Unmanned combat aerial vehicles and transformation

Joint Force Quarterly, Winter, 2002 by John J. Klein

Autonomous systems. On the other end of the spectrum is the autonomous control system, which uses an onboard computer to locate, identify, track, and expeditiously attack targets. A control station is only used to receive sensor imagery and aircraft flight information. The foremost advantage of an autonomous system is that it does not require a constant communications link with a control station, and therefore jamming or interference of the aircraft's communications link is not detrimental to the mission. Also, autonomous systems require minimal man-hour support and are thus less expensive to operate.

The disadvantage of the control system is that it has not been combat proven. Autonomous systems have been used for reconnaissance and surveillance, but none has performed in combat. That is due in part to the biggest challenge facing autonomous systems: accountability for making weapons release decisions. Even if technology advances to allow autonomous combat, operational commanders would likely oppose it because if school buses are misidentified as troop carriers, who would be held accountable--the software programmer, UCAV squadron commander, or leader who authorized unmanned aircraft? A purely autonomous system should not be used in combat because of this dilemma.

Semiautonomous systems. While certain phases of UCAV missions are remotely piloted, others are under autonomous control, blending man-in-the-loop and autonomous operations. For instance, time-consuming tasks such as aircraft station keeping and searching for enemy targets are accomplished autonomously using onboard sensors and computers. Once potential targets are located, decisionmakers verify their identity and ensure conditions exist to release weapons. The advantage is that the most dynamic phase has a man-in-the-loop, increasing the likelihood of success while maintaining rules of engagement and minimizing the chance of misidentification and engagement of noncombatants. The disadvantages are that communications links are susceptible to jamming or interference and that a decisionmaking process involving several people increases the time required to authorize weapons release and engage targets.

Gazing into the Future

From the descriptions of naval UCAVs on the drawing board, it appears likely that these vehicles will incorporate long-range surveillance sensors, electronic surveillance equipment, and precision weapons. Since the Marine Corps has no program underway, it seems doubtful that they will get a dedicated vehicle in the near future; however, it may be possible to modify a land-based Predator for use with close air support and surveillance missions. A near-term plan is in place, but what will naval UCAVs look like in the future?

Minesweeping. While not specifically found on unmanned aircraft, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has used a chemical sniffer to detect buried landmines. With similar technology, a swarm of miniature UCAVs could fly over amphibious landing areas or minefields to locate buried landmines. A single vehicle would lightly land next to the landmine. All of these vehicles would detect individual mines, and once the swarm had detected them all, they would detonate onboard incendiary devices in unison, destroying themselves and the mines. A signal to detonate would come from a single manned control station, precluding unintentional detonation and collateral damage.