by Phil
9. March 2010 07:32
I recently had an opportunity to inspect a MQ-1 Predator up close at United States Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio. It was very different from the other aircraft in the collection. Starting in the early flight gallery, you notice that the aircraft grow increasingly complex as time passes. Until you get to the Predator which is amazingly simple. In fact, it seems like an overgrown remote control model- except that the Predator is lethal.
In the past, the risk of pilot losses has limited our deployment of airpower. The Predator allows us to deploy air assets without that risk.
The question has been posed by others but bears repeating. Will airpower without consequences lead us to a dangerous place?
And what happens when someone uses these weapons against us?
by Phil
8. March 2010 08:16
Here are photos from my visit last week.
by Phil
28. February 2010 08:14
...Jim Tuttle, the Department of Homeland Security official responsible for safeguarding America against nonnuclear weapons, downplays the idea that drones could be used against us. "What terrorist is going to have a Predator?" he scoffed at a conference last winter.
P.W Singer writes in Newsweek that the DoD is currently unprepared for the possibility that drones could be used against us. And he's completely correct. While it may be true that we're unlikely to see a sophisticated drone like a predator or global hawk attacking the United States in the near future, small drones that are scaled up versions of current remote control (RC) aircraft could be built and deployed in a terror attack.
While many people consider RC aircraft toys, some versions are incredibly sophisticated. Consider the hexacopter.
This RC aircraft is capable of carrying multiple payloads and uses GPS navigation to fly to pre-determined locations.
It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how an aircraft like this could be used. But the genie is out of the bottle technology-wise. This capability exists and just like there's no practical way to ban automobiles that could be loaded with fertilizer rigged to explode, banning RC technology would be prove futile.
Prevention efforts need to focus on identifying the groups who would benefit from weaponizing this technology. And not assuming that just because the drone isn't as large and sophisticated as a predator that we are safe.
by Phil
6. February 2010 09:47
The latest issue of Air & Space magazine is out and it has some great articles.
I especially liked the articles on Mars rovers, the upcoming disposition of the remaining space shuttles, MiG vs F-18 war games, and the great Kelly Johnson.
Check it out online
by Phil
6. December 2009 08:14
The secret is out. The U.S. Air Force has confirmed the existence of the “Beast of Kandahar” UAV that was seen flying out of Afghanistan in late 2007. The jet aircraft – a tailless flying wing with sensor pods faired into the upper surface of each wing – is the RQ-170 Sentinel, developed by Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works. An Air Force official revealed to Aviation Week Friday afternoon that the service is “developing a stealthy unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to provide reconnaissance and surveillance support to forward deployed combat forces.”
Full Article, Aviation Week U.S. Air Force Reveals Operational Stealth UAV
by Phil
1. December 2009 22:16
Gizmodo has the scoop on a new aircraft deployed in Afghanistan possibly a variant of the Lockheed P175 Polecat.
Full Article
by Phil
8. November 2009 22:01
Up until now, each drone has been controlled remotely by a human over a satellite link, but the vehicles have been unable to communicate with each other or share intelligence. But in a demonstration last week, the U.S. Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) linked unmanned drones, including air and ground vehicles, into unmanned squadrons with a single person helming all six vehicles.
Full Article
6db282a5-de5a-448d-b19c-88c32863f557|1|4.0
Tags:
Drones/UAVs
by Phil
3. September 2009 09:32
FIVE years ago, in the mountainous Afghan province of Baghlan, NATO officials mounted a show of force for the local governor, Faqir Mamozai, to emphasise their commitment to the region. As the governor and his officials looked on, Jan van Hoof, a Dutch commander, called in a group of F-16 fighter jets, which swooped over the city of Baghlan, their thunderous afterburners engaged. This display of air power was, says Mr van Hoof, an effective way to garner the respect of the local people. But fighter jets are a limited and expensive resource. And in conflicts like that in Afghanistan, they are no longer the most widespread form of air power. The nature of air power, and the notion of air superiority, have been transformed in the past few years by the rise of remote-controlled drone aircraft, known in military jargon as “unmanned aerial vehicles” (UAVs).
Full Article
b28ce55a-350a-4423-875d-40fdc86ae85c|2|4.5
Tags:
Drones/UAVs
by Phil
10. July 2009 08:17
Here photos from my recent visit.
by Phil
9. June 2009 17:29
According to a recent article in the Economist:
SPYING is a sophisticated and expensive business—and gathering military intelligence using unmanned aircraft can be prohibitively so. Predator and Global Hawk, two types of American drone frequently flown in Afghanistan and Iraq, cost around $5,000 and $26,500 an hour respectively to operate. The aircraft themselves cost between $4.5m and $35m each, and the remote-sensing equipment they carry can more than double the price.
The article is about how blimps will be used in future surveillance and worth a read.
Full Article