Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
Did you think about these comments before you typed them? You think it is OK for civilian contractors to drop bombs on foreign soil, kill people, provide the top-cover/CAS for our soldiers on the ground - but we will still need military pilots (vs contractors) to fly tankers and cargo? You sound as if you think the limfac to using contractors is whether they work a normal duty day and stay stateside.
With a little research, you will find than an auto-land system does exist for landing on carriers - it is not the takeoff and landing issue that is keeping UAV's off of the boat.
1. "You sound as if you think the limfac to using contractors is whether they work a normal duty day and stay stateside." Believe it or not, that's a consideration. I know what you're asserting: that only uniformed service members should have the awesome legal power to deal death. But I'm here to tell you, friend, that that power is transferrable with the stroke of a pen in a federal regulation. Take a look at US military operations overseas in the last ten years -- you'll see contractors everywhere, performing jobs that would have been unthinkable for contractors a generation ago. The technology and economics of contractor-enabled strike missions simply makes too much sense to pretend it won't happen.
2. Of course an auto-land system exists for carrier ops, and has for years. Is it more limited than human-controlled approaches, particularly in certain sea states? You betcha. I do think auto-land and (to be developed in the future) auto-launch systems will prove adequate in the future, but we're not there yet.