Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Military In Dogfight Over Drones  
User currently offlineHalls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3474 times:

This is going to be an interesting battle.

Quote:
US military in dogfight over drones
By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington
Published: August 19 2007 21:40 | Last updated: August 19 2007 21:40
While Predator and Global Hawk drones cross the skies of Iraq and Afghanistan looking for insurgents or hunting for Osama bin Laden, thousands of kilometres away in Washington they have been dragged into a vicious turf battle.

Resurrecting tensions over US airpower that have lingered since the Korean war, the air force is pushing to become Òexecutive agentÓ for drones Ð unmanned aircraft Ð that fly above 3,500 feet. The army, navy and marines oppose the move, which would make the air force responsible for the acquisition and development of unmanned aerial vehicles such as the armyÕs Sky Warrior.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/78317cc4-4e93-11dc-85e7-0000779fd2ac.html

Anybody want to guess who will win this battle?

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3465 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I sincerely hope that the USAF is slammed as hard here as they were when they lost the armed helicopter battle. They're trying to turf guard on aircraft they didn't want 5 years ago, and many still don't want (since the airplanes don't require human pilots in the cockpits....kids with video game skills can fly the things).

THe Army, Navy and Marines should not be interfered with in the intelligence gathering and interdiction UAVs they are operating and developing. Having to go beg from the Air Force when you need a tasking is too slow and unreliable. They are worried they'll lose a mission here because they see the entire aerial force turning UAV in 30 years. They're worried about position and funding, and not about getting the mission accomplished.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3130 times:

Actually, turf battles regarding drones have been going on since WWII so this is nothing really new. I do suspect that the USAF will lose to the Army and Navy as far as combat operations in their specific applications are concerned but it will take a long time for that to come about.


"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineEchster From United States of America, joined exactly 10 years ago today! , 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2963 times:

Air Force will not be executive agency for drones

After an intense turf battle within the Pentagon, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England on Thursday ruled out the creation of an executive agency for all medium-and high-altitude drones.

Instead, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff would take a greater role in overseeing requirements and developments of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) across all military services, according to sources familiar with the issue.

England’s decision comes on the heels of an aggressive campaign by the Air Force to become the executive agency for all UAVs flying at 3,500 feet and above.


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...-agency-for-drones-2007-09-13.html


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2895 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 1):
I sincerely hope that the USAF is slammed as hard here as they were when they lost the armed helicopter battle.

Lose and get the back of their heads slapped while their at it!

Quoting DL021 (Reply 1):
They're trying to turf guard on aircraft they didn't want 5 years ago, and many still don't want (since the airplanes don't require human pilots in the cockpits....kids with video game skills can fly the things).

I'm really disapointed at the lack of PC flight sims in the 21st century but the concepts are relatively similar; to go through USF UPT and get a UCAV is a waste of resources; private pilot's license and maybe some IFR training for ATC purposes, but other than that it's amazing at how easy the UCAV's are to fly and fight. I think the Marines need to get Warrant Officers in the rotary winged aircraft just like the US Army does, I believe the USN recently experiemented with enlisted pilots for P-3's (not sure the current status) and there is no reason why qualified enlisted in USAF should not be manning the UCAV's.


User currently offlineThuderbird7 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

I wish the Military would combine, like the Israeli Defence Force, this way there would be one service fighting for the good of the Soldier, and not their own service. Big time money is wasted every year on the 5 services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard) training on 5 different posts the same task with limited resources. If they combined these schools and resources through a "ONE SERVICE" concept, I think the money would last longer. Having 5 different uniforms is ridiculous too. Between our Army, and Marines, it looks like 2 different armies!

User currently offlineSprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

Quoting Thuderbird7 (Reply 5):
I wish the Military would combine, like the Israeli Defence Force, this way there would be one service fighting for the good of the Soldier, and not their own service. Big time money is wasted every year on the 5 services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard) training on 5 different posts the same task with limited resources. If they combined these schools and resources through a "ONE SERVICE" concept, I think the money would last longer. Having 5 different uniforms is ridiculous too. Between our Army, and Marines, it looks like 2 different armies!

It's been tried. If the Air Farce had their way, the carriers would have been gone in 1946. Every services' needs are different, so there sould be "4" services(I still don't include the Coast Guard as a "true" service).

As far as the uniforms go, why would I as a sailor go out into the middle of a blue ocean, on a gray ship, dressed as a tree?

And then there is the esprit de corps that different services/uniforms builds. Might not mean much to you, but it means a lot to me.

There are a lot of better reasons out there, but that is for smarter people than me.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4318 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 4):
I think the Marines need to get Warrant Officers in the rotary winged aircraft just like the US Army does,

 checkmark 

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 4):
and there is no reason why qualified enlisted in USAF should not be manning the UCAV's.

Something tells me there would be too much resistance by the officer corps. With UCAV's proliferating and manned fighters supposedly on their last generation or next-to-last generation (with the JSF), flight officers are going to hold on to whatever scraps they can. But then maybe UCAV's will become so ubiquitous that there might not be enough officers to "man" them.

Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 6):
Quoting Thuderbird7 (Reply 5):
I wish the Military would combine, like the Israeli Defence Force, this way there would be one service fighting for the good of the Soldier, and not their own service. Big time money is wasted every year on the 5 services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard) training on 5 different posts the same task with limited resources. If they combined these schools and resources through a "ONE SERVICE" concept, I think the money would last longer. Having 5 different uniforms is ridiculous too. Between our Army, and Marines, it looks like 2 different armies!

It's been tried. If the Air Farce had their way, the carriers would have been gone in 1946. Every services' needs are different, so there sould be "4" services(I still don't include the Coast Guard as a "true" service).

Specialization is very effective so when you have a defense establishment as large as the U.S. does and it's affordable (relatively speaking) then that is a preferable option. Consolidation of services/equipment is the norm with smaller military organizations with limited budgets.

Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 6):
And then there is the esprit de corps that different services/uniforms builds. Might not mean much to you, but it means a lot to me.

 checkmark 
I think it means a lot to most who have served.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2662 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

We do need separate services, and even if they tried to consolidate, a la Canada, they'd end up with separate career and MOS tracks anyway. They just need to find a way to not kill programs needed by the grunts (who all the services are supporting whether they like it or not...the ultimate expression of power is the dusty boot on the ground) while fighting the turf battles to control the budget dollars.

Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 6):
I still don't include the Coast Guard as a "true" service

It absolutely is. It's a Navy prejudice that I find particularly snide as the Coasties are the ones who generally pull sailors in trouble out of the water. They also provide the port security and the coastal defence supplements the Navy requires.

It's a uniformed service that has participated in every armed conflict that has gone near the water, and a Coast Guard serviceman swears the same oath and salutes the same flag and reports to the same man.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineSprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
It's a Navy prejudice that I find particularly snide as the Coasties are the ones who generally pull sailors in trouble out of the water.

I find it snide to say that. First on scene makes the rescue. Even though its not part of the Navy's mission it is the Law of the Sea. I know I have been party to 2 rescues of fishing trawlers out to sea and the Coasties were no where to be found.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 8):
Coast Guard serviceman swears the same oath and salutes the same flag and reports to the same man.

Through a different chain of command. They do not fall under the DoD nor are they restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act. This, to me, removes them from being a military service.

Dan in Jupiter


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic US Military In Dogfight Over Drones
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Military Plane Down In Japan posted Tue Jan 17 2006 04:10:53 by AR1300
India Interested In Buying US Military Hardware posted Wed Feb 9 2005 18:52:20 by HAWK21M
Biggest Weaknesses In US Military? posted Sun May 2 2004 02:41:37 by L.1011
US Military Cargo Plane Crashes In Korea, Kills 2 posted Tue Aug 12 2003 12:29:16 by Hoons90
140,000 US Troops In Iraq - How Many Troop Flights posted Fri Sep 1 2006 00:46:03 by Gh123
Military In Newfoundland posted Fri Jul 14 2006 09:24:43 by UnitedFlyer
A380, US Military Cargo posted Mon Nov 14 2005 22:10:25 by 777D
Help With A US Military Reg. posted Thu Sep 29 2005 16:47:21 by SmAlbany
US Fighters In Russia? posted Fri Sep 23 2005 23:43:04 by SLCPilot
Pictures Of US Military Birds posted Wed Jan 19 2005 23:48:50 by Pilotntrng

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format