The US navy gets its new Spy plane, IT is big !!

Discussion in 'News & happenings' started by ManISinJpr, Jun 17, 2012.

Share This Page

  1. ManISinJpr

    ManISinJpr Want to resurrect.. !!!

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    488
    Reputation:
    1,326
    The era of unmanned drones is already upon us, making a new entry into this sphere is the new. MQ-4C Triton, It has a wing span of 130 feet, canfly for long hours and can spy on an area of 2.7 million square miles ( yes ) in real time !!! fitted with the smartest optics and gadgetry still not known to man !!
    [​IMG]
    here are more details :D

    Excerpts borrowed from the US Navy site.
     
  2. harryneopotter

    harryneopotter NEO is my middle name ! Staff Member

    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    606
    Reputation:
    1,629
    now all we need is the Skynet and then.....

    Hasta la vista, baby !
     
    ManISinJpr likes this.
  3. dbg

    dbg RAID Staff Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,111
    Likes Received:
    1,144
    Reputation:
    2,952
    Hmm.. Its a slightly larger variant of the Global Hawk ..
     
    ManISinJpr likes this.
  4. ManISinJpr

    ManISinJpr Want to resurrect.. !!!

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    488
    Reputation:
    1,326
    It is something PAR extraordinary !!
    I want to take a bet !
    within some years, we will have Pilotless passenger flights !! thereby killing all pilots to just be onlookers and emergency workers ;)
    anybody want to place ?
     
  5. dbg

    dbg RAID Staff Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,111
    Likes Received:
    1,144
    Reputation:
    2,952
    Nopes.. not in the near future .. We are still way off on Driverless cars at it is .. so having Pilotless commercial flights .. even Cargo/Transport ones seems to be pretty off.

    Anyhow it will always be cheaper to have a human pilot fly the aircrafts because loosing one plane in a crash is the bigger loss than the pilots salary.

    The whole point of having UAVs and UCAVs for the military is that they are more expendable .. and easily replaceable, to protect Human lives.. The higher costs involved in doing so are not a factor.
    The Global Hawk costs twice as much as a F-18 Super Hornet.

    Lets compare..
    Military applications are high risk .. so combat-result supersedes cost ..
    Civilian/commercial applications are low risk, mainlining low cost of operation will the priority.

    You can afford to loose few UAVs to get the job done... Result matters.
    You cant afford to loose even a single commercial aircraft .. its a business.
     
  6. ManISinJpr

    ManISinJpr Want to resurrect.. !!!

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    488
    Reputation:
    1,326
    No logic etc !!!
    Take a BET !!
    I am contrarian better by habit ;) you have 50% channce of loosing and I 50% chance of winning !!

    get your logic together ;)
     
  7. dbg

    dbg RAID Staff Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,111
    Likes Received:
    1,144
    Reputation:
    2,952
    Okay .. I'll take it .. No Pilotless commercial aviation withing the next 5 years atleast ..
     
  8. ManISinJpr

    ManISinJpr Want to resurrect.. !!!

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    488
    Reputation:
    1,326
    LMAO !! you fell in the trap right away !!
    who said next 5 years, I am giving you the odds, so you can't mention that ! :D

    Now you are stuck, I wanted all members to learn this side betting thing !!
     
  9. dbg

    dbg RAID Staff Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,111
    Likes Received:
    1,144
    Reputation:
    2,952
    I'm making my side of the bet clear .. so you don't pull any ambiguity later ;)
     
  10. ManISinJpr

    ManISinJpr Want to resurrect.. !!!

    Messages:
    1,404
    Likes Received:
    488
    Reputation:
    1,326
    You are no good ;) as a side better, side bets have 2 options only and no clauses.. :D
     
  11. JD666

    JD666 RAID Leader Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,584
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Reputation:
    5,403
    Its believed that the US govt has 64 UAV bases in US itself. Not considering the numbers it has abroad.

    A UAV has much better applications than just keeping the people on the ground, and not in the air. No government has thought twice before putting pilots in test planes. They could have very well used a remotely operated test bed before putting a human being in it for testing purpose.

    The UAV serves a purpose of longer endurance ( Flight crews can operate it in shifts on ground ). With in flight re-fueling being an option, it can stay afloat virtually endlessly. With Solar UAVs under testing and the new X series space craft also completing a mission, the future is slim, trimmed down, and remote controlled.Rather than the 50s and 60s when flight crews did 18hr + missions and fatigue was a key factor.

    With a self detonate mechanism upon being shot down/damaged, there is no risk of loss of technology. Whereas if a Pilot ejected over enemy territory there was an issue of retrieval / extraction, and also loss of technology to the enemy if any part of the aircraft survived upon impact.

    In the event of a potential Dirty Nuclear bomb attack ( as a possible future scenario ), a UAV will provide better re-con/coverage since the radiation damage can be sustained by metal, but not by human tissue.

    Not requiring the plumbing/installation to support a human being ( Air conditioning/oxygen system, control system, avionics, displays, seating space, Weight considerations ), a UAV can / is made slimmer, lighter, more efficient with a higher payload. And that makes for an incredible VFM proposition.

    The blurring of lines across the various sections of the army, a UAV can be operated by ground forces even.

    So rather than co-ordinating with the air force for an air strike during a ground campaign, the ground forces can control and get effective strike capability right in their own hands. So rather than communicating to and fro, they get the job done, right there, themselves.



    Oh and we are not going pilotless commercial aircrafts anytime soon in the future. Not even for the next 10 years. They might start testing and developing it but not till the computers/avionics are robust enough to handle emergencies/failures. Even so, there will always be a pilot to supervise all the operations.

    WE are already Pilotless in our flying as it is. From the take off roll, till the landing the pilot can virtually fly the aircraft without touching the control column even once.


    However a computer cannot be relied upon to take the extreme maneuvers or actions that save an aircraft ( or for that matter, that doom an aircraft ), but only a human being can.

    Besides even though most aviation accidents have been blamed on pilot error, if there were 2 aircrafts on the tarmac, one with a pilot and the other without one, which one would you prefer. And no Bill gates sitting calmly jokes, since the software is MS.

    Its human nature. No matter how robust technology will get, we as passengers will not board a pilotless aircraft. And companies wont make that mistake since they can grill a Pilot to make the take off / landing more efficient, conserve fuel, cut operating parameters to save fuel etc etc, but not a computer.
     
    dbg and ManISinJpr like this.

Share This Page