posted by
janrinok
on Monday August 18 2014, @05:30AM
from the jfk's-big-brother-and-flying-bombs dept.
from the jfk's-big-brother-and-flying-bombs dept.
Gizmodo has an article with elements of a political dynasty and an immature weapons systems.
The Allies had to figure out something to do with bombers that were so clapped-out that it wasn't wise to continue to put crews in them. They stripped out anything that wasn't necessary to make it fly, put in a TV camera pointed at the instruments and another pointed at the ground, and packed the thing with high explosive.
It required a pilot and a flight engineer to get the thing off the ground, after which the 2 guys would bail out and the crew of a trailing plane would fly the "drone". The effectiveness was complete garbage and 4 guys died doing it.
One of them was Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., the older brother of John F. Kennedy.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Guy Who Might have Become President Killed in First US Drone Program
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 22 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Tork on Monday August 18 2014, @05:59AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @06:12AM
I liked to listen to his stuff.
It let me know what *actual* Conservatives were thinking (as opposed to the nutballs hanging onto the Authoritarian+Crony Capitalist edge of the grid).
It was fun to catch the times he got snookered by a bogus science|technology press release too.
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday August 19 2014, @04:10AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @06:59AM
Sorry, but I still don't know the representational state transfer of the story.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Lagg on Monday August 18 2014, @06:00AM
We really need to get this terminology under control or not use it at all. Everything that is a vehicle and even vaguely remote controlled is being called a drone now. From RC quadcopters (just like the toy that flew by that moron's house and then suddenly she wasn't okay with "drone surveillance") to actual armed planes manufactured as weapons. When is it going to end? Are we going to see a headline about a terrorist drone attack when some guy flies his RC copter into a power line? Will I have to get special certification when I resurrect my RC hobby so I can have a license to operate my "drone"?
But yeah going by the logic at work here I'd question this being the first US drone. If we were to use the same mindset I'd have to call the bombs with adjusting fins being dropped out of bombers en masse a drone. It flew and steered and wasn't directly controlled. Therefore drone. See?
I don't even think the article buys its own crap and this is just a headline to make people think that there was a secret operation somewhere that killed some guy that would have run against obama just to take advantage of the buzzword. It seems like it's just as hesitant to call this a drone as I am, quoth the article:
and as per usual I can't blame soylent for this. The summary is just doing its job in reflecting the article. It's still a good submission as it brings attention to misuse of terminology and technical misunderstanding.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 3, Informative) by SlimmPickens on Monday August 18 2014, @06:27AM
Well, FWIW, the Oxford dictionary has one entry related to aircraft
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/drone [oxforddictionaries.com]
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday August 18 2014, @07:03AM
True enough, but there is more connotation to it now than that. It's generally assumed that it's an armed aircraft or used for spying or assassinations. I don't really agree with it or this turning of "drone" into a buzzword but that's what happened and I guess that's how it evolved so the only thing left to do really is try to keep it under control.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday August 18 2014, @07:37AM
The word "Hacker" has lost the same battle.
Is it wrong we are trying to reclaim it back by "hackathrons", "hack days", "hack fests", etc?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday August 18 2014, @08:00AM
It's not wrong but even me, who was once someone known by that honorific tries to go along with inappropriate uses of it because at a certain point it becomes disruptive if you don't. I don't agree with the connotation/definition it carries now and the horrendous misuse and people giving themselves the title which is a big faux paus but I try not to be disruptive about it. However, it's also a different issue and arguably a more severe one since this is an entire subculture that people are misclassifying as low life scum and script kiddies and it is indeed blatant misuse of the term in the same way calling an RC copter a drone is.
Drones on the other hand have really always been known by the definition I used even in sci-fi in the context of spacecraft. i.e. the point defense systems on space ships for example that go off and pester enemies or shoot down missiles were called drones.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday August 18 2014, @12:58PM
It's generally assumed that it's an armed aircraft or used for spying or assassinations.
Only by the ignorant.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday August 18 2014, @01:57PM
Maybe, but they're the majority. RC copters aren't drones and neither is any other hobby RC vehicle. Quit splitting hairs or you're going to end up contributing to the damage that was already done to the hobby.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by fnj on Monday August 18 2014, @03:50PM
There used to be true RC helicopters (may still be) that had no on-board smarts at all, just open-loop remote control, and they were/are hard as the devil to fly.
The current rash of quad/hex "copters" all have on-board electronic stability augmentation, and mostly on-board closed-loop station-holding and go-to-waypoint. I would stay that steps over the line to UAV.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @05:21PM
Yeah, with the rise of sophisticated, computer controlled vehicles, the english language has not caught up. All sorts of people keep getting words screwed up.
So, a word is needed for a vehicle that is controlled by a significant computer (greater than Pentium 3, 256 MB of RAM), as opposed to the simple controls of an old fashioned, remote controlled toy airplane or car. It can optionally take orders from a human. I guess this broad category of machines could extend to the Roomba, US military UAVs, US Army legged cargo carry robot, Amazon's warehouse robots. 'Drone' seems to be the leading contender for this category. I used to support the word 'droid'. The word 'drone' sounds good for a low level organic creature, such as a bee, ant, or a bottom level office worker in a giant corporation. I hope there is a better word out there. Maybe the category should be subdivided.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @08:06PM
Automaton [soylentnews.org]
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday August 18 2014, @06:34AM
Most us military drones ares till piloted by humans (who happen too sit in Creech [wikipedia.org], and they are still prepped fro flight by humans. Just don't see any meaningful difference.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by fnj on Monday August 18 2014, @03:59PM
I do see a big difference. A true drone is able to follow general commands using on-board smarts, like "orbit present station" or "go to programmed waypoint #97" or "go to lat x, lon y, altitude z". Certainly the things most people visualize when you say "drone" are controlled this way - like Predators. They are MONITORED by a "pilot", but almost all the time the pilot is not controlling the vehicle every second of real time like an R/C model plane pilot or the pilot of a Cessna.
I admit the distinction is hazy. Nobody manually flies a jetliner across the ocean either. The autopilot does the work.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday August 18 2014, @07:16AM
If it's more of a remote control flying bomb isn't it more like a guided cruise missile? It's just a question of semantics.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday August 18 2014, @07:44AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by jimshatt on Monday August 18 2014, @09:42AM
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday August 18 2014, @01:05PM
Don't any of you people have the internet, a paper encyclopedia or a paper dictionary?
Bottle rockets are rockets. Missiles with jet engines are not. A thrown rock is a missile, but is not a rocket.
There is no reason whatever to argue about semantics in this day and age.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 3, Informative) by Lagg on Monday August 18 2014, @02:00PM
Oh yeah that means a lot coming from you mcgrew when you were just arguing about semantics in a thread that said not to. Get off your pedestal.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18 2014, @10:05AM
No. In modern military usage, Rockets are unguided (but sometimes spin- or fin-stabilized) self-propelled ballistic-trajectory expendable ordnance. Missiles are self- or remotely-guided expendable ordnance. Drones are recoverable, reusable remotely- or semi-autonomously-guided vehicles.
A plane rigged with explosives would be a missile, akin to a very primitive cruise missile.