John Payne (satyr) Sun 19 Jul 09 19:04
Headline: Air Force Plans for All-Drone Future Okay, take it with a grain of salt, but the subtext is that the days of Air Force resistance to the use of drones are over. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/air-force-plans-for-all-drone-future/
pseudoanthropos (abloner) Mon 22 Feb 10 05:03
The whole business makes me sick.
Brian Slesinsky (bslesins) Mon 22 Feb 10 19:49
I'm not so sure. When there's plenty of time to get a close-up view without putting the pilot's life at risk, it allows for more patient decisions.
Michael C. Berch (mcb) Tue 23 Feb 10 00:45
Israel Rolls Out World's Biggest UAV Rattling a saber and marketing a product at the same time, Israel rolls a new Unmanned Arial Vehicle into action. The Eitan or Heron is not just any drone. It's a whopper as big as a Boeing 737, capable of staying in the air for 20 hours and capable of reaching Iran. Full story: <http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/22/israel-rolls-out-worlds-biggest- uav/?test=latestnews> Other coverage: <http://www.theage.com.au/world/giant-israeli-drone-puts-iran-within-range-2010 0222-orp1.html?autostart=1> <http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3851377,00.html> <http://www.defense-update.com/features/2010/february/eitan_rollout_21022010.ht ml> <http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=460>
John Payne (satyr) Fri 26 Feb 10 08:53
Big + not stealthy + slow = sitting duck. What's new here is hang time and range, otherwise 1990 vintage cruise missiles are more of a threat. The message is probably on the order of "this is just the tip of the iceberg."
Michael C. Berch (mcb) Sat 27 Feb 10 00:26
Except for the electronics (and electronics are cheap - it's software development that costs money) the thing looks fairly low-tech, though fuel-efficient, and probably pretty cheap to produce. So if you attack (say) Iran, what happens if you send 1,000 of them? Or more? Even with moderate attrition, you're way ahead. You can even send waves of them to distract air defenses. Send some high, some low. Decoys. They don't even all have to carry ordnance. It's a game-changer.
John Payne (satyr) Sat 27 Feb 10 12:22
Armed with very fast, medium range, anti-radiation (anti-RADAR) missiles, set to launch a few seconds before the remotely controlled host ship was destroyed by RADAR controlled ground-to-air or air-to-air missiles, it certainly could be. Not only do you get the other side to expend ordinance, but you have a good shot at taking out their RADAR at the same time.
Members: Enter the conference to participate
Non-members: How to participate