Re:Unmanned F-16s Declared IOC
by lifeisstillgood on Saturday October 01, 2016 @07:58AM
(#12617500)
I kind of understand why they want to develop the capability, but also am dubious of its value for a plane designed around a human pilot.
So, if the plane is going to do anything useful, it needs to get to its target intact and ready, and to be honest that's more about logistics and geography than human or not pilots. Maybe it can stay on-station longer but that sounds more like a duty roster benefit than a tactical advantage
The real benefit of pilotless craft I assume will come from designing it to do things that would kill a human inside it - presumably speed, manoeuvres etc. But then that means rebuilding a whole aircraft with new wings and weapons that can withstand such strain. And is that actually a win?
So, I am not sure where inammgoing with this except it feels that a lot of military spend is not tied to political aims or military benefit. Air craft carriers sit in that weird zone for me too (the UK is without one right now and I am dubious it's worth getting another)
So, if the plane is going to do anything useful, it needs to get to its target intact and ready, and to be honest that's more about logistics and geography than human or not pilots. Maybe it can stay on-station longer but that sounds more like a duty roster benefit than a tactical advantage
The real benefit of pilotless craft I assume will come from designing it to do things that would kill a human inside it - presumably speed, manoeuvres etc. But then that means rebuilding a whole aircraft with new wings and weapons that can withstand such strain. And is that actually a win?
So, I am not sure where inammgoing with this except it feels that a lot of military spend is not tied to political aims or military benefit. Air craft carriers sit in that weird zone for me too (the UK is without one right now and I am dubious it's worth getting another)