Jump to content

Talk:Unmanned combat aerial vehicle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.233.213.183 (talk) at 17:17, 11 December 2010 (→‎Al-Kaida loves UCAVs! Beijing too and Putin is also happy.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAviation: Aircraft Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
B checklist
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the aircraft project.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Aviation Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Military aviation task force

You're discussing one particular example of an UCAV as though it were the only UCAV ever. For instance, "The Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) is a millitary aircraft currently under developement of the USA's DARPA..." should be rewritten as "One example of an Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) is a military aircraft currently under development by the USA's DARPA...", and so on. PML.

Problem fixed. Impi 12:07, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

UAV is not UCAV!

seems like there are a lot of UAVs in the list (Saab types?). This list is about combat drones (UCAV) and combat drones technology demo (UCAVTD) not tactical drones (UAV/TUAV)! please check your entries and remove the UAV/TUAV thanks. Shame On You 16:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Kaida loves UCAVs! Beijing too and Putin is also happy.

The big benefit of UCAVs is that it closes the gap between superpowers and small countries. Right now the difference between US and Swaziland military might is a few thousands tanks, fighter-bombers and a 400-strong navy, manned by over a million convincedly patriotic yankees. Only one in every 100,000 GI Joe is susceptible to islamic/chinese/russian brainwash.

After robot warcrafts appear, however, the difference in power will be just a few l44t persons with laptops and folding umbrella antenna dishes. If Swaziland has better hackers, they can breach military satcoms and turn the american robot crafts against their masters. It is stupid of USA to discard its undisputed leadership in manned military might for dumb robots. In contrast to human soldiers who are individuals and have souls, all robots are alike or the same. One is hacked, all of them are hacked, because the method is the same. This will bring the fall of the free world as we know it. BTW, Russia has the best hackers in the world, their programmers are very good. 81.0.68.145 20:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Russia has the best hackers eh? That could be disputed. While I agre that hacking could become a large part of future combat scenarios and something you should be prepared against. I don't agre with sending sons and daughters to their death for plots of land.
Simply put networks are already important enough that if your network is breached as bad as in the senario given, you would still lose a war today as any GPS guided missile would be rendered useless and the opposing force would likely be able to track troop movement and listen on your "secure" broadcasts. If a senario like yours ever occurred then the so called "superpower" deserves to lose since such a mistake is unforgivable.
Sorry for being three years to late but I really needed to vent this as I can't stand US patriots that doesn't realize that America is not the only country in the world and seems to think that every other country they do acknowledge is out to get to them. On a second note: I get your prejudice towards China and Rusia considering USA's history but what exactly is your problem with Swaziland? 81.233.213.183 (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC) PS It is spelled 1337. DS[reply]

Chinese J-5s + J-6s + J-7s ---> UCAVs?

Where can I find more information about Chinese J-5s, J-6s & J-7s becoming UCAVs? can anyone point me to the right direction? Thank you TheAsianGURU 19:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would a dedicated air-to-ground UAV be a UCAV or not?

The Mikoyan Skat is a dedicated air-to-ground platform, so is it still a UCAV, despite the lack of air-to-air capabilities? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CeeWhy2 (talkcontribs) 10:21, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

The image Image:NEUROn-CG-concept-112005-dassault.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]