UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Nov > Nov 12

Re: UAVs vs 'Rods'

From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:55:57 -0400
Archived: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 15:24:56 -0500
Subject: Re: UAVs vs 'Rods'


>From: Amy Hebert <yellowrose129.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 23:45:41 -0600
>Subject: Re: UAVs vs 'Rods'

>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:53:50 -0500
>>Subject: Re: UAVs vs 'Rods'

>>>From: Amy Hebert <yellowrose129.nul>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:42:49 -0600
>>>Subject: UAVs vs 'Rods'

<snip>

>After 9-11, what is the one thing that has increased the most at
>commercial airports (besides the price to use the toilet)?

>Security.

>I don't know whether the object in the Fox News footage was
>something man-made or a hoax. I just happened to notic that
>AeroVironment's 'Broomstick' UAV illustration reminded me of the
>object filmed in Albany, NY.

>Whatever this object may have been, you will see more UAV's used
>in both the military and private sectors in the future. They
>can and will be used to patrol everything from shopping malls to
>airports. UAV's may even become man's second best friend (next
>to police dogs) when it comes to assisting the police in
>locating, tracking and apprehending criminals.

>When most people think of UAV's they think of large remote
>controlled aircraft like the Predator or even the Bird Of Prey.
>However, UAV's come in all shapes, sizes and abilities. If the
>pilot (remote control) has been properly trained, there is no
>reason why a UAV could not be used safely in, around or over
>busy airports, civilian neighborhoods, metropolitan areas, etc.
>With MAV's (mini-air vehicles) and even micro-air vehicles, the
>uses are endless. In fact, considering the potential threat we
>face from UAV's/MAV's being used against us by terrorists and
>other foes, it seems foolish to _not_ use these devices to
>protect our cities, airports and homes.

>As for what rights the price of security may cost us, we will
>see. But if it saves the life of just one civilian or one
>soldier, then it is worth it (IMHO).


Hi Amy,

I had another submission to this list about the above however I must
respond to a couple of things here.

You stated:

>Whatever this object may have been, you will see more UAV's used
>in both the military and private sectors in the future. They
>can and will be used to patrol everything from shopping malls to
>airports.

I can't speak for the States but here in Canada, over my dead
body. The last thing I want flying over my city is some mindless
and remotely operated vehicle that has no other connection than
it's data stream to the operations base.

It will be a long time before anyone [FAA, Transport Canada,
Civil Aviation Authority [UK] is going to trust a computer to
watch over the flight pattern of some UAV.

I suggest to you that rather than security the greatest hazard
to the general public will be the UAV circling their city. Right
now there are no regulations that allow UAVs to operate in
civilian airspace which comprises 95% of the land area, and I
don't see that changing soon.

Incidentally, the Bird of Prey isn't a UAV. It's piloted and a
prototype [design, construction/materials, flight
characteristics and stealth possibilities] for other aircraft
and even UAVs coming down the road. From a Boeing press release:


"Fully funded by Boeing, the Bird of Prey project costs $67
million. A subsonic, SINGLE-SEAT technology demonstrator, the
aircraft completed 38 test flights as part of its flight-
demonstration program. Its first flight took place in fall 1996.
Bird of Prey has a wingspan of approximately 23 feet and a
length of 47 feet, and weighs nearly 7,400 pounds. Powered by a
Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5C turbofan engine, the Bird of Prey has
an operational speed of 260 knots [300mph] and a maximum
operating altitude of 20,000 feet."


One of the reasons I carp on this tendency of others to consider
UAVs as a possibility for UFO reports is just that. It's
unnecessary noise and if it gets into the hands of the media,
they will blow-off sightings with good signal as this
possibility. We have enough problems as it is.

Caution.

Best,

Don Ledger


[And as this thread drifts away from UFOs we bid it a
 fond adieu, please --ebk]

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com