Slashdot Mirror


X-45 Makes Debut Flight

jonerik writes "The Associated Press (by way of MSNBC) reports the debut flight on Wednesday of Boeing's X-45A, the first unmanned aircraft designed from the start to carry weapons. According to the article, the X-45 - one of two being tested - flew for 14 minutes and will be able to carry 3,000 pounds of guided bombs. If eventually purchased by the Pentagon, expect to see it in service sometime between 2007 and 2010. The plane's relatively cheap cost ($10-15 million per aircraft), ease of maintenance, and lack of an onboard pilot will likely make it a staple of future U.S. war plans."

2 of 530 comments (clear)

  1. PKD by legLess · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Ok, I'm going to ramble a bit, but I think this is a good point. In 1976 Philip K Dick wrote this about his story Service Call:
    When this story appeared many fans objected to it because of the negative attitude I expressed in it. But I was already beginning to suppose in my head the growing domination of machines over man, especially the machines we voluntarily surround ourselves with, which should, by logic, be the most harmless. I never assumed that some huge clanking monster would stride down Fifth Avenue, devouring New York; I always feared that my own TV set or iron or toaster would, in the privacy of my apartment, when no one else was around to help me, announce to me that they had taken over, and here was a list of rules I was to obey. I never like the idea of doing what a machine says. I hate having to salute something built in a factory.
    Much of PKD's work was about the way machines sneak into our lives, slowly become necessary, then resist our best efforts to get rid of them. One of his stories (name escapes me) centers on a group of people, sole survivors of the last world war. All the natural resources of the planet are being consumed by two warring "autofacs" ("automatic factory" I think is the derivation), neither of which is smart enough to realize that the war is over. The humans are struggling to destroy the factories so they can regain control. Being a PKD story, of course they fail.

    On the one hand, a pilotless bomber is a great idea - why risk a human life if a machine can do the job? On the other hand it's more than a little scary - when your wars are fought by machines, human beings are in the way.

    For nearly all of history, some people have thought they have a license or right to kill other people. Its one of the primary activities of humans - kill other humans. To become more efficient at this, we keep making human-killing technology better and better. Now we're talking about giving that license to machines.

    The biggest difference between the movie Blade Runner (which I love) and PKD's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep on which the movie was based (which I also love, for different reasons) is that in Dick's world androids have no compassion, no caritas. They have no inate regard for human life, or any life for that matter.

    The Nuremburg trials established that "I was following orders" is not a valid excuse for committing atrocities during wartime. That only works for humans, though, since machines have no moral compass. We're talking about giving a license to kill humans to a machine with no soul, no regard for life, and no accountability. All in the name of efficiency.
    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
  2. Unpiloted Planes are a BAD IDEA by DG · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Time for a rant:

    One of the defining strategies of the American armed forces since the Gulf War is a near pathelogical reluctance to accept friendly casulties.

    Now there's nothing wrong with wanting to keep your own guys alive, but this obsession with not accepting casulties is subordinating other aspects of the military mission. There is a deliberate movement to reduce the effectiveness of weapon systems if it means less risk for American troops.

    Don't confuse "effectiveness" with "lethality" - weapons systems are only getting MORE lethal with time. What I am talking about is identifying and killing military targets AND ONLY military targets.

    The most effective means of knowing for sure if what you are shooting at is a legitimate target is to be in actual contact with it - that normally means troops on the ground. If you think there's baddies in that building, you go send some soldiers to have a look.

    But that exposes those soldiers to risk, and risk isn't allowed in the American battle manual any more. Instead, the new modus operendi is to drop a bomb - preferably many bombs - on anything you figure may have a target in it. Then you take satellite pictures of the crater to see what you hit.

    The side effect is to inflict a much higher percentage of civillian and friendly casulties than would be otherwise done. Yes, you hit the bad guys, but you also hit hospitals, orphanages, and other non-legitimate targets LIKE YOUR OWN PEOPLE.

    But as bad as this is, at least in a modern fighter/bomber you have a set of eyeballs attached to a decision-making process that can choose not to attack if they actually clue in that the target is non-legitimate. The record of those eyeballs is not great - witness the British Warriors taken out in the Gulf by American A10s, and the latest moron National Guardsman who saw fit to bomb a Canadian training exercise - but at least they were there. They were given the opportunity to not screw up.

    With a remotely-piloted plane, no matter how good the sensors are on the user interface, they will not be as good as the current eyeballs in the plane are. If eyeballs in a plane have a crappy record, then the record of the RPVs is going to be even worse.

    Less risk to the guys behind the weapon systems, but MORE risk for the guys on the ground - enemy, friendly, and neutral!

    Somebody needs to get a grip on the guys in charge of the American Air Force. They need to be reminded that they cannot win battles on their own, that their ultimate mission is support of the troops on the ground, and that the risk of loss of life to those troops is part of the tradeoff for doing the job right. Indiscriminate bombing is NOT acceptable.

    And for the kiddies who may think that you can videogame your way through everything, I have 10 years experience in the Army as a Armoured Recce soldier, so I actually DO know what I am talking about. Nothing in the Real World is as hated and feared as the American Air Force, because they are just as likely to bomb you or a crowd of civillians as they are the bad guys.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book