Drone Base in Malibu?

Having grown up near the big El Lay, I know the surrounding cities fairly well. And despite the below article, Pt Mugu, the site of the Navy’s new drone base, is a good half-hour away from the sunny shores of Malibu. Still, it makes for a good story, sort of:

Why Is the Navy Building a Shiny Drone Base in Sunny Malibu?

Malibu Drone Base, Pt Mugu

Malibu Drone Base, Pt Mugu

Sorry, Sushi/Massage Guru at Google: you no longer have the coolest tech job in America. That honor will belong to the future staff at the planned Point Mugu UAV installation in paradisiacal California. Surfing, sunrays, and constant sensor surveillance. And it’s only the beginning.

If we manage to keep the cost respectable in both basing and procurement of the Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton, we will keep ahead of the competitive curve.

18 thoughts on “Drone Base in Malibu?

  1. Mugu has long been the Navy’s Pacific Missile Test Center. My Uncle was stationed there and so was I. Makes perfect sense.

  2. I work for a concrete subcontractor. We’ve bid on the concrete work at several UAV hangers. They’re becoming quite common.

  3. Drones weren’t approved of by the State of Texas…or the governor…I wonder when the Feds will make it mandatory? Sounds like too much ‘Big Brother’ to me…k

    • I think these drones are slated to guard the coast-line or to head overseas for future ops. I don’t believe they are for internal uses. I could be wrong. . .

  4. Could be.
    “Perhaps worse, DHS is also flying Predator drone missions on behalf of a diverse group of local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies for missions beyond immigration issues. We know they have lent the drones out to the county sheriff’s department in North Dakota and the Texas Rangers, among others, but unfortunately, we don’t know the full extent DHS lending program. DHS, as is their custom, is keeping that information secret.”
    The above from.
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/11/homeland-security-wants-more-double-its-predator-drone-fleet-inside-us-despite
    But not to worry the FAA says that CIVILIAN drones can’t be armed.
    “We currently have rules in the books that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period. Those rules are in place and that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft,”

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/13/faa-official-no-armed-drones-us/#ixzz2MP1GCavX

    • Civilian drones can’t be armed. Military drones are constricted by the Posse Commitatus Act.

      Is the use of an unarmed Predator drone any different than the use of a Cessna light plane or a Bell Jet Ranger helicopter for surveillance?

      • The difference would be in the citizenry’s perception. How much faith & trust (both physically & philosophically) do they have in the constrictions concomitant with Posse Comitatus or the US Constitution? Put another way, after fours years of evidentiary governance, how much faith & trust has the present Administration earned from its citizens?

        • Posse Commitatus…. ???? Turn on the T.V. and see how our “cops” are dressing and the equipment they use. They have better stuff than we had when my unit invaded Kuwaitt. They used national guard to disarm lawful citizens at Katrina… Posse Commitatus is dead, they can do what they want.

      • xbradtc “Yet, the language of the Defense Authorization Act of 2012 seems to grant powers to the Federal Government that our Constitution expressly forbade. And those whose voices were loudest in condemning the PATRIOT Act are decidedly mute. But there isn’t any way that our military would ever be called to arrest and detain US citizens on US soil without charge. It is unimaginable. Right?”
        From an exellent post at.
        http://xbradtc.com/2012/07/23/police-battalions/

        • xbradtc. You called it in 2012. You convinced me then. President Bush (a good guy) after Katrina wanted to suspend Posse Comitatus (some say he did). This administration will use any excuse to “by-pass” the constitution. If “a high level official” (the senior gardener?) can order an American overseas killed what makes anyone think that the PC will slow them down.

  5. ND: Hmm, good links. Now I wonder if the law is followed.
    XB: Uh oh, if you mention Posse Comitatus. . .
    Struan: Perception is key.
    Sgt M: The cops do have some tricked-out gear.

  6. Point of order, Mr. Attorney General!

    Define, precisely, what “not engaged in combat” entails.

Comments are closed.