HMS Prince of Wales has launched jet powered drones from her flight deck as the Royal Navy begins exploring the use of crewless technology on the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers.

It is understood that the demonstration with HMS Prince of Wales looked at how the drone and associated support equipment, including launcher, can be integrated within a busy ship and flight deck.

Image Crown Copyright 2021.

The Banshee launched from the ship and recovered to land via parachute.

According to a news release here:

“Fixed-wing drones – called the QinetiQ Banshee Jet 80+ – flew from the carrier’s vast flight deck to assess how they might be used to train personnel in defending against ever-more-capable fast jets and missiles. The jet-powered Banshee, which looks like a mini fighter aircraft, can soar to 25,000ft, skim just above the waves, and flies at speeds up to 400 knots (around 460mph). It is hard to detect on radar, giving it all the likeness of an incoming missile – making it a realistic adversary for sailors to train in countering aerial threats.

These drones could eventually be carried by Royal Navy warships and provide operational training to task groups wherever they might be in the world, allowing them to conduct air defence exercises on demand to test reactions and hone responses. And the Banshee’s carrying capacity means the Royal Navy can use it for testing future sensors, weaponry and radio equipment.”

Image Crown Copyright 2021.

The Royal Navy say that the Banshee flights represent the first step for the Royal Navy in exploring how crewless tech could be operated from the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers in the future.

Image Crown Copyright 2021.

“There is a real need for a low-cost drone such as the Banshee that can replicate a range of the threats in the skies and provide a test bed for future payloads,” said Commander Rob Taylor, lead for Royal Navy Air Test and Evaluation.

“The key to this is that a warship can carry this drone with it on operations, launch it and use it to keep personnel razor-sharp in countering threats from above. The ability to adapt the payload for differing tasks is also crucial to provide value for money and interoperability across the fleet.”

You can read more from the Royal Navy here.

Another close up of the drone shows Fleet Air Arm markings.

The Banshee Jet-80 drone was developed by Qinetiq, on their website they say:

“Developed from the successful Banshee target, this twin-jet engine powered version was developed using knowledge and experience gained whilst operating the single jet engine variant which entered service in 2010.

The current version is fitted with twin 40kg thrust gas turbine engines giving a total of 80kg of static thrust. This offers an increase in the maximum straight and level airspeed of up to 180metres/second. The use of an auxiliary fuel tank ensures that endurance is similar to that of the single engine version with a typical mixed throttle mission time in excess of 45 minutes.

The Banshee Jet 80 Twin-Jet Engine Aerial Targets by QinetiQ
Banshee Jet-80 is rail launched.

When fitted with the patented Hot Nose the target provides a forward and side-looking IR source with output in Bands I, II and III, whilst the jet engines provide a realistic rearward looking IR signature. All other well proven augmentation devices traditionally available to Banshee can be fitted to this latest twin jet engine derivative.”

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
85 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ian M
Ian M
20 days ago

The aircraft is ship launched but recovers to land by parachute according to the blurb. This must limit the distance the launch vessel can be from the coast? With an endurance of c.45 minutes the RN will be parking the QE’s pretty close to the ranges where I presume the banshee will plop to earth.

Coll
Coll
20 days ago
Reply to  Ian M

I’m sure they would be able to parachute it back onto the ship if the pilot or computer can time it right.

Richard
Richard
19 days ago
Reply to  Coll

We used to recover them from the water after they landed there by parachute when it was the Mirachs. I’m wondering if they revived 792 or if it’s operated under a different designation these days.

Johan
Johan
14 days ago
Reply to  Ian M

these are target drones, to be used as a missile attack, not to carry any great payload, an issue Quinetiq have always had as soon as the size and weight goes up, catapult force rips wings off, Carbon fibre and composite doesn’t flex and stretches like alloys, USN have that issue with EMALS trying to rip confirmative tanks from Hornets,

Challenger
Challenger
20 days ago

Am I the only one reminded of Royal Navy jets of old with its shade of blue, lightning bolt and insignia!

Paul42
Paul42
20 days ago
Reply to  Challenger

There is only one like this, specially painted for promotional pics like these.

Ron StateSide
Ron StateSide
20 days ago

Catapult next to the ski jump seems like the right spot for it!

Kratos Valkyrie MTOW is 2,722KG with huge strike range. MQ-25 Sting Ray holding 15,000LBs of fuel is obviously a lot bigger. Curious if Mosquito and Vixen be similar to these two.

Bloke down the pub
Bloke down the pub
19 days ago
Reply to  Ron StateSide

Downside of having cat on starboard side, next to ski-jump, is that it can’t be seen properly from flyco.

Ron Stateside
Ron Stateside
19 days ago

The aft bridge’s flyco windows look like they give a perfectly clear view of that area.

Regardless, you can carry 8x Spear 3 and 2x Meteor internally in an F35. If Vixen/Mosquito could have the same internal payload with double the combat radius and 1/5th the cost I don’t see how the MOD is not “all in”.

oryzons
oryzons
18 days ago
Reply to  Ron Stateside

No you can’t.
F35 WILL be able to carry UP to 8 Spear 3 IF everything works out as planified.
OR
It WILL be able to carry UP to 2 of a TAILORED version of the METEOR if every thing works out as planified wich is already unlikely.

But an F35 will never be able to carry internally 8 Spear 3 and 2 Meteor, that’s completly impossible.

Ron Stateside
Ron Stateside
18 days ago
Reply to  oryzons

On the contrary it is possible and seemingly probable:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29789/spear-mini-cruise-missile-getting-an-electronic-warfare-variant-to-swarm-with-is-a-huge-deal

Back on point, Vixen looks like it could hold quite a bit internally, and with the way the sides of the fuselage are shaped, it makes me wonder if you could have “side doors” that rotate out and up like mini wings on either side of the fuselage, with hardpoints.

oryzons
oryzons
14 days ago
Reply to  Ron Stateside

Fair enough but I am not convinced. There is nothing official just possibility.
We’ll see.

Grant
Grant
16 days ago
Reply to  oryzons

It can carry 4 per spear 3 and 2 meteors with the slightly modified tails per side.

George
George
20 days ago

Hi folks hope all is well.
Good to see the use of technology, and of course will give an extra asset and reduce the risk of personnel if events get hot. Obviously this is just the start, and as ever this project will evolve.
Funny it may be me, when I first saw the picture, it reminded me of the V2s used by the Germans from the launch pad.
Cheers,
George

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
20 days ago
Reply to  George

V1s George!. But yes, that ramp looks similar.

George
George
19 days ago

Hi Daniel,
Thanks yes that’s correct I realized after, got my Vs the wrong way.
Cheers
George

Daveyb
Daveyb
20 days ago

The Banshee can carry additional wing tip radar augmentors to vary its RCS. Plus it can carry the Rattler.
comment image

This small drone missile can mimic the flight profiles of air to ground missiles, but can also do a ballistic profile. When ground launched, it can reach a speed of Mach 1.85, when air launched its pushing Mach 2.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
20 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Interesting why does it say 460mph in the text but up to Mach 2 here. Different version?

Ian M
Ian M
20 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

daveyb is referring to the small sub drone attached under the Banshee.

DaveyB
DaveyB
20 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Yes, the Bashee 80+ as shown here in orange and yellow is the same as the dark bluey grey one usewd on HMS Prince of Wales, with the twin jets is capable of nearly 500mph, depending on the altitude etc. Whereas, the Rattler, small deployable black missile (rocket powered) like thing under the Banshee, is capable of near Mach 2 speeds.

Tommo
Tommo
20 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Hi Spy , 460mph is uphill and Mach 2 must be down hill LOL

Lusty
Lusty
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

😂

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Cheers Lusty , something too smile about ,when queuing for Petrol for my Lawnmower

David Barry
David Barry
16 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Vespa or Lambretta?

Tommo
Tommo
16 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

Suffolk Colt don’t need a licence for one of those might upgrade too a Sit down mower

Jonathan
Jonathan
19 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

So the drone launches its own drone…..

how far down that rabbit hole could you go…..

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago

UAVs are definitely taking off it seems!

Airshow China 2021: China highlights its confidence in homegrown military UAVs29 SEPTEMBER 2021

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/airshow-china-2021-china-highlights-its-confidence-in-homegrown-military-uavs

Tommo
Tommo
20 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Not wrong there, Nigel they have just unveiled that twin jet engine Drone that about the size of bus god knows what it’s Radar cross section is but from the front shoot of the fuselage looks like Kelly Johnson SR 71

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
20 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

And their new engine for the J20A it appears. And with plans to build up to 500 of them, It should be a very interesting decade ahead! They are currently in the process of constructing a forth facility to build them.

“J-20A twin-engined, fifth-generation, multirole fighter aircraft powered by indigenously developed engines.”

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/air-platforms/latest/airshow-china-2021-chinese-air-force-displays-j-20a-powered-by-domestic-engines

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Really Indigenous developed Engines
NiGel shouldn’t you have placed an Rather large Question mark after that statement, If they have then that’s a first since the creation of Black Powder which they did invent alas their R+D group was its first casualties

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Not really Tommo, as it was a quote from Janes!

That said, clearly, they’re making progress in introducing locally produced engines that can supercruise.

No doubt why the west is looking at the next generation of engines to stay ahead.

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Thanks Nigel for that quick response It just seemed odd, although Jane’s is the go to publication for Al that’s new in the military world of defence ,I just wondered whether the hand of industrial and technological espionage had first put them on the road too developing a 100 per cent Indigenous built engine ,or they just got very lucky with their R+D I prefer the first option myself but then again The chap in my local takeaway doesn’t know either or does he .?

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

You can bet your bottom dollar they have been trying to steal as much tech as possible and will continue to do so!

More on the subject can be found here.

“The Pentagon is already seeing the consequences of such data theft as China presses on with the development of advanced weapons systems that seem to directly draw on American technology. Examples of advanced Chinese weapons that incorporate American know-how include the Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31 stealth fighters and electromagnetic catapult launch systems”

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-china-stole-top-secret-information-f-22-and-f-35-94201

Last edited 19 days ago by Nigel Collins
Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

It’s a shame that China doesn’t recognise intellectual copyright theft if they did then There’d be broke Nigel

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Agreed Tommo,

David Barry
David Barry
16 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

If they did, there would be a lot of chicoms with holes in the back of their heads.

No bad thing imho.

Tommo
Tommo
16 days ago
Reply to  David Barry

How are their families going too pay for those Bullets used ?

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

China has a very long way to go to match Western jet engine technology and capability. Somthing the Russians still lag well behind. They have nothing to match the quality of the EJ200 or F135. Which makes me wonder about most of the other technical advances China claims.

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay.

Let’s just pray the Blades melt on a continuing bases and if your correct in your assumptions Robert then hopefully their keep replacing those Blades Like for Like lol

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

I forgot to mention this, not that he has much of a clue about the planes actual capabilities compared to some on UKDJ!

PUBLISHEDMAY 3, 2019

General Charles Brown, the head of Pacific Air Forces, said the stealthy J-20 fighter could “possibly” be operational this year, a move he said would signal “greater threat, greater capability” for China in the Pacific.

He went on to emphasize that U.S. efforts to counter those developments include rising deployments of next-generation F-35 jets and continuing overflights of strategic areas such as the South China Sea.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

I would put a very large question mark against the 5th gen claim. An F15C probably wouldn’t have much trouble against one of these.

Reaper
Reaper
19 days ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Just a coincidence Chinese drones are very VERY similar looking to western ones.

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
19 days ago
Reply to  Reaper

Purely!!!

David Barry
David Barry
16 days ago
Reply to  Reaper

Just a coincidence but ours look like 1943ish Gernan V1s… 🙂

Bluemoonday
Bluemoonday
20 days ago

Looks like something flying around Richmond Park?

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Bluemoonday

The Deer,better be ready

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

It can chase Fenton, as well as the Deer LOL

farouk
farouk
20 days ago

You have to admit Gerry Anderson was well ahead for his time.:

thunderbird.jpg
Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Will it have Strings or wires

Geoffi
Geoffi
19 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Except that photo is of a pimped-up 60 year-old Draken…

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Geoffi

Cheers, Geaffi, you’ve just blown my dreams of ever seeing the Navy having an International Resuce Logo emblazoned on their UAVs

Peter S
Peter S
20 days ago

Does this really prove anything useful? The RN launched Hurricanes from much smaller CAM ships in WW2 and they had to ditch in the sea unless near to land. The launch and recovery of aircraft size drones will be a much more complex and expensive task. Since the operation of such drones will depend on software control, just as the F35 does, would it not make sense to design a STOVL drone to operate in the same way as F35? Wouldn’t vertical landing be both a simpler and safer option than trying to operate cats and traps alongside a ski… Read more »

Paul42
Paul42
20 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

The traps will be the problem. It means creating an angled deck, its not possible to safely recover any other way

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
20 days ago
Reply to  Paul42

Hi Paul, these drones don’t have any undercarriage to land back on deck maybe future models will have. I wonder if the Taranis might be given a go off the carriers?

Tommo
Tommo
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Questin, a couple of us proposed that the UAVs could have inbuilt Automatic airbag flotation Device meaning that less damage too the UAVs if the only way they can be recovered is by controlled water landing as they have no undercarriage .Traps would have to be Nets , and mats As they neither have hooks or undercarriage

Daveyb
Daveyb
20 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

I suppose it depends on the requirements of the drone. If the drone is to be used as a cheap throwaway target, then recovering it really doesn’t matter. If the ship has a plastic and metal 3D printer, it could produce them on board. However, if it’s something like the Banshee, then it would be better to recover them, as they’re not cheap. In the past drones operating off ships have been captured in nets. But that runs the risk of them being damaged during capture and also limits the overall size of the drone. Apart from that, you could… Read more »

Peter S
Peter S
20 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Very informative thanks. The problems of operating aircraft size drones from a carrier designed for STOVL seem enormous to me.
The F35 b virtually lands itself so a STOVL drone might seem a real possibility. I take the point about the engine power needed.
The USN is concentrating on tanker drones, understandable given the distances involved in Pacific deployments. The priority for the RN is to augment the F35 numbers. I expect it will prove cheaper to buy some more F35s than to develop the drone and install EMALS and cats and traps on the QEs.
Cheers

Paul42
Paul42
19 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

Look up Lockheeds “VARIOUS” UCAV concept. It seemed a bit space age at the time, but in fact its based on existing systems including the lift concept used in the F35B. This really is the type of thing we coukd use on the QE class without worrying about cats and traps.

expat
expat
19 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

I wonder if there’s a case for revisiting the concept of the Ryan X-13 Vertijet

450px-Ryan_X-13.jpg
James Blyther
James Blyther
20 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

Hi, with a catapult launch if they could design it around a new mini Pegasus engine to allow it to hover for recovery, They could resurrect sky-crane ( which was tested on the original harrier ) for the recovery part.

It would allow any warship that can operate the catapult and crane a small fast-ish jet to operate.

oryzons
oryzons
18 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

Or maybe, maybe it would be a lot easier if the Carrier would have been designed for cats and straps after all no ?

Just saying…

Mark
Mark
20 days ago

Surely we could experiment a little with a predator drone. It has a stall speed of 54 knots so if POW is going 30 knts into a 20 mph head wind it could basically come to a hover and drop on to the deck with a rolling stop. Yes I know the wind doesn’t always blow but surely with such a slow stall speed it won’t take alot to stop it even if it’s just a simple trap. A proven technology that could be cheaply modified and tested. Also the landing gear may need a little strengthening. I’m only saying… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
19 days ago

“According to the Italian Navy statement released recently to EDR On-Line, the Italian frigate conducted live firings with the Davide configured Super Rapido gun against a Banshee Jet 80 subsonic aerial target at low altitude. The gun/guided ammunition suite is optimized to counter fast and maneuvering threats with aiming kinematics at the defended naval platform. The need to use a drone flight trajectory parallel or diverting from the defended platform, imposed by the range safety regulations as occurred in that live firing represents a more demanding and stressing scenario for the guided munitions and the guidance system. The firing action… Read more »

Daveyb
Daveyb
19 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

This is quite a big thing for guided kinetic rounds, fired from a relatively slow moving ship or static gun system. As the article says the 76mm DART was fired at the Banshee drone target, that was passing the ship in parallel, not towards it (due to range safety)! This is important as the round is playing chase, especially as it uses radar beam riding to track the target, rather that flying towards a predicted interception point along the target’s likely path. This means if the target starts manoeuvring the DART is always chasing it, rather than correcting the predicted… Read more »

Ian M
Ian M
19 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

I do like a well worded, technical and informative response. Well done Mr b.

AlexS
AlexS
19 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

That is not how it works Daveyb.

The search is made by the ship main radar and processed.
Then the main radar hands the data to RTN 25X directors (there are 2 for the 2 guns.)
The radar/command guidance in the turret is the device that communicates with the guided rounds so obviously has to be CLOS.

It do not do any search and it is not supposed to do.

Last edited 19 days ago by AlexS
AlexS
AlexS
18 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

https://www.navalanalyses.com/2014/08/bergamini-class-fremm-frigates-of.html

You can see in above link the director radar in a FREMM. With companies name change and designations it is called Selex NA-25X in that diagram.

Daveyb
Daveyb
18 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

Hi Alex, cheers. However, that is only part of the story. The system uses two independent radars, one to illuminate the target and another to measure the delta between the target and the DART round, which forms part of the Strales kit. As quoted by Leonardo: “Leonardo has included the STRALES™ Kit that uses a guidance radar housed in front of the turret under an overhead flip cover to guide and actually fly Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot (FSDS) DART rounds toward airborne, missile, or surface target interception.” This radar is a Ka band guidance radar antenna used to generate the… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
18 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

With guns the behaviour has been to stop after confirmed kill. The NA25X probably is free to start to track another target after handed over to the Strales mount. Command guidance is not different to Semi-Active in that matter. Edit: in theory you probably could put several CLOS antenna system on the ship independent of the gun mount. The Orka do not appear to be considered an anti missile round, the nick name is Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft. “ORKA is a “One Shot One Kill” round fitted with an imaging semi-active seeker: It can be guided through… Read more »

Last edited 18 days ago by AlexS
Tommo
Tommo
18 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Thanks Davey,for your indepth, and informative post which Alex had posted, As with all AA shoots on any range safety is paramount especially when New munition comes into play, as with which the Davido rapido Gun was using ,76mm Dart rds .Could I suggest correct me if I’m wrong That this Shoot against the Banshee would not have been a run of the mill AA SHOOT but more of Telemetry data gathering pen and time base recorxing SHOOT, As you also stated that a target running parallel to the ship is not something that would normal happen .Gun Radar and… Read more »

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
17 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

On missile/CIWS shoots against say a low level height keeper rushton towed target the flight profile is calculated to provide the weapon systems threat evaluation software a valid threatening target profile. Usually the target is seen as heading towards the ship but is flown to pass not far ahead or astern. The system will still engage it because its in the threat envelope. Such shoots have gone wrong though. A T42 did a Phalanx shoot and hit the tow wire diverting the towed targets flight path. It hit the ship around the intakes for the GTs. Nobody was injured but… Read more »

Tommo
Tommo
17 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Thanks Cunbuster For ,that ,what I meant was really not about concerning the Bandhee but on the Muntions involved where as our mk 8 4.5 AAP , or SUP are fused high or low by Gun controller in the ops rm to the Gun and Round .These muntions that the Italian Navy used against the Banshee although of a different Calibre are a different kettle of Fish too ours ,and as I suggested in my Last post that the Shoot had been more of one that Involved the collection of Telemetry data for how the Rds acted once they had… Read more »

Reaper
Reaper
19 days ago

Strap bombs on and make these swarm suicide drones to hit ships ect before F35s. How many could we Lauch from a carrier quickly?

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
19 days ago
Reply to  Reaper

I was almost thinking the same thing, but using the small cruise missile already dangling off the bottom of one (the supersonic target). It’s a good looking little aircraft and if only it could be recovered properly rather than crashing into the sea. A sort of mini Vulcan! Also agree with Mark, in that it should surely be possible to use some of these large drones on the carriers. Not perhaps for actual peer strike missions. But surveillance and so on, or even engaging smaller/land targets…carrying Martlet or Sea Venom missiles assuming they could be integrated on them. The one… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
19 days ago

New caption comp:

” So where’s the fuse then”

Tommo
Tommo
18 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

And whose got the Fuse Key

MikeB1947
MikeB1947
19 days ago

If I’m correct the original Banshee was designed/manufactured by Meggitt in the 1980s. Can anyone advise when Qinetiq took over the development and production?

Daveyb
Daveyb
19 days ago
Reply to  MikeB1947
MikeB1947
MikeB1947
18 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Thanks. I was not aware of that acquisition.

George Parker
George Parker
19 days ago

I’m not sure of the significance of the publicity. Hopefully it is not the extent of the unmanned vehicle tests conducted by the carrier.

Paul42
Paul42
18 days ago

That seems like quite a ‘chunky’ launch ramp!!! Where was that stored on POW? Taking up space in empty hangar? A lot has been.made in the press about those being a lot more than it is…..and bearing in mind the fact it has to be recovered ashore by parachute, you have to ask why this was done at all?

Last edited 18 days ago by Paul42
Daveyb
Daveyb
18 days ago
Reply to  Paul42

Apart from using the drones as a training target when the ship is deployed and a long way from land. One possibility is to see how they might interact with a F35. The other is in developing the Navy’s Project Vampire, i.e. lightweight, fixed wing carrier borne crewless autonomous systems used for reconnaissance, surveillance and attack. The Banshee can be fitted with a high resolution camera and provides operator feedback through a data-link. include a warhead and you effectively have created a Harop like loitering munition.

Daveyb
Daveyb
18 days ago

Perhaps what is telling, was the location of the catapult system. It was strapped down to the deck where the waist cat would have been on the CATOBAR model. Is this the likely place that the possible lightweight EMALS will be fitted?

Mark
Mark
18 days ago

Hmmmmmm wonder what the range is? put a couple of pylons under the wings carrying 2 spear 3’s and a 150kg lump of explosive in it with a spear 3 seeker and hey presto a hunter killer suicide drone. The spear 3s take out the air defenses and then the banshee takes out the ship all controlled buy an F35b lurking at a safe distance away. Can see how the POW/QE will have a real bite to them in the coming years. We won’t need lots of F35b if one can control a swarm of drones like this.

Grant
Grant
16 days ago

Not sure how these drones can provide the same level of training to our ships as hawks flown by human beings. Getting rid of them as aggressoe squadrons was stupid and ultimately saved the government the square root of f**k all in cash