Smarter, Deadlier Drones Mapped Out in Defense Plan

[Indi Guy]

Source: Yahoo News

Drones that can decide for themselves how best to complete a pre-programmed mission — that's just one of the many advanced capabilities the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) wants to develop over the next 25 years as part of its Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap. 

The roadmap, released last week, lays out a broad vision for future unmanned air, land and maritime vehicles. But drones definitely get pride of place in the document, with the DoD exploring such technologies as precision navigation, swarming munitions and increased autonomy...

Another area of interest is weaponry. The DoD envisions camera-mounted, loitering munitions that get launched from an unmanned "mothership" and hunt targets in deadly "swarms." The munitions would circle around in the sky after launch. While they are in the air, an operator would identify a target on the ground via the onboard camera and then send the drone-bomb crashing into the target. The mothership would extend the range of these flying bombs beyond 250 nautical miles (463 kilometers), the report states.

Further down the road, the DoD wants to see drone-carried munitions deliver a stronger punch. The key here is developing "energetic nanoparticles." Since these particles have a greater surface area, the chemicals within the ammunition react faster, producing a more powerful explosion...




Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/smarter-deadlier-drones-mapped-defense-plan-192252528.html

---

"energetic nanoparticles" ...Where have we heard that before?

[blkmusclmachine]

1. Yuck.

[AdHocSolver]

2. When I read this, why does Dr. Strangelove come to mind?

Having worked as a programmer for several years, and observed the quality of software, or more accurately, lack of quality, it is utter madness to leave life and death decisions to computers.

The question to ask would be, "What is the default action by the computer operating the drone should the program "crash" or the computer get hacked?"

It is not a matter of "if this happens". It is only a matter of when.

[Ash_F]

3. I read the article and this sounds like a lot of money and effort....

To kill a bunch of pistachio farmers and/or goatherders.

"energetic nanoparticles" ...amazing.

[bemildred]

4. Oy. nt

[Alkene]

5. I'm hoping they don't become self-aware. n/t

[Helen Borg]

6. Too bad

They killed Caprica...

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. "DoD wants to see drone-carried munitions deliver a stronger punch"

.
.
.

Good idea!

They can wipe out the WHOLE wedding party, gang of innocent bystanders, etc.,

solves the problems of them pesky witnesses . . . .

But I've been hearing hearing rumors (probably false I know) that there are hundreds of thousands of homeless and hungry in the USA.

Can't be - "Home of the Brave and Land of the Free" wouldn't be wasting money to slaughter people around the globe while their own citizens starve and freeze to death . . .

would they?



CC

[reACTIONary]

10. If wipping out the WHOLE wedding party were the goal...

...there wouldn't be a need for this research. The munitions and delivery systems we now have can easily wipe out the WHOLE wedding party.

One purpose of this research is to make the munitions more precise and specific.... that is, hit the high value target without the collateral deaths. The other is to extend the range of opportunities that are actionable so that instead of hitting a wedding party or other public event, a strike can take place in a less public setting.

The United States is a wealthy enough nation to be able to take care of the poor and homeless without having to give up efforts to protect our people and to support our world-wide friends and allies. We can easily choose to do both.

On the other hand, we wouldn't be a wealthy and influential nation, and we would have far more homelessness and poverty if we were NOT able to protect ourselves, other western liberal democracies, and our allies in the more dangerous, threatened areas of the world.

[Maedhros]

13. Are you honestly trying to make the claim that rampant military spending DECREASES homelessness?

And that our drone strikes somehow PROTECT us? From what? Tribal insurgents thousands of miles from any U.S. territory with no means of projecting their limited military force against us?

And, by the way, the "allies" that you are so eager to "protect" include despicable con-men like Hamid Karzai, former Yemeni strong-man and human rights abuser Ali Abdullah Saleh and his former chief lieutenant and successor Adb Rabbu Mansour Hadi. In other words, the oppressive regimes that we prop up to guarantee our ability to plunder the region for whatever resources our corporate masters demand.

Your points would undoubtedly be better received somewhere like freerepublic.com - that lot is much more into the "USA! USA! USA!" chant after we blow up innocent children to "protect" ourselves.

[reACTIONary]

16. Military spending is necessary...

... to the existence and continuation of the United States as an independent nation and, in conjunction with our allies, to liberal western-style democracy. All nation states exist in a state of anarchy with regard to one another, that is, in a "war of all against all" (Hobbes). There is no overarching system of justice or authority to enforce it. Any and all of them, at any time, may act against any other. The answer to the question of "from what" is, traditionally, "from all other nation states". Russia. China. Etc.

Now days, to that we can also add loosely organized non-state actors, since modern communications, transportation and other technology do allow them to pose something of a direct threat. More importantly, however, they can also incite regional conflicts, disrupting and destabilizing regions that are important to the industrial world's economic functioning. When Iraq and Iran went at each other, the conflict disrupted Persian Gulf shipping and posed an economic threat to the rest of the world, ourselves and the other industrialized democracies in particular. Tribal insurgents thousands of miles from any U.S territory don't have to project force. Its enough for them to create havoc in their own backyard to be able to cause damage to us.

Industrialized democracies (all industrial nations) are vulnerable to disruptions in whatever resources our corporate masters industrial production demands. When production is disrupted the economy goes into decline. We know for a fact, from our recent financial crisis, that when the economy declines, homelessness will definitely increase. Being able to project power into regions that we depend on for industrial resources and to make sure those regions are not destabilized due to non-state actors engaging in asymmetric warfare is essential to maintaining prosperity for our own people.

[Maedhros]

17. Oh - you're a Conservative. That makes sense.

Your user name is "reactionary."

[reACTIONary]

18. Nope. I'm a..

...liberal and a progressive. A reality based liberal / progressive.

[Maedhros]

19. A Liberal arguing for might-makes-right foreign policy,

a pervasive surveillance state and pro-corporate economic policy?

[reACTIONary]

20. A liberal nation should always be willing to question...

... the justice of its cause. But it should never have to doubt the sharpness of its sword.

Might does not make right. But without might, right cannot overcome wrong. Justice requires enforcement. That's just the way it is. Sorry about that.

[Indi Guy]

21. I'll resubmit the question I asked in post#

Look at the million+ "collateral deaths" the MIC is responsible for, from the early '60s to and through the Cheney/Bush regime (not to mention the innocent casualties under Obama). Do you really believe that those in control of these programs are the good guys?

[reACTIONary]

22. I don't know...

...were they wearing white hats or black hats? Categorizing the significant portion of our population involved in the MIC over the course of 50+ years as either "GOOD GUYS" or "BAD GUYS" and pronouncing judgment on them regardless of the particular circumstances and challenges our nation has faced over those years doesn't seem appropriate to me.

But I do think it is appropriate to ask if the morally right (and the effective) course of action has or has not been taken in particular circumstances and to apply those judgments to current and developing circumstance.

That sort of foreign policy discussion, however, takes much more knowledge and discussion than a general, summary white hat / black hat judgment.

[Indi Guy]

24. I glad you find the deaths of millions amusing...

...

Your penchant for tedious & verbose obfuscation belies your obvious intent to circumvent rendering an opinion which might contradict your clearly defined positions. In other words, What a load of crap.

Since you refuse to answer my last question, here's a different one. What branch of the military does your employer sebcontract for?

[reACTIONary]

25. I'm personally involved in civil space...

... that is, NASA. My department also does national security space, but I'm not personally involved in it. Over all, my organization does a lot of work for the Navy.

I do not find the deaths of millions amusing. It is, however, a fact that all nations have, and all will, fight wars. It is a fact that people of all nations will die in them. We are not alone, and we, like all others must be prepared to act according to the reality of the world we live in.

Peace,

[Indi Guy]

29. Thank you for an honest and straightforward answer.

What do you think of the "preemptive" war we waged in Iraq?

[reACTIONary]

30. Basically a mistake (nt)

[Indi Guy]

31. In what ways? n/t

[reACTIONary]

32. Just the standard stuff you'd find in any critique...

... the pretext was based on faulty (or even contrived) intelligence and analysis, and while the initial overthrow of the regime was accomplished basically as expected, the process and prospect of "nation building" has been/is not exactly a stellar success. It distracted from other priorities, e.g. Iran's nuclear ambitions. Other benefits aside from the purported objective might not have been all that important, or may have been achieved in other ways. Etc. Etc.

[Maedhros]

23. It breaks my heart to see a supposedly Liberal board with posts like this.

Wow.

[Indi Guy]

15. What propaganda have you been reading?

Look at the million+ "collateral deaths" the MIC is responsible for, from the early '60s to and through the Cheney/Bush regime (not to mention the innocent casualties under Obama). Do you really believe that those in control of these programs are the good guys?

[WilliamPitt]

8. SkyNet is real.

[DJ13]

27. I really hope they know the Terminator movies were a warning

NOT a how to manual.

[Blue_Tires]

9. Did the Air Force seriously paint a German cross on a drone?

[reACTIONary]

11. It's a picture of a ...

... German Bundeswehir (federal defense force of the Federal Republic of Germany) Heron 1 drone being serviced by civil contractors before a mission in Mazar-e-Sharif, northern Afghanistan.

Here is an article with the same picture that identifies the drone:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/unmanned-aircraft-offer-warfare-with-fewer-casualties-20121221-2brq8.html

[ronnie624]

12. Wow, cool.

[CFLDem]

14. Pretty cool stuff!

I just love cutting edge technology like this. I wonder what Orville and Wilbur would say if they saw how far aviation has gone in a little over a century!

[NoOneMan]

28. They would probably give up writing

Their imaginations probably wouldn't be able to keep up with reality. And after all, it doesn't appear anyone heeded a damn thing they wrote

[Thinkingabout]

26. Smarter technology is being developed every day, soon will be able to eat rice from your plate.