DOCSLIB.ORG

5.1 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Business Model Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Service Demand 2015 - 2035 Literature Review & Projections of Future Usage Technical Report, Version 1.0 — February 2014 DOT-VNTSC-DoD-13-01 Prepared for: United States Air Force Aerospace Management Systems Division, Air Traffic Systems Branch (AFLCMC/HBAG) Hanscom AFB, Bedford, MA Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Defense in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Cover Page photo source: United States Air Force (www.af.mil) REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED February 2014 Final Technical Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. FUNDING NUMBERS Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Service Demand 2015-2035: Literature Review and Projections of VHD2 Future Usage, Version 1.0 6. AUTHOR(S) 5b. CONTRACT NUMBER MIPR #F2BDDL2100G001 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER U.S. Department of Transportation John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center DOT-VNTSC-DoD-13-01 55 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING U.S. Air Force AGENCY REPORT NUMBER Aerospace Management Systems Division, Air Traffic Systems Branch (AFLCMC/HBAG) Hanscom AFB 1641 Barksdale Rd. Bedford, MA 01730 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Volpe Program Manager: Jason Glaneuski 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) This report assesses opportunities, risks, and challenges attendant to future development and deployment of UAS within the National Airspace System (NAS) affecting UAS forecast growth from 2015 to 2035. Analysis of four key areas is performed: technology, mission needs, economics, and existing or anticipated challenges to routine use in NAS operations. Forecast effects of emerging technologies as well as anticipating new technological innovations in areas of airframes, powerplants, sensors, communication, command and control systems, and information technology and processing are evaluated. Anticipated mission needs include intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), as well as new areas such as stores delivery, cargo transport, search and rescue, and pilot augmentation; example business case models are developed for each of these areas. Challenges to routine UAS usage in the NAS include: absence of legislation and regulations for safe flight in integrated airspace; pilot training and certification; regulatory, policy, and procedural issues; social issues, such as privacy and nuisance concerns; environmental issues, such as noise and emissions; and safety. Provided these challenges are largely mitigated, the following are projections of UAS fleet size by user in 2035: Department of Defense ~14,000, with additional ~5,000 having optional pilot augmentation (Air Force ~3,500; Navy + Marines ~2,500; Army ~10,000); Public Agencies (Federal, State, & Local) ~70,000. Total UAS vehicles will approach ~250,000 by 2035, of which ~175,000 will be in the commercial marketplace. UAS operations are expected to surpass manned aircraft operations, for both military and commercial domains, by 2035. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPV), 138 Ground Based Sense and Avoid (GBSAA), Airborne Sense and Avoid (ABSAA), Communications, Command, 3 and Control (C ), Sensors, Information Technology, Airframes, Powerplants, Mission Needs, Economic 16. PRICE CODE Barriers, Market Development, Commercial Markets, Business Models, Regulations, Policies, Procedures 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unlimited Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 298-102 SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km AREA in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m2 ac acres 0.405 hectares ha mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liters L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or "metric ton") Mg (or "t") oz ounces 28.35 grams g TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) oF Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 Celsius oC or (F-32)/1.8 ILLUMINATION fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2 FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N lbf/in2 poundforce per square inch 6.89 kilopascals kPa APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol LENGTH mm millimeters 0.039 inches in m meters 3.28 feet ft m meters 1.09 yards yd km kilometers 0.621 miles mi AREA mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2 m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2 m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2 ha hectares 2.47 acres ac km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2 VOLUME mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz L liters 0.264 gallons gal m3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3 m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3 mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz MASS g grams 0.035 ounces oz kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb Mg (or "t") megagrams (or "metric ton") 1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T g grams 0.035 ounces oz TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) oC Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit oF ILLUMINATION lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc cd/m2 candela/m2 0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf kPa Kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per square inch lbf/in2 *SI = International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380. (Revised March 2003) Acknowledgments This report was produced for the United States Air Force (USAF) Aerospace Management Systems Division, Air Traffic Systems Branch (AFLCMC/HBAG) by the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center) under Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request (MIPR) agreement #F2BDDL2100G001. The intent of this report is to provide the USAF AFLCMC/HBAG with an initial comprehensive industry literature review and survey in support of (1) developing informed projections of future UAS service domains and demand, and (2) recommending opportunities for future UAS research and exploration. Generation and refinement of this report’s contents was a joint government-industry effort, drawing on UAS subject-matter expertise from personnel at the Volpe Center, Mosaic ATM, Inc., and Aviation Management Associates, Inc. The Volpe Center greatly appreciates comments and feedback submitted in response to Version 0.1 of this report. The report has been updated where appropriate to incorporate this input, and Version 1.0 of the report reflects these changes. The Volpe Center wishes to thank the USAF AFLCMC/HBAG for their continued support towards mission-critical UAS research and analysis. Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv List of Abbreviations .....................................................................................................................v Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................1 1. Background ...........................................................................................................................11 1.1 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 Historical Perspective ............................................................................................................... 11 1.3 Early Development ................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Modern Era Development ........................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Repüléstudományi Közlemények

    Repüléstudományi Közlemények

    Matyas Palik, Máté Nagy BRIEF HISTORY OF UAV DEVELOPMENT DOI: 10.32560/rk.2019.1.13 In this article, the authors present the technical development of the drones from the beginning to the present. The reader will get to know the most important periods and events of the drone's military application. At the end of the article, the authors summarize the four main purposes of military use of drones. Keywords: Flying Bomb, Pilotless Target Aircraft, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, UAV, drone INTRODUCTION The human’s desire to fly high in the sky emerged as early as its common sense. However, it took a long time to make this dream real. A large number of scientists had worked on this topic and it had demanded so many brave people’s life, until finally men could ascend from the ground. By that, people’s enthusiasm towards the aviation led to success. At first they con- quered the air by balloons, later by airships, and finally with airplanes. Meanwhile, the idea to use a machine that can fly without a person on board has always been in the researchers mind. This idea is not surprising at all, because such a system’s advantages are obvious. We don’t have to count with the death of the on-board personnel, if the aircraft is destroyed for some reason. In addition, we can use them for such boring tasks, like aerial re- connaissance. Finally, their financial advantage is unquestionable, due to the fact, that in gen- eral a UAV’s1 price is lower than the price of a conventional aircraft.
  • Universal GEOINT Credentialing Christopher K

    Universal GEOINT Credentialing Christopher K

    GEOINT ESSENTIAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE Transparent Transportable TransIndustry USGIF is a 501(c)(3) non-lobbying, nonprofit educational foundation dedicated to promoting the geospatial intelligence tradecraft and developing a stronger community of interest between Government, Industry, Academia, and Professional Organizations. Almost 500 students Twelve Accredited Geospatial have graduated from Intelligence Certificate Programs Northeastern West Point USGIF-accredited Penn State U. of Utah programs with George Mason UM Columbia Air Force GEOINT Certificates. Redlands Academy Fayetteville State USC UT Dallas U. of South Carolina Did you know USGIF offers hundreds of hours of training, education, and professional development opportunities throughout the year? in Scholarships $792K awarded since 2004 u S gif Monograph Serie S V o L u M e 1 USGIF in 2014 published the Human Geography monograph as a community resource. Socio-Cultural Dynamics and USGIF is developing the first GEOGRAPHYChallenges to Global Security Darryl G. Murdock, Robert R. Tomes and Universal GEOINT Credentialing Christopher K. Tucker, editors Program to bolster profesional development in the GEOINT tradecraft. USGIF produces the GEOINT Symposium, the largest intelligence event in the world. Sustaining Member 240 Organizations TEN YEARS Launched in 2012 as USGIF’s first official print magazine. GEOINT ESSENTIAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE SECTION I The GEOINT Essential Body of Knowledge �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 3 Transparency and Transportability
  • From Air, Sea, and Space, Geospatial Technology Is Helping Nations Monitor One of Their Biggest and Most Understated Threats: the Open Ocean

    From Air, Sea, and Space, Geospatial Technology Is Helping Nations Monitor One of Their Biggest and Most Understated Threats: the Open Ocean

    » CARDILLO AND LONG Q&A » FUTURE GEOINT LEADERS » SMALLSAT WORKING GROUP 2014 ISSUE 4 THE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF THE UNITED STATES GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE FOUNDATION WATCHING THE 2014 USGIF MEMBERSHIP DIRECTORY WATERFrom air, sea, and space, geospatial technology is helping nations monitor one of their biggest and most understated threats: the open ocean. © DLR e.V. 2014 and © Airbus 2014 DS/© DLR Infoterra e.V. GmbH 2014 WorldDEMTM Reaching New Heights The new standard of global elevation models with pole-to-pole coverage, unrivalled accuracy and unique quality to support your critical missions. www.geo-airbusds.com/worlddem CONTENTS 2014 ISSUE 4 The USS Antietam (CG 54), the USS O’Kane (DDG 77) and the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) steam through the Gulf of Oman. As part of the John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group, these ships are on regularly scheduled deployments in support of Maritime Operations, set- ting the conditions for security and stability, as well as complementing counterterrorism and security efforts to regional nations. PHOTO COURTESY OF U.S. NAVAL FORCES CENTRAL COMMAND/U.S. 5TH FLEET 5TH COMMAND/U.S. CENTRAL FORCES NAVAL U.S. OF COURTESY PHOTO 02 | VANTAGE POINT Features 12 | ELEVATE Tackling the challenge of Fayetteville State University accelerating innovation. builds GEOINT curriculum. 16 | WATCHING THE WATER From air, sea, and space, geospatial technology 14 | COMMON GROUND 04 | LETTERS is helping nations monitor one of their biggest USGIF stands up SmallSat Trajectory readers offer Working Group. feedback on recent features and most understated threats: the open ocean. and the tablet app. By Matt Alderton 32 | MEMBERSHIP PULSE Ball Aerospace offers 06 | INTSIDER 22 | CONVEYING CONSEQUENCE capabilities for an integrated SkyTruth and the GEOINT enterprise.
  • CRUISE MISSILE THREAT Volume 2: Emerging Cruise Missile Threat

    CRUISE MISSILE THREAT Volume 2: Emerging Cruise Missile Threat

    By Systems Assessment Group NDIA Strike, Land Attack and Air Defense Committee August 1999 FEASIBILITY OF THIRD WORLD ADVANCED BALLISTIC AND CRUISE MISSILE THREAT Volume 2: Emerging Cruise Missile Threat The Systems Assessment Group of the National Defense Industrial Association ( NDIA) Strike, Land Attack and Air Defense Committee performed this study as a continuing examination of feasible Third World missile threats. Volume 1 provided an assessment of the feasibility of the long range ballistic missile threats (released by NDIA in October 1998). Volume 2 uses aerospace industry judgments and experience to assess Third World cruise missile acquisition and development that is “emerging” as a real capability now. The analyses performed by industry under the broad title of “Feasibility of Third World Advanced Ballistic & Cruise Missile Threat” incorporate information only from unclassified sources. Commercial GPS navigation instruments, compact avionics, flight programming software, and powerful, light-weight jet propulsion systems provide the tools needed for a Third World country to upgrade short-range anti-ship cruise missiles or to produce new land-attack cruise missiles (LACMs) today. This study focuses on the question of feasibility of likely production methods rather than relying on traditional intelligence based primarily upon observed data. Published evidence of technology and weapons exports bears witness to the failure of international agreements to curtail cruise missile proliferation. The study recognizes the role LACMs developed by Third World countries will play in conjunction with other new weapons, for regional force projection. LACMs are an “emerging” threat with immediate and dire implications for U.S. freedom of action in many regions .
  • Design and Control of Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicles Michael L

    Design and Control of Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicles Michael L

    Air Force Institute of Technology AFIT Scholar Theses and Dissertations Student Graduate Works 9-15-2011 Design and Control of Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicles Michael L. Anderson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.afit.edu/etd Part of the Aerospace Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Anderson, Michael L., "Design and Control of Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicles" (2011). Theses and Dissertations. 1307. https://scholar.afit.edu/etd/1307 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Graduate Works at AFIT Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of AFIT Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DESIGN AND CONTROL OF FLAPPING WING MICRO AIR VEHICLES DISSERTATION Michael L. Anderson, Major, USAF AFIT/DS/ENY/11-12 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR UNIVERSITY AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This is declared a work of the United States Government and is not subject to Copyright protection in the United States. AFIT/DS/ENY/11-12 DESIGN AND CONTROL OF FLAPPING WING MICRO AIR VEHICLES DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Graduate School of Engineering and Management Air Force Institute of Technology Air University Air Education and Training Command In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Aeronautical Engineering Michael L.
  • Dissertation / Doctoral Thesis

    Dissertation / Doctoral Thesis

    DISSERTATION / DOCTORAL THESIS Titel der Dissertation / Title of the Doctoral Thesis „Robotic Wars – Legitimatorische Grundlagen und Gren- zen des Einsatzes von Military Unmanned Systems in modernen Konfliktszenarien.“ verfasst von / submitted by Mag. (FH) Dr. Markus Reisner angestrebter akademischer Grad / in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Wien, 2017 / Vienna 2017 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt / A 794 242 degree programme code as it appears on the student record sheet: Dissertationsgebiet lt. Studienblatt / Interdisciplinary Legal Studies field of study as it appears on the student record sheet: Betreut von / Supervisor: Ao. Univ.-Prof. DDr. Christian Stadler „… von allen hier aufgestellten Behauptungen gilt: Sie sind niedergeschrieben, damit sie nicht wahr werden. Denn nicht wahr werden können sie alleine dann, wenn wir ihre hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit pausenlos im Auge behalten, und dement- sprechend handeln. Es gibt nichts Entsetzlicheres als recht zu behalten.“ Günter Anders (1902-1992) Österreichischer Philosoph in seinem Werk „Die Zerstörung unserer Zukunft“ Inhalt: 1. Einleitung......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Fragestellung und Hypothese .................................................................. 6 1.2 Angewandte Methode und verfügbare Quellen..................................... 12 2. Drone Killing – Robotic Systems in der modernen Kriegführung ............ 19 2.1 Klassifikationen von Robotic
  • Overhead Surveillance

    Overhead Surveillance

    Confrontation or Collaboration? Congress and the Intelligence Community Overhead Surveillance Eric Rosenbach and Aki J. Peritz Overhead Surveillance One of the primary methods the U.S. uses to gather vital national security information is through air- and space-based platforms, collectively known as “overhead surveillance.” This memorandum provides an overview of overhead surveillance systems, the agencies involved in gathering and analyzing overhead surveillance, and the costs and benefits of this form of intelligence collection. What is Overhead Surveillance? “Overhead surveillance” describes a means to gather information about people and places from above the Earth’s surface. These collection systems gather imagery intelligence (IMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT) and measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT). Today, overhead surveillance includes: • Space-based systems, such as satellites. • Aerial collection platforms that range from large manned aircraft to small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). A Brief History of Overhead Surveillance Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, collectively known as ISR, date back to the 1790s when the French military used observation balloons to oversee battlefields and gain tactical advantage over their adversaries. Almost all WWI and WWII belligerents used aerial surveillance to gain intelligence on enemy lines, fortifications and troop movements. Following WWII, the U.S. further refined airborne and space-based reconnaissance platforms for use against the Soviet Union. Manned reconnaissance missions, however, were risky and could lead to potentially embarrassing outcomes; the 1960 U-2 incident was perhaps the most widely publicized case of the risks associated with this form of airborne surveillance. Since the end of the Cold War, overhead surveillance technology has evolved significantly, greatly expanding the amount of information that the policymaker and the warfighter can use to make critical, time-sensitive decisions.
  • Unmanned Systems Sentinel

    Unmanned Systems Sentinel

    Unmanned Systems Sentinel All opinions expressed within this newsletter are those of the respective author or authors and do not represent the official policy or positions of the Naval Postgraduate School, the United States Navy, or any other government entity. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Thanks to Robin Alexander, Mark Rindler and Marcy Huber for providing several of the below articles. 22 MAY 2016 Please keep in mind that in most instances the below summaries are excerpts from the original article. The full articles can be viewed at the accompanying hyper-links. The inclusion of these links does not represent an endorsement of the organization, service, or product. Immediately below are this edition’s highlights with links to the respective articles: NAVY/USMC: AeroVironment details Blackwing UAS (Navy to Deploy Submarine-Launched Drones) Navy Researchers to Test UAV Swarming Technology this Summer USN Expects More Development of Stingray Timeline This Year ARMY: US Army Special Operations Has Big Appetite for ISR – UAS Army tests prepare for all-domain warfare US Army tests GBSAA system Army Mulls Hybrid Electric for Next Gen Drones USAF: USAF’s Small UAS roadmap calls for swarming ‘kamikaze’ drones USAF to go small on UAS NATIONAL AIR SPACE: California has the Most Drones in US (Excellent tables and illustrations) FAA Expands Drone Detection Pathfinder Initiative FAA Key Initiatives – UAS FAA Releases Drone Registration Location Data FAA and FBI Test Drone Detection A Look Back at April Drone Law Developments:
  • Desind Finding

    Desind Finding

    NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE ARCHIVES Herbert Stephen Desind Collection Accession No. 1997-0014 NASM 9A00657 National Air and Space Museum Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC Brian D. Nicklas © Smithsonian Institution, 2003 NASM Archives Desind Collection 1997-0014 Herbert Stephen Desind Collection 109 Cubic Feet, 305 Boxes Biographical Note Herbert Stephen Desind was a Washington, DC area native born on January 15, 1945, raised in Silver Spring, Maryland and educated at the University of Maryland. He obtained his BA degree in Communications at Maryland in 1967, and began working in the local public schools as a science teacher. At the time of his death, in October 1992, he was a high school teacher and a freelance writer/lecturer on spaceflight. Desind also was an avid model rocketeer, specializing in using the Estes Cineroc, a model rocket with an 8mm movie camera mounted in the nose. To many members of the National Association of Rocketry (NAR), he was known as “Mr. Cineroc.” His extensive requests worldwide for information and photographs of rocketry programs even led to a visit from FBI agents who asked him about the nature of his activities. Mr. Desind used the collection to support his writings in NAR publications, and his building scale model rockets for NAR competitions. Desind also used the material in the classroom, and in promoting model rocket clubs to foster an interest in spaceflight among his students. Desind entered the NASA Teacher in Space program in 1985, but it is not clear how far along his submission rose in the selection process. He was not a semi-finalist, although he had a strong application.
  • Download File

    Download File

    Remote Controlled Restraint The Effect of Remote Warfighting Technology on Crisis Escalation Erik Lin-Greenberg Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2019 © 2019 Erik Lin-Greenberg All rights reserved ABSTRACT Remote Controlled Restraint: The Effect of Remote Warfighting Technology on Crisis Escalation Erik Lin-Greenberg How do technologies that remove warfighters from the front lines affect the frequency and intensity of military confrontations between states? Many scholars and policymakers fear that weapons that reduce the risks and costs of war – in blood and treasure – will lead states to resort to force more frequently during crises, destabilizing the international security environment. These concerns have featured prominently in debates surrounding the proliferation and use of remote warfighting technologies, such as drones. This project sets out to evaluate whether and how drones affect crisis escalation. Specifically, do drones allow decisionmakers to deploy military forces more frequently during interstate crises? Once deployed, how do these systems affect escalation dynamics? I argue that drones can help control escalation, raising questions about scholarly theories that suggest the world is more dangerous and less stable when technology makes conflict cheaper and less risky. At the core of this project is a theory of technology-enabled escalation control. The central argument is that technologies like drones that remove friendly forces from the battlefield may lead states to use force more frequently, but decrease the likelihood of escalation when used in lieu of inhabited platforms. More specifically, these technologies lower the political barriers to initiating military operations during crises, primarily by eliminating the risk of friendly force casualties and the associated domestic political consequences for launching military operations.
  • Designing Unmanned Aircraft Systems: a Comprehensive Approach

    Designing Unmanned Aircraft Systems: a Comprehensive Approach

    Designing Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Comprehensive Approach Jay Gundlach Aurora Flight Sciences Manassas, Virginia AIAA EDUCATION SERIES Joseph A. Schetz, Editor-in-Chief Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, Virginia 20191-4344 NOMENCLATURE Item Definition A area; availability; ground area covered in a mission; radar antenna area, m2; conversion between radians and minutes of arc Aa achieved availability Abound bounded area for a closed section 2 Ad IR detector sensitive area, m 2 Aeff effective antenna area, length Ai inherent availability AO operational availability; UA availability 2 Ap propeller disk area, length ARate area coverage rate Ar effective collection area of optical receiver ASurf surface area AR aspect ratio ARWet wetted aspect ratio AR0 aspect ratio along spanwise path a UA acceleration; maximum fuselage cross-section width; speed of sound; detector characteristic dimension awa radar mainlobe width metric awr radar mainlobe width metric ax acceleration along the x direction (acceleration) B acuity gain due to binoculars; boom area; effective noise bandwidth of receiving process, Hz 21 BDoppler Doppler bandwidth (time ) BN effective noise bandwidth of the receiving process 21 BT radar signal bandwidth (time ) BSFCSL brake specific fuel consumption at sea level b web length; wing span; maximum fuselage cross- section height bw wing span b0 span without dihedral C cost of contractor
  • Air University Review: September-October 1973, Volume

    Air University Review: September-October 1973, Volume

    AIR U N I V E R S IT V PROFESSIONAl JOURNAlrcificw Of THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE T H E T he Threat, F oreicn Policy, and Cost Control: P.ARAMETERS FOR F o RCE P l ANNINC................................................................................................... 2 Col. Edward Stellini, USAF Keyn o t e of the 1970s: Joint Ven t c r es lnto Spa c e ................................................................16 Phillip O. Davis William G. Holder Air Force Review Swords, P lowsh.ares, .and Procress....................................................................................... 3 0 Lt. Gen. Kenneth W. Schultz, USAF D rone Remo t el y Pil o t e d Veh icl es and Aer ospac e Power...............................................44 Lt. Col. E. J. Kellerstrass, USAF SuPERSONIC D e LIVERY OF CoNVENTIONAL W ea PONS—F a CT OR F a NCY?.................................. 55 Charles S. Epstein Ner ve Cen t er for Spa c e Defen se...................................................................................................... 66 Maj. Sainuel C. Beainer, USAF In My Opinion T he Unit Co mma n der and the Bureaucracy............................................................... 63 Lt. Col. Arthur C. Mussman, USAF T he Nixo n Doctrine—a New Era in Foreign Policy? ...............................................89 Maj. H. A. Staley, USAF Books and Ideas W here There’s P.ain Theres Hope: M il it a r y Pr o fessio n a l ism in the Dock .......................................................................................................93