scraper
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 181
Second that!I am not a UAV fan…
I am not a UAV fan…
UAV's aren't a bad thing. Just a new type of aircraft. The Air Force is purchasing more unmanned than manned aircraft nowadays...think of it as another option coming out of AFA.
Of course, as Bullet and Pima would tell you UAV's won't be replacing fighters for a long time....
ah okay....so perhaps we'll have a piloted craft lead a formation of UAV fighters that are remotely controlled by others? Or perhaps even autonomous UAV's.
Completely "autonomous" flights?
Only when SKYNET is operational; but that's HIGHLY CLASSIFIED.
Seriously though...you have operators on the ground now flying the MQ-9 Reaper armed with 4 Hellfire and 2 "mini" JDAM's. You put four of them in a "kill box" and you have an armed strike force.
Now "force multiply" that to shrink the kill boxes such that you have aircraft overhead of ALL ground forces...and remember...these "guys" can stay up there for 12+ hours loaded this way...
Not autonomous but...no pilot fatigue as the operators can change shifts "routinely" at 4 hours or ??
Now...fast forward a few years and instead of turboprops, make these turbofan aircraft...with a heavier payload, stealthy capability, loiter times WAY over that of a '16 or '15...and air refuelable...
Why not deploy 20 in kill boxes and not risk the aircrew?
Or...why not a few hundred...with some manned aircraft but mostly unmanned?
Yes, I'm a "stick shaker" but...I can see the benefits in both cost and manpower...and I can see the direction we're heading.
Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
I think there are obvious benefits, nobody can deny that there are. I just personally don’t like robots flying over the war zone. I’d rather a manned aircraft protect me.
And I do feel bad for aspiring pilots stuck in a UAV.
Very interesting ideas for sure...I can see how that type of capability would be useful for patrols and reconnaissance missions. Too bad the Coast Guard is really behind on UAV technology compared to the other services. I can see that being a real asset for drug and migrant patrols.
Do you think that exchangers who go to Air Force could take this airmanship class? I'd definitely be interested if I went on exchange to AFA
I think there are obvious benefits, nobody can deny that there are. I just personally don’t like robots flying over the war zone. I’d rather a manned aircraft protect me.
And I do feel bad for aspiring pilots stuck in a UAV.
AC-130s have the firepower to take a bite out of an infantry brigade, so they definitely have their upsides!
USCG was going to have some heavy investments in UAVs. The cancellation/restructure of the DEEPWATER program nixed it and they have priorities elsewhere in fixing/replacing all the OLD cutters. UAVs dropped way down the list of priorities.
USCG was going to have some heavy investments in UAVs. The cancellation/restructure of the DEEPWATER program nixed it and they have priorities elsewhere in fixing/replacing all the OLD cutters. UAVs dropped way down the list of priorities.
I wish we had more funding. when you say OLD you're right about that one. The Hamilton Class cutters (378') are almost 50 years old, and the Medium Endurance Cutters (210' and 270') are getting up there in age too. Luckily the FRC's are replacing all of the older Island class 110'. I wonder why it takes so long to get the NSC's...perhaps funding?
I think UAV's have a lot of potential. As a career track, they could be appealing to those who are not pilot qualified.
If anyone askes "which ones are old cutters".....
The vast majority.
Deepwater wasn't cancelled.