131–140 of 141 posts
Having an unencrypted video broadcast on a military drone is just a dumb idea by whoever manufactured it. Encryption would seem to be the most minimal requirement for such an application.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, they are both subsonic aircraft and have a very similar top speed. The F117, however, has a larger radar cross signature, which makes it appear as a larger aircraft than the B2 in a radar return.
Closest thing I can find to a cite is [1] which indicates they have similar sized returns, about the size of a hummingbird (!). [1] http://www.answers.com/topic/stealth-technology
http://www.deagel.com/Long-Range-Attack-Aircraft/B-2A-Spirit... http://www.deagel.com/Strike-and-Fighter-Aircraft/F-117A-Nig...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OK, so they shot a smaller, faster moving target. The original point still stands. It was an F-117. Yes, most "F" aircraft are air-to-air fighter aircraft. However F-117 is mostly used to attack ground targets, so it's "F" should be more like an "A" (If you want to nitpick that is ;-) )
The F designation was used to get more highly qualified pilots. (Lots of pilots would rather fly an "F" than an "A")
It's also not the first attack aircraft to carry a fighter designation; the F-111 long-range attack aircraft also carried that designation (though in that case it was because the aircraft was originally meant, in part, to fill an Naval air-defense fighter role).
the U.S. military found pirated drone video feeds on other militant laptops What is the meaning of "pirated" here? Are they going to sue militants for copyright infringement?
Having an unencrypted video broadcast on a military drone is just a dumb idea by whoever manufactured it. Encryption would seem to be the most minimal requirement for such an application.
I agree that the transmission should be encrypted, but I think the usefulness of the video feed to insurgents is overstated. You can hear and see the drones overhead, so it is pretty clear if your area is under surveillance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope, instead of merely listening in, the insurgents start to jam and crash the drones. Sorry, but a different view needs to be represented. To a lot of people the foreign occupation of Iraq is a grave injustice, not just some big game.
While I want the US to pull out of Iraq as much as anybody, I think that you have to dead in the skull to root for the insurgents. Most of the problems in Iraq right now are primarily due to religious extremists terrorizing the locals and fighting with Americans to push their agendas. No matter how bad Iraq is now, it will be worse off if these people take over.
So? The concept of American responsibility for the well-being of foreign citizens is the root of this whole war problem. Let my people go!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trick is: who better to run a military contractor than former military men? Who better to run a food company than someone who has worked in the USDA? These are natural career paths for those individuals that make perfect, natural sense and --in and of themselves-- aren't a real issue. The real issue is that our government can too easily reward individual companies or industry groups with hand-outs. If a single ge…
> Who better to run a food company than someone who has worked in the USDA? Are you asking as the food company, or as the proverbial "concerned citizen?" Because I would want the USDA to work for me, since I am paying my taxes. I want it to do its job and protect me from Kraft selling me salmonela infested cookie dough. It is hard for USDA to do that when they expect to be hired by Kraft and be payed large bonuses an…
I'd prefer we have qualified people in public office. Proven managers, subject-matter experts, etc. If we erect a wall between private industry and public service, we're not going to get that.
If there's a problem with the director of the USDA being able to let his former-employer slide, that's a separate problem than where (s)he came from or is going. I'd prefer we deal with that, than try to police people's careers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All rifles do this a bit; snipers/designated marksmen get very accustomed to their personal weapons, and need to take time to re-acclimatize with any other rifle. For a regular line infantryman in a modern army who is mainly using his rifle for suppressive fire it doesn't significantly reduce his effectiveness.
I'm guessing this is why the Riflemen's Creed ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Creed ) is so important?
War machine sending data through unprotected channel? In XXI century? After two world wars and a cold war? How?