So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

That's right, it looks like the UK has jumped on the UAV bandwaggon. While this one won't be autonomously bombing anyone, it's still interesting that we've made one - and more to the point, that this is the first time any mention of such a project has hit the news.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Well, it's a plus point that we're investing in this technology ourselves rather than buying from America in doing so. It'll be good for jobs in the appropriate regions of the country.

I think that UAVs are the future. Eventually they'll become able to dogfight with some of the existing planes owned by many countries, and win. Manned planes will then be replaced by all sides. Once that happens, the air war may just become an economic war, not a war of death. That assumes, of course, that both sides are using UAVs.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

What do you mean by economic war? Presumably these planes will eventually be used to carry out mass bombings of ground targets causing massive death tolls.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

thats one hell of a ****ing presumption right there.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

All governments are very sensitive to losing expensive planes and skilled pilots. These are most likely a lot cheaper to produce and should one be lost, a lot simpler to replace than a dead pilot.

I wonder if theyre going to be used in areas where, if shot down, their technology could be analyzed and replicated? im betting no, and theyll end up un Pakistan / Afghanistan / Iraq.

Chances of them being used for spying missions in North Korea? Zilch.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

I dunno about all the moral implications/objections, but it looks cool. :)

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not.

If not:

Why risk the life of a pilot when you can use an unmaned machine? the propaganda value would be enough to justify this action.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

"hey! we can bomb strategically significant targets without risking our pilots now!"

does not, to me, read the same as

"LETS OBLITERATE KAZAKHSTAN! FOR FUN! YEEHA!"

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Look at Iraq.

Shock and Awe = bomb the shit out of them

Pilots or no these planes will cause massive death tolls.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Shock and Awe is a Bad Thing(tm). But it is not the same as repaving a city with the bones of its infants which is what you seem to be suggesting is the logical progression of the UK building its own UAVs.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Where did I say that?

Where was that even implied?

Saying unmaned plane would be used in a 'war of death' (Furball's words) is not the same as saying we will bomb random cities for fun.

Not even close.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Mass bombings are so 20th Century.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Planes drop bombs.

they kill people.

Lots of people.

What don't you understand?

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

However it's unclear how these planes will cause it to happen more.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

When they are intended to, yes they do. And in present-day warfare, the result is that a legitimate target gets destroyed, plus a dozen people who were standing too close.

Not an entire city that was standing too close, because we don't use carpet-bombing as a matter of course.

What don't you understand?

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Mass bombing isn't necessarily equivilent to carpet bombing, you dig?

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

ASG:

Bombs kill people. Bombs are dropped by planes. These are clear.
Planes shoot down other planes. This is a constant in wars where no side has air superiority.


Unmanned planes will lead to a lower loss of life than manned planes, ignoring their superior aerial capabilities.

Thus air forces won't run out of pilots as before - they'll run out of planes.

How do you produce planes? Through industry, which is controlled by the economy.

Thus it'll be an economic air war.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

i was being illustrative.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

When was the last time the UK (or US) had a war with someone and didn't have air superiority?

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Did I say more?

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Presumably, one of the restrictions on the use of military force is the fear that your side will face casualties. Both from a military perspective, and PR perspective. So there were additional protests against the war when the 2,000th US death was announced, for instance.

If there is a new weapon which can somehow reduce the amount of (possible) deaths on your side, it might make military planners more reckless, or simply more willing to use force I'm not sure. Certainly, I would be more likely to get involved in a street fight if I had a device which could guarantee I wouldn't/couldn't die.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

As has been mentioned, all the recent wars involving the UK and the US took place in an environment of total air supremacy, and it's quite possible (given, for example, the US military's recent supplies problems) that the risk of the manpower is not the significant factor, given that, for example, the only significant loss of airmen was quite recently, when the plane was flying abnormally low.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

That's not the point. Wars don't require air superiority for them to happen. All the recent wars have been comparatively piss-easy wars compared to real wars between equal sides - WW2/Battle of Britain is pretty much the only recent example in the West.

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

so far as i can see, the only case of a plane being shot down in iraq (planes rather than choppers) was a year ago, when a hercules was taken down by an SAM on a routine flight.

it is almost impossible that these planes will be used in any context in which they are at all likely to be shot down by enemy fire. this just removes the human cost of crashes (which happen in peacetime anyway).

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

Bombs don't kill people, people kill people

Re: So now we can rocket-attack pakistani villages without asking the CIA to do it
 

[/shit edit]