Abracadabra-airborne Rearming

The technology for rearming aircraft with weapons into airborne refueling, with a number of notable
midair might soon be a reality. This revolutionarymodifications. Far Technologies' system comprises a
technology would enable combat missions, currentlyrearming plane (a C-130, C-130c, C-17, or even a C-5)
requiring dozens of aircraft, to be performed by verywith an internal bomb storage area and loading device
few, and to carry out numerous missions byconsisting of a large aft door with a modified
unmanned combat aircraft without returning to base.remote-driven robotic arm (boom) equipped with a
Airborne rearming might prove to be as significant asday-night camera as well as sensors, and, on the
the airborne refueling revolution that occurred half aattack aircraft, a special smart pylon to receive the
century ago.arms from the boom. Each C-130c would be able to
KB-29M performing mid-air refuling (Credit: U.S. Aircarry a payload of up to sixteen 2,000 lb (907 kg)
Force Museum)bombs (such as an MK-84), while larger aircraft would
In 1921, Alexander P. de Seversky, a Russian piloteasily be able to rearm a full squadron of planes (A
who immigrated to the U.S., was the first to applyC-17 could potentially carry up to seventy MK-84s
for and receive a patent for midair refueling. Twoand a C-5, around 100).
years later, the U.S. army began operational testingRearming mechanism
of midair refueling, but although successful, anotherAt present, manned attack missions may take up to
decade passed before the necessary technology andseveral hours, and most of this time is spent flying to
technique were perfected and midair refuelingand from the target. By employing a refueling and
became routine. World War II witnessed an evenrearming aircraft positioned 50 to 150 miles from the
greater improvement in the field of midair refuelingtarget, the efficiency of an air strike could be
technology, but the increase in internal aircraft fueldoubled with only a slight increase in time and flight
capacities reduced the need for this technology atdistance. While manned aircraft could benefit from
the time. With the introduction of "fuel-hungry"airborne rearming in certain scenarios, unmanned
jet-powered bombers in the post-war years, thecombat air vehicles (UCAVs) currently under
requirement for aerial refueling became apparentdevelopment could theoretically gain much more from
once again. Since existing refueling methods provedsuch a technology. Unlike manned aircraft, UCAVs can
inadequate for refueling jet bombers, the Boeingcurrently stay aloft for days, and in the future,
Company began testing the "Boeing boom" system,weeks or even months at a time, performing
in which a wide pipe connected to the rear of acountless refueling and rearming rounds. Such a
modified B-29 fitted with small wings, was loweredcapability does not yet exist and would require some
and "flown" to a connector on the receiver aircraft.level of automatic operation, similar to that currently
This new system permitted the transfer of overunder development for aerial refueling; if successful,
six-times as much fuel per minute and since thehowever, it would dramatically increase the flexibility
1950's, further improvements to the boom systemof air power utilization in future conflicts.
have increased its efficiency and safety. But althoughA comprehensive study, conducted by Professor
computers and a variety of sensors were integratedAsher Tishler from Tel Aviv University, on the
in recent years, the refueling system remainslogistical, economic, and operational aspects of ABRA
humanly-operated. Several companies world-wide areoutlined a number of benefits over conventional
developing automatic technologies for aerial refueling,rearming: (1) the number of bombs delivered in a
designed to further increase the safety of thisgiven time frame could be quadrupled in certain
complex procedure.situations, (2) a great cost reduction would be
Whereas aerial refueling increases the range of anincurred, due to the reduction in the number of
aircraft almost indefinitely, bombers still must returnaircraft needed to perform each mission, (3) an
to base for rearming as they are limited in theoperational capability could be maintained even while
amount of weapons they carry. However, when theairfields and carriers are under attack, (4) a reduction
target is situated hundreds of miles away from ain aircraft response time whenever a new target is
friendly base, precious time and resources are lost onlocated, and, although not explicitly mentioned in
flights to base for rearming. Furthermore, in someTishler's report, (5) the potential for aerial conquest,
cases the political situation precludes the use ofin which an aircraft (typically a UAV or UCAV)
friendly military bases near the operating theater.occupies a specific area of the enemy's airspace and
Bombs inside a rearming planemaintains it for an unlimited period to observe enemy
To resolve these problems, the Israeli company Farmovements and eliminate all relevant targets in that
Technologies developed the Airborne Rearmingarea.
System (ABRA; currently patent pending) inTFOT recently interviewed Nir Padan, CEO of Far
conjunction with the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI)Technologies as well as a distinguished Israeli test
engineering group that conducted preliminary systempilot, who elaborated on ABRA ca dabra.
design. The ABRA concept is similar in many respects