Yes, it's no longer the case that the Unpersonned Aircraft is just sent where it is too dangerous to use normal aircraft.....
They should not be thought of as 'cheap, dsiposable' systems. Which augment but do not replace conventional aircraft.
During a meeting we had not long agao, the increasing sophistication and cost of the Unpersonned Aircraft was raised - because by becoming too sophisticated and HVAA in nature, they were in some danger of becoming too valuable to risk in certain scenarios. Rather defeating their purpose.
Last edited by BEagle; 6th Jan 2008 at 06:40.