Article

2007-09-16 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 2007-09-16 00:30|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top
File under: Iraqi Insurgency

#1 Can it turn inside a Predator? If so I can see it's 2nd kill.

Posted by Thomas Woof 2007-09-16 04:52|| 2007-09-16 04:52|| Front Page Top

#2 I notice that the article carefully omits saying where this UAV comes from.

Posted by gromgoru 2007-09-16 09:30|| 2007-09-16 09:30|| Front Page Top

#3 Teamwork works. :-)

Posted by trailing wife 2007-09-16 10:20|| 2007-09-16 10:20|| Front Page Top

#4 First in Iraq, maybe, but didn't a UAV blow up a carload of terrorists in Yemen a few years back?

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2007-09-16 10:22|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2007-09-16 10:22|| Front Page Top

#5 That was a CIA Predator UAV, this is it's baby brother. I heard from someone you saw the video, the viper strike set off the IED. Only thing they found were the guys tennis shoes.

Posted by Steve 2007-09-16 10:31|| 2007-09-16 10:31|| Front Page Top

#6 The Hunter's the older UAV, first designed in the late 80s/early 90s. Built on an Israel air frame with some US electronics mods.

The Warrior is the updated Predator, more maneuverable and with longer air endurance, easier to fly than the Predator. (But I've heard pilots who are still not happy with the whole operator setup ....)

The Hunter can carry a couple Hellfires, but as one of our other esteemed commenters mentioned a while ago the Viper is better suited to the Hunter missions and it can carry more of them.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-16 10:42|| 2007-09-16 10:42|| Front Page Top

#7 I wonder if the cost is worth the few kills. As an eye in the sky it has great value, but as a shooting platform, limited duty at best.

Posted by wxjames 2007-09-16 13:24|| 2007-09-16 13:24|| Front Page Top

#8 #5: "Only thing they found were the guys tennis shoes."

Answer your question, #7?

Cockles. Heart. Warm. :-D

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2007-09-16 13:32|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2007-09-16 13:32|| Front Page Top

#9 #2 g*rom
I notice that the article carefully omits saying where this UAV comes from.

hummm... you musta slept in a Cracker Jack Box last nite...

~:)

Posted by Red Dawg">Red Dawg 2007-09-16 14:04|| 2007-09-16 14:04|| Front Page Top

#10 As an eye in the sky it has great value, but as a shooting platform, limited duty at best.

That's not what I've heard from company and battalion leaders who've commanded there.

Posted by lotp 2007-09-16 16:59|| 2007-09-16 16:59|| Front Page Top

#11 OK, more detail.

First, the UAVs can kill from the air without subjecting patrols to other attacks as they move to/through the IED location. So when you add up costs, include the cost of an uparmoured HMMWVs that might get blown up, fuel, medical care for the patrol members who might be hurt. Per mission.

Second, the UAVs can cross airspace where we might not have patrols close at hand or where we might not be able to move / kill fast enough to keep the enemy from fleeing.

Third, there is a huge deterrent effect from these things on the bomb placers who are doing it for money or are very low in the status chain for their insurgent group.

Fourth ... well, there are a lot of 'fourth's, but that gives the general idea.

Gotta say, the 03s - O5s and O6s I've talked to / heard talk who are back from theater rave about the impact of tactical UAVs for both recon and now for offensive use. These technologies are going to allow us to draw down troop strength a bit and rest some of our incredibly dedicated soldiers and marines who've been pulling 3, 4 or even 5 tours while their families try to keep things together at home.

Too expensive? I don't think so ....

Posted by lotp 2007-09-16 17:04|| 2007-09-16 17:04|| Front Page Top

#12 I'd think "death from the sky" unseen/unheard would put a twist in the Jihadis panties.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-09-16 17:28|| 2007-09-16 17:28|| Front Page Top

#13 UAVs are very cost effective, even with their $50-70,000 munitions. Currently is cost about $5,000,000 for every kill in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's no way to win a war, but a good way to lose one via bankruptcy. We will win when goals and tactics change to drive the cost down to $5,000/kill. The muslims will no longer be able to sustain their losses.

Posted by ed 2007-09-16 18:09|| 2007-09-16 18:09|| Front Page Top

#14 I think they are saying this is the first 'Army" kill - The USAF have been at it for a while ...
(don't now about you but I was confused at first ... doh!)

Posted by Linker 2007-09-16 20:27|| 2007-09-16 20:27|| Front Page Top

#15 Diesel engines in an aircraft?

Thar's interesting.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2007-09-16 20:50|| 2007-09-16 20:50|| Front Page Top

#16 RJ:
Back in WWII, the Germans and Russians did have a few diesel-engined airplanes. I don't remember the German, but the Russian was a variant of the Yer-2ACh long-range 2-engine bomber.

Posted by Gary and the Samoyeds">Gary and the Samoyeds 2007-09-16 21:11|| http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2007-09-16 21:11|| Front Page Top

#17 Currently is cost about $5,000,000 for every kill in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's no way to win a war, but a good way to lose one via bankruptcy. We will win when goals and tactics change to drive the cost down to $5,000/kill. The muslims will no longer be able to sustain their losses.

The way I read this is that either we reduce the cost-per-kill by three orders of magnitude or find a way to kill one thousand terrorists at a time. I prefer the second alternative.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-09-16 23:35|| 2007-09-16 23:35|| Front Page Top

23:53 Robjack
23:44 phil_b
23:41 Zenster
23:36 JosephMendiola
23:35 Zenster
23:33 JosephMendiola
23:33 phil_b
23:27 Zenster
23:26 JosephMendiola
23:24 Barbara Skolaut
23:21 Zenster
23:20 Zenster
23:18 Barbara Skolaut
23:17 JosephMendiola
23:09 JosephMendiola
23:05 JosephMendiola
23:00 JosephMendiola
22:58 Zenster
22:58 JosephMendiola
22:54 Zenster
22:49 trailing wife
22:40 KBK
22:35 trailing wife
22:31 trailing wife