Imagine being able to deploy a remotely controllable squadron of unmanned planes (drones) that can view the activity on the ground from 10,000 feet or higher with incredible clarity, day or night.
These planes are able to remain aloft and stationary for up to 24 hours at a time, and at that height, are virtually invisible and make no noise.
Not merely eyes in the sky, these drones can fire laser-controlled 500 pound bombs, all directed from a central command center thousands of miles away.
You can see how such an approach would change the game, militarily speaking.
But while it all sounds like science fiction, would it surprise you to know that next year is actually going to be the first time that we (the United States Air Force) are buying more of these unmanned planes (known an Predator and Reaper) than manned ones? Blew my mind.
Surreal, but real. Watch the video below from ‘Drones: America's New Air Force’ (on Sunday’s '60 Minutes'), and see for yourself.
Excerpt: From 10,000 feet above, the Predator was able to zoom in and send back a very precise image of Logan and the 60 Minutes team standing on the grounds of Creech Air Force Base. The Predator couldn't be heard or seen by the team, even though they knew the exact whereabouts of the drone. The Predator's camera even followed the 60 Minutes team as they drove off the base's flight line. It's this ability that makes it difficult for enemy fighters to escape.
Mark, FYI - The makers of drones are trying to have sell these to state govs for patrolling highways to catch speeders. Likely, they will spin it in the public as method to increase safety, road side assistance response time, etc. It costs a lot to higher people with pensions, if they can automate the system it will be huge savings.
Posted by: samaj | May 12, 2009 at 07:47 AM
Thanks, James. One direction I was going to go with this post was the whole brilliant pebbles concept that replaced star wars defense initiative; namely that you could use thousands of smallish devices to build a security "fabric" of sorts that could be applied any number of ways - from policy enforcement to big brother snooping to air force 2.0.
If you ever have a chance, check out Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson, which applies some of these concepts down to the nanotechnology level.
Posted by: Mark Sigal | May 12, 2009 at 11:51 AM
While the physical implications of this is interesting, I find the metaphysical/ideological problems the real issue. Like Vietnam and Iraq, besides in open warfare, how does one discern allegiance of individuals?
This technology demonstrates our mastery of the physical level, but continues to market on the illusion that greater physical mastery can overcome the heart issues. Even nanotech. will struggle to account for this gap.
Posted by: Eric Chang | June 13, 2009 at 03:29 AM
@Eric, war sucks but you can argue this one both ways. Removed (somewhat) from the fog of war, you can make less emotional, more data rich, pragmatic decisions. Obviously, the counter is that when you don't have to look in people's eyes before you kill them, you can be less human.
Posted by: Mark Sigal | June 15, 2009 at 02:25 PM