|
 |
From: Lance (UAV Research and Ideas)
Date: 30 Jul 2003
Time: 03:11:53
Remote Name: 66.82.54.52
Possible UAV materials are infinite. Foam, Composite, balsa wood, etc. I propose some late breaking technology and newer materials, ceramic coatings and or UAVs built from photorefractive composites? http://www.tech-db.ru/istc/db/pra.nsf/pran/1273 . Why? Weight, stealth, parasite drag, induced drag, boundary layers, and performance. I like this idea; http://www.aist-nara.ac.jp/~rieken/ . Then there are some really awesome practitioners, which have it all figured out; http://www.onventus-uav.net . Even Plastics are used in UAVs especially the smaller ones; http://plastics.about.com/ . The larger UAV are made out of just about anything you can imagine; http://www.hamiltonaerospace.com/uav.htm . We are not the only ones learning about what to make these out of and we are not the only country capable of making them http://www.sejong.edu/06_res/02_tech.html . So it is important to be the best at it and have ways to shoot down enemy UAVs. Which of course have been topics of conversation on this board. As technology progresses, your enemy will have the same tools so when you invent something you have to know how to defeat it too. Foreign country UAV programs have been established http://www.strikenet.js.mil/PAO/tuav/tuav2000/joint_international_programs.htm for the betterment of NATO Countries and UN participants. But what about hostile or potentially hostile nations, they have scientists too. Unmanned Flight is now capable in nearly any current aircraft with the exception of the skill necessary to fly and take-off in a Ryan Monoplane. If you think for one second that North Korea does not have UAVs of some type to augment their arsenal of Ballistic capable missiles think again. They trade with China and Japan and both have established programs. Even Saddam had a UAV type flying bomb. These technologies are available and are or have been in all the arsenals of the Axis of Evil Countries. http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/030408.htm . I am not the only person worried of this. UAVs that we build need to be light weight, good payload, stealthy and agile. But the enemy due to cost may decide to build a huge number of cheap units and bet on the numbers rather than survivability. Or take a different approach to the notion of single mission non-recovery theory as many academics have eluded to in the reports online. I would have to agree that money to buy the units is a big factor but if a UAV does not do very much in the way of surveillance or ordinance delivery then a smart bomb maybe a better way to go once air defenses have been taken out of the equation. It depends how many targets, time frame and economies of scale when it comes to the logistical costs of movements of people, fuel, food, weapons and power. Every mission should have a cost benefit and a goal oriented solution, that of course being the name of the game, to win it. UAVs provide options, lower costs over all and smart planning and curtail loss of life on both sides. This especially important during regime changes when you goal is to provoke change in leadership not in destroying vast amounts of individual human life, no matter what amount of value is placed on it by the culture opposing your political will. Never the less, winning at all costs goes without saying, losing sucks and defeat or retreat cannot be an option for our team. UAVs are here to stay and will require proper funding, such R and D will come back ten fold to mankind in potential commercial uses for moving freight within and out side our own atmosphere, for doing jobs in agriculture, short and small delivery and of course the future of air travel pilot less commercial aircraft much the same as the NYC subways and people movers across the country and throughout the world.
|
|
©Copyright 1996-. All rights reserved.
Site hosted by CCG
Site design by CCG Studio
DISCLAIMER:
Although we exert control over all articles written by our staff and
consultants, we are in no way able to assure the accuracy of any content generated by our
readers. Any information or advice provided by our readers should be used
cautiously, and should be considered as an opinion of such, and not the views, ideas,
opinions, or advice of Washguy.com. Washguy.com., its staff, and consultants
shall in no way be held liable or responsible for any false or misleading information or
injurious advice obtained from our readers, including any information posted to this
Bulletin Board forum. Any information or advice obtained from other readers
through Bulletin Board postings shall be used at the reader's own risk. The
Bulletin Board forum functions as a discussion group for the exchange of views,
information and opinions on issues related to the Car Wash Guys, Franchising and their
associated topics. Washguy.com, its staff, and consultants will not be held
liable for any incidental or consequential loss or damage sustained as a result of this
information or advice. No user shall be entitled to claim detrimental
reliance on any views received from the staff, consultants or other readers.
By using this Bulletin Board and it's related forums, you agree to indemnify and hold
Washguy.com, its staff and consultants harmless from any claims arising as a result of
your use of the information or materials you download from or upload to the Bulletin
Board.
