Talk:RQ-4 Global Hawk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Military aviation task force Related task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Aviation, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to aviation. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	Aviation Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related WikiProjects and/or task forces: Aircraft WikiProject

Unanswered questions:

Is the RQ-4 now a "production" aircraft or just a prototype? If it's a prototype, how far into development is it, and when will it enter service? If it's a production plane, when did it enter service? How many of them are there? --Robert Merkel 12:43, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Good questions, Robert. As I understand it, yes it is still a prototype, but no it has already entered service on a limited basis. They certainly used one for the invasion of Iraq, where it was (according to my source) very useful indeed. In recent years, the USAF seems to be quite prepared to do lengthy developmemt programs, easing gently from prototype to full-on production aircraft, and to use the quasi-prototypes in anger. They did the same with the first Gulf War and the ... er ... I forget the acronym - something-STARS, the (so to speak) "AWACS for tanks" 707 that is stuffed full of side-looking radar and communications gear. Tannin

Joint STARS or JSTARS

As of today, April 3 it goes into full time production. The USAF started the 18th Recon Squad headed by Lt Col Christopher B. Jella, replacing the 9th Operations Group as the operator of RQ-4A's in the USAF. Grunnamn is still sticking close to the project's devlopment however, seeing as the only qualified trainers are theirs.

Contents 1 QNR 2 "Unmanned" 3 cost 4 satellite photography 5 EuroHawk

[edit] QNR

What exactly is this bit about a quantum nucleonic reactor? What is the purpose? Produce gamma rays, but to what end? -Joseph 14:17, 2004 Jun 23 (UTC)

Nevermind. I figured it out. We ought to integrate an explanation into the article though. -Joseph 04:48, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)

Upon further investigation, the QNR thing looks like tabloid science. Thus illustrating the dangers of relying upon Popular Science as a news source. [1] -Joseph (Talk) 18:14, 2004 Sep 24 (UTC)

[edit] "Unmanned"

Does anyone else read this line as an oxymoron: This potentially paves the way for a revolution in unmanned flight, including that of unmanned civil passenger airliners. Wouldn't a passenger airliner be by definition "manned" in the sense of having humans aboard? Do they mean "pilotless"? "crewless"? Or should the phrase "passenger airliners" rather be "transports"?

Just changed this to "automatically piloted". Hope that helps. Akradecki 19:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Late reply, but that's much clearer, thanks Nate 02:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] cost

What is the cost per unit ? I heared they are quitte expencive ?

[edit] satellite photography

two different points here...

1. Google earth's best resolution of Edwards AFB shows what I am almost positive to be a global hawk park on the southernmost apron (in addition to 2 B-1B Lancers and a B-52 Stratofortress). This isn't too terribly relevant, I just thought some might find it interesting...

http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&q=&z=18&ll=34.898999,-117.874283&spn=0.0033,0.004989&t=k&om=1

1. The aurora project was, by most reasonable estimates, scrapped, due to high costs and lower necessity due to the increased coverage of satellite imagery. Why, then, does this same logic negate the need for the Global Hawk?? I have a few theories, but invite disccussion...

1. The Synthetic Aperture Radar provides a capability that satellites don't currently offer.

1. The loiter time (in excess of 24 hours by some accounts) exceeds that of any polar-orbiting satellite.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.26.204.228 (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

Re the EDW image...yes, that's were the flight test group parks them. There's usually one or two sitting out there. Akradecki 04:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EuroHawk

I merged in the EuroHawk article. It's just an RQ-4B with an EADS avionics package. Those avionics packages are interchangable anyhow; it seemed pointless to a separate article, when a paragraph in the main article would suffice. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 17:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)