Unmanned aircraft puts future of pilots, training in question at Dyess, elsewhere

[SpArK]

Unmanned aircraft puts future of pilots, training in question at Dyess, elsewhere




Image-------------image
WASHINGTON — Dyess Air Force Base is a premier B-1 and C-130 base, but the military is intent on expanding its fleet of unmanned aircraft remotely piloted from the ground.

The base's role in a military future featuring more UAVs is uncertain, but these "remotely piloted aircraft" — the Air Force's latest moniker for them — only are expected to become more important.


article----article

"You cannot be a brain-dead, wilting violet to fly these things," he said.



link-----------------link

 

[arya]

we need them badly

 

[Ray]

Unmanned aircraft cannot replace manned air platforms.

As I see it and what I have read in various fora,

1.On the stealth drone shot down, it is felt that a remote pilot cannot react the same way as a pilot on site. It would have never happened had there been a pilot onboard. I understand it was a smallish remotely controlled aircraft, and better to lose a machine than a pilot, but no robotic aircraft will ever be able to perform at the level a manned aircraft in so far as being able to react to the situation.

2. Unmanned aircraft comes packaged complete with their own sets of weaknesses that a savvy enemy can exploit. Autonomous airplanes will only be as good as the people that program them, so their tactical flexibility in any given situation is questionable. Remote controlled aircraft are only as reliable as the signal that links them to their pilots, which suggest that the countermeasures against them might be a lot cheaper than the weapon system itself. Robotic warfare adds a new dimension to the battlefield, but I hardly think it's going to replace anything that is already on it, either in the near future or afterward.