Drone Drivers

[TLAM Strike]

I would not want to be in a Civilian aircraft when any air combat is going on whether it be between drones and manned jets or jets and jets. The surveillance and targeting systems of current drones are just about equal to what is found on current manned aircraft (Some cases better with ones equipped with ISAR). Only real diffrence is that the manned jet has a guy looking at the picture on a 5x5" screen while the guy flying the drone has a nice 26" monitor.

Reliably is a problem yes. That can be solved by either increasing the quality of drones (work out the bugs) or increase the number of drones.

I think our drones really need a "Self Destruct" for when they go down. Screw retrial. Remember the Probe Droid in The Empire Strikes Back? No Stormtroops when looking for him/it. It was comprised so it destroyed its self beyond salvage- useful in a war zone.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I would not want to be in a Civilian aircraft when any air combat is going on whether it be between drones and manned jets or jets and jets.

I meant I wiuld not sit in a civilian plane even when drones are just navigating in the area even with no combat going on. When there is a malfunction in that damn thing, a software bug, whatever, there is nobody aboard to keep things under control. The operator does not sit at the end of a wire - he sits on the other side of a radiowave connection, or whatever they use for controlling it. With reliability of the things being like it currently is, I do not like so sit like a lame duck, without options if the thing goes into blind or amok mode.

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I think our drones really need a "Self Destruct" for when they go down. Screw retrial.

They already have a deletion feature for the sensible software and data aboard. Problem is - again, that feature still does not work reliably.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I meant I wiuld not sit in a civilian plane even when drones are just navigating in the area even with no combat going on. When there is a malfunction in that damn thing, a software bug, whatever, there is nobody aboard to keep things under control. The operator does not sit at the end of a wire - he sits on the other side of a radiowave connection, or whatever they use for controlling it. With reliability of the things being like it currently is, I do not like so sit like a lame duck, without options if the thing goes into blind or amok mode.

A software failure on a manned aircraft is just a deadly. It doesn't matter if the connection between the ailerons (or whatever) is by fiber optic wire or by radio wave if the "Brain" interpreting the pilots actions on the stick fails the aircraft is doomed.

They already have a deletion feature for the sensible software and data aboard. Problem is - again, that feature still does not work reliably.

I was thinking more of the hardware, less if fall in to the wrong hands... again...

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

A software failure on a manned aircraft is just a deadly. It doesn't matter if the connection between the ailerons (or whatever) is by fiber optic wire or by radio wave if the "Brain" interpreting the pilots actions on the stick fails the aircraft is doomed.

It matters very well becasue a radowave connection is much more vbulenrable than a wire or fibre connection, and a human brain inside the mahcine can form an image of what is going on in an unnormal flight situation even when system fails, while the operator of a drone cannot once the comlink broke down. so the pilot in the first case has higher probabilities to take influence on the situatio, than the operator in the seconed case.

After all, there must be a reason why currently much many more drones fall out of the sky for unforseeable reasons even if they do not take enemy fire, than manned airplanes, both military and civilian, both private or commercial.

The intel gathering and ground attackl drones came first, the aircombat drones, not mentioning the fully autonomous drones, lag behind by several years. If even the first do not work reliably currently, how much less reliavbility you have in the latter - which are designed for the far more cmplicated task of air combat...?

the era of drones will come. But it still is many more years away than the milizary wants to make us beleive. After all, the military must paint an optimistic picture, if it wants to secure financial funding.

[TLAM Strike]

Valid points Sky.

Personally I don't see autonomous drones in air combat (or any combat) for at least a decade or more. But remote operated air combat drones are a very possible with today's tech and need to be something we seriously consider here in the US.

Severing of Commlink between operator and drone is possible but very difficult. China or Russia might be able to jam it briefly, Iran possibly but I doubt someone group like AQ could pull it off with out finding them selves on the wrong side of an AGM-88.

You are right about so many drones crashing, right now we are in the "WWI" stage of drones. Vietnam was the "Wright Brothers" stage, today we are still learning what works and what doesn't. I think putting more drones in service only increases our knowledge and experience with them, with everyone that crashed the boys over at Lockheed etc learn a little more.

[Skybird]

Note that the intel and ground attack drones that get lost in considerable numbers in Afghanistan, are no autonomous drones AFAIK, but are remote controlled. And still they are not really that reliable. If a drone loses contact and crashes because the operator ordered it to go into a normal turn, then there are problems - big ones. Note that the producers even admits that (he gets quoted somehwrre in one of the articles I lined in the past two days), saying that due to demand they are fielded far ahead of their certified combat readiness.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Just out of curiousity, how many autonomous drones are in operation at this time? (that we know of)