Compromising National US Security???

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 06:54 AM
link   
I read on this foreign Hungarian news site regarding the F-16 Drone that the US Air Force has been testing out.

Now the big question.

If a foreign news website has this published like the one here below about this drone, is this a risk to our National security secrets? However, they do not describe the exact details on how the avionics controls works or that sort of stuff, but still, I do not think ANY foreign news agency like this one should not reveil on what our US military is working on.

index.hu...

And it just bugs me about this one as well on what DARPA projects are in the works. This should be STOPPED!!!! revieling our US military projects to foreign news websites.

index.hu...



edit on 30-9Sep-132013 by darpa999 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by darpa999
 

So many reasons for this, doesn't matter, leaked info, misinformation. But, how could we expect to stop such a report (assuming we wanted to) anyway?



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   

darpa999
If a foreign news website has this published like the one here below about this drone, is this a risk to our National security secrets?





We are in trouble today because "National Security" has been used to cover every crime in the book -- murder, torture, theft, smuggling contraband and more. Do you realize the CIA still refuses to release their records about the JFK murder even today? Do you understand the implications?

If we want our children and grand-children to live free, we better start working hard to sweep away the National Security state and everything it stands for.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by darpa999
 


I suggest that you have the situation backwards. Except for true "whistleblower" events in the news, most of what you find in the US media these days is material that is put out by TPTB. They have an agenda. I would suggest that what is behind this latest "news" is that combat aircraft such as the F-16s will be retro fitted with the same fly-by-long-distance-wire devices that is currently used on drones.

There is little difference between the one situation and the other. Except the F-16s will have many advantages over the typical drone. The one disadvantage is the inability to stay in the air for hours on end as do the drones. But not to worry, the F-16 will be able to carry some hellish weaponry into the target as high speeds as a counter balance to the surveillance capabilities of the drones.

Imagine, for example, Israel equipping their F-16s in such a manner to attack Iran's nuclear facilities by flying the converted planes directly into the fortified mountain installations? Not a pilot would be lost.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:14 AM
link   
A lot of this stuff, especially DARPA's public side, is all open lit and none of it's classified. DARPA bids the projects out in the open on SBIR or FBO or both. It's generally only AFTER the first project comes in that they classify it.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Perhaps that is generally true with government work, but in the real business of doing secret things it certainly is not and could not be true. Go ask the NSA how they conduct their business.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:37 AM
link   
The F-16's, while technically a drone, are outfitted to be targets for air to air engagements. They are not weapons at all anymore. Just expensive targets. Could they be used as a weapon? Of course but the cost to make it such would not be worth it.

Now if someone were to hack the flight controls, that would be a different matter. They do have a self destruct mechanism on board and the aircraft designated to shoot them down will have been in the air for a bit as well. A hacked aircraft would not make it far.

As for DARPA, they are a R&D agency. They often ask the public to design things through a competition with cash awards. R&D is hard to keep completely secret as at some point you have to take out your gadget and see if it works.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:45 AM
link   
They've had remote control planes for donkeys years, its just that the f-4's they used before are starting to become scarce due to they keep getting blown up so they've had a look in the desert for something new to slap the remote control kit into

This sort of project aint new/classified and the reason it takes so long is that the f-16's remain human flyable as well so you have to fit in the gear around the pilot which obviously takes some jiggery pokery along with the requirements for it to be remote detonated should something go wrong means it takes a while to refit



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by darpa999
 


what gives you the right to decide what people are allowed to talk about? if USAF wanted it to be so secret, they've got Area 51. since the info went public one way or another, it IS public knowledge right now, and there is NO stopping it.

Americans, always thinking they have the right to tell everyone else what to do. your nation is a disgrace to humanity.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Aliensun
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Perhaps that is generally true with government work, but in the real business of doing secret things it certainly is not and could not be true. Go ask the NSA how they conduct their business.


I do business with them. They are a great customer. Way better than Navy.

However, the poster I replied to specifically mentioned DARPA, which is quite open. As are a lot of other agencies, some of whose work does very much end up classified, but doesn't always start out that way. See also: SBIR, STTR.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   

TDawgRex
The F-16's, while technically a drone, are outfitted to be targets for air to air engagements. They are not weapons at all anymore. Just expensive targets. Could they be used as a weapon? Of course but the cost to make it such would not be worth it.



There seems to be efforts here to deflect the possibility of the F-16s to be used as drone fighters/bombers. Why try to whitewash what is or can be the obvious? The concepts of drone fighters/bombers has been around for a long time. This "target drone" announcement is pure PR, breaking the way for future enlightenments even if they will be use in that way.

As far as expensive to convert...? Hardly ever has the military looked at a promising situation in that manner. Still, the cost of training and maintaining a pilot is far more expensive than equipping a vintage plane into being a robot. The concept of kamikaze warfare has now reached a new level. Deal with it.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Aliensun

TDawgRex
The F-16's, while technically a drone, are outfitted to be targets for air to air engagements. They are not weapons at all anymore. Just expensive targets. Could they be used as a weapon? Of course but the cost to make it such would not be worth it.



There seems to be efforts here to deflect the possibility of the F-16s to be used as drone fighters/bombers. Why try to whitewash what is or can be the obvious? The concepts of drone fighters/bombers has been around for a long time. This "target drone" announcement is pure PR, breaking the way for future enlightenments even if they will be use in that way.

As far as expensive to convert...? Hardly ever has the military looked at a promising situation in that manner. Still, the cost of training and maintaining a pilot is far more expensive than equipping a vintage plane into being a robot. The concept of kamikaze warfare has now reached a new level. Deal with it.



What effort? Just pointing out the facts. The USAF needs hard targets to shoot at once in a while. They've pretty much burned through all the flyable F-4's.

If we ran out of guided munitions, cruise missiles, armed drones, etc, etc. Then I could see using these target drones as weapons. But they would not be as effective as you may think. And if we have to start using these things as weapons, then you know that the # has really hit the fan and the U.S. is desperate.

I could see these as being used in electronic warfare. Send up a flight to cross someones border and while they are reacting to that, the B2, F22 and F35's could be crossing somewhere else. It would make a great diversionary tactic without to much risk.



posted on Sep, 30 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Aliensun
Imagine, for example, Israel equipping their F-16s in such a manner to attack Iran's nuclear facilities by flying the converted planes directly into the fortified mountain installations? Not a pilot would be lost.



Aircraft vs fortified mountain = fortified mountain + metallic confetti

An aircraft is a lightweight aluminum can with a go nozzle (connected to a pilot's go nozzle?)

Penetration weapons require long dense uranium or tungsten rods to hit exactly right.





top topics
 
1

log in

join