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.

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The Greatest Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail