Aerial drones to begin circling American cities

[jeremy]

It is useful as a tool in support of ground ops though.

Questionable...

 

[INGunGuy]

The smaller ones are about the size of a 1/4 scale RC plane with much the same capabilities. The larger ones are slightly smaller than a Cessna with a pretty decent ceiling and speed.

Someone actually shooting one down...
I like to refer to such a shot as a Divine Intervention Shot. Because it is literally an act of God for someone to actually hit one. Minus shooting one down at take-offs or landings anyway.

Take-offs and landing are perfectly acceptable IMHO. Now am I actually advocating shooting down drones, nope, not at all. BUT, why does everyone constantly want to give up their liberties for some perceived security? There is no additional security by flying drones over our cities. NONE, Not at all, now of course law enforcement will say, that we are wrong, that we dont understand, that their OPSEC it too important to let us the general citizen know what, why, where, etc. Well to this I call BS! If some worthless terrorist wants to kill people, THEY WILL, period, nothing we or our totalitarian government can do will stop it.

I have an idea, how about sharing all this OPSEC info with everyone, so that everyone knows where to be looking for a terrorist. Better to have 100,000,000 eyes looking than at most what a million law enforcement officers. STOP SPYING ON ME AND LET ME LIVE THE FREE LIFE MY FATHER AND GRANDFATHERS WERE ABLE TO LIVE.

INGunGuy

 

[littletommy]

This would be a great gig for Dredd, all they need to do is remote feed the drone cam to his moms computer. Maybe he'd have less time to troll INGO.

 

[E5RANGER375]

people assume we arent already being monitored. ahahahahaha

 

[ATOMonkey]

Questionable...

Agreed, it fills a small niche.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Take-offs and landing are perfectly acceptable IMHO. Now am I actually advocating shooting down drones, nope, not at all. BUT, why does everyone constantly want to give up their liberties for some perceived security? There is no additional security by flying drones over our cities. NONE, Not at all, now of course law enforcement will say, that we are wrong, that we dont understand, that their OPSEC it too important to let us the general citizen know what, why, where, etc. Well to this I call BS! If some worthless terrorist wants to kill people, THEY WILL, period, nothing we or our totalitarian government can do will stop it.

I have an idea, how about sharing all this OPSEC info with everyone, so that everyone knows where to be looking for a terrorist. Better to have 100,000,000 eyes looking than at most what a million law enforcement officers. STOP SPYING ON ME AND LET ME LIVE THE FREE LIFE MY FATHER AND GRANDFATHERS WERE ABLE TO LIVE.

INGunGuy

You obviously have something to hide. The proper authorities will be along shortly, for your own protection.

 

[jeremy]

Most times that niche is not filled at all due to the Operators (depending on the type of drone) are either so Poorly trained in the Idea of how to use it or are flying it remotely from another Continent that it is less than useful. The data is generally bounced around so much that it is less than timely also...

 

[RichardR]

Using drones is retarded, why aren't they using RC dirigibles? dirigibles can stay airborne much much longer & would require much less skill to fly & wouldn't require anywhere near as much maintenance.

Oh wait, they are already under consideration. Dirigibles get the call: Uncle Sam wants you

Sort of reminds me of ...

 

[ATOMonkey]

Yes, that niche is not in support of traditional combat.

They should be used in conjuction with forward observers to identify and track targets or to soften up enemy positions.

The spooks also use them effectively to eliminate key targets in hostile areas.

The Global Hawk is much better suited to intelligence gathering since it has a VERY long loiter time, much better optics and sensors, and much better operators, since so few are in service. They also work very well in rescue missions, especially at sea, when you need to identify where the survivors are located. Even without clear skies, the Global Hawk can still identify ground targets. Amazing bird. It's a shame they don't arm it.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Using drones is retarded, why aren't they using RC dirigibles? dirigibles can stay airborne much much longer & would require much less skill to fly & wouldn't require anywhere near as much maintenance.

Oh wait, they are already under consideration. Dirigibles get the call: Uncle Sam wants you

Sort of reminds me of ...

Fantastic idea. It was just waiting for optics and sensors to get to the point that ulta-high altitude survellience was possible. Especially considering the size and weight of some of that equipment. Much easier to put 600 lbs into orbit than to float it.

 

[jeremy]

Yes, that niche is not in support of traditional combat.

It could be if the Operators of the Craft better understood the use of the equipment. Not just how to Fly them...

They should be used in conjuction with forward observers to identify and track targets or to soften up enemy positions.

That would be a better use...

The spooks also use them effectively to eliminate key targets in hostile areas.

LOL!!!
Right...

The Global Hawk is much better suited to intelligence gathering since it has a VERY long loiter time, much better optics and sensors, and much better operators, since so few are in service. They also work very well in rescue missions, especially at sea, when you need to identify where the survivors are located. Even without clear skies, the Global Hawk can still identify ground targets. Amazing bird. It's a shame they don't arm it.

Still the Same problems the Operators do not fully understand the Cans and Cannots of the euipment...

 

[Tactical Dave]

Camera drones will begin flying around American cities in order to spy on citizens easier from the sky. I like how they work out the kinks on these things by using them in war to spy on enemy troops... then they roll them out on the American public at home. The LRAD also comes to mind.


Drones may be coming to Miami-Dade

How is this any different from police helo's circling over head with cammera's?

A LOT of stuff starts out in the millitary then comes to the civilian world..... IE a lot of guns, a lot of aircraft stuff, you name it.


By your post I assume you think Police helicopers are wrong? Or you think they are going to put USAF optics/equpment on a civilian aircraft?

If it was the Air Force doing this for the government or the government then I would be upset also.


Let's also remember that anything you say can be heard and is heard if you know who wants to hear, anything you say on a phone or online is moniterd, anything you say around a cell that is off could be moniterd.......

If I was you I would be more worried about the things in orbit then some plane over head.

 

[E5RANGER375]

How is this any different from police helo's circling over head with cammera's?

Considering with the helo's they make more noise, have to pay more for pilots, can be in the air longer (no need to land to swap crews).... id say it would be better for the people in that area then having to listen to helicopters flying over.


A LOT of stuff starts out in the millitary then comes to the civilian world..... IE a lot of guns, a lot of aircraft stuff, you name it.


By your post I assume you think Police helicopers are wrong?

I like mayo on my helo's sub

 

[LEaSH]

IMPD have no helo's in service these days. State police might, but in other areas.

If the border patrol used UAV's with any success, then maybe I can see it happening. As it is they've obviously had limited success.

 

[rambone]

How is this any different from police helo's circling over head with cammera's?

A LOT of stuff starts out in the millitary then comes to the civilian world..... IE a lot of guns, a lot of aircraft stuff, you name it.


By your post I assume you think Police helicopers are wrong? Or you think they are going to put USAF optics/equpment on a civilian aircraft?

If it was the Air Force doing this for the government or the government then I would be upset also.

If police helicopters were just flying around with no particular mission in mind, then I would say it is a waste to have them in the air. They should be deployed for a particular objective and then put back on the ground. The taxpayers deserve some discretion with the way police spend their money. This is not a warzone and we are not the enemy.

I see it as possibly less useful than a helicopter. What do they believe they will accomplish by having this thing aimlessly circling the city? How is spying on citizens going to "keep people safe" as the Police Director says?

 

[Tactical Dave]

I like mayo on my helo's sub

Shut it you seamen wanna bee

 

[dross]

I honestly cannot see a police application for these.

 

[Expat]

I honestly cannot see a police application for these.

I can... by the way... could you put your clothes back on

 

[thompal]

The taxpayers deserve some discretion with the way police spend their money. This is not a warzone and we are not the enemy.

I see it as possibly less useful than a helicopter. What do they believe they will accomplish by having this thing aimlessly circling the city? How is spying on citizens going to "keep people safe" as the Police Director says?

It's not local money. Think "Federal Grant" i.e. - federalized police activity. The feds don't have to actively spy on citizens and control them, when they can merely pay the locals to do it for them, and the locals go along with it because they get all kinds of shiny toys to play with. The mayors and police chiefs conveniently forget their oaths as long as they can have more high-speed/low-drag goodies than their neighboring counties/cities. It's an arms race, but not necessarily with the people, but rather a race between departments to see who can become most like a hi-tech "Big Brother." And they ram it down the peoples' throats by selling it as being "for their own good."

 

[Tactical Dave]

If police helicopters were just flying around with no particular mission in mind, then I would say it is a waste to have them in the air. They should be deployed for a particular objective and then put back on the ground. The taxpayers deserve some discretion with the way police spend their money. This is not a warzone and we are not the enemy.

I see it as possibly less useful than a helicopter. What do they believe they will accomplish by having this thing aimlessly circling the city? How is spying on citizens going to "keep people safe" as the Police Director says?

Well your subject says droneS not drone, considering with a UAV you can swap pilots very quickly (don't have to land), if I remember right maintenance costs are lower, if I also remember right they are quieter then helicopers(talking about the smaller UAV's). Im sure fuel consumption is better. So for tax payers they will have to pay less for up keep, granted the initial cost is a bit high.

IMPD flies over all the time, they are not going to go back to the airport for because they have some down time between call's. So yes they do fly around with no particular mission when they are not on a call. Im sure someone that is with IMPD would be better to ask then me though...

From what I read this drone will be a police helicopter but un maned....

I honestly cannot see a police application for these.

The only difference I see with it compared to a police helicopter is one has a crew and a rotor, the other does not have a cew on board and has wings.