Flying into trouble? Drones to use US airspace as safety record questioned

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Flying into trouble? Drones to use US airspace as safety record questioned


rt.com

A newly-released internal investigation by the US Air Force has shown a plague of non-mission-related accidents involving drones in its foreign operations. Meanwhile, Washington is pushing ahead with plans to allow drones into US civil airspace.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
This story cracks me up, particularly this bit:

"One account from April describes a sub-contracted operator launching an $8.9 million MQ-9 Reaper from the runway at the Seychelles International Airport without getting the go-head from the control tower. The same operator then accidentally switched off the engine without noticing and then tried an emergency landing, but did not release the wheels."

“I will be blunt here. I said, ‘I can’t believe this is happening again,’ ” the report cites an Air Force official present at the scene as saying. He later adds, “You go, ‘How stupid are you?’”.

Right, I'm gonna say it out loud and clear, the government does not care about the safety of it's own people, just in case the good people of America weren't already aware of this. Furthermore, consider yourself fodder at the mercy of whatever whims your leaders decide on.

rt.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Additional, does anyone remember the Pakistan airliner crash earlier this year? Lot of people died and there was some rumour story about a UFO being spotted around it. I never ever heard an official say why the plane crashed and it disappeared from the front pages. If anyone has more info on it, let me know.
edit on 3-12-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
i dont think this is breaking news, i read about a bill to allow to the use of military drones over US airspace to "look for terrorists" some time ago.

www.washingtontimes.com...

edit on 3-12-2012 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Biigs
 


I'm sure the Mods can move if the deem necessary mate.

There are no terrorists btw



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
They've been flying them around North Dakota for a couple of years.

Court Upholds Domestic Drone Use in Arrest of American Citizen. There's a UAV wing at the Grand Forks Air Force base and the University of North Dakota has a UAV training program.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Have you had one come through your kitchen window and land on your breakfast table yet mate?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 


Not yet, but here's hoping... between lawsuit and salvage value, I'd be set for life



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 


The problem with the drones is that they are been pushed by private companies that manufacture them, government as usual get pay under the table to pass the laws necessary for this technology to thrive and reap profits, they careless who is managing the technology as usually is the private sector and what problems will come from it.

I expect the drones no only interfering with air space of commercial planes but many will start inundating the skies that all kind of problems with be arising from the crazy frenzy of possible profitability that will come, they will fall from the skies and will cause accidents they will interfere with air traffic and much more, it will become like swarm of birds because all the money that can be made and all the corruption in order to make that money.

But as usual money talks and BS walks when it comes to government and the private sector.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


The problem with drones, as I see it, is that they're similar to nuclear weapons in the immediate years following World War II. They're great, so long as the US is the only country that has them, but they're going to be a nightmare once they start to proliferate. It wouldn't take too much for a foreign power to sneak one into the country and start launching anonymous missile attacks from small and nearly impossible to track UAVs. I think we might see southern border towns being attacked by drug gang UAVs in our lifetimes.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
everyone should have drones and robot soldiers, leave them to fight the war while the humans farm reproduce and love each other. in peace... on mars....

"tell us who wins"

then suddenly they all make peace and come for the humans, actually this is now starting to sound like battle star galactica
edit on 3-12-2012 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Zcustosmorum
 



There are no terrorists btw

According to the govt's criteria, a lot of us normal citizens are terrorists.

You know, that list that puts you on a watch list if you pay with cash...
or store more than a weeks supply of food?



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


yeah hating the government is NOT the same as hating America/Americans.

and neither makes you a terrorist.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Yes very true, as this technology is controlled by the private companies that makes them, even if the government used them once in public use anybody with money can buy them, as usual that is the main reason why private makers wants legislation to be as lax as possible for this machines so they can profit from the higher bidder.

Is not really what the government can do with the technology as they has been using them already, is what the private sector can do with it.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
The technology is controlled by the government, and operated by the government. They're built by private companies, and some smaller ones are available for purchase by people other than the government, but they are in the micro UAV size, and are useless for carrying much other than cameras, and are very few and far between.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


... and what makes you think that the EU, Russia, China, North Korea and others don't see the success that the United States has with these things and isn't in the process of developing their own? They're basically remote control aircraft with fly by wire technology.

Maybe you missed this: China launches GPS system last year (the European Union has their own, as well,) so that their military isn't reliant on the US satellites, which could be scrambled at any time.

The future is all about drones, and not just ours.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I've never said they aren't. And in fact they are developing several. The Neuron just recently flew with the EU, and Taranis flies next year, the Pterodactyl just flew in China. I was talking about the technology HERE that is controlled by the gov't. UAVs and UCAVs are the next wave in weapons technology, and soon enough every country out there is going to have their own.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The technology is controlled by the government, and operated by the government. They're built by private companies, and some smaller ones are available for purchase by people other than the government, but they are in the micro UAV size, and are useless for carrying much other than cameras, and are very few and far between.


Zaphod, can you find an accident report confirming the OP's RT sourced description of the crash?

I can find the crash but no reference to anything remotely like the incident RT is describing?



Originally posted by Zcustosmorum

This story cracks me up, particularly this bit:

"One account from April describes a sub-contracted operator launching an $8.9 million MQ-9 Reaper from the runway at the Seychelles International Airport without getting the go-head from the control tower. The same operator then accidentally switched off the engine without noticing and then tried an emergency landing, but did not release the wheels."


I believe Russia Today may be embellishing the story and the OP's jubilation at the write off due to flagrant operator incompetence may be premature.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


I'm not sure the AIB report has been released yet. I found the release for the MQ-1 crash in Feb, but I haven't found anything on the MQ-9 that occurred in April. I know the crash happened, but I haven't seen the report yet.

ETA: The Washington Post claims that they have received over 1000 pages of AIB reports, and that this one was undisclosed. I'll keep trying to find a copy of it somewhere, because I don't really trust the MSM when it comes to accident reports.
edit on 12/3/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


I'm not sure the AIB report has been released yet. I found the release for the MQ-1 crash in Feb, but I haven't found anything on the MQ-9 that occurred in April. I know the crash happened, but I haven't seen the report yet.

ETA: The Washington Post claims that they have received over 1000 pages of AIB reports, and that this one was undisclosed. I'll keep trying to find a copy of it somewhere, because I don't really trust the MSM when it comes to accident reports.
edit on 12/3/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


TY for digging Zaphod, I'll wait until something verifiable turns up before commenting further.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


Something doesn't smell right about this. The USAF just recently graduated their first class of non-pilot UAV operators. I can't see them going to all the trouble of opening up a new category, training them for several years, and then just hiring a civilian contractor to fly them. I can see a micro-UAV flown by contractor, since some of those are hand launched, but not a Reaper, or a larger class UAV.

It turns out that Merlin RamCO is doing flight testing, and instructing of Predator and Reaper pilots, along with other services. The company website says that they do ISR support, and flight ops, but I can't find anything to show that they were contracted to fly the missions out of the Seychelles, except this article. The flights out of there were testing some new classified system that didn't require SATCOM, but if it was a flight test it wouldn't have been a mission, and if it was a mission, it would have been military pilots, with RamCO employees observing, not flying the mission. I think there's a grain of truth, with some misunderstanding, but I still can't find an AIB report anywhere. You would think they would have released it with the article.
edit on 12/3/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join