The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Sarzy.

True but,
the F35 is a Joint Strike Fighter. The JSF program is supposed to replace a wide variety of aging plane models (F-16, F-18, A-10, F117, etc.) It is one program that has two types of engines fitting in one plane. I think this is a better approach than updating one fighter/bomber/strike fighter at a time. Military programs like the JSF or UAV are used as a deterrent and we should always invest in them because they serve as a great political tool for Foreign policy, and as a great research tool for the our economy and the advancement of human achievement. It is because of programs like these that we have not used a Nuke or Dirty bomb in the last 50 years. Conventional warfare is still critical, whether you agree with it or not. If you want to blame our bullying around the world, then blame the politicians for that. That's a strategic failure, not an operational failure.

As for the space program. The U.S. is still spending tremendously into the space program through the U.S. Air Force. NASA has taken the passenger seat for all things critical when it comes to space, and I agree with that decision completely.

I support research programs like the JSF or the Air Force's GPS program among many other de-classified projects; however, I do not support the DOJ/DEA/ATF and 90% of the TSA. I think those departments are worthless and their funds could be used for education and healthcare.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^Jinx:
The Harrier is to the F35 as the Sopwith Camel is to the Eurofighter.
Ok, thats hyperbole, but the Harrier was pretty limited. I wasn't supersonic for a start, no stealth capabilities, fairly limited air to air/manoeuverability etc. No gun for ground attack either.
Personally I think its a pretty incredible feat of engineering. On the flip side its going to cost the US taxpayer $320billion.

It's a cool plane and all, but that number is absolutely insane.
$320 BILLION dollars.
Yeah, cut medical care, cut schooling, cut spending on space exploration, but don't touch the spending on making a fucking aeroplane for killing people.
And we wonder if countries have their priorities right when it comes to spending money.

>> ^juliovega914:

I was genuinely surprised it hadn't been posted either. I figured I'd do the job if noone else will, lol.
Anyone know how strong the thrust is on one of those UAV jets?


I dont know, sorry.

I was genuinely surprised it hadn't been posted either. I figured I'd do the job if noone else will, lol.

Anyone know how strong the thrust is on one of those UAV jets?

>> ^ghark:

Wow what arrogance and perhaps cluelessness from the writers, soldiers are over there committing war crimes on behalf of the American plutocracy, and they have the gall to say the forces are there to "restore stability". I'm as big a fan of FPS'ers as the next guy, but if they are going to use real world locations, at least make an attempt to learn about the situation there first.
How would you feel if another country invaded you town or city for its oil, then killed tens of thousands of your women, children, students, reporters etc, but if you fought back you were branded terrorists. Walls are built to divide you from your friends and close family, stealth bombers, Black Hawks, Apaches and UAV's patrol your skies, tanks roll through your streets, yes that's stability we are bringing to you backward folks.
I just looked up the deathcount in Iraq, currently it's sitting at ~100,000 civilians. The people that buy this game and support the developers are basically saying that these 100,000 deaths, many of whom are buried in mass graves, are nothing more than a joke.
A couple from last month:
8th Feb - Father and son shot dead in Al Moushahada, north Baghdad
10th Feb - Mobile phone shop owner shot dead in central Falluja
11th/12th Feb - Student by explosive device in Yaychi, southwest of Kirkuk
15th Feb - Man shot dead in front of house in Kirkuk


Stop being so reasonable!

It is propaganda, just like a lot of Hollywood war films. And the government loves it - censors out what they don't approve of in exchange for renting out military vehicles to Hollywood for next to nothing.

The funny thing is, I hated that the army made a video game recruitment tool. But, to be honest at least it was difficult as $&&% directly in contrast to these big budget titles that make it "immersive" (immersive as in loud noises and yelling) and easy.


>> ^BoneyD:

>> ^ghark:
Wow what arrogance and perhaps cluelessness from the writers, soldiers are over there committing war crimes on behalf of the American plutocracy, and they have the gall to say the forces are there to "restore stability". I'm as big a fan of FPS'ers as the next guy, but if they are going to use real world locations, at least make an attempt to learn about the situation there first.
How would you feel if another country invaded you town or city for its oil, then killed tens of thousands of your women, children, students, reporters etc, but if you fought back you were branded terrorists. Walls are built to divide you from your friends and close family, stealth bombers, Black Hawks, Apaches and UAV's patrol your skies, tanks roll through your streets, yes that's stability we are bringing to you backward folks.
I just looked up the deathcount in Iraq, currently it's sitting at ~100,000 civilians. The people that buy this game and support the developers are basically saying that these 100,000 deaths, many of whom are buried in mass graves, are nothing more than a joke.
A couple from last month:
8th Feb - Father and son shot dead in Al Moushahada, north Baghdad
10th Feb - Mobile phone shop owner shot dead in central Falluja
11th/12th Feb - Student by explosive device in Yaychi, southwest of Kirkuk
15th Feb - Man shot dead in front of house in Kirkuk

This is because they've sold their souls to the US Military Propoganda Wing (sorry Media Relations) in exchange for their help making the game more 'authentic'. See a video explaining this type of relationship here, as it pertains to Hollywood.
Of course, the trade off for their expert assistance is that they get to veto anything in script that they don't approve of. Any mention of atrocities and civilian deaths at the hands of the US would be the first thing on the chopping block. Look at the latest Medal of Honour for example: reference to the opposing force being named Taliban called for removal. EA buckled to the demand, preserving their ongoing cooperation.
Which isn't to say that you can't enjoy these games for what they are. But do recognise the implicit recruiting advertisments and general support for the war industry.

>> ^ghark:

Wow what arrogance and perhaps cluelessness from the writers, soldiers are over there committing war crimes on behalf of the American plutocracy, and they have the gall to say the forces are there to "restore stability". I'm as big a fan of FPS'ers as the next guy, but if they are going to use real world locations, at least make an attempt to learn about the situation there first.
How would you feel if another country invaded you town or city for its oil, then killed tens of thousands of your women, children, students, reporters etc, but if you fought back you were branded terrorists. Walls are built to divide you from your friends and close family, stealth bombers, Black Hawks, Apaches and UAV's patrol your skies, tanks roll through your streets, yes that's stability we are bringing to you backward folks.
I just looked up the deathcount in Iraq, currently it's sitting at ~100,000 civilians. The people that buy this game and support the developers are basically saying that these 100,000 deaths, many of whom are buried in mass graves, are nothing more than a joke.
A couple from last month:
8th Feb - Father and son shot dead in Al Moushahada, north Baghdad
10th Feb - Mobile phone shop owner shot dead in central Falluja
11th/12th Feb - Student by explosive device in Yaychi, southwest of Kirkuk
15th Feb - Man shot dead in front of house in Kirkuk


This is because they've sold their souls to the US Military Propoganda Wing (sorry Media Relations) in exchange for their help making the game more 'authentic'. See a video explaining this type of relationship here, as it pertains to Hollywood.

Of course, the trade off for their expert assistance is that they get to veto anything in script that they don't approve of. Any mention of atrocities and civilian deaths at the hands of the US would be the first thing on the chopping block. Look at the latest Medal of Honour for example: reference to the opposing force being named Taliban called for removal. EA buckled to the demand, preserving their ongoing cooperation.

Which isn't to say that you can't enjoy these games for what they are. But do recognise the implicit recruiting advertisments and general support for the war industry.

Wow what arrogance and perhaps cluelessness from the writers, soldiers are over there committing war crimes on behalf of the American plutocracy, and they have the gall to say the forces are there to "restore stability". I'm as big a fan of FPS'ers as the next guy, but if they are going to use real world locations, at least make an attempt to learn about the situation there first.

How would you feel if another country invaded you town or city for its oil, then killed tens of thousands of your women, children, students, reporters etc, but if you fought back you were branded terrorists. Walls are built to divide you from your friends and close family, stealth bombers, Black Hawks, Apaches and UAV's patrol your skies, tanks roll through your streets, yes that's stability we are bringing to you backward folks.

I just looked up the deathcount in Iraq, currently it's sitting at ~100,000 civilians. The people that buy this game and support the developers are basically saying that these 100,000 deaths, many of whom are buried in mass graves, are nothing more than a joke.

A couple from last month:
8th Feb - Father and son shot dead in Al Moushahada, north Baghdad
10th Feb - Mobile phone shop owner shot dead in central Falluja
11th/12th Feb - Student by explosive device in Yaychi, southwest of Kirkuk
15th Feb - Man shot dead in front of house in Kirkuk

Original Song: "Africa" Performed by Toto

Lyrics:

I hear a gunshot echo in the night
It's quiet here on Nelson Bay when wookies get their camp on
I take him out with my 4x Noob sight But he'll be back
To piss me off as soon as he can respawn

I see a camping asshole in our base
Waiting to steal our chopper so he can fly around and rape us
I take my engineer kit in my hand and say
Hurry Boys! The Hind is after you!

Chorus:
Gonna take more than Black Ops to drive me away from you
Ain't nothing that a million C4 Whores could ever do
Let's bring the pain down in Arica
While we're at it let's tear them a new one on Port Valdez Too

Gonna squad up and play some rush tonight
Hoping to find a lobby that isn't mostly full of douchebags
C4 on the UAV ain't right, If that's their plan
We'll raid their base and steal the driver's dog tags
Better fall back 'cause victory's in sight
Hurry Boys! The Tank is after you!

Chorus

Tags for this video have been changed from 'UAV, FPV, NYC, FAA, unmanned aerial vehicle, first person view, New York City, Federal' to 'unmanned aerial vehicle, first person view, New York City, Federal, brooklyn' - edited by RhesusMonk

>> ^My_design:

This is called FPV flying and in the RC aircraft world it is the up and coming thing. It's facing a ton of opposition because of potential for injury/damage and general misunderstanding of the technology. It takes a fair bit of money and knowledge to put something together that gets good range and image quality like shown. Previous videos done in Brazil and foreign countries have shown flights in populated cities and been blasted in US forums as dangerous risk takers that were going to cause stringent regulation from the FAA. The fear is that the FAA could make the approval of airfields and and flying in general very difficult. The AMA governs much of what happens in RC flight and they have come out with regulations regarding the use of FPV. I can't say what regulations he breaks in this video, but flying among buildings is probably a big one. Unless you fly RC and have seen the multitude of problems that can occur - from batteries literally exploding in flight, to engines seizing, to speed controls catching fire, to servos locking up, to radio glitching - you may not understand the potential for an incident. Let's just say it's far, FAR greater than commercial flight since none of the components used are regulated.


I haven't watched the video yet, it's loading slow because my internet connection is crappy today. The AMA does not have any authority to govern or regulate what happens outside of an AMA approved field. There is no license required to fly an RC plane, and no requirement to join the AMA.

FPV RC flying is probably in a legal gray zone. The FAA could consider them ultralight or microlight aircraft, neither require a license to operate, which are not allowed to operate over populated areas, but by definition of those categories, they would need a seat. If the FPV pilot has an actual pilots license, then the FAA might make a case that they are operating under the new sport pilot rules, and he could lose his license, pay fines and/or go to jail for reckless or careless operations.

I hope the FAA will stay out of it and not force any regulations. The aircraft are small, but still can cause some damage to property. I don't see it needing regulation unless it gets too popular and RC aircraft start falling from the sky on a daily basis.

I've always wanted to build my own UAV, but not an FPV. I want to be able to program a flight path in it, launch it from my yard, and maybe have a 3G modem in it so that I can track/watch it from my computer and give it new coordinates. Then have it return where I can download video and pictures from it.

Your video, A Video to Make You Cry: A UAV FPV of NYC not IAW FAA, etc., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^entr0py:

If they manage to shoot down any small rockets or mortars with that thing, at ranges greater than existing systems, then I'll be impressed. But as for UAVs, 1. Enemy UAVs are not a problem at the moment. 2. If they ever are a problem they can easily be given a reflective paint job that would protect against this laser.


Once you can track a moving target using photon laser based technology, it isn't hard to adapt it to other systems, like focused microwaves which aren't easily reflected. And in reality, it is hard to keep the shine needed on an airborne system traveling through normal atmospheric conditions. In reality, I think it is the lack of indirect fire, and the problem of blooming that keeps directed energy technology from becoming the end all of weapons. With that said, close proximity target interdiction is where directed energy weapons shine.

If they manage to shoot down any small rockets or mortars with that thing, at ranges greater than existing systems, then I'll be impressed. But as for UAVs, 1. Enemy UAVs are not a problem at the moment. 2. If they ever are a problem they can easily be given a reflective paint job that would protect against this laser.

The man speaks sense in the vid. Assuming this works as advertised it could be a real improvement. There are already multiple CIWS mounts on every ship just about so if this can work on already existing tech thats a huge bonus. The systems already mounted are great for tracking and taking down missles or (assuming they're dumb enough to get within a mile or 3) enemy aircraft, but UAV's are small enough its more difficult, at least without wasting gobs more ammo than is really necessary considering the size of the target.