South Korea requests information on Global Hawk

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
South Korea has requested information on the possibility of buying four RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 30(I) aircraft. South Korea will be taking over command of Peninsula forces in 2015, including intel gathering, so these would be good to add to the inventory.

The information is for the Block 30, but it mentions equipment specific to the Block 20. Total cost of the sale would be $1.2B. Both Northrop Grumman and the US have wanted the sale to go through in the past, but South Korea has been hesitant due to cost and reliability concerns.

The RFI doesn't mean a sale is guaranteed, but it's the next step towards a sale.


South Korea has requested information on a possible purchase of four Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk Block 30(I)s.

The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of the possible $1.2 billion sale on 24 December. Though the aircraft is described as a Block 30, the Congressional notification specifically mentions the Raytheon Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite (EISS), standard equipment on the earlier Block 20.

The notification is only the latest step in a long process, and may not result in a sale. Though Northrop and the US have long hoped for such a purchase, South Korea has repeatedly declined due to concerns over cost and reliability.

Source


WASHINGTON --- The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress Dec. 21 of
a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Republic of Korea for four RQ-4 Block 30 (I) Global Hawk Remotely Piloted Aircraft and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $1.2 billion.

The Republic of Korea (ROK) has requested a possible sale of four (4) RQ-4 Block 30 (I) Global Hawk Remotely Piloted Aircraft with the Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite (EISS). The EISS includes infrared/electro-optical, synthetic aperture radar imagery and ground moving target indicator, mission control element, launch and recovery element, signals intelligence package, an imagery intelligence exploitation system, test equipment, ground support, operational flight test support, communications equipment, spare and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics support.

The estimated cost is $1.2 billion.

Source




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Global hawk huh?
I guess they want to create their own 911 scenario?

Just like we did with global Hawk and the planes on 911?

funny



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


The Global Hawk wasn't used on 9/11. Regardless of which theory you believe, that engine at the Pentagon was too big to be from any variant of the RQ-4. That turbine wheel was missing the blades so it would have been much bigger than what was found.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


The Global Hawk wasn't used on 9/11. Regardless of which theory you believe, that engine at the Pentagon was too big to be from any variant of the RQ-4. That turbine wheel was missing the blades so it would have been much bigger than what was found.


I strongly disagree and feel bad that you believe that.

and forget about the missile that hit the pentagon, I'm talking about the twin towers.
edit on 26-12-2012 by FinalCountdown because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I hope it goes through, I love our south Korean buddies. If it helps them spy on... cough... cough I mean protect their borders then great.

This is why we have allies, they give us gangnam style, we give them some drones.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Global Hawk:

LINK
LINK


The Northrop Grumman Global Hawk is a robotized American military jet that has a wingspan of a Boeing 737. The excerpts below were taken from an article entitled: "Robot plane flies Pacific unmanned," which appeared in the April 24, 2001 edition of Britain's International Television News:



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


Those weren't Global Hawks either. They were 767s. I know aircraft, and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that what we saw that day were a pair of Boeing 767s.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


Those weren't Global Hawks either. They were 767s. I know aircraft, and there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that what we saw that day were a pair of Boeing 767s.


I'm truly sorry you feel that way.
It sucks when your "belief" keeps you from seeing the truth



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


It's not "belief" it's knowledge of aircraft.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
edit on 12/26/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Well, you have the right to "believe" anything you want, even if you are wrong.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I don’t see why anyone would oppose the sale. Why not give the south greater ability to defend itself? The stronger they are the less help they will need from US moving forward.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


Sir, if you cannot tell the difference between an RQ-4 and a Boeing 767, what possesses you to presume that you know better than people who can?

You aren't one of these who believes that the 767 I saw hitting the second tower live on the news wasn't really there are you?
edit on 26-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


No, of course not.
But I do believe and there is no real evidence to dispute my belief in that the planes that flew into the towers were remote controlled and on a set "path".

There is no amount of "evidence" that you can show me that would change this from a "fact" in my mind.

What, are you going to say they didn't have the technology to do this with those types of planes?

Really? You're telling me something is just to impossible?



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
No, I'm not going to say that. But where is the evidence that supports your belief? Proof cannot be produced that something that didn't happen, it is only possible to present proof that something did.

ie we have evidence that planes hit the towers, we cannot provide proof that they didn't pass straight through and continued flying in another dimension unharmed, if someone was to make that claim. We would probably say that was unlikely though.

Your belief that the aircraft were remotely piloted and empty falls into the same category.

And what has ANY of that got to do with the RQ-4 being considered by South Korea if you already know they were not used in 9/11 anyway


Any plane can be remotely piloted, not just the ones built for the task
edit on 26-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
No, I'm not going to say that. But where is the evidence that supports your belief? Proof cannot be produced that something that didn't happen, it is only possible to present proof that something did.

ie we have evidence that planes hit the towers, we cannot provide proof that they didn't pass straight through and continued flying in another dimension unharmed, if someone was to make that claim. We would probably say that was unlikely though.

Your belief that the aircraft were remotely piloted and empty falls into the same category.

And what has ANY of that got to do with the RQ-4 being considered by South Korea if you already know they were not used in 9/11 anyway


Any plane can be remotely piloted, not just the ones built for the task
edit on 26-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)


Understood.
But I never said empty.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FinalCountdown
 


Even if they were remote controlled, and I'm not saying they were, how does that have anything to do with the Global Hawk on 9/11? The planes that hit the towers were still Boeing 767s, even if they were remote controlled.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

***ATTENTION***



This is NOT the 9/11 forum. That forum has specific posting limits and conditions for a reason. Please keep comments upon the topic of this thread - South Korea requests information on Global Hawk

Thank you.

Hefficide



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


The previous cancelling of the sale was on the Korean side. This time however, Korea will need them as they are taking over command of the Peninsula within the next couple of years. They'll be in charge of intelligence gathering, as well as all other military aspects, so they'll need assets like the RQ-4 in case the U-2 isn't always available for missions.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
A few more details on the Global Hawk sensors that will be installed, if the purchase goes through.

It's the RQ-4 Block 30(I), with the EISS (Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite), which will include cloud penetrating radar, high resolution electro-optical camera system, and an infrared sensor. The camera resolution will be 12 inches from over 65,000 feet. EISS is supposed to enhance sensors, and increase their range by 50%.

The RQ-4s for South Korea will include Infrared/Electro-optical sensors, Synthetic Aperture Radar Imagery, and a Ground Moving Target Indicator, a Mission Control element, launch and recovery element, SIGINT package, imagery intelligence, exploitation package, test equipment, ground and flight support, comm equipment, spare parts, training, TOs, and several logistical support elements.





new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join