Slashdot Mirror
Air Force Hires Civilian Drone Pilots For Combat Patrols (latimes.com)
schwit1 writes: For the first time, civilian pilots and crews now operate what the Air Force calls "combat air patrols," daily round-the-clock flights above areas of military operations to provide video and collect other sensitive intelligence. Civilians are not allowed to pinpoint targets with lasers or fire missiles. They operate only Reapers that provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, known as ISR, said Air Force Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, head of Air Combat Command.
After all, if I were at war with the United States, they would be legitimate targets. And presumably, if they didn't wear uniforms and hid among civilians, then US is to blame for any "collateral damage" from bombing civilian centers. After all, there are unlawful combatants hiding among them.
Mother's Basements and other places used for self-imposed isolation exist in all places and probably in all cultures.
The biggest problem is finding people that will follow orders when the penalty for not following orders is lower than it is for a military officer or enlistee. That barrier will probably preclude civilian contractors that have never had military service from performing that job. Don't know about former-military civilian contractors though, they might be better at not flinching, but then there's the legality issues surrounding the ramifications of bad calls where innocent people died, or where someone intentionally does something that kills noncombatants. At least in the past civilian contractors had to be present to do the acts that killed innocents such that the country in which the acts were committed could mount something of an objection. What's the law on a civilian remotely operating a machine in a foreign country that's specifically equipped to kill, using that machine to kill? At least a military member could see prosecution if through the military system of justice, but I don't know how well that would work for civilians.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
TFA explicitly points out that the civilians will not be pulling the trigger. They will be used only for Combat Air Patrols (a term that seems just a bit inappropriate) that are for data gathering and surveillance only. The trigger pullers will be active duty military.
The problem, in TFA's eyes is that this represents a slippery slope - how many degrees of separation do you need in a military setting?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Those things aren't armed, so short of someone using one of those drones for a kamikaze strike (which i'd imagine would be p. hard given that the thing is flying relatively high and there are armed soldiers in the room), there isn't much one can do.
You can get shot down, but that's about it.
The MQ-9 typically carries an ordnance load-out of some kind, even when operating in an observer role; it's just that when it's operating in an observer role, it carries less ordnance, not zero.
Typically, if the analysts get alerted, and while watching the feed, decide that they need to go "weapons hot", there is a military pilot or two in the room with the civilian pilots to handle laser-painting the targets, or the dropping of ordnance on them.
TFA explicitly points out that the civilians will not be pulling the trigger. They will be used only for Combat Air Patrols (a term that seems just a bit inappropriate) that are for data gathering and surveillance only. The trigger pullers will be active duty military.
The problem, in TFA's eyes is that this represents a slippery slope - how many degrees of separation do you need in a military setting?
IIRC, the air force has about four major protocol points that they follow in order to ensure that drone strikes are legal. One of those is that the person pulling the trigger be military so that you are ensured a direct chain of command, i.e. legal authority to kill others on behalf of the state, (this also ensures they get qualified immunity from lawsuits.)
That's sticky mainly due to the Geneva Convention's definitions for the criteria needed for the label. Given that the United States has been a party to the conflicts in which nonmilitary persons have been hired by the US to participate in, they're not mercenaries by the definition that requires Nationals not affiliated with the belligerent nations. Given that they're generally not hired into infantry or other common roles and are usually used for specialty jobs it's hard to argue that their pay is disproportionate. Given that their roles aren't generally infantry, it's even difficult to claim that they take a direct role in fighting the hostilities. Would someone working VIP security that gets into a firefight with a specific group of assassins fall into the same 'direct fighting' role as a soldier in-uniform on a routine patrol?
Based on the need to satisfy several conditions of the 1977 Amendment, Protocol 1, Article 47, it would be difficult to call people in specialized roles mercenaries. It's a challenge applying even one of the several criteria depending on how taking a direct role is interpreted.
Mind you, I don't think that we should employ so many non-military individuals in the military roles in forward-deployed areas, even in things like the laundry or meal production. I believe that other than the medical corps, every individual providing services to combat personnel should themselves be trained as combat personnel and be prepared to take on that role if necessary. I don't want a bunch of laundry workers or mess hall attendants being unable to defend the base because they're civilians, and as civilians have to be defended by the regular military personnel.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Re 'Next stop, machine-learning drone pilot" That is the end design. Entire section of nations will just become free fire zones for US drone AI systems.
The US mil is thinking back to Vietnam and the Strategic Hamlet Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and even the UK experience in the Boer War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The AI will just patrol 24/7 and interdict in any movement it its grid.
Until then its more of the (Nov. 20 2015) https://theintercept.com/2015/...
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"