I noticed you mentioned in your previous testimony that you felt that unmanned fighters or UA.... They're not really UAVs. Being in the Trenton area, I've been speaking to pilots as well as to manufacturers. For the next generation—probably not the aircraft we're going to purchase now, but after you and I are no longer here, so probably in 20 to 25 years—they don't think people will be in planes anymore. When we talk about UAVs in the battlefield, we know that, number one, in modern society we have an aversion to bringing back people who are no longer with us. In other words there is the cost of just human resources. For the purposes of surveillance and even for the purposes of battle, UAVs give you a couple of advantages. One, you don't see the deceased members of the armed forces coming back, and two, as far as wounded personnel go, in this day and age it's costing in the millions of dollars. When you look at the human cost, the emotional cost, and the actual cost, it makes more sense to use drones in those areas where you're likely to have casualties. Would you agree that's a significant consideration that governments make when it comes to utilizing unmanned vehicles versus manned vehicles?
On November 27th, 2014. See this statement in context.