Are collaborative combat aircraft (CCAs)--a.k.a. large fighter drones--that fight with piloted fighters too much effort to be worth it?
The challenge of sustainment emerged from the earlier study. CCAs may be relatively small, but the Increment 1 aircraft are about the size of the smallest crewed jet fighter ever used operationally, the British Folland Gnat of the 1950s. They are aeroplanes that need runways, fuel, parking and maintenance. Let’s call them robo-gnats.
If they were much smaller they would have less range and less payload. Range is ‘critically important, and always an issue,’ Kunkel says. Higher payload translates to an ability to put more weapons in the air, another vital attribute.
That's a big problem. If the only logistics advantage robotic fighter drones provide is lack of aircraft crew, is the concept a failure? I wonder if the same calculation scales down to my longstanding issue of small reusable fighter drones?
I suspect the CCAs will get smaller, perhaps merging with the scaled-up and more complex FPV drones that won't be able to roam low over a battlefield where soldiers have tactics and counter-measures to contest the "brown skies" low over the battlefield. The Air Force will look different but will remain the Air Force.
NOTE: TDR Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.
NOTE: You may also like to read my posts on Substack, at The Dignified Rant: Evolved. Go ahead and subscribe to it. You know you want to.
NOTE: Image from the article.
