I guess that the UAV technology is still immature.
Yes, this. We are nowhere near replacing most manned military aircraft, especially fighters, with drones for at least a decade, probably more. Despite the vehement protestations of many of slashdot's armchair generals.
Real-world, maybe not so much - except for only a single F-117 being downed, where many more could have been if lowered RCS hadn't been effective. But the F-22 has done incredibly well over numerical odds in combat exercises. The only situations where it hasn't were due to giving the opposing forces a "head start" in which standoff was diminished and they were allowed to go directly into dogfighting.
Worried about it? That's been their interpretation since day one. If sales are up, then "their witch hunt on piracy is finally paying off, and all they need to do now is increase their efforts tenfold with even more invasive and restrictive measures." But if sales are down, then their witch hunt on piracy isn't paying off yet, and all they need to do now is increase their efforts tenfold with even more invasive and restrictive measures.
I've worked both manned and unmanned, airframers and engines. Unmanned technology is not nearly to the point of being effective at an air-to-air role yet, and won't be for some time - I mean crap, people - most of our drones are still running with turboprops; we're just starting to get the hang of jet engines in some prototypes. There will be at least one more generation (6th) of manned fighters, to eventually replace the F-22s. There is no Moore's Law for defense aerospace, it moves slower than that.
My did got a VHS camcorder in the 1980s and spent a significant amount of time and money on tapes to record as much as he could of my and my sisters' significant life events - proms, sports, graduations, weddings, etc. To this day, those VHS tapes sit there decaying, never watched. It seems like everyone is too busy living their current lives and experiencing the present to have time to start delving into even the "important" moments of the past. Photos? Sure. Video? Hasn't happened yet. Maybe I'll be proven wrong some day.
I am currently buying up and refurbishing as many pre-black box vehicles as possible in anticipation of opening up "'Don't Track Me Bro!' Used Cars" in 2015 - coming soon to a vacant lot near you! Burner phones are a lucrative market, why not burner cars?
We haven't been at war with any country since 1945, so by your logic, our military currently has no instruments of war. Ignoring that, the specific drones I was providing design input to during my tenure at GA - with bomb-carrying capability, long range sensor packages, and other unspecified military capabilities - were most certainly instruments of war, just as an Abrams is in instrument of war. They have no legitimate civilian or law enforcement purpose, since such purposes could be served by other UAVs without the military features. To attempt to argue otherwise is being either obtuse or disingenuous.
First off, I'm against flying them over the U.S. due to privacy rights, so I am on your side here, just for a different reason. Their time on station combined with the sensor packages and standoff range of those sensors give them a huge advantage over manned aircraft for surveillance, and that's just not something the government should be using on its own citizens on its own soil. They're instruments of war, not of police investigation. And that's not even considering their ordnance capability.
The waivers and acceptance of risk are due to the lack of pilot - you're correct, when there's no crew life at stake, the military requirements are not as strict. As far as airworthiness, honestly, what is safe enough to fly over one's kids? In terms over incidents per flight hour, the Pred-A and Pred-B Avenger are in the same neighborhood as civil aircraft - and I've seen the so-called airworthiness of some of the civil aircraft at the local airstrip up close and personal. I wouldn't want a lot of those old deathtraps flying over people either, let alone taking a flight in one.
Slashdot Mirror
Quick! To Kickstarter!
Decomposing bodies release Methane, which is worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas by an order of magnitude.
That's why you bury them real deep...
No, that would release CO2 into the atmosphere. Simply burying them is better - sequesters it in the soil.
I guess that the UAV technology is still immature.
Yes, this. We are nowhere near replacing most manned military aircraft, especially fighters, with drones for at least a decade, probably more. Despite the vehement protestations of many of slashdot's armchair generals.
I, for one, welcome our new cinderblock-chucking quadrupedal robotic overl-- OW, MY FOOT!
Real-world, maybe not so much - except for only a single F-117 being downed, where many more could have been if lowered RCS hadn't been effective. But the F-22 has done incredibly well over numerical odds in combat exercises. The only situations where it hasn't were due to giving the opposing forces a "head start" in which standoff was diminished and they were allowed to go directly into dogfighting.
So in other words, stealth is very effective as part of an overall system.
Yes, eventually we will have mecca wars with no humans involved. But not just yet.
Um. Freudian slip? Assuming you mean mecha...
If it's that useless and that easily defeated, wouldn't we have lost more than, say, one..?
The PAK-FAs are a worthy competitor to the F-35
...or so their brochure says. If the F-35 is catching crap about not being in service yet, then the PAK-FA shouldn't get a free pass, either.
A grip is a mythical animal, half lion and half bird
Gryphon is the English translation. Yes, I worked JAS-39 (tangentially) back in the day, too.
I see what you did there.
FYI, the talk was to be given by Violet Blue, who is certainly NOT a guy.
Worried about it? That's been their interpretation since day one. If sales are up, then "their witch hunt on piracy is finally paying off, and all they need to do now is increase their efforts tenfold with even more invasive and restrictive measures." But if sales are down, then their witch hunt on piracy isn't paying off yet, and all they need to do now is increase their efforts tenfold with even more invasive and restrictive measures.
I've worked both manned and unmanned, airframers and engines. Unmanned technology is not nearly to the point of being effective at an air-to-air role yet, and won't be for some time - I mean crap, people - most of our drones are still running with turboprops; we're just starting to get the hang of jet engines in some prototypes. There will be at least one more generation (6th) of manned fighters, to eventually replace the F-22s. There is no Moore's Law for defense aerospace, it moves slower than that.
Pike suspects that the F-35 Lightning II, now under development by Lockheed Martin, might be 'the last fighter with an ejector seat...
...And I'd put lots of money on his suspicion being incorrect.
My did got a VHS camcorder in the 1980s and spent a significant amount of time and money on tapes to record as much as he could of my and my sisters' significant life events - proms, sports, graduations, weddings, etc. To this day, those VHS tapes sit there decaying, never watched. It seems like everyone is too busy living their current lives and experiencing the present to have time to start delving into even the "important" moments of the past. Photos? Sure. Video? Hasn't happened yet. Maybe I'll be proven wrong some day.
Asshole on speakerphone
Holy hell yes THIS. Who the fuck ever thought it was a good idea to equip every desk in a cube farm with a fucking SPEAKER PHONE?
I am currently buying up and refurbishing as many pre-black box vehicles as possible in anticipation of opening up "'Don't Track Me Bro!' Used Cars" in 2015 - coming soon to a vacant lot near you! Burner phones are a lucrative market, why not burner cars?
Do you have pendulums in your house? PAK CHOOIE UNF.
We haven't been at war with any country since 1945, so by your logic, our military currently has no instruments of war. Ignoring that, the specific drones I was providing design input to during my tenure at GA - with bomb-carrying capability, long range sensor packages, and other unspecified military capabilities - were most certainly instruments of war, just as an Abrams is in instrument of war. They have no legitimate civilian or law enforcement purpose, since such purposes could be served by other UAVs without the military features. To attempt to argue otherwise is being either obtuse or disingenuous.
Hey, it wasn't my argument. I don't have any.
First off, I'm against flying them over the U.S. due to privacy rights, so I am on your side here, just for a different reason. Their time on station combined with the sensor packages and standoff range of those sensors give them a huge advantage over manned aircraft for surveillance, and that's just not something the government should be using on its own citizens on its own soil. They're instruments of war, not of police investigation. And that's not even considering their ordnance capability.
The waivers and acceptance of risk are due to the lack of pilot - you're correct, when there's no crew life at stake, the military requirements are not as strict. As far as airworthiness, honestly, what is safe enough to fly over one's kids? In terms over incidents per flight hour, the Pred-A and Pred-B Avenger are in the same neighborhood as civil aircraft - and I've seen the so-called airworthiness of some of the civil aircraft at the local airstrip up close and personal. I wouldn't want a lot of those old deathtraps flying over people either, let alone taking a flight in one.
Well, I used to work for General Atomics, and I say you're full of shit.
Mid six digits is the new low UID? Wow. I never even thought mine was very low.