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

[carl]

I think this article is yet more fear-mongering from those who just feel the need to fear-monger about anything.

I don't know if it is fear mongering or not, but the article serves a useful purpose, to highlight the fact that drones crash a lot. They can't help but crash a lot given the limited view of the world the drivers have, the lag time between control input and response, what appears to me (viewing from the outside) to be limited control response, they are underpowered and the drivers have zero kinesthetic (sic) feedback. They are going to be crashing a lot until all those things are fixed.

And of course sometimes they decide to go walkabout. I'll never forget the bemused look on the face of a battle captain once. I asked him what was up and he said "The drone." "Oh yeah. Where's it going?" "We don't know exactly, but it's on its way."

[davidbfpo]

A NYT article Drone Pilots Are Shown to Have Stress Disorders, which refers to a new DoD report:

In the first study of its kind, researchers with the Defense Department have found that pilots of drone aircraft experience mental health problems like depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress at the same rate as pilots of manned aircraft who are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. The study affirms a growing body of research finding health hazards even for those piloting machines from bases far from actual combat zones.

Note the DoD report is not readily found, that maybe because it is due to presented at a conference this week.

Link to NYT article:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/us...it_th_20130223

[davidbfpo]

In July 2012 the University of Surrey's Centre for International Intervention held a conference 'Hitting the Target?" How New Capabilities Are Shaping Contemporary International Intervention'; I am sure there are plenty of similar conferences elsewhere.

There is something different about this as the principal academic comes from the 'Critical Studies on Terrorism' school:

The workshop’s objective was to explore how new selective precision strike capabilities available to military and intelligence forces are shaping approaches to international intervention. It aimed to be a forum for dialogue between different academic disciplines, as well as between academia and policy-makers/practitioners.... it became apparent that the principal focus would be on the increasing offensive use of unmanned aerial vehicles, or “drones”, a topic of increasing public debate as well as policy relevance.

There are some PPT on a link.

The conference is in partnership with RUSI, with an event next month in London, to launch a report and is decidedly optimistic that:

Military action in Mali, Libya and elsewhere have demonstrated the continuing, critical reliance on advanced technological capabilities in modern Western intervention.

Link:http://www.ias.surrey.ac.uk/workshop...ion/report.php

Link to RUSI event (for members):http://www.rusi.org/events/ref:E511BB3D16FB0F

[slapout9]

Video of what some of the new capabilites are.... identifyitng your cell phone from 20,000 feet and theses are only the ones that they are admitting to..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNy...layer_embedded

[ganulv]

Video of what some of the new capabilites are.... identifyitng your cell phone from 20,000 feet and theses are only the ones that they are admitting to..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNy...layer_embedded

A million terabytes a day? The Intelligence Community is apparently drafting a 1:1 map of the world.

[carl]

A NYT article Drone Pilots Are Shown to Have Stress Disorders, which refers to a new DoD report:

The article says that the primary thing stressing the drone drivers is schedules. That is exactly the same thing the most bugs any commercial pilot. The article hinted the person doing the study was a bit disappointed by that because this person seemed to be looking for a more dramatic reason, angst about taking life anonymously, touchy-feely stuff like that.

The reason pilots are almost always stressed about schedules is two fold. First, unless you're lucky it isn't a 9-5, or 3-11 or 11-7 job. It always varies and it makes it hard to fit into a 9-5. Monday to Friday world.

Second, (and I don't know how much this goes for drone drivers) flying is a lot more fatiguing and fatiguing in a different way than people think. Prepping the plane, figuring the weather, delaying for two hours for weather and then flying two hours dodging weather to land in a snowstorm at an airport with moderate braking wears you out and then the day may only be half done. The suits don't see that. They only see you've been on duty for 7 hours. Dealing with an attitude, year after year, that equates 7 hours of blue skies and calm winds with 7 hours of blizzards stresses a guy.

[davidbfpo]

The link is to a short article by a US law professor, on a blog I've heard of, but do not visit:http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/03/a...5nDLls.twitter

Greg Johnsen, author of 'The Last Refuge: Yemen, Al-Queda, and America’s War in Arabia'...often read as arguing that American drone strikes in Yemen do more harm than good, because they spawn increased membership in the jihadi forces there....Based on his experience, he believes that a more refined drone program remains necessary — not that the US should end its drone program altogether. In particular, he believes that targeted killing in Yemen of high-level figures in AQ and associated forces does not tend to generate greater support and membership for these forces. Most Yemenis do not support these figures, are not outraged when they are killed, and do get mobilized against the US or the Yemeni government as a result.

The key point is, using Yemen as an example, that drones strikes should be concentrate on high-level figures.

[davidbfpo]

Via FP a report of a speech by the Pentagon's former top lawyer, Jeh Johnson:

Our government finds itself in a lose-lose proposition: it fails to officially confirm many of its counterterrorism successes, and fails to officially confirm, deny or clarify unsubstantiated reports of civilian casualties. Our government's good efforts for the safety of the people risks an erosion of support by the people. It is in this atmosphere that the idea of a national security court as a solution to the problem -- an idea that for a long time existed only on the margins of the debate about U.S. counterterrorism policy but is now entertained by more mainstream thinkers such as Senator Diane Feinstein and a man I respect greatly, my former client Robert Gates - has gained momentum... But, we must be realistic about the degree of added credibility such a court can provide."

Fuller remarks and the speech are on:http://e-ring.foreignpolicy.com/post...ft_to_military

[Firn]

From my humble point of view the economics and the bigger technological trends are strongly in favour of drones&Co and their use. It will be quite interesting to watch how it evolves.

[jmm99]

We start with Fox News Poll: Majority supports use of drones (by Dana Blanton, March 04, 2013) (interviews conducted 25-27 Feb 2013, before Rand Paul's filibuster) (poll internals):

Do you approve or disapprove of the United States using unmanned aircraft called drones:

To kill a suspected terrorist in a foreign country?

Approve 74%
Disapprove 22
(Don’t know) 4

To kill a suspected terrorist in a foreign country if the suspect is a U.S. citizen?

Approve 60%
Disapprove 36
(Don’t know) 5

To kill a suspected foreign terrorist on U.S. soil?

Approve 56%
Disapprove 40
(Don’t know) 4

To kill a suspected terrorist who is a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil?

Approve 45%
Disapprove 50
(Don’t know) 5

However, three weeks later, we have Gallup with In U.S., 65% Support Drone Attacks on Terrorists Abroad - Less than half of Americans are closely following news on drones (by Alyssa Brown and Frank Newport, March 25, 2013) (after Rand Paul filibuster) (poll internals):



(much more in article).

Two factors are probably at play here: (1) The legislative hearings re: drones, including the Rand Paul filibuster; and (2) The methodological variation in the two polls - Gallup ran two separate polls.

Regards

Mike