I am thinking about joining the Air Force

Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the Air Force ROTC program at the University of Arizona, with participants sharing insights, experiences, and advice for prospective candidates. Key points include the importance of commitment to the Air Force, as it can lead to a fulfilling career with opportunities for education and job placement in civilian sectors. Participants emphasize that while ROTC can provide valuable training and leadership skills, it also comes with obligations that may interfere with academic pursuits. The conversation touches on the potential for military experience to enhance job prospects, particularly in technical fields like engineering and actuarial science, but cautions that it may not directly benefit careers in astrophysics or academia. There are also discussions about the differences between ROTC and military academies, highlighting that academy graduates may have advantages in terms of career progression and opportunities. Overall, the thread encourages careful consideration of the military's commitments and benefits, particularly for those interested in pursuing advanced degrees in science or engineering.
  • #61
dotman said:
In fact, this is a very real concern. Recall this recent news:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/12/17/drone.video.hacked/index.html"

The U.S. official, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to discuss the information

Howcome we don't have some CIA agent just execute those 'US officials'? They are traitors and have no business being in the loop if they spill the beans to the media. There is a reason why we have sensitive, classified, secret and top secret designations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
You all make very great points about how Unmanned is superior to manned flight. And I do agree with most of them but, you can't match human wit and ingenuity with a computer during a dogfight. There is a lot going on that can't really be thought up by a computer.
 
  • #63
MotoH said:
You all make very great points about how Unmanned is superior to manned flight. And I do agree with most of them but, you can't match human wit and ingenuity with a computer during a dogfight. There is a lot going on that can't really be thought up by a computer.

Ask yourself this question.. what is the point of a 'dogfight'. If you can destroy an enemy aircraft from 70 mile range, and without any consequences to your own unmanned aircraft, why would you risk a pilot's life to do it from few hundred feet away?
 
  • #64
MotoH said:
You all make very great points about how Unmanned is superior to manned flight. And I do agree with most of them but, you can't match human wit and ingenuity with a computer during a dogfight. There is a lot going on that can't really be thought up by a computer.
There are still humans operating the drones, and they can take risks that pilots in manned aircraft could not. A properly-designed drone can execute maneuvers that no manned aircraft could without blacking out or even killing its pilot. Computers don't operate drones - they are interfaces for humans to interact with and operate the drones.
 
  • #65
The U.S. official, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to discuss the information

cronxeh said:
Howcome we don't have some CIA agent just execute those 'US officials'? They are traitors and have no business being in the loop if they spill the beans to the media. There is a reason why we have sensitive, classified, secret and top secret designations.

Not being 'authorized to discuss the information' does not mean the information was classified. It simply means that the official is not in the public relations department, and is not normally tasked with speaking to the media, or supposed to relate the department's message to the people.

People who disclose classified information are investigated and prosecuted by the FBI. This is very rare. People who disclose non-classified information they are not supposed to discuss are sometimes investigated by their department, and possibly reprimanded or fired. They are not generally criminally prosecuted.

Finally, the CIA does not operate on American soil (legally, at least). They are not assassins who kill Americans. They are talented individuals who work their hardest to protect us from terrorist threats abroad, and we owe them a lot.

I'm sure many of them would find your statement horribly offensive.
 
  • #66
dotman said:
Finally, the CIA does not operate on American soil (legally, at least). They are not assassins who kill Americans. They are talented individuals who work their hardest to protect us from terrorist threats abroad, and we owe them a lot.

I'm sure many of them would find your statement horribly offensive.

I was not suggesting there be an investigation. I simply suggested the traitors get their due by people who do these things already to terrorists. We are at war, and no 'US official' has any business running their mouth to the media - it does not benefit them, and it does not benefit the public
 
  • #67
cronxeh said:
Howcome we don't have some CIA agent just execute those 'US officials'? They are traitors and have no business being in the loop if they spill the beans to the media. There is a reason why we have sensitive, classified, secret and top secret designations.

it's probably just COTS stuff, anyway. as soon as one gets shot down and salvaged, the whole thing would be figured out in a week.
 
  • #68
Proton Soup said:
it's probably just COTS stuff, anyway. as soon as one gets shot down and salvaged, the whole thing would be figured out in a week.

The only UAV's that are even remotely in harms way at the moment are the MQ-1 predators who have attached hellfire missiles, and their operating altitude is around 28,000 feet. I am pretty sure the combat that is currently going on, and will continue to go on, IE insurgency does not have the technology to knock any of these suckers out of the sky.

If we were to go up against an actual country that had SAM batteries or other AA installments there would just have to be a jammer sent up to scramble the radar signal, or with the advancements in stealth, we could make a UAV have similar characteristics to the F117 nighthawk with the radar absorbing paint and the geometric body panels. This combined with how small the actual UAVs are would be nearly no radio signal at all, since if I remember correctly the radar signature of the F117 is like the size of a tennis racket.
 
  • #69
MotoH said:
The only UAV's that are even remotely in harms way at the moment are the MQ-1 predators who have attached hellfire missiles, and their operating altitude is around 28,000 feet. I am pretty sure the combat that is currently going on, and will continue to go on, IE insurgency does not have the technology to knock any of these suckers out of the sky.

If we were to go up against an actual country that had SAM batteries or other AA installments there would just have to be a jammer sent up to scramble the radar signal, or with the advancements in stealth, we could make a UAV have similar characteristics to the F117 nighthawk with the radar absorbing paint and the geometric body panels. This combined with how small the actual UAVs are would be nearly no radio signal at all, since if I remember correctly the radar signature of the F117 is like the size of a tennis racket.

yeah, just a bunch of bumpkins there. it's not like any other governments might have an interest in trade here.
 
  • #70
all of our supposed "enemies" that are not insurgent oriented already have UAVs, which are capable of anything the United States UAVs can do. North Korea has UAVs from Europe for example.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Replies
98
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
2K