Ahhhh....thats why it was a PC joke, dude.
-
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
UAVs, not just an Air Force gig anymore
- Thread starter kanakAttack
- Start date
And will be for CARGO. I think the day when a bunch of grunts willingly ride in an aircraft with no pilots is a loooong ways off.
Want2flyNow
I said over-easy!!!!!!
Wow. Thanks for taking a shit on my 14 year old flying dreams. ANyways.. will someone explain the philosophy behind UAVs.
"The UAV War"
1) both sides launch their robots.
2)both sides shoot down each others robots
3)the world goes "oh shit. that was pointless"
4)the world goes back to the old fashioned way
I thought the point of war was to kill the oppsing side. If you blow up the other sides robots whos gonna care? Whoopty do.
P.S-Does austrailia let Americains fly for their Navy and Af?
wish i could go UAV:icon_rage tipping....
"The UAV War"
1) both sides launch their robots.
2)both sides shoot down each others robots
3)the world goes "oh shit. that was pointless"
4)the world goes back to the old fashioned way
I thought the point of war was to kill the oppsing side. If you blow up the other sides robots whos gonna care? Whoopty do.
P.S-Does austrailia let Americains fly for their Navy and Af?
wish i could go UAV:icon_rage tipping....
invertedflyer
500 ft. from said obstacle
My argument is simple. People that argue for UCAVs mention "taking our pilots out of harms way". What did we sign up for anyway? Are infantrymen going to be taken out of harms way too? Why should aircrew be different?
Pilots train constantly to go into harms way.. its why they joined the service. Why is there this emphasis on removing them from that threat? The day that a modern version of robocop roams the battlefield dusting enemy robocops is the day the UCAV should be flying CAS.
/2c
Pilots train constantly to go into harms way.. its why they joined the service. Why is there this emphasis on removing them from that threat? The day that a modern version of robocop roams the battlefield dusting enemy robocops is the day the UCAV should be flying CAS.
/2c
skidz
adrenaline junky
They are aiming at the pilot and aircraft because they can. Nothing more.
To replace bodies on the ground, who are really in harms way, makes much more sense and would replace more bodies with less robots than replacing a single pilot(and nfo or gunner) with a single robot. But they can't go there because of the "a person in the thick of it will be able to make the difficult decisions with more precision than a robot and a controller looking through video screens" reason.
It's because they can.
To replace bodies on the ground, who are really in harms way, makes much more sense and would replace more bodies with less robots than replacing a single pilot(and nfo or gunner) with a single robot. But they can't go there because of the "a person in the thick of it will be able to make the difficult decisions with more precision than a robot and a controller looking through video screens" reason.
It's because they can.
"Taking pilots out of harm's way" is more of a tagline than a real justification. UAVs offer some capabilities that manned aircraft do not. Right now, their best attribute is their incredible time-on-station. They're weak as far as flexibility and payload, but they are improving rapidly. 5 years ago, the Predator was a baby, now it's loaded to bear with Hellfires. In 5-15 years the leaps are going to be even greater. UAVs will be used in all but the most dynamic environments. By the time the JSF is retired, I'm sure they'll be able to perform in just about any CAS or strike mission.
The whole history of warfare has been about putting more distance between combatants. We've gone from hands to clubs to spears to arrows to cannons to missiles. This is just an evolution of the process. I imagine there was a caveman lamenting the fact that clubbing his enemies to death eliminated the human in the loop from having to strangle his enemies with his bare hands, but we've moved on.
The whole history of warfare has been about putting more distance between combatants. We've gone from hands to clubs to spears to arrows to cannons to missiles. This is just an evolution of the process. I imagine there was a caveman lamenting the fact that clubbing his enemies to death eliminated the human in the loop from having to strangle his enemies with his bare hands, but we've moved on.
skidz
adrenaline junky
I forgot about this. They've been using -52s in Afghanistan for CAS because they could stay on station for a long time with an ass-load of weapons, so why not just put a computer in it and more fuel? It would do a lot more than a little a Reaper or any other UAV.
Because UAVs also crash a lot. Which is fine, because they're relatively cheap. Start augering in automated B-52s and you'll see issues. Plus, I doubt it would be economical to wire one of those up with the number of servos it would need to do strikes unmanned.
Because they cost LOTS of money. From flight training to health care to retirement. Just too damn expensive . . . .
Don't look now, but unmanned rotorcraft will hit the fleet before UCAS does and someone will have to fly those as well......
MQ-8 Fire Scout operating with USS Nashville in 2006
The more things change . . . . .
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/qh-50.html
invertedflyer
500 ft. from said obstacle
One could argue that a pilot in the thick of it would be able to make difficult decisions with more precision.
Now the Reapers are carrying GBU-12s as well. However, the main UCAVs that they are looking at will be jet powered, unlike the reaper. Won't that affect their TOS?
Cuz it just ain't cool!
UCAV pilots will have to be trained and given benefits too. Granted flight training would probably be cheaper, but thats assuming an all-UCAV fleet.
My argument will still rest on the robocop premise. Theres a reason that human intelligence is valuable on scene IMO.
Okay, but the Robocop premise is silly.
The SA provided by a camera/FLIR operated remotely is less than from a manned aircraft right now. In the future, that will almost certainly change. When it does, the fact that one is physically in a cockpit or not will cease to make much of a difference, and being there could actually be a hindrance; e.g. an aircraft operated from the rear could have several guys operating the weapons and sensors, taking shifts as needed, is unaffected by psychological and physiological factors, etc. War is about being unfair, to the enemy, that is, and in a fight against an enemy that doesn't care whether he dies, trading people for people with him is stupid. If technology helps us kill him faster, so much the better.
invertedflyer
500 ft. from said obstacle
Point taken... but my point still rests more with the "if the infantrymen is at risk, why should aircrew be special and get to sit out of the fight?" Plus the additional... "we sign up to go into harms way" mentality. Its for the sake of argument, not necesarily speaking to actual operational capability.
Less stress on aicrew, improved time-on-station, as well as the ability to maneuver and pull more Gs without human factors are definite strengths.
However, IMO weakness (in the early stages at least) include situational awareness, as well as payload. I'm no expert but I'd say that the predator's optics aren't as versatile as a pilot with the JHMCS. I agree that this won't always be the case... operational capability will increase. I guess its just a fact that I don't want to embrace
Less stress on aicrew, improved time-on-station, as well as the ability to maneuver and pull more Gs without human factors are definite strengths.
However, IMO weakness (in the early stages at least) include situational awareness, as well as payload. I'm no expert but I'd say that the predator's optics aren't as versatile as a pilot with the JHMCS. I agree that this won't always be the case... operational capability will increase. I guess its just a fact that I don't want to embrace