Piloting aircraft appears to be headed to for same fate as wagon wrights and wheel wrights... historically important, but of little use in contemporary (or future) technology.
Maybe that's a direction CAP should embrace.
Maybe he was thinking of using big drones with hooks, asking cadets to don some sort of web harness, and hooking cadets to drones...?
Kinda hard to give Cadet O-Flights in a Drone.... And O-Flights are a required part of the Cadet Program.
I definitely could see the use of sUAVs to augment ground searches, as part 107 only allows for the "crew" to be in actual visual contact with the device. "Remote Pilot/crew member" could be a new ground team specialty...
Piloting aircraft appears to be headed to for same fate as wagon wrights and wheel wrights...
Thrawn, I quote from Live2Learn:QuotePiloting aircraft appears to be headed to for same fate as wagon wrights and wheel wrights... Tell me how does this does not mean that "no one is suggesting CAP get away..."Live2 did! Otherwise, do you see "wagon wrights" around? I do not...And Eclipse said "in 5-10 years..."
Eclipse, I was intrigued to see the underlined emphasis in your underlined assertion, "the tech already exists", hoping that you'd provided a link to evidence of same.".
those so called self driving cars are killing people.
GA continues to shrink.....
Not buying that - apples to oranges comparison for one, for another those so called self driving cars are killing people.
Show me an off the shelf, TRL 9 UAS SAR system that's ready for CAP to take over and fly as volunteers.
Quote from: Spam on October 02, 2016, 02:11:45 PMthose so called self driving cars are killing people.Not commenting about the other stuff, but there has only been 1 death associated with the "self-driving"/"autopilot" Tesla car. Even then, evidence seems to point that the semi-truck was mostly at fault for turning in front of the Tesla.
That's what human drivers do (you and I do it every day, when someone pulls into their blind spots without checking).
Recall how excited CAP was about Hyperspectral Imaging, and our wonderful new Gippsland aircraft? Yeah... lets do that again.
For SAR/DR missions, we've not done the systems engineering front end analysis, nor the functional allocations and information analysis, let alone the FMECA, and you're claiming "the tech already exists", and we should start investing in it. Were we to submit a POM through CAP-USAF for such a pipe dream, we'd be laughed at.
My takeaway: its pointless to pursue a Quixotic argument about engineering realities with a powerful ego who seems unassailably convinced that engineering is easy, all the answers are cheap and already solved and risk free, and who thinks that our obvious failure with a developmental and unproven system is not applicable to his belief that CAP can field an as-yet undeveloped UAV SAR system within a handful of years. Unproven, not developed UAV SAR systems, for which "Google it" is the reference. Yeah.
When the AF decides to start retiring planes and not replacing them, then I'll know the writing is on the wall.
Quote from: etodd on October 02, 2016, 10:17:34 PMWhen the AF decides to start retiring planes and not replacing them, then I'll know the writing is on the wall.When Congress stops giving the Air Force money to buy us planes, it will be too late to be coming up with plan B.
Really? Considering how old some of the planes in the fleet are, I'd say we'd last quite a while after that.
Any ideas for Senior only Squadrons in 20 years, 50? What for them once the planes are gone? And the aging pilot population dwindles?
When drones are so easy to use and cheap that every agency has them and we are no longer called for SAR and Aerial Photography ... what will CAP become
My main point was that the last fighter pilot had been born, and I believe I indicated that puts manned flight on a 50-year clock.50 years, not today. Combat systems will likely be the last to be replaced, as much because of social issues as technological ones.50 years ago we hadn't yet stepped foot on the moon, 50 years from now we'll have private colonies on mars, or at least significantexploration because the ability has left the hands of governments and is in the hands of private enterprise. There are now literally hundredsof companies racing for space in the same way NASA did in the 60's. Hundreds. Many feeding off of each other and collaboratingin real-time, and design computers can iterate in weeks what used to take years with slide rulers.Couple that with VR, which is just dipping its toe in the world, finally, in a meaningful way. Sure Candy Crush in 360 surround is what most consumers will use it for, but the real "magic" is industrial design, where today you can walk into virtual spaces you designed and see flaws immediately. Soon you'll be able to feel those objects and flaws, too.VR coupled with autonomous craft will allow people to "travel" via ground and air vehicle in ways that require physical presence today.Yeah, latency, blah, blah. It's an issue today if you want to send a UAV to another continent and have it make life or death decisions.Far less so for teams of SAR people working in the AOR with small FPV drones. Instead of thinking Predator, think the spiders in Minority Report.One person cold cover acres at a time from his car, which drives itself down a road adjacent to a search area (etc., etc.)ELT? With the money and the autoiztion I could build a drone that could home on an ELT today. Me. And I still usually leave globsof solder on the bench when I fix a broken wire. All of the parts already exist today. CAP's issues, on the other hand, are a lot more immediate, thus my 10 year assertion, primarily because it's already in trouble membership and viability-wise, and doesn't have the flexibility to start losing what members and mission it has to autonomous anything.And again, the technology already exists today. Autonomous software in cars will feed autonomous software in everything else, including aircraft(not to mention toasters, pencils, and alarm clocks.Cars are physically capable of driving themselves. Aircraft are physically capable of flying themselves (including commercially), the rest is just details, will , and money.
Quote from: Spam on October 02, 2016, 05:46:51 PMRecall how excited CAP was about Hyperspectral Imaging, and our wonderful new Gippsland aircraft? Yeah... lets do that again.Not even a remotely apt comparison - ARCHER was literally experimental even after adoption, questionable as to whether even a fully-functional system was appropriate for CAP SAR, and then CAP did everything it could to insure it failedbecause of an overly complex system of training and approval needed to even get near the thing, let alone actually use it.I'm sure they exist, but I'm not personally aware of a single actual "find" with it, and many times that wasn't because of the tech, but because getting it to a mission made self-dentistry look like a good idea.Quote from: Spam on October 02, 2016, 05:46:51 PMThere are starting to be anecdotal stories of drone use in SAR popping up after various natural disasters - most of the time off-the-shelf stuff that that was already in hand or someone grabbed from the local big-box. I could go right now, stand on the edge of a flooded residential area, and scan it quickly with an FPV drone and never get my feet wet. Today, with something that coast a couple hundred bucks.FWIW drones have been reconning wild fires during high fire danger periods for about a decade. I saw some video footage from Matthew (Hurricane, that is!) where an off the shelf drone was used to recon flooded areas. The AI is still primitive, however it's coming along nicely. VERY soon there won't be any reason to remember the 238 distinct buttons to push in sequence to do all of the nav and aviation SA functions in our (ha! ha!) "technically advanced" aircraft. Nice analogy, by the way. "Self dentistry", indeed!
There are starting to be anecdotal stories of drone use in SAR popping up after various natural disasters - most of the time off-the-shelf stuff that that was already in hand or someone grabbed from the local big-box. I could go right now, stand on the edge of a flooded residential area, and scan it quickly with an FPV drone and never get my feet wet. Today, with something that coast a couple hundred bucks.
FYI, national directive just came out in the Aux to discontinue any use of drones that anyone has been doing and to not start anything else. However, they did ask for Auxies knowledgeable about drones to join a working group to look at the issue.
"Inventive" doesn't scale. It's easy to sit and talk about making pictures "snap" and doing all sorts of NEAT! NEW! stuff on your own time, but when a national, government connected organization with an actual mission mandate needs to do something, it has to be scalable, affordable, and hardened.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 17, 2016, 08:59:57 PM"Inventive" doesn't scale. It's easy to sit and talk about making pictures "snap" and doing all sorts of NEAT! NEW! stuff on your own time, but when a national, government connected organization with an actual mission mandate needs to do something, it has to be scalable, affordable, and hardened. All of that and... skills must be readily available to operate the nifty tech to produce consistent results to a known standard.
Don't worry, DoD won't come looking for that bonus later.... oh, waitSent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
In the case of the California Guard bonus situation, it appears to be mismanagement and outright fraud on the part of a few recruiters trying to make targets.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 27, 2016, 05:11:04 PMIn the case of the California Guard bonus situation, it appears to be mismanagement and outright fraud on the part of a few recruiters trying to make targets.FTFY - Please don't slime everyone with your overly broad statements.