Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Military (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/military/)
-   -   Bye Bye Global Hawk (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/military/64923-bye-bye-global-hawk.html)

WAFP 01-24-2012 08:12 PM

Bye Bye Global Hawk
 
Global Hawk getting the boot

Well, the writing has been on the wall for awhile now. Good news for the U-2 bubbas? At least they'll be gainfully employed for a LONG time now :D

AZFlyer 01-24-2012 08:30 PM

I don't know anything about what it costs to fly a U-2, but I am both surprised and pleased that it costs less to operate than a Global Hawk. I'll echo WAFP's sentiment that this is hopefully good for the Dragon Lady pilots.

Just seems a littler counter-intuitive that a 40 year old manned spy plane costs less to operate than a modern UAV. :confused:

UAL T38 Phlyer 01-24-2012 08:40 PM

The USAF has acknowledged that about 25% of Global Hawks have crashed. Makes you wonder if there are more.

According to what I found on the web, including R&D, each GH cost $218 million! The GAO found it had an accident rate 100 times the F-16 in a combat-zone. :eek:

(Northrop said it was unfair to compare a mature system with a new one). :cool:

Preds and Reapers have similar loss rates (70 lost), but are much cheaper ($10 million), so the USAF can justify it.

WAFP 01-24-2012 09:20 PM


Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer (Post 1122320)
The USAF has acknowledged that about 25% of Global Hawks have crashed. Makes you wonder if there are more.

According to what I found on the web, including R&D, each GH cost $218 million! The GAO found it had an accident rate 100 times the F-16 in a combat-zone. :eek:

curious as to where you got the stats...

Kikuchiyo 01-24-2012 09:37 PM

From the linked article:

"Officials say that while Air Force Block 30 version is being cut, the Navy’s variant could be used by the Air Force. "

Meaning the AF will still fly them and have them, it'll just be a different version.

DustoffVT 01-25-2012 04:53 AM


Originally Posted by AZFlyer (Post 1122316)
Just seems a littler counter-intuitive that a 40 year old manned spy plane costs less to operate than a modern UAV. :confused:

Counter intuitive until you learn that here at CBP, our UAVs take about 12 people to launch and recover. In Houston they have to have guys all over the city with binos in case it loses link - on the beach, on top of a parking garage, etc. & a dedicated chase crew in the citation. Not to mention the minute wind limits and airspace issues.

UAL T38 Phlyer 01-25-2012 04:57 AM


Originally Posted by WAFP (Post 1122331)
curious as to where you got the stats...

Wikipedia. Yeah, I know...although when I look up things there that I have personal knowledge of, it is usually surprisingly good. By extrapolation, I (cautiously) assume other areas are similar.

I had read something about this a couple of years ago in AW&ST; so I checked Wiki to see if I was still in the ballpark.

Grumble 01-25-2012 06:02 AM

If you guys have SIPR access go to Beales website, the 9th RSS has some really good briefs on there wrt to capes and lims of both the U-2 and Global Hawk. Bottom line, it was still a long LONG way from ever competing with the U-2 for capability. Even several in the air at once.

alarkyokie 01-25-2012 12:40 PM

Meanwhile, on the home front...
Feds hide data on domestic use of drones — RT


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:41 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands