We don't cover military UAVs much here, but this one is too notable to overlook (from Gizmodo):
"For the first time in history, an unmanned machine has engaged and destroyed another unmanned machine in real combat. It sounds like science fiction, but it happened a week ago in Iraq, when a MQ-9 Reaper killed a remote controlled vehicle carrying a bomb.
The MQ-9—operated by the 46th Expeditionary Reconnaissance and Attack Squadron—destroyed the RC car using a laser-guided 500-pound GBU-12 bomb in southeast Iraq. The commander of the squadron, Lt. Col. Micah Morgan, said that they "searched for, found, fixed, targeted and destroyed a [threat] with just one aircraft."
With an entire wing of UAVs in the US Air Force, we won't be surprised to see full-scale unmanned and robotic battles in the near future. The question is: if nobody is going to die—except probably civilians on the ground—what's the bloody point of real war? Why not just organize a videogame league and get over with it? [Aviation Week]"
[UPDATE: Actually, on reading the AvWeek story, I think Gizmodo may have got a bit overheated. It doesn't say that the ground vehicle was unmnanned, only that the explosive devices was remotely operated. Although you can't entirely blame Gizmodo, since the AvWeek headline is "Unmanned-On-Unmanned Combat Emerging In Iraq"]
A $10M MQ-9 Reaper used a $25K GBU-12 bomb to destroy $50 R/C car and the individual controlling it, unfortunately obliterating any evidence as to whether it was an actual threat, or an Iraqi child playing with a toy.
Essential this is why asymetric warfare makes you lose in the long run...
you fire a 1mln$ missile from a platform that costs more than 1000$ to operate a day
at an old civilian car parked in the middle of nowhere and later it turns out they were not terrorists but a couple having uhm... a date
Unfortunately UAV have one thing that makes their use inviting barbaric actions: it is very hard to trace the one that abuses the power in person, while in reality, it can be a single specific person. You cannot imagine tank platoon go wild without being noted, you can imagine frontline bomber pilot go wild but later or sooner he will have to land while remaining cooperative with airspace command etc.
UAV pilot, even if makes atrocity, hides so easily behind a wall of similar persons, procedures, obscure wireless transmissions and Artificial Stupidity Systems. The only option that remains for a government is to protect community as a whole, making all possible accidents an example of 'smooth operation'.
This is a good segue into the topic. Those of us (us being the members of this community) with details of how things operate or tactics used by the military should be mindful that both the BAD Guys and Good Guys monitor the internet and sharing details can and will comeback to get you in the end if you reveal something that should not be revealed. Please be mindful of opsec.
The press release might have been written another way:
A $10M MQ-9 Reaper used a $25K GBU-12 bomb to destroy $50 R/C car and the individual controlling it, unfortunately obliterating any evidence as to whether it was an actual threat, or an Iraqi child playing with a toy.
Comments
Essential this is why asymetric warfare makes you lose in the long run...
you fire a 1mln$ missile from a platform that costs more than 1000$ to operate a day
at an old civilian car parked in the middle of nowhere and later it turns out they were not terrorists but a couple having uhm... a date
:-D
UAV pilot, even if makes atrocity, hides so easily behind a wall of similar persons, procedures, obscure wireless transmissions and Artificial Stupidity Systems. The only option that remains for a government is to protect community as a whole, making all possible accidents an example of 'smooth operation'.
A $10M MQ-9 Reaper used a $25K GBU-12 bomb to destroy $50 R/C car and the individual controlling it, unfortunately obliterating any evidence as to whether it was an actual threat, or an Iraqi child playing with a toy.