Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Robot X-47B stealth bomber test flight

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 02:41 PM
Original message
Robot X-47B stealth bomber test flight
Source: BBC

By Dan Whitworth
Newsbeat technology reporter

Military chiefs in America say a new, unmanned stealth bomber has carried out its first test flight.

The X-47B jet is being designed by weapons manufacturer Northrop Grumman for the US Navy.

It was in the air for 29 minutes during its maiden flight and reached an altitude of 5,000 feet.

Officials say it will help form part of a new generation of unmanned drones and works like a smaller version of the B-2 Stealth Bomber.


Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/12381538



Great, another flying Batmobile to inflict collateral damage while remaining invisible to radar -- and thus deniable. I'm sure it's worth the money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. We need an international agreement that robotic vehicles cant be above a certain size
Edited on Mon Feb-07-11 02:53 PM by DJ13
I want the world depicted in the Terminator movies to remain a piece of fiction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. It's the small ones you should worry about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obxhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. If you didn't see it, it was never there.
Regardless of the carnage on the ground.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HankyDubs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. hey that's great
obviously the military industrial complex is tightening its belt just like everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. Pilots will be a thing of the past one day
I'm not boarding the first remote piloted commercial aircraft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laconicsax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. You're in luck.
That plane crashed in 1998

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5NXpar4Ouw

Airbus blamed the crash of its fully automated plane on pilot error and denied that the automation system was flawed in any way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. 1. That crash was from 1998
2. It was during an airshow with a low speed fly-by.

3. It was a fly-by-wire plane, as are all modern planes. I am not sure where you get "fully automated" from. Do you mean there was a glitch in the fly-by-wire system? There were pilots on the plane flying the thing.

4. Better get used to robot planes. They will eventually be safer. The real test will be robot semi-trucks. Those are coming too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laconicsax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. It was a demonstration of the computer-controlled autopilot.
The computer was flying the plane, the pilot's inputs were overridden, the plane crashed, and Airbus blamed the pilot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Plucketeer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. Budget cuts???
What? Where? Surely not to these life-serving marvels! :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. Skynet.
I have been overdosing on Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles.

The last episode I watched, they led the audience to believe that the various drone airplanes will be soon part of skynet.

aka hunter/killers (terminator vernacular)

If I took various mind altering drugs in copious amounts, I would now go off on a conspiracy rant, but alas, glen beck corners the market in that horse shit these days. LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Finally, a stealth bomber that eats old peoples' medicine for fuel. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
10. Note to the military: Let's keep these things remotely piloted and not start introducing A.I. into..
their control systems....mmkay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-11 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. You mean like this one?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bossy22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
12. so would you rather have something that can easily be shot down by air defenses?
Edited on Tue Feb-08-11 08:58 AM by bossy22
seems like a waste of money to me. I don't think that the purpose of the stealth on this aircraft is so they can cause collateral damage with impunity. I applaud this kind of technology because it will allowo ur carriers to operate farther from shore and therefore farther from danger
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nalnn Donating Member (528 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I agree
While I do agree that this is a very precise weapon by design and intended to reduce collateral damage, I have to wonder:

Remember Maxim, Nobel? Their most famous inventions were intended (at least Maxim's(machinegun), not sure about Nobel's(TNT)) to reduce the effect of wars. Instead, the opposite happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bossy22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Maxim's hopes for the machine guns
was that it would make war so terrible that it would be avoided- it didnt work. Though i agree that such fear is legitimate, we must also realize that the same thing was said for about nuclear weapons- and no matter how you feel, there hasnt been a true world war since nuclear weapons became a part of world powers's arsenals.

My hopes is that this allows us to keep american soldiers farther from danger
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnroshan Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-08-11 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
16. I don't think we'll ever learn.

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."

Dwight D. Eisenhower

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 18th 2024, 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC