Sunday Times: Predator Question

[POMPI]

I have a question for you military chaps.
I've just been reading today's Sunday Times and in there it talks about the Predator UAV having two Hellfire missiles. I was under the impression that these UAV's were unarmed.

[Baby_Obs]

Havn't read the article, but good idea, targets of opportunity and all that.

[ChristopherRobin]

They've been trialling them for a while now, and must have rushed them into service for the war.

See http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/autonomy_samples/autonomysuggest/autosuggest.jsp?docid=9158&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviati onnow.com%2Favnow%2Fnews%2Fchannel_military.jsp%3Fview%3Dsto ry%26id%3Dnews%2Fmpred1017.xml

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

And of course they become UCAV's when you arm them.

Nasty looking things. Surely they would be ineffective against a 1st world highly developed enemy? I can understand their attractiveness for current ops but surely an advanced opposing force could interupt the control signal.

I would imagine.

Not that I know anything.

Cheers, WWW

[fobotcso]

Okay, Okay, Okay, that'll do.

Yes, Chris, and that's exactly why there should be no even apparently innocent speculation about arms in use in a war that is actually in progress as we write.

And, WWW, we've had this discussion before. That fact that it is possible quote a reference where an item has appeared in print does not make it open season on that topic.

"Pompi" may be what he wants us to think. Maybe not. What worthwhile reason could he possibly have for wanting to ask that question?

While we're at war, please try to control your enthusiasm for speculation. (And you may not like my style, but there can be no doubt about my motives.)

[CAC Runaway]

What possible harm can it do to talk about a UAV that has been around for a long time and can be widely read about in Flight International each week. At present it is only capable of flying with one Hellfire but is not being used as a UCAV in Afghanistan as the trials are still continuing.

[fobotcso]

The question should be "What good can it do to discuss a weapon of war in a Forum that can be seen by our enemies against whom that weapon is being deployed?"

[ChristopherRobin]

OK, I cannot question your motives, but linking to a site that discusses something that isn't exactly rocket science?

"Airplane carries missile." - Hardly atomic launch codes is it?

[glider insider]

its one thing to talk about how to interrupt the signal to a UAV, but its a different kettle of fish to have the technology / funding to do it.... and those that do have the technology / funding already have the knowledge...


so how would you down a UAV

[fobotcso]

Now then Chris, don't be grumpy! I had no problem with the content of your post but object to the topic being sustained rather than being ignored. Anyway, I couldn't make the link work.

Sure, there is no threat to World Peace in this topic but on occasions like this we should all stick to simple motherhood principles.

In time of conflict, there is no justification whatsoever for public debate or discussion, particularly with anonymous people, about weapons, tactics, and Force deployments. Once you start, it is very difficult to draw the boundaries.

You, Chris, of all people should know the truth of that. ;) ;) ;)

[ChristopherRobin]

Ok, I know, just teasing...at least my link didn't work, and you know what? I just can't be arsed to fix it - now that is unlike me isn't it?

Lets talk about girls instead!

[fobotcso]

:D

[pana]

Good idea! Especially if it is possible to overtake control ! :cool: :cool:

[MajorMadMax]

So...what's all this about girls then?? ;)

Cheers! M2

[attackattackattack]

C'mon CR, spill the beans - how do you override girlies' control inputs :)?

[Smoketoomuch]

Relax gentlemen.. might I suggest investing in the gadget below - and say 'bye-bye' to those worrisome 'girl control' problems.

http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/user/w/e/wea/www/Girl-remote-control.gif

[ Grrr, wassup with my spilling toady!]

[ 20 November 2001: Message edited by: Smoketoomuch ]

[POMPI]

""Pompi" may be what he wants us to think. Maybe not. What worthwhile reason could he possibly have for wanting to ask that question?"
...because he reads something in a newspaper that does not tally with something he has read in previous newspapers/journals/Janes bulletins or has general knowledge of. That's why.
Be a pretty long shot for me to set myself some years ago on a web site that may or may not take off in the odd chance that I may be able to glean some intelligence from a specific web site.


Concerns noted, thanks for the info.

[ 21 November 2001: Message edited by: POMPI ]