Does Pilot = Dodo?

[Integer1]

Who will fly the new X-prize winning shuttles? Or to Mars? Or regular commercial airplanes? As long as we have commercial airplanes in the sky, we will need military planes in the sky, especially after you-know-what happened. Would the government of any country allow the civilians to have more powerful cars/boats/trucks/airplanes than them?

There will always be jobs for pilots even if UAV's took major effect tomorrow. In fact, I think UAV's are great.

The whole point of a plane is that it has to be large enough to carry ordinance, one or more people, and fuel. It makes a ton of sense to have a 10 meter long plane instead.

1) no fuel costs, no passenger weights or size, a cost of 1/1000th of a regular military plane, a very specialized function, and no humans dying if it gets shot down
2) could have very very light but effective payloads of chemical, bio, or nuclear weapons
3) hard to see on radar and to shoot down

All sorts of commercial sectors will want UAV's, such as newspeople, farmers, USPS (who knows). It will drive more interest, awareness, and competition into military flight programs, which is a good thing. And the price of regular military planes will come down as a result, so the military will still be able to afford them, and they will be of an even higher technology as a result of all this extra research. (Think Computers, DVD burners, etc.)

I think the future IS air planes, though yes, computer technology will become more involved with them. People are afraid of computer jobs being outsourced to India, but I think if you're good enough, you'll be able to have a job in this new emerging field that will only grow as the need and use of regular planes, UAV's, x-prize stuff, and space shuttles will only GROW.

(And that's only talking about the US! There are many countries that don't even know what a plane is.)

 

[Greaper007]

I agree with the group, Untill computer programers and engineers outman pilots at the pentagon and below, unman aircraft won't overtake those run by pilots.

 

[lattajosh]

Had a long China post, but until there is a China thread, I'll wait. As for UAVs, no one will ever fully trust a machine with their safety, whether it be on an airliner, transport, or close air support. There are too many things to go wrong with UAVs to fully trust them when lives are in the balance.

 

[fc2spyguy]

Aside from the boring stuff, they still have the Soviet-developed Sunburn nuclear anti-ship (read anti-carrier) missile. From what I have heard, we do not possess systems to effectively stop it, I could be wrong though. Anyone?

Yeah, you're wrong on that one. There are several missiles in the Navy inventory that are capable of defeating the sunburn. I can't get into details but we have the technology to defeat it.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

And my PC employer agrees with you as well ... My view -- China: one big gray prison. The sky is gray, the buildings are gray, even the people are gray.....

Aaaaah, yes, the "good old days". Well, not to worry guys, THEY will always be "ChiComs" in MY heart. And to many of my "brothers" also as long as this flies over the mainland.

"We'll" never say die .... and the spirit of Navy attack aviation lives on ... I still have fond (?) memories of some long-ago, lost SIOP targets.

Oh, well, where did I put my wheelchair? It's probably "made in China", as well ....

No worries, A4...You can be my wingman anytime!

 

[vegita1220]

Air superiority and a quality fighting force wins a war such as WWIII (assuming nukes aren't used), not crappy air power and huge sizes of manpower; it wouldn't take much (assuming air superiority) to bomb the Chinese manufacturing centers and the major Chinese cities, meaning you'd really have 1 billion starving people; and even with the supplies, the Chinese would still have to train and supply all those troops too.

And from what I hear, China is shrinking their military; they themselves know such a huge army is rather pointless these days.

China buying Russian bombers and supersonic antishipping missiles would lead to a really bad day. One of their subs just scared the crap out of the JSDF when it popped up nearby while inserting undetected...supposedly. Then there's all that "advice" they're trying to get on amphibious operations...gee wonder where that's going to go. And nitpicking, but they've had border clashes with the Russians and the Indians.
And air superiority...doubt the ROKs and Japanese would let us use their bases in that scenario...meaning no F-22s, unless you plan on flying them out of Guam or something. Which, even with supercruise, should make for one sore ass.
They've got a ways to go, but they're spending bucks, while we're chopping back, spending a lot on combat as opposed to R&D(Iraq), and of course, we've got to cover te whole damn world. It's not so much that I think that they'd beat the Pacific Fleet, it's more like even one flattop going down would be too damn much.

Maybe I just always see nothing but the bad, but I see the whole PRC as one big CF waiting to go off. Lots of unused weapons, really fanatical old guys running the show who're starting to get old, a potentially volatile environment, and the Taiwan issue adds up to one bad fricking day if things roll right. And I swear, I think the PRC really do want to create the next Greater East Asian Coprosperity Sphere(that's what the Japanese wanted in WW2).

And I agree with A4. Anybody who's ever been there will tell it's a gray smoggy nasty place that doesn't make sense. Even their subway system was built retarded. One big square running near the city borders...good going genius. And don't forget where SARS originated. Bleak, dude, bleak.

 

[Broadsword2004]

I think F/A-18 E/F Superhornets and F-35's launched from carriers could take on any fighter China has, as their pilots lack the training of U.S. pilots and they also do not have the avionics in them of the American aircraft. As for Japan, they hate China, and if China was a real threat, you can bet they'd let the U.S. use their base. But from what I have read, they are trying to get the U.S. to leave and the U.S. and Japan will share a base that is only 40 miles from Taiwan.

China has no experience operating carriers, they have no combat experience fighter-plane-wise even, unless you mean World War II.

Also, no carrier is going to get close enough to China in an actual war scenario to get taken out. The Chinese would have to fly their planes most likely far out of range to get to the carrier, and even if they could, they'd have to intercept the carrier's own aircraft. Then there's the carrier's anti-aircraft defenses. No carrier would go down without one hell of a fight in a real war scenario, and China would lose a LOT of their force in trying to do so.

As for Chinese submarines, the U.S. has submarines too, and has done a lot of exercises in submarine warfare (Cold War); China hasn't done this to near that caliber. Also, the carriers have anti-submarine aircraft it will send out to hunt down enemy subs.

As for China going into Japanese waters, they are just a bully thinking now that they can exert supposed "influence" around those areas, when really they are still nothing at the moment. The Japanese told them if they find another Chinese sub in their waters again, they will sink it.

True, China is growing in power, but they still have a long ways to go before they catch up to the United States.

 

[fc2spyguy]

Broad, some of what china has can compete with what we have.

First, you mentioned carriers. If china is looking to succeed Taiwan they don't have the need for carriers. Taiwan is well w/i striking distance of their aircraft, as well as their fighters.

Second, you mentioned subs. Believe it or not diesel subs when submerged are actually quieter than nukes. This is because they are operating on battery power. Now, it is a given that they have to surface to recharge their battieries but a good commander could ensure that is necessary only when the enemy is not around (read good surveilance from shore stations).

Now, maybe the F/A-18 could take on any fighter that they have but does that include the air defense systems that China has along the coast? Granted, precision strikes from tomahawk missiles and B-2 bombers would likely occur before flyovers by less steathly aircraft but remember, it's not just aircraft vs. aircraft that happen in wars.

To assume that China is "nothing" is just plain ignorant. I've been w/i 1k yards of a chinese boat and trust me, they could have hurt us just as much as we them. A lot of things change when you're looking at the bridge of the "enemy" as opposed to talking about them.

I think you should learn a little more about Chine before you discount them so easily. A war with them would not be a pretty sight.

Oh yeah, F-35's won't be around 2012 assuming no set backs, so they shouldn't even be considered in any equation at this point.

 

[Flash]

One of their subs just scared the crap out of the JSDF when it popped up nearby while inserting undetected...supposedly.

That is what the press says. The JMSDF found it, didn't they? And the JSMDF wasn't exactly scared, just really pissed.

Broad, I'm going to assume that you actually have no clue what you are talking about.

He actually has some valid points. You are right about them using carriers, but some of his other points are valid.

Believe it or not diesel subs when submerged are actually quieter than nukes. This is because they are operating on battery power.

Deisel boats are only as good as their operators. While the PRC has Kilos, most of their subs are of 50 year old Russian designs.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030502-china-sub03.htm

To assume that China is "nothing" is just plain ignorant. I've been w/i 1k yards of a chinese boat and trust me, they could have hurt us just as much as we them. A lot of things change when you're looking at the bridge of the "enemy" as opposed to talking about them.

No offense but some of what china has can compete with what we have

You are right, the PRC has plenty that can hurt us, conventially and nuclear. But I have been within 100 feet of them and they are a lot less scary then others in the region. They have a long way to go before they become a serious threat to the US military. Just because they buy 300 Flankers, a couple Sovremennyy's, nice SAM's and some anti ship missiles doesn't make them bad asses all of the sudden. They need to learn how to use and employ them. Give them 30 to 50 years, then I will be a little worried. They have plenty of problems at home they need to worry about in the meantime.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/31/international/asia/31china.html

China has no experience operating carriers, they have no combat experience fighter-plane-wise even, unless you mean World War II.

On a historical note, you are right about carriers but wrong about aerial combat. The last major conflict they had involved aerial combat. In 1979 the PRC invaded Vietnam, the two have been rivals/enemies for hundreds of years. The Vietnamese halted the invasion and dominated in aerial combat.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/prc-vietnam.htm

 

[A4sForever]

ROGER THAT, STEVE, but ...

No worries, A4...You can be my wingman anytime!

Belay that, "Ice" ... YOU can be MY Wingman !!!
...... "Maverick" [a.k.a. A4sForever ( :icon_wink ???)]

 

[Brett327]

Blah Blah Blah

Just to jump on some of what Flash had to say, seems like the majority of the folks on here spouting their various opinions on these matters are students or wannabes. I remember how cool I thought I was and how much I thought I knew when I was a flight student. The bottom line is that nobody knows S about any of this and everything here, even from people like me and Flash who have been out on the pointy end of the spear, is nothing more than wild conjecture. Just laying down a little perspective for everyone for the new year.

Brett

P.S. Hey Flash, when were you at NUW last and in what squadron?

 

[Broadsword2004]

Yeah, true, I wasn't trying to imply though that China would be easy to fight (easy like Iraq, which also gave a little bit of trouble in marching to Baghdad)in like a conflict over Taiwan; I just meant more in terms of their projection power, it will be a while before they can be considered a threat the way the Soviets were, in terms of force (or a while before their projection power is anything like the U.S. currently has).

I guess I just mean, from what I read, I think people over-hype Chinese military power to be a lot more than what it really is.

 

[fc2spyguy]

Deisel boats are only as good as their operators. While the PRC has Kilos, most of their subs are of 50 year old Russian designs.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030502-china-sub03.htm

You link to that article but something like that is pretty insignificant really. On the same argument one could easily say that our Navy has sacked over 25 CO's in the past 3 years due to loss of confidence by the Navy.

 

[Fly Navy]

I guess I just mean, from what I read, I think people over-hype Chinese military power to be a lot more than what it really is.

A) it's the potential and ambition that is the threat, not necessarily their current status.

B) They have a ****load more man-power to call upon.

 

[kmac]

Fly Navy-
On your second point: The Japanese had a ****load more manpower to call upon on the islands in the Pacific. They learned quickly that bonzai type charges were ineffective. That being said, numbers of people don't matter against superior firepower/tactics when employed properly. I'm no grunt, just a student of history. Numbers would matter if we tried to invade China, but that goes against the axiom of never fight a land war in Asia.