Suck On This: Predator Drone Bags Eleven RIFWs

[Guest]

Quote

Once you've committed to going to war, a military victory in that war is a good thing. Even though it means that someone got killed.


(This has been a public service message from Captain Obvious)

Especially RIFWs / RHs - death to them.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[Zenister 0]

Quote

God I hate Predators...guess they're good for some things, but hell if they replace real pilots! Plus, it's just more fun when you can look back and see the flames! Oh sorry, apparently that was supposed to have been said in the stereotypical, uneducated hick voice.

i have got hours of video that proves they do, infact replace 'real' pilots for a wide variety of missions.. certainly not all, but a great many. They also replace forward observers and eliminate the need to dip into ground fire to drop your payload on a target that will never know you were there.. and guess what?? its only going to get 'worse'... we have the technology.....

plus, you can lose 10 Predators for the cost to train a single combat pilot...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

i have got hours of video that proves they do, infact replace 'real' pilots for a wide variety of missions

They can do recon and some surgical strike, but hell if a machine can every fully replace a human being in total mission capability that a fighter can do. It's just not possible. Programming and technology is amazing today, but a computer can't do things that the human brain can.

Quote

and eliminate the need to dip into ground fire to drop your payload on a target

Why the hell would you want to get rid of the fun part?

Quote

plus, you can lose 10 Predators for the cost to train a single combat pilot...

I know you're probably exagerating for effect, but just in case, 1 Predator costs approx $50 million. Last I checked, it costs roughly $6 million to fully train a pilot. So, where's the logic in this one?

So all in all, UAVs are good for some small things, but overall I still hate them and still maintain that they will never fully replace the manned aircraft. Screw the predator.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

still maintain that they will never fully replace the manned aircraft.

In our day and age of the media being a full part of a war (propaganda, etc...), a Drone being shut down is much more preferable than a manned aircraft being shut down, and its crew (if still alive) being displayed on TV/Websites, etc...

Quote

Screw the predator.

Exactly the point. Hard to say the same about a manned aircraft.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[Zenister 0]

your numbers arre off by a good bit..

and there is a human mind directing the drone (several actually) it is just not IN the aircraft.

and if you think modern warfare is about 'fun' you havent seen enough of it... (and yes i know you are active duty)

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

Yup!! Huh- huh, HICK, Yup !!!
Ain't notihn' makes me prouder to wave the Flag than knowing we're killin' A-rabs in their own country!!

Na much better killing ass holes that are trying to stop free people from building nation with a freely elected gov't with the USA's help. My guess is you voted for a man that 10 out of 10 terrorist preferred.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

i have got hours of video that proves they do, infact replace 'real' pilots for a wide variety of missions

They can do recon and some surgical strike, but hell if a machine can every fully replace a human being in total mission capability that a fighter can do. It's just not possible. Programming and technology is amazing today, but a computer can't do things that the human brain can.

Quote

and eliminate the need to dip into ground fire to drop your payload on a target

Why the hell would you want to get rid of the fun part?

Quote

plus, you can lose 10 Predators for the cost to train a single combat pilot...

I know you're probably exagerating for effect, but just in case, 1 Predator costs approx $50 million. Last I checked, it costs roughly $6 million to fully train a pilot. So, where's the logic in this one?

So all in all, UAVs are good for some small things, but overall I still hate them and still maintain that they will never fully replace the manned aircraft. Screw the predator.

The MQ-1 Predator is a system, not just an aircraft. A fully operational system consists of four aircraft (with sensors), a ground control station, a Predator Primary Satellite Link, and approximately 55 personnel for deployed 24-hour operations. A SYSTEM cost $40M in 1997 dollars.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

My guess is you voted for a man that 10 out of 10 terrorist preferred.

So you think he voted for Bush?

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[bodypilot90 0]

no kerry

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

My guess is you voted for a man that 10 out of 10 terrorist preferred.

So you think he voted for Bush?

Recent history shows the liberal hiding under the covers... but thanks for playing!

Alan, tell our guest what he's won!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

no kerry

Oh. My guess was that terrorists like Bush, especially because Iraq has been their playground for some time. They didn't have that before.

I'm sure some propaganda you may have heard made you think terrorists prefer Kerry. But terrorists didn't hear that propaganda. So really, you don't know who they prefer. I think your guess is as good as mine.

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

no kerry

In comments addressed to Bush, Al Qaeda said:

"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."

"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040317/325/eotq9.html

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

no kerry

In comments addressed to Bush, Al Qaeda said:

"Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilisation."

"Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040317/325/eotq9.html

And you fell for their reverse-psychology?

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

In our day and age of the media being a full part of a war (propaganda, etc...), a Drone being shut down is much more preferable than a manned aircraft being shut down, and its crew (if still alive) being displayed on TV/Websites, etc...

Yeah, but how often do we get shot down? Not to mention I'd rather die than have to sit at Nellis in a trailer.

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

your numbers arre off by a good bit.

How so?

Quote

and there is a human mind directing the drone (several actually) it is just not IN the aircraft.

Well I know that, but those people can't make a split second decision like a pilot can that's actually there. They can probably do a good amount, but there's still no replacement for actually having a person there.

Quote

and if you think modern warfare is about 'fun' you havent seen enough of it...

Well I know, but coming from another perspective, it's a hell of a lot better to actually fly instead of "flying" from a trailer. War is not fun, people die...it's a terrible thing, don't get me wrong. But in a different way, it's more "fun" to actually be the one flying then just sitting somewhere in front of a computer. That's the point I was trying to make. I agree, war sucks.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Quote

In our day and age of the media being a full part of a war (propaganda, etc...), a Drone being shut down is much more preferable than a manned aircraft being shut down, and its crew (if still alive) being displayed on TV/Websites, etc...

Yeah, but how often do we get shot down?

Fighting Iraq, the Taliban, Panama, etc... not very often. However, the Pentagon has to prepare for the eventuality that one day, it may be fighting Russia, China, etc... with much more potent weaponry and troops than our recent foes.

Quote

Not to mention I'd rather die than have to sit at Nellis in a trailer.

That's your prerogative. But I would venture into stating that there are probably many dead pilots from the USAF, RAF, Wehrmacht, Russian Air Force, etc... who would have preferred the use of Drones during WWII.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[shropshire 0]

Regardless of cost (Financial).. drones dont come back in flag (pick your country) drapped boxes but people do. So I know which I'd prefer to use....

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

However, the Pentagon has to prepare for the eventuality that one day, it may be fighting Russia, China, etc... with much more potent weaponry and troops than our recent foes.

True, but what an American pilot can do with a viper, eagle, raptor, hawg, etc. is much more lethal than what someone can do with a UAV...at this point anyways. I realize the tech, but I don't honestly think UAVs will be able to match even close to the above for a very long time. Hence, to win the war, it's in our best interest to use the best assets...human pilots.

Quote

But I would venture into stating that there are probably many dead pilots from the USAF, RAF, Wehrmacht, Russian Air Force, etc... who would have preferred the use of Drones during WWII.

I doubt it's as high as you would think. I don't know a single pilot who, because he doesn't want to risk injury or death, decides to fly from a trailer than from the cockpit. If I die, well it'll be for a reason and with honor...and I'd rather do that then sit in a trailer and never have really seen action. I think it's only a mentality that can be understood when you're in the military...no offense to you or anyone else that's not in, but there's just something about wanting to see action vs sitting at a desk w/ a joystick for 20 yrs. Maybe it's easier applied to different aspects of the military, but there's still the feeling.

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

Regardless of cost (Financial).. drones dont come back in flag (pick your country) drapped boxes but people do. So I know which I'd prefer to use....

No offense, but it's not you who tells me if I should risk my life or not. It's my decision. If I ever came back in a box, I would be pissed if people used me as material to blame the govt, President, etc. I signed up, I know what I'm into. Losing people sucks, but those people willingly gave up their lives, they weren't forced to. Now, if we had a conscripted military, I could see your point. But since we decide to join, it's up to us, not you or anyone else. Therefore, it's our preferences that matter.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

True, but what an American pilot can do with a viper, eagle, raptor, hawg, etc. is much more lethal than what someone can do with a UAV...at this point anyways. I realize the tech, but I don't honestly think UAVs will be able to match even close to the above for a very long time. Hence, to win the war, it's in our best interest to use the best assets...human pilots.

That's true to a certain extent. But not all missions require highly trained pilots. If you'd replace the quasi laughable Iraqi air force by, say, the RAF, then some missions would either get scratched because too dangerous, or would result in great losses of qualified pilots and aircrafts, which supply is certainly lower than that of drones drones.

Quote

doubt it's as high as you would think. I don't know a single pilot who, because he doesn't want to risk injury or death, decides to fly from a trailer than from the cockpit. If I die, well it'll be for a reason and with honor...and I'd rather do that then sit in a trailer and never have really seen action. I think it's only a mentality that can be understood when you're in the military...no offense to you or anyone else that's not in, but there's just something about wanting to see action vs sitting at a desk w/ a joystick for 20 yrs. Maybe it's easier applied to different aspects of the military, but there's still the feeling.

And once again, it's your prerogative to think so. Although I'm sure the Drones "operators" would not necessarily agree (I think they're on active duty as well). Ultimately, the boys with the stars on the uniform make the decision.
But in simple economics, and as the technology is becoming more and more performing, I would think that:
Cost of a drone < Cost of SUM(aircraft+pilot training+pension to family). Not counting the "trauma" factor of body bags returning home.
I understand what you are saying overall. But I think the Pentagon has to prepare for any eventuality, including one where the enemy is highly equiped with equal technology.
The days of Verdun and Stalingrad where you would win by having one more man to send off the trenchée than the enemy has left are gone, I believe.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

But not all missions require highly trained pilots

Yeah that's true. Let the uavos fly their predators around looking for intel and maybe the once in a while "target of opportunity." But beyond that, nah.

Quote

f you'd replace the quasi laughable Iraqi air force by, say, the RAF, then some missions would either get scratched because too dangerous, or would result in great losses of qualified pilots and aircrafts, which supply is certainly lower than that of drones drones

Well some missions will be more dangerous, but just b/c they are doesn't mean we say, "ah fuck it" and throw it out. No matter how dangerous, many missions just can't be completed well w/ a UAV. Plus, you're talking about losses such as those suffered in Vietnam...the only reason that happened was b/c we couldn't frickin bomb the SAM sites until after they shot a guy down...not to mention the tech was nothing back then compared to today (as far as accuracy, type of munitions, etc.). It'd take one hell of a magical occurance to bring about losses like that, or just one jackass in the WH who doesn't let us do our jobs.

Quote

Although I'm sure the Drones "operators" would not necessarily agree (I think they're on active duty as well)

Hey if they don't want to fight and would rather sit in a trailer, fine. I'm just saying I sure as hell wouldn't want to do it. And yeah, they're active duty. I mean, good on them for doing the job, I'm just saying a lot of pilots would rather, well, do something else than sit in the trailer.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

The MQ-1 Predator is a system, not just an aircraft. A fully operational system consists of four aircraft (with sensors), a ground control station, a Predator Primary Satellite Link, and approximately 55 personnel for deployed 24-hour operations. A SYSTEM cost $40M in 1997 dollars.

AND 1997 was all LRIP. Predator Aircraft and Sytems are in full rate production now... MUCH cheaper...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Zenister 0]

you have no idea what you are talking about.... but keep living in the past.. Remote Drones can and will replace man on the battlefield, and not just in the Air..

maybe this analogy will work...

you lose your weapon, you are issued another one.. you lose your life we have to replace you...we have ALOT of weapons to spare...

and that is a VERY good thing

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

Remote Drones can and will replace man on the battlefield

Not going to happen. Why? Not b/c tech won't be there, but b/c international concern and disagreement will be there. Think about it...if a country has an entire military made of drones, then that country is MUCH MORE willing to go to war b/c just like people have been saying in this thread, "what does it matter if we lose them? They're not people." Thus, members of the international community won't allow it for fear that a state will become greedy and start wars on the premise that they're not losing life anyways, so who gives two shits if we attack country X? That's why it won't happen.

Drone militaries far surpass the morality of war...it won't happen (and since I'm a realist, I'll say this with 99% certainty).

[billvon 2,991]

>Think about it...if a country has an entire military made of drones, then
> that country is MUCH MORE willing to go to war b/c just like people have
> been saying in this thread, "what does it matter if we lose them? They're
> not people."

Of course. The US has taken this very approach - "Why not go to war? We know we will win, and our losses will be low." You can bet your BDU's that we would not have invaded Iraq if there was a chance we could have lost - or even been beaten back. If your losses are going to be low, war sounds much better, whether you're a voter, a senator or the president.

>Thus, members of the international community won't allow it for fear that a
>state will become greedy and start wars on the premise that they're not
>losing life anyways, so who gives two shits if we attack country X? That's
>why it won't happen.

Uh, that _did_ happen. The international community tried to stop our invasion of Iraq; we saw few drawbacks so we just did it. Drones are just the next step.

And "members of the international community won't allow it?" You're serious? The UN will say "you can't use RPV's" and you imagine the US and China will say "Oh, OK, we'll destroy them all immediately?" Surely you have noticed how much heed the US pays the international community.

>Drone militaries far surpass the morality of war...it won't happen (and
>since I'm a realist, I'll say this with 99% certainty).

It will make it easier and cheaper to wage war, and will make war more palatable to politicians. To our leaders, RPV's will be the best thing since sliced bread. How long do you think they would hesitate to attack North Korea if the only costs were a few billion in robots? Heck, you could call it a US job creation program!