I guess we'll always need aircrew . . .

[nittany03]

If for no other reason than to shoot down UAVs gone stupid.

Yeah, sure. The wave of the future is unmanned aircraft. The pilot is obsolete, the NFO even more so. Why put valuable lives at risk to do something a robot can do? All you need is a trailer in Nellis and a good datalink. No, of COURSE, they never go NORDO. Riiiight . . .

 

[ea6bflyr]

Almost as good as shooting down your own airwing aircraft:

On July 8, 1991, an E-2C from VAW-122 developed an engine fire that soon burned out of control. The crew of five bailed out of the stricken aircraft which continued flying toward Syrian airspace, making it necessary to destroy the E-2C. The "Privateers" of VFA-132 responded, Upon receiving authorization to shoot down the aircraft, the pilot, LT William 'Maggot' Reilly, of a VFA-132 F/A-18 Hornet selected the 20mm gun and splashed the Hawkeye. This was the first and only "kill" achieved by an aircraft flying from the deck of USS Forrestal in the carrier's 37-year history. There was a story going around the ship that either the pilot of the hornet or VFA-132 as a squadron wanted to paint the shark squadron insignia from VAW-122 on the side of the hornet marking the kill. VAW-122 did not appreciate the sentiment and "killed" the idea.

-ea6bflyr

 

[fc2spyguy]

You know, I always found it a little amusing. The Army paid for the more expensive self landing variant, and has SGTs flying their UAVs. While the AF didn't, and has a significantly higher loss rate from my understanding.

 

[Flash]

You know, I always found it a little amusing. The Army paid for the more expensive self landing variant, and has SGTs flying their UAVs. While the AF didn't, and has a significantly higher loss rate from my understanding.

The Army has only more recently started operating their own MQ-1 variant, the MQ-1C Warrior. Previously they almost exclusively operated much smaller UAV's than the USAF and their mishap rate was pretty high as well, it just cost the taxpayer less with the much cheaper, and less capable, Army UAV's. So to compare mishap rates is apples and oranges, unless the Army guys are already talking smack about their MQ-1's, which have barely made it off the production line and have virtually no service record.

It is a moot point when it comes to this incident though, because from the article describes the UAV went completely 'stupid', to use the technical term, and nothing could have helped it.

 

[Goober]

Almost as good as shooting down your own airwing aircraft:



-ea6bflyr

Debate still remains after multiple gun passes as to whether they actually got rounds on the plane or whether the wing finally burned through. But if it makes 'em feel good...

 

[MasterBates]

While they may leak like the titanic, and occasionally catch on fire, I will say that the Grumman Iron Works product has taken more of my beatings without breaking than Sikorsky or MD/BAE products.

 

[Jeffe]

If I were those dudes that have shot them down, I would put THAT kill on my plane...

--Skynet is beginning

-Jeffe