history.

What UAVs would have been developed and used during the cannon Twilight War...

[Panther Al]

Yes.... and no.

Yes, they would exist, and be used. Especially in the first year or so. But none of them would be what people think of as UAV's these days: Serving for the most part as unmanned forward observers for artillery more than anything else.

The idea of Predators, and Global Hawks, as well as other advanced recon platforms, No. Tech wasn't *quite* there - at least in any significant numbers. I would imagine there was a few of the more advanced out there, but only a few.


Of course, this is a matter of opinion: For them to exist in the TW2K timeline, they would have to be in service no later than 97 - figuring the year or two buildup would push the arrival of the 96 and 97 era designs to operational status before the beginning of the war.

[Schone23666]

I'm pretty sure the Global Hawk UAV was around during the time. DOD and DARPA were futzing with several different UAV designs during the 90's, I believe Paul Mulcahy has a section on UAV's that might have been used during the Twilight War.

As AvGas becomes more scarce, I think UAV's might become more popular, particularly smaller lighter ones that is, that could run on electric or alcohol fueled motors. Also, I don't think it would be unrealistic to jury rig various weapons (within reason, of course) onto these UAV's, like they did with earlier versions of the Predator that were outfitted with two Hellfire missiles before they came out with the more heavily armed UAV's like they have now such as the Reaper drone. Even then, if it's only carrying cameras, that will still be a huge boost as real time reconnaissance on any battlefield is critical, especially if you have reduced recon assets to work with.

Then again, a lot of this IMO will slightly depend on what timeline your particular T2K scenario takes place in, as I know there's a few alternate timelines out there. There is a T2k module called "Airlords of the Ozarks" that dealt with New America that I have on PDF, it talks about dirigibles and 1-man light aircraft that consisted of a glider, frame and motor (forgot the damn name) that were used, if these were to also be unmanned, espeically with the dirigible equipped with cameras and a plethora of weapons, THAT would be admittedly VERY cool. :uzi:

[atiff]

1-man light aircraft that consisted of a glider, frame and motor (forgot the damn name)

A microlight.

[Mohoender]

I have to say that I didn"'t know anything on UAV and therefore I checked rapidly. The least I can say is that I have been surprised as the answer is yes they will be around no doubt, at least until 1997-1998 and why not 2000. What might not be possible would be surgical strike. However, by 2000, I could very well imagine having a few still in operation and fitted with free falling grenades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles

[atiff]

However, by 2000, I could very well imagine having a few still in operation and fitted with free falling grenades.

Before you posted this, I had visions of normal (hobby) remote controled planes or helicopters dropping grenades (held in some kind of trap that is released with a switch signal), or even as a crude 'guided missile'. Not long ranged, but might be effective as 'poor man's air power' by 2000.

Andrew

[ArmySGT.]

So interesting tidbits in the history section of this WIKI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAV

I know it is a WIKI and I am not going to stake anything on it as being 100% accurate.

[Mousekill]

I know this is an old thread, but it is definately interesting. It seems that the smaller Unmanned Aicraft Systems are very appropriate for Twilight 2000. The Pioneer (RQ-2) and Pointer (FQM-151) were in use at the time the Twilight War and it seems logical their use would have ramped up significantly during war time. You would have to fudge the timelines of the the Raven (RQ-11) and Shadow (RQ-7) a bit, but they would also work nicely.

The Shadow is the platform I am familiar with. I don't know enough about the system to say if it could work on alcohol, but it was originally designed to operate off Mogas which is useful since Avgas is mostly gone. Plus, the earlier versions of the control station felt like cutting age 1980's technology. An example is they had Sony VCRs to record mission data.

It's my understanding the Raven can be charged from a HMMWV and are extremetly tough and simple.

While both of these systems are mostly used for recon, they are very portable, don't require airfields to operate, and would be very useful to military units (or anybody else) that have lost support from higher level surveilance and intelligence assets.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I recall some Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait who surrendered to a UAV after getting pasted by the Wisconsin. Or maybe it was the Missouri.

[Raellus]

During Desert Strom UAVs were still new and being used (and actually had some Iraqis surrendering to UAVs) in combat for the first time in modern history.

IIRC, the Israelis were the developers of the Pioneer UAV system used by the U.S.N. in GW1. The Israelis used them in '82 as decoys to fool Syrian SAM sites in Lebanon into turning on their radars so that F-4 and F-16 Wild Weasels could past them with Shrikes, HARMs, and cluster bombs.

I agree with Mousekill on every point. I might even take it a step further.

I think UAVs would be the most common aircraft in most hot zones during the later years of the Twilight War. Some of the earlier types of prop-driven UAVs are essentially large model aircraft and, although I'm no aircraft mechanic, it seems to me that they would be a lot easier to keep fueled and running than any manned aircraft. I don't think you'd see any hunter-killer types like the modern Predator, but small recon drones wouldn't be too uncommon over T2K battlefields.

In Fusilier's excellent T2K PbP, the protagonists recently (a few weeks ago, IRL) encountered some kind of UAV circling the ruins of Czestachowa (we still haven't figured out who was operating it or why). I thought the episode was a stroke of genius and immediately kicked myself for not thinking of such an encounter in my own campaign.

[DigTw0Grav3s]

..In Fusilier's excellent T2K PbP, the protagonists recently..

Link? Would love to read it.

[Canadian Army]

With the development of UAVs having started during the 1980s (well, acutally earlier than that... the Soviets had alot of Recon Drones back in the 1950s and 1960s... and the Kregismarine had television guided rocket bombs back during WW2) what UAVs would have been used during the Twilight War?

Here is a link to the UAV section of Paul's site: http://www.pmulcahy.com/uavs/uavs.html

It has the info you are looking for.

[WallShadow]

Anybody thought about using kites? The US (Army) Weather Service did in the turn of the 20th century. Build a big enough kite and you might even be able to lift a (brave) man up for observation purposes.

[Legbreaker]

Hang gliders and winch launched gliders could also be useful for recon, although they tend to need a pilot to avoid crashing... :rolleyes:

[pmulcahy11b]

Here is a link to the UAV section of Paul's site: http://www.pmulcahy.com/uavs/uavs.html

It has the info you are looking for.

Sorry to admit it, but a lot of that page is out of date, greatly so in some places, and update time for UAVs is a long way off. But it will give you a start point.

[Matt Wiser]

So what was that Soviet UAV picked up over Western Europe in the 1970s that was mistaken for a MiG-25R recon Foxbat? Yastreb is the name I heard, IIRC.

[WallShadow]

Hang gliders and winch launched gliders could also be useful for recon, although they tend to need a pilot to avoid crashing... :rolleyes:

Are you sure you don't mean _delay_ crashing?;)
Sail planes with proper cammy would be a great,l really stealthy recon asset--just don't get noticed, don't get fired at, and especially don't get hit.
How about a towed steerable parachute connected to its tow vehicle by a releasable cable. You'd just need a sufficiently straight stretch of road to build up speed and height.
If a winch itself is too slow, why not a drop-weight catapult, using the winch to hoist the counterweight back up again?

[Mousekill]

UAVs, even the smaller ones, aren't just planes, they are a "system". This includes the control terminals/shelters, launchers, landing gear and the air vehicle. In most cases, the system won't work if any of these components are missing.

It would be necessary to decide how much the system should be broken into its components. For example, the RQ7 Shadow has a static line which is basically two lines strung between two drum brakes, and it has anothe gizmo that is set up beside the landing strip that tracks and guides the plane in to land. Would each piece need to be a distinct gizmo in the game or could they be combined into a more generic landing system?

[HorseSoldier]

I think EMP would hammer a lot of UAV systems pretty hard, and make them generally pretty scarce. (That and the fact that they seem to crash a lot in my personal experience with them . . .)

[Mousekill]

They do crash a lot. I walked away from two crashes myself as the camera guy (dumb UAV humor). The Shadow is the system I'm familar with, so it's the only one I can say much about with confidence. The plane's structure is fairly simple. Whenver it's possible, crashed planes are recovered and the parts sent back to the factory for reuse. Even the brand new planes are Frankenstiens and include pieces from crashed planes. The system also has a pretty significant team of contractors that deploys at various levels with the system. It doesn't seem too far fetched that if a large number of systems were deployed, these contractors and the enlisted UAV mechanics could canibalize broken and crashed planes to keep a dwindling but sizable fleet of them working

The payloads are a different story. They are sophisticated and delicate and don't seem to survive crashes much. Over time, I could see these payloads becoming very scarce and users having to Yankee Engineer new payloads. One example might be a simple digital camera that pops pictures at a given interval, storing pictures onto its internal memory card that doesn't transmit imagery back to the operator and must be physically recovered from the plane (which could make for a cool mission - recovering imagery from an air vehicle that crashed somewhere inconvenient).

I honestly don't know what an EMP would do them. The engines are pretty basic and don't have much in the way of electronics that I'm aware of. The engine isn't started by a guy yelling contact and spinning the prop, but it's very close. The control surfaces are moved by servos. Electronics handle input from the control shelter, handle the planes automatic functions, and transmit the imagery. The plane uses GPS for navigation and to transmit imagery, so the satellites being slagged would pose a problem. The control shelters are just an excuse to stuff lots computers into the back of a Humvee, so that could be a problem. We were never nuked and the GPS always worked.

[Mousekill]

My very rough first go Shadow 200 UAV

Shadow 200B (RQ-7B) Air Vehicle (AV)
Price: $150,000 (S/-)
Fuel Type: G, AvG
Load: 36kg
Veh WT: 150kg (without payload)
Crew:2
Minimum Landing/Takeoff Zone: Take Off: hydraulic launcher, Landing: 300m primitive runway
Travel Speed: 664 (but max range from control station is 125km)
Fuel Capacity: 80L
Fuel Consumption: 10L
Mnt: 10
Notes: The plane can be broken down for transport.

I fudged on the numbers a bit to keep it in the air for 8 hours, guessed on a few other things based on available information, and dropped a few of the newer features since they would likely have been ahead of the game’s tech.


Typical Payload:
Price: $ 200,000 (S/-)
Weight: 36kg
Features: Daylight Camera with Zoom, FLIR with Zoom
Both allow size of target to be estimated and give a grid for image crosshairs. It also allows AV to act as a forward observer for artillery.
Notes: I dropped some of the newer payload features since they seem like they would have been ahead of the technology of the day to make small enough to fit in payload (finger of God, laser painter, etc)

Ground Control Station (GCS) – a specialized HMMWV
Price $80,000 (R/-)
Fuel Type: D, G, A
Load: 0.5
Weight: 2.75
Crew: 2
Mnt: 4
Travel Move: 215/85
Combat Move: 50/20
Fuel: 90
Fuel Cons: 30
Combat Statistics:
Unarmored Vehicle
Config: Veh
Susp: W(2)
HF:1, HS:1, HR:1
Notes: 10KW generator that operates electronics, lights and air conditioning (required to keep computers cool) in the back. The generator runs off the vehicles fuel tank and uses 7 liters of fuel per period, just like a standard 10KW generator. It has controls for an Air Vehicle Operator (AVO) and Mission Payload Operator (MPO – the camera guy), and tons on communications/networking capabilities.

I upped cost and the maintenance a bit for all the electronics.


Air Vehicle Transport (AVT)
Price: $40,000 (R/-)
Specially designed HMMWV to carry 3 AVs, 240 liters of fuel, fuel pumping gear, and landing/arresting gear)
Mnt: 2 (nothing too special about it)
Travel Move: 180/60
Combat Move: 40/10
Fuel: 90
Fuel Cons: 30
Combat Statistics:
Unarmored Vehicle
Config: Veh
Susp: W(2)
HF:1, HS:1, HR:1
Notes: I dropped the speeds because it handles like a brick.


Launcher:
Price: $10,000 (R/-)
Load: 0.1
Veh Wt: 0.5 tons
Mnt: 1
Requires Compressed Nitrogen to fire. Folds into a trailer of similar proportions to a one-ton cargo trailer. The plane cannot launch without this launcher.

UAV platoons typically have a maintenance shop in the back of a HMMWV. I’d say treat this as a HMMWV that is maybe a bit pricier to cover the shop compartment.

Landing/Arresting Gear: Includes a Tactical Automated Landing System (TALS), arresting gear (static lines) and nets for the end of the runway.
Cost: $10,000 (R/-)
Weight: 400KG
Notes: If missing the TALS, the plane cannot be landed. If the arresting gear is missing, the plane can land, but won’t stop and will likely crash. If missing the net, if there is a mishap on landing and the plane misses the arresting gear, the net won’t be there to stop the plane and the plane will likely crash. This is typically carried in the AVT.

Antennas: Each GCS needs a set of antennas to operate the plane.
Cost: $10,000 (R/-)
The GCS cannot control a plane or receive video if these antennas are missing. This is typically carried in the GCS.


I mostly made these times up from guesses of averages.

Let’s say that from the time a UAV platoon occupies an area, it takes 22 people of that platoon 30 minutes crew to 1 hour to set up for operations (emplace the GCS, emplace the launcher, set up landing gear, assemble planes, etc.) For every 2 missing, it adds 10% to setup time.

It takes 30 minutes to preflight a plane. In a panic, the preflight can be skipped, but there is a decent probability things won’t go well. It takes at least 3 to launch a plane. The crew chief is always with the plane and the launcher, and the operator is always in the GCS or at the PGCS. The third can either be an assistant to the crew chief or the camera operator.

Malfunctions
1. If the preflight was skipped, make all rolls against double the wear value.
2. Roll for a potential breakdown to plane during preflight. If a breakdown occurs:
a. Roll 1d10. If greater than the wear level, the malfunction is minor and only adds 1d20 minutes to preflight.
b. If less than wear level, the plane breaks down and requires maintenance (it can either be replaced with another plane, or the mission can be scrapped)
3. Roll for potential breakdowns during flight, but roll for every period in flight. A minor break down means the plane must return to base. A major break down and the plane crashes.
4. When plane lands, roll for breakdown as if the plane had received double Preventative maintenance that week. If a minor breakdown occurs, the plane has a hard landing and suffers a minor breakdown. If the plane has a major breakdown, it misses the landing gear and hits the net. If there is no net, it slings off the end of the runway crashes.

I tried to keep go #1 simple so. . . .

Things I don't like:
1. The Shadow is a system, and malfunctions are often caused by the GCS, launcher or the landing gear and not the plane, so it seems that somehome both the ground systems and the air systems need to be considered.
2. Since flying a UAV is boring in the real world, and likely to cause a coma in a gaming world, it seems like this system might still be a bit complex since it will likely be supporting player operations instead of the players operating the planes.

Things missing
1. Salvaging crashed planes and assembling new planes from the surviving parts.
2. Engine noise: The lower the plane is, the better the image resolution. But, the lower the plane is, the more likely it is to be heard.
3. Jury rigging payloads when no "store bought" payloads are available.
4. Does UAV operation require a new skill? Should UAV operator be a possible MOS? If so, only enlisted guys can fly UAV's, and the skill would be more about getting good imagery and reacting to breakdowns than with fancy flying (the Shadow doesn't allow fancy flying as a way to "enlisted guy" proof them).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

So what was that Soviet UAV picked up over Western Europe in the 1970s that was mistaken for a MiG-25R recon Foxbat? Yastreb is the name I heard, IIRC.

Yastreb would be correct, it's Russian for hawk or falcon if I remember right.
It was the Tupolev Tu-123, introduced into service in the mid-1960s and based in the Western military districts.
I'm at work at the moment so unfortunately there's only a few pages on the Tu-123 I can access but there's a number of websites and even YouTube videos if you do a search for Tu-123.
As a drone, it's a massive aircraft, have a look at the third website listed below for some pics of it on it's carrier truck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-123
http://www.kamov.net/russian-aircraft/tupolev-tu-123/
http://kevsaviationpics.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/tupolev-tu-123-yastreb.html