DH,
Good info and not at all a surprise to me. These are very high loss rates and could soon eat up any cost advantages offered for UAVs in some roles.
Backing up an earlier post, I know that the US Predator ops in Bosnia required the US Army to maintain a substantial standing force of Blackhawks and other aircraft to get to crash sites and retrieve sensitive technology before the Serbs got to them and sold it to the Russians. That tasking was the largest element of the helo force's work, and drove significant costs and effort.
I also spoke with US Army guys who were not at all keen on Predators - because every time one turned up to support them, it told the nearby Serbs that something was going off.
I freely admit to being a bit of a UAV sceptic. In my view, there has been a definite 'sexiness' to some UAV procurement over the last few years that merits some examination. We have all-volunteer forces, and we appear ready, as a nation, to tolerate loss of some of our people. So just how strong IS the case for taking people out of harm's way by giving tasks to UAVs?
Now, if we are looking at an ability to develop vehicles that can do things manned aircraft absolutely can't, I'm with the UAV folk. Comms relay is one area that UAVs would be great for - the 'dull' end of the task spectrum. But at the 'dirty' end of the job list, if we are spending scarce cash to buy a capability that one could do with a Piper Cub fitted with a FLIR and a few A-10 located at a FARP - that could do plenty of other stuff as well - perhaps we need to think it through.
Thoughts or comments?