Aircraft Maker Pushing Exports Of Spy Drones

[Richard]

And so it goes...

Richard

Aircraft Maker Pushing Exports Of Spy Drones
AP, 2 Apr 2010

The U.S.-made RQ-4 Global Hawk spy plane looks like an upside-down double-decker bus with wings, flies slowly, offers zero leg room — and is one of the most coveted pieces of military technology in the world.

Impressed by its successes in combat for the U.S. Air Force in Iraq and Afghanistan, countries around the globe are lining up to buy the unmanned "drone" aircraft to bolster their own intelligence abilities, despite concerns that exports might send sensitive technology into the wrong hands.

Some experts said the export of the planes could also heighten tensions with countries like China, Iran and Russia — who could be the subject of closer observation and perceive the drones' operations as offensive threats.

Undaunted by such concerns, Northrop Grumman, the producer of the Global Hawk, just wrapped up an Asian tour in Tokyo with a full-sized mock-up and says that along with Japan other countries considering adding the plane to their air forces are South Korea, Australia, Singapore, Britain, Spain, New Zealand and Canada.

Germany has already contracted for a variant called the EuroHawk to be delivered this year.

(cont'd) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100402/ap_on_re_as/as_japan_exporting_drones

[JJ_BPK]

Aircraft Maker Pushing Exports Of Spy Drones


I voted my proxy FOR export.

Everyone is trying to make UAV's. It's like the car market.

If you prevent your country's manufactures from selling what they have, you only hurt yourself.

Now, If your want to argue why the arms industry is a gazillion dollar business, that's different. Stopping governments from spending on arms is a world wide problem.

[Dozer523]

I voted my proxy FOR export.

Everyone is trying to make UAV's. It's like the car market.

If you prevent your country's manufactures from selling what they have, you only hurt yourself.

Now, If your want to argue why the arms industry is a gazillion dollar business, that's different. Stopping governments from spending on arms is a world wide problem. We're not in the UAV business to make a buck. We're in it too kill bad guys. (You knew that.)
"Bad guys" is a relative term. This may come as surprise to some of you, but there are people out there who don't like me (personally). When I see an upside-down double-decker flying bus coming toward me I'd like to think it's on my side. In that situation, I probably have enough to worry about. ("F Me! To whom does THAT upside-down double-decker flying bus belong?!!?" . . . )

Let them try all they want and let us try to make it difficult . . . like how we deal with the Iranian nuclear bomb. And, yup! when you're on the receiving end of any weapon it is the same thing. (You knew that too.)

[Richard]

We're not in the UAV business to make a buck.

Better define 'we' in that one - I suspect Northrup Grumman defines it differently.

Remember - the 'right' to peddle arms is an ages old American tradition. :rolleyes:

And so it goes...

Richard's jaded $.02 :munchin

[Axe]

I have never looked, but I assumed the USG would have the drones covered under ITAR.

If they aren't under ITAR now, it will be interesting to see if they are added soon. Then it will be interesting to see what countries Northrop Grumman can sell them to under the license.

[Utah Bob]

Better define 'we' in that one - I suspect Northrup Grumman defines it differently.

Remember - the 'right' to peddle arms is an ages old American tradition. :rolleyes:

And so it goes...

Richard's jaded $.02 :munchin

Yup. 'We' would be the guys with boots.
The other 'we' is the guys with suits.