Using drones: principles, tactics and results (amended title)

[William F. Owen]

I have the greatest curiosity as to why the "Drones" are being used all. Bearing in mind the circumstances of their employment, and the lack of air defence, why are they deemed better than a manned aircraft - and by that I mean the right manned aircraft. An P-3 can fire AGM-114, and carry a much higher resolution sensor.

Now, I can see quite a few good roles for UAVs, but they are pretty specific and mainly a function of political concerns. Yes there are sound operational reasons, but personally, I can't see it in the circumstance we are discussing.

[Mark O'Neill]

I have the greatest curiosity as to why the "Drones" are being used all. Bearing in mind the circumstances of their employment, and the lack of air defence, why are they deemed better than a manned aircraft - and by that I mean the right manned aircraft. An P-3 can fire AGM-114, and carry a much higher resolution sensor.

Now, I can see quite a few good roles for UAVs, but they are pretty specific and mainly a function of political concerns. Yes there are sound operational reasons, but personally, I can't see it in the circumstance we are discussing.

You cited a certain platform: Work out the accurals on a P-3 and crew.............. and that is without getting one 'lost'. 'Robot spuds in' makes a far better headline for any government than '13 aircrew die a horrible death' , even before one calculates any other costs

Cheers

Mark

Mark

[William F. Owen]

You cited a certain platform: Work out the accurals on a P-3 and crew.............. and that is without getting one 'lost'. 'Robot spuds in' makes a far better headline for any government than '13 aircrew die a horrible death' , even before one calculates any other costs

Well aware and that's all pretty obvious, but what if you have P-3 in theatre anyway? The issues related to cost, is that you have P-3s anyway, and they cost what they cost. You can't stack them and see a reduction is cost without loosing big time in capability and skills fade.

I just used the P-3 as an example, but put another way, "Big War" mission, chasing subs. "Small War " mission, -something else. Could me good to ask the same question of the MQ-9s?

[davidbfpo]

Link goes to an article in The Spectator, 7th May 2009, whcih touches upon the use of drones and as an Indian viewpoint is interesting IMHO we rarely see: http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magaz...it-worse.thtml

A glimpse at the authors background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma_Chellaney

davidbfpo

[Entropy]

Wilf,

P-3's are extensively employed in both Iraq and Afghanistan and are valuable platforms for a variety of functions. The problem is that there are simply not enough ISR platforms to meet demand, P-3's included. I have a friend who is a P-3 pilot and their optempo is quite high.

UAV's have advantages because they can be fielded faster and provide more ISR for a given amount of resources - they have longer loiter times and one can get more flight-hours per aircrew than what you'd get with a manned aircraft. It's also easier to covertly monitor a target with a UAV than a large-multi-engined aircraft. For Afghanistan in particular, lack of ramp space and logistics favor UAV's, especially those operated from distributed locations.

[William F. Owen]

Wilf,

P-3's are extensively employed in both Iraq and Afghanistan and are valuable platforms for a variety of functions. The problem is that there are simply not enough ISR platforms to meet demand, P-3's included. I have a friend who is a P-3 pilot and their optempo is quite high.

UAV's have advantages because they can be fielded faster and provide more ISR for a given amount of resources - they have longer loiter times and one can get more flight-hours per aircrew than what you'd get with a manned aircraft. It's also easier to covertly monitor a target with a UAV than a large-multi-engined aircraft. For Afghanistan in particular, lack of ramp space and logistics favor UAV's, especially those operated from distributed locations.

Mate, all good points. Especially the ramp space, and FOB operations.

[Ken White]

Mildly off thread comment by me on the last paragraph of the linked article:

"Unwittingly, Obama’s strategy may end up repeating the very mistakes of American policy over the past three decades that have come to haunt US security and that of the rest of the free world. In seeking narrow, tactical gains, the Obama team risks falling prey to a long-standing US policy weakness: the pursuit of short-term objectives without much regard for the security of friends. It must abandon its plan regionally to contain rather than defeat terrorism, or else an Islamist takeover of Pakistan is inevitable."

The on-thread aspect is that Mark O'neilcorrectly pointed to the why of Drones; the article points out that the application of Drone power can be quite, uh, selective -- and the quoted paragraph ties all that together with American short-termism.

Our failure to heed History and take the long view is well known. Hopefully we can do better this time. Given the callow nature and venality of many of our politicians from all parties, whether we can or will do so is worrisome.

Which gets back to Drones. A strong point is lessened cost in many aspects. Another is is their ease of use in dangerous or problematic situations.

A shortfall is that very ease of use can lead to flawed decisions and uses...

[davidbfpo]

IMHO a good article in The New Yorker drawing together many of the issues, without citing David Kilcullen though and especially on the legal aspects: http://cryptome.org/0001/predator-war.htm

Note the full article is behind a 'pay wall' and is an update on a previous article (incomplete): http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...6fa_fact_mayer and a follow-up (complete): http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...-pakistan.html

There is a further article (with stats in appendices): http://www.newamerica.net/publicatio...revenge_drones

davidbfpo