Slashdot Mirror


Behind the Scenes With America's Drone Pilots

An anonymous reader writes "As President Obama meets with advisors on an Afghanistan strategy today (who are now leaning more toward Joe Biden's more-drones policy), and even as Al Qaeda claims it's not all that scared of drones, the new issue of Esquire takes the first real in-depth look at the American military's UAV build-up. Defense geek Brian Mockenhaupt spends some time on the ground in Afghanistan, as well as back at the Pentagon, where the pilots ('more like snipers than fighter pilots') are playing a kind of role-playing game, getting to know terrorists' daily ins and outs. Looks like these Reaper drones are the real wave of the future, eh?"

28 of 419 comments (clear)

  1. Where do I sign up by Botched · · Score: 4, Funny

    To be a rigger?

  2. Re:Interesting... by guruevi · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  3. Re:Interesting... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Too late. U.S. Customs and Border Protection is testing them over Lake Erie and Ontario, and have been for several years over the Mexican border.

  4. I hate to say this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...given the serious topic, but this is IMHO another typical case of American fantasy: a war without casualties. I mean, without American casualties, of course. Wishful thinking, whatever technologies you throw at the problem.

    1. Re:I hate to say this... by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...given the serious topic, but this is IMHO another typical case of American fantasy: a war without casualties.

      I'm pretty sure that was the intent of all inventions developed for wartime use.

      From the spear, the longbow, musket, and machine gun... The intent and purpose was to give your side the benefit of being able to put the enema at "arms length" (so to say) and put you on the side less likely to die.

      I mean having people kamikaze their aircraft into targets might be more cost effective in the short term, but the point of making weapons was to kill the other side more effectively by putting your side at less risk.

      Just a note...

      Its really been the US doctrine since WWII whereas the Russians, Japanese, and Germans generals would still order suicidal attacks on targets for bravery where the US forces would just bomb the crap out of it, shell it with more artillery than needed, call in more air strikes, and then have the infantry move in forward with tanks in front of them. The tactics work.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:I hate to say this... by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Funny

      From the spear, the longbow, musket, and machine gun... The intent and purpose was to give your side the benefit of being able to put the enema at "arms length" (so to say) and put you on the side less likely to die.

      FWIW, you don't need to put the enema a full arms' length up there. Just a couple inches past the sphincter will do fine. If you want to try for arms' length, go right ahead -- it's your bowels, after all... I just suggest using extra lube in that case.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:I hate to say this... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And lose. You can't *hold* ground with robots or avatars. You can't win hearts and minds. You can't accomplish significant political objectives.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  5. Look at the USAF... by tcopeland · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...Chief of Staff's reading list. Short on fighter pilot stuff, long on strategy and counterinsurgency. They see the way things are going, no doubt about it.

  6. Re:Interesting... by blhack · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except for FAA approval, there isn't much stopping our police state to use them.

    We already do use them to patrol the border.

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
  7. why drones are so BAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're bad because one of the reasons people, soldiers included, don't like war is due to the risk of being killed. If you remove that you also remove the only motivation to stop a war or just not start it. The geek in me loves the tech involved in drones development (minus the weaponry) but my human half is scaried as hell because they represent one more step towards an endless war scenario.

    1. Re:why drones are so BAD by WhiplashII · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, no matter what we do this will happen. Better us than them. They target civilians. We accidentally hit civilians.

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
  8. Re:Another Benefit of Traditional Planes by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After reading this I realize the not-so-obvious benefit of real planes flying around patrolling and bombing the enemy... The fear factor. As stated in the summary " Al Qaeda claims it's not all that scared of drones", which makes sense, a little spec in the sky orbiting quietly does not put the fear of God, oh sorry Allah, into the enemy. Get a couple of F35s, A10s or Apaches cruising about voila, fear is back. Intimidation is back factor in warfare. Never really thought about that aspect of an all-drone airforce...

    I've been under an F-15 at an air show and it sounds like God just got home, especially when the afterburners light up. I can only imagine what it's like when there's no concern about popping the eardrums of those on the ground.

    That being said, operationally they keep the aircraft above 20k feet specifically to avoid small arms fire. The level required to act as a psychological weapon makes them great for target practice.

    Incidentally, if they're not intimidated by having antitank missiles and precision-guided bombs falling on their heads, I doubt flying any lower will do much to wilt their spirits.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  9. Air power never wins wars by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Air power never wins wars, and that is what drones are. It is important to have boots on the ground, especially in a counterinsurgency campaign. For most insurgencies, the recruitment pool is the citizenry within the country who are unsatisfied and discontented. If a counterinsurgent force is relying primarily on impersonal methods such as drones or air power, the local populace will never see or interact with the foot soldiers of the counterinsurgency. The only way you can beat an insurgency is by interacting with the populace within the country, to galvanize support for the counterinsurgency campaign. If all you do is bomb people from the air you are going to get eh exact opposite effect. Without boots on the ground, you will not get proper intel. As such, there is a higher likelihood of collateral damage. When surprise attacks indiscriminately kill both combatants and civilians, you lose what little support you may have had. You have to go out there into the bush at the squad or platoon level and interact with local leaders, repair damage from both insurgent and counterinsurgent attacks, give little kids food/medical attention. You build up a rapport with people, and they will work with you. Otherwise, they are more likely to see you as the enemy instead of the insurgents. It may not be the newest, sexiest piece of technology, but it works. And you cant be afraid to have people out in harm's way. You have to have men getting in firefights, so the locals see you actually taking an interest in protecting their towns, their fields, their families. If this doesn't happen, you will lose.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re: Air power never wins wars by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Air power never wins wars

      That's the one lesson that nations can't seem to learn.

      Without boots on the ground, you will not get proper intel. As such, there is a higher likelihood of collateral damage. When surprise attacks indiscriminately kill both combatants and civilians, you lose what little support you may have had.

      This is the key. As long as we keep blowing up women and children, we're making more enemies than we kill.

      The West (including Israel) have a blind spot, thinking "collateral casualties don't count". But to the people on the receiving end, their family is just as dead as if we had deliberately blown up their skyscrapers.

      Whatever else our new strategy entails, "no civilian casualties" needs to be the cornerstone, or we're never going to win.

      \rant

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  10. Sex with sheep by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Funny

    From page 4:

    Indeed, they see many things meant to be secret, like men having sex with sheep and goats in the deep of night. I first heard this from infantry soldiers and took it as rumor, but at Bagram I met a civilian contractor who works in UAV operations. "All the time," he said. "They just don't think we can see them."

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Sex with sheep by Sinical · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why don't we just buy a television transmitter and have it broadcast this kind of video 24 hours a day? I dunno how well sheepfucking plays with the locals, but if there's any kind of personally identifiable info, maybe we can ridicule some of these guys to death. Uhm, if there're TVs. Otherwise we could distribute leaflets with choice video stills on them.

      Or not. Mostly I just thought the title of "Afghanistan's Funniest Home Sheepfucking Videos" was really catchy.

  11. Re:Another Benefit of Traditional Planes by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fear factor isn't from noise. It's from never seeing what platform delivered the munition. You sit a drone up at 25-30k feet, the target wont ever hear it or see it. The survivors of an attack only know that the hand of God came down upon them without any warning, no sound, and their buddies got vaporized. THIS is where you get the fear factor. The knowledge that it could come at any time, and there is no way to know when. In fact, you almost have to assume that there is a drone over you at all times, and that all it would take is the push of a button to wipe you out.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  12. Re:ChAir Force by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a flight sim "game" with real death for someone at the end of the day, not "pretend death and go post my frag score on slashdot". They receive flight hours towards their career gates because the training and experience to perform this mission is specialized and expensive to generate, so that providing a solid incentive path to bring and keep high quality personnel in the career field is important.

  13. Not that bad by cromar · · Score: 4, Funny

    On the other hand, if wars are made up of robots fighting robots, there'd be drastically lowered casualties on both sides... then, maybe, we could reduce wars to episodes of BatteBots and generate a large potential for advertising profit as the world tunes in to see the latest "war." In this way, it would be possible to turn the human craving for cyclical violence into a family friendly TV show. The advertising revenue would feed back into the "wars" much in the same manner as the current military-industrial complex uses profits from one war to develop the weapons for the next.

  14. Re:infernal machines by czarangelus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're mistaken. The American people don't object to the killing or abuse of their OWN people either. It is well known that American prisons are full of non-violent druggies subjected to rape, torture, and all forms of sexual violence. Instead of a national outcry against this, it is treated as a subject for late-night humor. When blacks in Oakland protest against a black boy having been murdered, shot point blank in the back while restrained on the BART - most Americans were angry at the PROTESTORS and cheered when the police fired tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse them. Americans will only become angry when it is a friend, neighbor, or family member who is abused. Anyone else and it becomes ENTERTAINMENT. The show "Cops" exists as a voyeuristic corruption of the justice system which is obviously based on the court room in Idiocracy.

    --
    When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
  15. Why hire remote pilots? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd just virtualize the controls, make it a MMO game, then offer cash prizes for the top "scores." I guarantee you, you'll have some 14 yr old with a D average who'll figure out how to bounce Hellfire missiles off walls to kill terrorists behind corners.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Why hire remote pilots? by dpilot · · Score: 4, Funny

      And no doubt his sister and brother will post such insightful stuff on the Internet that whole nations will turn over their reins of governance to them.

      Of course you'll have to cover up the murders the kid unknowingly commits, just so you can keep him playing your computer games.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  16. Re:ChAir Force by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The man who straps a bomb to his chest and dies killing his enemies, or the man who kills from a lazy-boy with no risk to himself whatsoever.

    They aren't cowards for strapping bombs to their chest. They are cowards because they tend to go after relatively undefended civilian targets. Driving a truck bomb into a barracks filled with Marines represents a legitimate act of war. Blowing up a pizzeria filled with civilians that had no military value is the coward's way out.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  17. Website not coming up: Here's the text by Pentavirate · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is as much for my benefit as anybody else.

    The war begins each day on the long drive into the desert, just past the Super Buffet and the Home Depot and the Petco, and the swath of look-alike houses that cling to the city's edge, along the forty miles of the strangest daily commute in America. Air Force Staff Sergeant Charles Anderson plucks his wristwatch from the cupholder and crosses into the war zone. He wears the watch only at work, and the ritual shifts his thoughts away from the everyday, which lately has been occupied by wedding plans and house hunting. He drives in silence, no music or news, past rocky scrubland that mirrors the Afghan mountains, valleys, and plains he'll spend his workday patrolling. First Lieutenant John Hamilton crosses over as he passes the High Desert State Prison, thirty miles outside Las Vegas, northwest on route 95. His cell-phone calls always drop off here, and over time he has come to think of the prison as the demarcation line between homelife and battlefield. A few more miles and Creech Air Force Base rises from the desert, a cluster of buildings at the foot of barren hills, cast gold by the early-morning sun. Captain Sam Nelson is the last to cross over. He steps into a plain brick building, home to the 42nd Attack Squadron, pulls his cell phone from his green flight suit, and leaves it on a counter with a pile of others. He passes through a doorway, from unclassified to secret, and the door shuts and locks behind him.

    On this July morning, the three will crew a Reaper -- big brother to the Predator -- an unmanned aerial vehicle scanning the landscape from about twenty thousand feet, seventy-five hundred miles away. Nelson flies it, and Anderson runs the array of cameras and sensors that hang under the plane's nose and can see the hot barrel of a freshly fired weapon from miles off in the dark of night. Hamilton, the mission intelligence coordinator, feeds them reports from the battlefield and talks to the "customers," their name for the ground troops they'll be supporting in Afghanistan. He's twenty-four, still soft in the face, and studied public policy at Stanford; now in the morning paper he reads about policy he helps implement. He digs that. Never mind that his neighbors don't know how close to the war he really is every day. In the Reaper Operations Center, crowded with computers and flat-screen TVs, he settles in at his workstation, which has a bank of six computer screens, a laptop, two secure phone lines, and a radio headset. On the bottom center screen, he'll soon have nine message windows open, chatting with his bosses at Creech, commanders in Afghanistan, and troops on the battlefield.

    The top middle screen shows the view from the Reaper -- in this case Afghanistan at rest. The sun has already set, but the infrared lens illuminates a darkened world in a palette of black and white. Down the hall, Nelson and Anderson step into the Ground Control Station, a windowless room ten feet wide and twenty feet deep, with beige walls and a drop-tile ceiling. At the far end, two men in flight suits and radio headsets sit in bulky tan faux-leather chairs before a cubicle cockpit of joysticks, throttles, and ten monitors. They stare at Afghanistan's roads and schools and markets and homes, as they have for the past several hours. Nelson and Anderson, their relief, slip into the seats as the Reaper flies on. Nelson checks his cargo, shown as neon-green silhouettes at the bottom of his center screen: four Hellfire missiles and two five-hundred-pound GBU-12 laser-guided bombs. Another shift of remote-control combat has begun.

    At this very moment, at any given moment, three dozen armed, unmanned American airplanes are flying lazy loops over Afghanistan and Iraq. They linger there, all day and all night. When one lands to refuel or rearm, another replaces it. They guard soldiers on patrol, spy on Al Qaeda leaders, and send missiles shrieking down on insurgents massing in the night. Add to those the hundreds of smaller, unarmed Unmanned Aer

  18. Re:infernal machines by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Armed forces are still giving out medals that were originally produced in anticipation of that invasion.

    For example, 500,000 Purple Hearts were made in preparation for the anticipated invasion of Japan. As it turned out, they were not needed then. This stockpile has been reduced by the Korean and Vietnam wars and all of the lesser actions (Iraq 1 & 2, Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, and various "peacekeeping" missions), but about 100,000 still remain unused.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  19. Re:ChAir Force by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >Muslims do not revere Muhammed. They simply believe he delivered the word of God.

    However, large numbers of them will happily kill you for insulting him and vastly larger numbers will riot over same. You seem to be using a rather non-standard definition of "revere."

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  20. Re:ChAir Force by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bullshit. They're evil for killing civilians, not cowards. Attacking the enemy where he is strong isn't bravery, it's fucking stupidity. Sometimes killing civilians is justified either as collateral damage or intentionally. e.g. had German families started settling in France during WWII occupation you can bet your ass they would have been fair targets.

    In the case of blowing up some random people in a bazaar for some obscure religious difference then it's evil - but it's not cowardly. Giving your life for something intentionally is the very opposite of cowardly. But if you think dramatic terms like "coward's way out" make it sound worse, go for it.

  21. Re:infernal machines by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good. If injecting our values and culture onto the Middle East is what's required to get them to behave by the rules of the civilized world then I'm all for it.

    LMAO. Just LMAO. "Civilized world" as defined by who? People who think nothing of executing people after refusing appeals based on new evidence exonerating them? Or executing mentally defective people, and juveniles?

    Or perhaps a civilized world where a country that has the largest percentage of its populace in the world incarcerated, and 1/4 to 1/3 of those incarcerated for crimes 65% of the population don't even believe should be a crime?

    Or a civilized world where Supreme Court justices appointed by the administration of a political party rule that in the elections to determine the leader of that nation, that to recount votes to ensure accuracy would be to "undermine" the system?

    Or a civilized world where following lobbying by unrelated interest groups, the President signs into law legislation to keep a person alive, despite their wishes, and that of the guardian they made an informed and aware decision to put in place to honor their wishes?

    Or a civilized world where it is considered de jure for a medical insurance company to collect up to and over a thousand dollars a month for "health insurance", and then deny coverage for abdominal cancer in a patients 40s, on the grounds that they had failed to disclose they had their tonsils removed at age 9?

    That civilized world, you mean?