To: Hawkmoon who wrote (85880 ) 1/15/2012 3:25:43 AM From: Maurice Winn 2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217752 The sky will be full of drones. With good quality satellite feedback [via Globalstar for example] and GPS and powerful on-board processors, there's no need to even consider putting 80kg of wet chemistry inside it. It's not just the 80kg either. An ejector seat, oxygen supplies, seat belts, lunch, and other stuff are needed to look after them. And acceleration can't be too fast or they'll conk out. Not that drones need to do tight turns normally though perhaps evasive action might require that. 150kg of pilot stuff requires a LOT of aircraft just to keep it aloft. Remove that 150kg and they can shrink a lot of componentry, which then means less componentry weight to carry which means further shrinkage. As you mention, the value of the pilot is a lot too. <That said, I would rather avoid exposing a human pilot to hostile fire any day. > I had a colleague, Joseph Yim who was a fighter pilot [part time in Singapore]. I hadn't realized until talking with him just how valuable fighter pilots are. Without thinking about it, I had assumed the plane was the most valuable part. But in fact because the supply is so limited and the training so expensive, it's really important to keep the pilots alive [never mind the emotional stuff]. Aircraft can be replaced comparatively cheaply. A friend of our son's is also a fighter pilot [in UK] and he described similar ideas about the extent and cost of training. Drones can be churned out the thousand, of many different sizes and with various functions. One big aircraft could sprinkle hundreds over an area 10km high, delivering them from an aircraft carrier far away. It would be very annoying as a soldier on the ground to have to watch out for swarms of them swooping to attack. Mqurice