• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Aerial Vehicle Operator (AVO) a.k.a. Drone Operators Requirements

To pile on here, one of my Commodores in the mid-2000's said: "There is nothing unmanned about unmanned platforms, aviation or otherwise." If you look at TRITON, the manpower requirements are jynormous. I know when unmanned, autonomous platforms were just a sparkle in the eye of the defense industry and DoD, drastic reductions in manpower was a yuge selling point. It really hasn't turned out that way.
 
robav8r said:
To pile on here, one of my Commodores in the mid-2000's said: "There is nothing unmanned about unmanned platforms, aviation or otherwise." If you look at TRITON, the manpower requirements are jynormous. I know when unmanned, autonomous platforms were just a sparkle in the eye of the defense industry and DoD, drastic reductions in manpower was a yuge selling point. It really hasn't turned out that way.
Click to expand...
"The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots."
 
Great simpsons quotes aside, it's true that UASs will usually result in an increased maintenance requirement as you now have the ground station and associated data links to care and feed on top of the aircraft. People like to think the ground station is just a conex box or room somewhere but it's really a chunk of the airplane. Also you have more parts and complexity than a manned aircraft. Lots of radios and data links (and we know how good we tend to be with that stuff), maybe additional mission computers because the processing is plot between the air and the ground, and some weird ground equipment for maintenance that an manned system wouldn't have to name a few.
 
Pags said:
Great simpsons quotes aside, it's true that UASs will usually result in an increased maintenance requirement as you now have the ground station and associated data links to care and feed on top of the aircraft. People like to think the ground station is just a conex box or room somewhere but it's really a chunk of the airplane. Also you have more parts and complexity than a manned aircraft. Lots of radios and data links (and we know how good we tend to be with that stuff), maybe additional mission computers because the processing is plot between the air and the ground, and some weird ground equipment for maintenance that an manned system wouldn't have to name a few.
Click to expand...


As the Marine Corps wants to get into the MQ-9 world, I don't think anyone wearing an EGA has a true appreciation or understanding (I sure didn't until I got to where I am now) of just how HUGE this program is. The amount of tail and associated support units and equipment goes on for days and everyone in those units have to be able to talk to everyone else with 100% reliability across the globe.

A planned power, or network, outage for construction or maintenance (or even a damn fire drill) back home can have direct consequences on ATO lines flying combat ops in the various AORs.
 
Pags said:
Great simpsons quotes aside, it's true that UASs will usually result in an increased maintenance requirement as you now have the ground station and associated data links to care and feed on top of the aircraft. People like to think the ground station is just a conex box or room somewhere but it's really a chunk of the airplane. Also you have more parts and complexity than a manned aircraft. Lots of radios and data links (and we know how good we tend to be with that stuff), maybe additional mission computers because the processing is plot between the air and the ground, and some weird ground equipment for maintenance that an manned system wouldn't have to name a few.
Click to expand...
When I read your Simpson’s quote this came to mind...

 
Not sure which thread to post this in

dab9f61431011d44cdc1d102fbe5edf9.png
 
Sorry I'm late, Triton pilot checking in. I have no idea what MQ-25 or flying warrants is gonna look like, but I can talk to MQ-4 at least.
Brett327 said:
I think it's a pretty new thing, at least on the Navy side. For the group, does Triton or Fire Scout have dedicated non-URL operators, or rely on the supporting squadron Aircrew? Some of the USMC or USAF folks may have some sense of what the gig is like.
Click to expand...
Triton does not, it's only operated by squadron aircrew, with assistance from contractors in some aspects such as WBSC coordination and troubleshooting the human-machine interface in general.
taxi1 said:
When the Navy can safely operate these things off of the big decks, use is going to explode. JMO, YMMV, etc.
Click to expand...
Concur, Triton is already flying as much as it can at this point.
Dontcallmegump said:
I don't know how that is... care to share, or pass on required reading?
Click to expand...
VUP-19 is structured pretty much how the VP squadrons are. Skipper, XO, CMC, a handful of department heads, a bunch of JO's at the pilot and TACCO positions, and a bunch of enlisted sailors for operating the sensors. MO is collocated with the aircraft, and said site also has an O-4/O-5 OIC attached. The big difference I see between VUP-19 and my sea tour is the presence of a reserve Squadron Augment Unit, or SAU, and a pretty sizable one at that.
taxi1 said:
If you're operating a platform that big up in the atmosphere with the rest of the planes, you pretty much need to know everything you'd know if you sitting in it, and have a similar level of maturity about operating it.
Click to expand...
100% agree.
 
Brett327 said:
I think it's a pretty new thing, at least on the Navy side. For the group, does Triton or Fire Scout have dedicated non-URL operators, or rely on the supporting squadron Aircrew? Some of the USMC or USAF folks may have some sense of what the gig is like.
Click to expand...
MQ-8 is currently maintained and operated by Fleet Sailors and Aircrew underway. Not sure how they're maintained ashore these days.
 
I know we're not supposed to speculate, but I bet the LCS crashed into the firescout.

news.usni.org

MQ-8B Fire Scout Crashes Into Littoral Combat Ship USS Charleston On Deployment - USNI News

An MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicle crashed into the side of Littoral Combat Ship USS Charleston (LCS-18) after taking off from the ship today, the Navy announced. The rotary-wing UAV was operating from the ship around 9:40 a.m. when the collision happened in the Western Pacific...
news.usni.org news.usni.org

 
Hozer said:
I know we're not supposed to speculate, but I bet the LCS crashed into the firescout.

news.usni.org

MQ-8B Fire Scout Crashes Into Littoral Combat Ship USS Charleston On Deployment - USNI News

An MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicle crashed into the side of Littoral Combat Ship USS Charleston (LCS-18) after taking off from the ship today, the Navy announced. The rotary-wing UAV was operating from the ship around 9:40 a.m. when the collision happened in the Western Pacific...
news.usni.org news.usni.org

Click to expand...
Well, with the LCS you never know.

I just hope this isn't my bud's det.
 
It would be a real shock to the system for some of us pilot hopefuls if they ended up making UAV a potential path they could have you select into during the SNA pipeline. Hoping they keep it separate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top