On Fri, 09 May 2008 22:45:03 GMT, wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2008 21:05:04 GMT, wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 9 May 2008 15:18:48 -0400, "John T"
wrote in
:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


Is there some specific reason the military MUST operate their UAV over
populated areas?

I believe permitting the military to establish a precedent of training
over populated areas is not in the best interest of our citizens.

You are roughly 80 some years too late to "establish a precedent".


Please provide objective evidence that the military has been operating
UAVs over populated areas for 80 years.

The US military has been training over populated areas since not too
long after the invention of the airplane.


Perhaps, but that doesn't address my opinion about military UAV
operations.

OK, if you want to be explicit and limit the discussion to UAV's,
what is the diffence between a civilian R/C airplane and a military
UAV other than the UAV is built to mil spec, totally tested, built
by people under constant supervision to defined standards, has a
guaranteed interference free operating frequency, usually has GPS
tracking, and is operated by a trained crew while a R/C model is
built by some guy in a basement with electronics from Taiwan,
operated by the same guy who may or may not be sober at the moment,
and is subject to interference from every other Taiwanese R/C
transmitter in the area and may or may not have the money to pay
for any damage he causes?

Can you cite a source for the Raven's "guaranteed interference free
operating frequency?" I doubt there exists a radio link that is
totally immune to jamming or interference.

Most RC modelers will check the aircraft's controls before launching
it. This one was reported to head east immediately after launch, so
it's likely that check wasn't performed in this instance. Perhaps a
little more training would be prudent before the military unleashes
its hardware in domestic operations.