Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
What makes you think there'd be a single command and control center that you could hit? What is the difference between taking out the command and control centers vs. taking out the enemy's airfields, taking out the Pentagon, taking out power plants, etc?
And whilst your manned fighters might have better response times, they'd also be heavier, less maneuverable, and outnumbered due to drones being cheaper, and your losses would lead to far greater war weariness on the home front than mine would.
|
A manned fighter doesn't need a command and control center. you can take out airfields, and take out the pentagon, and take out communications, or power and the planes can still take to the air, and fly.
In todays battlefield where they focus on taking out communications, and where the attacking of battle links almost takes priority a remote commanded vehicle run from one or even multiple centers is going to get priority attention especially if you can take out air cover in massive numbers.
While your right, a drone is smaller and lighter and more maneuverable then a human piloted counter part.
In a fight to gain missile lock in a turning fight the human pilot is going to gain the advantage because there's no possible lag on a manned plane.
You also run into the problem with communication jamming. A remote piloted vehicle could have trouble with this. A human pilot can continue to fight without a radio.
Until you develop a certain amount of autonomy in drone technology where it has the ability to fight without human intervention, I don't buy that its a relevant or good replacement for current technology.