Green
Showing posts with label Drone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Drone. Show all posts

Monday, October 7, 2013

OppiKoppi Beer Drone To Deliver Booze To South Africa Festival-Goers (VIDEO)

Still bummed that the tacocopter probably isn't making deliveries anytime soon? Haven't quite built your own burrito bomber or found a flying pizza delivery system yet? If you're a big fan of unmanned food delivery systems and planning to be in South Africa from August 8 to 10, then we just may have made your day.

The Oppikoppi music festival plans to have a beer drone on hand to deliver booze to festival-goers. Attendees will be able to order beer from their phones, to be delivered at the District 9 campsite. For now, the "drone" is hand-guided, but will eventually fly on a GPS grid.

Check it out:

[h/t The Daily Meal]

Also on HuffPost:


View the original article here

Saturday, June 29, 2013

U.S. Drone Policy: Obama Seeking To Influence Global Guidelines


(Repeats with no change)

By Tabassum Zakaria

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama, who vastly expanded U.S. drone strikes against terrorism suspects overseas under the cloak of secrecy, is now openly seeking to influence global guidelines for their use as China and other countries pursue their own drone programs.

The United States was the first to use unmanned aircraft fitted with missiles to kill militant suspects in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

But other countries are catching up. China's interest in unmanned aerial vehicles was displayed in November at an air show. According to state-run newspaper Global Times, China had considered conducting its first drone strike to kill a suspect in the 2011 murder of 13 Chinese sailors, but authorities decided they wanted the man alive so they could put him on trial.

"People say what's going to happen when the Chinese and the Russians get this technology? The president is well aware of those concerns and wants to set the standard for the international community on these tools," said Tommy Vietor, until earlier this month a White House spokesman.

As U.S. ground wars end - over in Iraq, drawing to a close in Afghanistan - surgical counterterrorism targeting has become "the new normal," Vietor said.

Amid a debate within the U.S. government, it is not yet clear what new standards governing targeted killings and drone strikes the White House will develop for U.S. operations or propose for global rules of the road.

Obama's new position is not without irony. The White House kept details of drone operations - which remain largely classified - out of public view for years when the U.S. monopoly was airtight.

That stance is just now beginning to change, in part under pressure from growing public and Congressional discomfort with the drone program. U.S. lawmakers have demanded to see White House legal justifications for targeting U.S. citizens abroad, and to know whether Obama thinks he has the authority to use drones to kill Americans on U.S. soil.

On Friday, a three-judge federal appeals court panel unanimously ruled that the CIA gave an inadequate response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union seeking records about drone strikes. The CIA had said it could neither confirm nor deny whether it had drone records because of security concerns.

The judge who wrote the ruling noted that the president had publicly acknowledged that the United States uses drone strikes against al Qaeda.

LETHAL ACTION

Strikes by missile-armed Predator and Reaper drones against terrorism suspects overseas began under former President George W. Bush and were expanded by Obama.

The ramp-up started in 2008, the last year of Bush's term, when there were 35 air strikes in Pakistan, and escalated under Obama to a peak of 117 in 2010, according to The Long War Journal ( http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes.php ).

That jump in use of armed drones resulted from the authorization to use "signature" strikes, which allowed targeting terrorism suspects based on behavior and other characteristics without knowing their actual identity, a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity.

Caitlin Hayden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said the administration is committed to explaining to Congress and the public as much as possible about its drone policies, including how decisions to strike are made.

"We are constantly working to refine, clarify, and strengthen the process for considering terrorist targets for lethal action," Hayden said.

The administration recognizes "we are establishing standards other nations may follow," she said.

James Lewis, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, said other countries, including Russia, have unarmed reconnaissance drones. China says it has an armed drone, but "we don't know if it works," he said.

"Getting agreement on the applicability of existing humanitarian law to the new technologies is crucial," he said, because China and Russia do not endorse applying laws of armed conflict to new military technologies.

One of the Obama administration's goals is to "regularize" the drone program, making it more a part of accepted U.S. practice in the future, Lewis said. "This is going to be part of warfare."

While the Obama administration moves toward refinement and transparency of standards, drone strikes continue to spark outrage in countries where they are conducted. Washington has sought to portray civilian casualties from drone strikes as minimal, but groups collecting data on these attacks say they have killed hundreds of civilians.

A U.N. human rights investigator who is looking into drone strikes worldwide said on Friday the U.S. campaign had violated Pakistan's sovereignty.

INTERNAL DEBATES

One focus of U.S. officials' internal debate is whether to shift drone operations to the Pentagon from the CIA.

That would allow the CIA to return to more traditional operations of espionage and intelligence analysis, and put the killing of terrorism targets in the hands of the military.

It would probably be a "phased approach" that would account for differences in the threat and political sensitivities, said a second U.S. official. "There would have to be some tailoring."

In Pakistan, where the U.S. military is not in ground combat, the Obama administration would probably not want drone strikes to appear as being conducted by the military.

In Yemen, there may not be the same sensitivities. U.S. military personnel are on the ground working with Yemenis in counterterrorism operations.

The United States has also carried out drone strikes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Somalia.

"I think if they moved it, not as a covert action program, but one of the tools of the warfighter, then the result of it is probably going to be more public exposure about what they are doing," Stephen Hadley, national security adviser under Bush, said.

The "center of gravity" in internal administration debates is the goal of greater consistency on how drone strikes are managed, decided upon, and executed, the second official said. (Editing by Warren Strobel and Mohammad Zargham)

Related on HuffPost:


View the original article here

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Distinguished Warfare Medal Honoring Drone Pilots Faces Bipartisan Backlash

Distinguished Warfare Medal Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) is part of a bipartisan group of senators urging the combat awards to take precedence over the Distinguished Warfare Medal. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

WASHINGTON -- A new medal that would honor drone pilots and cyber warriors and outrank battlefield combat medals such as the Purple Heart and Bronze Star is facing backlash from veterans organizations and members of Congress, with a bipartisan group of 22 senators pressing the Pentagon to change the designation.

The newly created Distinguished Warfare Medal, approved last month by then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, will honor members of the military for achievements beyond the battlefield since Sept. 11, 2001.

The backlash to the medal centers around the fact that it will take precedence over traditional several combat awards, which require that the recipient risk his or her life in order to receive them.

On Friday, 22 senators wrote to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and expressed their concerns.

"We believe that medals earned in combat, or in dangerous conditions, should maintain their precedence above non-combat awards," wrote the senators. "Placing the Distinguished Warfare Medal above the Bronze Star and Purple Heart diminishes the significance of awards earned by risking one's life in direct combat or through acts of heroism. Moreover, the Distinguished Warfare Medal's placement directly above the Soldier’s Medal -- an award for bravery and voluntary risk of life not involving conflict with an armed enemy -- diminishes the precedence given to acts of individual gallantry in circumstances other than combat."

The senators who signed the letter are Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), Angus King (I-Maine), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

Boozman, Heller, Manchin and Tester also recently introduced legislation that would prevent the Distinguished Warfare Medal from outranking direct combat awards. Republican lawmakers have a similar bill in the House of Representatives, and a bipartisan group of 48 House members have also written to Hagel.

The award has also prompted protest from veterans groups. The American Legion urged its members to complain to lawmakers, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars wrote to Hagel.

VoteVets.org Co-Founder Jon Soltz recently argued that Hagel may better understand the importance of keeping the Purple Heart and Bronze Star above the Distinguished Warfare Medal because of his experience in Vietnam.

"This isn't a knock on Leon Panetta, but unlike Chuck Hagel, Panetta was never a grunt, an enlisted man," wrote Soltz. "In Hagel, we have someone who brings that unique experience to the table. In fact, he'd be the first enlisted man ever to serve as Secretary of Defense. Of course, in addition to that, Senator Hagel was awarded two Purple Hearts, so he knows full well the kind of sacrifice it takes to be awarded that medal."

The Pentagon did not return a request for comment, but spokesman George Little told the Associated Press in late February, "The Defense Department remains committed to honoring the remotely piloted aircraft operators and the cyber warriors as appropriate. This is recognition of their significant contributions and the changing nature of warfare."

When he announced the creation of the award in February, Panetta said "remotely piloted platforms and cyber systems" have "changed the way wars are fought."

The Associated Press also noted that the new award may be handed out without the public ever knowing about it because the actions taken by the recipients may be classified.

CORRECTION: This story originally identified Sen. Mark Begich as being from Arkansas. He represents Alaska. Due to an error in a press release, the story also originally stated that Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado had signed the letter, when in fact it was his cousin, Sen. Tom Udall of New Mexico.

Also on HuffPost:

Get Alerts Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!

View the original article here

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Iran Drone Capture Denied By Revolutionary Guard

TEHRAN, Iran -- Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard is denying that it captured a foreign unmanned aircraft during a military exercise in southern Iran.

A spokesman for the Guard, Yasin Hasanali, told The Associated Press that the drone was actually being used during the drill as a supposed enemy aircraft.

Iranian media on Saturday quoted a spokesman for the Guard as saying that its electronic warfare unit had taken control of a foreign drone's navigation system and forced it to land during the site of the military exercise.

Iran has claimed to have captured several U.S. drones, including an advanced RQ-170 Sentinel CIA spy drone in December 2011 and at least three ScanEagle aircraft.

The Guard's military exercise, code-named Great Prophet-8, ends on Monday.


View the original article here

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Military Consdering Scaling Back Drone Program

LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE, Va. — The Pentagon for the first time is considering scaling back the massive buildup of drones it has overseen in the past few years, both to save money and to adapt to changing security threats and an increased focus on Asia as the Afghanistan war winds down.

Air Force leaders are saying the military may already have enough unmanned aircraft systems to wage the wars of the future. And the Pentagon's shift to Asia will require a new mix of drones and other aircraft because countries in that region are better able to detect unmanned versions and shoot them down.

If the Pentagon does slow the huge building and deployment program, which was ordered several years ago by then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, it won't affect the CIA drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere against terror suspects. Those strikes were brought center stage last week during the confirmation hearing for White House counterterror chief John Brennan, President Barack Obama's pick to lead the CIA.

Gen. Mike Hostage, commander of Air Combat Command, said senior leaders are analyzing the military's drone needs and discussions are beginning. But he said the current number patrolling the skies overseas may already be more than the service can afford to maintain.

Overall, Pentagon spending on unmanned aircraft has jumped from $284 million in 2000 to nearly $4 billion in the past fiscal year, while the number of drones owned by the Pentagon has rocketed from less than 200 in 2002 to at least 7,500 now. The bulk of those drones are small, shoulder-launched Ravens owned by the Army.

The discussions may trigger heated debate because drones have become so important to the military. They can provide 24-hour patrols over hotspots, gather intelligence by pulling in millions of terabytes of data and hours of video feeds, and they can also launch precisely targeted airstrikes without putting a U.S. pilot at risk.

The analysis began before Brennan's confirmation hearings, where he was questioned sharply about the CIA's use of drones to kill terror suspects, including American citizens overseas. The CIA gets its attack drones from the Air Force fleet, but any decision to stop building them would be unlikely to have any effect on that program.

The Air Force discussions are focused more on whether the military's drone fleet is the right size and composition for future conflicts.

There has been a seemingly insatiable appetite within the military for the unmanned hunter/killers, particularly among top combat commanders around the world who have been clamoring for the drones but have seen most resources go to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We are trying to do the analysis and engage in the discussion to say at some point the downturn in operations and the upsurge in capabilities has got to meet," Hostage said.

Hostage, interviewed in his office at Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Va., amid the intermittent roar of fighter jets overhead, said the military's new focus on the Asia-Pacific region will require a different mix of drones and other aircraft. Unlike in Afghanistan, where the U.S. can operate largely without fear of the drones being shot down, there are a number of countries in the Pacific that could face off against American aircraft – either manned or unmanned.

Right now, Predator and Reaper drones that pilots fly remotely from thousands of miles away are completing 59 24-hour combat air patrols a day, mostly in Afghanistan, Pakistan and areas around Yemen and the Africa coast. The standing order is for the Air Force to increase that number of air patrols to 65 a day by May 2014, although officials say that is an arbitrary number not based on an analysis of future combat requirements.

The staffing demands for that increase have put a strain on the Air Force, as they would require nearly 1,700 drone pilots and 1,200 sensor operators. Currently there are fewer than 1,400 pilots and about 950 sensor operators.

Lt. Gen. Larry D. James, the Air Force deputy chief of staff for intelligence, said no recommendations for changes to the projected drone fleet have been sent yet to Pentagon leaders. A key part of the decision will involve what types of drones and other aircraft will be needed as the military focuses greater concentration on the Pacific.

While Predators and Reapers have logged more than 1 million hours of combat patrols in the skies over Afghanistan and Iraq, where insurgents don't have the ability to shoot them down, they would be likely to face challenges in the more contested airspace over the Pacific.

Countries with significant air power or the ability to shoot down aircraft are scattered across the region, including China, Russia and North Korea – as well as key U.S. allies such as Japan and Australia. America's pivot to the Pacific reflects a growing strategic concern over China's rise as a military power, amid simmering disputes over Taiwan and contested islands in the south and east China seas.

Hostage said the Predators and Reapers can be used in the Pacific region "but not in a highly contested environment. We may be able to use them on the fringes and on the edges and in small locales, but we're much more likely to lose them if somebody decides to challenge us for that space."

James said the Air Force is evaluating how much to continue to invest in drones like the Reapers that can be used for counterterrorism missions in more so-called permissive environments, versus how much investment should be shifted to other aircraft. The Air Force uses an array of aircraft, such as the U-2 spy plane, the high-altitude Global Hawk drone or satellites and systems that can gather intelligence from space.

David Deptula, a retired Air Force three-star general who was deputy chief of staff for intelligence, said the military needs to measure its drone requirements by the amount of data and intelligence needed by troops to accomplish their mission. The focus should not be on the number of drone patrols but on how well the information is being received and analyzed.

As technologies advance, he said, the Pentagon can reduce the number of drones in orbit, while still increasing the video, data and other information being transmitted.

"There are smarter ways to deliver the capabilities that are more cost effective" than just building more drones, he said.

Related on HuffPost:

Get Alerts Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!

View the original article here