If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
At the very least, I've never heard of a C-172 with 12 hours edurance,
nor capable of employing the sensors and equipment callled for in this instance. This may be true, but a C-172 would not need 12 hours endurance to accomplish the same =objective= (although it would, by definition, need it to accomplish the same =mission=. Subtle but important difference, which also bears on the equipment. I don't know the details of the sensors, but some of them may be unnecessary in a C-172. So surveilling the border to enforce existing border control laws are a violation of PRIVACY now? It could be, depending on how it's done. Cost is only an advantage if the lower priced alternative can actually meet the requirement. .... and the "requirement" can be tailored to meet the cost. Don't confuse motion with action. Don't confuse action with results. Don't confuse "results" with what you wanted in the first place. Jose -- Money: what you need when you run out of brains. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote: Where is the up-side of domestic UAV operations? do you equate UAV operations with only military use? In my opinion, the only justification for removing the pilot from the aircraft is if the mission is too dangerous to risk human life. so you don't see any mission that would involve a platform airborne for more than 24 hours? -- Bob Noel New NHL? what a joke |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote: It is my understanding that the RFP was written is such a way that sensible and cost effective solutions would not meet the request. you came to this conclusion without even seeing the RFP? -- Bob Noel New NHL? what a joke |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:39:29 -0500, Bob Noel
wrote in :: In article , Larry Dighera wrote: Where is the up-side of domestic UAV operations? do you equate UAV operations with only military use? In my opinion, the only justification for removing the pilot from the aircraft is if the mission is too dangerous to risk human life. so you don't see any mission that would involve a platform airborne for more than 24 hours? I see no reason for 12-hour endurance for border patrol. With the limited number of federal agents patrolling the nation's southern border, who would use all the data gathered by these UAVs anyway. The money would be better spent on personnel; they're out numbered. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 17:51:48 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote: On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:06:41 -0700, mike Williamson williamsonONETHIRTY@earthlinkdotnet wrote in :: Larry Dighera wrote: On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:58:22 GMT, Jack wrote in :: The Cessna can't match the capabilities of the UAV, nor is there a reasonable chance that it can be modified to do so. The vast capabilities of a UAV (including Hellfire missiles) are unnecessary for the domestic border patrol mission. And is Hellfire part of the RFP, or are you just trying to make it sound foolish? nor capable of employing the sensors and equipment callled for in this instance. In your opinion, what equipment capability IS "called for" in this instance? Comms relay for agents on the ground, IR and TV sensors. Capability to realtime the data to units in the field (i.e. send the picture to a ground unit so they can see exactly where the border runners are hiding. Night operational capability. So surveilling the border to enforce existing border control laws are a violation of PRIVACY now? Employing UAVs, when conventional aircraft would suffice, betrays the Bush administration's agenda for further domestic spying. Border patrol is domestic spying? Domestic UAV operation sets a dangerous precedent. Surely, you are not naive enough to believe, that if the Bush administration is successful in deploying UAVs domestically, border patrol will be their sole mission. Domestically deploying UAVs will open the skies for hoards of unmanned aircraft operated by people located SAFELY ON THE GROUND. These UAVs will likely be operated by military personnel. The military has time and again demonstrated its complete lack of accountability in military/civil mishaps.* You aren't going to like it if people die at the hands of UAV operators. What incentive do the ground-based personnel operating UAVs have to act as prudent and responsibly as a pilot actually aboard his aircraft? Where are the UAV operators' accountability? How can the estates of those who fall victim to domestic UAV operations know who is responsible for the deaths caused by unmanned aircraft? What has any of this to do with domestic spying? Whether military pilots (on the ground or otherwise) are responsible is a rather different issue then whether Bush's Eveel sekrit agents are watching you. Cost is only an advantage if the lower priced alternative can actually meet the requirement. If not, then it isn't a viable alternative and the cost isn't a factor at all. Of course. What do you guess/know the requirements you mention to be? Because video camera equipped model aircraft have successfully demonstrated, that high-tech solutions are unnecessary in border patrol missions, I find UAVs inappropriate for this mission. They are much too costly and dangerous to be deployed domestically. * http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...e=source&hl=en A model aircraft may indeed work for very localised situations (i.e. a mile or so of border) in excellent visibility. It's not going to work along the whole border, nor at night. And adding an accident report from a manned in flight collision to an argument about how unsafe UAVs are is pure sophistry. -- Peter Kemp "Life is short...drink faster" |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote: Where is the up-side of domestic UAV operations? do you equate UAV operations with only military use? In my opinion, the only justification for removing the pilot from the aircraft is if the mission is too dangerous to risk human life. so you don't see any mission that would involve a platform airborne for more than 24 hours? I see no reason for 12-hour endurance for border patrol. You need to think a little out-of-the-box. Consider a platform operating at an optimum altitude (say for sensor coverage and comm range) that takes a considerable of time climbing to that altitude. It could be useful to minimum the number of climbs through lower altitudes in order to not interfere with small aircraft operations. -- Bob Noel New NHL? what a joke |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
Dave Stadt wrote: I doubt it. Are the UAV's going to swoop down and gather up the illegals? By the time a UAV spots something and Border Patrol gets there the illegals are long gone. You can't be this dumb. The UAV will spot the activity miles before they get to the border. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
"John Doe" wrote in message ink.net... I doubt it. Are the UAV's going to swoop down and gather up the illegals? By the time a UAV spots something and Border Patrol gets there the illegals are long gone. Or are you saying the UAV's can discern between normal everyday illegals and terrorist? If so I would like to hear more. How you figure? illegals crossing the border are going to outrun a UAV circling overhead? This I gotta see. So the UAV sees them, now what? The Border Patrol stationed 25 miles away dashes out and catches them. I doubt it. Isn't it true the Border Patrol or whomever doesn't have the resources to detain and return illegals and in fact leaves most of them go inside this country (US of A)? Soooooo what are the UAVs going to accomplish other than taking pictures of millions illegally crossing the border. At best it is a multi-million dollar AN3 bolt in a 12 inch hole. |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
"Peter Kemp" wrote in message ... Comms relay for agents on the ground, IR and TV sensors. Capability to realtime the data to units in the field (i.e. send the picture to a ground unit so they can see exactly where the border runners are hiding. Night operational capability. Is this actually going to take place or is it just wishful thinking on your part? If enough ground personnel are not available, which they are not, it makes no sense. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|