Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Air Force Report Envisions a Broader Use of Drones
Small remotely piloted planes are now used mainly to gather intelligence and fire missiles at insurgents. But over the next several decades, the Air Force envisions building larger ones that could do the work of bombers and cargo planes and even tiny ones that could spy inside a room.
A Predator aircraft in a training flight at Creech Air Force Base in Indian Springs, Nev. The Predators, controlled by pilots on the ground, fly air patrols over Iraq and Afghanistan. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images) In a report released Thursday laying out a "flight plan" for developing pilotless systems, the Air Force also said it could eventually field swarms of drones to attack enemy targets.
And it will have to be ready to defend against the same threat, which could become another inexpensive way for insurgents to attack American forces.
Col. Eric Mathewson, who directs the Air Force task force on pilotless aerial systems, said in an interview that the service sketched its vision to encourage contractors and university researchers to help create the technologies.
Military contractors have already been rushing to expand in what promises to remain a prime growth area even as Pentagon budgets tighten.
In the last decade, the use of remotely piloted planes has soared in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Air Force and the Central Intelligence Agency have fielded Cessna-size drones, called Predators and Reapers, to send back video of insurgent activity and mount missile attacks.
Army units have used hand-launched models, which look like toy planes, to peer over hills or buildings. Other drones monitor the seas and eavesdrop from high altitudes, much like the storied U-2 spy planes.
But many of the systems have been rushed out in an "almost reactive" fashion, Colonel Mathewson said.
"At the same time, we have put industry and academia at a disadvantage because we haven't told them where we're going," he said. "So we wanted to describe the future, so they could help us find the solutions."
Colonel Mathewson said the goal was to create economical alternatives for most Air Force missions. In that sense, the plan - which was approved by Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley and Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, the Air Force chief of staff - helps cement a major cultural change at the service, where many pilots initially recoiled at the idea of drones.
Colonel Mathewson said the service would like to create modular craft - basic airframes that could be easily configured for different missions.
The report envisions a family ranging from "nano"-size drones that could flit inside buildings like moths to gather intelligence, to large aircraft that could be used as strategic bombers or aerial refueling tankers. Midsize drones could act like jet fighters, attacking other planes or ground targets and jamming enemy communications.
The changes will begin with enhancements of current systems, Colonel Mathewson said. The more exotic changes would come from 2020 through the 2040s.
Perhaps the most controversial is the idea of drones swarming on attack. Advances in computing power could enable them to mount preprogrammed attacks on their own, though that would be a difficult legal and ethical barrier for the military to cross.
But before long, even a single insurgent could dispatch several small drones at once. Referring to the improvised explosive devices that insurgents have planted like mines in Iraq and Afghanistan, the report warned that the next inexpensive threat to American troops could be "an airborne I.E.D."
- Posted in
61 Comments so far
Show AllAm I the only one that sees a Big Brother scenario behind this?
bb has been with us for some time now.........
and they were talking about putting cameras/recorders in bees or flies or something to spy inside buildings a long time ago................
don't worrry, they'll all get squashed or trodden on.................
Yeah, but the moment you discover and swat an electronic spy-moth in your home, the loss-of-signal will be immediated interpreted as proof that you are a terrorist, automatically triggering a hellfire missle strike - from a reaper drone already circling overhead.
You can't win against this degree of evil.
ok. how about we trap them in a jar (they wouldn't be able to hear but the signal might still work)................???
or we just let them out the window..................
or we use sign language..............
or big blackboards..............
Enemies? What enemies?
I am so thankful that they do not teach ethics in our engineering and military schools, otherwise we would never have such wonderful programs as these...
I am afraid that "American ethics" is becoming just as much of an oxymoron as "military intelligence" and "western civilization".
But is anyone surprised considering the fact that Torture is touted as a good thing from our esteemed leaders?
... though that would be a difficult legal and ethical barrier for the military to cross.
----------------------
is this a punchline to a joke?
Pretty chilling. The electronic moth stuff especially seems far fetched. Thankfully, I've been around long enough to see the rarther poor record of futurists's predictions.
And silly me, In my own futuristic projections, I always thought that by 2040 we would be well on our way to abolishing war.
There have already been reports of "dragonflies", people have seen them and their immediate reaction is "what the f* was that!??"
Not far-fetched at all. The future is now, man!
Electronic moth, far fetched? Why? They already have drones the size of a dragonfly.
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003329.html
Think about all the stuff the military has invented (that we know about), and nothing seems far fetched. An ex-military guy I talked to a few years ago once said, "If you can imagine it, the military has already done it, or will."
The sky is the limit with these guys. No amount of paranoia is too much for them.
Yes, I have much the same interpretation. Whenever the public is made aware of such technology, you can bet the military and CIA have already been using it for some time.
Building a working model of a dragonfly, and making one of a smaller insect with all the AI computing power and battery power necessary to indepedently navigate into and around a building and collect images and sound while remaining undetected. Sorry, not possible.
Nonsense.
It's just a matter of continuing developments in miniaturization. Are you not aware of nanotechnology? People are already building molecular machines.
And Moore's Law (doubling computing power per unit of volume approximately every 18 months) still seems to be holding up pretty well. i'm keyboarding on a Mac Book that is only a bit larger than the place mat it sits on, yet is far more powerful than the original ENIAC computer that filled a very large room.
You may remain in denial but there is NO technical block to the development of such technologies. And apparently no social, political or ethical blocks either...
Well put, webwalk.
There are three important, observable, scientific events transpiring now and since the beginning of time: Acceleration, Ephemeralization, and Precession.
Acceleration is obvious. Everything is speeding up. I asked a precocious 7-year-old if he felt that this year had occurred faster than last year. Without hesitation he said, "of course".
Ephemeralization is the concept of "more with less". As technological advances accelerate, at first humans try to make them bigger, but as seemingly disparate artifacts and tools become more advanced and implemented into design, everything becomes smaller and more efficient.
Precession is an evolutionary advancement that takes place inadvertently and naturally, at a perpendicular angle to the conscious motivation. For example, a honeybee flies forward into a flower to collect honey, however, at right angles to its stinger, the insect gathers pollen which is then spread about inadvertently to other flowers as it goes about its instinctual business of beehive-building.
Can you give some examples of what you are talking about? The acceleration process is related to capitalist economics and its requirement of ever accelerating production of goods and services. This translated to an ever acceleration in the pace of life. The perception of years getting shorter as one ages is a natural psychological one - each year becomes a smaller percentage of total span of ones memory.
I don't see much "ephermeralization" (sounds more like Andy Warhol's dictum). Everything is getting bigger and less efficient - 4000 lb cars to carry 150 lb payloads, 5000 sq ft houses when 1000 sq ft used to be fine, sprawling suburban infrastructure, accelerating energy usage.
When I was young, it was predicted that by now, we would all have flying cars, all commercial airliners would be supersonic or hypersonic space planes, we would have a permanent human presence on the Moon and Mars, all our food would be synthesized from plankton from the sea - solving the problem of human hunger forever, all human reproduction would be regulated by eugenic and population control authorities, and we would all work less than 20 hours a week and enjoy enormous amounts of leisure - chores at home would all be done by robots and we would enjoy vacations in space. All of this would powered by nuclear power plants that would prodce electricity too cheap to meter. Everyone would live to be 100.
Anyone 50 years of age or older remembers this stuff - Walter Chronkite talked about it on the program "the 21st Century", none of these things came true. Futurism always takes the short term trends in the current "go-go" sector of the economy, then way, way overpredicts - beyond the laws of physics and practicality.
A fly-sized electronic spy would have to have artificial intelligence abilities far beyond anything an actual insect acquired over 500 million years of evolution. - it would also have to have a power source far more efficient than anything out there. Moore's Law is not a physical law - it is just capitalist hype - it will hit a limit soon - dictated by physical laws such as quantum mechanics. Most so-called 'nanotechnology" is just another capitalist futurist buzzword. I work for MSHA and live in Pittsbugh where the the premier instituton in robotics and computer science is located, the Carnegie Mellon University Robotics Institute. One of the cutting edge things they were developing was a robot to use in mine rescues. I was distinctly unimpressed with what they have developed so far.
Man-made molecular machines are still purely speculative at this point - I just checked the Wikipedia article on the subject - not much there.
and "star wars"... never stopped them from spending money on it...
mike malloy stated this week... it's time... for... "strategic pullback" by the empire...
"Sorry, not possible."
I wish it weren't possible too, but it is and will most likely be done.
There are countless things that we live with in our lives today that were thought not possible just a few years ago.
It is as it is. We need to deal with what is and what will most likely be and go from there.
"Perhaps the most controversial is the idea of drones swarming on attack. Advances in computing power could enable them to mount preprogrammed attacks on their own, though that would be a difficult legal and ethical barrier for the military to cross."
HaHaHaHaHa! Since when has the military had "ethical" problems with any "weapons system"?--from muskets to biological and chemical warfare (Ft. Detrich being the chief facility for such)to nuclear weapons the military boys can never have enough "toys" with which to kill people and destroy things.
Eventually, others will obtain this technology and turn it against the United States--just watch it happen.
Poet
Future Holds Swarms of Suicide Bombers
These devises do exist and fly size have been used to listen in to conversations in our middle east wars.
There is no doubt in my mind that they have been used here in our country to listen into what ever meetings they want. Quite simply the problem here is having them discovered and the investigation that would follow.
Where are our youth who have been brought up with and create this technology and should be creating counter measures for these devises?
Oh that's right they are picking out man bags at the mall.
Buggered~
Ohhh, this is just an awesome report.
I'm starting a bug collection again, just like I did in 2nd grade.
Let's fight 'em there so we don't have to fight 'em here. Let's fight 'em here so we don't have to fight 'em there. Let's fight 'em here, let's fight there, let's fight them everywhere. Let's just fight fight fight and fight.
FUCKING AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You're gonna need some pretty strong pushpins.
Pure insanity! The military industrial complex, a very large part of the US, is an aberration of the common and decent human being. In theological terminology they can be identified by the four letter word...EVIL.
Cue "Terminator" theme music.
Poll details: Majority in US oppose both wars
By The Associated Press
A majority of Americans oppose both the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq, though the war in Afghanistan is a little more popular. Here are details:
OVERALL RESULTS: 34 percent favor the war in Iraq and 63 percent are opposed; 44 percent favor the war in Afghanistan and 53 percent are opposed.
PARTISAN DIFFERENCES: 64 percent of Republicans are in favor of the war in Iraq and just 10 percent of Democrats are; 66 percent of Republicans favor the war in Afghanistan, as do 26 percent of Democrats.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/44707
** I wonder why the Republicans hate Obama so much when he's giving them the gift of war they approve so strongly? And why do Democrats approve him overwhelmingly?
Good question, Cygnus. Perhaps the answer is that you are assuming rational thinking from Americans. Remove that assumption and try again.
I never thought I would find Orwell's 1984 lacking in imagination. But then Shrub would become suddenly articulate when describing revenge, torture and killing and the military would show startling ingenuity when devising ways to spy and wipe out populations. Just goes to show, everyone has their areas of talent.
Maybe the world would be safer if science fiction writers would keep their visionary ideas to themselves.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
"Maybe the world would be safer if science fiction writers would keep their visionary ideas to themselves."
I know this statement was intended with tongue firmly implanted in cheek. But please consider that 'visionary ideas' are what give us the only hope of escaping our present, self-annihilating condition.
The question really is how to separate and successfully employ technological advancements that equitably enhance the living conditions of our species and throw out the ideas that lead to our destruction.
Nice little handheld electronic flyswatters are available through I.P.M. supply houses.You can wave them though an attacking swarm of "nano-gnats" and the electromagnetic field will fry them.A portable E.M.P. generator(pulse bazooka)T.M.pending, might be available soon to enhance your robotic pest control arsenal.Currently I suggest 22 cal. bird shot in a target pistol.As for crawling "nano-bots" breast tape along the door jambs and windowsills might work.This opens up a whole new field for Integrated Pest Management specialists and consultants.What a wonderful investment of tax dollars for the global market place! peace
... to be a fly on the wall at DARPA would be interesting
"But before long, even a single insurgent could dispatch several small drones at once. Referring to the improvised explosive devices that insurgents have planted like mines in Iraq and Afghanistan, the report warned that the next inexpensive threat to American troops could be 'an airborne IED.'"
Inexpensive?
Are you shitting me?
Is the Pentagon serious about trying to market development of drone and counter-drone hi tech technology to American tax payers by fear mongering us about such futuristic fantasy battlefield scenarios?
Apparently so. At least the New York Times considers this real world news that's fit to print.
Bill from Saginaw
"But before long, even a single insurgent could dispatch several small drones at once. Referring to the improvised explosive devices that insurgents have planted like mines in Iraq and Afghanistan, the report warned that the next inexpensive threat to American troops could be "an airborne I.E.D.""
Yeah, it could be inexpensive Bill. Did you ever play with those remote controlled toy planes when you were a lad? I would not be suprised if someone with the knowledge of electronics could cobble together some Japanese designed toy plane with a bomb strapped to it. Perhaps built by underage Chinese workers. Don't tell me nobody has thought of that?
It works like this: American workers pay taxes so that the American upperclass can get rich designing and selling f23s or mega-battleships or whatever. then the technology trickles down to things like velcro and cheap drome swarms. Then the poor saps of US taxpayers have to shell out again so the rich will sell them force-fields or ray-guns or whatever to protect the "national interest".
In other advanced countries, what we do is spend our finite tax dollars, not on new weapons, but on things like universal health care (I recommend it).
RC aeromodeling is hardly just something kids do. It is a sopisticated hobby that a lot of old farts, but (like ham radio and other technical hobbies) few young people are getting into.
But, considering the limited range and limited amount of explosives one can fit on even a jumbo-scale model plane, I really don't see the scary threat.
Egad, bubonic bugs! Quick, Henry, the FLIT!
Any Buddhist will say that making killing machines is not the right livelihood.
Mass anthrax mailings from the President of Vice are cheaper.
When the boys at the Pentagon put their minds to something they really shine.
We'll never stray from fossil feuls. The MIC would be up shits creek. Profits would decline big time if they had to slow down making their killing machines.
On the other hand, these are the guys who should be given the task of designing a car that runs on spring water, compressed air, whatever. But that will never happen anytime soon. Not with this government. Not in our lifetime.
We walked on the moon 40 years ago, survive for months in space now, and discovered how to create a life of flesh and blood by cloning some cells, yet nobody can figure out how to seriously replace fossil fuels.
As long as huge profits can be made, the status quo is firmly in place.
We have nuclear proliferation because we (the club) have them and they don't.
The second half of that is the fact that we use our nuclear technology when they have none. (Israel/Lebanon = bunker busters with atomic warheads)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/
index.php?context=va&aid=3813
So yea, if we escalate our war and occupation using new killing technology, we can only expect such a reaction.
Well, I see why You changed the headline from the frontpage to the article.
Now we are looking at some Airforce personal lots of militarists and even more patriots 'that want a future with moth size drones.
Too much B-picture science fiction.
The Question is: DO WE want a future that is even crappier than the one we have managed to create for our Selves already?
Are We not enough in trouble as it is, do We really need some sort of invitation in form of a mushroom cloud, to get the idea?
Militarism kills everything, not just 'enemies' and 'tough luck' civilians. Skies burned, waters poisened, earth polluted for thousands of years to come.
It is incomprehensible to me how people can be so delusional as in going down the gutter and not removing the one cancer from the body of society that causes its destruction - militarism.
Equally incomprehensible is the argument that 'National Security' requires a standing army. The US is in trouble BECAUSE of its militarism, which in turn generates so called 'enemies' that are a proclaimed threat to 'National Security'.
Maybe it is much better for the world if the US follows the path of the USSR.
Russia is arguably a better place to live in now than it was as the USSR.
There are Russian tourists on Hawai'i and some numbers live on Maui.
So let me rather ponder how we will name the follow up of the former 'United States of America'. Not an easy task once You realize that all names related to the USA are factually incorrect. America? Where does that come from? Indians? Where does that come from?
So the idea is to pick a name that tells that we don't drone your country. Even though the other way around sounds better. 'Dronistan'.
Let's call the USA from now simply 'Utopia'. With so many people not living in the now, but pondering how to kill, spy and oppress people in the 'future', 'Paranoia' might equally work. Or 'Insania'.
USA You Are Your Own Greatest Enemy.
You found Your Master in Yourself.
Enjoy the fight.
Amerigo Vespucci, if my memory serves, Italian Explorer. peace
Correct. You get a gold star.
Yup! Congratulations! You receive a free
Wish. May be expressed anytime from Now on
and shall always be voiced with positive
intend. For additional Wishes and details
call: It's Just Karma!
:-)
The idea was to make aware of the fact, that
this continent was baptised by people other
than the one's who called it Their Home for
time before. It's one form of name calling.
New England! Los Angeles, San Francisco and
what not all over the planet. People should
be able to change their country's name in a
convention as much as their own.
Even though who knows what name they would
come up with here...
When the military runs out of oil it will use nuclear power. Yes nuclear power is dirty in several way but so is DU and that has not stopped the military.
Why not put control collars on all persons in the country under interdiction. They would be wireless network devices with GPS. Then he military would know the location and movement of every person in the zone. They could also include explosives so that anyone could be killed at the press of a button. This is so much more direct than airplanes. Why we could do the same in the homeland to protect the owning/ruling class from the people/villains. Villains from the English word for villagers.
I believe I saw the phrase 'economical alternatives' in the article. Does this mean that there will be more money for education and health care?
No, it means it's cheaper to shoot those who insist on it.
The military probably coopted the idea from phillip Pullman's Golden Compass trilogy...
The insurgents won't have these until after they hit Walmart.
Scary - and an obvious follow-up on what's been happening.
Economical ways and war don't really go together. But what the heck, economical killing will be our new mantra.
In order to make a case for ordering anti-drone weapons will the Pentagon supply the insurgrents in Afghanistan and Pakistan with drones? And then provide them with the capability of neutralizing our new anti-drone weaponry? And then will the Pentagon ask for bids on a system to knock out this anti-drone neutralizer, and so on and so forth? Just think, all this waste and destruction, when all that it'll take to stop the bloodshed is troops out now along with justice for the Palestinian people.
You've got the picture. Keep up the market for weapons and anti-weapons weapons.
Joe
This is exactly the business paradigm our form of state capitalism (remember nazi Germany?) would be most likely to deploy. The ultimate Market: stuff produced for the purpose of destroying itself & others & having to be replaced, endlessly (at the expense of the public purse, of course, and for the profit of the corporations).
Why does socialism scare people when we've already seen what capitalism leads to?