StratPost.com: The new Panther tilt rotor UAV from Israel Aerospace Industries.

StratPost.com: Israel Aerospace Industries new Panther tilt rotor UAV.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Israel Aerospace Industries
• Panther
• tilt rotor
• UAV
• StratPost

[NovaScotiaImages]

Inovative? really? C'mon, this technology is a little long in the tooth. Remember the Osprey? That did not fare well either. Fixed wing VTOL capable aircraft date way back. Nothing new, and indeed nothing stealthy here folks.

[15Eagle22Raptor35JSF]

@darkmath100 @darkmath100 We keep Marines stationed on boats during deployments in case they're needed. MALCs tend to help in that department. I don't think we are building any carriers at the moment, and as for the F-35, it's slated to replace most of the current inventory of aircraft (including the F-15, F-16, A-10, AV-8 (not our's), and others). It's not as stealthy as you think it is either.

As for our continued presence in Afghanistan, I can't comment on that.

[darkmath100]

@15Eagle22Raptor35JSF They don't have a different gameplan. They simply can't stop fighting the last war. It's a classic mistake made countless times throughout history. We need micro/mini automated robotic weapon systems not F35s, Aircraft Carriers and new Marine Amphibious Landing craft. Imagine that, we're building a new Marine Amphibious Landing vehicle. Who are we going to invade, Cuba? We tried that, it didn't work out so well.

[15Eagle22Raptor35JSF]

@darkmath100 Or maybe they've got a different gameplan than what is easily seen..

[darkmath100]

@15Eagle22Raptor35JSF Cheap not being a reason, maybe that's hyperbole on my part. I guess I'll just chalk it up to stupidity.

[15Eagle22Raptor35JSF]

@darkmath100 I see your point with the mortars. However, you statement that the Pentagon only works with expensive weapons makes absolutely no sense. I'm sure there are other reasons why they have not considered your system. But it being too cheap is definitely NOT the reason why.

[darkmath100]

@15Eagle22Raptor35JSF Did you see the video I referenced? Search you tube for "Taliban Mortar Attack U.S. Base With Response" for example of what I'm talking about. The Taliban aren't moving when they're firing. This is often the case as the weapons are to heavy to move very often.

The software to tie a mini-UAV to a GPS mortar is trivial but because it doesn't cost more than $100 million the Pentagon won't touch it. If we lose in Afghanistan it's our fault.

[15Eagle22Raptor35JSF]

@darkmath100 Okay, I see what you're saying, but there's a key flaw. The important words in what you said are "as long as the target didn't move". One of the critical components of guerilla warfare is constant movement. In the time it took to launch a UAV, get a fix, and launch a mortar I think that the Taliban (or whoever the enemy is) would have changed their relative location.

[darkmath100]

@15Eagle22Raptor35JSF I mean GPS mortar. It can adjust it's path in flight. What you could do is add software to the mini-UAV to take it's GPS position and calculate the GPS position of a target on the ground. You have a some sort of download link into the GPS mortar and as long as the target didn't move then the mortar would "fly" to the target. We have the same capability for artillery shells but not for mortars. The result is these FOB's are incapably of defending themselves from pot shots.

[15Eagle22Raptor35JSF]

@darkmath100 How would a mortar help? Wouldn't steerable missiles aid more, especially with moving targets? Once you launch a mortar you can't exactly change its direction in midair. Additionally, UAVs might be more helpful if they could perform recon/targeting/strike missions in one package and not if you needed separate UAVs for every mission type.