Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hulka

These damn things are a major step toward elimination of all personal privacy and the imposition of a police state and you’re pimping them because you don’t think they will run into stuff?

May your chains sit lightly.

Apologies if I misunderstand your point. It’s hard to wade through that bureaucrateze verbage on one cup of coffee.


18 posted on 06/14/2010 5:03:52 AM PDT by tickmeister (tickmeister)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: tickmeister
No worries. I think you missed the point because perhaps I wasn't clear—written for those in the aviation world.

Not so much “chains,” as UAVs are no different than manned aircraft. No different (except no man on board).

If you object to UAVs flying in NAS because of concerns about big brother, then you better be concerned about all the U-2/TR-1’s, as well as Rivet Joint and other data-collectors flying in our airspace, and they have far more intelligence collection capability than a UAV.

Issue is how to incorporate UAVs into the NAS. Military ops and training are bound and restricted by FAA rules and regs in our airspace, so, question is how to train our UAV operators before we use those things in war zones. And for border surveillance, how do we ensure safe ops as they fly along the border if we don't address the issue of safe operation and satisfy FAA regulations?

Again, they are no different than other platforms we fly every day in the NAS, they are just unmanned.

29 posted on 06/14/2010 6:42:31 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson