UAVs, not just an Air Force gig anymore

Found it, sans audio. Regardless, this is seriously one of the best things I've ever seen. Fuckin' outstanding!

Now navigator types can control UAVs as well:

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123175665

I wonder what exactly the change is, they have long had Nav's with PPL's flying UAV's.

They waived the requirement to have commercial and instrument ratings; navs that get accepted will go through the new course being stood up for those going into the new UAV - only designator (started some test classes with officers taken from various non-aviation fields). Basically they are putting them through IFS and some T-6 sims (and possibly flights) to get airsense and then teaching enough instrument stuff to satisfy the FAA before delving into the UAV-specific part of the training.

Ahhh, gotcha. I wonder how many now take the bait.

Cron, thanks for posting the video! The audio portion is just music, there was no dialog.

Great video that even a jet puke can appreciate.

,

Sooooooooooooooooo ... when these are mainstreamed ... who are you gonna' go drinkin' w/ at the O'Club after the mission ... ???

Dude from my squadron is working a deal to go fly UAVs for the AF as his shore tour. He's actually psyched about it. It takes all kinds, I guess.

Hey guys just found this story about the X-47. Gosh I hope I never have to fly this thing.
http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=51239

Hate to be the A/G officer back aft "catching" dueing those recoverys.

Not so sure that they'll be "flown" from the carrier. Most likely, they carrier will act as the LRE (Launch and Recovery Element) and prep and arm the bird. With colaborative mission/strike planning, the "pilots" don't need to be on the boat at all. With this arrangement, then you can rotate multiple crews through a mission (if longer than 6-8 hrs) without taking up the space on the boat.

After the "trap" they can go grab a beer, but Focs'le Follies will never be the same.

Or more to the point in the world of front-seat/left-seat Aviation ... how do you sell this 'flying' to a prospective airline ... ???

Oh ... that's right -- you don't.

The answer is: Buh-Bayh. (sic)

Therein lies the rub: until people are comfortable with Hal 9000 taking the rotation and the landing, there will still be monkeys in a cockpit, manipulating ailerons, elevators, and rudders.

30 UAV's

Inbound email just rx'ed with following link: (Didn't find it on AW with a search...)

http://www.popsci.com/technology/gallery/2010-02/gallery-future-drones

After completing a 24-hour mission, an MQ-1C Sky Warrior aircraft from makes a landing Jan. 11.
Photo Credit: Sgt. Travis Zielinski, 1st ACB, 1st Cav. Div., USD-C.

I guess changing pilots after several hours wouldn't be that hard to do. The no O club would be a bummer though.

I have to admit I don't understand the point of this past the obvious PR reasons, but it certainly shows the Air Force is buying in more and more heavily.

Anybody know the currently "correct" nomenclature or why "remotely piloted aircraft" are a separate subset of UAS's? Is it a distinction between units controlled from a ground terminal vs autonomous units?

To the best of my knowledge, it is an overall name change. What used to be UAVs...then UASs...are now called RPAs. That article doesn't seem to make it sound that way, though.

My understanding is that these cadets don't automatically get assigned to fly RPAs, though, after commissioning. It is a USAFA only thing at this point.

I got a chance to review a Tank brief this morning that discussed the issue of awarding Air Medals, DFCs, and the like to UAV (ahem...RPA) pilots - it was the first time I'd seen RPA used, and had to think for a minute about what the hell they were talking about. The name change should really be thought of more along the lines of rPA - they really want to emphasize the "pilot" part to kind of take the sting out of not being in a cockpit. Whether that actually works or not within USAF corporate culture remains to be seen.

I would have liked to have heard the discussion that came with the brief... ;-)

You have got to be sh!tting me!!! A DFC for a guy who sits in a room using what in essence is Microsoft Flight Simulator????

If they get a papercut reading the newspaper while the RPA is in transit, do they get a purple heart????

I can see it now, flash forward 15 years....
Son: "Dad, how did you get all those medals?"
Response, "Well son, I was sitting in my air-conditioned control room at Nellis AFB and operating an aircraft flying over Afghanistan when I spilled coffee on my lap. It was really hot and I got a pretty nasty burn! So, since I got injurred during a 'combat mission' I earned this Air Medal and Purple Heart"

I don't think they should wear pilot wings (or get flight pay) but we're going to give them a combat medal for operating a remote control aircraft from freakin' Nevada!!!

Please tell me that this was laughed at immediately and it was someones idea of an April Fool's joke two week too early....

I find it pretty funny they keep trying to change the name, everyone inside and outside the military still uses UAVs no matter what big Air Force has decided to call them lately.

I think there is a big push to get the UAV types recognized for the job they do, especially now that their role has expanded exponentially in the past few years. In a recent article from the Washington Post some of the UAV pilots argue they should get some kind of recognition, including former fighter types. The briefing might be a bit of a sop to them but I think it will run into very stiff opposition from the leadership in the USAF and the rest of the services (I doubt you ever find a Marine voting for it), the article mentions that previous proposals to do the same have ben shot down before. Just like Bronze Stars are now limited to those actually in a war zone I doubt they expand the eligibility of the awards mentioned anytime soon.

What they could do to recognize them is expand the use of the Aerial Achievement Medal. I think they already get them in certain circumstances but they can add little UAV's and other symbols to them for other achievements while flying the mighty Predator or Reaper. It is an existing medal that would recognize their achievements while not cheapening some of the more historic and traditional medals. It should be no surprise that we are not the only ones talking about this, here is an interesting thread at another forum. Skyhawk's post, #164, is interesting, not sure if it is entirely true though.

That post lines up with everything I've heard from buds performing that mission. Most of them (the ex-fighter guys, at least) are completely happy to go about their business and not receive any personal recognition in the way of medals. They don't want 'em.

They are, however, pissed that the rest of the world perceives them as being a bunch of pampered sissies sitting around playing flight sim as if it were a casual duty with no consequence. They acknowledge that they are not putting themselves physically at risk in that duty, but that they are subjected to the same legal, career, and emotional risks that others performing that same job physically in the combat zone do.

(This reply NOT directed at Hacker...)

Emotional risks? EMOTIONAL RISKS?!? Good God Almighty!!

I might suggest that if one finds "emotional risks" in the act of destroying/killing the enemy...one should be examining other career paths! The only "emotional risk" I (or my contemporaries) ever suffered in combat was an overwhelming sense of euphoria following a successful mission...wherein much of the enemy (or his support) was killed/destroyed.

We're in deep trouble here, folks!

Banty, over to BZB!! (Your thoughts, Hugh?)