Stepping up drone missions
In the past year alone, the Air Force has supported more than 400 firefights involving RPAs, Maybury says. In 2010 they captured 30,000 hours of full motion video during their missions along with 11,000 high fidelity images. "We call them remotely piloted aircraft because in fact we have professionals—both pilots and sensor operators—operating them," Maybury says. "I don't even like the word 'drones.' It sounds boring personally."
The Air Force's large-scale RPA deployment began after 9/11; it had a single RPA in operation in 2001. The Air Force now operates at least four different models of medium-sized or large unmanned aircraft. In addition to its 175 Predators, there are 14 jet-powered Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawks, the largest RPAs in the Air Force's fleet with wingspans of 35 to 40 meters. About 40 turboprop-powered General Atomics MQ-9 Reapers (a larger version of the Predator) were supposed to be entering the fleet this year. The Air Force also uses the Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel, a "stealthy reconnaissance aircraft whose existence has only recently been acknowledged by the Air Force," the CBO reports.
Last year, for the first time in its history, the Air Force trained more RPA pilots than fixed-wing pilots. RPAs are often equipped with full-motion cameras, infrared cameras to provide night vision, signals intelligence sensors to eavesdrop on communications and a variety of other sensors. In addition to a pilot, each RPA has a sensor operator who directs the cameras and signals sensors during a mission. All of this information is fed to a system of "exploiters," Air Force personnel who analyze all of that streaming video and other signal intelligence coming in and feed information as needed back to the pilot and sensor operator.
Other branches of the military, as well as the CIA, have also come to rely heavily on drones. The Army primarily operates three medium-sized models of unmanned aircraft—Northrop Grumman MQ-5B Hunters, AAI Corp. RQ-7 Shadows (also used by the Marines), and two different types of Predators. The CBO estimates that the Army alone will spend about $5.9 billion in the next five years to add to its drone fleet.
The Navy is testing two new types of RPA—the long-endurance Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) aircraft—a Global Hawk variant—and the Northrop Grumman MQ-8B Firescout unmanned helicopter. The Navy's plans call for purchasing 65 BAMS through 2026 and 168 Firescouts through 2028, according to the CBO.
ROVER ground stations
This wide variety of drones enables attacks on a diversity of enemy positions, but perhaps as significant is the ability to communicate with troops on the ground. This is done with the help of Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver (ROVER) ground stations that combine a ruggedized laptop, software, a handset and a radio to give troops live, overhead intelligence from a variety of platforms—manned aircraft, unmanned aircraft, just about anything with a camera able to stream a data feed, says Chris Bronk, an information technology policy research fellow at Rice University's James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy in Houston and a former U.S. State Department diplomat. "This helps American soldiers see beyond the next hill, in real time," he adds. The original ROVER system, developed in 2002, required a Humvee to lug it around. Newer systems can fit into a backpack.
ROVERs "are particularly transformational because now you have people on the ground who can see what the aircraft is seeing in the air in real time while also communicating with the DCGS [distributed common ground station] back in the U.S.," Maybury says. Troops with ROVERs can even request that RPA pilots and sensor operators fly or scan in a particular direction or over a particular area.
A key development in RPA operation over the past five years has been the ability to install systems of multiple cameras such as the Gorgon Stare video capture system and the Autonomous Real-time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance Imaging System (ARGUS-IS). "Now we're able to see not just a single full-motion video but actually wide area motion imagery [WAMI], which provides multi-spot infrared imagery," Maybury says. "Ten years ago, you get a single feed, today we're looking at 65 spots of two frames a second around a wide area." A ROVER can dial into a particular channel or tell a sensor operator to follow a particular vehicle on a particular channel.
Micro air vehicles
Military and intelligence units have become increasingly interested in smaller drones that can improve reconnaissance and surveillance operations. Some of these drones are hand launched while others are even smaller and resemble birds and insects.
The Air Force Research Laboratory Air Vehicles Directorate Micro Air Vehicle Integration & Application Research Institute at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio is dedicated to the development and testing of micro air vehicles (MAVs). Less than 0.6 meters in length, a MAV is capable of operating below rooftop level in an urban environment. It may have a fixed wing, rotary wing (helicopter), flapping wing or even no wings. The Air Force has been developing MAVs as a way of getting in close on enemy fighters, although such small devices are difficult to control (even a wind gust can take them out of position).
AeroVironment, Inc. is developing even smaller drones that weigh less than 20 grams. DARPA contracted the Monrovia, Calif., company to design and build a flying prototype "hummingbird-like" aircraft for the Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program. In February AeroVironment introduced its 16-centimeter-long Nano Hummingbird, capable of climbing and descending vertically, flying sideways left and right, flying forward and backward, as well as rotating clockwise and counter-clockwise under remote control and carrying a small video camera.
Subscription Center
See what we're tweeting about
20 Comments
Add CommentIt is impressive how technologically-advanced our society has become. However, I would be more impressed if all that money and effort were allocated to life-enhancing purposes instead of the purposes of destruction and killing. These drones are technologically amazing and worthy of admiration. However it is very sad to see the motivations and purposes behind this technology.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is cool that Scientific American can quote its 1849 article on this topic!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've always wondered what these drones have against wedding parties. They really despise them. Amazing piece of technology, though.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA little satire on the subject. http://www.thechicagodope.com/2010/11/11/cia-admits-drone-strike-killed-six-in-wisconsin-wedding-party/
I'm highly impressed by the U.S. Army's planning document (pdf - "Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2010-2035") you link to. It shows in great detail the intention to introduce UAV's to the United States (acronym NAS - National Air Space); shows how they intend to use them for information-gathering, "homeland defense," and to help with emergencies and disasters; and even proposes eventual coordinated "swarms of nanos" in urban environments (equipped with face recognition) and larger UAV's capable of "non-lethal" weaponry.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo mystery here. Looks like Congress will appropriate the money, too.
Great more funds for dead civilians
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was also instrumental in the creation of the internet. Who knows? Perhaps someday this technology will become equally beneficial to everyone.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat is the most revolting is that the US uses its outrageous military spending solely to defend its wealthy few.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRemember that all this technology the government and military develops is open for abuse.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReality check: ALL technology is open to abuse.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUsing thousand of Drone air plans in Iraq,Afghanistan and Pakistan and murdering millions of innocent people why not U.S.lingering there without success?What is wrong with U.S. foreign policy? Why above countries still fighting with U.S.?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhere is the data on the cost (per drone)?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOnce a drone is shot down or captured, won't it go straight to other countries for dismantling and duplication (at 1000th of our cost)? Similar to what is already happening to military robotics.
Can these drones be used to spy on our own citizens? Can they be used by the military to forward their own agenda (as far as funding and congressional voting)?
How many of other drones were purchased by the CIA and the other American backed companies that operate independently of "military orders", but carry out war with their own means and agenda?
Aren't these the same drones now being used by our own border patrols (Mexico). What is their impact on the drug cartels and the overall war on drugs? Are the facial recognition cameras simply noting the players? Are they afraid of stepping on American financing toes? Are they using the information to stop the flow, or just using it to get their own piece of the "financial kickback" pie?
Shooting down a US pilot engaged in wartime activities is considered an act of war. Would shooting a pilot operating a drone be considered murder or an act of war if the pilot is in the US? I am concerned that we have inadvertently brought the battlefield to our shores.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are commenting on the internet so like it or not, by global standards you are part of the wealthy few.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour numbers are way off - the USA has killed tens of thousands and not millions and the majority of those were not unarmed civilians. The USA is not at war against Iraq or Afghanistan. We are at war with a group of Saudi Arabian religious zealots and probably indirectly with the religious dictatorship of Iran. Compared to nuking Japan or firebombing Dresden, this has been a very civilized set of wars. The real barbarous animals here are the ones that deliberately target children and turn Mosques and Madrassas into military targets.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery good point but really, we are already at war with people targeting our country that have already stated clearly that civilians are their main objective to kill. It would be different if we were fighting a real country.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI like robots because they do nothing wrong unless made to do wrong. It all looks to me to be evolution on the time-line of Earth , - which I believe is the most important perspective - we must look at the time-line of the Earth before judging things. The biggest problem has been lack of peace in nature - even before humans came along and nothing in nature had the power to fix the problem. I want robots to set up new designer ecosystems. That means the opportunity for peace in nature. I am not arguing for a principle, rather a sustainable environment that allows advancement of science so we can survive and have capacity to live fully. The bottom line is that the current problem is if robots are supported only for work in civilizations rather than work in ecosystems. Look, if you had the best designer ecosystem - what would it not do for you?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAny sceptics or supporters of my theory should answer this important question.
I like robots because they do nothing wrong unless made to do wrong. It all looks to me to be evolution on the time-line of Earth , - which I believe is the most important perspective - we must look at the time-line of the Earth before judging things. The biggest problem has been lack of peace in nature - even before humans came along and nothing in nature had the power to fix the problem. I want robots to set up new designer ecosystems. That means the opportunity for peace in nature. I am not arguing for a principle, rather a sustainable environment that allows advancement of science so we can survive and have capacity to live fully. The bottom line is that the current problem is if robots are supported only for work in civilizations rather than work in ecosystems. Look, if you had the best designer ecosystem - what would it not do for you?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI invite all to answer this important question.
"The September 11, 2001 attacks initiated a flurry of advances in military technology over the past decade that has helped the U.S. and its allies redefine modern warfare."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYet the most sophisticated of all drones, the Predator dates back to the mid 90ties...
"The U.S. Army's drone armada alone has expanded from 54 drones in October 2001..."
Did you take into account the four drones that flew respectively into the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and into the ground in Pennsylvania?
In the hopefully not too far away future, US drones will have to face World revolution based on the civil society's myriads of personal ultra-light, electrical tiltrotor aircraft.
Should the revolutionaries not be able to outnumber the US drones, they will nevertheless beat them economically because these personal aircraft will grant the civil society much more even than the economic value currently granted by the motorcar they will substitute over time, plus the huge savings from abandoning intercity motorway infrastructure construction and maintenance.
Not only will military drones weigh heavily on the State budget, but with the announced (or already mass-produced?) hypersonic drones capable of dropping six tons of bombs on any big city of the globe within less than two hours, a threat of yet incomparably greater magnitude is arising:
As we know from WW2, a bomb carpet dropped on a big city creates the same fire storm as happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- yet without the environmental aftermath of a nuclear blast.
Strategically, this type of environmentally friendly mass-destruction potential will lead to a DRAMATIC LOWERING OF THE DECISION-FOR-ACTION THRESHOLD -- with the risk of nuclear escalation nonetheless to follow!
Teheran, mon amour...
The United States has not declared war on any of the countries you speak of - they are indulging in preemptive presence in those countries because they want their oil. The overseas countries have stated that they want the U.S. military out of their countries, and the U.S. should leave and stop meddling in the affairs of other countries. They should take their military personnel back to the U.S. where they belong to protect their own country. The very reason why you say other countries want to attack U.S. is because U.S. did it to them first and won't leave.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt has been announced "Drones Are Going Mainstream" in United States air space nationwide, for sole purpose of surveillance. They were getting resistance from FAA because of concerns FAA has about potential crashes the unmanned drones could likely have with commercial & private airplanes because drones are not controlled by air traffic controllers. It is a very valid and sensible concern. But as usual government prevailed and drones are probably flying around America as we speak. It is written they are difficult to detect, but that makes sense - how else can they spy effectively on society if easy to detect. This is a very large step forward in more loss of USA peoples freedoms, and you Americans just let it happen. Your Founding Fathers would be shamed of you Americans for what you are putting up with - when will you all finally stand up for yourselfs and say "Enough!" "No!" All of us in Europe we are stunned that you had most sublime document in all of History of world, and you just let them take it from you over last ten years without one objection. It will not be long you will understand what you lost when it is too late to do anything about it, when you look at the world from behind locked gates.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this