Special Forces Unveil Upgraded Reaper Model

The other interesting, for us black project types, group to watch is the Special Forces. They have made their own odd and fascinating forays into aviation several times now. This time, it seems to went out and had their own version of the Reaper built.

They gave the Reaper external fuel tanks.
They gave it an HD EO sensor rather than the standard one.
They put in stronger landing gear for heavier landings.
Built in autotracking of up to 12 targets.
And encrypted the video feed (oh thank gawd).

I am sure there is more.

The interesting thing is...why are they unveiling it? Do they have a replacement? Or...?

The interesting thing is...why are they unveiling it? Do they have a replacement? Or...?

Or it's a warning to would be "insurgents" whether foreign or domestic that it is about to get worse.

a reply to: anzha

a reply to: anzha

They're probably trying to get it for the regular AF units, so they have to unveil it.

a reply to: anzha

I just want to make this clear. I hate drones. I hate the use of them, I hate the look of them, I hate the shape of them, and the noise of them, and I think the only thing that is worse than a moron thinking he is billy big nuts because he can launch a missile and wreck an entire apartment complex, is a moron who can do it from a secure location on the ground and feel the same way.

There should be some physical risk to performing an assault by air. Marginal maybe, but risk all the same. There's no bloody honour in it otherwise, and regardless of any argument to the contrary, that is still more important than winning or being safe in my book.

a reply to: TrueBrit

There's no bloody honour in it otherwise, and regardless of any argument to the contrary, that is still more important than winning or being safe in my book.

You may feel that way now but what about when the Toyota pickups start rolling into your neighborhood with mounted weapons ?
I know what you're saying but I think "honour" in warfare is a thing of the past...

a reply to: donktheclown

Asymmetric warfare is a blade which cuts both ways.

And as for honour in warfare being a thing of the past, I rather think that depends on who happens to be involved.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Have you ever been in combat? I have and I'm in favor of anything that can blow away the enemy without placing anyone from my side at risk.

a reply to: JIMC5499

And you are more than welcome to that opinion. Until I have been where you have however, I am going to maintain my position until I see for myself, why you might feel as you do.

a reply to: TrueBrit


Chivalry is dead bo. There are no more enemies with honor to fight. So why fight the dishonored with honor?


Having aircraft on station to support special forces on the ground; no matter how they're flown, is the most important goal. I know some guys over there right now for whom I'd trade countless apartment buildings for their safe homecoming.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: anzha

I just want to make this clear. I hate drones. I hate the use of them, I hate the look of them, I hate the shape of them, and the noise of them, and I think the only thing that is worse than a moron thinking he is billy big nuts because he can launch a missile and wreck an entire apartment complex, is a moron who can do it from a secure location on the ground and feel the same way.

There should be some physical risk to performing an assault by air. Marginal maybe, but risk all the same. There's no bloody honour in it otherwise, and regardless of any argument to the contrary, that is still more important than winning or being safe in my book.

What ratios should we use in war? How many US troops should die in an engagement where a 100 enemy are killed?

In my time in the military, you make every effort to keep your troops alive. In your opinion, we should take a few troops out and kill maybe 10 to make the 100 enemy casualties fair? I must be one of the morons in which you speak because nothing in war is fair, honorable or glorious.

I have three combat tours with the US military and I would like to think that I have a more realistic view of war than you. If you can gather intelligence by using drones I'm all for it. You don't have to jeopardize men and material to get the same information. And by chance your drone comes upon a target of opportunity you'd be a "moron" not to take it. As George Patton said, " You must make the other poor bastard die for his country not you dying for yours". He didn't mention any loss ratios.

a reply to: buddah6

I am not talking about ensuring losses.

I am talking about ensuring that it is never beyond easy to take another persons life, that it is always a job of work, and that there is always risk, even if you fight through it and come away clean. Tankers do it. Airmen do it. Soldiers and Navy men do it. Drone pilots sitting on home soil, fresh shaven every morning, showered and pressed and neat and smelling like the plentiful supply of deodorant they have access to, do not do that. Not at all. Not in the least. They work about as hard at it, as I do on fragging dudes in computer games, or shooting pool.

The guys who have never flown anything but drones, who joined up and started that career path right off the bat, probably know as much about warfare as your average couch gremlin on his Xbox. Most of them probably use the same damned controller. They do not shake when flack hits their craft, they do not burn when it hits the ground, they have never felt what it is like to be just outside of the blast wave of a thermobaric detonation, or what it feels like to have bullets zipping around their heads, or what it feels like to have the vapourised pieces of a friend coat their fatigues and faces.

Most of them know about as much of the realities of what you are talking about, as I do, and in my book, that makes them unfit to be involved in the first place. Its a dry, clinical, remote, removed thing that they do. Their fingers are on buttons that can end the world for a family, and yet they have never set foot on the soil they are contesting, never risked a paper cut to take that shot, and that... There is no way to square that in my head. It's one thing being better at killing than your enemy, to be better at moving unseen, to out flank, or to out gun an opponent. But never to be there at all... That is just bloody cowardice.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The true problem is not the drones but war itself. When you must take a life it kills a little of you as well. I can still see the face of my first kill and that was 49 years ago. He had made it into my fire direction control bunker and I shot him twice as he struck my platoon sergeant. The sad part is that it wouldn't be the last time. You wear that dirt for the rest of your life.

If using drones insures the least casualties, I'm for it. The oldest saying in the military is the war will end when the enemy has no further will to fight. It is ugly but it seem that statement is valid.

Coward is a word like honor and valor which get thrown about after the combat is over while sitting in safety. Like I have said many times war is the most dirty endeavor man has created.

a reply to: buddah6

The statement you closed with stands to reason, and is born out by virtually every campaign ever documented in print.

And let me be clear. I have the utmost respect for people who have been where you have been, where my grandfathers went, both for those that arrived and never returned, and those who came home.

But that moment you describe, that you will never forget. That moment is something I am willing to bet, that is not the same for a drone pilot, and while you are no doubt of the opinion that the fewer people who have go through what you did, the better, I would say that the moment you describe, that dirt, is what stops the best humans from exceeding the necessary, and becoming utterly detached from morality, when they are about the business of war.

You know the dirt that piled up on you, and I doubt you would seek to add more without just cause, since you seem like a decent sort. If everything is reduced to an Xbox game, achievement hunter mentality will take over, and this is not something anyone, service person or horrified observer, would wish to see.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

Would you trade every innocent in the building for those individuals?

Would they trade those innocents for their lives? What kind of people would? Would you trade the lives of the people in the nearest apartment building to your house, for those men you mentioned?

Would you have it done on your own soil?

a reply to: anzha

Alcohol-water injection? Are they planning on running from or chasing after something? Or is it just to give some extra oomph on takeoff with all the extra weight?

TWould you trade every innocent in the building for those individuals? Would they trade those innocents for their lives? What kind of people would? Would you trade the lives of the people in the nearest apartment building to your house, for those men you mentioned? Would you have it done on your own soil?ext

a reply to: TrueBrit

When the NWO takes place, and this planet needs a group of Elders (you should be old by then) to run the show, I'm casting your name into the ring. The world needs more people like you - people who still maintain a belief in honour. Thanks.

Unfortunately, in this time and place, we need deterrence. What a terrible and unjust predicament we've gotten ourselves into.......

a reply to: cmdrkeenkid

It's used on takeoff.

a reply to: anzha

Is Special Forces part of US Special Operations Command? When I hear Special Forces, I think Green Beret. But this article indicates that Air Force Special Operations Command is in control of this project.

and had secure video transmission to provide National Security Agency (NSA) type 1 line-of-sight (LOS) encrypted video (transmission only).

Does that mean that the current video signal is not encrypted? I thought the military always used encryption on any communications that could be intercepted.

How long can these aircraft remain airborne with the extra fuel tanks?

-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

The video link from Predator is unencrypted.

With two external tanks the loiter time is 42 hours.

Im curious on why they are continuing on with the Hellfire Missile..I know its a big hitting munition against hardened and armoured targets but with a lot of the insurgence being soft targets why dont they use bomblets or an M74 submunition.