Wednesday, March 3, 2021

Overlooked

Every so often you may find yourself reading an interesting story, in whatever medium you prefer, when you suddenly realize that the authors have just made a casual reference to something far more amazing, surprising, or completely game-changing than the original topic of the article. This may indicate that your understanding of the topic, the industry, or the world itself is out of date; alternately, it may indicate that the authors are taking something for granted that isn’t general knowledge, just because it isn’t novel to them. But in the case of the Lockheed-Martin “Speed Racer” unmanned aerial vehicle, I think it’s possible that I just have a different perspective than the technology writer who authored the original article…

I got the story from the Popular Mechanics website, but only because it was picked up by the News app on my iPhone. Apparently, when they say “There’s an app for that!” they aren’t kidding. The new vehicle called the “Speed Racer” UAV is an interesting piece of technology in its own right, a drone that can be used both as a reconnaissance platform and as a cruise missile. If you load it up with sensors it can penetrate contested airspace and send information about the battlefield back to its carrier vehicle, and if you load it with an explosive warhead it becomes an extremely stealthy missile that can find and destroy anything you tell it to look for. Even better, it can apparently be launched by any aircraft big enough to carry it, without the need for any added equipment – Lockheed is apparently testing it with a Beechcraft model 1900, a light transport airplane called a C-12 in military service…

The possibilities for launching both advanced reconnaissance drones and advanced cruise missiles from a common, off-the-shelf transport craft are already extraordinary. If this article is correct, not only could the drones be fielded at a fraction of the cost of building a new carrier vehicle (let alone the cost of a new manned airplane for the same purpose), but the US could also deploy them from widely-dispersed platforms that would also be indistinguishable from a common commercial transport. The implications of Lockheed’s “StarDrive” design system may be even more amazing, however, especially from a business standpoint…

The details of the system are highly confidential (and probably classified, as well), but the technology involved allows the company to move from conceptual drawings to a working prototype aircraft in months, not years, using computer-aided design (CAD) and robotic manufacturing equipment. For example, the company was able to produce the first prototype for its new advanced fighter in less than a year from the completion of the first concept drawing. This doesn’t quite match the 173 days North American Aircraft needed to produce the first P-51 Mustang prototype, but the long-term possibilities in the face of the military and commercial Cold War now ramping up are intriguing…

Imagine the possibilities if the US was able to field new military aircraft ten or twenty times faster than any foreign adversary, and implement upgrades and improvements to the design even more quickly. For that matter, imagine if Lockheed (and whatever corporate partners they deside to take on) were able to produce new commercial offerings for sale in the time it usually takes to decide to start a new design project. This technology has the potential to change not only the aerospace industry but any other industrial sector where the “StarDrive” system can be used in a cost-effective manner beyond recognition, and the authors of the linked article barely even mention it in passing as they discuss one of its recent accomplishments…

I’d like to think that the people who follow such developments have only just gotten around to telling the rest of us about it, and that they already realize the incredible competitive advantage this technology would offer to any company that could get permission to use it. And I certainly hope that anyone who might see their company wiped out by a competitor with this kind of tech is already talking to Lockheed about licensing possibilities. But either way, it’s a good example of why you should always consider the broader implications of what you are reading…

No comments: