The shape of things to come in naval aviation

[casper]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23268285

[Sneaky_Nikon]

I rather suspect it's how all aviation will go.

The pilot has been the limiting factor in ACM for some time.

[Angry Turnip]

That is one of the better looking UAV types.
The pilotless combat aircraft debate has been on going for years,but this does seem to be a big step in making the pilot surplus to requirements.
Assuming of course that they can build the things without them costing megabucks.

[AERTANK]

Despite the obvious advancements in technology and aviation science these machines/robots showcase, I think we all should be wary of where this technology is leading society worldwide, not least the implications for international law, conventions and agreements.

[Sneaky_Nikon]

Same place as international law is now. Applicable only to those who don't have top of the range weapons.

[AERTANK]

Same place as international law is now. Applicable only to those who don't have top of the range weapons.

Agreed, this is how international law is applied (I'm big, your small, so I'm right, your wrong), and I have strong reservations about how UAVs are used at the moment. It will be a major leap, though, when autonomous aerial vehicles can decide without any human input whether people live or die!   

[Angry Turnip]

I understand what you mean,but these aircraft are still controled from the ground by people,and they have to request permission to engage.Still rather sinister.

It reminds me a bit of EDD-209 from Robocop,and it was defeated by a flight of stairs.

[AERTANK]

I understand what you mean,but these aircraft are still controled from the ground by people,and they have to request permission to engage.Still rather sinister.

The aim is to have these machines totally autonomous making the decision to engage themselves! As far as I'm aware (at least for the US drones) the present operators are given a set of engagement parameters and work within those (like tank crew, commander selects target, gunner fires). The parameters themselves are very broad in scope, which has led to thousands of civilian deaths. Mostly they don't know who it is they are attacking, in a zone of operation any male between the ages 12 to 70 are considered militants free to be engaged, then there is the "Double Tap" were first responders (people rushing to help) are also targeted! This happens in Countries were no declaration of war has been made, it is illegal, a war crime, immoral, and counter productive!

[Furryforest]

I still think a pilot brings a edge that can't be factored in. As good as cameras, sensors and radars are, nothing beats the mark I eyeball and the gut instinct of a pilot. I think there is too much detachment (Call of Duty effect!) having a remote operator.

[Angry Turnip]

I understand what you mean,but these aircraft are still controled from the ground by people,and they have to request permission to engage.Still rather sinister.

The aim is to have these machines totally autonomous making the decision to engage themselves! As far as I'm aware (at least for the US drones) the present operators are given a set of engagement parameters and work within those (like tank crew, commander selects target, gunner fires). The parameters themselves are very broad in scope, which has led to thousands of civilian deaths. Mostly they don't know who it is they are attacking, in a zone of operation any male between the ages 12 to 70 are considered militants free to be engaged, then there is the "Double Tap" were first responders (people rushing to help) are also targeted! This happens in Countries were no declaration of war has been made, it is illegal, a war crime, immoral, and counter productive!

Lets not get into a political debate here about armed UAV`s;they are always going to be controversial,but this is best left to other forums.