<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Northrop Crafts Multimission N-UCAS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/</link>
	<description>The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 23:53:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tibia Gold</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177686</link>
		<dc:creator>Tibia Gold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177686</guid>
		<description>Even with a slow internet Tibia Gold connection downloading the client is a matter of minutes.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even with a slow internet Tibia Gold connection downloading the client is a matter of minutes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RS Gold</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177685</link>
		<dc:creator>RS Gold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:06:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177685</guid>
		<description>It is may be useful for some people who like playing the .
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is may be useful for some people who like playing the .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ACE</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177680</link>
		<dc:creator>ACE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 07:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177680</guid>
		<description>Exactly who could possibly fly this thing? videogamers? i mean since it&#039;s unmanned g powers don&#039;t apply for it...let the ace combat veterans fly it...seems like a miracle for me, i am more for manned planes, people are more aware of their real sorroundings and like someone before said, you can&#039;t hack this thing if it&#039;s flown manually, if somebody jamms the radar this billion dollar baby drops down faster then rain. the only possible good reason i see in this project is, unmanned crafts provide maneuvers that are normal pilots are simply not capable of, the other thing is that pilots won&#039;t get harmed but war doesn&#039;t come without losses and i think combat jet pilots know what they are doing.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly who could possibly fly this thing? videogamers? i mean since it’s unmanned g powers don’t apply for it…let the ace combat veterans fly it…seems like a miracle for me, i am more for manned planes, people are more aware of their real sorroundings and like someone before said, you can’t hack this thing if it’s flown manually, if somebody jamms the radar this billion dollar baby drops down faster then rain. the only possible good reason i see in this project is, unmanned crafts provide maneuvers that are normal pilots are simply not capable of, the other thing is that pilots won’t get harmed but war doesn’t come without losses and i think combat jet pilots know what they are doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephen russell</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177679</link>
		<dc:creator>stephen russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 23:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177679</guid>
		<description>Fund it, produce it &amp; then Deploy them.
Test on US Mex border from Yuma base.
Or FT Bliss TX base.
Get this UCAV flying.
Major need for.
Lasers &amp; miniguns or cannons &amp; ext bombs.
Long range, inflight refuelling capable
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fund it, produce it &amp; then Deploy them.<br />
Test on US Mex border from Yuma base.<br />
Or FT Bliss TX base.<br />
Get this UCAV flying.<br />
Major need for.<br />
Lasers &amp; miniguns or cannons &amp; ext bombs.<br />
Long range, inflight refuelling capable</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rix</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177678</link>
		<dc:creator>Rix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 01:26:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177678</guid>
		<description>Lasers have been next generation for a couple of generations now. Look also for the activists to to make the use of them a war crime, probably under the geneva convention ban on blinding weapons.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lasers have been next generation for a couple of generations now. Look also for the activists to to make the use of them a war crime, probably under the geneva convention ban on blinding weapons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TrustButVerify</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177677</link>
		<dc:creator>TrustButVerify</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177677</guid>
		<description>Yeah, but, *lasers*. Stop resisting the inevitable and be overwhelmed by the gee whiz factor already. Robot jet stealth fighters with lasers? Faced with that level of coolness, the bad guys would have no option but to lie down and cry.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, but, *lasers*. Stop resisting the inevitable and be overwhelmed by the gee whiz factor already. Robot jet stealth fighters with lasers? Faced with that level of coolness, the bad guys would have no option but to lie down and cry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: murc</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177676</link>
		<dc:creator>murc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:22:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177676</guid>
		<description>Cool.
I&#039;ve liked the X-47B from the get go, and I&#039;m glad to here that its still going strong.  And I to was a bit suprised about the lasers part....I think you could modify the X-47B aircraft for a laser payload....But I think it would have to be customized for that specific plane.   meaning, I doubt they could come-up with some sort of module system.....like put the &quot;Air 2 Air module&quot; in the payload and its a fighter. put the &quot;laser module&quot; in it and it can take out missiles &amp; ground targets.
that would be cool, but I dont see it being that (plug n play)easy.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool.<br />
I’ve liked the X-47B from the get go, and I’m glad to here that its still going strong.  And I to was a bit suprised about the lasers part.…I think you could modify the X-47B aircraft for a laser payload.…But I think it would have to be customized for that specific plane.   meaning, I doubt they could come-up with some sort of module system.….like put the “Air 2 Air module” in the payload and its a fighter. put the “laser module” in it and it can take out missiles &amp; ground targets.<br />
that would be cool, but I dont see it being that (plug n play)easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TrustButVerify</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177675</link>
		<dc:creator>TrustButVerify</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:57:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177675</guid>
		<description>Oh, and as for the post itself? Very interesting. The DEW option in particular.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and as for the post itself? Very interesting. The DEW option in particular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TrustButVerify</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-177674</link>
		<dc:creator>TrustButVerify</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-177674</guid>
		<description>At the risk of sounding like a two-note record, the SATCOM links our existing UAVs use are quite secure, and the NSA spends a lot of time and money keeping COMSEC safe. Furthermore, the SATCOM antennas used on the airframes are highly directional by nature and not very susceptible to jamming. (You&#039;d have to be in a very precise &quot;right place at the right time&quot; to interfere with them, very difficult with a moving airborne platform.) There&#039;s also the potential to use frequency-agile waveforms which are even less vulnerable to interference.
Lastly, I believe the latest generation of UCAVs have demonstrated a decent amount of autonomy. There&#039;s no reason this shouldn&#039;t continue to be the case. That being the case, an aircraft which finds itself out of positive control could either proceed along preprogrammed lines (drop payload A on GPS coordinates X,Y,Z) or return to base on its own.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the risk of sounding like a two-note record, the SATCOM links our existing UAVs use are quite secure, and the NSA spends a lot of time and money keeping COMSEC safe. Furthermore, the SATCOM antennas used on the airframes are highly directional by nature and not very susceptible to jamming. (You’d have to be in a very precise “right place at the right time” to interfere with them, very difficult with a moving airborne platform.) There’s also the potential to use frequency-agile waveforms which are even less vulnerable to interference.<br />
Lastly, I believe the latest generation of UCAVs have demonstrated a decent amount of autonomy. There’s no reason this shouldn’t continue to be the case. That being the case, an aircraft which finds itself out of positive control could either proceed along preprogrammed lines (drop payload A on GPS coordinates X,Y,Z) or return to base on its own.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ohwilleke</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/03/25/northrop-crafts-multimission-n-ucas/#comment-37210</link>
		<dc:creator>ohwilleke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=2751#comment-37210</guid>
		<description>Great stuff until hostile forces get them too.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great stuff until hostile forces get them too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

