Talk:Northrop Grumman X-47B/Archive 1

Archive 1

Carrier based flight testing

on 2/13/2010: http://www.navy.mil/search/print.asp?story_id=51239&VIRIN=81899&imagetype=1&page=1 needs summary and addtion. Twredfish (talk) 18:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Article describes preparations for the X-47B. More important to add something when it actually gets on a carrier. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Armament on Specs list

I tried to remove the list of armament and sensors from the specs page, and I see they were added back, with a source. Unfortunately, the source is a little bit misleading. It states "provisions" (similar to how this Navy page lists it. Those provisions are not part of the actual aircraft. It has two "weapons bays", which are basically for sizing only. They do not have the capability to carry or release weapons. Furthermore, while the aircraft is "provisioned" for an ISR payload (like EO/IR, GMTI, etc.), it doesn't actually carry any payload of that sort.

I will amend the specifications to reflect the sources and say "provisions for". -SidewinderX (talk) 15:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Four companies (including Northrop Grumman) will bid for the contract to design and build the deployment version. Arms will be carried years later, they say. That would be the X-47C. Do you think the X-47B could carry arms in an 'emergency'? — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

resource

The Navy's Fighter-Plane-Size UAV, the X-47B, Is Unveiled in California "Yesterday at its Palmdale, Calif., manufacturing facility, Northrop Grumman unveiled its first completed X-47B Navy Unmanned Combat Air System. This giant UAV could soon be one of the most lethal unmanned aircraft in the U.S. military." by By Andrew Mosema December 17, 2008 12:00 AM Popular Mechanics.

97.87.29.188 (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Aviation Week resource

• Automated Aerial Refueling Next For X-47B Dec 9, 2011 regarding Aerial refueling
• Unmanned Combat Aircraft Tests Move Quickly by Graham Warwick December 6, 2011

99.56.122.24 (talk) 08:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

npov tag

The Design and Development section has problems. The use of all caps for simultaneously, and multiple exclimations '!!!' (both already changed) aren't very encyclopedic. Additionally the lack of citations are a problem. The first few paragraphs read like a conspiracy theory. If there is artlicles supporting your assertions, please reference them. 72.211.150.15 (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to log in. Previous was Ender8282 (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I've removed it all as uncited OR. - BilCat (talk) 10:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Costs section

Am I the only person that cannot find a reference to cost in the reference for this section? The LA Times article is interesting reading but no mention of current costs, increase in project cost, etc exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaccari (talk • contribs) 22:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

The source is a two-page article (the link to the second page is at the bottom, in admittedly quite small font). Info on costs is on the second page. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 23:03, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Chinese Clone?

According to a report today in the Guardian:

China announced late last month that the People's Liberation Army was preparing to test-fly a domestically developed drone, which analysts say is likely a clone of the US's carrier-based X-47B. "Key attack technologies will be tested," reported the state-owned China Daily, without disclosing further details.

Any additional insight into this? Or confirmation of its validity? joepa^T 17:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Some information and pictures can be found here: http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2012/09/skybow-chinas-x-47-like-stealth-ucav.html It looks more like a scaled up Dassault AVE-D Petit Duc http://img302.imageshack.us/img302/7167/7023002312um.jpg than the X-47B. Mightyname (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

References

X-47 C stats wrong.

Something is wrong with this: "Proposed larger version with a payload of 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) and a wingspan of 172 ft (52.4 m)". A plane with that kind of wingspan would never get off an aircraft carrier. It would be the size of an airliner, and if it were true, would have a payload way bigger than 10000 lb.1812ahill (talk) 10:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

True, it does sound quite excessive (I'd assume that, if it's true, it would have to be a land-based drone, and not carrier-based). Is there a newer source to confirm or disprove the X47C stats? — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 18:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

No real sources. If it's based on the X-47B it's either a very long range flyer or very heavy load(10x) bomber. Neither fit the specifications. The only option left is a different design altogether with extreme wing spans. Size matters for stealth which makes this unlikely. If it's to replace regular crafts it has to fit the existing support footprint. Perhaps, it's connected to the LRS-B program. Mightyname (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I dug up a more reliable source than Bill Sweetman's disappeared blog entry http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/November%202009/1109edit.aspx It clearly states the reference to the Next Generation Bomber with the same 172 ft statement and a mass of 350,000 pounds. With the cancellation of Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems the X-47C has become the N-UCAS with different specifications for the NAVY while the Air Force gets the NGB. There is no longer room for a 10,000 lb payload ship in the plans. Mightyname (talk) 14:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Navy Drone Successfully Lands on Aircraft Carrier

July 10, 2013, 4:35 PM

• "Navy Drone Successfully Lands on Aircraft Carrier" is the WSJ headline.

[1] Video: The first successful landing.

ABOARD THE USS GEORGE H.W. BUSH—An unmanned plane piloted by a string of computer algorithms landed on an aircraft carrier for the first time Wednesday as the tailhook of the drone known as “Salty Dog 502” caught the third wire of the ship’s deck and abruptly came to a halt.

"Top Navy officials repeatedly hailed as historic the successful landing—which after countless tests and simulations on land was not much in doubt." Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 00:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

• "Northrop Grumman, U.S. Navy Catapult X-47B From Carrier Into History Books" [2] Another WSJ headline, among others. – Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• More video, photos, and info on “robotic avionics”: [3] with this quote saying it is ready, rather than in 2019. ““It has taken several years of software development, thousands of simulated landings in high fidelity labs and many hours of flight test in the Patuxent River landing pattern to prove this aircraft is up for the challenge,” Capt. Jaime Engdahl, program manager for the Navy Unmanned Combat Air System wrote in a blog post. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• "Video: Drone Landing Shows Carrier Relevance" [4] "Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said this week’s first-ever landing of an experimental drone on an aircraft carrier shows how the nuclear-powered fleet will remain relevant for decades to come." — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Northrop will compete with three other companies for deployment version

• "The X-47B will never be put into operational use, but it will help Navy officials develop future carrier-based drones. Those drones could begin operating by 2020" [5] FYI, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 22:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
• "Northrop Grumman is expected to square off against other defense giants for the work, including Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing Co. and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. Lockheed Martin is pitching the Sea Ghost, Boeing the Phantom Ray, and General Atomics the Sea Avenger. [6] — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:16, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/x47/

  Triggered by \bairforce-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 10:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag. No further action is necessary.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

broken link for reference 35

http://foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/05/06/video_the_navys_stealth_drone_makes_its_first_arrested_landing/

gets page not found  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippschaumann (talk • contribs) 09:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)