FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Flying Blind, The Problem with the Predator

by Jeffrey St. Clair

Few things are as predicatable as the excited bleats of Pentagon flacks touting the killing efficacy of new weapons systems every time the US begins a military operation. During the Gulf War, the press was dazzled with reports of smart bombs and Scud-blasting Patriot missiles. The bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998 saw the Pentagon and representatives from Boeing boast about the advent of new cruise missiles. The war on Serbia witnessed the use of Stealth bombers and the Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, which the Pentagon portrayed as being the unsung hero of the Kosovo air war.

It is equally predictable that many of these claims fall on their face after the bombing ceases and a final assessment is down. Those precision-guided weapons were laughably inaccurate. The Scud missiles launched by Iraq evaded the Patriot interceptors with ease. The stealth bomber has proved to be so thin skinned that in cold weather it performs with all the agility of a flying ice cube.

Now comes the Predator UAV, which the media, clinging to every word of Pentagon press releases, has hailed as a “revolutionary” reconnaissance aircraft of the future. In recent days, the press has begun to speak of this aircraft, now puttering over Afghanistan, as the key to the war on the Taliban. ABC News even went so far as to predict that it “may turn out to be Osama bin Laden’s worst nightmare.”

The Predator drones are 27 feet long with a wingspan of approximately 49 feet. They cruise along at the leisurely pace of about 84 miles an hour, scouting for targets. The planes are made at a $25 million per copy pricetag by the San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, which describes its creation as the Pentagon’s “eyes in the sky.”

But a newly unearthed report by Thomas Christie, the Pentagon’s top systems testing officer tells a much different story. Christie is director of Department of Defense’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation division. According to Christie’s report, “the system’s limitations have a substantial negative impact on the Predator’s ability to conduct its missions,” and that “poor target location accuracy, ineffective communications, and limits imposed by relatively benign weather, including rain, negatively impact missions such as strike support, combat search and rescue, area search, and continuous coverage.”

In sum, this revolutionary new weapon doesn’t work right when confronted with wind, cool temperatures, rain, snow or cloud cover-a resum? of incompetence that makes the B-2 bomber look like a model of efficiency by comparision and certainly must make bin Laden and his harem sleep sounder at night. Christie’s devastating report sat dormant for months until was unearthed by one of the Pentagon’s biggest pains in the neck, the Project on Government Oversight. The leaked report can be viewed at POGO’s excellent website.

Once these planes go into full-scale production there’s often no turning back regardless of how badly the machines perform on the battlefield. That’s why the Pentagon and its bevy of contractors, such as General Atomics, work so assiduously to keep the nose of the Pentagon press corps trained to the hype about the plane’s potential, while keeping its performance record buried away.

But by nearly any standard the Predator is a dreadful product. According to the Pentagon’s report and insider information:

Since 1995, an estimated 17 of the 50 Predator aircraft built for the U.S. Air Force have crashed during testing and another 5 are believed to have been shot down on military missions. At $25 million per Predator, hundreds of millions of dollars have been lost during testing alone. Director Thomas Christie, Operational Test and Evaluation, wrote in the report that the Predator is “not operationally effective or suitable” because the aircraft has several critical limitations. When flying in the rain, Predator missions are negatively impacted in a number of ways including poor target location accuracy and ineffective communications, according to the Pentagon’s report. There is considerable concern that the Predator is highly vulnerable to being shot down because it flies at a slow speed and at low altitudes. It also cannot perform its mission while flying at night, according to the Pentagon’s report.

Ultimately, the report concludes, “DOT&E finds the system to be not operationally suitable…because of the serious deficiencies in reliability, maintainability and human factors design.”

“When the national media fails in their investigative responsibilities, it is American service men and women, as well as American taxpayers, who suffer the consequences,” said Danielle Brian, Executive Director of POGO. CP

Jeffrey St. Clair is editor of CounterPunch. His new book is Killing Trayvons: an Anthology of American Violence (with JoAnn Wypijewski and Kevin Alexander Gray). He can be reached at: sitka@comcast.net.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

January 23, 2017
John Wight
Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
Mark Schuller
So What am I Doing Here? Reflections on the Inauguration Day Protests
Patrick Cockburn
The Rise of Trump and Isis Have More in Common Than You Might Think
Binoy Kampmark
Ignored Ironies: Women, Protest and Donald Trump
Gregory Barrett
Flag, Cap and Screen: Hollywood’s Propaganda Machine
Gareth Porter
US Intervention in Syria? Not Under Trump
L. Ali Khan
Trump’s Holy War against Islam
Gary Leupp
An Al-Qaeda Attack in Mali:  Just Another Ripple of the Endless, Bogus “War on Terror”
Norman Pollack
America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
Bob Fitrakis - Harvey Wasserman
We Mourn, But We March!
Kim Nicolini
Trump Dump: One Woman March and Personal Shit as Political
William Hawes
We Are on Our Own Now
Martin Billheimer
Last Tango in Moscow
Colin Todhunter
Development and India: Why GM Mustard Really Matters
Mel Gurtov
Trump’s America—and Ours
David Mattson
Fog of Science II: Apples, Oranges and Grizzly Bear Numbers
Clancy Sigal
Who’s Up for This Long War?
Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail