Re:Woefully inefficient... (Score 1)

That 400 lbs of cargo isn't flown in by magical faeries.

Really?

Hauling in a truck-load of fuel, to move 400 lbs of water, to supply a few soldiers for a day or two, is going to kill FAR more people than just having someone transport supplies to those soldiers by traditional means, or avoiding putting those soldiers so far out there in the first place that they get cut off.

1) Your truck load of fuel can be up to 1000 miles away from your soldiers. Kind of a big deal when you are worried about the danger of "forward positions".

2) You're the only one saying this is just going to carry water. It's not.

3) If you're afraid of risking more soldiers, why are you willing to send them on manned delivery runs, but afraid of the risk of them trucking in fuel 1000 miles away?

And besides lives, you have all kinds of questions of COST, MAINTENANCE, RELIABILITY, etc. If one of these ridiculously low-capacity supply planes means that a dozen Humvees don't get armor because of cost or lack of manpower, then you're making an incredibly stupid mistake.

Well no shit maintenance is an issue. And it's not with Humvees? And who said we were going to make dumb ass judgements on when to use these and when to spend on something else? That's just an assumption based on the idea that they are useless. A bit of a self-fulfilling argument.

In addition, I specifically pointed out that there are alternatives which could do the job INFINITELY better than this far-fetched creation.

This creation doesn't exist yet, so that remains to be seen. You said use one of the vehicles from DARPA. Right. Show me the DARPA vehicle that is going to navigate 1000 miles of a war zone and deliver a 400 lb + payload right now.