<![CDATA[Gizmodo: mq-9]]> http://tags.gizmodo.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gizmodo.com.png <![CDATA[Gizmodo: mq-9]]> http://gizmodo.com/tag/mq9 http://gizmodo.com/tag/mq9 <![CDATA[Runaway Drone Shot Out of Sky]]> An MQ-9 Reaper drone's fail-safe programming failed and it rushed through Afghanistan's airspace on Sunday. The US Air Force simply responded by sending a manned plane to shoot it down. Turns out this isn't all that uncommon.

Apparently the pilots of an unmanned, but armed, MQ-9 Reaper drone lost control of the UAV a few days ago. The resulting manned mission to take it down was mounted almost immediately and ended successfully before the drone reached the edges of Afghanistan's airspace.

I wonder what would've happened if the Reaper hadn't been shot down. It is typically used for "hunter-killer" missions and targets enemies on the ground. Would it continue a mission like that without operator input?

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles like the Reaper are supposed to be programmed to return to their home bases in case they lose contact with their pilots. There's no explanation as to why the fail-safe didn't kick in for this particular Reaper. Nor is this incident the first time that a UAV has been shot down by intentional friendly fire. What's going on and when can I start to panic? [Aviation Weekly via Popular Science]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5359382&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[First Fully-Unmanned Machine Combat in History Heralds Robotic Apocalypse]]> For the first time in history, an unmanned machine has engaged and destroyed another unmanned machine in real combat. It sounds like science fiction, but it happened a week ago in Iraq, when a MQ-9 Reaper killed a remote controlled vehicle carrying a bomb.

The MQ-9—operated by the 46th Expeditionary Reconnaissance and Attack Squadron—destroyed the RC car using a laser-guided 500-pound GBU-12 bomb in southeast Iraq. The commander of the squadron, Lt. Col. Micah Morgan, said that they "searched for, found, fixed, targeted and destroyed a [threat] with just one aircraft."

With an entire wing of UAVs in the US Air Force, we won't be surprised to see full-scale unmanned and robotic battles in the near future. The question is: if nobody is going to die—except probably civilians on the ground—what's the bloody point of real war? Why not just organize a videogame league and get over with it? [Aviation Week]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5042370&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[First All-UAV Air Force Combat Wing Takes to the Skies Sans Pilots Over Iraq]]> Last week, the 174th Air Force Fighter Wing flew its last manned combat sortie over Iraq in F-16s, which have now been mothballed in favor of MQ-9 Reapers. This makes it the first combat-specific wing to ditch conventional aircraft entirely and toward a force of all unmanned robo-drones piloted from the ground. Welcome to the Skynet era, everyone!

There are a few Wings currently manned by Predator UAVs, which can indeed carry Hellfire missiles, but unlike the Reaper, their main mission is reconnaissance. Quite the contrary, the Reaper is the first true hunter-killer UAV, and its 66-foot wingspan and the ability to carry up to 1.5 tons of laser-guided bombs and other ordnances makes the Predator look like a fluttering sparrow.

And over Iraq, the Reaper can do the targeting-pod recon and close-air support that manned jets most commonly find themselves tasked with at a fraction of the cost (Reapers cost $18 million each, compared to three times that much for an F-16). Not to mention without the operational expenses or potential danger to the pilots, who can be in Las Vegas munching Taco Bell with their families. [Strategy Page via /.]

]]>
http://gizmodo.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5036124&view=rss&microfeed=true