4 ms·
Almost certainly not armed. It's there for surveillance, not to hit targets; no point in carrying the weight unless you're expecting a fight
by meepmorp 4y ago
Almost certainly not armed. It's there for surveillance, not to hit targets; no point in carrying the weight unless you're expecting a fight
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rbanffy 4y agoBesides that, I wouldn't expect the US to use an MQ-9 to hit anything discreetly. There are much better tools for that.
- somat 4y agoI stumbled on a video yesterday about the battle of Khasham, after a bit of research it is probably mostly hyperbola but there are some truths in there, one of which was that the first shots to stop the convoy were via mq-9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viuUzGGac5M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viuUzGGac5M It is a dark subject but I admit I laughed when the video got to the part where a b-52 was involved, a hulking monster of a strategic bomber, "Ahh man you tactical bombers get to have all the fun. Ok, get your lumbering ass over here, we are trying to send a message, so you get to drop some bombs too."
- gibspaulding 4y agoI love that we're still flying B52's. That plane first flew closer to the Wright Flyer than to today. (By a lot!)