General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThese New Drones Are Like Nothing The World Has Ever Seen
http://www.businessinsider.com/check-out-these-next-generation-drones-2012-6Even with drones already dominating the skies, neutralizing adversaries and covertly collecting data, new research is still underway on the generation of pilotless planes to come.
And the United States isn't the only country interested in developing long-range and lethal drone technology.
The strike fighter was developed by Northrop Grumman as part of a research contract awarded in 2007. Look for these in use for the Navy, which hopes to use them as carrier-based drones. Tests for that begin in 2013.
National Origin: United States
Intended Customers: United States Military and clandestine services
Status: In development, used by Navy for testing
Cruise Speed: around 420 mph, (Mach 0.55)
Wingspan: 62 ft
Range: At least 2,400 miles
Boeing Phantom Ray
The project was hatched in 2007, and was carried out in utmost secrecy. The drone's development was funded internally, without funding from the government of military. The Boeing Phantom Ray, which precedes the development of the Phantom Eye, is Boeing's planned ground strike and surveillance drone.
National Origin: United States
Intended Customers: United States Military and clandestine services
Status: In development, maiden flight April 27, 2011
Cruise Speed: 614 mph (Mach 0.8)
Wingspan: 50 ft
Range: 1500 miles
General Atomics Predator C Avenger
This drone is incredible. The Predator line of drones currently in constant use in Afghanistan and Iraq were the first ever weaponized UAVs. This model follows up with a reduced heat signature and speed boosts. It boasts an upgraded "quick response armed reconnaissance capability" from its predecessors.
National Origin: United States
Intended Customers: United States Military and clandestine services
Status: Deployed. Maiden flight April 4, 2009
Max Speed: 460 mph
Wingspan: 66 ft
Range: 20 hours
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/check-out-these-next-generation-drones-2012-6#general-atomics-predator-c-avenger-3#ixzz1x6ZECjtD
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)America is exceptional!
vi5
(13,305 posts)..when there is a Republican in office that we're allowed to criticize for overseeing and maintaining this drone program.
You might upset somebody around here! Too much common sense! Shush!
EOTE
(13,409 posts)Obama made it extra clear that males who are in war zones are not civilians and are, therefore, bad. So once a republican takes over and starts killing civilians again, THEN I'll be upset.
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)Sorry about your civilians, but there may be an Al-Qaeda number 2 in your midst.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)Using our technological advantage to insure that, should an aircraft be shot down, all we lose is equipment instead of risking a pilot's life.
Nothing at all wrong with that.
siligut
(12,272 posts)I have come to the conclusion that we are never going to just get along. There is something in humans to always want what the other guy has. I would prefer we didn't need this sort of technology at all, but since I am being realistic, I want our defenses/offenses to be the best.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)Conflict was a way of life. It was how one tribe was able to survive by insuring another tribe was not.
Brutal, but it was how things had to be.
We have yet to outgrow that.
siligut
(12,272 posts)Well, that is paraphrased, but I think it is the basis for war. Going deeper than resources? I am not sure that as long as we are physical beings, that you can go any deeper.
Why do we want more than we can use? Some believe it is the desire for immortality.
Maybe I answered more in a technical sense, but I haven't gotten much further than that in my thinking.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)The strategy of terrorism is, of course, to terrify your chosen enemy. Drones send the message that Americans are afraid to risk even a military pilot's life.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)It sends a message that we are technologically superior so we do not have to risk a highly trained person.
It terrifies the terrorists.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Drone strikes don't deter terrorism. In fact, the policy radicalizes local populations and increases their numbers. See Pakistan and Yemen since the drone campaign ramped up.
It does not terrify the terrorists, it terrifies the civilians into hating the US.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Shock and Awe prompted a relative of Osama's to renounce terrorism. He did the 100s of thousands versus 3 thousand calculation and decided terrorism would end up costing his people more than it would ever us.
Conversely, Osama continually cited examples of supposed American cowardice to encourage terrorists.
- Vietnam
- Lebanon
- Somalia (thanks to the GOP spin that we "fled" Somalia before the mission was complete; we left because it was done)
So there is little doubt he was using drones as evidence of American cowardice.
I was going to say "it does both". But Shock and Awe has nothing to do with drones. So while the drones may worry terrorists tactically, from a strategic standpoint it is pure golden to them.
Javaman
(62,530 posts)develops an effective emp bomb.
You gotta look for the weak points in any system, the stuff nobody thinks about.
global1
(25,253 posts)Remember this version? There are probably still people living in London that do.
The V-1 flying bomb (German: Vergeltungswaffe 1,[3] Fieseler Fi 103) also known as the Buzz Bomb or Doodlebug was an early pulse-jet-powered predecessor of the cruise missile. The V-1 guidance system used a simple autopilot to regulate altitude and airspeed, developed by Askania in Berlin. With the counter determining how far the missile would fly, it was only necessary to launch the V-1 with the ramp pointing in the approximate direction, and the autopilot controlled the flight.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Nice to know we have improved drones so much. Hitler would be proud, I bet.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)That was a cruise missile. Two completely different weapons systems.
Drones require pilots on the ground. Cruise missiles rely on internal guidance systems. Drones carry weapons and return to a base after encountering targets. Cruise missiles are fired and are destroyed when they encounter a single target.
just1voice
(1,362 posts)Both are armed, unmanned flying aircraft.
Both are launched into "enemy" territory.
Both kill civilians.
Both create the feeling of being terrorized.
In a real war drones would be great to have. In the fake "war on terror" drone usage creates huge anti-American sentiment not only where the drones kill civilians but also at home as well. Simply put, killing civilians makes the U.S. look like terrorists.
ag_dude
(562 posts)Similarities? Yes.
It's not a matter of semantics of message board 'gotcha', they actually different things.
ag_dude
(562 posts)your comparison would be just about as accurate as comparing the V1 missiles to drones.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)Volaris
(10,272 posts)HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)Mairead
(9,557 posts)I can easily imagine several of those things buzzing into DC, coming from different directions, flying right on the deck below the radar, everyone sees them but nobody pays attention because our rulers have accustomed us to them, boom boom boom boom boom-- Capitol, WH, Pentagon, CIA, NSA, where else?
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)xchrom
(108,903 posts)Locrian
(4,522 posts)Gregorian
(23,867 posts)I'm not sure I like the new meme. But at least it's a cat.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Bake
(21,977 posts)And they're flying over U.S. cities ...
Bake
deaniac21
(6,747 posts)2 hellfire missles on the way to work today.