"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

The military is having enough difficulty staffing its UAV operations
as it is. Adding the "equitable" headset you suggest, while adding
more realism to UAV operations, may further reduce pilot interest in
them.

Is that not a good thing? If these "pilots" aren't prepared to take
personal responsibility for their own actions, then they have no
business being "in the sky" with those of us who do.

But it's all about money, as usual. It seems the UAV manufacturers
and NASA feel that UAVs offer something piloted aircraft don't. I
can't see how civil UAV operations with a ground based crew of 7 can
possibly provide a financial incentive for their operators. And one
mishap will put the final stake in civil UAV operation's heart as far
as the flying public is concerned. What am I missing?

I can see UAVs being useful to the military. I can see UAVs in
civilian trial uses being of interest to the military. Regardless of the
eventual financial benefits of civilian use (presumably there might
be some), adoption of this technology in the NAS is at variance
with existing rules for pilot certification, and the reasons why these
rules came about. It'll be very interesting to see how these differing
concepts of what constitutes a "pilot" get reconciled.