REMOTE PILOT

No Flier in the U.S. Air Force Loves UAVs...

And this includes current UAV pilots themselves.

There, we at Remotepilot.com said it!  Somebody had to.

Look at the faces of the guys at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada working 12 hour shifts, 7 days a week, 120 days straight.  Are their eyes "smiling" like these guys were getting serviced at a Nevada brothel? 

No way, these guys want to be back in the air doing something they love -- "pushing" an F-18 or F-15.  Then their eyes'll probably start to "smile" again.   

Look at the higher ups in the Air Force, themselves mostly fliers.  Here's how they talk about UAVs:  

"They (UAVs) are part of a growing area in the Air Force (blah), ...look at the tech involved with them (blah), ...the guys at the Pentagon love us (blah)."

Yes, truly inspirational, impassioned words; they make young people want to devote their lives to something great -- like being full-time glue sniffers.

  

Seriously, though, Remotepilot.com will say that Air Force higher-ups do at least accord UAVs begrudging respect in one regard:  for the aerial "persistence" which their platform affords   

  

Problem is, dogs are "persistent."  The guys who knock on our doors selling security systems are "persistent."  That fact that a lot of people in Afghanistan don't bathe -- that's "persistent."  Just because something is "persistent" doesn't mean it engenders any sort of love.

Given that the U.S. Air Force want's to almost triple the number of UAV pilots by 2012,  Remotepilot.com thinks the US Air Force needs to secure the "sales-services" of people who -- in some cases -- do potentially love what UAVs do:  Army, Navy, Marine "combat team" members in Afghanistan as well as the Air Force's own Special Tactics personnel.

These are the guys who may see UAVs as literally a gift -- a flying one -- that keeps on giving.  These are the guys who can tell a bunch of 20 year old Air Force Cadets why they are the $hit for devoting their careers to driving UAVs instead of opting for "sphincter-duty" aboard come-and-go "Bomb-Cats."

No flier in the U.S. Air Force loves UAVs, yet the service demands an almost tripling of the number of UAV pilots in the next three years. Remotepilot.com says the Air Force should look to ground combatants in-house -- but mostly in the other services -- to make the case to Air Force Cadets who are undecided or put-off by the idea of driving UAVs. 

What Are All the "Live Drivers" Going To Do?

                                      

We were reading through Defensetech.org yesterday and came across a post titled, "Top Gun (Sans Top Gunners)."  

In it was an interesting comment that touched on a possible growth "avenue" for manned, military jet fighter/attack pilots in the future.  This was a concept we had not considered before.  Below is the comment in its entirety: 

" UAVs support the teams on the ground in Afghanistan.

A UAV gets shot down, you don't have to waste time sending a rescue team out to recover the guy/gal.

UAVs can loiter (and loiter some more). Theoretically, fresh flight crews on the ground can rotate at thecontrols until the UAV's fuel runs out (Years in case of Global Hawk, which is recon only).

Teams on the ground don't need to roll the dice calling in some "live driver" who's been amped on Dexedrine for the last 12 hours and who'll "hopefully" miss the friendlies.

US and allied Combat fighter/attack pilots certainly rock and are a highly skilled elite. But these days their `only peer competition is basically... themselves.

As such, civilians probably view fighter pilots/planes these days as kind of like an NFL team in a  League of 1: "Yeah its fun to hear of their "practices" and "scrimmages," but the last air-to-air "game day" was, what, 1990-91?

My advice to fighter/attack pilots, all the military, fast-moving, "live drivers" in combat jets: Go in to business manufacturing one and two seat super-sonic jets for the civilian market-place. That's where you'll see renewed appreciation for your skills and know-how. "

Posted by: Barnacle Bob at June 10, 2009 12:34 AM"

We don't know how accurate the statements in this "Barnacle Bob's" post were, but the point about developing one and two seat super-sonic jets for civilian use is a rather interesting concept.   Perhaps that is the evolution of military fighter/attack jet technology:  It is reconfigured for a civilian market-place as are its former operators. 

Who knows, In 20 years maybe it'll be common-place to go to Malibu Beach on a weekend and watch as dozens of  privately-owned "sports-jet" air-craft contest in air-to-air combat over the Pacific Ocean for million dollar purses?  Maybe you'll have a future in which 1000s of people buy and fly civilian, super-sonic jet aircraft that are vastly updated versions of this Bede BD-5 Micro:

   

                                        

                                               

We here at remotepilot.com certainly do believe that as UAVs, to some extent, push manned military air-craft aside in certain applications, that we will see said "push" cause a corresponding over-flow of some of the technology from (And love of) the aforementioned manned military air-craft in to the civilian market-place.  

After all, we'll just have too many fighter/attack-jocks on the street that need a new home.  And the public will certainly want to put these well-liked, highly trained pilots to work doing something new and interesting ;-)