World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems · World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems Market Profile and...

World UnmannedAerial VehicleSystems

Market Profileand Forecast2008

WorldUnmannedAerialVehicle SystemsMarket Profile and Forecast

2008 Edition

Steven J. Zaloga, Senior Analyst - Missiles & UAVs(410) 676-7698email: [email protected]

Dr. David Rockwell, Senior Analyst - Military Electronics(703) 385-1992 ext. 106email: [email protected]

Philip Finnegan, Senior Analyst - Defense & Aerospace Companies(703) 385-1992 ext. 105email: [email protected]

homepage: www.tealgroup.com

Main Office3900 University Dr.Suite 220Fairfax, VA 22030(703) 385-1992(703) 691-9591 fax

Sales Offices:

Eastern RegionDoug CornellP.O. Box 3029Falls Church, VA 22043(703) [email protected]

Mid Western RegionDavid Conklin8031 Buckland Dr.Cincinnati, OH 45249(513) [email protected]

Western RegionPravin Parmar2618 E. First St.Long Beach, CA 90803(562) [email protected]

EuropeMonika CornellP.O. Box 3029Falls Church, VA 22043(703) [email protected]

© Teal Group CorporationALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Briefing Book SeriesDefense & Aerospace Agencies BriefingDefense & Aerospace Companies BriefingInternational Defense BriefingMilitary Electronics BriefingWorld Missiles & UAVs BriefingWorld Military & Civil Aircraft BriefingWorld Power Systems Briefing (Aero)World Power Systems Briefing (I&M)World Space Systems Briefing

Weekly NewsletterDefense Business Briefing

Sector StudiesWorld Unmanned Aerial Vehicle SystemsWorld Space Mission Model

Table of Contents

Executive Overview

The Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1World UAV Expenditures Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2UAV Unit Production Forecast by Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2UAV Unit Production Forecast by Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Study Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Forecast Assumptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Forecast Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Assessing the UAV Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Civil UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

The Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Regional Acquisition Forecast Summary by UAV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Asia-Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14The Americas (less USA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Americas/Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

UAV Regional Production Forecast Summary by UAV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Mini-UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Tactical UAVs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Naval UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15MALE UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16HALE UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16UCAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Civil UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

The US Market

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19DOD UAV Funding History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20US UAV Budget Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22US Production Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23US Procurement Expenditure by Category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Program Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24RQ-1/MQ-9 Predator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24RQ-4A Global Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28RQ-7A Tactical UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31US Army Future UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33US Navy UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36US Marine Corps Tactical UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39US Micro-/Mini-UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41UCAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46US Coast Guard UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49US Civil UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

European UAV Market

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57Current European Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57Civil UAV Development in Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Country Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Bulgaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

©Teal Group Corporation World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems

European Union/NATO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62Finland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78Netherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Poland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Portugal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Russia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84Serbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88Spain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94United Kingdom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Rest of the World UAV Market

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Bahrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Israel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109Kuwait . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Qatar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Saudi Arabia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110United Arab Emirates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Algeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Angola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Botswana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Ivory Coast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Libya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Morocco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113South Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Asia-Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Korea (ROK) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Malaysia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127Philippines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Singapore. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Sri Lanka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130Taiwan (ROC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

The Americas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

page ii Table of Contents

World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems ©Teal Group Corporation

Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137The Demand for ISR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137The UAV Market. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137The Market Upside. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137Reality Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137Persistent Surveillance and Endurance UAVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138Sensor Payloads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

Funding Forecast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138US UAV E-O/IR RDT&E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138US Airborne Hyperspectral E-O/IR Technology RDT&E+Procurement (also for non-UAVs) . . . . . . . . . 138US UAV E-O/IR Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138International UAV E-O/IR Procurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139Global Hawk Basic and Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139Global Hawk SYERS (Senior Year E-O Reconnaissance System) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142Global Hawk SPIRITT & USAF Hyperspectral Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143Navy BAMS E-O/IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144Coast Guard Deepwater Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145Predator AN/AAS-52(V) MTS-A/B (Multi-Spectral Targeting System) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145Predator RAPTOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147[Predator] Imaging Laser Radar Development Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148Army RQ-1C Warrior ER/MP E-O/IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148US Civil Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149SensorCraft ISR UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHARE) UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

UCAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150US Air Force/Navy UCAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150US Navy UCAS-D E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

Tactical UAV E-O/IR Sensors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152US Navy MQ-8B Fire Scout BRITE Star II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152US Army MQ-8B FCS Class 4A (Fire Scout) E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154USCG Bell Eagle Eye Star SAFIRE III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155US Commercial UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156US Army Shadow 200 TUAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156US Marine Corps Shadow 200 MCTUAS E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157USMC RQ-2A Pioneer POP 200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158US Army Hunter Raven Eye II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159USAF FINDER UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Mini-UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160US Army A160 Hummingbird FCS Class II UAV ARGUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160Marine Corps ScanEagle Photon IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161RQ-11 Raven ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162Marine Corps Dragon Eye ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162Pointer and Exdrone ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163Air Force Desert Hawk (was Sentry Owl) E-O Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164US Mini-UAV E-O/IR Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164

Micro-Air Vehicle (MAV) E-O/IR Sensors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164FCS Class I MAV E-O Sensors (DRS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) E-O Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165

International UAV E-O/IR Sensor Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165Sensors Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165Israeli E-O/IR Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166French E-O/IR Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Table of Contents page iii


German E-O/IR Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167South African E-O/IR Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Technology Development Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167LASH & EPAS & AURORA & Navy & Army Hyperspectral Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167Airborne UAV-Specific Solicitations and Contracts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169E-O/IR Technology Program Solicitations and Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172UAV E-O/IR Market Shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

Synthetic Aperture Radars

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181SAR Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181Changing Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181The SAR Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Persistence Pays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Market Shares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

Endurance UAV SARs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183Global Hawk MP-RTIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183Global Hawk AGS/MP-RTIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185Global Hawk HISAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187Navy BAMS ISAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189Coast Guard Deepwater Endurance UAV ISAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191Predator TESAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191Predator B Lynx SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192Warrior ER/MP Lynx II SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195SeaVue SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195SensorCraft ISR UAV SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196Vulture SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHARE) UAV SAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

UCAV Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197US Navy UCAS-D Radars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Tactical UAV Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197MQ-8B Fire Scout Lynx II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198Bell Eagle Eye RDR 1700 MMR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198US Civil UAV SARs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198Army Shadow 200 TUAV SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199MiniSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199Army Future Combat System (FCS) A160 FORESTER FOPEN SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200USMC Dragon Warrior MiniSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201MicroSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

International UAV SAR Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201EuroHawk SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201I-Master . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202PicoSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202SWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202AWARDS (All-Weather Airborne Reconnaissance Drone Sensor) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203QuaSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203MiSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203Mini-SAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203CARABAS (Coherent All Radio Band Sensing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203EL/M-2055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203EL/M-2022U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

Recent SAR Solicitations and RDT&E Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

SIGINT & Electronic Warfare Systems

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209SIGINT: The New EW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209US Markets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

page iv Table of Contents


International Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

Funding Forecast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

Endurance UAV EW & SIGINT Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211Global Hawk Hyperwide COMINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211LR-100 RWR/ESM/ELINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212Airborne Signals Intelligence Program (ASIP) & High Band System (HBS) & Low Band System (LBS) . . . 212Global Hawk Electronic Warfare Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214Predator SIGINT (USAF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214

UCAV EW & SIGINT Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215US Air Force/Navy UCAV Electronic Warfare Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215US Navy UCAS-D SIGINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

Tactical UAV EW & SIGINT Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215Tactical SIGINT Payload (TSP) (US Army). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215Lightweight Modular Support Jammer (LMSJ) (USAF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216Adaptive Joint C4ISR Node (AJCN) (USAF & US Army) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217US Marine Corps Electronic Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218FCS Class III & IV ESM Warning Systems (Army). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218Battlefield Helicopter Emulator (BHE) (DARPA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218Dragonfly COMINT (USN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

International UAV EW & SIGINT Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219EuroHawk ISIS SIGINT System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219UK Watchkeeper SIGINT: Soothsayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220TRC 274 & TRC 6200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220Top Scan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220Skyfix SIGINT Suite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221EL/K-7071 COMINT/DF & EL/L-8385 ESM/ELINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221Skyfix COMINT/DF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221Recent EW Solicitations and RDT&E Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221

C4I Systems

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223System Type Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223Teal Group Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224


Data Link Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225JTIDS and MIDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225USAF Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226US Navy Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227US Army Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228Smart Tanker/ROBE (Link-16/Satellite). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228EPLRS & SADL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229Improved Data Modem (IDM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230Common Data Link (CDL) & Tactical Common Data Link (TCDL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232Tactical Common Data Link-Network (TCDL-N). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234Communications Data Link System (CDLS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234Tactical Control System (TCS) & UAV Operating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234New Technology Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235

Networking and Data Fusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236C4I (Networking) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236Data Fusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

CBRN Sensors

Market Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239


Chemical & Biological Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

Table of Contents page v


TACTIC: Aerosol/Vapor Cloud Detection and Countermeasures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240Joint Biological Point Detection System Contract to GD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240IPDS Systems for Navy Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240ACTD Selections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240Biological Assessment Mobile Laboratory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241JBAIDS Toxin Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241FLIR GasFindIR Camera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241Chemical Alarm/Detector Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241JBPDS Biological Detection Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241Biological Agent ID Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242Bright Onyx UAV Chemical Sensor Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242FY06 Chemical/Biological Initiative Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242ScanEagle UAV Biological Agent Detection Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242$1 Billion for Chemical Agent Disposal Facility Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243Handheld Bio Aerosol Detection Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243Battele Gets $500 Million for DHS Biodefense Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243TACTIC Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243Joint Material Decontamination System Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243Chem/Bio Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244JBPDS Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244Chemical Agent Alarm Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244ScanEagle Chem-Bio Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244

Radiological & Nuclear Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245Alternative Nuclear Detection Technologies Sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245Nuclear Radiation Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245Radiological & Nuclear Countermeasure System Architectures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245Radioactive Liquid ID System Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246Radiological Collection UGV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

General Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246Combating Terrorism Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246J-UCAS Revolutionary Technologies Solicitation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247CBRNE Non-Intrusive Detection Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247CBRN Unmanned Ground Reconnaissance (CUGR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247CUGR MARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248Fox NBC Vehicle Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248CBRN Detection & Remediation Contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248CBRN Services Contract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249CBRN Medical Science Solicitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249Fox NBC Recon Vehicle Upgrades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249Counter Terrorism CBRN BAA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

UAV Manufacturers Overview

AAI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251

AeroVironment Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254

Aurora Flight Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256

The Boeing Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257

Elbit Systems Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

EMT Ingenieurgesellschaft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260

European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. (EADS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

General Atomics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

Honeywell Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

Insitu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266

Kaman Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267

Lockheed Martin Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267

Northrop Grumman Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

page vi Table of Contents


Proxy Aviation Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

Safran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272

Swift Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

Teledyne Technologies Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

Textron Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274

Thales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

Appendix

US DoD UAV Prime Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

Table of Contents page vii


page viii Table of Contents


Index

A

A-45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48, 97, 150-151, 215A160 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 35, 160, 182, 200-201AAI . . . 6, 26, 31-32, 34-35, 38, 44, 83, 92, 116, 148,

157-159, 235, 251-253, 255-256, 264-266,274-275

AAS-44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 166AAS-52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145-147, 166, 195AGS. . . . . . 28, 30-31, 58, 63-64, 181, 184-187, 270ALE-50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214AN/AAS-44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 166AN/AAS-52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145-147, 166, 195AN/ALE-50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214AN/USD-502 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132APY-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146, 192-194, 198ASARS-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143, 182, 187-188ASIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 140, 147, 194, 210-215AURORA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167-169AWARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203Ababil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Adaptive Joint C4ISR Node . . . . . . . . . . . . 217-218Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar System. . . 187AeroVironment . . 3, 33-34, 37-39, 42-46, 68-69, 80,

83, 162, 165, 236, 254-256Aerosonde 38, 54, 115-118, 125, 161, 164, 253, 265Aerostar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86, 107-109, 116, 166Agilucho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78Aladin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 72, 74, 76-77, 81-82, 260Algeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112Altus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90Angola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 112, 114Aquila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 12, 19-20, 32, 36Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78-79, 102, 131Army Future Combat System. . . . . . . . . . . 182, 200Asia-Pacific. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 14-17, 115Aurora Flight Sciences . . 27, 34, 149, 256, 258, 264Australia . 26, 28, 30-31, 79, 101, 106, 109, 115-118,

124, 127, 129, 141, 144, 189-190, 212, 252-253,255, 258-259, 263, 265-267, 270

Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-60, 62-63, 79, 102, 111

B

BAE Systems . . 34-35, 38, 58, 95-97, 102, 111, 116,118, 126, 140, 143-144, 152, 160-161, 167-169,185-186, 189, 211-212, 215-218, 221, 225, 252,260, 266, 269

BAI Aerosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43, 102, 254BAMS 19, 21, 23-24, 26-31, 36-37, 39, 77, 108, 117,

125, 138, 144-146, 177, 182, 189-191, 195,212-213, 234, 257, 269

BQM-147. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 163BQM-155 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 20, 40, 105, 158

BQM-34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 19, 47, 118Bahrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102Banshee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 65, 127Beejoe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 63, 71Bell Textron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 49-51, 67, 156Bigua. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79Bijo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Boeing 7, 21, 33-41, 46-49, 52, 87, 96, 106, 116, 129,

145, 148, 150-151, 154, 160-161, 183-184,189-191, 196, 200-201, 232, 235, 242, 244-245,252-253, 255-259, 263, 265-271, 273, 275

Botswana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 132Brevel . . . . . . . . . . 57-58, 62-63, 65, 67, 71-73, 262Bright Onyx . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242Broad Area Maritime Surveillance System . . . . 271Bulgaria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

C

CARABAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203CATRIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78-79, 81CBRN Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239-250CDL-N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223-225, 234CEC . . . . . . 149, 155, 168, 170, 172, 174, 192-195,

198-200, 205-207, 220, 223-225, 229-232, 239,246

CIRA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79CL-289 . 5-6, 57, 63, 66-67, 72, 75, 77, 79, 132, 167,

202, 262CL-89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 57, 63, 92, 95, 132COMINT 189, 192, 209-212, 215-217, 219-221, 234CONOPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 29, 37, 190, 193, 234Camcopter . . . . . . . . 59, 96, 102, 111-112, 157-158Canada . . . . 5, 9, 28, 58, 62-63, 72, 76, 79, 95, 108,

132-134, 147, 169, 186, 194, 214, 238, 259, 263,270, 272, 275

Chile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 131, 134China . . . 93, 101, 106, 118-120, 127-129, 205, 235Civil UAV . . 2, 8, 11-13, 16, 23, 51, 58, 72, 85, 98-99,

109, 139, 198-199Class 1 UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Class 2 UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Class 3 UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Class 4 UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Coast Guard 8-14, 21, 27-28, 30, 41, 49-51, 53, 102,

123-124, 131, 145, 156, 177, 182, 191, 198, 240,252, 263-264, 272, 275

Coast Guard UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Commercial Applications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Commercial Leasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Common Data Link. . . . 32, 148, 168, 223-224, 227,

232-234


Condor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 78Cooperative Engagement Capability . 220, 223, 230Cormorant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 268Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60-61Crécerelle 3, 5, 58, 62-63, 65-66, 79, 81, 83, 90, 167Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61-62

D

DAR . 21, 33-36, 38-39, 42, 44, 46-48, 98, 106, 146,148, 150-151, 154-155, 160-161, 164-165, 171,173, 175-177, 196, 200-201, 205, 207, 217-218,235-237, 239-240, 243, 247, 252, 268, 271, 274

DARPA . . . . . . . 21, 33-36, 38-39, 42, 44, 46-48, 98,150-151, 154-155, 160-161, 164-165, 171, 173,175-177, 196, 200-201, 205, 207, 217-218,235-237, 239-240, 243, 247, 252, 268, 271, 274

DBR-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84DP-5X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252Daewoo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124-125Data Fusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172, 236, 238Data Links. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223, 226-228, 236Deepwater 9, 28, 30, 49-51, 145, 156, 191, 195, 272,

275Denmark . . . . . . . . . . 58, 62, 65, 133, 255, 270, 272Desert Hawk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 161, 164, 268Dragon Eye . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 42-45, 161-163, 254Dragon Warrior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 201Dragonfly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189, 219, 252

E

EADS . . . 58, 62-63, 66-72, 74-77, 80, 111, 116-117,121, 165, 185-186, 201-203, 210, 219, 225, 229,238, 251, 259, 261-262, 266, 270, 272, 275-276

EL/K-7071. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221EL/L-8385 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221EL/M-2022U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105, 204EL/M-2055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67, 203-204ELINT. . . . . 5, 75, 77, 81, 85-86, 118, 150, 185, 201,

209-210, 212, 216, 219-221EMT . . . . . . . . . 72, 74, 76-77, 81-82, 127, 260-261EPAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167-169ER/MP. . . . . 138, 148-149, 159-160, 168, 177, 182,

194-195, 197, 216, 256Eagle 1 . . . . 4, 66, 105, 116, 126, 133, 261-262, 266Eagle 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67, 90, 262, 266Eagle Eye . . 11, 23, 39, 41, 49-51, 67, 71-72, 76-77,

125, 145, 155-156, 182, 198, 252, 261, 270, 272,275

Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101-103, 270Elbit 27, 53, 70, 81, 83, 93, 95-96, 103-107, 109, 113,

115-116, 129, 133-134, 159, 165-166, 177, 191,202, 220-221, 252-253, 255, 259-260, 266-267,271, 275

Epervier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60EuroHawk . 28, 58, 67, 75-77, 81, 201-202, 219, 262EuroMALE. . 58, 62, 66-68, 71-72, 75-77, 80, 89-90,

261-262European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62-63, 72, 261Exdrone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42-43, 102, 162-163

F

FAA . . 8-10, 12, 19, 21, 24, 27, 30, 32, 50-53, 55, 59,116, 145, 255

FBI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 54FCS. 21, 24, 32-33, 35-36, 39, 42, 44, 148, 154-155,

157, 160, 164, 170, 172, 174, 192, 194, 198-200,215-216, 218, 230, 237, 273

FFOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122-124FLIR Systems . . . . . . . 152-153, 155-158, 161-164,

178-179, 241FOAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97-98FQM-151 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-43, 68, 163FURI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118Falco. 21, 60, 78, 80, 92, 97, 110-111, 120, 127, 147,

157-158, 167Filin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Finland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64, 66, 79Fire Scout . . 32-33, 35-39, 41, 49-50, 70, 76-77, 96,

129, 152-156, 158, 178, 182, 192, 194, 198,215-216, 219, 232, 234-236, 252, 268-271

Firebee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7, 12, 19, 47, 118Fox NBC Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248Fox-T. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116France 7, 10, 57-58, 62-67, 70-72, 75-76, 82, 89, 91,

105, 111, 129, 132-133, 185-186, 220, 225, 238,253, 255, 261-262, 264, 266, 270, 272-273,275-276

Fuji . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122-123Future Combat System 24, 33, 35, 42, 148, 154, 170,

173-174, 182, 192, 200, 205, 230, 237, 252, 256,260, 264, 270, 273-274

Future Combat Systems 24, 174, 230, 252, 256, 274

G

GPS . 5, 43, 52, 70, 79, 122, 127, 147, 155, 172, 229General Atomics 10, 24, 26-28, 30, 33-37, 50, 52-53,

58, 67, 75, 92-93, 110, 117, 133-134, 144-146,148, 154, 182, 190-195, 198, 202, 214, 235, 253,257, 261, 263, 266, 269, 271-272

Germany . 7, 28, 31, 57-58, 62-65, 67, 71-72, 75-77,81-82, 92, 127, 132-133, 154, 185-186, 201, 219,225, 238, 260-262, 270-272, 274-276

Global Hawk 4-6, 12, 19-21, 26-31, 36-38, 49-50, 53,57-58, 63-64, 67-68, 72, 75, 87, 89, 96, 101,117-119, 123, 125, 129, 138-147, 150, 153, 156,166-167, 177-179, 181-191, 197, 201, 210-214,


page x Index

219, 234, 238, 252-253, 256-257, 259, 262-263,266, 269-271, 274

Global Observer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37, 254-255Gnat . . . . . . 24, 92-93, 110, 127, 145, 148, 193-194GrANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85-86Greece . . . . . . . . . 65, 71, 77-78, 146-147, 270, 272

H

HAE-UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 30HALE 2, 4, 7, 12-14, 16, 19, 23, 31, 51-52, 58, 63-64,

68, 71-72, 75-76, 78, 80, 88, 99, 102, 108-109,115, 117-118, 120, 124-126, 134, 138-139,234-235

HISAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139-141, 182, 187-188HV-911 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 49-50, 156Harpy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106, 114, 121Helios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 53Hermes 1500. . . . . . . . . . 67, 90, 104-105, 109, 260Hermes 450 . . . 95-96, 105-106, 108-109, 116, 159,

166, 191-192, 202, 220-221, 255, 259-260, 275Hermes 750. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105Heron . 24, 26, 35, 67, 78, 93-94, 103, 105, 108-109,

120-121, 133, 147-148, 194, 204, 215, 221,260-262, 266, 271

Honeywell 33-34, 36, 42, 44, 164, 253, 255-257, 264Hummingbird . . . . . . . . . 35, 38, 130, 160, 200, 258Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, 78, 83Hunter . . 6, 12, 20, 24, 26-27, 35, 40, 53, 60, 67, 87,

105, 108, 145, 148, 158-160, 165, 178, 191, 199,204, 217, 238, 256, 266, 271

I

I-View . . . . . . 106, 109, 116, 252, 259-260, 266-267IAI 6, 67, 83, 89, 91-93, 103-109, 116-117, 120-122,

128, 130-131, 133, 147, 149, 153, 156-159,165-166, 178-179, 194, 203-204, 215, 221, 252,260-261, 266-267, 269, 271

IMI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108, 140, 224, 232ISR. . . . . . . 1, 28, 36, 41, 76, 98, 127, 133-134, 137,

142-144, 147, 149, 151, 154, 158, 166, 169, 177,185, 189-191, 194, 196, 204, 206, 214-218, 224,232-234, 236-237, 273

ISS . . . . 139-142, 147, 166, 177, 187-188, 201, 219ISURSS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43India. . . 101, 105-106, 109, 120-121, 127, 204, 266,

272, 275Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 118, 121-122Insitu . . . 37-38, 54, 74, 232, 258-259, 265, 273, 275Integrated Sensor Suite . . . . . . . 139-140, 147, 211Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 103, 108, 112Irkut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Israel 3, 6, 8, 10-12, 19, 24, 26-27, 35, 37, 39, 53, 58,

60-61, 64, 66-67, 70, 78, 84, 86, 88, 90, 93, 96,

101-109, 112-116, 120-122, 124, 127-128,130-131, 148, 153, 157-159, 165-167, 178,191-192, 203-204, 220-221, 252-253, 255,259-262, 266-267, 269, 271

Israel Aerospace Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . 261, 266Israel Aircraft Industries . . . . . 6, 104, 148, 153, 157,

252-253, 259-260, 262, 266-267, 269, 271Italy . . . 24, 58, 63-64, 67, 69, 71, 76, 78-79, 81, 127,

146-147, 185-186, 225, 238, 255, 263, 270Ivory Coast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67, 113

J

J-UCAS 21, 46-48, 98, 150-151, 215, 235, 247, 258,271

J/AQM-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122JBAIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241JBPDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240-242, 244JTIDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223-226, 228-230JUSTAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134, 147, 194, 215, 263Japan 1, 9-10, 31, 101, 117, 122-124, 129, 147, 154,

263, 270Joint Tactical UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40, 158Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109-110

K

KZO . . . . . 34, 67, 72-73, 76, 82, 167, 252, 260-262,273-274

Kaman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 269Kentron . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59, 110, 112, 114-115, 120Korea. . . . 31, 101, 106, 111, 116, 123-127, 270-271Korean Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116, 124-125Korshun. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 87Kuwait . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 110

L

L-3 WESCAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146, 148, 193LASH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144, 167-169LMSJ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216-217LR-100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189, 211-212Lark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114-115, 260Latin America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 134Libya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79, 113, 127Lightweight Modular Support Jammer. . . . . . . . 216Littoral Airborne Sensor/Hyperspectral. . . 144, 167,

169Littoral Combat Ship . . . . . . 21, 36, 38-39, 153, 270Lockheed Martin 24, 26-27, 30, 36-38, 42, 45, 48-49,

52, 96-97, 115, 144-145, 148, 150, 152, 154, 156,164-166, 182, 189-191, 196, 213, 220, 230-231,233-234, 253, 255, 257, 260, 263, 265, 267-269,271, 274

Luch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86


Index page xi

Luna . 58, 72, 74, 76-77, 82, 107, 127, 167, 203, 260Lynx SAR . . . . . . . 147-148, 182, 192-194, 202, 215

M

MALE. . . 2-4, 7, 12-14, 16, 19, 23, 31, 54, 58, 62-63,65-68, 71-72, 74-77, 79-83, 88-91, 93-94, 97, 99,102-103, 109-112, 115, 118, 120-121, 124-126,128-129, 131-134, 138-139, 145, 147, 186, 194,214, 221, 234, 261-263, 266

MALP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80MAVUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133MCMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65-67MCTUAS . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 31-33, 40-41, 157-158MIDS . . . . . . . . . . 155, 170, 223-226, 228-231, 270MP-RTIP . . . . . . . . 29, 139-140, 177, 181-187, 270MQ-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-28, 97, 145-147, 213, 235MQ-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79MQ-4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78MQ-9 4, 7-8, 23-28, 97, 145-147, 192-193, 213, 235MQM-105 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19MTS-A/B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145Malakhit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Malat. 6, 67, 89, 91, 93, 103-104, 106, 108-109, 116,

121, 259Malaysia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Marine Corps . . . . 20-21, 31-32, 37-42, 45, 49, 153,

157-158, 161-163, 171, 174, 177, 210, 218, 226,228, 234, 239, 243, 251-254, 258, 265, 270,273-275

Marine Corps Tactical UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Mastiff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 103-105Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134-135, 159MiSAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203Micro UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 77Micro-bat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Middle East . . . . . . . . 13, 15-17, 101-102, 140, 142Midge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90, 95, 132Mini UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68, 78Mini-SAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203MiniSAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182, 199-201Mirach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 58-59, 66, 78-81Mirach 150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 78-79Mirach 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78-79Mirach 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-59, 78-81Morocco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113Moshkara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85-86Multi-Spectral Targeting System . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

N

NATO . 5-6, 28, 30, 58, 61-64, 67, 75-76, 81-82, 101,132-133, 181, 184-187, 204, 227, 232, 235, 238,252, 270-271

NATO AGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 270

NII Kulon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Nano Air Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165Netherlands 58, 63, 65-66, 79, 81-82, 133, 185-186,

203, 260-261, 272-273Nibbio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111, 167Nigeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 113-114Night Intruder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116, 124Northrop Grumman. 26-27, 29-31, 35-39, 46-50, 52,

75, 77, 96, 102, 106, 117, 139, 141, 145, 148-157,159, 170, 178-179, 181-187, 189-192, 196-201,204-205, 207, 210-213, 215, 218-219, 227, 232,235, 251-253, 256-260, 262-263, 265-271,273-274

Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69, 82, 238Nuclear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204, 245-246, 248-249

O

OAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-35, 52One Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252Orel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87Organic Air Vehicle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 253, 264Outrider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 20, 64

P

PHARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 197PW-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119Pakistan. . 80, 94, 101, 113, 120-121, 127-128, 146,

260, 263Pchela . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Pegasus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 77, 130, 150, 271Pelican . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78Philippines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122, 128Phoenix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 5, 57, 81, 95-96, 229Pioneer . . 6, 20-21, 31-32, 39-41, 45, 153, 158-159,

161, 165-166, 218, 224, 234, 251-252Piver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 63, 66-67, 72, 132Pointer . . . . . . . . . . 42-43, 45, 68, 80, 125, 133, 163Poland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31, 78, 82-83, 147, 252Portugal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83Predator 4-7, 10, 12, 19-21, 24-28, 30-31, 33-37, 50,

52-54, 57-58, 67-68, 75-81, 87, 89-90, 93, 96-98,117, 125, 127, 133-134, 138, 140, 144-148, 160,166, 177-178, 182, 186, 190-195, 197, 199,210-211, 213-215, 224, 232, 234-235, 238,252-253, 255, 257, 261, 263, 266, 271-272

Predator B . . 4, 24-27, 30, 36, 50, 53, 68, 76, 96-98,117, 140, 144-147, 177-178, 182, 190, 192-195,214, 263, 271

Predator C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26, 117, 263Proxy Aviation Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271Puma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161, 164, 254-255


page xii Index

Q

Qatar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 110, 117, 129QuaSAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203

R

RQ-1. 3, 6-7, 20, 23-25, 28, 33, 35-36, 42-44, 46, 58,69, 78, 80, 97, 115, 127, 145, 148-149, 162, 191,236

RQ-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-32, 39-40, 45, 158RQ-4 20, 23, 26, 28-31, 36-37, 63, 75, 117, 123, 125,

138-142, 182, 185, 187-189, 201, 211, 213-214,219, 233, 270

RQ-7 20-21, 26-27, 31-32, 35-36, 40-41, 52, 83, 157,167-168, 199

RQ-8 . . . . . . 32-33, 35-36, 38-39, 41, 49-50, 76, 83,153-154, 156, 270

Radiological . . . . . . . . . . . . 155, 204, 245-246, 249Rafael . . . . . . 66, 106-108, 166, 178, 220, 237, 260Raven . . . . 20, 23, 33, 36, 40-46, 69, 78, 80, 83, 88,

97-98, 110, 115, 153, 157, 159-160, 162-163, 178,236, 253-256, 264

Raytheon . 29, 40, 111, 139-142, 144-147, 149-150,154, 166, 178-179, 182-188, 191, 193, 195, 197,200, 205, 212-215, 229-231, 233-235, 252, 257,265, 270-271, 273

Republic of Korea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Romania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83-84, 252Russia . . . . . . . . . 7, 27, 30, 58, 80, 84-88, 101, 125

S

SAFIRE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155-156SAGEM . . . . 10, 58-59, 62, 65-67, 69, 71-72, 76-77,

81-82, 89, 116, 266, 275SAIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33-35, 154, 231, 270SDTI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 65-67SEAMOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 74, 76, 262SHARC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 91SIDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 67, 72, 261SIVAM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132SOCOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39, 43, 163, 200SPIRITT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138, 143-144, 167SURSS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-44SWARM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39SWORD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202-203SYERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142-143Safran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253, 272Saudi Arabia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 102, 110-111, 270ScanEagle . . 38, 40-41, 96, 116, 129, 161-162, 164,

232, 237, 242, 244, 253, 257-259, 265, 273, 275Schweizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153Scout . . . . 6, 32-33, 35-39, 41-42, 44, 49-50, 64, 70,

76-77, 91, 96, 103-105, 114, 128-130, 152-156,

158, 167, 178, 182, 192, 194, 198, 215-216, 219,232, 234-236, 252, 264, 268-271

Sea Sentinel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133SeaVue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146, 195Searcher . . . 3, 89, 92, 103-106, 108-109, 120-122,

124, 128-131, 167, 204, 221, 266Seeker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59, 110-112, 114-115, 120Sender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96Senior Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142-143SensorCraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149, 196Sentinel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70, 133Sentry Owl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 45, 164, 268Seraph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115Serbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 88Shadow 200 . 31-32, 83-84, 109, 116, 156-159, 166,

182, 197, 199, 216, 234, 251-252, 266Shmel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 88Silver Arrow . 66-67, 93, 95, 103, 105, 107, 109, 113,

116, 191, 260Silver Fox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 41, 45, 54, 133Singapore . . . 31, 101, 104-105, 117, 121, 128-129,

270, 274Sky-X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78, 80-81Skyfix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221Skylark . . . 81, 83, 106-109, 115, 119, 133-134, 166,

255, 259, 275Sojka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61Soothsayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220South Africa. 8, 90, 102, 104, 111-115, 120, 127, 167South America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102, 126, 134Soviet Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84, 101Spain . 59, 63-65, 69, 71, 76-77, 83, 88-89, 127, 154,

185-186, 225, 261-262, 270, 273, 276Spectral Infrared Remote Imaging Transition Test-

bed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143Sperwer. . . . . 3, 58-59, 62, 64-67, 71-72, 77-78, 81,

89-90, 116, 132-134, 167, 266, 272Spiral 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47-48, 151, 244Spiral 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229, 244-245Sri Lanka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130, 275Stalker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106, 268Sterkh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85Sukhoi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85-87Surveyor 2500. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262Sweden . . . . . . 58, 63, 65, 71, 89-91, 112, 203, 272Swift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161, 164, 254, 265, 270, 273Swift Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 270, 273Switchblade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255Switzerland . . . . . . . 62, 71, 76-77, 91-92, 104, 264

T

TACTIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240, 243TCAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 63, 184-186TCDL-N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223-225, 234


Index page xiii

TCS. . . . . . . . . . 31-32, 157-158, 223-225, 234-235TDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223-228TESAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182, 191-192, 197, 199TR911D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156TRC 274 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220TRC 6200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220TRW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 212, 252TUAV 13-14, 21, 23, 31-33, 35-39, 41, 55, 65, 72, 74,

82, 89, 91, 93, 96, 99, 106, 108-109, 116, 118,123-124, 126-127, 129-131, 148, 153, 156-159,165-166, 182, 191-192, 194, 197-199, 215-216,218-219, 221, 234-235, 238, 252, 266, 271

Tactical Common Data Link . 32, 148, 223-224, 232,234

Tactical Control System. . . . 157-158, 223-224, 234Tactical Data Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223, 226-228Tactical SIGINT Payload . . . . . . . 210, 215, 217-218Tactical UAV 2-4, 12-15, 23, 27, 31-32, 35, 37, 39-40,

60-62, 64-65, 72, 78, 80-84, 86, 88-96, 101-104,110-115, 118-122, 124-126, 128-132, 134-135,138-139, 152-153, 156, 158, 177, 192, 197,210-211, 215, 234, 236, 238, 270

Tadiran. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88, 104, 221Taiwan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 104, 130-131, 270Teledyne. . . . . . 28, 34, 102-103, 252, 260, 273-274Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177, 204, 246, 249Textron. . 11, 41, 49-51, 67, 154, 156, 251, 253, 255,

261, 270, 274-275Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101, 131Thales 58, 67, 70-71, 95-97, 106, 110, 116, 133, 165,

185-186, 202-203, 210, 220, 225, 232, 253,259-260, 262, 267, 271-272, 275-276

Tier 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24, 40-41, 145Tier 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24, 40, 145, 273Tipchak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Top Scan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220Tucan . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 34, 58, 63-64, 72-73, 76, 82Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92-94, 105-106, 263Turna. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

U

UAOS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114-115UAV-X1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92UAV-XI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92UCAR. . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 35-36, 154-155, 267, 269UCAS-D . . . . . . . . . 46, 48, 152, 197, 210, 215, 269UCAV . 2, 4, 7-8, 12-13, 16, 23-24, 27, 46-49, 58, 68,

71-78, 80-81, 87-89, 91, 97-99, 106, 108-109,115, 118-119, 121, 124-125, 129, 138-139,150-152, 165, 197, 210-211, 215, 253, 257-258,262, 268, 272

UCAV-N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

US Air Force . 7, 12, 24-25, 27, 29-30, 37, 46, 52-53,109, 117, 129, 142-145, 150, 161, 181, 197, 210,215, 224-226, 232, 253, 257, 263, 268, 271-273

US Army . 6, 12, 19, 24-27, 31, 33-35, 39-45, 52-53,97, 102, 133, 148-149, 154-157, 159-160, 162,167, 170-172, 174, 194-195, 197-199, 205, 207,215-217, 228-230, 238, 240-241, 244, 246,251-252, 254-256, 263-264, 267, 269-271, 274

US Coast Guard UAV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49US Marine Corps Tactical UAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39USAF . . 20-23, 25-31, 45-49, 87, 97, 138, 140-143,

147, 150, 160-161, 164, 182-189, 192-194, 199,204, 210-214, 216-217, 224, 226, 229-230, 234,238

USCG . . . . . . 23, 30, 49-50, 145, 155-156, 195, 198USMC. . . . . . . 20, 22-23, 32-33, 37-41, 43, 46, 153,

158-159, 162-163, 201, 210, 218, 243USN . 23, 28, 39, 41, 47, 49, 138, 145, 190-191, 219,

231Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94-95United Arab Emirates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111, 270United Kingdom 95, 99, 133, 259-260, 264, 267-268,

275

V

V-22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 228, 275VR-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85VR-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, 84VTUAV . . . . . . 14, 35-39, 72, 74, 82, 89, 91, 99, 118,

123-124, 126, 129-130, 153, 158, 192, 194, 198,219, 234-235, 271

VUAV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41, 49-50, 145, 156, 182Vega Radio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86Vektor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82Vigilante . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Vulture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115, 196

W

WESCAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145-146, 148, 166, 193WK180 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96WK450 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95-96, 166, 202Warrior . . . . . . . 7, 21, 24, 26-27, 33, 35-36, 44, 138,

148-149, 159, 168, 177, 182, 190, 194-195, 201,216, 235, 251-252, 263, 266, 271, 274

Wasp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39, 44-45, 236, 254Watchkeeper . 58, 67-68, 95-99, 106, 109, 165-166,

177, 192, 198, 202, 220, 232, 259-260, 266-267,271, 275

Witness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

X

X-45 . . . . . . 7, 23, 46-47, 49, 87, 109, 150-151, 258


page xiv Index

X-46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150X-47 . . . . . 7, 23, 46-47, 49, 109, 150-151, 258, 269X-50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252XRAE1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Y

Yugoslavia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24, 78, 88, 145Yula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85


Index page xv


page xvi Index

Executive Overview

The OutlookUnmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)

are the most dynamic growth sector ofthe aerospace industry today. ThisTeal Group market study estimatesthat the market will more than doubleover the next decade from currentworldwide UAV expenditures ofabout $3.4 billion to $7.3 billionwithin a decade.

The most significant catalyst tothis market has been the enormousgrowth of interest in UAVs by the USmilitary, tied to the general trend to-wards information warfare andnet-centric systems. UAVs are a keyelement in the intelligence, surveil-lance, and reconnaissance (ISR) por-tion of this revolution, and they areexpanding into other missions as wellwith the advent of hunter-killerUAVs. This study suggests that theUS will account for 73% of theRDT&E spending on UAV technol-ogy over the next decade, and about59% of the procurement. These repre-

sent higher shares of the market thanfor defense spending in general, withthe US accounting for about 67% oftotal worldwide defense R&D spend-ing and 37% or procurement spend-ing according to Teal GroupInternational Defense Briefing fore-casts. These discrepancies are due tothe heavier US investment in cut-

ting-edge technologies, and themarked lag-time in such research andprocurement elsewhere, especiallymajor aerospace centers such as Eu-rope. This follows trends in other cut-ting-edge technologies observed overthe past decade by Teal Group ana-lysts in such areas as precision guidedweapons, information and sensortechnology, and military applicationof space systems.

Teal Group expects that the salesof UAVs will follow recent patterns ofhigh-tech arms procurement world-wide, with Asia representing the sec-ond largest market, about 18% of the

worldwide total followed by Europe.As in the case of many cutting edgeaerospace products, Africa and LatinAmerica are expected to be very mod-est markets for UAVs. A civil marketfor UAVs is only beginning to emergein no small measure due to the lack ofaccess to national airspace until suit-able UAV standards and practices

have been created. Teal Group ex-pects that a civil UAV market willslowly emerge over the next decade,starting first with government organi-zations requiring surveillance sys-tems similar to military UAVs such ascoast guards, border patrol organiza-tions and similar national security or-ganizat ions . A commercial ,non-governmental UAV market willemerge much more slowly except insome niche markets such as Japan un-til the airspace access issue is fully re-solved late in the forecast period.


World UAV ForecastR&D and Procurement

RoW = Rest of World

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20170

2

4

6

8($ Billions)

US R&D US Proc. RoW R&D RoW Proc.

World UAV Expenditures Forecast

R&D ($ Millions) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

USA 1,450.0 1,550.0 1,635.0 1,720.0 1,600.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,750.0 1,800.0 2,700.0 17,205.0Rest of World 250.0 320.0 510.0 590.0 650.0 725.0 770.0 805.0 850.0 910.0 6,380.0

Total R&D 1,700.0 1870.0 2,145.0 2,310.0 2,250.0 2,225.0 2,270.0 2,555.0 2,650.0 3,610.0 23,585.0

Procurement ($ Millions) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

USA 1,025.0 1,395.0 1,960.0 2,000.0 2,105.0 2,035.0 1,865.0 1,765.0 2,095.0 2,060.0 18,305.0Rest of World 680.3 597.2 1,125.0 1,242.6 1,485.4 1,470.2 1,636.6 1,500.5 1,488.7 1,663.1 12,889.6

Total Procurement 1,705.3 1,992.2 3,085.0 3,242.6 3,590.4 3,505.2 3,501.6 3,265.5 3,583.7 3,723.1 31,194.6

Grand Total R&D/Procurement 3,405.3 3,862.2 5,230.0 5,552.6 5,840.4 5,730.2 5,771.6 5,820.5 6,233.7 7,333.1 54,779.6

UAV Unit Production Forecast by Region

(Units, Air Vehicles) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

USA 1,448 1,688 1,499 1,437 189 267 1,772 1,722 1,747 1,787 13,556Europe 368 409 385 301 283 403 572 655 492 174 4,042Mid East 150 88 197 386 98 178 171 110 109 23 1,510Asia 419 463 558 554 687 788 662 604 542 679 5,956Americas 21 33 13 29 75 34 40 1 1 45 292Africa 30 5 6 11 36 31 25 40 5 21 210

Total 2,436 2,686 2,658 2,718 1,368 1701 3,242 3,132 2,896 2,729 25,566

(Value, $ Millions) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

USA 1,025.0 1,395.0 1,960.0 2,000.0 2,105.0 2,035.0 1,865.0 1,765.0 2,095.0 2,060.0 18,305.0Europe 200.4 183.4 325.7 308.5 470.4 655.2 697.6 761.9 623.9 566.3 4,793.2Mid-East 186.4 136.2 425.9 429.9 492.4 280.4 266.4 43.0 122.0 448.0 2,830.6Asia-Pacific 283.7 225.3 292.4 451.9 478.6 510.6 609.8 625.6 718.8 613.0 5,849.7Other 9.8 52.3 81.0 52.3 44.0 24.0 62.8 70.0 24.0 35.8 455.8

Total 1,705.3 1,992.2 3,085.0 3,242.6 3,590.4 3,505.2 3,501.6 3,265.5 3,583.7 3,723.1 31,195

UAV Unit Production Forecast by Type


Mini-UAVs 1,806 1,985 1,965 1,885 620 885 2,415 2,370 2,120 1,951 18,002Tactical UAVs 269 328 292 358 268 303 304 230 213 144 2,709Naval UAVs 1 6 6 38 27 40 48 50 55 59 330MALE UAVs 43 51 63 105 91 84 86 73 57 62 715HALE UAVs 7 8 13 11 16 13 17 14 19 27 145UCAVs 3 1 2 4 1 1 — 6 5 11 34Civil UAVs 307 307 317 317 345 375 372 389 427 475 3,631

UAV Total 2,436 2,686 2,658 2,718 1,368 1,701 3,242 3,132 2,896 2,729 25,566


mini-uavs 50.8 57.2 59.5 56.1 60.4 52.7 54.6 53.0 68.2 71.6 583.8Tactical UAVs 418.5 430.0 744.5 848.0 674.5 561.5 517.5 726.5 665.0 310.0 5,896.0Naval UAVs 40.0 40.0 75.0 259.5 199.5 305.0 367.5 373.0 401.5 422.5 2,483.5MALE UAVs 351.0 470.0 801.0 939.0 1,081.0 1,032.0 1,140.0 726.0 588.0 668.0 8,836.0HALE UAVs 525.0 675.0 1,105.0 845.0 1,010.0 1,270.0 1,195.0 1,090.0 1,300.0 1,580.0 10,595.0UCAVs 200.0 200.0 105.0 75.0 330.0 30.0 — 60.0 300.0 430.0 1,730.0Civil UAVs 120.0 120.0 195.0 220.0 235.0 254.0 227.0 237.0 261.0 241.0 2,110.0

Total 1,705.3 1,992.2 3,085.0 3,242.6 3,590.4 3,505.2 3,501.6 3,265.5 3,583.7 3,723.1 31,195


Page 2 Executive Overview

Study Parameters

The aim of this study is to examinethe future worldwide market for un-manned aerial vehicles. Teal Groupalready covers the UAV market in its

World Missiles & UAVs Briefing

(WMUB) which examines the UAVmarket on a program-by-program ba-sis. The aim of this study is to comple-ment the WMUB by examining themarket from a complementary per-spective, namely national require-ments. This approach has been takenas a study based on existing programshas distinct limitations. Unlike moreestablished markets such as missilesor aircraft, the UAV market is so newand undeveloped that anotherapproach to market assessment isnecessary.

The approach taken in this marketis requirements-driven. Rather thantry to estimate the current market sizeand extrapolate growth rates fromthat point, the study examines likelyrequirements for UAVs on a coun-try-by-country basis and estimatesthe likely scale and pace of acquisi-tions. The reason for this is that themarket is very new and so past trends

provide little guidance for the future.The primary forecasts are based onUAV deliveries, not orders or budgetappropriations. In the US case wheremore data is available, both budgetand production forecasts are pro-vided. The primary focus of the studyis the military requirements for recon-naissance and strike UAVs. The studydoes not cover target drones.

Due to the requirements orienta-tion of the study, it is organized on aregional/country basis. Countrieswhich have been assessed to have alikely UAV requirement are included;those with a low probability of ac-quiring UAVs are not included.

From a technical standpoint, themarket has been divided into variouscategories that are common in the in-dustry. Some of these begin to blendtogether at the margins, but the cate-gories are useful both in terms of re-quirements assessments and costingestimates. The categories are:

• Micro UAVs—A UAV smallenough to be held in the palm of

the hand, usually weighing lessthan a kilogram.

• Mini-UAVs—A UAV smallenough to be launched by a person.A typical example is theAeroVironment RQ-11 raven.Sometimes called “Over-the-Hill”UAV or back-pack UAV

• Tactical UAVs—A UAV used forreconnaissance by Army forma-tions the size of a division or less,with endurance of several hoursand operating radius of 200 km orless. Some typical examples arethe British Phoenix, GermanTucan, US Shadow, FrenchCrécerelle/Sperwer, and IsraeliSearcher.

• Naval UAVs—A tactical UAVadapted for shipboard use with acustomized ground controls sta-tion for shipboard operations. Thisdoes not include tactical UAVs orMALE UAVs operated by naviesfrom shore bases.

• MALE UAVs—A Medium Alti-tude/Long Endurance UAV with


Executive Overview Page 3

World UAV Forecast

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20170

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500(Units, Air Vehicles)

Mini Tactical MALE HALE UCAV Naval Civil

endurance of about 24 hours andlong range capability, generallyused for operational reconnais-sance. Typical examples are thePredator and Eagle 1.

• HALE UAVs—A High Alti-tude/Long Endurance UAV withendurance of a day or more and

long range capability, generallyused for strategic reconnaissance.The Global Hawk is currently theonly example of this type now inservice.

• UCAVs—Uninhabited CombatAir Vehicle, a high performanceUAV designed primarily for

ground attack. Tactical UAVs andMALE UAVs with secondarystrike capability such as the MQ-9Predator B are not included in thiscategory, but in their original plat-form/size category.

Forecast Assumptions

Forecasting is by its nature, an art,not a science. To stretch this analogyfurther, the forecasts in this reportshould be regarded as “impression-ism” not “realism”. The numericalforecasts in this report may seem toprovide a highly detailed “realistic”portrayal of the market. The readershould not be fooled by the seemingprecision of these numbers. By its na-ture, this forecast is based upon as-sumptions , summaries , andsimplifications which invariablyinvolve large margins of imprecision.

Forecasting can be viewed meta-phorically as a tree. We have a fairly

solid knowledge of the trunk, that isthe recent size of the market over thepast few years. The future can beviewed as the limbs- the limbs repre-senting major alternative scenariossuch as future conflicts, major politi-cal upheavals, etc. The branches onthe limbs represent variations withinthese major scenarios influenced bynew technologies, local political de-velopments, and so on. At one ex-treme is the possibility of globalArmageddon in which case, zeroUAVs will be built; on the other ex-treme is global peace and tranquilityin which case, zero military UAVs

will be built. There are endless varia-tions in between with varying num-bers of UAV systems likely to bebuilt. Our forecast is only one possi-ble branch of the many potentialbranches of the tree. Many other pos-sible forecasts are plausible given dif-ferent scenarios or assumptions. Weattempt to make clear our assump-tions and rationale in each of the sec-tions in this report. We do not claimthat this is the only possible scenario,or the only plausible forecast.

Forecast Costs

The cost of UAV systems can beassessed in a wide variety of ways in-cluding the basic “fly-away” cost ofthe system, the cost of a system in-cluding spares and support, the cost ofa system including these costs plus ashare of the RDT&E spending, andthese costs plus operations and main-tenance expenses. The approach hereis to use the bare-bones “fly-away”cost. A second problem in estimatingfuture UAV spending is the variety ofsystems on offer. Some tactical UAVsare quite elementary with simplecommercial-off-the-shelf TV cam-eras while others have elaborate sen-sor suites. Likewise, UAV systemsvary enormously in complexity andsome systems include multiple modu-

lar payloads. Finally, the number ofair vehicles per system vary so thatsome systems include four air vehi-cles but other packages might includesix or eight. Some systems can in-clude one ground control station(GCS) while others can include twoor more.

Due to the complexity of these costissues, a simplified cost forecast hasbeen used here for non-US UAV sys-tems. Costs have been estimated forspecific categories of UAV systems,and a portion of the system costs havebeen assessed against each UAV. Sofor example, a typical tactical UAVsystem might cost about $10 millionand has five air vehicles. As a result,to formulate the value of tactical UAV

market, each air vehicle has been as-signed a cost of $2 million ($10 mil-lion @ 5 air vehicles per system) eventhough the actual cost of the air vehi-cle is typically less than $2 million.While not ideal, this simplified pric-ing approach is more practical than amore precise, but unwieldy if not im-possible, approach such as estimatingdifferent costs for different systemsfor each individual countryrequirement.

We do not include operations andmaintenance costs associated withUAV operations in this report as thenumbers are lacking, especially forinternational expenditures outside theUS.

Assessing the UAV Market

Forecasting the size of the futureUAV market is far more problematicthan in other areas of aerospace tech-nology. There are several reasons for

this. The most important is that tacti-cal UAVs are a revolutionary newtechnology. They are not an estab-lished technology (such as missiles,

combat aircraft, etc.) where there areclearly defined requirements and es-tablished bureaucratic organizationsthat foster their procurement. While



there has been a considerable amountof attention to UAVs in the press, andconsiderable experimentation withUAVs by many armies, there are stillan enormous number of unansweredquestions about the nature of UAVsand their operation that make anyforecasting difficult. Until recently,the UAV market was relatively small.In the mid-1990s, for example, themarket was probably less than $100million annually worldwide. It hasexpanded more than ten-fold in lessthan a decade, and currently about $3billion is spent annually worldwideon UAVs. As a result, traditionalmethods of estimating market sizesuch as extrapolations based on pastgrowth rates do not offer a plausiblemethod to assess the future marketsize. To further complicate matters,UAVs have been proliferating notonly in numbers but also in missions.While UAVs have traditionally beenthought of as an intelligence collec-tion platform, in recent years theyhave expanded into potential combats tr ike platforms which couldsubstantially increase their marketpotential.

Other traditional measures of mar-ket assessment are also lacking. Forexample: what will be a likely table oforganization and equipment of a UAVunit? How many UAVs will be de-ployed in a typical maneuver divi-sion? Will the assets fall under armycontrol or be a multi-service asset?Since there are no established num-bers for UAV deployment, it is verydifficult to extrapolate on future UAVneeds based on existing nationalorders-of-battle.

Technology Trends: Promiseand Problems

The difficulties with the currentgeneration of tactical UAVs havestemmed from under-estimations oftheir cost and over-estimation of theircapabilities. Many armies became in-terested in UAVs in the 1990s on theexpectation that they were simple andcheap to operate. While many of theearly systems were elementary, mostof the NATO armies have insisted in

adding sophis t icated featuresincluding thermal imaging cameras,encrypted data transmission, optionalELINT or other sensor packages, andsurvivability enhancements. Thesesensors add weight and cost to thedesigns.

In addition, the airframes on manyearly tactical UAVs put the accent onlightweight and low-cost at the ex-pense of durability. These early sys-tems were viewed as expendable, andtheir construction led to high attritionrates with many types not exceeding adozen missions before requiring re-placement. Some recent exampleswill highlight these difficulties. InUAV operations during OperationTelic in Iraq in 2003, British forcesconducted 138 Phoenix UAV sorties,losing 23 air vehicles and sustainingdamage to 13 more; in other words acasualty rate of over 25%. In 2004,Canada deployed a single newCrécerelle UAV system to Afghani-stan, crashing two air vehicles andsidelining two more due to stresscracks and making the system unser-viceable after only a few months ofoperation. While these may be ex-treme examples, durability andreliability of UAVs remains asignificant hurdle.

While loss rates such as thesemight have been acceptable whencarrying inexpensive sensor pack-ages, the trend towards million dollarsensor packages has prompted armiesto demand a far more durable and ro-bust air vehicle than was commonwith early UAVs. The inherent risksof the use of remote control to pilotthe UAV, as well as the difficulties inremotely landing UAVs led to highloss and damage rates.

These problems should have beenexpected given the novel nature of thetactical UAV. Many of these problemsare being overcome. US UAV reli-ability rates have steadily improved,and some high-end platforms such asPredator and Global Hawk have reli-ability comparable to similar mannedaircraft such as the U-2.

In the case of small UAVs, techno-logical innovations are helping to re-

duce the loss rate. With the advent ofGPS, inexpensive inertial platformsare becoming more common, whichprovide a capability to recover a UAVto a predetermined location if thedata-link to the ground station be-comes interrupted. But the increasingsophistication of these UAV sensorpackages have been making themlarger and more expensive, and henceless affordable for tactical roles suchas scouting for mechanized units. In-stead of directly serving the small unitcommander, they have been endingup as brigade or divisional assets,much like the earlier generation ofUAVs such as the CL-289. As a result,the proliferation of tactical UAVs hasnot progressed as deeply as manyimagined a few years ago.

Curiously enough, other UAVs areemerging for this role. Cheap,semi-expendable mini-UAVs are en-joying a flurry of attention at the mo-ment since they seem to offer a meansaround the cost dilemma posed by themore sophisticated and expensivetactical UAVs. The other attraction ofmini-UAVs is that they can be oper-ated without cumbersome air-trafficcontrol restrictions since they usuallyoperate at very low altitudes belowthe threshold of air-traffic control(ATC) rules.

Mini-UAVs and tactical UAVshave proven to be especially attrac-tive in peace-keeping operationsshort of all-out war, such as recent op-erations in Iraq and Afghanistan.Most nations deploying troops onsuch missions are very averse to suf-fering casualties. Mini- and tacticalUAVs offer a partial solution. Patrolmissions that formerly required asquad of infantry can now be accom-plished by an unmanned aircraft, withno risk of human casualties to minesor sniper fire. UAVs are unobtrusive,and can cover a wide area on a singleflight, making them useful for moni-toring truces, restricted areas, or otherobjectives. The success of UAVs inBosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq islikely to lead to growing interest intheir application in peacekeepingoperations.



This interest will be heightened ifcertain technological developmentsfinally occur. One of the most nettle-some problems in peacekeeping oper-ations is the presence of mines/IEDs.The US is now looking at remotemine detection equipment that couldbe carried on a UAV. Should thisprove practical, this mission alonewill justify the procurement ofadditional UAVs.

The Past as PrologueIt is useful to take a brief look at the

recent history of UAVs to better ap-preciate the current and future mar-ket . The use of UAVs forreconnaissance purposes can betraced back to US use of the BQM-34Firebee and its derivatives at the timeof the Vietnam War. This was the firstextensive use of drones in combat,and their mission was primarily stra-tegic reconnaissance. These systemsused wet film cameras and infraredline-scanners; they had no real-timedata capability. The European NATOcountries showed an early interest intactical reconnaissance drones start-ing in the 1970s such as CL-89,CL-289, and the Italian Mirach fam-ily. Once again, these systems gener-ally carried wet film cameras and IRlines-canners with no real-time datatransmission features. The Israelisused both the US Firebee and Chukarin the 1973 October War and 1982Lebanon War.

Early experiences with thesedrones led Israeli firms in the late1970s to begin developing smallRPVs that could provide real-time in-telligence using simple video cam-eras. Israeli systems like the Scoutand Mastiff were the forerunners ofmany contemporary tactical droneprograms. However, contrary tomuch of the hype surrounding thissubject, there is little evidence thatthere was extensive use of theseRPVs in actual combat in the 1982war.

In the wake of the 1982 Mid EastWar, the US reinvigorated its ownRPV programs. However, the USArmy stumbled badly in the real-time

intelligence field in the early 1980swith its overly ambitious Aquila pro-gram, which significantly put backUS RPV efforts.

Through the 1990s, the UAV mar-ket was very small and was domi-nated by Israeli firms, especiallyIsrael Aircraft Industries’ Malatbranch. IAI Malat represented about90% of the world production ofreal-time UAV systems in the 1990s, atelling comment on how small thismarket was in spite of all of the pub-licity, and its annual business duringthe period averaged under $100 mil-lion. IAI produced only 600 UAVsthrough the beginning of 1998, andless than a hundred UAV systems. Be-sides these programs, there was an es-tablished UAV program in Europe,but this concentrated on the earliergeneration of reconnaissance UAVssuch as the CL-289 Piver which didnot have real-time intelligencecapability.

Gulf War LessonsAt the time of the Gulf War, sev-

eral countries had a handful of UAVsystems, many having been pur-chased as technology demonstrators.The French operated a handful ofALTEC Mart systems, while the USoperated a small number of AAI/IAIMalat Pioneers from US Navy battle-ships to provide gun fire correctionand target location data. These rathermodest operations in 1991 were prob-ably the first large-scale use of tacti-cal UAVs with real- t ime datatransmission capability.

Balkan LessonsThe utility of UAVs in contempo-

rary conflicts was highlighted duringthe air campaign over Kosovo. Thenew style of warfare is dependent onlow casualties, especially politicallysticky incidents such as captured pi-lots. In an age of “information war-fare”, someone or something has togo out and collect the information. Inpast wars this might have been amanned reconnaissance aircraft likethe U-2 or SR-71, or a spy satellite.Space based reconnaissance remains

important, but UAVs are far moreflexible and offer real time imageryimmediately after the mission is as-signed. In addition, operation at lowaltitudes offers better imagery resolu-tion which is often needed inpeace-keeping operations where indi-viduals and small objects need to betracked. Kosovo saw the use of a widerange of UAVs including the RQ-1Predator, BQM-155 Hunter, andCL-289 Piver.

On the down side, Kosovo also re-vealed the vulnerability of UAVs tocontemporary air defenses. A total of27 UAVs were lost, some to air de-fense missiles, some to operationalproblems. This was about ten timesthe scale of aircraft losses, though interms of expense, the UAV losseswere considerably less significant.Furthermore, the loss of a UAV doesnot compel a risky search-and-rescueoperation as was the case with thedowned F-117 aircraft. Technologylosses are less as well. The Kosovoexperience raises the question of theinclusion of counter-measures on fu-ture designs. What are the trade-offsin terms of weight, cost, and payloadto include countermeasures, and howmight they be activated? It seemslikely that countermeasures are notworthwhile for small tactical UAVsthat are much smaller than contempo-rary fighter aircraft, but they might beconsidered on large, high-costsystems such as the Global Hawk.

New Markets: Mini- and Mi-cro-UAVs

Mini- and Micro-UAVs have be-gun to attract considerable attentionfrom a wide variety of potential mili-tary users over the past few years.These are seen as potential reconnais-sance assets at small unit level, or forperimeter security tasks. In addition,advanced micro-UAV designs areviewed as having an application to ur-ban warfare, able to operate withinbuildings instead of flying overbuildings.

There are numerous challenges tothe mini-UAVs, not the least of whichis size. By their very nature, these



UAVs rely on very small airframesthat are subject to wind conditions atlow altitude. This will put a damperon their use in areas such as near thecoast where there are apt to be intenseand frequent gusts. It will also com-promise their use for security taskssuch as perimeter patrols if the sys-tems cannot perform 24 hours a day, 7days a week due to periodic vulnera-bility to weather.

The second technical challenge issensor limitations. Due to their smallsize, these UAVs are forced to rely onvery small, light-weight cameras.This results in several related prob-lems. It is difficult to fit such a sensorto a stabilized platform due to payloadrestrictions, and as a result, the imageprovided to the operator can be de-graded by wind-induced motion, orvibration from the aircraft propul-sion. Even if using some of the neweroptical stabilization technologies, theimagery is often far from ideal due tothe narrow viewing angle of the cam-era, poor resolution of low-powercameras, and degradation of imageryby transmission problems betweenthe UAV and the operator due to weakpower sources. These problems be-come more serious the smaller the air-frame. For example, there are UAVpayloads in simple ball mounts withpan, tilt, and zoom functions weigh-ing only 6 pounds. While this is a fea-sible payload for a mini-UAVweighing 50 pounds, it is too muchfor a 10 pound UAV.

It remains to be seen whether ad-vances in miniaturized sensors,power sources, and secure low-powercommunication links can continue tochip away at these hurdles, and stillkeep the unit cost of the UAVs to rea-sonable limits. Teal Group expectsthat in the mid-term, the market formini-UAVs will deepen, but that mi-cro-UAVs will still remain at the de-velopment stage without large scaleserial manufacture or deployment.

Unmanned Combat Air Vehi-cles (UCAVs)

The latest visionary role for UAVsis to replace conventional combat air-

craft. Once again, this is a revival ofan old idea rather than an entirely newconcept. The US Air Force experi-mented with Firebee drones, armedwith laser-guided bombs and Maver-ick guided missiles back in the late1960s and early 1970s. The early ex-periments were aimed at developing asurrogate for attack aircraft, primarilyto carry out dangerous ground attackmissions. Today’s futurists see a rolefor UCAVs not only in the ground at-tack role, but even as fighter aircraft.The lessons of this experience havelong been forgotten.

UCAVs became a bit less futuristicin October 2001 when UAVs wereused in combat for the first time overAfghanistan. The US Air Force hadbeen experimenting with a RQ-1Predator armed with Hellf i reanti-tank missiles earlier. This wasmore of a technology demonstrationeffort than a scheme to actually armthe Predator. But when conflict brokeout in the wake of the 11 Septemberattacks, the Predator was deployed tothe Afghanistan theater including thearmed version. During at one missionin October 2001, it was used to trackthe convoy of a senior government of-ficial, and then to fire a missile near abunker where the delegation tookshelter. The mission was not success-ful, but press accounts suggest theproblem had to do with rules of en-gagement, not with the basic technol-ogy. Further UCAV operations havetaken place, such as the attack on anAl Qaeda official in Yemen in the au-tumn of 2002. These first demonstra-tions of the UCAV in combat arereminiscent of the first use incidentsof air-to-air combat in 1914 with pi-lots dueling with guns, bricks, andother improvised weapons. Theyprovide only a hint of their futurepotential.

The first use of the Predator as aUCAV raises an interesting questionabout future UCAVs. The US AirForce and Navy have been studyingair vehicles that perform like conven-tional strike aircraft. Their flight com-puter is briefed on a strike mission,and then the air vehicle flies out to the

target and attacks it, perhaps underhuman control. The Predator missionin Afghanistan suggests another alter-native. The “hunter-killer” UAVserves as both a reconnaissance plat-form and a strike aircraft, searchingout the target before attack it. Thisraises some question about the con-figuration of the UCAV, since a rela-tively slow UAV like the Predatormay be more versatile than a highspeed jet UAV for such missions. In-deed, in the forecast period here, theprocurement of these hunter-killerUAVs such as the MQ-9A Reaper, isfar more likely than the stealthUCAVs mentioned below. One of theissues to be settled will be control ofthe UAVs. The US Air Force has at-tempted to assert its control overMALE and HALE UAVS owing tothe Army decision to acquire theMQ-9C Sky Warrior variant of thePredator, but at the moment, DoDappears to be letting the services gotheir own way.

Two UCAVs were under develop-ment for future requirements, the AirForce’s X-45 being developed byBoeing, and the Navy’s X-47 beingdeveloped by Northrop-Grumman.These are sleek, stealthy, unmannedstrike jets, and bear little similarity tothe ungainly and slow reconnaissanceUAVs. Initial flight trials have begunwhich should help to clarify the tacti-cal potential of UCAVs. The US pro-gram has undergone considerableturmoil over the past few years withthe Navy now in charge of a rumpdemonstration program concerningcarrier landing capabilities. It is as-sumption of this study that the US AirForce UCAV program has gone“black”- in the world of secretcompartmented programs.

Several of the European air forceshave expressed interest in UCAVs,but so far little developmental fund-ing has been committed outside theUnited States. France is trying to pushits neuron program as the basis for aEuropean UCAV, but Britain hasfunded its own Taranis effort and Ger-many has already flown its Barrakudademonstrator. Russia had plans for a



number of UCAVs back in the Sovietdays, and appears to be getting backinto this business with designs likethe MiG Skat.

There are two main attractions toUCAVs. On the one hand, the re-moval of the pilot promises to reducethe size of the air vehicle by eliminat-ing the space and weight required forthe aircrew and related support sys-tems. In addition, the lack of anaircrew makes the UCAV desirablefor use in international crises wherethe loss or capture of a pilot would bepolitically unacceptable.

Although advanced concept dem-onstrations of tactical UCAVs willtake place in the next decade in theUnited States, their actual deploy-ment now seems a distant dream. Abrief examination of the difficultiesthe US has faced in fielding even sim-ple tactical UAVs should help providea more sober perspective on the prac-tical obstacles to such a system. Thechallenge to the tactical UCAV willcome from three directions: human,missile, and arms control politics. Itremains to be seen when it will be

possible to design and field an inte-grated computer, flight control, andelectro-optical sensing system that isas small, intelligent, and versatile as ahuman pilot. There is no existingcombination of computers and sen-sors of similar size that can duplicatea pilot under a wide range of real lifeconditions. For example, there is littledoubt that a UCAV can be built to de-liver guided weapons against a target.But what happens when the UCAV isthreatened by hostile fighters? Is itsimply a sitting duck? This was cer-tainly the case in Kosovo where anumber of UAVs were shot down bySerbian helicopters flying alongsideand attacking them with simpledoor-mounted machine guns. Unlikereconnaissance missions over a pre-determined objective, a fighter mis-sion requires a wide range of abilitiesthat are not currently achievable withexisting technology. The fightermission currently seems the mostdistant for a UCAV.

In the case of ground attack mis-sions against a predetermined target,a UCAV may be attractive as air de-

fenses continue to become more so-phisticated. But in this role, theUCAV will have to compete againstmissiles. This will come down tolife-cycle costs. Is it cheaper to de-ploy a $25-35 million UCAV with anexpected survivability of 15 missionsand high maintenance costs, or 25 to35 $1 million Tomahawk cruise mis-siles with relatively low maintenancecosts? This tradeoff will be the centerof much of the future debate, assum-ing UCAV technology proves practi-cal and affordable. In view of recentexperiences with tactical reconnais-sance UAVs, this cannot be lightlyassumed.

Teal Group believes that UCAVproduction will be quite small in theforecast period and limited primarilyto demonstrators. We expect that“hunter-killer” UAVs such as MQ-9Areaper will prosper, but forecasts forthese UAVs are included under therelevant UAV headings since they arebased on existing UAV airframes.

Civil UAVs

One of the most frequent questionsour analysts have been asked is“when will there be a civil UAV mar-ket?” Since there are so few civilUAV programs at the moment, it isworth examining this issue in somedetail at the opening of this study.

The market for UAVs outside ofthe military is extremely small at themoment, but one of considerable in-dustry interest. The long-term issue iswhether UAVs might blossom in thecivil aviation market, matching or ex-ceeding the scope of military UAVs.While this is an intriguing issue, thisstudy is limited to the likely growth ofthe market over the next decade.Within this time frame, Teal Groupbelieves that the civil market will re-main small but begin to experiencesome growth as access to nationalairspace becomes more accessible.

To begin with, it is helpful to dis-tinguish at least three elements of thecivil UAV market:

• Government UAVs

• Commercial UAVs

• University/Research UAVs.

Of these categories, the third willbe largely ignored as it is likely to re-main limited to small scale “bou-tique” manufacture of air vehicles forscientific research. Teal Group be-lieves that non-military governmentuse of UAVs will be the largest singleportion of the civil UAV market overthe next decade, and that commercialuse of UAVs will lag substantially.

Operations in National Air-space

At the moment, there are a numberof exploratory programs to examineUAVs by various federal agencies

outside the Department of Defenseand Coast Guard. The single largesthurdle to the growth of the civil UAVmarket is the issue of UAV operationsin controlled airspace. FAA standardsare only beginning to emerge for rou-tine UAV operations in US airspace.This is also true worldwide with theexceptions of Israel and South Africawhich have established UAV operat-ing rules through their civil aviationadministration. Even in these cases,there have been complaints by Israeliaviation over the interference experi-enced due to UAV operations. In2006, there was an incident near theTel Aviv airport where a UAV cameclose to a passenger aircraft.

In Europe, the European AviationSafety Agency (EASA) issued a callin early 2006 for the formation of anew organization to co-ordinate theuse of UAVs in Europe. The aim is topermit “normalized” UAV flights in



non-segregated airspace by early inthe next decade. In addition, effortsare underway to unify European stan-dards with other standards such asthose being developed in the US byRTCA and ASTM, with EUROCAE(European Organization for CivilianAviation Equipment) considering thedevelopment of mirror standards withFAA cooperation.

IAOPA (International Council ofAircraft Owners and Pilots Associa-tion) has been pushing for an interna-tional standard for UAV compatibilityin the ATC environment, and IAOPAmade a presentation on this issue toICAO (International Civil AviationOrganization) in Montreal in March2006.

“Sense-and-Avoid” Require-ment

One of the technological issueconnected to airspace access will bethe need for sense-and-avoid systemson UAVs operating in controlled air-space. This issue is addressed in moredetail in the US civil UAV section. Tosummarize, requirements for SAAsystems will have an impact on thecivil UAV market since the technol-ogy does not exist today and until itdoes exist, it will be difficult for acivil UAV market to emerge. Once thetechnology does reach maturity, is-sues such as size, cost, and weightwill effect the civil UAV market sincea high-cost, large, power intensivesystem will favor large UAVs but dis-courage the proliferation of low cost,small UAVs. As a result, there mayend up being different SAA require-ments for different types of UAVs op-erating under different conditions(which further clouds any marketforecast!)

Durability: Civil vs Military Atti-tudes

Even once the issue of access to airspace is resolved, other obstacles re-main. At the moment, military UAVdurability is low. As mentioned else-where in this study, the British suf-fered a casualty rate of almost 25% onUAV sorties in Iraq in 2003 in a few

weeks time, and Canada managed toincapacitate its single tactical UAVsystem in a few months of operationin Afghanistan. While these loss ratesare higher than those experienced bythe US UAV fleet, UAVs continue tohave a higher loss rate than conven-tional manned aircraft. In the case ofthe military, this is not a big issue ifthe mission justifies the cost. How-ever, in a non-war situation such aspolice traffic monitoring, it is difficultto see a city council funding policeUAV operations if the UAVs sufferaccident rates far in excess of policehelicopters. Many proposed civilUAV applicat ions are notlife-or-death situations, and so fiscalconstraints and operating costs willbe a far more substantial issue than inthe military case. This is even morethe case with potential commercialextensions of the surveillance UAVsuch as their use by TV news stationsfor collecting video imagery. Onceagain, until UAVs prove cost-effec-tive with relatively high reliabilityrates, their use in such a role remainsfinancially unattractive. The durabil-ity issue is tied to another commercialissue, namely insurance. Commercialoperation of UAVs will be inhibited ifinsurance firms feel that UAVs are notdurable enough, and if they present adistinct liability hazard, such as highpotential for crashes in a dense urbanenvironment.

Beyond the Airspace BarrierAssuming that industry and the

FAA and other international organi-zations manage to create a flexible en-vironment for the operation of civilUAVs, how soon will a significantcivil/commercial market emerge?

To begin with, some brief assess-ment is needed of the current market.This is fairly easy to answer as at themoment there is essentially no marketexcept in the margins of experimentaland research use. Outside the US,there have been civil UAV markets inplace since the 1980s, notably in Ja-pan where there is a significant infra-structure for the use of small helicop-ter UAVs for crop-dusting. This

market is discussed in more detail inthe Japanese section of the study. Al-though the Japanese crop-dustingUAVs have been on offer for severalyears on the international market,they have not caught on to any signifi-cant extent, which suggests that themarket is based on peculiarities of Ja-pan’s geography and thegovernment’s agricultural policiesand subsidies.

In the US, commercial UAV pur-chases have been minimal. In April2005, Tactical Aerospace Company(TAG) in California received a $2.8million contract to provide 14 heli-copter UAVs to Rotor F/X, a firm thatprovides airmobile cameras to thefilm industry and television. Thesewill presumably be used in a low alti-tude environment like Japanese agri-cultural helicopter UAVs to avoidFAA restrictions. It’s worth notingthat TAG claims this is the largestnon-military UAV purchase to date inthe US. Even if this sale was the firststep in a market that would growten-fold in five years, this would stillonly mean a $30 million market by2010.

In view of the fact that the UScivil/commercial market is nearlynon-existent at the moment asidefrom these rare sales, where are thesales of civil UAVs likely to emerge?Existing military UAVs are for themost part reconnaissance platformsequipped with various types of sen-sors. So parallel applications in thecivil sector seem the most likely start-ing point for UAV proliferation.

The first broad application ofUAVs outside the military is likely tobe in the paramilitary sphere wherethe requirements and missions arefairly similar. This will include coastguard and border guard applicationsfor monitoring maritime traffic, mon-i tor ing borders , and similarquasi-military homeland securityroles. These types of applications arealready being studied for example bythe US Coast Guard’s Deepwater pro-gram, and the Department of Home-land Securi ty’s border patrolinitiative on the Mexican border. The



Coast Guard program is in deep trou-ble at the moment, which the BorderPatrol UAV initiative is still small.

The other likely near-term require-ment for civil UAVs will be in similarover-land border patrol assignments.The US border patrol has already be-gun to examine UAVs for this role,and UAVs have been used in Israel forpolice surveillance patrols, and offAngola for patrol of oil rigs. SaudiArabia is currently looking at a com-prehensive border security systemincluding UAVs.

Civil Disaster SurveillanceAnother potential surveillance

market would be forest fire patrolssuch as those of the US Forest Service(USFS). The applications would befor a variety of different platforms. In2006, the Coast Guard employed aPredator/Mariner UAV it was usingfor demonstration purposes to con-duct surveillance on wildfires inAlaska. This application has beenpushed forward by the state’s twosenators. SAGEM and the French re-search agency ONERA began a testcampaign in 2005 to use older BusardUAVs for fire patrol.

The USFS has tested a NASAGeneral Atomics Altair (Predator de-rivative) for monitoring a remotewildfire and providing real-timevideo. The USFS also plans to exam-ine other roles for UAVs includingtheir use as a communication relaywhich could be a substitute groundbased repeaters in remote areas. Sofar, USFS studies have concluded thatoperating such UAVs is likely to bemore expensive than manned aircraft.Similar trials are occurring in Franceand elsewhere in Europe. Japan hasalready acquired small numbers ofhelicopter UAVs which have beenused for similar disaster surveillance,for example surveillance of earth-quake areas and volcanic eruptions.This market is likely to be slow inemerging due to the usual litany ofreasons: airspace access, durability,and cost concerns, as well as the am-ple availability of alternate platforms,namely manned aircraft. Besides

these issues, civil disaster surveil-lance is, by its nature, an occasionalevent which may not merit the main-tenance of a dedicated UAV force. Asin the case of fire-fighting aircraft,this could lead to the emergence of acommercial UAV service whichleases UAVs to state and localgovernment for emergencyapplications.

UAVs in Other Federal Appli-cations

It seems likely that UAVs willeventually penetrate other govern-ment agencies. For example, it wouldnot be surprising to see the FBI andcomparable international federal po-lice organizations acquire a modestnumber of UAVs in the long-term toassist in surveillance operations. Thiscould be both optical and communi-cations surveillance. Other federallaw enforcement agencies are alsopotential customers once the cost ofUAV operations becomes competi-tive to manned aircraft operations.For example, this could include drugenforcement activity such as surveil-lance of terrain for drug cultivation.At the moment, these applicationsseem more distant and on a smallerscale than other government applica-tions noted above. Since the require-ments seem less pressing, theseagencies are more likely to wait untilUAVs are a proven technology withan established record of operationalcosts. At the moment, there is no reli-able track record to determine costs,air vehicle reliability or other factors.US military costs have significantweaknesses due to their use in a com-bat environment and the willingnessof the military to operate UAVs inrisky situations where a civil UAVwould probably be grounded. Never-theless, the high rate of attrition ofmilitary UAVs serves as anotherimpediment to UAV proliferation intoother segments of the government.

UAVs for State and Local Gov-ernment Applications

At the moment, it seems unlikelythat a significant market will emerge

over the next decade for anysignificant number of UAVs for stateand local government applications,excluding civil disaster scenariosmentioned already above. Part of theproblem is the impediment of air-space access mentioned above. Forexample, in 2006, the LA Sheriff’sdepartment attempted to operateChang Industry SkySeer UAV but inJune the effort was shut down by theFAA. There are few state agencieswith the type of surveillance require-ments of a national government, andbudget limitations at state and locallevels are likely to act as a significantimpediment until UAVs are a moreestablished technology. While UAVshave attractions for some types ofbroad area surveillance missions suchas coast guard maritime patrol andborder patrols in remote areas, stateand local police tend to have missionsin more confined geographic areas.

UAVs are unlikely in the mid-termto prove to be a suitable substitute forpolice helicopters for existing policemissions such as traffic patrol, search& rescue, medical evacuation andsimilar functions. UAVs at the mo-ment are very specialized platformssuitable mainly for the surveillancemission while a helicopter is moreversatile and can be used for missionssuch as medical evacuation, VIPtransport and other roles that an un-manned UAV is incapable of per-forming. It is also unclear whenUAVs will develop a track record ofoperations’ costs to allow police unitsto realistically estimate the trade-offsbetween helicopters and UAVs forsome missions in locales where sur-veillance operations are a persistentmission. For the time being, helicop-ters will be a more versatile andcost-effective alternative to UAVs,and the use of UAVs too risky and un-certain to create a substantial market.However, it would not be surprisingto see state and local police agenciestaking a growing interest in the use ofUAVs late in the forecast period astheir performance is demonstrated atfederal level and as a civil UAV in-dustry begins to mature. This could



begin with the lease or purchase ofsmall numbers of mini-UAVs forspecific local requirements such aswide area search missions in areasnear national forests and so on.

Surveillance of Critical Infra-structure

There have been suggestions thatUAVs might be used for non-govern-mental security roles such as patrol-ling critical infrastructure. This couldinclude surveillance against crimi-nal/terrorist threats such as nuclearpower plants, or the use of UAVs as asubstitute for manned aircraft for sur-veys of pipelines, power-lines, air-ports and the like. At the moment, theuse of UAVs for critical infrastructureprotection of fixed sites such as nu-clear power plants, chemical plantsand so on appears to be remote due tothe many factors inhibiting the civiluse of UAVs already mentioned. Inaddition, UAVs have to competeagainst existing technologies on acost basis. Fixed sites such as powerplants and other industrial facilitiescan use less expensive surveillancemethods including both manned pa-trols as well as fixed surveillance de-vices such as CCTV. Should asignificant domestic terrorist threatemerge, attitudes could change rap-idly. For example, if terrorists manageto smuggle man-portable anti-aircraftmissiles (MANPADS) into a country,or even rocket propelled grenades(RPG) and begin attacking airlinesfrom the perimeter of commercial air-ports, there would likely be a call forheightened perimeter security. Thiscould include UAV surveillance, buteven in these dire circumstances,other more traditional patrol andsurveillance methods would probablybe the preferred choice until UAVsmature.

The use of UAVs for survey ofpower lines and pipelines is a nichemarket that could be satisfied by spe-cialist aviation firms contracting outUAV services rather than outrightpurchase by firms which do not needenough fl ight t ime to just i fyownership.

Commercial ApplicationsBesides the adaptation of mili-

tary-like reconnaissance UAVs toparamilitary and surveillance roles,numerous applications have beensuggested for civilian UAVs. Some ofthese seem contrived and commer-cially dubious. Endurance UAVshave been suggested as the basis for alow-cost alternative to satellites toserve as orbiting communication re-lays for communication networks andas airborne cellular antennas. Thismarket has been undermined by prob-lems in the communications industryrather than technology hurdles. Nev-ertheless, such an application has notyet emerged and may never do so. It ispossible that such a function could bemore economically addressed by an-tennas mounted on tethered balloonsor on minimally controlled balloons.The military is beginning to look atcommunication relay UAVs as a solu-tion to the use of line-of-sight datalinks in urban areas and in other typesof restricted terrain that inhibit UAVoperations. This could pave the wayfor civilian off-shoots.

Commercial Leasing/UAV Ser-vices

One of the first commercial appli-cations for UAVs may not be directcommercial applications but rathercommercial ownership of UAVswhich are in turn leased out to gov-ernment or industrials firms for sur-veillance missions. As suggestedabove, some organizations have sur-veillance or survey needs that mightbe met by UAVs, but the cost of ac-quiring UAVs, training crews and op-erating the systems may be morecomplex and expensive than is war-ranted. As a result, a small number offirms have already been organized toprovide UAV services. The Israelifirm Aeronautics was one of the firstin this field, contracting with the Is-raeli government in 2004 to conductsurveillance operations over Gaza ina quasi-military/police role. As men-tioned above, a California firm is op-erating UAVs for the film and TVindustry. There have been reports that

Bell Textron already has contracts fora small number of Eagle Eye tilt-rotorUAV by a company which plans toprovide UAV services to industry andgovernment. The US Forest Servicehas already stated that at least in thenear term, it would prefer to leaseUAV services than acquire and oper-ate UAVs. As a result, the UAV ser-vices option may prove to be the mostpopular commercial route for UAVsin the short- term unti l UAVtechnology matures.

Research UAVsUAVs have been used extensively

for civilian scientific research, butnone of this has transitioned to highvolume commercial applications.Scientific applications can be easilyenvisioned for UAVs such as environ-mental monitoring, weather/atmo-spheric data collection, oceano-graphic data collection, agriculturalmonitoring, and high altitude geolog-ical mapping of magnetic, radiologi-cal and gravimetric data. Some ofthese research applications could be-come commercial. For example, theUS Department of Defense has dis-cussed contracting private firms tooperate research UAVs over the Pa-cific to collect weather data. For thetime being, Teal Group is not fore-casting these non-commercial UAVsas they are likely to be single airvehicles, not serial production.

Civil UAV Market SummaryTeal Group does not believe that a

substantial civil market yet exists, andthat no substantial market is likely toemerge until the mid-term (2011-12)beyond already established programssuch as the Coast Guard and Borderpatrol efforts already mentioned. Theinitial growth in the civil UAV field ismost likely to be quasi-military secu-rity applications such as maritime pa-trol and border patrol and the airvehicles are likely to be identical totheir military counterparts. As a re-sult, the civil UAV market is likely tobe small through this forecast period,and in our estimate, well under 10%of the overall market.



UAVs today are probably in a situ-ation analogous to aircraft at the endof the First World War or helicoptersat the end of World War II. The bulkof aircraft manufacture up to 1920was for the military, with modestnumbers of aircraft in civilian hands.As aircraft technology became moremature through the 1920s, civil appli-cations of aircraft became more plau-sible for roles such as mail deliveryand eventually for passenger trans-port, and within a decade had becomea significant market. Likewise, heli-copters were largely confined to mili-tary roles well into the 1950s untilthey reached maturity, not enteringthe civil market in substantialnumbers until the 1960s.

Another more relevant analogywhich may elucidate the time frameof civil UAV proliferation is the mili-tary example. In the case of the USArmy, the army attempted to field atactical UAV in the late 1970s(Aquila) but was frustrated by andoverly ambitious design. The armyagain tried repeatedly in the 1990s tofield a tactical UAV but was frustratedby bureaucratic interference when theDoD forced the Army and Navy tojoin their disparate requirements in ajoint program (Hunter), followed bypoor Army decision making on thefollow-on program (Outrider). At notime was there any specific techno-logical barrier since in the same time

frame the Israelis managed to fieldtactical UAVs. Rather it was a combi-nation of technological ambitions,bureaucratic hurdles, poor decisionmaking, and other normal impedi-ments to technological innovationwhich crippled the Army program.The army finally settled on theShadow and began deploying it inIraq roughly 30 years after the Armytactical UAV program began. TheShadow includes numerous improve-ments over Israeli UAVs of the 1980s,but it can hardly be considered a revo-lutionary technological advance. TheUS Air Force example is perhaps lessmessy and less prolonged, but itshould be recalled that the US AirForce also took decades with a longperiod of experimentation with sys-tems such as Compass Cope (1970s),Condor (1980s) before the advent ofPredator and Global Hawk. Ifnon-real-time reconnaissance RPVsare included such as the Vietnam-eraFirebee drones, then the Air ForceUAV time-l ine is even moreprotracted.

These historical analogies suggestthat the civil UAV market will proba-bly be slow in coming, and that itsmost rapid rise will probably not oc-cur until well outside this forecast pe-riod. A likely scenario is that therewill be a spurt of small-scale UAV ac-quisition by government agenciessuch as the Coast Guard and Border

Patrol, as well as modest acquisitionsby a handful of commercial firms es-tablishing a small UAV services/leas-ing industry to cater to othergovernment agencies as well as forinitial commercial demand. Thisspurt will be noticeable in themid-term of this forecast (2011) as-suming that the FAAstandards for air-space access are formalized and arenot too onerous. Should the FAA re-strictions remain in place or includesubstantial technological hindrancessuch as a restrictive sense-and-avoidrequirement, complicated and expen-sive certification procedures, or oner-ous insurance levels, this wouldprobably push back this spurt to theend of the forecast period. This spurtis likely to be followed by a lull of afew years while government and in-dustry become familiar with UAV op-erations and associated issues such asdurability and operational cost. Onlyafter these issues are settled is therelikely to be significant growth innon-military governmental and com-mercial use of UAVs. A rapid rise incivil UAV acquisition is unlikely tooccur before 2020. The bottom line isthat Teal Group believes that the po-tential for civilian use of UAVs isquite plausible, but that this is along-term potential that will not bemanifest until well into the nextdecade.

The Numbers

Regional Acquisition Forecast Summary by UAV Type

USA


Mini-UAVs 1,295 1,405 1,310 1,150 — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 11,160Tactical UAVs 110 225 125 175 80 135 145 75 75 60 1205Naval UAVs 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 78MALE UAVs 27 38 45 88 59 49 39 40 38 38 461HALE UAVs 5 6 5 5 7 7 9 9 8 8 69UCAVs 3 1 1 4 — — — 4 5 10 28Civil UAVs 7 7 7 7 35 67 69 84 111 161 555

Total 1,448 1,688 1,499 1,437 189 267 1,772 1,722 1,747 1,787 13,556




Mini-UAVs 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 35.0 45.0 220.0Tactical UAVs 35.0 130.0 260.0 285.0 95.0 35.0 20.0 225.0 225.0 45.0 1,355.0Naval UAVs 40.0 40.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 95.0 105.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 805.0MALE UAVs 195.0 320.0 605.0 780.0 780.0 705.0 685.0 385.0 385.0 420.0 5,260.0HALE UAVs 455.0 605.0 820.0 635.0 690.0 1045.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 7,850.0UCAVs 200.0 200.0 75.0 75.0 300.0 — — — 300.0 400.0 1,550.0Civil UAVs 75.0 75.0 100.0 125.0 140.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 1,265.0

Total 1,025.0 1,395.0 1,960.0 2,000.0 2,105.0 2,035.0 1,865.0 1,765.0 2,095.0 2,060.0 18,305.0

Europe


Mini-UAVs 331 390 345 225 190 295 460 540 390 96 3,262Tactical UAVs 31 8 26 71 79 81 77 79 58 32 542Naval UAVs — — — 3 7 16 23 22 21 19 111MALE UAVs 6 11 12 2 5 5 8 8 7 10 74HALE UAVs — — 1 — 1 3 3 3 3 3 17UCAVs — — 1 — 1 1 — 2 — 1 6Small Civil UAVs — — — — — — — — 12 12 24Civil MALE UAVs — — — — — 2 1 1 1 1 6

Total 368 409 385 301 283 403 572 655 492 174 4,042


Mini-UAVs 19.9 23.4 20.7 13.5 11.4 17.7 27.6 32.4 23.4 5.8 195.7Tactical UAVs 108.5 28.0 91.0 248.5 276.5 283.5 269.5 276.5 203.0 112.0 1,897.0Naval UAVs — — — 22.5 52.5 120.0 172.5 165.0 157.5 142.5 832.5MALE UAVs 72.0 132.0 144.0 24.0 60.0 60.0 96.0 96.0 84.0 120.0 888.0HALE UAVs — — 40.0 — 40.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 680.0UCAVs — — 30.0 — 30.0 30.0 — 60.0 — 30.0 180.0Civil UAVs — — — — — 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 36.0 120.0

Total 200.4 183.4 325.7 308.5 470.4 655.2 697.6 761.9 623.9 566.3 4,793.2

Middle East


Mini-UAVs 120 60 120 320 20 120 120 100 100 — 1,080Tactical UAVs 20 26 59 43 48 36 36 6 6 6 286MALE UAVs 8 — 2 7 14 16 13 2 — 6 68HALE UAVs 2 2 6 6 6 1 2 — 3 11 39Coast Guard MALE UAVs — — — — — — — 2 — — 2Police TUAVs — — 10 10 10 5 — — — — 35

Total 150 88 197 386 98 178 171 110 109 23 1,510


Mini-UAVs 2.4 1.2 2.4 6.4 0.4 2.4 2.4 2.0 2.0 — 21.6Tactical UAVs 50.0 65.0 147.5 107.5 120.0 90.0 90.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 715.0MALE UAVs 64.0 — 16.0 56.0 112.0 128.0 104.0 16.0 — 48.0 544.0HALE UAVs 70.0 70.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 35.0 70.0 — 105.0 385.0 1,365.0Civil UAVs — — 50.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 — 10.0 — — 185.0

Total 186.4 136.2 425.9 429.9 492.4 280.4 266.4 43.0 122.0 448.0 2,830.6



Asia-Pacific


Mini-UAVs 45 105 190 165 310 410 280 210 130 300 2,145Tactical UAVs 72 58 67 55 51 47 41 50 69 35 545Naval UAVs — — — 27 12 15 15 18 24 30 141MALE UAVs 2 — — 7 12 13 21 22 11 8 96HALE UAVs — — 1 — 2 2 3 2 5 5 20Coast Guard MALEs — — — — — 1 2 2 3 1 9Commercial VTUAVs 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 3,000

Total 419 463 558 554 687 788 662 604 542 679 5,956

(Value, $ millions) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAVs 2.7 6.3 11.4 9.9 18.6 24.6 16.8 12.6 7.8 18.0 128.7Tactical UAVs 216.0 174.0 201.0 165.0 153.0 141.0 123.0 150.0 207.0 105.0 1,635.0Naval UAVs — — — 162.0 72.0 90.0 90.0 108.0 144.0 180.0 846.0MALE UAVs 20.0 — — 70.0 120.0 130.0 210.0 220.0 110.0 80.0 2,000.0HALE UAVs — — 35.0 — 70.0 70.0 105.0 70.0 175.0 175.0 700.0Commercial UAVs 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 450.0Civil MALE UAVs — — — — — 10.0 20.0 20.0 30.0 10.0 90.0

Total 283.7 225.3 292.4 451.9 478.6 510.6 609.8 625.6 718.8 613.0 5,849.7

The Americas (less USA)


Mini-UAVs 15 25 — 15 65 30 35 — — 45 230Tactical UAVs 6 6 10 14 10 4 — — — — 50MALE UAVs — 2 3 — — — 5 1 1 — 12

Total 21 33 13 29 75 34 40 1 1 45 292

Africa


Mini-UAVs — — — 10 35 30 20 20 — 10 125Tactical UAVs 30 5 5 — — — 5 20 5 11 81MALE UAVs — — 1 1 1 1 — — — — 4

Total 30 5 6 11 36 31 25 40 5 21 210

Americas/Africa


Mini-UAVs 0.8 1.3 — 1.3 5.0 3.0 2.8 1.0 — 2.8 17.8Tactical UAVs 9.0 33.0 45.0 42.0 30.0 12.0 15.0 60.0 15.0 33.0 294.0MALE UAVs — 18.0 36.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 45.0 9.0 9.0 — 144.0

Total 9.8 52.3 81.0 52.3 44.0 24.0 62.8 70.0 24.0 35.8 455.8



UAV Regional Production Forecast Summary by UAV Type

Mini-UAVs


USA 1,295 1,405 1,310 1,150 — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 11,160Europe 331 390 345 225 190 295 460 540 390 96 3,262Middle East 120 60 120 320 20 120 120 100 100 — 1,080Asia-Pacific 45 105 190 165 310 410 280 210 130 300 2,145Americas 15 25 — 15 65 30 35 — — 45 230Africa — — — 10 35 30 20 20 — 10 125

Total 1,806 1,985 1,965 1,885 620 885 2,415 2,370 2,120 1,951 18,002


USA 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 35.0 45.0 220.0Europe 19.9 23.4 20.7 13.5 11.4 17.7 27.6 32.4 23.4 5.8 195.7Middle East 2.4 1.2 2.4 6.4 0.4 2.4 2.4 2.0 2.0 — 21.6Asia-Pacific 2.7 6.3 11.4 9.9 18.6 24.6 16.8 12.6 7.8 18.0 128.7Americas/Africa 0.8 1.3 — 1.3 5.0 3.0 2.8 1.0 — 2.8 17.8

Total 50.8 57.2 59.5 56.1 60.4 52.7 54.6 53.0 68.2 71.6 583.8

Tactical UAVs


USA 110 225 125 175 80 135 145 75 75 60 1,205Europe 31 8 26 71 79 81 77 79 58 32 542Middle East 20 26 59 43 48 36 36 6 6 6 286Asia-Pacific 72 58 67 55 51 47 41 50 69 35 545Americas 6 6 10 14 10 4 — — — — 50Africa 30 5 5 — — — 5 20 5 11 81

Total 269 328 292 358 268 303 304 230 213 144 2,709


USA 35.0 130.0 260.0 285.0 95.0 35.0 20.0 225.0 225.0 45.0 1,355.0Europe 108.5 28.0 91.0 248.5 276.5 283.5 269.5 276.5 203.0 112.0 1,897.0Middle East 50.0 65.0 147.5 107.5 120.0 90.0 90.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 715.0Asia-Pacific 216.0 174.0 201.0 165.0 153.0 141.0 123.0 150.0 207.0 105.0 1,635.0Americas/Africa 9.0 33.0 45.0 42.0 30.0 12.0 15.0 60.0 15.0 33.0 294.0

Total 418.5 430.0 744.5 848.0 674.5 561.5 517.5 726.5 665.0 310.0 5,896.0

Naval UAVs


USA 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 78Europe — — — 3 7 16 23 22 21 19 111Asia-Pacific — — — 27 12 15 15 18 24 30 141

Total 1 6 6 38 27 40 48 50 55 59 330


USA 40.0 40.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 95.0 105.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 805.0Europe — — — 22.5 52.5 120.0 172.5 165.0 157.5 142.5 832.5Asia-Pacific — — — 162.0 72.0 90.0 90.0 108.0 144.0 180.0 846.0

Total 40.0 40.0 75.0 259.5 199.5 305.0 367.5 373.0 401.5 422.5 2,483.5



MALE UAVs


US 27 38 45 88 59 49 39 40 38 38 461Europe 6 11 12 2 5 5 8 8 7 10 74Middle East 8 — 2 7 14 16 13 2 — 6 68Asia 2 — — 7 12 13 21 22 11 8 96Americas — 2 3 — — — 5 1 1 — 12Africa — — 1 1 1 1 — — — — 4

Total 43 51 63 105 91 84 86 73 57 62 715


USA 195.0 320.0 605.0 780.0 780.0 705.0 685.0 385.0 385.0 420.0 5,260.0Europe 72.0 132.0 144.0 24.0 60.0 60.0 96.0 96.0 84.0 120.0 888.0Middle East 64.0 — 16.0 56.0 112.0 128.0 104.0 16.0 — 48.0 544.0Asia-Pacific 20.0 — — 70.0 120.0 130.0 210.0 220.0 110.0 80.0 2,000.0Americas/Africa — 18.0 36.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 45.0 9.0 9.0 — 144.0

Total 351.0 470.0 801.0 939.0 1081.0 1032.0 1140.0 726.0 588.0 668.0 8,836.0

HALE UAVs


USA 5 6 5 5 7 7 9 9 8 8 69Europe — — 1 — 1 3 3 3 3 3 17Middle East 2 2 6 6 6 1 2 — 3 11 39Asia — — 1 — 2 2 3 2 5 5 20

Total 7 8 13 11 16 13 17 14 19 27 145


USA 455.0 605.0 820.0 635.0 690.0 1045.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 7,850.0Europe — — 40.0 — 40.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 680.0Middle East 70.0 70.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 35.0 70.0 — 105.0 385.0 1,365.0Asia-Pacific — — 35.0 — 70.0 70.0 105.0 70.0 175.0 175.0 700.0

Total 525.0 675.0 1105.0 845.0 1,010.0 1,270.0 1,195.0 1,090.0 1,300.0 1,580.0 10,595.0

UCAVs


USA 3 1 1 4 — — — 4 5 10 28Europe — — 1 — 1 1 — 2 — 1 6

Total 3 1 2 4 1 1 — 6 5 11 34


USA 200.0 200.0 75.0 75.0 300.0 — — — 300.0 400.0 1,550.0Europe — — 30.0 — 30.0 30.0 — 60.0 — 30.0 180.0

Total 200.0 200.0 105.0 75.0 330.0 30.0 — 60.0 300.0 430.0 1,730.00

Civil UAVs


USA 7 7 7 7 35 67 69 84 111 161 555Europe — — — — — 2 1 1 13 13 30Middle East — — 10 10 10 5 — 2 — — 37Asia 300 300 300 300 300 301 302 302 303 301 3,009

Total 307 307 317 317 345 375 372 389 427 475 3,631




USA 75.0 75.0 100.0 125.0 140.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 1,265.0Europe — — — — — 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 36.0 120.0Middle East — — 50.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 — 10.0 — — 185.0Asia-Pacific 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 55.0 65.0 65.0 75.0 55.0 540.0

Total 120.0 120.0 195.0 220.0 235.0 254.0 227.0 237.0 261.0 241.0 ,2110.0





The US Market

Market OverviewAlthough the US is currently in the

forefront of developing and deploy-ing reconnaissance and strike UAVs,the path has been protracted and un-even. In general, the US armed forceshave had considerably more successwith strategic endurance UAVs thanwith tactical short-range UAVs, andthe current production effort is a re-flection of this trend. The combat op-erations in Iraq have encouraged arapid introduction of mini-UAVs andtactical UAVs which have caused atleast a temporary bow-wave of acqui-sition that is likely to taper off over the

mid-term as operations wind down.On the other hand, the MALE andHALE programs such as Predator,Global Hawk, and BAMS are likelyto see a more even acquisition pattern.

The first signs of a civil UAV mar-ket are beginning to emerge in theUnited States. The first stage is smallscale use of UAVs by federal agenciesfor a variety of missions. The lack ofFAA regulations for regular access tonational airspace will limit the scopeof civil UAV acquisition at least untilthe mid-term around 2011-2012.Even if a full set of regulations be-

come available by then, a civil marketmay take time to emerge dependingon technical issues such assense-and-avoid requirements forcivil UAV operations. Our forecastpresumes that the civil market will be-gin with federal investment, followedin the out-years by relatively smallscale commercial acquisitions, someof which will be lease operationsaimed at government requirementssuch as fire-fighting and weather pa-trols.

Past as Prologue

The US made extensive use of re-connaissance UAVs during the Viet-nam War based primarily on theBQM-34 Firebee drone, and had anextensive development effort in en-durance and hypersonic UAVs in the1960’s and 1970s. The US Navy op-erated hundreds of QH-50 DASHanti-helicopter drones off destroyersin the late 1960s and early 1970s. This

tradition has been largely forgotten.Most of the reconnaissance systemswere the older generation which re-lied on wet film cameras and infraredline scanners with no real time capa-bility. The first serious effort to de-velop a new-generation tactical UAVwith real-time intelligence capabilitywas the US Army’s ambitiousMQM-105 Aquila UAV which began

in the late 1970s. The program provedtoo ambitious and after nearly a de-cade of development and $1.5 billionin funding, it was finally cancelled.

Israel’s innovative use of tacticalUAVs in the 1982 Lebanon war high-lighted the potential value of this newgeneration of real-time intelligencesystems. Congress finally lost pa-tience with the ineffective manner in


US UAV Production ForecastBy Type

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20170

50

100

150

200

250(Production, Air Vehicles)

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500(Expenditures, $ Millions)

Mini (x10) Tactical MALE HALE

Naval UCAV Civil Expenditures

which the US armed services werepursuing separate and often overlap-ping UAV efforts and in 1987 it frozeall RDT&E funding and directedDoD to develop a coherent joint-ser-vice plan. In June 1988, the Pentagonsubmitted a seven-year, $2.3 billionmaster plan covering developmentand procurement of four differentUAVs (Close-Range, Short-Range,Medium-Range, and Endurance) fora variety of missions. The “me-dium-range” RQ-1 Predator and en-durance RQ-4 Global Hawk were thefirst into service followed by theArmy’s RQ-7 Shadow some 15 yearslater. The short-range program(BQM-155 Hunter) was cancelled in1996, though the army has resur-rected the requirement in recent yearswith the ERMP effort. The Navy hasnot bought any tactical UAVs, and theMarine Corps is still stuck with the Pi-oneer. An entirely new class of smallmini-UAVs has emerged due to thedistinct requirements of the Iraq oper-ations that were not even envisionedunder the original scheme. It is worthrecalling the long development spanof these UAVs when trying to forecastthe likely production potential of fu-ture efforts.

The long delay in deploying UAVsin the 1990s was due to a host of fac-tors. The programs with a singlesponsor, the medium and high endur-ance UAVs under the Air Force, gen-erally prospered. The joint programshave generally had problems due to

incompatible requirements. The tacti-cal close- and short-range system,were merged into a joint effort by theOffice of the Secretary of Defense inthe early 1990s combining Army,Navy, and Marine requirements, andthe programs were an embarrassingmess. At the root of the problemswere the divergent requirements ofthe three services. In particular, theArmy requirements and Navy re-quirements were fundamentally dif-ferent. The Army is content with anair vehicle of limited range since theendurance mission is left to the AirForce. The Navy has only modest in-terest in short range systems, mainlyto support the Marine Corps in am-phibious operations. But for tradi-tional naval missions, a longer range,faster, and higher endurance system isneeded. Furthermore, Army and AirForce systems rely on runways fortake-off and landing which are notwell suited to a naval environmentwhere deck space is at an absolutepremium. Vertical-take off is the ob-vious solution for the Navy, but unat-tractive to the army and the air forcesince it adds unwanted complexityand weight. The Navy was loathe todeploy volatile fuels on board shipbut heavy fuel engines were a techno-logical barrier; the army had no prob-lems with the fuel issue as its usesgasoline, aviation fuels and diesel inits vehicles. Belatedly recognizingthe obvious, OSD finally consentedto letting the Army and Navy go their

own way in the late 1990s, after asubstantial delay in the program.

At the moment, the Army has fi-nally fielded its RQ-7 Outrider almost30 years after the start of the Aquilaprogram, while the Navy is still fum-bling around trying to define its re-quirements. The Marine Corps hasbeen left in the lurch because it wasplanning to piggy-back on the Navytactical UAV effort; it is now optingfor the Shadow rather than yet an-other Pioneer life-extension.

The Marine Corps, Army, and AirForce have all deployed off-the-shelfmini-UAVs in recent years such as theRaven and Dragon Eye. These pro-grams stem from the need to havesmall unit UAVs for timely intelli-gence gathering, not constrained bythe need to integrate their missionsinto the local air traffic control sys-tem. Prior to the arrival of themini-UAVs, tactical UAV missionstypically required a day’s notificationprior to missions, hardly a desirablesituation under fluid counter-insur-gency condit ions . Since themini-UAVs fly under the generallyaccepted controlled-airspace, theycan avoid these restrictions. Eventhough mini-UAVs have distinct limi-tations in terms of durability, imageryquality, range, and endurance, theycan provide tactical units with nearimmediate intelligence gatheringcapability. As a result, they havethrived.

DOD UAV Funding History

RDT&E ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08

Army 50.2 45.0 34.1 35.2 67.4 29.5 33.3 44.6 157.9 95.1Navy 30.2 38.3 35.9 299.4 395.3 244.7 123.1 102.6 347.2 797.5USAF — — — — 200.5 362.6 422.7 763.7 322.3 74.9DoD 210.7 165.0 138.8 176.6 153.0 157.1 581.2 7.0 7.0 5.0

Total 291.1 248.3 208.8 511.2 816.2 793.9 1160.3 917.9 834.4 972.5

Procurement ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08

Army — 0.8 47.4 56.4 105.4 231.4 319.0 324.2 87.8 91.1Navy — — — — — — — — 37.4 37.7USMC — — — — — 2.0 6.7 14.1 13.7 90.2USAF 157.2 133.1 51.0 162.2 407.9 397.8 587.5 721.6 622.8 889.5

Total 157.2 133.9 98.4 218.6 513.3 631.2 913.2 1,059.9 761.7 1,108.5


Page 20 The US Market

US Summary ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08

RDT&E 291.1 248.3 208.8 511.2 816.2 793.9 1160.3 917.9 834.4 972.5Procurement 157.2 133.9 98.4 218.6 513.3 631.2 913.2 1,059.9 761.7 1,108.5

Total 448.3 382.2 307.2 729.8 1,329.5 1,425.1 2,073.5 1,977.8 1,596.1 2,081.0

Future US UAV TrendsLooking across the next decade,

several emerging markets are likely toreach fruition. The biggest single itemwithin the forecast period will be theAir force follow-on to the cancelledJ-UCAS. A quick perusal of the fund-ing chart above will show a markeddrop in USAF RDT&E funding afterthe J-UCAS was reorganized and putunder Navy control. It is preposterousthat the USAF suddenly lost interestin UCAS and far more likely that theprogram “went black” into acompartmented secret program. TheAir Force has several potential UCASapplications including a fighter-sizedSEAD (suppression of enemy air de-fense) aircraft, a strategic bomber,and a futuristic hypersonic bomber asenvisioned under the joint DARPAFalcon program. In recent months,the USAF has backed away from anunmanned strategic bomber, so thiseffort will probably remain in limboover the next decade under theDARPA Falcon rubric. The far mostlikely area of USAF RDT&E invest-ment will be in a fighter-sized UCASand the program is likely to remainblack (and very expensive) for muchof our forecast period. The start ofprocurement of such a system is diffi-cult to predict, since the Air Forcefaces an upcoming procurementbow-wave with the arrival of the F-35JSF late in the forecast period.

The other Air Force programs areby far the most mature (and expen-sive) with both the Predator andGlobal Hawk enjoying solid servicesupport in spite of some significantcost escalation. The cost escalationhas been largely connected to capabil-ities improvements, with the additionof sensors adding significantly to thesystem costs, though at the same time,adding considerably to the system’scapabilities.

The Navy is finally starting toshape its future requirements. Themost likely mission will be the BroadArea Maritime Surveillance role,though the Navy has yet to fully de-fine how BAMS will relate to the newP-8 MMA aircraft. The Navy is stillslow on the tactical UAV mission,with the future requirement mostclosely tied to the LCS Littoral Com-bat Ship, which itself is far from cer-tain. Finally, the Navy’s commitmentto the remnants of the J-UCAS pro-gram is likely to be frail. The idea thatthe Navy will seriously entertain theoperation of relatively large, un-manned aircraft off their carriers is abit hard to believe until carrier land-ing capabilities are fully proved- atechnology effort that is likely morethan a decade off.

The Marine Corps plans to finallyreplace Pioneer with Shadow, and tojoin the Navy on a “small” UAV, a cat-egory somewhere betweenmini-UAVs and TUAV, foreshad-owed by extensive use of LeasedBoeing Scan Eagles in Iraq.

The Army at the moment has a rel-atively well defined set of require-ments in the short term, with thecompletion of the fielding of theRQ-7 and the eventual procurementof the Warrior for the ERMP require-ment. However, the follow on pro-grams connected to FCS are likely tobe far more problematic and maynever emerge. The Army is likely topress on with other tactical UAV pro-grams, especial ly an armedhunter-killer capability, initially withWarrior but eventually with astand-alone system optimized to thisrole. This might have been satisfiedby UCAR, but with the cancellationof this program, another one will haveto be considered.

The emergence of a civil UAVmarket is likely to begin in the USduring this forecast period, albeit one

that is likely to be restricted to thegovernmental sector initially. Thesingle greatest barrier to the emer-gence of a civil UAV market remainsuncertainties over the timing of ac-cess to controlled national airspace.The Coast Guard was paving the wayon this issue due to their role in pro-moting the use of UAVs in the civilsector, but this effort has gone intolimbo. The Customs Service will beoperating small numbers of Predatorson the Mexican and Canadian bordersdue to Congressional initiatives, butthe force is likely to remain small,perhaps a dozen air vehicles. NASAisacquiring a modest number of GlobalHawks and Predators, primarily forresearch purposes. NOAA would liketo acquire a small number of endur-ance UAVs, primarily for hurricanetracking and other weather and re-search applications. In total, thesegovernment activities might total asmany as three dozen endurance UAVsover the forecast period.

The emergence of a commercialcivil UAV market is unpredictable atthe moment due to the lack of airspace access. The FAA is currentlytrying to establish guidelines forday-to-day use of UAVs, beyond theexisting waivers for temporary use ofair space. It is unclear how soon theserules will emerge, but the FAA is aim-ing for the 2011-2012 time frame.There are several significant hurdleshere, both administrative and techni-cal. On the technological side, theFAA’s likely insistence on some formof collision avoidance system is likelyto impact the nature of UAV access toairspace. This might end up being amenu of sense-and-avoid technolo-gies depending on the size of the UAVand its flight regime with less elabo-rate systems for mini-UAVs operatingat very low-altitudes, but elaboratesystems for large UAVs operating athigher altitudes. Should some single


The US Market Page 21

approach be chosen, such as an activesystem for detection and avoidance,this could adversely affect the emer-gence of a civil/commercial UAVmarket since such systems might beimpractical or too expensive onsmall/tactical-sized UAVs which arelikely to be the inexpensive entrypoint for commercial use.

There will probably be some tenta-tive ventures into commercial UAVsat the fringes, for example the use ofmini-UAVs that operate under con-

trolled airspace for possible surveil-lance, TV, or other applications. Amore likely scenario would be theemergence of a UAV leasing industrydirected towards government re-quirements analogous to the aircraftfire-fighting companies. Many civilgovernment organizations mighthave requirements that could be satis-fied by UAVs such as emergency ser-vices, road/infrastructure survey, andsearch-and-rescue but who do nothave such a steady requirement to be

able to afford a permanent UAV force.A modest commercial leasing indus-try may emerge to satisfy these needsas well analogous commercial needsfor observation, land and crop sur-veying, and other missions. However,commercial demand for UAVs will bemore tightly constrained by cost andcost-competitive alternatives whichimplies that UAV technology mustmature considerably before itbecomes commercially attractive.

US UAV Budget Forecast

RDT&E ($ Millions) FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

Army 95.1 46.0 11.5 12.2 25.0 35.0 45.0 50.0 50.0 50.0Navy 797.5 776.3 994.0 885.1 619.3 603.0 650.0 650.0 700.0 750.0USAF 662.4 816.3 736.5 699.1 863.7 860.0 943.0 970.0 2,345.0 2,545.0

Total 1,555.0 1,638.6 1,742.0 1,596.4 1,508.0 1,498.4 1,638.0 1,670.0 3,095.0 3,345.0


Army 91.1 317.2 403.0 357.5 301.2 300.0 200.0 200.0 350.0 350.0Navy 37.7 95.4 100.1 122.1 484.3 475.8 485.0 485.0 460.0 460.0USAF 889.5 1,240.5 1,254.0 1,136.3 1,102.9 979.9 895.0 1,200.0 1,200.0 1,200.0USMC 90.2 20.9 10.6 5.8 5.8 5.9 8.0 8.0 12.0 12.0

Total 1,108.5 1,674.0 1,767.7 1,621.7 1,894.2 1,761.6 1,588.0 1,893.0 2,022.0 2,022.0



US UAV Funding ForecastRDT&E, Procurement and O&M

FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17$0

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

$6

$7($ Billions)

RDT&E Procurement O&M

Summary ($ Millions) FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17

RDT&E 1,555.0 1,638.6 1,742.0 1,596.4 1,508.0 1,498.4 1,638.0 1,670.0 3,095.0 3,345.0Procurement 1,108.5 1,674.0 1,767.7 1,621.7 1,894.2 1,761.6 1,588.0 1,893.0 2,022.0 2,022.0O&M 265.0 295.0 310.0 345.0 370.0 400.0 430.0 460.0 490.0 500.0

Total 2,928.5 3,607.6 3,819.7 3,563.1 3,772.2 3,660.0 3,656.0 4,023.0 5,607.0 5,867.0

US Production Forecast


RQ-11 Raven (USA) 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 — — — — — — 4,000RQ-11 Raven (USMC) 145 275 120 — — — — — — — 540BATMAV (USAF) 150 130 190 150 — — — — — — 620Other Mini (US) — — — — — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 6,000Subtotal Mini-UAVs 1,295 1,405 1,310 1,150 — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 11,160

USN/USMC (STUAS) 75 150 120 120 65 120 120 — — — 770US (TUAV) 30 50 5 55 — — — 60 60 60 320USMC (MCTUAS) 5 25 — — — — 10 — — — 40USA (MQ-8B) — — — — 15 15 15 15 15 — 75Subtotal TUAVs 110 225 125 175 80 135 145 75 75 60 1205

USN (MQ-8) 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 78Subtotal Naval UAVs 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 78

USAF (R/MQ-1) 24 24 24 41 26 27 20 20 20 20 246USAF (MQ-9) 3 2 9 11 9 10 7 8 8 8 75USA (ERMP) — 12 12 36 24 12 12 12 10 10 140Subtotal MALE UAVs 27 38 45 88 59 49 39 40 38 38 461

USN (BAMS) — — — — 2 2 4 4 3 3 18USAF (RQ-4) 5 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 51Subtotal HALE UAVs 5 6 5 5 7 7 9 9 8 8 69

USAF (X-45) 1 — — — — — — — — — 1USN (X-47) 2 1 1 2 — — — — — — 6USAF (NG-SEAD) — — — 2 — — — 4 5 10 21Subtotal UCAVs 3 1 1 4 — — — 4 5 10 28

Total US Military 1,441 1,681 1,492 1,430 154 200 1,703 1,638 1,636 1,626 13,001

USCG (Eagle Eye) — — — — — 2 4 4 6 6 22USG (Large UAV) 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 38US Commercial (Small UAV) 5 5 5 5 30 60 60 75 100 150 495

Total US Civilian 7 7 7 7 35 67 69 84 111 161 555

US Procurement Expenditure by Category

($ Millions) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Mini-UAV 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 5.0 5.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 45.0Tactical UAV 185.0 400.0 45.0 295.0 40.0 50.0 100.0 330.0 330.0 330.0Naval UAV 40.0 40.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 95.0 105.0 100.0 100.0 100.0MALE UAV 195.0 320.0 605.0 780.0 780.0 705.0 685.0 385.0 385.0 420.0HALE UAV 455.0 605.0 820.0 635.0 690.0 1045.0 900.0 900.0 900.0 900.0UCAV 200.0 200.0 75.0 375.0 — — — 300.0 300.0 400.0Civil UAV 55.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 270.0 290.0 300.0 310.0 320.0 400.0

Total 1,155.0 1,655.0 1,710.0 2,250.0 1,860.0 2,190.0 2,125.0 2,360.0 2,370.0 2,595.0

NOTE: This is an estimate of calendar year expenditures on UAVs, not fiscal year procurement budget.



Program ProfilesThis section of the study examines

each of the major UAV programs sep-arately, and has brief overviews of fu-

ture categories of UAVs includingUCAVs, Army programs related to

the Future Combat Systems (FCS)program, and mini-/micro-UAVs.

RQ-1/MQ-9 Predator

OverviewThe RQ-1A Predator is the US Air

Force’s first medium endurance UAV.The Predator stemmed from the ear-lier Tier 1 and Tier 2 Medium Endur-ance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(MAE-UAV). The Tier 1 was devel-oped primarily under CIA funding,and was operationally deployed forsurveillance missions over the formerYugoslavia in 1993-94. It uses theGeneral Atomics Gnat 750 airvehicle.

The upgraded vers ion, theGnat-750-TE Predator won theDoD’s Tier 2 competition with a de-velopment award in January 1994 andin 1997 was redesignated as theRQ-1A. The Predator was first de-ployed over Bosnia in the summer of1995. The US Air Force assumed op-erational control of the Predator on 2September 1996.

The armed forces reached finalagreement on the system’s joint oper-ational requirements document in thesummer of 1997, and Predator be-came the first ACTD program to beapproved for procurement in August1997. The first series production con-tract for two GCS and eight air vehi-cles was awarded to General Atomicson 20 August 1997. The US Air Forcehad a requirement for 12 systems and101 air vehicles, but this number hassteadily increased to accommodateimproved types such as the MQ-9Aand currently stands at 367 air vehi-cles though FY11 under currentplans. General Atomics delivered its100th Predator on 5 February 2004.

A new version of the Predator wasannounced in 2000, the Predator-Bwhich was first acquired by NASAfor research purposes . In i ts

hunter-killer version for the Air

Force, it is designated as the MQ-9A

Reaper. The Air Force is planning toacquire the MQ-9A alongside theMQ-1A Predator.

The US Army awarded a contractin May 2003 for three IGNAT UAVsbased on the Predator to help defineits UAV requirements for a divi-sional/corps level UAV called the Ex-tended Range Multipurpose UAV(ERMP). APredator derivative called

Warrior won the Army ERMP com-petition against a derivative of the Is-raeli Heron called Hunter II in 2005.The Army plans to acquire seven ormore systems, each with 12 airvehicles.

General Atomics and LockheedMartin are teamed to offer a deriva-

tive of the Predator called the Mari-

ner (a.k.a. Predator B-ER) as acontender for the US Navy’s BAMS(Broad Area Mission Surveillance)

requirement. Italy became the firstexport customer for Predator, order-ing six systems in 2000 and a furtherfive in 2004.Britain began steps tolease or borrow Predators for opera-tions in Iraq in early 2004 and hasused them in combat. The Predator-Bversion was selected by NASA’sEarth Science Enterprise for research

applications as the Altair and firstflew in June 2003; it is the first civilUAV to win an FAA airworthinesscertificate which facilitates its use innational airspace. Additional sales toNASA and NOAA are expected.



MQ-9A Predator B

US Army Warrior ERMP

Funding History

RDT&E ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02** FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08*

PE0205219F Reaper DevelopmentReaper — — — — — — — — — 61.0PE0305219F Predator DevelopmentPredator — — — — — 40.1 82.1 54.1 67.9 22.3PE0304260F Airborne SIGINTMQ-9 SIGINT — — — — — — — — 2.6 18.1PE0305204A Tactical UAVERMP — — — — — — — 92.2 120.9 45.2

Procurement ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02** FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08*

US Air Force Procurement 3010FPredator 129.7 57.4 30.0 203.3 139.1 202.0 320.6 253.5 235.0 278.0(quantity) (11) (7) (7) (22) (25) (15) (27) (24) (24) (24)Reaper — — — — — — — — — 58.5(quantity) — — — — — — — (2) (2) (4)Predator mods 3.4 — — 14.8 10.1 13.7 36.5 29.9 58.0 74.7Reaper mods — — — — — — — — — 20.6US Army Procurement: BA2 Communications and Electronics EquipmentERMP — — — — — — — 42.5 9.4 118.5(quantity) — — — — — — — — — (1)

*Request

**In FY02, the Predator program received an additional $167.6 million from the Defense Emergency Relief Fund

(DERF) which was used to equip the Predator with a Multi-Spectral Laser Designator/Sensor and Hellfire launch

capability as well as purchase an additional four RQ-1A and three MQ-9A air vehicles. The FY02 Supplemental

added nine MQ-1B and 1 MQ-9; the FY02 Plus-Up added four MQ-1B, for a grand total of eight in the basic ap-

propriation and 21 in the various add-ons. However, it would appear the actual number funded was lower with a

total of 102 air vehicles funded in FY97-03.

Costs

Procurement unit costs (then-year $) from P-1 documents:

FY99: $7,632,800 (RQ-1)FY02: $2,909,000 (MQ-1B) $11,367,000 (MQ-9)FY03: $3,727,000 (MQ-1B) $8,667,000 (MQ-9)FY04: $4,459,000 (MQ-1B) $11,302,000 (MQ-9)FY05: $4,924,000 (MQ-1B) $12,440,000 (MQ-9)FY06: $3,664,000 (MQ-1B) $14,095,000 (MQ-9)FY07: $4,263,000 (MQ-1B) $13,400,000 (MQ-9)FY08: $5,561,000 (MQ-1B) $12,499,000 (MQ-9)

Current Developments

MQ-9A ReaperThe success of the armed RQ-1A

Predators led the Air Force to acceler-ate the development of a heavier ver-sion of Predator, dedicated to thehunter-killer role. The Air Force se-lected the Predator B for this mission,now designated MQ-9A Reaper inAir Force service. Supplementaryfunding in the FY02 budget coveredthe acquisition of the first threeMQ-9As, and a total of 23 Reaperswere funded as part of the Predatorline in FY02-07. After FY07, Reaper

is funded on its own budget line. Thefirst Reaper was built in January 2002and first operational reaper was deliv-ered to Creech AFB in Nevada inMarch 2007.By mid-2002, the AirForce objective was to acquire twoMQ-9 squadrons, each consisting of20 air vehicles and five ground con-trol stations. The FY08 budget sub-mission anticipates funding 50Reapers through FY13.

The Air Force is also expected tobegin trials of other munitions fromthe MQ-9A including the JDAM

bomb, and AGM-65 Maverick mis-sile.

The Budget Roller-CoasterThe Air Force has funded 102 air

vehicles through FY04. Under theFY04 budget plan, the USAF was tofund 62 MQ-9A Predator Bhunter-killer UAVs in the FY02-09budgets, but under the FY05 budgetthis was slashed to 27 air vehicles andrevised yet again in the FY06 budgetback up to 101 Predator Bs throughFY11. The FY07 budget submission



in February 2006 again saw a majorshift in procurement objectives. TheUSAF added a substantial number ofPredators to the FY05-11 plan, goingfrom 160 to 255 aircraft. At the sametime, there was a pronounced shift inthe composition of the planned forcein favor of the MQ-1 over the MQ-9versions. The MQ-1 objective in-creased from 59 to 218 aircraft whileMQ-9 fell from 101 to only 37 aircraftin the FY05-11 plans. In the FY08budget submission, the objective is285 Predators from FY02 to FY13.

Navy Broad Area Maritime Sur-veillance

Although the Navy selected theRQ-4 Global Hawk for its originaldemonstrations of UAVs for the mari-time surveillance role, it has broad-ened its search for the definitive airvehicle at the procurement stage toconsider Predator derivatives. One ofthe initial offerings was a turbo-jetpowered version of the Predator,dubbed Predator C, but now GeneralAtomics, teamed with LockheedMartin, is offering a derivative of thePredator B, called Predator B-ER orMariner. The prototype Mariner firstflew on 22 April 2004.

The Navy has acquired two GlobalHawk endurance UAVs to conduct aMaritime Demonstration Program.This is intended to serve as the basisfor the BAMS requirement witheventual procurement of an endur-ance UAV for long-range surveil-lance. The Navy began its MaritimeDemonstration Program and a Con-cept of Operation (CONOPS) effortin FY03, and the two Global Hawkswill be delivered in 2004-05.

Although the US Navy selectedthe RQ-4 for its original demonstra-tions of UAVs for the maritime sur-veillance role, it has broadened itssearch for the definitive air vehicle atthe procurement stage to considerother candidates including the Gen-eral Atomics Predator/Mariner and anunmanned Gulfstream derivative.Under the FY05 budget plant, initialprocurement funding for the BAMSUAV would be provided in the FY07

budget. However, during the FY06deliberations in the autumn of 2005,the Navy completely gutted theBAMS program and cut bothRDT&E funding as well as plannedprocurement funding. Under theFY07 budget released in February2006, the Navy reinstated funding forBAMS, noting that it will be a com-plementary system to the P-8A Posei-don MMA aircraft. The bids for theprogram were submitted in the springof 2007, with Northrop Grumman of-fering a derivative of its RQ-4BBlock 20 and Lockheed Martin/Gen-eral Atomics offering the Mariner.The Navy plans to award the SDDcontract in 1QFY08. The SDD pro-gram will include the acquisition oftwo more aircraft, funded in the FY09budget. The plan is to begin low-rateinitial production of four aircraft inFY11 with an objective to field theseaircraft starting in 2014. The Navyhas not yet publicly announced an ac-quisition objective on the aircraftsince the requirement is for an “effec-tive time on station” objective thatcould be met by different aircraft indifferent ways. In 2007 during thebidding process, the Navy indicatedthat it has a $2.32 billion costassigned to the program, a $1.3billion increase compared to previousestimates

Australia signed a BAMS agree-ment on 13 January 2007 to becomepartner on the program. Australia hassome unique objectives for its pro-gram, and expects that the groundsupport system will involve and Aus-tralian company.

Navy Armed PredatorIn December 2005, the US Navy

acquired a single MQ-9A Predator Bfor an undisclosed application, not as-sociated with BAMS. The acquisitiondoes not appear in the open budgetand the program may be associatedwith support of navy operations incombat theaters such as Iraq.

Extended Range UAVThe US Army awarded a contract

in May 2003 for three IGNAT UAVs

based on the Predator to help defineits UAV requirements for a tacticalUAV with capabilities beyond thosepossible with the smaller RQ-7AShadow for use at division/corpslevel. The RQ-5 Hunter was onceconsidered a possible candidate forthe Army’s Extended RangeMulti-Purpose UAV, but a more capa-ble platform was desired by the Army.ERMP is designed to fill a spot be-tween the Army Shadow and the AirForce MQ-9 Predator B in capability.However, the Army wants to operatethe ERMP using the existing GCS ofthe Shadow UAV, not an entirely newsystem infrastructure. The Army re-leased the RFP for ERMP in Septem-ber 2004. The program was plannedto entail about four-five systems eachwith 12-18 air vehicles and five GCS;the subsequent plans through FY11are for seven systems with 12 air vehi-cles each; the FY08 budget envisionsnine systems through FY13. ThePhase I involved a down-select to twocompetitors which took place in earlyFY05 and included General Atomics(teamed with AAI and Sparta) with a

Predator derivative called Warrior, aNorthrop-Grumman team with a ver-sion of the Israeli Heron calledHunter II. The General AtomicsWarrior was selected by the Army forthe ERMP requirement on 8 August2005.

Funding for engineering develop-ment of the ERMPbegan in FY06 andwas expected to cost $280.5 millionthrough FY11; the SDD phase is ex-pected to be completed by 1QFY08.The Army plans to begin procure-ment funding of the first system inFY08 with starting with low-rate ini-tial production in FY08-FY10 and afull-rate production award at the endof FY09. The Army expects to reachfirst unit equipped in late 2009/early2010. Recent Army documents sug-gest that the program objective is nowset at one Warrior system in each ofthe ten divisions, implying a require-ment for over 120 air vehicles.



Air Force Hunter-Killer Re-quirement

In late 2004, the US Air Force re-leased a request for information (RFI)to industry for a next generationhunter-killer UAV capable of carry-ing up to four 500 pound guidedbombs as part of a 3,000 pound pay-load. Northrop Grumman has beenpromoting a UAV derivative of theScaled Composites Model 395 endur-ance aircraft after ruling out ahalf-size Global Hawk derivativecalled the Model 396 due to the sizeand price constraints of the USAF re-quest. Other contenders for the re-quirement are expected to be GeneralAtomics, Aurora Flight Sciences, andLockheed Martin. The Air Force hasstated that it would like to field thefirst aircraft by the end of 2007 and seta unit cost of $10 million and a systemcost of $30 million as the objective.

Border Patrol PredatorCongressional support for UAV

technology prompted US Customs

and Border Protection (CPB) to addUAVs to its aviation force. In 2004,CPB leased an Israeli Elbit Hermesand borrowed a US Army Hunter toconduct trials along the Mexican bor-der as a possible tool for border pa-trol. The Hermes logged 590 hours offlight over four months and theHunter a further 329 hours over threemonths.

This demonstration prompted aCongressional addition to the CPBbudget for the acquisition of a Gen-eral Atomics Predator B in 2005which began operations in October2005 from Sierra Vista municipal air-port along the Mexican border. ThePredator crashed on 24 April 2006due to apparent pilot error but the pro-gram proved successful enough thatCongress funded another Predatorwhich deployed in November 2006.CPB now has plans to fund UAV op-erations at about $10 million per year.Congress funded two more Predatorsin the FY06 supplemental, and theFY07 budget funds two more. The ad-

ditional UAVs will lead to expandeddemonstration efforts with a Cana-dian border patrol demonstration tobe based out of Grand Forks, NorthDakota in the autumn of 2007 and ajoint CPB/Coast Guard effort inFlorida in the spring of 2007. TheCPB effort is being controlled out ofan integrated Air and Marine Opera-tions Center in Riverside, Californiawhich facilitates coordination withthe FAA.

The CPB program is proving to bethe ground-breaker for UAV airspaceaccess issues and so could facilitatefurther UAV use by other governmentagencies. In May 2006, the FAA alsogave the Air Force the green light touse Predators over the United Statesduring disaster relief operations forsearch and rescue. Although the Airforce was ready to provide thiscapability in the wake of HurricaneKatrina in 2005, the missions werecancelled due to national airspacerestrictions.

Teal Group Analysis

The Predator UAV program haslaid the groundwork for future endur-ance UAVs. Until recently, the USmilitary has relied on U-2s to performhigh altitude, long-endurance mis-sions. However, with the spread ofhigh altitude anti-aircraft missileslike the Russian S-200 Angara (SA-5Gammon), these missions became toorisky.

The decision to employ the Preda-tors in a more versatile hunter-killerrole has considerably expanded inter-est in the program. The successful useof the Predator in this role over Af-ghanistan in 2001, Yemen in 2002,and Iraq in 2003 has opened the AirForce’s eyes to the possibility of hav-ing UCAV capability today instead ofat the end of the decade. As a result,

the Air Force’s acquisition plans forthe Predator have continued to ex-pand over the past few years. It nowseems likely that all Predators will bere-equipped into the MQ-1B/-1L con-figuration, and the Air Force nowplans to acquire the MQ-1B and thelonger range MQ-9A Reaper at thesame time.

Both the Army and Navy are alsolooking at the Predator for their ownrequirements. The Navy will considerthe Mariner variant of the Predator Bfor its BAMS requirement, while theArmy has selected the Predator’sWarrior derivative to complement isshort-range RQ-7 Tactical UAV. Thishas caused some friction with the AirForce which in 2007 attempted to takecontrol of the medium-high altitude

UAVs. Both the Army and Navy arelikely to resist this effort. Efforts tocombine USAF/USA contracting forPredator/Reaper/Warrior in 2006-07also failed to reach an agreement. Theforecast for the Navy BAMS require-ment will be found in the GlobalHawk section; this is not intended toprejudge the winner in this competi-tion but is merely an administrativeissue.

The Predator has also been leadingthe way with sales into the civil/gov-ernment market, first with experi-mental types such as the NASAAltair, but more recently with surveil-lance types such as the Border PatrolPredators. This is likely to continueand these are included in the US Gov-ernment (USG) line below.



Production Forecast

User (Variant) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

General AtomicsUSAF (R/MQ-1) 24 24 24 41 26 27 20 20 20 20 246USAF (MQ-9) 3 2 9 11 9 10 7 8 8 8 75USA (ERMP) — 12 12 36 24 12 12 12 10 10 140

Total 27 38 45 88 59 49 39 40 38 38 461

RQ-4A Global Hawk

OverviewThe RQ-4A Global Hawk High

Alt i tude Endurance UAV(HAE-UAV) is a high altitude recon-naissance UAV with greater rangeand endurance than the RQ-1APredator.

Development began in the springof 1995 with the selection of theTeledyne Ryan/E-Systems team. TheGlobal Hawk conducted its first flightin February 1998, and a secondGlobal Hawk made its maiden flightin November 1998. A total of sevenAdvanced Concept TechnologyDemonstration (ACTD) air vehicleswere built plus two Mission ControlElements and three Launch & Recov-ery Elements. The eighth GlobalHawk (which was also the first seriesproduction aircraft) was delivered tothe 9th Reconnaissance Wing atBeale AFB in September 2003. Seriesproduction was first funded in theFY02 budget and plans now call forsix Block 20, 26 Block 30 and 15Block 40 aircraft. The Air Force isplanning a series of evolutionary up-grades first called “spirals” and nowrenamed as the more conventionalBlocks which are detailed below. Ini-tial serial production of the RQ-4Awas nine air vehicles (seven USAF,two USN) from Lot 1 (FY02) to Lot 3(FY04). Production of the enhancedRQ-4B started with the second air ve-hicle of Lot 3, funded in FY04, the

17th aircraft built. Assembly of thefirst Block 30 aircraft with the ASIPsensor began in 2006 on AF13.

The US Navy has acquired twoRQ-4As to examine their utility in amaritime surveillance role and mayprocure the aircraft under its BAMSprogram; Australia became a partneron BAMS in 2007. The US CoastGuard is also planning to acquire theGlobal Hawk for its Deepwater sur-veillance requirement.

Germany is also planning to ac-quire the “EuroHawk” for its SIGINTand maritime surveillance require-ments with a short term requirementfor five aircraft. In 2004, NATO se-lected Global Hawk as part of itsforthcoming AGS radar system. Can-ada and the UK have requested dem-onstrations of the Global Hawk forconsiderat ion for future ISRrequirements.

Funding History

RDT&E ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08*

PE# 0304260 Airborne SIGINTRQ-4 — — — — — — — 4.9 10.5 10.9

PE# 0305205D8Z Endurance UAVCommon Ground Segment 46.6 — — — — — — — — —



USN Global Hawk BAMS Demonstrator

PE# 0305220F Global HawkGlobal Hawk — — — — — — 345.7 382.6 327.7 247.7

PE# 0305205N Endurance UAVBAMS — — — 188.4 95.1 64.0 — 26.2 116.7 480.2

Procurement ($ Millions) FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08*

US Air Force Procurement 3010FGlobal Hawk — — 21.0 162.2 181.0 246.7 359.1 359.6 448.0 577.8(quantity) — — — (3) (3) (4) (4) (5) (5) (5)RQ-4 mods — — — — — — — — 4.6 24.3

*request

Costs

Procurement (flyaway) unit costs (then-year $) for P-1 documents:

(USAF; $ millions)

FY02: $50.7FY03: $46.4FY04: $50.6FY05: $73.4FY06: $61.7FY07: $84.2FY08: $86.8FY09: $101.3FY10: $80.9FY11: $82.6FY12: $98.9FY13: $101.4


USAF Program PlansThe current procurement objective

has been for 54 production UAVs(plus the seven ACTD aircraft),though since 2007, the procurementdocuments have made this less firm,referring to future acquisition objec-tives with the generic disclaimer “tobe determined”. The Air Force is nowplanning to incrementally improvethe Global Hawk through a series ofBlocks (formerly “spirals”). Plansnow call for six Block 20, 26 Block 30and 15 Block 40 aircraft in addition tothe nine Block 9 aircraft already builtfor a total of 56 aircraft. The firstBlock 20 aircraft was rolled out in late2006.

New SensorsNorthrop Grumman and Raytheon

are working on a new family of modu-lar surveillance radars under theMulti-Platform Radar Technology In-sertion Program (MP-RTIP). The aimis to develop a family of radars thatcan be used on large manned plat-

forms akin to the E-8 JSTARS as wellas smaller platforms such as GlobalHawk.

The Air Force is also consideringchanging the mix of platforms/sen-sors to drive down the cost. One op-tion considered would be to buy 25 ofthe Global Hawks with the improvedSAR but not the RTIP instead of buy-ing all 38 Multi-Intelligence Capabil-ity aircraft with both sensors. Theremaining 13 would have the RTIP.At the moment, the Air Force plans toacquire 15 RQ-4 Block 40 with theMP-RTIP radar.

The Air Force is now starting tofund the upgraded sensor packagesvia a modification line in the budget.The first aircraft modification fund-ing starts in FY08 with long-leaditems for three SIGINT sensors andone RTIP. The FY09 funding in-cluded long-lead for three moreSIGINT packages and purchasesthree SIGINT sensors and one RTIPradar.

US Navy Broad Area MaritimeSurveillance

The Navy funded the acquisitionof two RQ-4 Global Hawk enduranceUAVs in FY03 to conduct a MaritimeDemonstration Program. This is in-tended to serve as the basis for theBAMS requirement with eventualprocurement of an endurance UAVfor long-range surveillance. TheNavy began its Maritime Demonstra-tion Program and a Concept of Opera-tion (CONOPS) effort in FY03.

The Navy started the BAMS UAVeffort in FY04 and planned to acquireanother BAMS UAV with FY05funding to further push this conceptalong. However, this funding did notemerge and so the demonstration willbe limited to two aircraft. The Navybegan flight testing of the first of itsRQ-4A in October 2004 and the sec-ond aircraft made its first flight inJune 2005.

Although the US Navy selectedthe RQ-4 for its original demonstra-tions of UAVs for the maritime sur-



veillance role, it has broadened itssearch for the definitive air vehicle atthe procurement stage to considerother candidates including the Gen-eral Atomics Predator/Mariner and anunmanned Gulfstream derivative.

Under the FY05 budget plant, ini-tial procurement funding for theBAMS UAV would be provided in theFY07 budget. However, during theFY06 deliberations in the autumn of2005, the Navy completely gutted theBAMS program and cut bothRDT&E funding as well as plannedprocurement funding. Under theFY07 budget released in February2006, the Navy reinstated funding forBAMS, noting that it will be a com-plementary system to the P-8A Posei-don MMA aircraft. The bids for theprogram were submitted in the springof 2007, with Northrop Grumman of-fering a derivative of its RQ-4BBlock 20 and Lockheed Martin/Gen-eral Atomics offering the Mariner, aderivative of the Predator B. TheNavy plans to award the SDD con-tract in 1QFY08. The SDD programwill include the acquisition of twomore aircraft, funded in the FY09budget. The plan is to begin low-rateinitial production of four aircraft inFY11 with an objective to field theseaircraft starting in 2014. The Navyhas not yet publicly announced an ac-quisition objective on the aircraftsince the requirement is for an “effec-tive time on station” objective thatcould be met by different aircraft indifferent ways. In 2007 during thebidding process, the Navy indicated

that it has a $2.32 billion costassigned to the program, a $1.3billion increase compared to previousestimates

Australia signed a BAMS agree-ment on 13 January 2007 to becomepartner on the program. Australia hassome unique objectives for its pro-gram, and expects that the groundsupport system will involve and Aus-tralian company.

US Coast Guard DeepwaterPlans

The Coast Guard is expected to se-lect the Global Hawk for its endur-ance Deepwater UAV requirement. Asignificant roadblock until 2003 wasthe lack of a FAA certification for theoperation of the Global Hawk overthe US, but this was achieved in 2003.Nevertheless, Global Hawk acquisi-tion probably won’t occur until 2014at the earliest. In the interim, theUSCG has spoken about paying fordata from UAVs operated from twoland bases. These may be DoD oper-ated facilities. The eventual require-ment will probably total aboutfour-eight air vehicles.

NATO AGS UAVThe NATO Alliance Ground Sur-

veillance (AGS) program reached amilestone in 2004 with the selectionof the Airbus A321 equipped with theTransatlantic Cooperative AGS Ra-dar (TCAR) as the base platform, andthe RQ-4B Global Hawk as the sup-porting system. Under current plans,NATO will acquire seven Global

Hawks and five Airbus AGS. Recentplans called for the RQ-4B GlobalHawks to retain the US Air Force sen-sor option, not TCAR, and it is possi-ble that an interim capability could beprovided as early as 2007 by loan of aUS Air Force Global Hawk. Fundingturmoil in 2007 has led to some talkabout scrapping the manned Airbus321 platform and relying entirely onthe Global Hawk.

Stealth HAE-UAVIn March 2003, Lockheed Mar-

tin’s Skunk Works began work on astealthy Penetrating HAE-UAV(PHAE) due to its conviction that theUSAF will eventually require aGlobal Hawk follow-on able to oper-ate over countries deploying newerSAM systems such as the RussianSA-10/-20. This was internallyfunded at a cost of around $28 mil-lion, and was unveiled in 2006 as theP-175 Polecat. The design is a flyingwing, resembling the B-2 bomber ingeneral configuration but with asmaller 90 foot wingspan and 1,000pound payload. Three flight testswere conducted through March 2007when the prototype was lost in a flightaccident.

NASA Global HawkNASAis attempting to acquire two

ACTD Global Hawks from the USAFwhich are intended primarily for re-search purposes.

Teal Group Analysis

The Global Hawk is at the cuttingedge of the use of UAV technologyfor strategic reconnaissance. The atti-tude of the Congress has warmed uptowards these strategic reconnais-sance programs due to the use ofPredator and Global Hawk in recentcombat operations over Afghanistanand Iraq. This publicity has high-lighted the value of such systems tonational leaders and will help to keepthe program funded even in the eventof cost escalation. Indeed, a major

concern in recent years has been theincreasing demand for Global Hawkservices with other governmentagencies vying for flight hours.

The procurement objective nowappears to be over 56 production air-craft in addition to the seven pre-pro-duction aircraft and two more for theNavy. These numbers will probablyincrease in later years. One of themain inhibitions in further acquisitionhas been the escalating cost of the air-craft. Although it was originally

planned to acquire the HAE-UAV for$10 million a copy, this benchmarkhas been thrown out the window as aresult of the continued addition ofsensors. At the moment, the unit costof the airframe is closer to $25 mil-lion, the flyaway price escalating over$60 million by the enhancements tothe sensor suite.

The Navy has been notoriously er-ratic in its UAV plans, but the actualflight tests of the two RQ-4A alreadyfunded by the Navy should help to



clarify the Navy’s needs in this re-gards. Global Hawk or a maritimeversion of Predator seem the mostlikely candidates for the eventualBAMS requirement. There are otherpotential US clients for the GlobalHawk including the CIA and the Na-tional Geospatial Intell igenceAgency (formerly NIMA, NRO)which is beginning to consider the useof HALE UAVs as an alternative to itstraditional satellites, but for the mo-ment, it is likely that the USAF willhave priority in these missions.

Export prospects for the GlobalHawk appear good in spite of the re-

markable inanity of the State Depart-ment linkage between the GlobalHawk and the Missile TechnologyControl Regime in 2003-2004. At themoment, it would appear that the nin-compoops at the State Departmentwill consent to Global Hawk sales ifthe recipient countries promise not tofit them with missiles. One wonderswhy the State Department does not tryto limit airliners sales on the groundsthat they can be fitted for weaponsdelivery?

The number of export aircraft willbe limited both by the high cost of thesystem and technology concerns.

However, exports could add substan-tially to Global Hawk production inthe out-years of the forecast period.Germany and Australia appear to bethe near term buyers as well as the Eu-ropean AGS batch. Other mid-termcustomers could include Britain andJapan. South Korea has a stated re-quirement for a MALE UAV but mayproceed first with a national program.Singapore has expressed interest inGlobal Hawk, but is probably a sig-nif icant way from actual lycommitting to such a program.

Production Forecast


Northrop GrummanUSAF (RQ-4) 5 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 51

RQ-7A Tactical UAV

OverviewThe RQ-7A Shadow TUAV pro-

gram is a UAV system to providereal-time reconnaissance, surveil-lance, and target acquisition informa-tion to US Army brigades.

TUAV suffered a series of misfor-tunes and false star ts in themid-1990s, becoming entangled byDoD insistence that the Army andNavy combine their tactical UAV re-quirements. After this led to a stringof failures, in November 1998 theJoint Requirements Oversight Coun-cil gave the Army the go-ahead toproceed alone with the TUAV pro-gram. In late December 1999, theArmy awarded a contract to AAI De-fense Systems for their Shadow 200UAV. The Army awarded a secondLRIP contract for four systems on 30March 2001, and a third in March2002. A favorable Milestone III deci-sion was made on 25 September 2002leading to an award of a full produc-tion contract on 27 December 2002.The system was first deployed withthe 4th Infantry Division at Ft. Hoodin 2002 and was operationally de-ployed in Iraq in 2003. The Army ac-quisition objective has fluctuated

over the past few years from a low of37 systems to the current high of 79systems. The Army is continuing tofund improvements in the TUAV sys-tem including increased payload, im-proved sensors, TCS improvementsand other features, some of which areaimed at the new 2004 RQ-7B config-uration of the air vehicle which has

greater payload, fuel and andendurance.

In 2006, the Marine Corps decidedto acquire six Shadow systems underits Marine Corps Tactical UAS(MCTUAS) requirement to replaceits old RQ-2 Pioneers UAVs.

Poland became the first exportcustomer for the Shadow in 2006 withan expected purchase of two systems.



RQ-7A TUAV

Funding


PE# 0305204A Tactical UAVProject 114 TUAV 50.2 45.0 34.1 35.2 68.6 67.9 15.8 24.0 15.9 7.9


Army Procurement BA 02: Communications and Electronics EquipmentTUAV — 0.8 47.4 56.4 105.4 121.6 305.6 305.2 36.0 39.5(systems) — — (4) (5) (9) (8) (22) (16) — —Marine Corps Procurement BA 04: Navy Weapons ProcurementMCTUAS — — — — — — — — — 90.2(systems) — — — — — — — — — (5)

*Request


Shadow Program PlansThe Army has changed its pro-

curement objective several times overthe past few years. It was set at 44 sys-tems up to FY03, then raised to 60systems. In the FY05 budget submis-sion, it was reduced again to 39 sys-tems, with procurement fundingending in FY07 instead of FY09. Inthe FY06 budget submission it wasincreased to 55 systems with addi-tional funding being slotted into theFY08-11 time frame and in the FY07budget submission in February 2006,it was raised again to 74 systems and

in the FY)8 budget submission it wasraised to 79 systems.

The Army is continuing to fundimprovements in the TUAV systemincluding increased payload, im-proved sensors, TCS improvementsand other features. Air vehicle im-provements include a target locationerror (TLKE) system, addition of aTactical Common Data Link (TCDL),integration with the Joint Tactical Ra-dio System (JTRS) and an improvedlaser designator. The program also in-cludes efforts to incorporate reliabil-ity fixes and other improvementshighlighted by operating experiences

in Iraq. AAI was awarded a $11.7 mil-lion contract in July 2006 to developthe new Tactical Commons DataLink, with L-3 Communications andCubic being its major partners on theeffort.

MCTUASIn 2006, the Marine Corps decided

to acquire six Shadow systems underits Marine Corps Tactical UAS(MCTUAS) requirement to replaceits old RQ-2 Pioneers UAVs. Thesewill be funded in FY08-09 at a totalprogram cost of $139.3 million.

Teal Group Analysis

The Army is finally on the way tofielding its own tactical UAV, morethan 25 years after its first doomedUAV program, the Aquila. Instead ofa custom built design, it has opted fora low-cost off-the-shelf solution, theAAI Shadow 200. The Army’s re-quirement for the Shadow hasbounced up and down over the pastfew years, now at 79 systems afterreaching its nadir of 39 systems in theFY05 budget request. This fluctua-tion is due to a decision to press aheadwith a longer-range system, the deci-sion to acquire the RQ-8 Fire Scoutfor the FCS brigade, and the Army’sgeneral confusion over its futureUAV needs. The Army appears now

to have decided it would rather havethe capability sooner rather than laterdue to the demonstrated performanceof the RQ-7 in Iraq. Consolidation ofits FCS-related UAV efforts will alsohelp Shadow.

There has been some talk of aUSMC acquisition connected with itsTier III requirement to replace itsover-aged Pioneers. However, nofunding for this is included in the cur-rent FY08 budget documents and theMarines appear to be focusing on theTier II requirement instead.

The RQ-7 could have a significantexport potential, and may have someadditional domestic procurement op-portunities such as for civilian organi-

zations such as US Customs forsecurity patrol. The civil require-ments for RQ-7 are much more diffi-cult to predict since at the moment,UAVs are not authorized to operate incontrolled air space over the US. Itwill probably take five years at leastfor the FAA to approve a regime forUAV operation, but RQ-7 will have agood shot at civil applications at thatstage due to its maturity by the end ofthe decade.

The RQ-7 production forecast be-low is for air vehicles and presumesthat at least four air vehicles will beacquired per system (4+1 attritionspare).



Production Forecast


US (TUAV) 30 50 5 55 — — — 60 60 60 320USMC (MCTUAS) 5 25 — — — — 10 — — — 40

US Army Future UAVs

OverviewThe US Army, in cooperation with

DARPA, is beginning to explore afamily of networked armored vehi-cles called the Future Combat System(FCS). This system is expected to in-corporate several UAVs. The Armyhad identified four Classes of UAVs itexpected to acquire but in yet anothershake-up of the program dumped

Class II and Class III in 2006, leavingonly Class I and Class 4. Class I is theplatoon UAV and the Army currentlyplans to use the AeroVironmentRQ-11 Raven until DARPA com-pletes its objective Micro-Air Vehicle(MAV) which is being developed byHoneywell. Class IV is a pair of en-durance UAVs, the Class IV-A at bri-gade level which is the RQ-8B Fire

Scout and the Class IVB at divisionaland corps level which is the Ex-tended-Range/Multi-Purpose UAV(ERMP-UAV), based on the GeneralAtomics Warrior (Predator deriva-tive). The Army envisioned acquiring6,600 UAVs to equip its future bri-gades but this is l ikely to besubstantially reconsidered.

Funding History


PE# 0603286E Advanced Aerospace SystemsA160 Advanced Air Vehicle — — — — 13.6 9.0 9.0 7.0 7.0 5.0

PE# 0604645A Armored Vehicle Systems Modernization Eng. Dev,Project F62 Recon platforms & Sensors

Class 1 UAV — — — — — 13.2 5.1 1.3 1.8 —Class II UAV — — — — — — 0.3 4.1 6.1 —Class III UAV — — — — — — 0.3 11.6 17.0 —Class IV UAV — — — — — 16.3 27.6 27.6 40.5 —

PE# 0604662A FCS Recon (UAV) PlatformsProject FC3 Recon

(UAV) Platforms — — — — — — — — — 41.1


RequirementDuring the 1990s, the US Army

began examining whether contempo-rary main battle tanks have any futureon the modern battlefield. The mainproblem from the US Army perspec-tive has been the difficulty of trans-porting heavy divisions around theglobe. As part of the Army’s quest for“transformation”, futurists havepushed for a radically different ap-proach in future combat systemsaimed at a family of light vehicleswhich would place a greater stress oninformation gathering at a distancerather than a close-combat platform.This is attractive since it implies thatthe FCS will not come under directhostile fire, and therefore does nothave to be armored. To conduct mis-sions at extended ranges, the FCSwould incorporate UAVs into the de-

sign to enable the platform to acquireand engage targets at extendedranges.

Boeing/SAIC wins LSI Con-tract

A team consisting of Boeing andSAIC were selected as the lead sys-tem integrators for the FCS programin March 2002. This contract is for theconcept and technology developmentphase (CTD) which could be fol-lowed by additional contracts if theoptions are exercised.

Army FCS UAV PlansThe Army is currently categoriz-

ing its UAV requirements into classes.Under the scheme, each of the army’s33 planned brigade-sized Units ofAction would operate about 200UAVs each consisting each of 108

Class 1; 36 Class 2; 48 Class 3/Class4A and eight Class 4B UAVs. Thiswould represent an objective of about6,600 UAVs consisting of about3,600 Class 1; 1,200 Class 2; 1,600Class 3/Class 4B and 275 Class 4B.

Class 1 UAVClass I is the platoon UAV with an

operational radius of 16 km, a onepound payload, and an operating alti-tude of 90 minutes. The Army cur-rent ly plans to use theAeroVironment RQ-11 Raven untilDARPA completes its objective Mi-cro-Air Vehicle (MAV). The Army isacquiring Raven in large numbers un-der its small UAV program (SUAV)and more details can be found in theMini-UAV section in this report.

In April 2003, the US Army Com-munications-Electronics Command



awarded Mission Technologies inSan Antonio, TX a contract for the de-velopment and production of threeGenerat ion II mini-UAVs.Honeywell Aerospace is the primecontractor for the MAV with AAICorp. being the airframe subcontrac-tor. AAI won a February 2006 con-tract for $1.7 mill ion for theconstruction of 55 MAV air vehicles.The Honeywell MAV underwent itsfirst untethered free flight in 2005 andin late May 2006 the Army selectedthe Honeywell MAV for the SDDphase, awarding Honeywell a $61million contract which includes themanufacture of 12 systems. TheHoneywell was fielded in Iraq on atrials basis in the summer of 2007.

Class 2 UAVThe Army Class II was the com-

pany-level Organic Air Vehicle(OAV) with a 30 km range, 10 poundpayload, five hour endurance and1,000 feet operating altitude. DARPAwas planning to validate the OAV ad-verse weather capability in late 2002in at least two different size UAVs,followed by demonstrations of OAVwaypoint flight and collision avoid-ance technology in January 2003. Theprogram awarded two Phase I devel-opment contracts in 2002 with deliv-ery of air vehicles by December 2002.These went to a team headed by Mi-cro Craft (TRW, Athena Technolo-gies, Alturdyne) and a team headedby Honeywell Engines and Systems(AeroVironment, D-Star Engineer-ing, MLB, Honeywell Labs, NASAAmes Research Center, Cypress Int’l,and Techsburg). In November 2004,DARPA awarded three contracts forthe development of prototype OAV-IIto Aurora Flight Sciences, BAE Sys-tems and Honeywell Internationals.The requirement was for a 112 poundUAV with two hours endurance and a10 km operational range. The cost ob-jective was $75,000 per air vehicle,excluding the sensors. An early ob-jective of the flight test program wasto examine collision avoidance tech-nology. In July 2005, BAE an-nounced its decision to drop out of the

OAV-II effort. This left Aurora withits Goldeneye and Honeywell with itsISTAR based on the earlier AlliedAerospace design. DARPA wasscheduled to down-select to one OAVII developed in 3QFY06 which willlead to the Phase II program with thedesign and construction of twoprototypes for FY07/08 flight trials.

The Class II program underwent ashakeup in mid-2004 with a decisionto fund a parallel Class II UAV not us-ing ducted-fan technology. In August2005, Boeing/SAIC down-selectedthe Piasecki Air Guard shrouded rotorvehicle for this effort. Under the 2006plan, the Army Class II contender wasexpected to fly-off against theDARPA-sponsored OAV-II aroundFY08. However, the Class II programwas chopped out of the FY08 budgetrequest in February 2006.

Class 3 UAVClass 3 was the battalion-level

UAV. The program had a majorshake-up in the summer of 2004 and

Boeing/SAIC down-selected threecontenders for the requirement in Au-gust 2005 including the Piasecki AirGuard, AAI Shadow II and TeledyneBrown Engineering’s Prospector. TheProspector is a US variant of theRheinmetall KZO Tucan UAV beingacquired by the German army. Thisprogram was expected to continuewith the next major decision point be-ing the down-select to a single con-tractor for SDD. However, the ClassIII program was chopped out of theFY08 budget request in February2006.

Class 4 UAVThe US Army awarded a contract

to General Atomics in May 2003 forthree IGNAT UAVs based on thePredator to help define its UAV re-quirements. These UAVs were de-ployed to Iraq in 2004 to help definearmy requirements. For a variety ofreasons, the Army decided to breakthe Class IV category into two sepa-rate types: the Class IVA at brigade



US Army Class I Mini-UAV

level which will be the RQ-8B FireScout and the Class IVB at divisionaland corps level which is the Ex-tended-Range/Multi-Purpose UAV(ERMP-UAV). Two teams were com-peting for ERMP: General Atomics(teamed with AAI and Sparta) with a

Predator derivative called Warrior,and a Northrop-Grumman team witha version of the Israeli Heron called

Hunter II. The General AtomicsWarrior was selected by the Army forthe ERMP requirement on 8 August2005. This program is covered inmore detail in the RQ-1 Predatorsection.

The Class IVB is the RQ-8B FireScout, based on an earlier Navy pro-gram. The Navy initiated a VTOLUAV program in its FY00 budget andon 11 February 2000, the Navy se-lected the Northrop GrummanRQ-8A Fire Scout. In late 2001, theNavy announced plans to cancel theFire Scout program, though it later re-started the program. In any event, theArmy began considering the use ofthe Fire Scout as a test-bed for theirUCAR (Unmanned Combat ArmedRotorcraft) program in 2002-03.

However, in August 2003, the Armydecided to select Fire Scout as the ba-sis for its Class IV UAV for the FutureCombat System program for its bri-gade level Class 4A system. At themoment, the Army is contracting withNorthrop Grumman to build eightMQ-8B Fire Scouts to continue thedevelopment effort. There have beensome attempts by other firms to un-seat Northrop Grumman in this pro-gram, with Boeing pushing for anunmanned version of the AH-6 LittleBird Helicopter called UnmannedLittle Bird (ULB) and Bell offering anunmanned version of the Bell 407Xwhich won the ArmedReconnaissance Helicopter (ARH)contest.

SIGINT UAVThe US Army is currently contem-

plating the use of a UAV for signalsintelligence collection. An initial pro-gram to package the Division TacticalUAV SIGINT system into a 60 pound,one cubic foot module small enoughto be carried by the RQ-7 Shadowproved beyond state-of-the-art andthe Army back-pedaled to three cubic

foot package capable of being carriedby the RQ-8 Fire Scout. The moduleis being developed by BAE Systems.

A160 HummingbirdUntil 2002, the FCS program fo-

cused mainly on concept develop-ment and preliminary examination ofkey technologies. These includedpreliminary work on the A160 UAVand the OAV. The plan was to com-plete three A160 air vehicles by June2002 and to conduct the first flighttests of a synthetic aperture radar/moving target indicator (SAR/GMTI)sensor on the A160 by October 2002.The A160 Hummingbird was beingdeveloped by Frontier Systems, butBoeing acquired the air vehicle in2004. The design employs a rigid ro-tor and was initially funded under aseparate DARPA effort codenamedHummingbird Warrior. The firstflight of the A160 was conducted on29 January 2002. The Army contin-ued flight tests on the A160 inFY03-FY05, including tests up to agross weight of 5,000 pounds and analtitude of 30,000 feet, but the trialswere delayed by the loss of one of theprototype air vehicles. The effort con-tinues to be funded by DARPA but isbeing monitored by the Army. TheArmy is also expected to support ademonstration effort of FrontierSciences Maverick VTUAV forspecial forces applications.

Other UAV EffortsThe Army has also supported a va-

riety of other UAV efforts. For exam-ple, the Army has been using theSAIC Vigilante VTUAV as a test-bedto examine UAV armament and inearly 2005 conducted firing trials ofthe APKWS from the Vigilante at theYuma Proving Grounds.

Teal Group Analysis

The Army is embarking on a widerange of new UAV concepts, many ofwhich are connected with its FutureCombat System (FCS) effort. TheUAVs are essential to FCS since the

vehicles are too light to be survivable,and therefore need UAVs to allowthem to carry out some of their mis-sions at stand-off ranges outside the

envelope of enemy close-combatweapons.

The FCS program is a tinker-toyassortment of fads and alarmingly un-realistic planning assumptions that



A160 Hummingbird

has been continually reorganizedover the past few years as the Armyabsorbs the fiscal reverberations andtactical lessons of the recent fightingin Iraq. On the fiscal side, the Armyfaces substantial operations andmaintenance costs as its current fleetof combat and tactical vehicles havebecome worn out and in serious needof rehabilitation or replacement. Thecombat lessons of Iraq are unlikely tosupport the current conception ofFCS which emphasizes light weighttransportability over survivability.The heavy losses suffered by the armyagainst RPGs and IEDs will likelyforce a reconsideration of the need forheavy armored vehicles for the closecombat role.

Even after the FCS program is sub-stantially reorganized, renamed, orcancelled, the Army is likely to pressahead with the associated UAV pro-grams. If anything, a reorganizationof the FCS program could shift thefunding from the sillier aspects of theprograms such as the family of lightarmored vehicles, and back to its truetransformational core of digitizationand ISR (intelligence, surveillance,reconnaissance).

Unfortunately, the Army’s trackrecord on UAVs does not inspire agreat deal of confidence over the pro-posed schedule or the scope of theplanned acquisition, nor has the UAVaspect of the FCS program beenhelped by its erratic funding and an-nual course changes. It took the armynearly 25 years to field an adequatetactical UAV from the Aquila of thelate 1970s to today’s RQ-7 Shadow.In addition, army funding for UAVsin recent years has been modest, anduntil recently, the FCS budget wasquite skimpy on UAV funding. Thatso many of the key UAVs are still be-ing developed by DARPA stronglysuggests that the technology is notmature enough for serial productionuntil late in the forecast period. Theprogram has been suffering from aroller-coaster ride where one aspectof FCS receives priority one year,only to be switched in priority thenext year. This happened yet again in2006 when the army dumped two ofthe programs, the Class II and ClassIII, bizarrely the two programs whichin 2005 the Army had decided toafford more priority.

This leaves only the Class I in de-velopment. Yet the Army has beenbuying substantial numbers of RQ-11Raven mini-UAVs for the same re-quirement under its SUAV program.It remains to be seen whether theHoneywell MAV proves practical andaffordable. If so, it may complementrather than replace the Raven for mis-sions where hover/stare features areimportant such as urban warfare.However, helicopter type UAVs areinevitably less fuel efficient than air-craft types, so Raven is likely to re-main in use for open fieldenvironments.

The Army seems more likely topress ahead with the Class 4A/-4Bprograms, with the Fire Scout alreadyselected for the Class 4Arequirement.Due to its substantial payload, theFire Scout may branch out to satisfyother requirements including a surro-gate UCAR armed platform, and alsoas a divisional/brigade SIGINT plat-form. The Warrior ERMP also hasreasonably good prospects, and thatforecast is contained within thePredator section.

Production Forecast


Northrop GrummanUSA (Class 4A MQ-8B) — — — — 15 15 15 15 15 — 75

US Navy UAVs

OverviewThe US Navy is attempting to de-

fine its future UAV requirements afterseveral years of disjointed and con-fused effort. At the moment, it is con-centrating on two efforts, the MQ-8BFire Scout VTUAV (Vert ical

Take-Off UAV) and the BAMS

(Broad Area Maritime Surveillance)endurance UAV. In addition, it hashosted a variety of smaller study ef-forts, including several futuristicefforts with DARPA.

In February 2000, the Navy se-

lected the Northrop Grumman

RQ-8A Firescout VTUAV. How-

ever, in late 2001, the Navy an-nounced it was planning to cancel theFire Scout program and buy fourGlobal Hawk UAVs instead. TheNavy reversed itself again in 2003,stating that the Fire Scout was beingre-examined. Under current budgetplans, the Navy plans to beginVTUAV procurement in FY07 tosupport the new Littoral Combat Ship(LCS), with an objective of 168 airvehicles.

With the money saved from post-poning the Fire Scout, the Navy ac-quired two RQ-4A Global Hawks toconduct a Maritime DemonstrationProgram. This was intended to serve

as the basis for the BAMS require-ment with eventual procurement of anendurance UAV for long-range sur-veillance. The Navy has contractedfour firms and teams to proposeBAMS contenders : NorthropGrumman RQ-4 Global Hawk, theLockheed Martin teamed with Gen-eral Atomics with the PredatorB-ER/Mariner, General Dynamicsteamed with Aeronautics with theDominator, and an undisclosed offer-ing from the Boeing Phantom Works.The Navy hopes to begin procure-ment funding the BAMS UAV inFY11 and deploy the first seriesproduction UAV around FY13.



Both the Marine Corps and Navyhave been leasing the Boeing/InsituScan Eagle for operations and dem-onstrations and have also studiedother small UAVs for various applica-tions as mentioned below. In January2007, the Navy announced it would

begin a formal program to acquire a

Small Tactical UAS (STUAS) forboth Navy and USMC Tier II require-ments. with initial deliveries in May2010. The Navy plans to acquire 88

systems in FY09-13 and may extendthe program beyond this date.

Funding History


PE# 0305204N Tactical UAVVTUAV — 38.3 35.9 73.2 65.4 85.6 59.1 76.4 104.7 32.9STUAS — — — — — — — — — 6.1

PE# 0305205N Endurance UAVBAMS — — — — 188.4 95.1 64.0 — 26.2 116.7

PE# 0603261N Tactical Abn. Recon.UAV Conops — 38.3 35.9 37.8 46.4 — — — — —


Navy Aircraft Procurement BA.4: Other AircraftVTUAV — — — — — — — — 37.4 37.7(quantity) — — — — — — — — (4) (3)

*Request


BAMS Endurance UAVThe Navy began funding in the

FY03 RDT&E budget for a GlobalHawk Maritime Demonstration Pro-gram and a Concept of Operation(CONOPS) effort to start its BroadArea Maritime Surveillance (BAMS)program. The effort was intended topiggyback on US Air Force contractsfor the Global Hawk to minimize theexpense of acquiring a Global Hawkand associated equipment to conductthe experiments. The original planwas to acquire two Global Hawks, butthen it was reduced to one GlobalHawk, and finally changed back totwo Global Hawks. The Navy beganflight testing of the first of its RQ-4Ain October 2004 and the second air-craft made its first flight in June 2005.The Global Hawk underwent accep-tance tests and flight trials thendeployed on fleet exercises andmissions near Iraq.

Although the Navy focused on theGlobal Hawk in its original BAMSprogram, it was pushed to open thecompetition to other suitable plat-forms such as the General AtomicsMariner (an extended range maritimepatrol version of the Predator) and a

UAV derivative of the General Dy-namics Gulfstream G550. A requestfor information on BAMS was re-leased to industry on 17 March 2004.In September 2005, the Navy selectedfour bidders for the program:Northrop Grumman with the RQ-4Global Hawk, Lockheed Martinteamed with General Atomics withthe Mariner derivative of Predator,

General Dynamics Advanced Infor-mation Systems teamed the IsraeliAeronautics firm and their DominatorUAV, and an undisclosed UAV fromthe Boeing Phantom Works.AeroVironment has also proposed itsGlobal Observer for the requirement.

Under the current plans, the Navywill conduct the Milestone B in4QFY07 based on the flight trials



MQ-8B Fire Scout

with the two Global Hawks. This willpermit a SDD contract award to begindevelopment in 1QFY08. The Navyplans to conduct the Milestone C de-cision in 4QFY11 and so expects tobegin procurement funding in FY11as well which will permit low-rate ini-tial production and initial deliv-ery/operational capability in FY13.

MQ-8 VTUAVIn spite of the curtailment of fur-

ther funding for the RQ-8AFire Scoutin 2001, subsequent Navy budgets re-versed course again and providedfunding for trials on the existing airvehicles. The Fire Scout was tested inApril 2003 aboard a surrogate LittoralCombat Ship (USS Denver) to exam-ine its suitability for this future re-quirement. Northrop Grummanreceived a $8.3 million contract inJanuary 2006 to conduct flight trialsaboard the High Speed Vessel-2. Twoof the EMD RQ-8A aircraft con-ducted autonomous landings on theLPD-13 Nashville off Patuxent NavalAir Station on 16-17 January 2006.

The Navy plans to procure nineMQ-8B Fire Scouts in the engineer-ing manufacturing developmentphase to serve as the basis for the tri-als and to provide interim capability;this is a an increase of four air vehi-cles due to a Congressional plus-upsin FY05 and FY06. The Navy expectsthat the Milestone C decision will bemade in 3-4QFY07, low-rate pro-curement of seven MQ-8B take placein FY07-08, and that the full rate pro-duction decision will be made in1QFY09. The Navy currently plans toacquire 168 MQ-8B under the pro-curement program of which 43 will befunded in FY07-FY13.

The Navy is also considering ahunter-killer version as the MQ-8Seascout.

STUAS (Marine Tier II)Both the Marine Corps and Navy

have been leasing the Boeing/InsituScan Eagle for operations and dem-onstrations and have also studiedother small UAVs for various applica-tions as mentioned below.

In January 2007, the Navy an-nounced it would begin a formal pro-gram to acquire a Small Tactical UAS(STUAS) for both Navy and USMCTier II requirements. The program isexpected to be in three stages, Incre-ment 0 (off the shelf); Increment 1(C2 integration, communications re-lay, heavy fuel engine); Increment 3(payload enhancement). The Navywould like to reach Milestone B inFY08, low rate production in3QFY10; initial deliveries in May2010, and initial operational capabil-ity in FY10. The acquisition objectiveis not entirely clear, but the Navy indi-cates it plans to acquire 88 systems inFY09-13. Contenders for the require-ment are expected to include the BAESystems Skylynx, AAI AerosondeMk 4; Advanced Ceramics SilverFox; Boeing Scan Eagle; NorthropGrumman Kil ler Bee, andpresumably an AeroVironmentdesign.

Naval UAV ConceptsThe Navy is considering the use of

the AeroVironment Helios very longendurance UAV as a possible adjunctcommunications relay, bridging thegap between satellites and surfacebased means.

In 2003, Congress added $4.2 mil-

lion for the Navy to examine a Preci-

sion Re-supply Vehicle, type ofUAV.

The Navy has funded a team ofBoeing and Insitu Group in February2002 to conduct a 15 month study of

their ScanEagle UAV, a very smallUAV weighing only 33 pounds thatcould be used for a variety of mis-sions. The ScanEagle is small enoughthat it could conceivably be launchedfrom a submarine. In this regards, theNavy contracted with NorthropGrumman in early 2003 to develop anexpendable launch capsule to enablea submarine to launch a small UAV

from underwater, dubbed the SACS

(stealthy affordable capsule system).The Navy has been funding the Ad-

vanced Ceramics Research Silver

Fox mini-UAV for various applica-tions including use as a stand-offchemical detection system. In August

2005, the Navy acquired three A-160

Hummingbird helicopter UAVs fora flight demonstration program.

DARPAhas been cooperating with

the Navy on a futuristic Cormorant

Sub-launched and RecoveredMulti-purpose UAV (MPUAV/a.k.a.MPAV) and in May 2003 fundedLockheed Martin’s Skunk Works fora Phase 0 study effort of the concept.



Silver Fox

DARPA and the Navy have also beencooperating on a study program to ex-amine the use of micro-air vehiclesfor ship self-defense, using the

AeroVironment Wasp MAV as a testbed.

The Navy began funding

DUSTER (Deployable UnmannedSystem for Targeting, Exploitationand Recon) in FY04. The program isaimed at examining airborne recon-

naissance systems that could be usedin place of the existing aircraft basedTARPS pod. The Navy has receivedCongressional plus-ups to study thedevelopment of low-cost SmartWarfighting Array Reconfigurable

Modules (SWARM), a type ofE-O/IR system for long-enduranceUAVs. The Navy has also procured15 Neptune tactical UAVs from DRSUnmanned Technologies starting in

2002. These are unusual in that theycan take off and land on water and arebeing studied for special operationsapplications. The Navy has an objec-tive of 27 Neptunes. SOCOM ac-quired 65 XPV-1 Tern tactical UAVswhich were operated by the Navy’sFleet Composite Squadron-6 (VC-6)in Afghanistan in support of specialforces operations.

Teal Group Analysis

The Navy has shown belated inter-est in UAVs for surveillance applica-tions compared to the Army orMarine Corps due to fundamentallydifferent tactical intelligence gather-ing requirements. Until recently, theNavy felt that existing naval sensorsare capable of detecting hostile ships,aircraft and submarines; over-the-ho-rizon surveillance and targeting is al-ready performed to by Navyhelicopters, aircraft and oceansurveillance satellites.

Over the past few years, the Navyhas begun to more seriously considerthe applicability of an enduranceUAV to its surveillance missions inconjunction with the new P-8 MMAwhich will replace the aged P-3Orion. At the moment, the Navy plansto begin funding the production seriesof BAMS around FY11 but the scaleof this funding is still not clear in theout years since the quantity will betied to which air vehicle the Navy se-lects. The forecast below presumes

that the Navy funds about three peryear to the end of the forecast period.

The Fire Scout program now ap-pears tied to the Littoral Combat Shipprogram, a program which is by nomeans assured of reaching series pro-duction. However, even this is betternews than previous Navy plans toshelve the program entirely. Navyprocurement began procurementfunding for VTUAV in FY07 and ex-tend well beyond FY13 with the pacelikely depending upon the progress ofthe LCS program in general and thesuitability of the VTUAV. The Navycurrently plans to field a set of threeUAVs per LCS, and the objective forthe LCS has been put at 56-60 shipswhich the Navy plans to support with168 air vehicles. The real question isthe Navy’s commitment to the pro-gram given its past roller-coaster his-tory. It is entirely possible that theNavy will reverse course again. Therehave been some arguments that theEagle Eye tilt-rotor is better suited to

the mission as the Marine Corps hasargued. It is also possible that thenavy will acquire the MQ-8B for aninitial group of ships, but opt for an-other system on the later ships. As aresult, the forecast below for MQ-8Bshould be regarded as optimistic.

Should the Fire Scout reach fullscale production, it has fairly goodexport prospects as there are fewship-compatible UAVs in productionat the moment. The forecast belowdoes not include Army acquisition ofthe RQ-8 for the FCS program whichis covered separately in the US ArmyUAV section.

The Navy has also decided to for-malize its Small UAV program whichuntil recently took the form of leasingUAV services such as the BoeingScan Eye. The new STUAS programwill acquire STUAS/Tier II UAVs forboth the Navy and Marine Corpsrather than rely on continued leasing.

Production Forecast


Northrop GrummanUSN (MQ-8) 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 78UndeterminedUSN/USMC (STUAS) 75 150 120 120 65 120 120 — — — 770UndeterminedUSN (BAMS) — — — — 2 2 4 4 3 3 18

US Marine Corps Tactical UAV

OverviewThe RQ-2A Pioneer is a remotely

piloted vehicle developed in Israel forsurveillance requirements. The US

Navy acquired it in the late 1980s asan interim UAV system for use off USNavy ships and by the US MarineCorps. Production to date has in-

cluded at least nine systems andslightly over 100 air vehicles. Con-gress ordered the Navy to halt futurepurchases in FY88 due to the decision



to press ahead with a Joint TacticalUAV (BQM-155 Hunter, see report).However, the Navy purchased 12 at-trition replacements after the GulfWar, a further 20 air vehicles in FY94,and 15 air vehicles in 1996 to keep ex-isting units operational until a newUAV system arrives in service. Cur-rent plans are to keep Pioneer opera-t ional unti l 2010. Lacking afollow-on, the Marines instituted a Pi-oneer Improvement program in 2000to keep the system viable until the endof the decade. Procurement fundingfor the upgrade began in FY03 with aprogram cost of $35 million. The Ma-rines started a new vertical unmannedaircraft system (VUAS) effort inFY06 which quickly ended due tofunding and other issues. In late 2006,the Marines decided to satisfy theirTier III requirement by buying sixRQ-7 Raven systems which will befunded in FY08-09. The Raven willreplace the Pioneer once available.

In July 2004, the Marines awardeda contract to Boeing to deploy two

ScanEagle UAV units to Iraq whichare being operated alongside the Pio-neer as an interim Tier II small UAV.In 2007, the Navy has initiated a for-mal Tier II Small Tactical UAS devel-opment/acquisition program, but this

is covered in the US Navy UAVsection above.

Funding History


Navy Weapons Procurement (WPN) BA 2: Other MissilesPioneer UAV 18.9 — — — 8.8 1.9 12.7 4.9 16.4 —Marine Corps Procurement BA 04: Navy Weapons ProcurementMCTUAS — — — — — — — — — 90.2(systems) — — — — — — — — — (5)


Pioneer PIP EndedIn 2000, the Marine Corps started

a Pioneer Improvement Program,aimed at making the system more por-table and to extend the useful life ofits components. There are also plansto gradually improve the air vehicle,starting with the software from theRaytheon Tactical Ground ControlStation, and later extending the effortto the sensors and communicationlinks.

The Marines started to fund pro-curement elements of this effort inFY03 with an expected program costof $35.6 million. The program in-cludes procurement of an improvedGround Control Station based on the

system used with the Army Shadow;upgrades to the Launch and RecoverySystem such as smallertrailer-mounted launchers; TacticalData Link upgrades; Air vehicle up-grade kits including a more capableE-O/IR payload, auxiliary fuel tanks,and engine upgrades; and associatedlogistics support. The program was tobe completed by FY09. However, inlate 2006, the Marines decided thatrather than continue to fund the Pio-neer, it would be more cost effectiveto simply buy a new UAV. They de-cided to acquire the US Army RQ-7Shadow as detailed below.

Marine ScanEagle (Tier 2)As part of its UAV improvement

efforts, the USMC recategorized itsprograms in 2004 into Tier 1 (smallUAVs), Tier 2 (intermediate tactical)and Tier 3 (tactical such as Pioneer).In July 2004, the Marine Corpsawarded Boeing with a contract fortwo ScanEagle UAV systems (mobiledeployment units) for deployment toIraq with the 1st Marine Expedition-ary Force. The ScanEagle was firstdeployed in Iraq in August 2004 andby May 2005 had accumulated 3,000flight hours. Marine UAV Squadron 2(VMU-2) deployed them to the AlAsad area of Iraq and they are beingused alongside the Pioneer. These



RQ-2A Pioneer

UAVs are being operated under anISR services contract rather than pro-curement. The Marine Corps is alsooperating the Silver Fox small UAVwith the 15th Marine ExpeditionaryUnit starting in the summer of 2006.

The Tier II program will be a jointUSN/USMC acquisition and is beingmanaged by the US Navy so the de-tails of the Tier II/STUAS programare contained in the US Navy UAV re-port in this section.

Future Marine UAS (Tier 3)The Navy planned to acquire the

RQ-8 Fire Scout to replace the Pio-neer for its Tier 3 requirement butabruptly cancelled the program in2001. As a result, the Marine Corpswas forced to keep the Pioneer in ser-vice until 2010-2011 though attritioncould end the service life faster thanplanned. The Marines planned to starta new program in FY06 which ex-pected to develop a system whichwould include 11 systems each withtwo ground control stations and fourair vehicles. The Marines consideredboth the Army RQ-7 Shadow andNavy RQ-8 Firescout and rejectedboth. The Marines ideally would likea system which could be employed inthe reconnaissance role, but also toact as an armed escort for its planned

V-22 Osprey force. This implies ahigher speed airframe such as theTextron Eagle Eye tilt-rotor UAV.

In the summer of 2004, the MarineCorps announced that it was reorient-ing the TUAV program, and specifi-cal ly looking for a Vert icalUnmanned Aircraft System (VUAV).Although the USMC OversightCouncil issued a decision memo inthe summer of 2004 suggesting itwould look at various UAVs as poten-tial candidates, it was later decided tonarrow the focus to the Coast GuardHV-911 on the grounds that theUSMC could then leverage off theCoast Guard’s development effort. Asa result of this decision, the MarineCorps planned a three-year demon-stration of the HV-911 starting inFY06 for its future UAV require-ments. The program was expected torun for four years (FY06-09) at a costof $26.3 million in RDT&E and $45.2million in air vehicle procurementfunding. The funding was expected tobe sufficient for two GCS and eightVUAV. In the meantime, the CoastGuard program ran into some signifi-cant problems which raised the issueof whether the Eagle Eye would infact be available in time. As a result,in the FY07 budget submission this

program was trimmed back to a oneyear effort to study alternatives.

In late 2006, the Marine Corps fi-nally concluded that the best shortterm solution was to go off-the-shelfand a decision was made to acquirethe US Army RQ-7 Shadow, under aprogram renamed Marine Corps Tac-tical Unmanned Aerial System(MCTUAS). This program plans toacquire six systems, funded inFY08-09 at a cost of $139.3 million.

Teal Group Analysis

In the past year, the Marine Corpshas finally made several critical deci-sions about its future UAV program.The Pioneer is so aged that rather thancontinue to pour money into its repair,the USMC decided to simply buy sixRQ-7 Raven systems of the type oper-ated by the US Army. This will satisfythe short term Tier III requirement,though it is possible that the Marines

might revisit the requirement late inthe decade after the Navy has ac-quired some RQ-8 Fire Scouts. TheShadow acquisition is covered abovein the RQ-7 Shadow section.

At the same time, the Marines andthe Navy are proceeding to regularizetheir operation of Tier II small UAVs,a category between the Tier 1 SURSSmini-UAV and the Tier III Shadow.

Until now, they have been leasingBoeing Scan Eagles. Under the newTier II/STUAS program, the Marinesand Navy will jointly acquire a newsystem. This is covered in the USNavy UAV section above since it isbeing managed and funded by theNavy.

US Micro-/Mini-UAVs

OverviewSmall, low-cost UAVs are being

examined for a variety of military ap-plications. Generally these are cate-gorized as mini- and micro-UAVs.Mini-UAVs are tactical systems in-

tended for small unit reconnaissance,perimeter security and similar appli-cations. They are small enough to beman-portable, and are either handlaunched or use some form of launchassistance such as a bungee cord. Mi-

cro-UAVs are very small air vehicles,which can be held in the hand. In thisreport the abbreviation MAV is usedto encompass both types.

The US deployed two MAVs in the1990s, the FQM-151 Pioneer and the



ScanEagle

BQM-147 Exdrone. In recent years, aprofusion of programs have sproutedup primarily to support operations inAfghanistan and Iraq. In 1997, theMarine Corps took its first steps to de-velop the Dragon Eye, a mini-UAVintended for small unit reconnais-sance. The Marine Corps has begun toacquire the Dragon Eye as part of itsSURSS (Small Unit Remote ScoutingSystem) in FY04 with an objective of176 systems and about 1,000 air vehi-cles for a program cost of $25.5 mil-lion. The contract for Dragon Eye wasawarded to AeroVironment in No-vember 2003. Due to high wash outrates, in 2006, the Marines decided tosubstitute the Army’s RQ-11 Ravenas the “Block 1” of SURSS startingwith part of the FY06 funding.

The US Army acquiredAeroVironment RQ-11A Ravenmini-UAV systems for operations inIraq and Afghanistan and plans to ac-quire 648 Small UAV systems(SUAS) in FY06-11; the Raven B wasselected for this requirement in 2006.

The Air Force has acquired theLockheed Martin Sentry Owl MAVfor perimeter security functions and is

planning to acquire a very small UAVcalled BATMAV in FY07-11.

DARPA has funded a significantnumber of Micro-UAV efforts andthis effort in part supports the Future

Combat System MAV requirement.Honeywell has been the prime con-tractor on the FCS-related MAV.

Funding History


US Army Procurement: Communications and Electronics EquipmentSUAV — — — — — 109.8 13.4 19.0 10.2 20.7(quantity) — — — — — (185) (270) (106) (64) (100)Marine Corps Procurement (PMC): Communications and Electronics EquipmentSURSS — — — — — 2.0 6.7 14.1 13.7 n/a(quantity) — — — — — (9) (50) (113) (83) (46)

Costs

Private funding for the develop-ment of the FQM-151 Pointer totaled$220,000. Unit cost of the FQM-151Pointer in the 1989 buy was $16,400each with an aim to drop costs downto $5,000 to $10,000 in a mass pro-duction version. The ground controlunit is believed to cost about $20,000in the initial versions.

Unit costs for the Exdrone havenot been released, but are believed tohave been about $10,000 per air vehi-cle.

The Marine Corps objective forDragon Eye was a system cost of$60-70k which includes two air vehi-cles and a manportable ground con-trol station. According to FY06



FQM-151 Pointer

Sentry Owl

budget documents, the actual unitcost was $130,000 in FY04 and$154,000 for the FY06 buy.

RQ-11A Raven has an system costobjective of about $25,000 which in-

cludes a GCS, sensors and three airvehicles, but actual procurementfunding for the SUAV effort is closerto $200,000 per system includingspares.


Army Small UAV (SUAS)After a 1999 demonstration of the

FQM-151 Pointer for military opera-tions in urban terrain, the Army ap-proach AeroVironment about theconstruction of a smaller UAV. Ini-tially dubbed “Flashlight”, the UAVeventually evolved into the RQ-11Raven under the Army’s PathfinderACTD. This system was initiallydubbed SUAV (Small UAV).

The first large scale acquisitionwas by SOCOM with a purchase offive systems with options for 10more. During operations in Iraq, theArmy determined the need for an im-mediate capability for a small unitUAV and decided to increase thescope of the Raven acquisition to 185Raven systems, funded in FY03-04.AeroVironment received a $20.7 mil-lion contract for the 185 systems. Thesystems cost about $25,000 each andinclude three air vehicles, a groundcontrol station, remote video terminaland associated sensor pack. The100th Raven system was delivered inlate 2004. According toAeroVironment, as of early 2005,1,300 Raven air vehicle had beenbuilt with about 2,000 more undercontract. The Army procured a fur-ther 270 systems in FY05 to supportfielding modular units.

The Army has a continuing re-quirement for a Small Unmanned Ae-rial System (SUAS) and plans to fund648 systems in FY06-11 at a cost of$127.4 million. The Army openedthis requirement to competitive bidwith AeroVironment offering deriva-tives of the Raven, and L3 Communi-cations offering the BAI AerosystemsEvolution XTS which had earliercompeted in the Marine Dragon Eyeprogram. AeroVironment won thecompetition with the RQ-11 Raven Band so Raven will form the basis for

Army Small UAVs for the foreseeablefuture. The RQ-11 Raven B SUAS re-ceived full rate production authorityin October 2006.

In the longer term, the Army islooking for a mini-UAV with VTOLcapability and this is covered in theUS Army UAV report in this section.

Marine Dragon EyeIn September 1997, BAI

Aerosystems was awarded two con-tracts valued at over $1 million forfurther work on the Exdrone. Underthe first award, BAI converted 60Exdrone into the new Dragon Droneconfiguration with a GPS upgrade,and an upgraded sensor. The USMCexperimented with the Dragon Dronefor shipboard launches. The upgradeswere applied to the bulk of the flyableexamples of the approximately 85Exdrones still in inventory. The sec-ond award was to mount a miniaturechemical weapons detector on aDragon Drone for future trials.

The US Marines had a requirementfor an Interim Small Unit RemoteSensing System (ISURSS). This isbased around the Dragon Eye MAV

with each system including three airvehicles, and a ground station basedaround a Panasonic CF-34ToughBook laptop computer.

In July 2001, the Navy ResearchLab awarded a competitive develop-ment contract to BAI andAeroVironment for prototypes of theDragon Eye. Marine funding for theprogram was $3 million in FY01 and$2.2 million in FY02. The aim was tofield a four pound drone and an asso-ciated ground control station basedaround a portable laptop computer.The Dragon Eye carries a small onepound daylight camera and is entirelybattery operated. The air vehicleshave a durability of about 40 flights.A small number of Dragon Eyes weredeployed in March 2003 with Marineunits during Operation Iraqi Free-dom.

The Marines originally planned toacquire 1,000 Dragon Eyes and 200Dragon control stations at a cost ofabout $3,000 per air vehicles and$10,000 per GCS. The goal was laterstated to be 311 systems at a cost of$60-70k per system, with each systemconsisting of two air vehicles and one



Dragon Eye

ground control station. This acquisi-tion objective would probably in-clude 1,000 air vehicles due to theexpendable nature of the UAVs.AeroVironment was selected to pro-vide the Dragon Eye and a contractwas awarded in November 2003 forthe FY04 batch of nine systems. Theprogram is now called SURSS (SmallUnit Remote Scouting System) andthe objective was repegged at 291new acquisition systems since 20AeroVironment systems were pro-vided earlier in the development pro-gram. Total acquisition costs inFY04-FY09 were expected to be$25.5 million. However, under the re-vised program covered in the FY06budget plan, the acquisition objectivewas trimmed to 176 systems inFY04-07 at a cost of $26.7 million. In2006, the Marine corps decided toswitch from the Dragon Eye to theArmy’s Raven due to a high wash outrate during operations in Iraq. As a re-sult, 101 of the systems funded inFY06 are “Block 0” Dragon Eyeswhile the remaining 12 delivered inearly 2007 were Ravens. The remain-ing SURSS requirement will be satis-fied by the Raven Block 1. Marinedocumentation on the funding for thisextended program are incomplete, butsuggest that funding will continue inFY08-09 for a further 131 systems(46+85)

The Marines studied a larger andmore elaborate helicopter UAV calledDragon Warrior. This was basedaround Sikorsky’s Cypher UAV, butthe program was shelved in 2003.

Micro-UAVsDARPA has been studying the fea-

sibility of micro-UAVs since themid-1990s. These are small (under 1foot), powered UAVs using miniatur-ized cameras. The idea is that theycould be used by individual soldiersto scout ahead in urban warfare envi-ronments. The requirement is thatthey have a range up to 10 km, speedsup to 30 mph, and endurance of20-120 min. DARPA spent about $12million on the program in FY98-00.In December 1997, a number of con-

tracts were given out for the purposeincluding:

• MIT (micromechanical sys-tems-based micro-gas turbine en-gines for micro-UAV)

• D-STAR Engineering (low ob-servable, safe-operation, fuel effi-cient, light weight propulsion andpower system for advancedMicro-UAV)

• Technology in Blacksburg(thermo-electric-based advancedMicro-UAV)

• SRI Int’l (flapping wing propul-sion using electrostrictive polymerartificial muscle actuators)

• Vanderbilt University (elastic-dy-namic ornithopic flying robotic in-sect

• California Institute of Technology(Micro-bat)

In June 2001, DARPA narrowedthe competitors to Honeywell andMicroCraft for a 36 month cost-shar-ing VTOL UAV study. A Micro-AirVehicle (MAV) was included in 2002Department of Defense AdvancedConcept Technology Developmentefforts. AeroVironment developed

the Wasp MAV for DARPA and in2002, set an endurance record of onehour, 47 minutes.

DARPA has also been involved inthe Army’s Class 1 MAV requirementfor the FCS program. Class I is theplatoon UAV with an operational ra-dius of 16 km, a one pound payload,and an operating altitude of 90 min-utes. The Army currently plans to usethe AeroVironment Raven untilDARPA completes its objective Mi-cro-Air Vehicle (MAV). In April2003, the US Army Communica-tions-Electronics Command awardedMission Technologies in San Anto-nio, TX a contract for the develop-ment and production of threeGenerat ion II mini-UAVs.Honeywell Aerospace is the primecontractor for the MAV with AAICorp. being the airframe subcontrac-tor. AAI won a February 2006 con-tract for $1.7 mill ion for theconstruction of 55 MAV air vehicles.The Honeywell MAV underwent itsfirst untethered free flight in 2005 andin late May 2006 the Army selectedthe Honeywell MAV for the SDDphase, awarding Honeywell a $61million contract which includes themanufacture of 12 systems.



RQ-11 Raven

AF MAV RequirementThe USAF had a requirement for a

small UAV to conduct perimeter se-curity duties at forward-deployed USairbases. Among the candidates werethe Pointer, the Sea Dragon, theRQ-2A Pioneer, and Sikorsky’s ex-perimental Cypher flying disc. In2001, the Air Force’s Electronic Sys-tems Command at Hanscom AFBtook over this effort under its FPASSquick reaction program aimed at ex-amining small UAVs to detectman-portable SAM operators nearairbases. A contract was awarded tothe Lockheed Martin Skunk Worksfor an initial batch of UAVs for thisapplication, based on the Sentry OwlUAV. A small number of Sentry Owlswere experimentally deployed by airforce units for base surveillance inAfghanistan in 2002.

The Special Operations SystemsGroup (SOFSG), Battlefield AirmenFlight released a request for informa-

tion on 21 December 2005 to acquirea Battlefield Air Targeting Micro AirVehicle (BATMAV). The aim is toprovide a small UAV for real-time re-connaissance, surveillance, and targetacquisition (RSTA) and battle dam-age assessment (BDA). The RFP wasreleased in September 2006 and was asmall business set-aside. The AirForce has stated the requirement forBATMAV as approximately 314 sys-tems for the primary customer. (30 inFY07, 75 in FY08, 116 in FY09 and93 in FY10) The proposed system in-cludes a Ground Control Station (oneper system), Air Vehicle (two per sys-tem). The Air Force planned to beginfunding the system in FY06. Therehave been reports that theAeroVironment Wasp was selectedfor this requirement.

Navy EffortsThe Office of Naval Research’s

Swamp Works has been examining a

variant of the Marine Corps DragonEye called Sea ALL (Sea AirborneLead Line) with the Fifth Fleet for po-tential applications in naval force pro-tection. The Naval Surface WarfareCenter (NSWC) at Carderock hasbeen examining a small UAV calledSwamp using Swamp Works fundingto develop a UAV under $2,000 thatcould be employed as an expendablesensor, much like a sonobouy, with acheap camera. The Office of NavalResearch (ONR) has funded Ad-vanced Ceramics Research (ACR) todevelop a low-cost UAV called SilverFox that was originally intended totrack whales. It has subsequentlybeen used to examine other applica-tions for mini-UAVs, and was used insmall numbers over Iraq in 2003.Congress added a further $15 millionfunding in FY04 to acquire moreSilver Foxes.

Teal Group Analysis

Mini- and Micro-UAVs have be-gun to attract considerable attentionfrom a wide variety of potential mili-tary users. These are seen as potentialreconnaissance assets at small unitlevel, or for perimeter security tasks.In addition, advanced micro-UAV de-signs are viewed as having an appli-cation to urban warfare, able tooperate within and around buildingsinstead of flying over buildings.

There are numerous challenges tothe mini-UAVs, not the least of whichis size. By their very nature, theseUAVs rely on very small airframesthat are subject to wind conditions atlow altitude. This will put a damperon their use in areas such as near thecoast where there are apt to be intenseand frequent gusts. It will also com-promise their use for security taskssuch as perimeter patrols if the sys-tems cannot perform 24 hours a day,seven days a week due to periodicvulnerability to weather.

The second technical challenge issensor limitations. Due to their smallsize, these UAVs are forced to rely on

very small, light-weight cameras.This results in several related prob-lems. It is difficult to fit such a sensorto a stabilized platform due to payloadrestrictions, and as a result, the imageprovided to the operator can be de-graded by wind-induced motion, orvibration from the aircraft propul-sion. Even if using some of the neweroptical stabilization technologies, theimagery is often far from ideal due tothe narrow viewing angle of the cam-era, poor resolution of low-powercameras, and degradation of imageryby transmission problems betweenthe UAV and the operator due to weakpower sources. These problems be-come more serious the smaller the air-frame. For example, there are UAVpayloads in simple ball mounts withpan, tilt, and zoom functions weigh-ing only six pounds. While this is afeasible payload for a mini-UAVweighing 50 pounds, it is too muchfor a five pound UAV.

Several armed forces have decidedto forego the usual prolonged devel-opment programs, and simply acquire

existing systems to test them in actualworking conditions. Over the pastfew years, the US Marine Corps, USArmy, and USAF have all begun ac-quiring mini-UAV systems. The in-vestments for these systems arerelatively modest, on the order of $25million for 100-150 systems. The USArmy has requirements even beyondthe initial Raven purchase, but ap-pears to be interested in fielding avail-able systems now, and not wait for aan optimum system.

This pattern may be paralleledelsewhere, with armies first acquiringan exist ing modest ly-pricedmini-UAV system in spite of its limi-tations, with the expectation that theshelf-life of the air vehicles is fairlylimited anyway. What remains to beseen is how valuable these systemswill prove.

The initial word from the USArmy in Iraq is that they are ex-tremely valuable in low intensity con-flicts for patrolling. In spite of theirsignificant technical limitations, theyhave some decided advantages. Un-



like tactical UAVs where there is aneed for deconfliction with other air-craft, mini-UAVs are operated at sucha low level that they can be employedwithout a major concern over otherair traffic. They are readily available,and units don’t have to wait hours ordays to schedule a mission. Somearmy officers are referring to them asbeing an intel l igence col lec-tion/warfighting technology as valu-able as night vision goggles. If thenight vision goggle analogy holds,the scope of mini-UAV purchasescould expand significantly in comingyears. It seems likely that both theArmy and Marines will continue toacquire mini-UAVs beyond the cur-rent SUAS and SURSS programs,and there is likely to be a continuingthough small acquisition by otherDoD organizations such as the Air

Force and Special OperationsCommand.

Micro-UAVs face an even greatertechnical and tactical challenge. Atthe moment, it is hard to see how theycan carry a sensor and transmitterlarge enough to provide useful infor-mation. Even should these programsproceed to serial production, the sizeof the market is likely to remain mod-est if for no other reason than the rela-tively modest costs of the air vehicles.

Until recently, the size of the inter-national market for mini-UAVs hasprobably been on the order of about$5 million in annual world-wideRDT&E spending and perhaps $10million in procurement. It has proba-bly tripled in size over the past fewyears. Some of this is a spurt causedby Iraqi war needs, but it appears to bethe start of a trend which will proba-bly drive up the mini-UAV market to

$35 million annually through the endof the decade.

The micro-UAV market is evenmore difficult to predict. Annualfunding has probably been higherthan in the case of mini-UAVs, as thetechnology for miniaturization hassoaked up a small but significantamount of funding from DARPA forbasic and advanced research. Annualworld funding in this field has proba-bly exceeded $10 million annuallylargely in the US, though it is difficultto identify all this funding as some hasbeen allotted for multi-role technol-ogy demonstrations. Procurement sofar has been nearly non-existent ex-cept for technology demonstrations.Actual micro-UAV procurement overthe next decade is difficult to assesssince it is by no means clear that suchair vehicles and systems will provefeasible.

Production Forecast


AeroVironmentRQ-11 Raven (USA 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 — — — — — — 4,000RQ-11 Raven (USMC) 145 275 120 — — — — — — — 540UndeterminedBATMAV (USAF) 150 130 190 150 — — — — — — 620Other (US) — — — — — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 6,000

UCAVs

OverviewIn the mid-1990s, the US armed

forces began to examine the conceptof UCAVs (uninhabited combat airvehicles). Unlike current UAVs thatare intended primarily for reconnais-sance missions, UCAVs are a combatUAV that could be employed on strikemissions. UCAV programs were ini-tially developed under separate USAir Force and US Navy programs butin June 2003, DoD decided to mergeboth programs into a common effort

referred to as J-UCAS (Joint Unin-habited Combat Air Systems). In2004, DoD decided to shift manage-

ment responsibility for the J-UCASeffort back to the Air Force to occur inFY06 (October 2005). Two systemswere being developed, the Boeing

X-45C and the Northrop Grumman

X-47B Pegasus which shared a Com-mon Operating System. The J-UCASprogram was expected to reach theOperational Assessment phase inFY07 through FY10 at which pointthe services would decide whether toproceed engineering development, orterminate the program. Instead, inDecember 2005, DoD ordered theprogram split in two with the AirForce shifting its attention to a classi-

fied program, and the Navy responsi-ble for the remnants of the UCAVprogram, now limited to a carrierdemonstration effort, now calledUCAS-D. Northrop Grumman wonthe demonstration contract in thesummer of 2007. The Navy effort isaimed at fielding the carrier-borne

strike N-UCAS in FY18.The Air Force examined a strate-

gic stealth strike platform under itsNew Generation Long Range StrikeProgram, but it would now appearthat a manned aircraft will bepursued.



Funding History


PE# 0207256F J-UCAS— — — — — 2.3 — — — —

PE# 0604731F UCAV— — — — 40.0 14.6 — — — —

PE# 0604731F UCAV— — — — 160.5 — — — — —

PE# 0603400F J-UCAS— — — — — — — 76.7 — —

PE# 0604400F J-UCAS— — — — — — — 272.3 — —

PE# 0603400D J-UCAS ATD— — — — — — 354.8 — — —

PE# 0604400D J-UCAS ACPD— — — — — — 217.4 — — —

PE# 0604402N UCAV— — — — — — — — 99.6 161.6

*Request


UCAV RequirementIn the mid-1990s, the US armed

forces began to study he possibility ofusing UAVs to carry out lethal strikemissions as well as conventional re-connaissance missions. This waslargely an offshoot of existing studiesof the utility of UAVs. The concept isnot entirely new. The BQM-34Firebee drone was tested in a strikeconfiguration during the late 1960s asan effort to develop a system capableof penetrating concentrated air de-fenses and reducing crew casualties.

J-UCAS ConsolidationIn FY02, the Office of the Secre-

tary of Defense began considering theamalgamation of the USAF and USNUCAV programs under a single of-fice, patterned on the current JSF pro-gram office, with one service takingcharge of development. In 2003, DoDdecided to consolidate the Air Forceand Navy program under a commonJ-UCAS (Joint Uninhabited CombatAir System), with management beingcentralized under DARPA. This wasformally announced on 23 June 2003.In May 2003, DARPA instructedBoeing and Northrop Grumman todevelop new UCAV designs capableof a range of 1,300 nautical miles anda payload of 4,500 pounds with lowobservable airframes. Under the ef-

fort, Boeing will probably build threeUCAV at a cost of about $140 millionand Northrop Grumman two at a costof $160 million. Boeing received acontract from DARPA in July 2003 tointegrate the new Spiral 1 objectivesinto the program.

The Spiral 0 effort was planned toinclude two X-45As and one X-47A.

Spiral 1 was planned to involve thelarger X-45C and X-47 demonstra-tors and include demonstrations oflow-cost low observability features,catapult launches for the naval vari-ants, arrested landings and other dem-onstrations of system capabilities.This effort was to be followed by atwo year operational assessment



X-45A UCAV

scheduled to begin in 2007. The de-velopment program was expected tolast seven years with operational de-ployment of the Air Force A-45around 2010 and the Navy systemaround 2105.

Back to the USAFIn April 2004, DARPA announced

plans to include a Common OperatingSystem into the J-UCAS program.This was an attempt to impose an inte-grator/broker to manage the programbetween Boeing and NorthropGrumman and to ensure commonalityon certain aspects of the programsuch as ground control, sensors, pay-loads and other potential shared sys-tems. In 2004, DoD decided to shiftmanagement of the J-UCAS backfrom DARPA to the Air Force. Part ofthe consolidation effort meant that theSpiral 1 risk-reduction phase wouldbe curtailed in favor of an earlier Op-erational Assessment (OA) phase.This became largely moot inDecember 2005 when the programwas reorganized.

J-UCAS KilledAs a result of the Quadrennial De-

fense Review, the Air Force decidedto back off from the J-UCAS effort.Various public explanations havebeen offered, apparently centered onconcern that the current platforms aretoo small for the USAF mission. InDecember 2005, DoD ordered theprogram split, with the Navy takingover the remnants of the J-UCAS pro-gram, and the Air Force initiating aclassified program.

The future direction of the USAFprogram is not clear but may includeboth a tactical strike UCAV and a stra-tegic (long-range) strike element. TheAir Force began looking at

long-range manned and unmannedoptions under its Next GenerationLong Range Strike (NGLRS) pro-gram which is expected to reach $1.1billion in RDT&E funding in FY11.However, in 2007, Air Force officialsindicated that a manned platform wasthe preferred solution. The tacticalUCAV effort has disappeared frompublic view, but may be an enlargedversion of the current J-UCASdesigns.

UCAS-DIn the wake of the cancellation of

J-UCAS, the Navy restructured theprogram as a two element advanceddevelopment effort. The immediateprogram is a carrier demonstrationprogram. The Navy issued a RFP forthe demonstration program inmid-FY07 with Boeing and NorthropGrumman competing. NorthropGrumman teamed with LockheedMartin for this contract, and won the

award in the summer of 2007. Thisdemonstration program is intended toexplore the feasibility of carrier basedUCAS operations no later than FY13.The plan calls for the aircraft to be de-veloped by the end of FY11,land-based testing to begin in3Q-FY11 and ship testing to begin in1Q-FY13. A parallel program will beconducted to develop the necessaryship interface including precisionnavigation systems and the missioncontrol system.

The second program is a UCASTechnology Maturation effort whichwill examine a variety of UCAS im-provements including an automatedin-air refueling system. The Navy hastentatively discussed a future car-rier-borne strike UCAV, now calledN-UCAS. The Navy has tentativelyset a goal of an IOC of FY18, butgiven the lack of planning, this is thesketchiest of goals.

Teal Group Analysis

The Uninhabited Combat Air Ve-hicle (UCAV) is the most futuristicapplication for UAVs, and has seenconsiderable turmoil over the pastseveral years while the servicesthrash out what they expect from the

program. DARPA headed theprogram until through the recent con-solidation, only to see DoD againbreak up the program with the Navypursuing the carrier-based J-UCASand the Air Force pursuing a classi-

fied UCAV. The program as it cur-rently stands has probably entered the“land of the walking dead” as theNavy is lukewarm at best about thisrequirement. Navy program willprobably have enough money to pre-



X-47A Pegasus First Flight

vent the current effort from com-pletely dying, but not enough for it toprosper. The Navy has not shown anyparticular enthusiasm for UAVs ingeneral, and the idea of funding a re-motely piloted air vehicle to land oncarrier decks seems exceedingly riskyand unattractive.

The Air Force is another matterand the service would l ike along-range platform to take up theslack from its aging and hodge-podgecollection of B-52s, B-1s and B-2s.As of 2007, the Air Force has stated

that it would lean towards a mannedoption for its future bomber, but givenits past predilection for black aircraftprograms, an unmanned bomber re-mains a possibility. It is likely that theUSAF will pursue more than a singleUCAV program, one aimed at tacticalstrike requirements and one forlong-range requirements. The tacticalprogram would most likely be astealth strike platform aimed at pro-viding a capability to conduct sup-pression of enemy air defense(SEAD) missions in the event that the

air defense environment becomesmore hostile than it is today. Theproblem with the Air Force programis that much of this activity will prob-ably be in the black world for severalyears. As a result, the scope and direc-tion of the program will be publiclyinvisible. The aim is apparently tofield an advanced long-range strikeprogram by FY18, probably withsome form of demonstrator flyingmuch sooner.


BoeingUSAF (X-45) 1 — — — — — — — — — 1Northrop GrummanUSN (X-47) 2 1 1 2 — — — — — — 6UndeterminedUSAF (NG-SEAD) — — — 2 — — — 4 5 10 21

US Coast Guard UAVs

OverviewThe US Coast Guard is consider-

ing the acquisition of two or moreUAVs for its Deepwater moderniza-tion effort. These include a Verticaltake-off and landing UAV (VUAV)and a high altitude endurance UAV.

In November 2002, the USCG se-lected the Bell Textron TR-911D Ea-gle Eye over the Northrop GrummanRQ-8 Fire Scout for its VUAV re-quirement. The first prototype TR918VUAV began flight testing in 2006but crashed shortly after the start ofthe program. The first eight VUAV’swere funded in the FY04 budget. TheUSCG was considering the acquisi-tion of 43-45 UAVs (down from 69),but the FY08 budget submission re-leased in February 2007 has no UAVprocurement funding beyond FY07.

The Marine Corps was planning athree-year demonstration of theHV-911 starting in FY06 for its futureUAV requirements.

The Coast Guard was expected toselect the Global Hawk for its endur-ance UAV requirement but this couldchange. This will probably total fourair vehicles and may be a lease ar-

rangement rather than an outrightpurchase.

Deepwater RequirementThe US Coast Guard embarked on

a major 20 year re-capitalization ef-fort in 2002 dubbed Deepwater. Theprogram began in June 2002 with theaward of a $11 billion contract toICGS, a joint venture of NorthropGrumman and Lockheed Martin. The$11 billion price tag covers the first

20 years of the program, and the thirtyyear cost is expected to total $17 bil-lion. The Deepwater effort includes awide range of equipment such as sur-veillance aircraft and new CoastGuard patrol vessels. It is the firsttime that the Coast Guard has ac-quired UAVs for its traditionalmissions.

The Coast Guard plans to acquireat least two types of UAVs: a vertical



Bell Helicopter Eagle Eye

take-off and landing UAV (VUAV)and a high altitude endurance UAV.

VUAV RequirementIn November 2002, the USCG se-

lected the Bell Textron HV-911 EagleEye over the Northrop GrummanRQ-8 Fire Scout for its VUAV re-quirement. The USCG is consideringthe acquisition of 69 UAVs and up to50 ground control stations. The newUSCG cutters will begin to be de-ployed around 2006. The plan was tobegin funding the Eagle Eye in FY06at a rate of 5-8 annually.

Endurance UAV RequirementThe Coast Guard is expected to se-

lect the Global Hawk for its endur-ance UAV requirement. The mainproblem at the moment is the lack of aFAA certification for the operation ofthe Global Hawk over the US, and asa result, Global Hawk acquisitionprobably won’t occur until 2016 atthe earliest. In the interim, the USCGhas spoken about paying for datafrom UAVs operated from two landbases. These may be DoD operatedfacilities. The eventual requirementwill probably total about four-eightair vehicles.

Land-Based DemonstrationIn 2004, the USCG received a $10

million budget plus-up to examine theutility of land-based UAV operations.This was used to fund the trials of aGeneral Atomics Mariner (Predator Bderivative) on a “Concept of Opera-tions” demonstration in July 2004 inAlaska to demonstrate its value forendurance surveillance. The CoastGuard had earlier stated that it ex-pected to acquire the Global Hawk forthis mission as part of its Deepwaterrequirement, but it has been unable tofund the Global Hawk to date.

HV-911 VUAV Program PlanICGS was awarded a contract to

begin the VUAV program in February2003. The USCG conducted prelimi-nary design review for the HV-911 on29 January 2004 and so the programentered the system design phase on 4February 2004. The critical design re-view for the HV-911 was scheduledfor November 2004 but slipped to 19January 2005. The Coast Guard be-gan funding the VUAV in the FY04budget for $50 million; AC&I fund-ing for the UAV program in the FY07Coast Guard Budget is $4.9 million.However, the 5-year AC&I budget re-

leased in February 2007 as part of theFY08 budget cycle has removed allUAV funding after FY07.

The TR918 Eagle Eye receivedFAA certification for testing in De-cember 2005. The first prototype en-tered flight demonstrations on 26January 2006 but crashed on 5 April2006 after losing engine power dur-ing stable hover while at the Bell testcenter near Fort Worth. The TR918air vehicle was about three-quartersthrough the first test phase when thecrash occurred, and it is unclear whatimpact the crash will have on the pro-gram. The plan was to begin ship-board tests aboard a Large MaritimeSecurity Cutter in December 2006.Operational testing aboard a LargeMaritime Security Cutter was sched-uled to begin in September 2007. Ini-tial operational capability wasexpected to be reached by April 2008including three production VUAVsand two ground control stations.

Recent Coast Guard statements in-dicate the program objective was43-45 air vehicles, down from a highof 69.

Teal Group Analysis

Should the Coast Guard Deep-water UAV program proceed asplanned, it will be the first large scalecivilian use of UAVs in the UnitedStates. The selection of the BellTextron Eagle Eye for the VUAV re-quirement was a major boost for thisprogram, which has been offered forover a decade to the Navy and otherservices. The Deepwater programcame under intense Congressionalscrutiny in 2006-07 over the issue ofprogram management by the ICGSrather than the Coast Guard itself.

This is likely to lead to some signifi-cant turmoil in the program over thenext year as Congress may force a re-organization of program managementto place more emphasis on CoastGuard oversight.

The Deepwater UAV program ap-pears to be in trouble as well due tothe slow pace of FAAaction on the airspace access issue. So far, there are noclear guidelines for the routine use ofUAVs in controlled air space, and theFAA has yet to issue guidance on is-sues such as sense-and-avoid require-

ments. Under these circumstances,the Coast Guard may be forced topush back the UAV elements of Deep-water until the operations issues aresettled. The FY08 budget submissionhas completed deleted funding forUAV acquisition in FY08-12. Underthese circumstances, the Coast Guardis likely to use the Eagle Eyes ac-quired under previous budgets fortesting and demonstration, but ourforecast presumes that any significantacquisition will be delayed until theoperational issues are resolved.

Production Forecast


USCG (Eagle Eye) — — — — — 2 4 4 6 6 6 28



US Civil UAVs

At the moment, there are a numberof exploratory programs to examineUAVs by various federal agenciesoutside the Department of Defenseand Coast Guard. The single largesthurdle to the growth of the civil UAVmarket is the issue of UAV operationsin controlled airspace. FAA (FederalAviation Administration) standardsare only beginning to emerge for rou-tine UAV operations in US airspace.In lieu of routine access to national airspace, UAVs must either operate inrestricted airspace such as those overcertain US military bases and govern-ment test ranges, or to obtain an FAAwaiver.

Over the past few years, UAV op-erations such as transit of militaryUAVs from military airbases throughcivilian air corridors, requires exten-sive planning and in some cases ac-companiment by chase aircraft. Theseexisting rules are too restrictive at themoment to contemplate widespreadcivil use of UAVs until these issuesare settled. In addition, even militaryemployment outside of restricted mil-itary airspace, for example the trans-fer of UAVs to the Air Guard foroperations from commercial airfields,has likewise been constrained by theabsence of final guidelines.

In 2005, a consortium of US firmsteamed with NASA dubbed Access 5was in the process of attempting towork with the FAA on establishingparameters for UAV operation in theUS. NASA funding for this programwas cut in 2006, ending the effort andshifting the responsibility back to theFAA.

Although this program has ended,its objectives are worth detailing tohelp elucidate the pattern that mayemerge over the next few years. Thename “Access-5” was a reminder ofthe group’s ambition to create UAVaccess to national airspace within fiveyears (2010). This was envisioned asa four step process.

• Step 1 would permit experimentalcertification of UAVs and routineoperations above 40,000 feet, and

the goal was to have this in placeby September 2006.

• Step 2 would allow routine opera-tions above 18,000 feet and estab-lish type certification of HALEUAVs.

• Step 3 would require special air-worthiness certification of theUAV and routine operationsabove 18,000 feet as well as intro-duction of sense-and-avoidtechnology.

• Step 4 would introduce standardairworthiness certificates for airvehicles and the capability foremergency recovery via restrictedairspace to a designated dual-useUAV/manned aircraft airport.

A part of the first step was the issu-ance of experimental certificates tospecific types of UAVs which permitthem to fly under “file and fly” rules.The first was issued to the BellTextron Eagle Eye tilt rotor which isoriented towards the US Coast GuardDeepwater requirement. Of the 100FAA certificates of authorization(CoA) issued through mid-2006 toUAV operators, only five were to in-dustry, the rest to government agen-cies such as NASA, NOAA, theForest Service and Customs and Bor-der Protection. A total of 55 were is-sued in 2006 and most of theremainder in 2004-05. By the summerof 2007 this was up to 130 of which 13were to industry.

The FAA is expected to concen-trate on at least two major areas ofconcern in formulating new rules.The basic issue will be control andcommunications to permit the groundcontrol stations to be integrated intothe existing air traffic control system.A mid-term goal wil l be“sense-and-avoid”, in other words, anorganic ability of the UAV to sensethe presence of another aircraft andavoid collision. This is already an is-sue in the military environment asthere have been at least two air-to-aircollisions involving UAVs and air-

craft/helicopters over Iraq throughthe summer of 2005.

The issue of access to national air-space is absolutely critical to any as-sessment of the dynamics of civilUAV market growth. Until regular ac-cess to national airspace is available,civil UAV operations will be rare andlimited to research applications or toparticularly important governmentaltasks such as coast guard patrol orborder patrol in limited areas wherethere is little interference with regularaviation.

In 2005-06, the FAA permitted theBorder Patrol to operate surveillanceUAVs along the Mexican border, butto do so they restricted access to gen-eral aviation which caused its own setof problems. Indeed, the precedent setby this example has led general avia-tion organizations to begin a cam-paign to counter-act any attempt topermit UAV operations at the expenseof general aviation.

Besides the FAA access issues, avariety of other technical issues re-main to be resolved involving indus-trial standards for UAVs. These issuesare being examined by a variety of or-ganizations in the US. The privatelyfunded ASTM International is devel-oping a variety of industrial standardsfor such issues as UAV embeddedsoftware, certificates and standardsfor UAV pilots, sense-and-avoid stan-dards, and basic aircraft standards.The RTCA (Radio Technical Com-mission for Aeronautics) with FAAbacking is developing minimum avia-tion system performance standards(MASPS) for UAVs, UAV commandand control systems, and UAVsense-and-avoid systems. RTCA isalso working on developing acut-off-point to divide fully certifi-cated UAVs from small UAVs whichwould be more lightly regulated interms of sense-and-avoid sensors, etc.but which would also have morerestricted airspace access. The goal isto establish this guideline by 2010.

Due to industry and Congressionalpressure, the FAA finally set up an



Unmanned Program Office in July2006. Minimum sense and avoid per-formance standards might be avail-able as early as 2009, frequencyassignments in 2010 and rule estab-lishment in 2010-2011. However, adefinitive detect-sense-avoid perfor-mance standard may not be availableuntil 2011 or after.

In September 2006, the FAA se-lected Lockheed-Martin to develop aplan for introducing UAVs into thenational air space system. The pro-gram is expected to last for five years(mid-2011)

At the moment, it is also unclear towhat extent civil UAVs will have tobe integrated into the future Auto-matic dependent surveillance broad-cast (ADS-B) network which isexpected to be ready around 2010 andnationwide by 2013. The ADS-B net-work will track national airspace bymonitoring GPS data from the air-craft, process this for both the air traf-fic control network and the aircraft,and provide this data to the ATC andaircraft via data-link. In August 2007,the FAA chose ITT to develop thissystem.

Sense and Avoid TechnologyThe FAA rules are expected to in-

clude sense-and-avoid (SAA) re-quirements, though they might differfrom the certificated UAVs and thesmall UAVs. This could have a signif-icant impact on the proliferation ofUAVs. This sensor will have to enablea UAV to operate under visual flightrules conditions, namely the ability tosense a nearby aircraft with or with-out a transponder. There is currentlyno system available to accomplishthis though a variety of systems areunder development or consideration.Commercial transports over 33,000pounds with more than 30 seats havebeen obliged to be fitted with TCAS II(Traffic Collision Avoidance System)since 1993 by the FAAbut this systemdepends on interaction with the otheraircraft’s transponders.

Two approaches are possible, aminimal passive system and an activesystem. The first would be some form

of TCAS transponder system whichwould provide limited sense-and-avoid capability.

The other approach would be amore active sensor system for VFRintegrated into the UAV’s flight con-trols which enables the UAV to sensethe presence of another air vehicle at acertain range and then take predeter-mined steps to avoid a collision.Some very limited sense-and-avoidsystems have been demonstrated. Atthe most elementary level, one of theFrench mini-UAVs has an activeacoustic sensor though this is aimedprimarily at avoiding collisions withwalls, not other air vehicles. The USArmy was working on a compactsense-and-avoid system for theOAV-II tactical UAV which couldhelp establish a benchmark. Presum-ably, it could require an active emit-ting system of some sort such as aconventional radar or laser-radar.

NASA Dryden Research in con-junction with Scaled Compositesconducted a series of test flights in2003 with the Proteus aircraft to ex-amine the applicabil i ty of anAmphitech high frequency radar sys-tem. Although this technology hasproven successful, the size, weight,and power demands would limit it tolarge UAVs.

The US Air Force Research Lab(AFRL) has an active SAA programunderway with industrial partners in-cluding Northrop Grumman, Boeing,Lockheed Martin, Calspan, GeneralDynamics, Bihrle Applied Research,and DRA in conjunction with theFAA. In early FY07, the first testswere conducted of a surrogate HALEUAV fitted with an optical DAA (De-tect and Avoid) sensor using passiveoptical ranging mated to a collisionavoidance algorithm, and testedagainst a cooperative transport withTCAS and a non-cooperative generalaviation target. Further flight tests areexpected in FY08 and beyond. Gen-eral Atomics is planning its own testsof optical-based SAA devices on thePredator.

SARA Inc. has developed a small,passive acoustic non-cooperative

alert system (PANCAS) for use onsmall UAVs for operations up to10,000 feet.

The impact of SAA requirementson civil UAVs will be dependent uponthe type of system finally selected andthe associated costs and weights, aswell as the effect that a delineation be-tween small, lightly regulated UAVsand certificated UAVs may have onSAA regulations. It seems likely thatthe lightly regulated small UAVs willnot be obliged to have a full SAApackage, but perhaps a more limitedpassive system akin to the SARAPANCAS tied to restricted access toairspace such as administrative con-trols on altitude and regional use.

The size and cost of an eventualSAA sensor package will have a sig-nificant impact on civil UAVs in sev-eral respects. First, it will increase thecost of the UAV. Secondly, if the earlysensors are heavy, it will pre-empt therapid proliferation of smaller (andhence more affordable) UAVs. Byway of example, the US Army’s RQ-7Shadow tactical UAV has a payloadof 25 kg. If the “sense-and-avoid”system weighs even a modest 10-15kg, it could cut the payload of the airvehicle in half. In addition, the powerdemands of such a system could besignificant. It could have a dispropor-tionate effect on fixed wing versusvertical wing UAVs since the sensorwill have to have full hemisphericcoverage and an emitter located onthe fuselage of a helicopter UAV mayhave blind spots caused by the rotat-ing blade if the system uses active RFemission (rather than a purely opticalsystem). Hemispheric coverage im-plies other design issues since the an-tenna/emitter location will be asignif icant issue for properfunctioning.

The bottom line however is thatthe “sense-and-avoid” requirement islikely to add yet another set of techno-logical, cost, and weight hurdles forcivil UAVs which will dampen themarket in the mid-term (2011-2014),especially if the requirement remainsambiguous over the next severalyears. Given the complexity of this



task, it is hard to see how a reliableSAA device will be ready any soonerthan 2012.

Homeland SecurityCongressional support for UAV

technology prompted US Customsand Border Protection (CPB) to addUAVs to its aviation force. In 2004,CPB leased an Israeli Elbit Hermesand borrowed a US Army Hunter toconduct trials along the Mexican bor-der as a possible tool for border pa-trol. The Hermes logged 590 hours offlight over four months and theHunter a further 329 hours over threemonths . This demonstra t ionprompted a Congressional addition tothe CPB budget for the acquisition ofa General Atomics Predator B in 2005which began operations in October2005 from Sierra Vista municipal air-port along the Mexican border. ThePredator crashed on 24 April 2006due to apparent pilot error but the pro-gram proved successful enough thatCongress funded another Predatorwhich deployed in November 2006.CPB now has plans to fund UAV op-erations at about $10 million per year.Congress funded two more Predatorsin the FY06 supplemental, and theFY07 budget funded two more. Theadditional UAVs will lead to ex-panded demonstration efforts with aCanadian border patrol demonstra-tion to be based out of Grand Forks,North Dakota in the autumn of 2007and a joint CPB/Coast Guard effort inFlorida in the spring of 2007. TheCPB effort is being controlled out ofan integrated Air and Marine Opera-tions Center in Riverside, Californiawhich facilitates coordination withthe FAA. The CPB program is prov-ing to be the ground-breaker for UAVairspace access issues and so couldfacilitate further UAV use by othergovernment agencies.

This requirement could eventuallyconstitute a significant market if theBorder Patrol were to decide that thisis an important mission worth the re-sources. UAVs are attractive in thismission since they can operate overremote desert areas and in rugged ter-

rain where other options such aground patrol or fixed CCTV camerasare not a viable option. On the otherhand, the technical ability of UAVs toperform this mission does not ensurethat the Border Patrol will be able tocommit sufficient resources to suchan approach. Illegal immigration overthe Mexican border is a politicallytouchy issue with some Americansopposed to the current rate of illegalimmigration while elements of thebusiness community is happy to re-ceive the benefits of a low-cost laborforce willing to work for sub-standardwages due to their ambiguousposition in American society.

The bottom line is that at the mo-ment, there does not seem to be astrong consensus in the federal gov-ernment to hermetically seal theUS-Mexican border against illegalimmigration. It is possible that theBorder Patrol will continue to acquireUAVs through the forecast period(2012-2015). The aim would be tocover gaps in existing coverage overmore remote areas or to act as acost-cutting substitute for existing pa-trols. However, this is more likely toconsist of a rolling series of acquisi-tions, testing UAVs in small numbers,followed by later and larger acquisi-tions if the first trials are successful,cost-effective, and politically sup-ported.

Civil Use of Military UAV As-sets

In May 2006, the FAAgave the AirForce the green light to use Predatorsover the United States during disasterrelief operations for search and res-cue. Although the Air force was readyto provide this capability in the wakeof Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the mis-sions were cancelled due to nationalairspace restrictions.

NASA Research UAVsNASA has been involved in UAV

research for over a decade, such aswith the Helios very ling enduranceUAV as part of its Environmental Re-search Aircraft and Sensor technol-ogy (ERAST) program. NASA has

been operating a high altitude deriva-tive of the General Atomics Predatorcalled Altair for several years. Asnoted in the sections below, theNASAUAVs have been the backboneof scientific research for other federalagencies to examine the applicationof UAVs to missions such asfire-fighting and weather forecasting.

To build up its capabilities, NASAacquired a Predator B in 2007,dubbed Ikhana which will be used fora variety of long-endurance, high alti-tude scientific missions. NASA hasalso been negotiating with the US AirForce to acquire two of their ACTDGlobal Hawks to provide furthercapability.

Forest ProtectionAnother potential surveillance

market would be fire patrols such asthose of the US Forest Service(USFS). The US requirement is cur-rently being examined under a pilotprogram that is expected to last sev-eral years. The applications would befor a variety of different platforms.The USFS has begun to use a NASAGeneral Atomics Altair (Predator de-rivative) for monitoring a remotewildfire and providing real-timevideo. The USFS also plans to con-duct short range tests including theuse of a NASA Yamaha RMAX heli-copter UAV to sit over a fire to pro-vide weather data, a mission which iscurrently impossible with mannedaircraft due to the danger. The USFSalso plans to examine other roles forUAVs including their use as a com-munication relay which could be asubstitute ground based repeaters inremote areas.

The USFS has already conductedinternal studies of UAV costs versusmanned aircraft and so far is not com-mitted to any large scale purchases oflarger UAVs in the Predator-sizerange. Their studies conclude that op-erating such UAVs is likely to bemore expensive than manned aircraft.The main thrust of the USFS effort atthe moment appears to be to examinewhere UAVs might fit in to their firecontrol mission. Should they prove an



appropriate tool, there have been sug-gestions that the USFS would look toprivate contractors to provide theUAV services, rather than acquire andoperate the UAVs themselves muchas is done with fire-fighting aircraft.

In August-September 2006, theUS Forest Service used a NASAAltair (Predator) flying from theAmes Research Center and one of theGeneral Atomic fields to conductwide-area surveillance of wildfires toevaluate the cost-effectiveness of aMALE UAV in this role. The Altair isfitted with a special multi-wavelengthAMS-Wildfire sensor for real timeprocessing and data transmission.The Esperanza fires in southern Cali-fornia were a particular focus of at-tention in October 2006 and missionswere conducted both with and with-out the new sensor pod. The flightswere conducted again in the summerof 2007.

NOAA Weather ResearchThe National Oceanographic and

Atmospheric Administration has be-gun to employ UAVs to help carry outits missions and is pushing for federalfunding of an endurance UAV. Whilesome of this effort is devoted to scien-tific research, NOAA is beginning toexamine the need for UAVs for theregular conduct of NOAA missions.In 2005, NOAA employed the NASAAltair to conduct a demonstrationprogram over the Channel Island Ma-rine Sanctuary. It has also operatedSilver Fox UAVs for other scientificresearch such as detecting and track-ing humpback whales. During Sep-tember 2005’s Tropical StormOphelia, NOAA conducted weathersurveys from NASA Wallops usingAerosonde UAVs.

The FY08 budget has $3 millionfor a NOAA UAS Project which willconduct several demonstrations cov-ering hurricane monitoring, fisheriesassessment, marine sanctuaries, Arc-tic ice melt and Central Pacific atmo-spheric water transport. NOAA hasbeen promoting the idea of using en-durance UAVs to push the detectionand tracking of hurricanes further outinto the Atlantic beyond the rangecurrently patrolled by manned air-craft. These UAVs would use remotesensing as well as dropsondes.

Among the applications proposedby NOAA is a network of ten endur-ance UAVs which would circle theglobe once every 72 hours to collectatmospheric data to supplement thatcollected by Geostationary Opera-tional Environmental Satellites(GOES) and Polar-orbiting Opera-tional Environmental Satellites. Thisis intended to support a multi-nationalenvironmental monitoring effortcalled Global Earth ObservingSystem of Systems.

Emergency RescueThe non-profit Alliance for Robot

Assisted Crisis Assessment and Re-sponse attempted to use UAVs to helplocate climbers lost on Mount Hoodin 2006, but were frustrated by highwind conditions.

Other Federal AgenciesIt seems likely that UAVs will

eventually penetrate other Federalagencies. It would not be surprising tosee the FBI acquire a modest numberof UAVs in the long-term to assist insurveillance operations. This couldbe both optical and communicationssurveillance. Other federal law en-forcement agencies are also potential

customers once the cost of UAV oper-ations becomes competitive tomanned aircraft operations. For ex-ample, this could include drug en-forcement act ivi ty such assurveillance of terrain for marijuanacultivation. At the moment, these ap-plications seem more distant and on asmaller scale than other federal appli-cations noted above. Since the re-quirements seem less pressing, theseagencies are more likely to wait untilUAVs are a proven technology withan established record of operationalcosts. At the moment, there is no reli-able track record to determine costs,air vehicle reliability or other factors.US military costs have significantweaknesses due to their use in a com-bat environment and the willingnessof the military to operate UAVs inrisky situations where a civil UAVwould probably be grounded. Never-theless, the high rate of attrition ofmilitary UAVs serves as anotherimpediment to UAV proliferation intoother segments of the federalgovernment.

Initial Commercial InterestIn the summer of 2007, Evergreen

Helicopters announced plans to initi-ate an Unmanned Systems divisionwhich is acquiring an Insitu Insightsystem with six air vehicles. Ever-green is involved in the aircraft ser-vice business and sees a market forUAV services such as the USFS re-quirement for seasonal wildfiremonitoring.

In Alaska, Conoco and Shell arebeginning to study the potential use ofUAVs for oil exploration over dan-gerous areas in the Barents andChukchi seas.

Teal Group Analysis

This market is potentially volatileunder the current miasma of securityconcerns, and Washington’s attitudetowards border security could changedramatically. For example, if therewas an incident where some form ofWMD was smuggled over the border

and unleashed in a major US city, thiswould substantially change Washing-ton’s attitude towards border patroland would probably lead to a signifi-cant level of UAV deployment to dealwith remote areas.

At the moment, the lack of accessto national air space is the most seri-ous barrier to UAV proliferation intothe civil market in the US. Until thisissue is resolved, acquisitions will beon a small scale and be focusedmainly on demonstrations rather than



regular use. At the moment, it seemsthat most of these regulations will notcrystallize until around 2011-12. Fur-ther clouding any forecast is the tech-nological chal lenge of asense-and-avoid system, and the rip-ple effects this will have on the civilmarket. One plausible scenario wouldbe for the FAA to promulgate rulesaround 2011-12 which would breakthe UAV sector into small UAVs un-der about 35 pounds and everythingelse. The mid-large UAVs would beobliged to comply with the full pano-ply of ATC rules including a SAAsys-tem; the small UAVs would operate inan altitude constrained environment,and probably have additional restric-

t ions regarding operat ions incrowded air corridors. Should this bethe case, this would tend to warp thecivil/commercial market in favor ofmini-UAVs and endurance UAVs andcut off the TUAV category from thecivil market. The mid-range would beforced to carry too large and expen-sive a SAA suite, and so would bepriced out of the market and burdenedwith a sensor too large for their pay-load. This is certainly not the onlyplausible scenario, nor is it necessar-ily the most likely. But it does suggestthat the growth of a civil UAV marketin the opening years of 2012-17 aregoing to be heavily shaped by theregulatory environment.

The forecast below is predicatedon the assumption that FAA rules donot emerge until 2012 or later and thatthe initial market is largely confinedto US government agencies. A smallcommercial sector is likely to beginappearing, gearing mainly towardsleased services to the US governmentand some business applications suchas survey in remote areas. As FAAregulations may favor a bifurcatedmarket of small lightly regulated andfully regulated by expensive UAVs,the commercial market is likely to be-gin by the use of small UAVs, a cate-gory of which will depend to someextent on for thcoming RSTAdefinitions.

Production Forecast


USG (Large UAV) 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 38US Commercial (Small UAV) 5 5 5 5 30 60 60 75 100 150 495





European UAV Market

Market Overview

Current European Programs

The pattern of UAV deployment inEurope has been markedly differentthan in the US, with widespread de-ployment of new tactical UAV sys-tems over the past few decade, butfew strategic long-endurance systemscomparable to Predator or GlobalHawk. The deployment ofmini-UAVs has picked up steam in re-cent years, led by a very active Ger-man program, and recently followedby France. In general, France andGermany have set the pace for UAVdeployment in Europe, with Britainabsent from its usual pioneering rolein the wake of its troubled Phoenixtactical UAV program.

Another difference between theUS and European pattern is a dissimi-lar viewpoint on UAVs fostered bypast deployments. Several of the Eu-ropean countries operated the CL-89and then the CL-289 jet powered re-connaissance drone. This has ledsome of the European countries, espe-cially France and Germany, to distin-

guish “reconnaissance” from “sur-veillance” UAVs, the former type be-ing high-speed penetrating dronesdesigned to move through dangerousareas defended by advanced air de-fense systems, as opposed to surveil-lance drones which loiter forpersistent surveillance in air spaceswhich are relatively free of air de-fenses. The US pattern over the pastdecade has favored surveillance overreconnaissance, while the Europeansare continuing to make the distinctionin their programs.

The acquisition pattern of UAVs inEurope has also provided a curiousbarometer of the progress of Euro-pean defense integration. In spite ofall the consolidation of the Europeanaerospace industries over the past de-cade, participation in multi-nationalprograms has actually diminished ifUAVs are any indication of the trends.In view of the novelty of the technol-ogy, it might have been expected thatthe European armed forces would

have joined together to develop andmanufacture common UAV systemssince the requirements are so similar.The opposite has been the case, with adearth of joint programs and a pleth-ora of separate UAV efforts.

France has been trying to lead ajoint-European program, but this hasnot been enthusiastically received byother major players such as Germanyand the UK. In the German case, theFrench pull-out from the Brevel tacti-cal UAV program in the 1990s leadsome Germans aerospace firms toview recent French initiatives veryskeptically. Although France hastalked a great game as the center ofEuropean UAV development, its ac-tual track record of UAV develop-ment and production has not beenimpressive. In addition, this potentialarea of cooperation had been poi-soned by the Airbus managementcontroversies. The way around thisdilemma would be to hand over themajor programs to a multi-national


European UAV Forecast

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20170

20

40

60

80


$0

$200

$400

$600

$800(Expenditures, $ Millions)

Mini (x10) Tactical MALE HALE Naval

UCAV Small Civil Civil MALE Expenditures

organization such as the EuropeanDefense Agency (EDA), a move thatFrance supports. However, with Brit-ain eyeing a Predator acquisition aswell as its Watchkeeper effort, andGermany already committed toEuroHawk, the need for aFrench-dominated MALE UAV ef-fort is not attractive to Berlin andLondon. Italy already operates Preda-tor, and few other countries have apressing need for an endurance sys-tem. In August 2005, EDA attemptedto jump start a common EuropeanUAV effort by announcing plans tosolicit bids from five firms to conducttechnology demonstrations of be-yond-line-of-sight data links forUAVs and potential sense-and-avoidtechnologies but this has done little toaddress the continuing fragmentationof European UAV efforts.

In June 2004, the two main Frenchaerospace firms EADS and Dassaultbelatedly announced plans to jointheir efforts on two UAV efforts, anendurance UAV and a UCAV pro-gram. The deal is based on the factthat EADS had been selected by theFrench DGA to head the EuroMALEendurance UAV effort, and Dassaultthe UCAV effort. So nominally, bothfirms will cooperate on both pro-grams. At the same time, both firmsappear to be pursuing a wide range ofother UAV ventures separately, in-cluding tactical UAVs, maritime sur-veillance UAVs, and a wide range ofmini- and micro-UAVs. Dassault hasbeen attempting to assert its positionas the number one French UAV firmin spite of the fact that it has not yetfielded a single UAV and Dassaultrepresentatives have complainedwhen the French government showedinterest in the EADS-Germany AG-ILE/Advanced UAV concept as amore suitable venue than the Frenchcopy of an Israeli MALE UAV. It hasbeen a common assumption amongmany major aircraft companies that

UAV programs should naturally flowto them, in spite of the fact that it hasbeen smaller electronics houses likeSAGEM in France, General Atomicsin the US and other non-aviationfirms who have tended to push thetactical UAV technology forward.

The most successful EuropeanUAV to date has been the FrenchSAGEM Crécerelle/Sperwer, astop-gap tactical UAV originallycombining the British Banshee air ve-hicle with a new French ground con-trol system. Having pulled out of theFranco-German Brevel tactical UAVprogram, Sperwer has become theFrench system by default. The Frencharmy is deploying an upgraded ver-sion of the system for its SDTI (Sys-

tem de drones tactiques inter-

mediaires) program based on theSperwer export version. An upgradedCrécerelle derivative using the newSperwer air vehicle has been sold toCanada, Netherlands, Denmark andSweden. France is also beginning toexplore micro-UAVs as part of itsFelin future combat soldier program.France has initiated a medium endur-ance UAV under its Eagle program,and is attempting to entice Europeanparticipation in a more elaborate en-durance program, EuroMALE asmentioned above. France has alsoinitiated a multi-national UCAVeffort, now being called Neuron.

Germany has continued to fund theBrevel program even after the Frenchpull-out, and is in the process of pro-curing the local derivative calledTucan. Germany also has a range ofexperimental tactical UAV programsunderway including a naval helicop-ter UAV, and is in the forefront ofmini-UAV deployment in Europewith its Luna and Aladin mini-UAVs.Germany is also planning to acquirethe Global Hawk for its signals intelli-gence missions as EuroHawk, andGlobal Hawk has been selected byNATO as the adjunct to manned air-

craft for its AGS strategic surveil-lance program. EADS-Germany hasalso been developing its own UCAVdemonstrator, the Barrakuda whichwas unveiled in 2006 which alsoforms the core of its proposedpan-European Agile/Advanced UAVeffort.

The Italian army had a standing re-quirement for UAVs since the late1980s, but serial production was con-tinually delayed due to a lack of fund-ing. The Kosovo air campaign finallyconvinced the Italian armed forces ofthe need for such systems, and eightsystems each of the Mirach 26 andMirach 150 are now on order. TheKosovo experience also convincedthe Italian air force of the need for along-range surveillance system, andItaly has begun acquiring the RQ-1Predator for this mission, including arecent August 2004 order for fivemore air vehicles. Italy has an excep-tionally active UAV effort at the mo-ment including a UCAV demonstratorand both MALE and HALEprototypes.

Britain has finally begun to catchup in UAV development over the pastfew years after a decade of problems.In July 2004, the MoD selectedThales to develop i ts newWatchkeeper UAV system, and Brit-ish units have been operating loanedPredators prior to the purchase of thisendurance UAV. BAE Systems hasrecently unveiled a number of UAVdemonstrators that had previouslybeen under wraps.

Russia has a very extensive UAVprogram, but has had little success inexporting its tactical UAVs in recentyears, or in funding its new enduranceUAV efforts. Sweden has extensiveresearch efforts underway on UAVs,but few actual deployable systemshave yet emerged. Many of thesmaller European armies have tacticalUAV programs as well.

Civil UAV Development in Europe

In Europe, the European AviationSafety Agency (EASA) issued a call

in early 2006 for the formation of anew organization to co-ordinate the

use of UAVs in Europe. The aim is topermit “normalized” UAV flights in


Page 58 European UAV Market

non-segregated airspace by 2009.EASA was expected to begin a pro-cess for UAV type certification in2007. EASA granted the SchiebelCamcopter a “Permit-to-Fly” in June2007, one of the first.

Eurocontrol is leading a UAV Op-erational Air Traffic Task force to ad-dress ATC issues. In addition, effortsare underway to unify European stan-dards with other standards such asthose being developed in the US byRTCA and ASTM, with EUROCAE(European Organization for CivilianAviation Equipment) considering thedevelopment of mirror standards withFAA cooperation. There are also ef-forts in the individual countries, forexample, Britain’s Autonomous Sys-tems Technology Related AirborneEvaluation and Assessment program.

At the moment, UAVs are treatedas experimental aircraft and are al-lowed to fly in segregated airspace,with flights within non-segregatedairspace expected to be possible by2008. Type certification is expectedaround 2010 for civil UAVs operatedby national organizations, and for

commercial UAVs around 2012, Eu-ropean analysts suggest thatcivil/government UAV acquisitionwill begin somewhere around2011-12 if these time lines take place,while civil/commercial acquisitionmight begin around 2014-2015.

In 2006, the European defenseAgency launched its own attempt toaddress UAV access to airspace with abudget of about Euro 500,000. Theaim is to coordinate the efforts of Eu-ropean military organization withtheir civilian counterparts to developcommon guidelines.

In June 2006, the British press re-ported that that several Europeangovernment are discussing a commoncivil UAV program for border secu-rity applications that could eventuallytotal about one billion pounds ($1.8billion). The initiative is based in parton recent Belgian experiments withmilitary UAVs to patrol off the Bel-gian coast for customs violations andto catch ships dumping oil. The pri-mary application for the multi-na-tional UAV force at the momentwould seem to be coastal patrol to

monitor customs viola t ions ,environmental issues, and illegalimmigration.

A variety of civil applications forUAVs have already been explored inEurope. For example, the French de-fense research organization ONERAteamed with SAGEM in 2005 to ex-amine the use of UAVs for forest firepatrol. The initial trials were con-ducted using Busard and SperwerUAVs. In the summer of 2006, theBasque provincial government inSpain decided to fund the demonstra-tion of the Aerovision Fulmar UAV toconduct fisheries protection missionsoff the coast as part of an 18 monthexperiment.

Country Profiles

Austria

Austria has had a modest, govern-ment funded UAV effort since themid-1990s, and has partially fundedthe small Camcopter program bySchiebel Robotics /CamcopterGmbH. There has been a standing re-quirement since the mid-1990s for anoff-the-shelf UAV system, and theItalian Mirach 26 and Kentron Seekerwere among the systems studied in a1997 demonstration effort. The Aus-trian Army tentatively selected theSeeker, but the government refused toaward a contract, citing the need toacquire the system from a Europeancandidate.

Schiebel opened a plant for theCamcopter in 2006 with an annual ca-pacity for 100-150 Camcopters. Thisappears to be geared mainly to the ex-


European UAV Market Page 59

EADS Police Mini-UAV

Schiebel Camcopter

port market, Notably Schiebel's dealwith the UAE.

Teal Group Analysis

Austria is a likely candidate for atactical UAV system later in the fore-cast period, probably consisting oftwo-three systems. Austria is also an

observer on the European ECAP en-durance UAV study group, but itseems unlikely that Austria will ac-

quire such a system in the forecastperiod.

Austria 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — 12 — — — — — — 12

Belgium

In the late 1960s and early 1970s,the Belgian army purchased two pla-toons (40 air vehicles) of the MBLEDefense (now Thomson-CSF Elec-tronics-Belgium) Epervier system fortactical reconnaissance, completingthe buy in 1978. The system used aconventional wet film camera system,though a real-time data system using alow light level TV and IR linescannerwere tested.

In 1997, the Belgian army formu-lated a requirement for a new divi-

sional level UAV system with anobjective of three-four systems eachwith four to eight air vehicles. TheRFP was scheduled for release in1998. By 1998, the requirement hadbeen further refined to three divi-sional-level systems. As part of its1997-99 defense plan, Belgiumplanned commit BFr 2.4 billion forthe program. The Israeli Hunter wasselected with three systems ordered,each with six air vehicles. Deliverybegan in February 2001 to Air Com-

ponent/80 UAV Squadron. The 80UAV Squadron was deployed to theDemocratic Republic of Congo inJuly 2006, losing a Hunter to groundfire on its first flight. A second waslost due to engine failure on 3 October2006 which crashed into a neighbor-ing house killing a civilian. This is be-lieved to have been the first civiliankilled in a UAV related accident.

Teal Group Analysis

With the acquisition of the Huntercomplete, and the Belgian procure-ment budget so low at the moment,

further tactical UAV acquisitions areunlikely for the foreseeable future. Itis possible that Belgium will acquire a

small number of mini-UAVs later inthe forecast period for peace-keepingoperations.

Belgium 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 20 — — — — — 20

Bulgaria

The Kintex defense export firmdisplayed its NITI small UAV at theIDEX 07 convention in the UAV inFebruary 2007, the first known Bul-

garian UAV effort. The Bulgariangovernment has been attempting toestablish a joint civil/military require-ment for a UAV system. In May-June

2006, the Italian Galileo firm demon-strated its Falco tactical UAV to a Bul-garian government delegation at theairport of Chesnegirovo.

Teal Group Analysis

Bulgaria has a very modest de-fense procurement budget and the ex-tent of its interest in UAV operations

is not especially clear. A modest tacti-cal UAV acquisition seems possible,but it is not clear if this will be an im-

port or whether Bulgaria will use thisas an opportunity to support the localindustry.

Bulgaria 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — — 6 — — — — — 6

Croatia

Croatia’s Ministry of Defense dis-closed a UAV requirement in May1998. The plan was to acquire two

UAV systems, one tactical and oneoperational.

Croatia developed its own UAV atthe time of the 1991 civil war, underthe designation MAH01. Their first



UAV codenamed “Bird” used filmcameras and first flew in 1992. By1993, they had developed a real-timeE-O system. During the OperationStorm offensive in July 1995, UAVs

were used for reconnaissance gather-ing and on at least one occasion wereused to deliver propaganda leaflets.

Teal Group Analysis

Croatia has a very small defenseprocurement budget and has substan-tial modernization needs. AUAV pro-

gram seems rather low on the list ofpriorities, and a more likely coursewill be to fund one of the Croatian

universities or development agenciesto continue the development of indig-enous tactical UAV designs.

Croatia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 15 — — — — — — — — 6Tactical UAV — — — — — 6 — — — — 6

Czech Republic

The former Czechoslovak airforce operated Soviet VR-3 ReysUAV systems since the 1980s. Theseare a large, vehicle-launched dronewhich provide wet film imagery or re-corded TV data. In the early 1980s,the government began a low-cost pro-gram to examine small mini-UAVspatterned after the early Israeli dronesunder the name Sojka. By the early1990s, this had resulted in a series oftest air vehicles, the latest of which,the Sojka III was considered ready forproduction in 1993. Developmentwas managed by the VTUL a PVO(Air Force and Air Defense Force)Technical Institute. After the dissolu-tion of the Warsaw Pact, Hungaryjoined the Czech Republic on the pro-gram, with the Czech Air Force Re-search Institute in Prague beingresponsible for the Sojka air vehicle,payload and launcher, and the Hun-garian Military Technical Institute inBudapest being responsible for theground control stations. A limitednumber of air vehicles and GCS weremanufactured in the mid-1990s and at

least one system was operational dur-ing the 1996 Duha air defenseexercises with the Sojka III beingused mainly to test the air defensenetwork.

In 2004, the Czech air force re-search institute began an effort to up-grade the Sojka III. One of the main

aims of the program is to develop amodular payload system to permit theuse of multiple sensor types.

Teal Group Analysis

The Czech Republic is likely to ac-quire any UAV it purchases from do-mestic manufacturers, and this wouldmost likely be an additional batch ofSojka systems. The Czech army isquite small, and its current defense

budget is barely adequate to under-take higher priority efforts such as theNATO standardization effort.

A new UAV acquisition programmight include another Sojka systemor two, and the Czechs recently an-

nounced a modernized version thatmay be the basis for such an order.



Sojka

Czech Republic 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 10 20 20 — — — 50Tactical UAV 6 — — — — — — — — — 6

Denmark

Denmark had an army requirementfor a short-range surveillance and tar-get acquisition UAV capable of carry-ing day and night sensors. The RFPfor the system was expected in 1996,and the award in 1998. The requestfor information was released by theRoyal Danish Air Force Air MaterialCommand in November 1996 withresponses due in February 1997. Thesystem was intended for use along-side the Danish MLRS batteries as an

artillery spotter. The objective wastwo systems each with two GCS andsix UAVs/payloads. Denmark finallyselected the SAGEM Sperwer, a de-rivative of the French Crécerelle sys-tem. Denmark acquired 10 Sperwerair vehicles and probably two sys-tems, locally called the Taarnfalken(Kestrel). The first system becameoperational with the Queen’s Artil-lery Regiment in May 2001 and thefull package completed delivery in

September 2002. The Danish Minis-try of Defense was extremely disap-pointed with the performance of theSperwer system, especially when op-erated in the hot temperatures of Iraq.As a result, in early 2006, the Danishgovernment decided to dispose of thesystems, and Canada decided topurchase the equipment to reinforcetheir own Sperwer units.

Teal Group Analysis

Denmark has been very critical ofthe problems with Sperwer, evenmore so than the Canadians, and hasdecided to sell them off. The DanishArmy still sees a need for a tactical

UAV system, so acquisition of anoff-the-shelf solution later in the fore-cast period seems likely. It would alsobe possible that Denmark will acquire

some mini-UAVs late in the forecastperiod.

Denmark 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — — — 30 30 — — 60Tactical UAV — — — — 4 4 — — — — 8

European Union/NATO

Europe has had a significant tradi-tion of cooperation in UAV acquisi-tion, especially Franco-Germancooperation. Ironically, at the mo-ment of greatest European aerospaceindustry consolidation, joint UAV ef-forts have fallen afoul of past difficul-t ies . The col lapse of theFranco-German Eurodrone Brevelprogram in the mid-1990s has put adamper on cooperative UAV efforts,and at the moment, tactical UAV ef-forts in France and Germany arelargely separate.

The current issue is the extent towhich the European DevelopmentAgency (EDA) will play a role in har-monizing European UAV efforts. Todate, the policy has been contradic-tory. On the one hand, EDA doesseem to view UAVs as a particularlygood example of a new technologyfield where it will be able to wieldsome influence. As a result, UAV

study programs are already in theEDA budget. On the other hand, EDAhas been reluctant to take on specificengineering development efforts.France has been attempting to foistEuroMALE on EDAas and attempt to

establish this program as a Europeanventure but, as of August 2005, thathad not occurred.

A German UAV working group,UAV Dach including 11 companiesfrom Germany, Austria, Switzerland,



EADS Advanced UAV

and the Netherlands has established aventure to develop a maritimesurveil-lance UAV for civil operations suchas pollution control, monitoring eco-nomic exclusion zones, and fisheriesprotection. The program will first aimat defining the technical requirementsof the system as well as addressing thesubstantial issues of airspace accessand air vehicle certification.

CL-289 PiverCanadair was successful in its first

venture into RPVs, the CL-89, build-ing over 500 CL-89 drones have beenbuilt for the armies of France, Ger-many, Britain and Italy. Having beendesigned as a divisional asset, theCL-89 suffered from a short range;even with an extended range fuel tankits maximum range was only 140 km.In July 1976 Germany signed a MoUwith Canada for the development ofthe longer-ranged CL-289 byCanadair and Dornier and was joinedby France in March 1977. Thetripartite development contract for$410 ($C) million was signed in No-vember 1987 with an aim towardsfielding 14 systems and 235 air vehi-cles. The production MoU was signedby Germany and France in January1986. The first system was turnedover to the German army on 29 No-vember 1990 and the French army re-ceived their first set in early 1991 fortrials. Production for the French andGerman armies was completed inJune 1993. France procured 55 air ve-hicles and two ground station sys-tems, while Germany procured 188air vehicles and eleven ground stationsets.

During the European interventionin the Yugoslav Civil war, the CL-289was deployed with the 7th ArtilleryRegiment of the French army nearMostar airport, with over 40 flightsthrough the summer of 1996. In Au-gust 1996, the CL-289 marked its500th mission with the French andGerman armed forces since its intro-duction in 1992. During operationsover Kosovo in April 1999 the Ger-man army had 21 UAVs in operationand flew 237 missions from Decem-

ber 1998 to July 1999. Total losses inthe fighting included five Germanand two French CL-289.

EADS has managed an upgradepackage for the CL-289 calledAOLOS-289 with new flight soft-ware and a modified computer. Thefirst of the upgraded systems wasturned over in May 2003 and 160French and German UAVs will be up-graded.

BrevelThe Eurodrone Brevel was a coop-

erative Franco-German effort to fielda reconnaissance UAV for divisionalsurveillance and artillery spotting re-quirements. Unlike the CL-289which relied on conventional IRlinescanners and wet film systems,the new UAV was designed to providereal-time electro-optical surveillancecapability. In 1983, Matra and MBBconsolidated their research work onUAVs, forming consortium calledEurodrone in 1989. The new system,called Brevel, was named after thecities where the firms are based, Bre-men and Velizy. The Brevel programsuffered from a lack of harmony in theFrench and German defense budgets,with Germany being the main sourceof budget problems in 1991-92. InOctober 1992, the program was re-started again after Germany agreed tobear the burden of RDT&E fundingfor Brevel for two years. On 13 No-vember 1992, Eurodrone wasawarded a FFr 1.4 billion ($264.5million) contract from the FrenchMinistry of Defense for the develop-ment of the Brevel, even though theFrench ministry of defense indicatedthat they would have to defer majorfunding until 1997. In February 1994,the French and German governmentsprovided the Eurodrone partners withan additional contract increment tobegin the second phase of Brevel de-velopment. When the next Frenchfive year defense plan was releasedcovering 1997-2002, funding forBrevel procurement had beendropped. France subsequently pro-ceeded on its own with the Crécerelleprogram, while Germany continued

the Brevel effort under their localname of Tucan. Both these programsare covered below in the respectivecountry sections.

ECAP UAVIn October 2002, the European de-

fense ministers decided to support theEuropean Capability Action Plan(ECAP) aimed at covering serious de-fense technology gaps in Europe, no-tably UAVs. The members of thiseffort are Germany, Spain, France, It-aly, the Netherlands, UK and Sweden,with Austria and Belgium present asobservers. A preliminary study by theworking group concluded that the Eu-ropeans needed about 20MALE/HALE (medium/high altitudeendurance) UAVs for the ISTAR (In-telligence, Surveillance, TargetAcquisition and ReconnaissanceMissions).

In October 2002, NATO nationsconcluded a UAV interoperabilityagreement under the STANAG sys-tem.

The European Union has beensponsoring a multi-national studyprogram called UAVNET to preparefor potential civilian use of UAVswithin a decade.

AGS UAVThe NATO Alliance Ground Sur-

veillance (AGS) program reached amilestone in 2004 with the selectionof the Airbus A321 equipped with theTransatlantic Cooperative AGS Ra-dar (TCAR) as the base platform, andthe RQ-4B Global Hawk as the sup-porting system. Under initial plans,NATO would acquire seven GlobalHawks and five Airbus AGS. In 2006,the plans were revised downward dueto budget pressure with the objectivenow being five Global Hawk. Theprogram ran into more funding tur-moil in 2007 with Netherlands back-ing off its commitment. There havebeen suggestions that to trim costs,the Global Hawk portion would be re-tained but the Airbus platformseliminated.



Teal Group Analysis

At the moment, a common Euro-pean tactical UAV program seems un-likely as France, Germany, Britain,Italy, Spain and other are in the midstof acquiring their own tactical UAVs.The ECAP effort may foster a

pan-European tactical UAV programlate in this forecast period, but it is un-likely to have any immediate impactsince so many European countries arealready committed to tactical UAVefforts in the short-term.

In the immediate future, it appearsthat joint NATO efforts will be fo-cused on the AGS requirement andthe associated acquisition of GlobalHawks.

NATO 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

HALE UAV — — — — — 1 1 1 1 1 5

Finland

During the 1990s, Finland had arequirement for a UAV system tomake up for shortfalls in aircraft re-connaissance. It tested the IsraeliScout for both the maritime patrol andartillery spotting roles. Purchaseswere put off in the early 1990s due tothe high cost of the F/A-18 program.Four systems were short-listed for theprogram: Alliant Outrider, OerlikonRanger, Sagem Sperwer and MatraTucan. The Ranger was tested in early1998. In August 1999, Finland an-nounced that it was acquiring oneRanger system with six air vehicles ata cost of FMk 110 million ($20 mil-lion). Eventually, two systems wereacquired, each with five air vehiclesand associated E-O packages.

Finnish firms have been active instudying other applications forUAVs. For example, the electronicsfirm Vaisala has studied the use of aweather reconnaissance system usinga dropsonde delivered by a UAV.

In the summer of 2004, Patria es-tablished an industrial consortium toexamine domestic capabilities to de-

velop a tactical UAV system to re-place the existing Ranger system. Theministry of defense has established arequirement for a joint army/air forcereconnaissance system and has bud-get Euro 100 million for it, with theexpectation that the system would beacquired in the 2010-2015 timeframe.

MASS Mini-UAVIn the summer of 2006, Patria un-

veiled its Mini-UAV Modular Air-borne Sensor System. This uses an airvehicle with light-weight Styrofoamfront elements that can be replaceddue to inevitable landing damage.

Teal Group Analysis

The Finnish armed forces after theexperience with the Ranger wouldprefer to acquire an off-the-shelf sys-tem than develop one their own.However, Patria already has a modestprogram underway. The Finnish

armed forces have a requirement for aMini-UAV system, which is likely tobe satisfied by the new Patria design.Finnish officers have stated that theysee a need for a medium endurancesystem, but it has lower priority than

either another tactical UAV system ormini-UAV system.

In all likelihood, the future UAVsystem will be acquired late in theforecast period.

Finland 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 30 30 50 — — — — — — 110Tactical UAV — — — — — 6 6 6 — — 18



Patria UAV

France

France has the most ambitiousUAV plans of any country in Europe,but its plans have traditionally runaground over budget limitations. Inthe tactical UAV arena, it was in-volved in the joint Franco-GermanBrevel effort, but bailed out in the late1990s in favor of an off-the-shelf buyof the SAGEM Crécerelle. The after-taste of this and similar missile fias-coes such as Polyphem and TriGAThas led to a continuing estrangementbetween France and Germany overfuture developments and a noticeableGerman reluctance to participate incurrent French-led UAV efforts.

As detailed below, France outlineda broad range of UAV initiatives in itscurrent 2003-09 defense budgetplans, but these were scuttled in thesummer of 2004 due to budget short-falls. The French DGA put off two ofits keystone programs, the MCMMTUAV effort and the SIDM-MALE,ostensibly to better coordinate the ef-for t with i ts new net-centr icwar-fighting program called BOA.

At the moment, France is nomi-nally committed to a broad range ofUAV efforts, and has attempted toskirt around the budget problems byproclaiming these to be Europeanventures in the hopes of rounding upother European partners as substitutesfor the disenchanted Germans. In re-ality, the programs are in a shamblesdue to the frequent cancellations andre-starts, as well as confusion overpriorities.

Early Tactical UAV EffortsIn the 1980s, a number of French

firms such as Sagem and Altec pur-sued their own UAV efforts, andFrance on occasion purchased thesein small numbers for trials. So duringOperation Desert Storm, the Frencharmy employed four Altec Mart sys-tems. When the Ministry of Defensedecided to pull out of the Brevel effortin the mid-1990s, Sagem already hadan off- the-shelf design, theCrécerelle, waiting in the wings, and

this has formed the basis for the cur-rent French tactical UAV program.

Crécerelle/SperwerAlthough nominally committed to

the Franco-German Brevel effort, in1988, the French armament director-ate DGA provided initial funding toGroupe SAGEM for the ATAOS (Au-tonomous Tactical Attack and Obser-vation System). This was used todevelop the Marula mini-UAV, alongwith an associated flight control sys-tem and a fully equipped system wasdeployed on trials in 1993. At thesame time, the army’s Section Tech-nique de l’Armée de Terre purchaseda few privately developed ALTECMart mini-drone system in 1988 andfour systems were deployed withFrench forces during OperationDesert Storm. The tests and use ofthese two systems helped defined theFrench requirement which emergedas the Crécerelle (Kestrel) in 1993.Groupe SAGEM was provided a con-tract in 1993 for RDT&E of this sys-tem, and production of two completesystems for trials. To speed the devel-opment, SAGEM used the BritishBanshee (Spectre) drone as the air ve-hicle, and utilized flight control ele-ments developed earlier under the

ATAOS program. The Banshee is awidely used target drone manufac-tured by TTL Corp. with about 1,600manufactured to date for about 23countries. In 1994, the French armyawarded SAGEM a FFr50 million ($9million) study contract to explore anextended range Crécerelle with anendurance of 5.5 hours versus thecurrent three hours.

The Crécerelle was deployed forthe first time with French forces inMacedonia in 1999 with the 61st Ar-tillery Regiment. A total of three werelost in combat during operations inKosovo. The Crécerelle systemformed the basis for the Sperwer sys-tem which uses a new and more capa-ble air vehicle. This system has beenexported to Sweden, Denmark,Greece, and the Netherlands and pro-duction to date of this UAV family hasbeen about 18 systems and 100+ airvehicles. Spain is expected to becomea client in 2004.

At the moment, the French army issupplanting the first Crécerelle sys-tems with the new SDTI (System de

drones tactiques interimaires), whichis an upgraded SAGEM Crécerellesystem based around Sperwer-A airvehicle. As a short-term solution,



Spewer-B

DGA is trying to incorporate someMCMM features into the SDTI. So atParis-05, SAGEM showed a Sperwerfitted with a Rafael Spike anti-tankmissile as a possible option to test anarmed UAV. SAGEM began flighttests of an upgraded, longer-rangeSperwer, the Sperwer-B in June 2006at the Kemijarvi UAV test range inFinland. SAGEM is attempting to in-terest the French government inSperwer-B as a “mini-MALE” to sat-isfy the requirements of the long-de-layed Eagle/EuroMALE programs.

SDTIThe SDTI (System de drone

tactique intermediare) is a mediumendurance UAV for the army with anoriginal requirement for 15 systems,since reduced to four systems.Aerospatiale Matra offered the CACSystems Ranger for the SDTI require-ment. SAGEM offered the Sperwer,an upgraded version of the existingCrécerelle developed for the Nether-lands army. The Israeli firm Silver Ar-row offered an undisclosed UAV. TheDGA selected SAGEM for the SDTIrequirement using the Sperwer-A.The requirement was four systemsand 18 air vehicles. The standard sys-tem consists of a ground control sys-tem and three air vehicles, plus areserve of five air vehicles. Systemtrials were conducted at CEV-Sitresin 2003, and two low rate productionsystems were delivered for troop tri-als in 2004. The SDTI/Sperwer-Awas accepted into service by the 61

st

Artillery Regiment in April 2006,based near Chaumont in easternFrance and replaced the worn-outCrécerelle UAVs; the regiment oper-ates two batteries of CL-289 Piverand two SDTI/Sperwer-A batteries(each battery includes two systemsand nine air vehicles). Arapid deploy-ment SDTI cell includes 23 troopsand can conduct 1-2 missions daily. Afull strength cell is 64 troops and conconduct up to three missions daily.System retirement is currentlyscheduled for 2011.

As a short-term solution, DGA istrying to incorporate some MCMM

features into the SDTI. So at Paris-05,SAGEM showed a Sperwer fittedwith a Rafael Spike anti-tank missileas a possible option to test an armedUAV. It also displayed a Sperwer-Bwith weapons at the 2006 Eurosatoryshow.

SAGEM began flight tests of anupgraded, longer-range Sperwer, theSperwer-B in June 2006 at theKemijarvi UAV test range in Finland.SAGEM is attempting to interest theFrench government in Sperwer-B as a“mini-MALE” to satisfy the require-ments of the long-delayed Ea-gle/EuroMALE programs. In 2006,SAGEM was awarded a contract todemonstrate Sperwer-B armed withthe Israeli NT/Spike ATGM as a po-tential hunter-killer UAV for Frencharmy use.

SDTTUnder the current 2003-2009 bud-

get program, the French DGA wasplanning to acquire a new tacticaldrone called MCMM (Multi Charges

Multi Mission) and a new endurancedrone. In April 2002, SAGEM joinedwith Dassault to form a consortium tobid on this system. SAGEM unveiledits Sperwer HV at the June 2001 Parisair show. This uses a turbo-jet pow-ered air vehicle to complement the ex-isting piston-powered Sperwer fordeep-penetration missions wheregreater speed is needed. EADS hasteamed with Galileo Avionica to

evolve their Mirach 100/5 into theCarapace for this role. The aim was tofield a tactical UAV with a higherspeed than systems such as Sperwer,thereby providing better responsetime, and suitable for replacing theCL-289 as well.

The MCMM was conceived of as amore ambitious package than SDTIwhich would include a reconnais-sance UAV as well as a hunter-killerUAV capable of carrying varioustypes of guided submunitions such asthe BONUS, the STRIX, or 2.75 inchrockets. The requirement was for 15systems and about 80 air vehicleswith a program cost of 450 million.Under the 2003-2009 budget plans,40 air vehicles would be acquiredthrough the end of the current budgetplan by 2009, and the remaining 40 by2010. However, in the summer of2004, the DGA announced that it wasputting off the program for an undis-closed duration to better evaluate itsneeds based on experiences with thenew Sperwer SDTI. SAGEM dis-played a Crécerelle UAV armed witha Rafael NT Spike missile at the 2005Paris air show, and there have beenearlier hints at an armed UAV as a pre-cursor to the delayed MCMMmulti-role UAV. The French DGAprovided a development contract in2006 to SAGEM to begin the study ofan armed UAV, separate and distinctfrom the Neuron effort.



Eagle 1 MALE UAV

In recent years, the MCMM re-quirement has been renamed as SDTT(Systeme de drone tactique terrestre:Army tactical drone system). Thissystem is intended to replace both theCL-289 Piver and SDTI/Sperwer inthe 20011 period. A demonstration isscheduled for 2007. The army is cur-rently studying a VTOL solution forthe program, and in 2006, SAGEMwas awarded a contract to demon-strate the Bell Textron Eagle EyeVTOL UAV as a possible candidatefor both French army and navyrequirements.

MALE Endurance UAVFrance acquired a single US

Hunter system in 1995 to test out itsrequirements for a medium endur-ance UAV, and the system was de-ployed in Kosovo. In the spring of2000, the French DGA released anRFP for the MALE (Moyen altitude

longue endurance) for the air forcewith a stated requirement for five sys-tems. EADS offered the Eagle, a de-rivative of the IAI Heron, for theMALE requirement. The Israeli firmSilver Arrow offered the Hermes1500 and SAGEM offered the USGeneral Atomics Predator UAVunder the name Horus-SD.

In July 2001, DGAannounced thatit would acquire a few Eagle-1 as aSIDM-MALE (Systeme Interimaire

de Drones MALE: Interim MALEUAV System) until a fully developedsystem is ready. The SIDM effort costabout 90 million consisting of 54million for the UAVs and 36 millionin operational costs. The Heron hadits first flight on 18 October 1993. De-velopment of the Eagle began at IAIin the mid-1990s and the first flight ofthe French version of the air vehiclewas conducted in 1998. Through June1999, a total of 10 flights had beenconducted including two of over 20hour duration and including at leastone mission 4,000 km from the basenear Paris. The Eagle was first dem-onstrated at the 1999 Paris air showand was shown again at Paris 2003 ina slightly more refined form. The Ea-gle-1 system employs Israeli ground

stations and payloads as EADS hasnot had time to develop these sys-tems. EADS is working on a furtherpackage called Eagle 2 with Euro-pean payloads, an uprated engine, anda flight control station and communi-cations package more compatiblewith US/NATO. In 2004, EADS re-ported that it was planning to use thedata-link technology developed forthe Brevel/KZO. In 2005, EADS an-nounced that it was acquiring the ex-clusive intellectual property rights forthe Eagle airframe from IAI Malat.The Eagle one MALE system willconstitute EuroMALE Block 0. Thefirst flight of the definitive SIDM de-sign took place from the Istres testbase in September 2006. It is fittedwith a IAI TAMAM electro-opticalsensor and an Elta EL/M-2055 SAR.The French government is consider-ing ordering a small number ofadditional air vehicles to provideimmediate capabil i ty unti l adefinitive EuroMALE is ready.

The current French five year de-fense plan for the 2003-2008 timeframe envisioned the acquisition offive systems and 16-24 MALE air ve-hicles, of which 12 air vehicles wouldbe funded under the current program,and the remainder afterwards. Initialdeployment would begin in 2009.The program cost, including supportand maintenance for 15 years, waspegged at 1.1 billion, with the acqui-sition costs estimated as 591 million.However, in June 2004, DGA post-poned the MALE program for a dem-onstration program aimed at testing aEuroMALE in 2008. In June 2005,the French defense minister an-nounced the launch of theEuroMALE program. The program ispegged at about Euro 300 million andDassault subsequently teamed withEADS to develop a commonEuroMALE endurance UAV. Thiscould be a further elaboration of theEagle such as the proposed Eagle 2, ora wholly new design.

The French DGA has been tryingto shift responsibility for EuroMALEto the European Defense Agency(EDA), but to date, this has not met

with success. Germany is activelyplanning to acquire the Global Hawkin its EuroHawk configuration; Italyhas already acquired Predator; Britainhas leased and purchased Predator foroperations in Iraq and has its ownWatchkeeper program in place. As aresult, there is no great enthusiasm tosponsor a program aimed mainly atFrench requirements. France wouldlike to limit its financial stake inEuroMALE to about 25%. A reportfrom the French Senate in 2006strongly criticized the program asconfused and wasteful andrecommended dumping the programaltogether.

SAGEM has been trying kill thecurrent MALE UAV program with atwin-headed program. On the onehand, SAGEM has been promotingthe idea that a MALE UAV is not whatthe French armed forces need, butrather an improved tactical UAV. Ithas argued that in typical peacekeep-ing missions such as the recent Frenchoperation in the Ivory Coast, that aMALE UAV is excessive in perfor-mance and insufficient in number. In-stead, SAGEM is proposing alonger-range Sperwer, the Sperwer-Bwhich was unveiled at Eurosatory inJune 2006. The second approach is tooffer an alternative to the long-de-layed Dassaul t /EADS Ea-gle/EuroMALE, namely its ownBusard (Buzzard). This is a joint pro-gram with the government researchorganization Onera using a GermanStemme powered sailplane as surro-gate for endurance UAV research.The Stemme sailplane can be oper-ated in controlled civil airspace thatwould be off-limits for UAVs at themoment to permit studies of UAVsubcomponents. This will permit fur-ther research on civil UAV applica-tions as well as military enduranceprograms. SAGEM has publicly dis-played a model of a purely UAV vari-ant of the Busard which suggests thatSAGEM views the Busard as a poten-tial MALE UAV alternative to the Ea-gle. To further confuse matters, in2006, the DGA visited with Thales inthe UK to receive a briefing on the



Watchkeeper. Some French officialshave argued that the Watchkeeperwill satisfy 70% of the French MALErequirement at 30% the cost. How-ever, in June 2006, the head of theDGA, Francois Lureau ruled out ac-quiring the Watchkeeper for theMALE requirement, but suggestedthat it might be satisfactory for afuture tactical UAV requirement.

In late 2006, French officials be-gan another round of discussions withGerman and Spanish officials about ajoint MALE program. The Germansmade it clear that they had no interestin joining the existing French pro-gram, pushing for a MALE UAVcloser to Predator Ain size rather thanthe larger Predator B size preferred bythe original French EuroMALE re-quirement. In addition, the Germanspushed for a greater role in the pro-gram, offering to use their EADSBarrakuda UCAV demonstrator as thecore of the program to save cost and tooffer an alternative jet-powered de-sign. This configuration was origi-nally dubbed AGILE and wasenvisioned as a multi-configurationdesign. Using modular componentsbased around a common fuselage, theAGILE could be configured as a tacti-cal UAV/UCAV more suitable for Eu-ropean requirements than current US

prop designs, while it could also beconfigured with sail-plane type wingsto provide MALE capability. EADSfinally conceded to the German pres-sure and this al ternat ive waspromoted by EADS at the 2007 Parisair show under the name “AdvancedUAV”.

In response, the partners on theNeuron UCAV including Dassault,Alenia and Saab have been discussingan alternative using Neuron technol-ogy as the core for a MALE UAV(even though there is no apparent coretechnology ready at the moment).Alenia has already begun to fly itsown MALE demonstrator and has alarger design on the drawing board.

HALEIn the past, Aérospatiale has also

shown illustrations of a possibleHALE (Haute Altitude longue endur-ance) UAV called the Fregate andSAROHALE. Dassault has shown itsown conceptions of an ultimateHALE as well using an unconven-tional configuration. The French Mil-itary Intelligence Directorate wouldlike to deploy a HALE for strategicreconnaissance by 2012. The pro-curement objective would be five sys-tems, and would be in the class of theGlobal Hawk.

The DGA in late 2006 solicitedFrench industry to embark on the newMirador program (Moyen infrarouge

aeroporte pour la detect ion

d’observation rapide anti-missile:Mid-Infrared Airborne for anti-mis-sile detection/rapid observation). Asthe name implies, this is envisioned asan orbiting, long endurance platformthat could be used for cueinganti-TBM systems as is being pro-posed for the SAMP-T air defensesystem.

ONERA has been promoting stud-ies of a HALE UAV as a high-altitudecommunications relay during crisesor during events such as the Olympicswhere exis t ing satel l i tes areoverwhelmed.

DRAC Mini UAVEADS has been selected to supply

the French army with its firstmass-produced mini-UAV as part ofthe DRAC (Drones de renseignment

au contact: Contact IntelligenceUAV) requirement. On 10 January2005, EADS received a contract forabout 30 million for 160 Trackersystems.

The French army acquired fourAeroVironment FQM-151 Pointermini-UAVs for trials and used themoperationally in 2004 in Haiti. Thesetests helped the French army establisha requirement for a mini-UAV desig-nated as DRAC (Drones de

renseignment au contact: Contact In-telligence UAV). The program is theresponsibility of the ETAS section ofDCE (Direct ion des Centres

d’Expertise et d’Essais). The UAVsystem is designed to be man-portableby a crew of two, with the UAV han-dled via a touch-screen laptop con-nected to a portable ground controlstation with a radio-link to the UAVand a small met station to survey windconditions. The meteorological sta-tion is an interesting innovation and isprompted by the widely recognizedvulnerability of mini-UAVs to wind.The UAV used for the initial trials in2003 was the EADS Tracker. Theplan was to place the DRAC require-ment out to competitive bid, with



EADS DRAC Tracker

hopes to deploy the first systems in2006. In 2005, the DGA selected theEADS Tracker for the requirementand ordered 160 systems. Each sys-tem consists of two air vehicles, twolaptops for image exploitation andone GCS. The Tracker is a small,hand-launched mini-UAV operatedby a two-person team. It uses atwin-boom sail-plane configurationto maximize endurance and is pow-ered by a small electric motor locatedin a pod over the wing. Endurance istwo hours and the sensor is aday/night camera. The air vehicle andcamera are cheap enough that theTracker air vehicle can be consideredexpendable for some high-valuemissions. The first 25 DRAC systemswere scheduled for delivery in 2007.

The French firm Tecknisolar-Senihas received some modest fundingfrom the DGA to examine solar-pow-ered mini-UAVs. These are small,hand-launched mini-UAVs usingboth solar power, and other types ofbattery powered propulsion. Thesmall Coccinel le ( ladybird)mini-UAV has already been tested bythe French army which is consideringthe incorporation of mini- and mi-cro-UAVs into its Felin future infan-try system. The firm alsomanufactures a smaller UAV called

Bourdon (bumblebee) which alsouses electric propulsion, and somewere apparently sold to the UAE.However, the DGAdecided to go for amore conventional approach with theEADS Tracker.

Future French Micro-/Mini-UAVDRAC is intended to serve as a

forerunner to a more extensive familyof micro- and mini-UAVs intendedfor the Felin future infantry system.DGA’s approach to this requirementhas been to fund a large number ofsmall programs. Felin is expected toincorporate mini- and micro-UAVsfor scouting at the company, platoonand perhaps squad level. The baselineUAV was the Odin mini-UAV, but lit-tle detail on this system has been re-leased. It is designed to operate at arange of a few kilometers for about anhour, and is optimized for the urbanenvironment.

The DGA has funded The InstitutPolytechnique in Grenoble teamedwith Novadem to develop the CPX4min-UAV. This helicopter UAV usesfour sets of propellers for better sta-bi l i ty and was displayed atEurosatory 06. The CPX4 weighs lessthan half a kilogram, has an effectiverange of one km, and an endurance of25 minutes on battery power. It has aneffective payload of 90 g which con-sists of a CMOS color daylight cam-era . The micro-UAV alsoincorporates an acoustic sensor toavoid obstructions such as walls.

The DGA has also funded the de-velopment of a larger helicoptermini-UAV called Hovereye whichwas developed by Bertin Technolo-gies. In contrast to the CPX4 which isexpected to be used with the Felin in-fantry suite, the Hovereye is intendedfor mechanized infantry due to itsgreater weight and size. It was on dis-play in the SAGEM area mounted ona VAB infantry vehicle as well as inDGA’s technology innovation dis-play.The core program is sometimescalled Hovereye, the aim being tofield a small hel icopter typemicro-UAV.

The Merlin UAV is a light UAVwith somewhat greater range (sevenkm) and a one hour endurance. It is in-tended for missions in terrain and isoperated via two touch-screenlaptops. The US firm AeroVironmentdemonstrated its RQ-11 Raven to theFrench army at Mourmelon in March2006.

DGA has also participated in amulti-national effort codenamedMAVDEM with Italy, Norway andSpain which will see flight demon-strations in 2007-08 and which is ex-pected to transition to direction of theEuropean Defense Agency in 2006.DGA is also participating with theFrench research agency ONERA in auniversity microdrone program initi-ated in September 2005 to encouragethe development of new approachesto micro-UAVs suitable foroperations in an urban environment.



Hovereye

CPX4

French Naval RequirementsThe French navy’s interest in a

vertical-take-off UAV was consoli-dated by the DGAinto a joint helicop-ter UAV requirement called Devil,and an RFP was released to industryin early June 2005. However, the pro-gram has been continually reorga-nized as the French navy rethinks itsrequirements.

The French navy explored the util-ity of ship-based UAVs by sponsoringa technology demonstration programwith the Canadian CL-227 Sentinel.In the summer of 1995, the DGAawarded a contract to a team ofFreewing Aerial Robotics and MatraDefense to supply a ScorpionTilt-Body for trials (locally known asMarvel). This was conducted with theFrench Defense Ministry’s CERT/ONERA research laboratory.

In the autumn of 2002, the DGArestarted this effort by fundingONERA to study two possible mari-time UAVs for its DMT (Drone Mari-

time Tactique) requirement. One wasexpected to be a small helicopter de-sign converted into a reconnaissanceUAV akin to the US Navy Fire Scoutwhich would be operated fromFrench aircraft carriers and the newBatiment de Projection. The otherwas a small rotary wing UAV for op-

erations from frigates. Recent planscalled for the beginning of advanceddevelopment in 2006 focusing on theparticular needs of seaborne launchand recovery, followed by an initialdeployment in 2012. In late May2005, the DGA released an RFP to in-dustry for a VTOL UAV called“Devil” which could be employed ineither army or navy roles. The aim isto have a deployable system by 2008.The specifications call for a take-offweight of 700 kg, a payload of 150 kg,a speed of 90 km/h and an enduranceof 14 hours. This may be an effort toconsolidate both navy designs as wellas possible army applications into asingle VTOL UAV.

In recent years, Dassault hasteamed with Elbit from Israel, Thalesfrom France and Ameur Aviation inFrance on a hybrid maritime surveil-lance UAV demonstrator based on aDGA contract. The program wasbased on an Ameur Aviation compos-ite airframe light aircraft. The idea isto employ a manned aircraft as thedemonstrator which can be switchedto remote control operation to speeddevelopment of the concept. The na-ture of the airframe means that the de-sign will be used primarily from shorebases or large flat deck ships such asaircraft carriers or amphibious assaultships with aviation decks.

The EADS Orka-1200 is intendedfor the larger maritime UAV require-ment while the smaller Scorpio is in-tended for the small naval UAVrequirement. The Orka-1200 has alsobeen offered to the German navy as areplacement for the GermanSAEMOS program which has col-lapsed after over a decade of funding.The system is based on a manned heli-copter developed by HelicopterGuimbal. The Orka-1200 has a 7.2 mrotor and a maximum take-off weightof 680 kg of which 180 kg is payload.The payload is the usual modular typeand can include E-O/IR, ESM/ECM,SAR or others. The landing system isautomatic, but there is no evidencethat EADS has actually demonstratedthis feature at sea yet. The usual con-figuration would be to deploy twoOrka-1200s per ship, and they can bestowed in a 6.6x8.5 ship hanger. TheOrka-1200 has a 195 kph maximumspeed, eight hour endurance and a185 data- l ink range whentransmitting real-time imagery.

The Scorpio is the smaller memberof the EADS helicopter pair. Thereare two configurations available, thesmaller Scorpio-6 and larger Scor-pio-30. Both share common sensorand flight control packages but theScorpio-6 is limited to a six kg pay-load while the Scorpio-30 can carry apackage up to 15 kg. Both types arebased on large remote control modelhelicopters with Scorpio-6 having a1.7m blade and Scorpio-30 having atwo meter blade. Take off weight is 13kg and 38 kg respectively. Both oper-ate at altitudes of about 2000m, andhave an effective operating range of10 km which is limited mainly by theradio data link. Flight control is au-tonomous and relies on both an iner-t ia l and GPS platform. Theirendurance is rated at one hour for theScorpio-6 and two hours for the Scor-pio-30. Besides being offered for theFrench navy requirement, EADS istrying to interest a broader range ofcustomers in the Scorpio systems, in-cluding both military and paramili-tary/police forces. The Scorpio isintended as an “entry-level” UAV



Orka-1200

with useful features but a lowpurchase and operating cost.

In June 2005, Eurocopter teamedwith Guimbal to form a new VTOLUAV business called Vertivision. BellHelicopter has teamed with SAGEMin France and Rheinmetall in Ger-many to market the Eagle Eye tilt-ro-tor in Europe for naval requirements.In November 2006, SAGEM wasawarded a contract to demonstrate theEagle Eye as a potential solution forjoint army/navy VTOL UAV require-ments. In December 2006, DGA re-leased an RFP to evaluate thesuitability of VTOL UAVs to meet thejoint army/navy requirements.

Early French UCAV EffortsFrance initially participated with

the US in examining flight controlsystems for UCAVs in the late 1990s.

Before the turn of the century,France began to study UCAV require-ments, and Dassault built and flew asub-scale demonstrator, the Petit Duc(Little Horned Owl) AVE (aeronef de

validation experimental: experimen-tal demonstration air-vehicle) startingin July 2000. At Paris 2003, models ofboth the Petit Duc and Petit Duc Cdemonstrators were displayed. TheEuropean aerospace consortiumEADS undertook preliminary studiesof a UCAV called the URAV whichcould be used for either reconnais-sance or tactical strike. In April 2002,Dassault and SAGEM announcedplans to team on UAV ventures in-cluding a UCAV dubbed the “MoyenDuc” (Medium Horned Owl) basedon the earlier “Petit Duc” demonstra-tor. The long term plan is to build a

full scale demonstrator, or “GrandDuc”. During the 2003 Paris 2003 AirShow, the French defense ministerMichele Alliot-Marie pledged tocommit €300 million to a UCAV pro-gram and invited the other majorEuropean countries to join theprogram, with Dassault in the lead.

France has been the principalplayer in the Neuron program, and isexpected to maintain a majority of thework even if additional Europeanfirms join. Sweden was the first majorpartner in the Neuron program, com-mitting about €75 million comparedto France’s €300 million pledge. Italypledged about €40-70 million, andGreece committed to about €20million.

The Swedish decision in favor ofsupporting the Neuron program inJanuary 2006 paved the way for theinitial development funding for Neu-

ron with DGA awarding Dassault a$486 million contract on 9 February2006 to build and test the demonstra-tor. Six countries are participating onthe program: France, Sweden, Italy,Spain, Switzerland, and Greece.DGA will act as the govern-ment-to-government managementagency on the program whileDassault will lead the industrial team.The work-share includes Alenia’swork on the avionics, EADS CASAon the wing, data link and ground sta-tion, Hellenic Aerospace the rear fu-selage and integration rig, Ruag thewind tunnel testing and weaponslauncher, and Thales the data relayand command-control interface. Bel-gium is still debating participationwith possible involvement in thesatellite up-link feature.

Teal Group Analysis

Although France would like to seeitself as a driving force in Europeanaerospace technology, the collapse ofits UAV programs over the past fiveyears has deflated these pretensionsin one of the most dynamic areas ofdevelopment. The collapse of theBrevel program with Germany in the1990s has soured the most obviousroute of co-operative ventures, and incombination with the turmoil at

Airbus, has made the Germans in-tensely skeptical about “European”UAV ventures that leave French com-panies with a disproportionate shareof the pie. Germany opted out of Neu-ron, rejected EuroMALE, has gone itsown way on mini-UAVs, and is buy-ing American for its HALE require-ments. France’s ambitious $1.5billion UAV program in the original2003-2008 budget plan has collapsed.

All that resulted from the plan was asingle Eagle one demonstrator, fourSperwer systems, and a few dozenDRAC mini-UAVs, a very emaciatedshadow of the original scheme.France has tried to position itself asthe European leader in UAV technol-ogy, but instead has fallen behindmost of its neighbors such as the UKand Germany which have active pro-grams well underway. While France



Neuron

debates and talks about UAVs, othercountries have actually been buildingthem.

A comprehensive French UAV ef-fort will have to await the next2009-14 budget plan. In themini-UAV area, France already hasDRAC underway, but may acquiremore mini-UAVs and even mi-cro-UAVS to complement the Felinprogram late in the forecast period.France’s tactical UAV fleet is punywith only a single army artillery ob-servation regiment. There is still noconsensus about future needs, withsome talk now of consolidating thearmy and navy requirements in a

common air vehicle such as a Frenchversion of Eagle Eye. SAGEM wouldlike to convince the government toabstain from grandiose schemes andsimply buy more Sperwer UAVs tosatisfy its needs. What may emerge isa mixed configuration, with someSperwer-B’s being acquired to re-place the Sperwer-A, and some fasterand more capable system being ac-quired to replace the CL-289 Piver,perhaps from the EADS “AdvancedUAV” design or an Eagle Eye VTOLUAV.

France may acquire a handful ofEagle SIDM UAVs to provide an im-mediate MALE capability until the

EuroMALE follow-on program is re-solved. HALE UAVs at the momentseem destined to remain in the limboof technology demonstration.

France has also been very slow inaddressing civil applications forUAVs aside from some minor demon-strations related to forest fire observa-tion. It is likely that France will followthe general pattern of using govern-mental requirements to help pave theway for civil use of UAVs, and theseare likely to be endurance UAVs usedfor f ire patrol and bordersurveillance.

France 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 140 150 150 — — — 150 300 300 — 1,230SDTT — — — 5 15 20 20 10 — — 70MALE UAV 1 1 — — — 1 1 1 1 1 8Naval VTUAV — — — — 3 6 6 6 6 6 33Civil UAV — — 1 — — — — 2 2 2 7UCAV — — — — 1 — — 2 — 1 4

Germany

Germany has a number of pro-grams underway to acquire UAVsranging from mini-UAVs throughtactical UAVs.

The Eurodrone Brevel was a coop-erative Franco-German effort to fielda tactical UAV for divisional surveil-lance and artillery spotting require-ments . Following the Frenchwithdrawal from the program, Ger-many has decided to proceed with ac-quisition of the Tucan variant. InAugust 1998, the Bundeswehr placeda DM500 million ($280 million) or-der with STN Atlas for six Tucan sys-tems. The first system was deliveredin 2005.

Germany has also acquiredsmaller mini-UAVs from EMT inPenzburg such as the Luna andAladin and has a standing require-ment for mini-UAVs. At the high endof the UAV scale, German is consid-ering the adoption of the GlobalHawk under the name Euro Hawk asan endurance UAV system.EADS-Germany has begun flighttests of the Barrakuda UCAV demon-

strator and this air vehicle is also be-ing proposed as the core of a joint Eu-ropean MALE UAV. Germany alsohas a requirement for a naval UAVsystem in the wake of the failure of itsown SEAMOS program.

CL-289 PiverGermany was the co-developer of

the CL-289 drone along with Canadaand later, France. Under the originalproduction MoU Germany was tohave received one battery set in eachof 1988 and 1989, followed by two in1990, three in 1991 and the final fourin 1992. The first system was turnedover to the German army on 29 No-vember 1990 and production for theGerman army was completed in June1993. Germany procured 188 air ve-hicles and eleven ground station sets.During the peacekeeping operationsover Kosovo in April 1999 the Ger-man army had 21 UAVs in operationand flew 237 missions from Decem-ber 1998 to July 1999. Total losses inthe fighting included five GermanCL-289s. Dornier has proposed to de-

velop an extended range version ofthe CL-289, called KWS-289, whichwould carry additional fuel. Thiswould enable the drone to cover1,500 square miles of territory vs. the300 square kilometers possible withthe current version. A proposal wasmade to the German BWB in early2001, but to date it does not appear tohave been approved.

KZO Tucan Tactical UAVDue to the delays in fielding the

Brevel tactical UAV system, in thesummer of 1996, Germany acquired asingle unit of six Phantom UAVs at acost of $1 million from Meggitt Tar-get Systems for use as a low-cost, in-terim brigade intelligence system.

As mentioned above on the Euro-pean Union section, Germany was aparticipant with France in the devel-opment of the Brevel tactical UAV.Following the French decision in1997 to pull out of the productionphase of the program, Germany de-cided to proceed with acquisition ofthe Brevel, under its original German



designat ion of Tucan KZO(Kleinflugger-zur- Zielortung). InAugust 1998, the Bundeswehr placeda DM500 million ($280 million) or-der with STN Atlas. The original planwas to acquire eight systems consist-ing of 16 GCS and 80 air vehicles.However, by the time that theBundestag approved the procurementproject in December 2001, the objec-tive had been trimmed to six Tucansystems. Each system includes twoground control stations (GCS) and 10air vehicles for a program total of 12GCS and 60 UAV. The first systemwas handed over to the army in De-cember 2005. In 2006, the first systemwas prepared for deployment withGerman peacekeeping forces inAfghanistan.

Taifun/Tares Attack UAVThe German armed forces have

been studying the possible use of theBrevel system as the basis for theTaifun anti-radar drone for air de-fense suppression, and also theMucke for jamming battlefield com-munications. Other potential applica-tions include minefield detection andsurveillance, real-time data link relaymissions for extended range mis-sions, real time long range naval tar-get locat ion, and civi l ianenvironmental research. Due to thecut-backs in the 1997 defense budget,

defense minister Volker Ruhe ordereda postponement in the decision on thedevelopment of the army Taifun UAV.The original Taifun requirementcalled for 20 launcher systems and3,000 air vehicles with a developmentcost in 1997-2004 of DM452 million($280 million) and a procurementphase in 2005-2011 of DM940 mil-lion ($535 million). In 1997, the Fed-eral Audit Office reported to theGerman parliament that the Taifun’soperational requirement was open toquestion and that its long range raisedconflicts between army and air force

targeting. It recommended a recon-sideration of the program in light ofcurrent German out-of-area require-ments. STN Atlas has also been work-ing on an electronic support measuresder ivat ive of Tucan cal ledFledermaus (Bat). In early 2003, itwas reported that the defense ministryprocurement agency recommendedthe termination of the Tucan programdue to lingering technical shortcom-ings and escalating costs. Programcost estimates had grown from theoriginal 372 million to about 1.2 bil-lion. More recent plans have been toconduct demonstrations through2006 and user trials in 2007. Ifaccepted for service in 2008,production could begin in 2009.

In May 2004, Rheinmetall’s De-fense Electronic division acknowl-edged that it was looking at a smallUCAV based on a tactical UAV toserve in the anti-radar role. TheUCAV would not be lost after engag-ing the radar, but would attack it withsome form of undisclosed munition.Although Rheinmetall described theconcept as a “follow-on” to Taifun, itmay in fact be an alternative to thistroubled and long-delayed program.In 2005, Rheinmetall unveiled itsTARES which is a reconfiguredTaifun. In place of a dedicated anti-ra-dar mission, TARES is fitted with an



Tucan

Taifun

optical sensor and a data-link whichwould allow an operator to direct theTARES to attack a wider range of tar-gets. In this respect, it is more of apersistent loitering missile than aUCAV.

Micro-UAVThe German BWB development

agency has been supporting an aca-demic and industry effort to examinethe feasibility of micro-UAVs. TheInsitut fur Luft- und Raumfahrt-systeme of the Technische UniversitatBraunschweig has been developingseveral micro-UAVs including the390 gram Carolo and a scaled-up ver-sion called Carolo XL. Carolo is be-ing commercial ly offered byRheinmetall in its P50 variant.Braunscheweig has also been work-ing on a helicopter mini-UAV withthe capability to automatically followa target such as a moving vehicle.

On the industry side, EADS-Dornier has been working on theirDO-MAV weighing less than 500grams and a 500 gram helicopter mi-cro-UAV called MAV VTOL-Solu-tion.

Special Forces VTUAVThe Bundeswehr has a standing

requirement for a close-rangeVTUAV capable of operating indoorswhich is believed to be focused on amicro- or mini-UAV. This is intendedmainly for special forces uses. Thesecould involve some of the designsmentioned above. To start the ballrolling, the Bundeswehr began flighttrials of five contenders for this re-quirement in June 2006. EMT hasbeen working on a small VTUAVcalled Fancopter for this requirement.The Fancopter has an operating rangeof 500 meters and an endurance of 15minutes. Diehl/BGT is offering itsSensoCopter which is a small heli-copter UAV with four blades aroundthe per iphery based on theMicrodrones GmbH MD4-200.MBDA is offering a tail-sitter. SIMSecurity & Electronics is offering theAir Robot/Skyeye. Rheinmetall alsooffered the Kolibri 60.

Luna Mini-UAVThe German army initiated its

LUNA (Luftgestutze Unbemannte

Nahaufklarungs-ausstattung) re-quirement in 1995 for a mini-UAV foruse with forward ground troops withan effective operating radius of about10 km. Eight manufacturers were in-vited to participate in the bidding withproposals due in April 1997. The re-quirement included various procure-ment options from 50 to 300 systems.The design from EMT in Penzburgwas selected for trials deployment. InAugust 1996, the BWB acquired twoEMT X-2000 Luna systems on an ex-perimental basis, which are amini-UAV deployed at brigade levelor lower. These were first deployed inKosovo in March 2000 and con-ducted 174 sorties as part of theKFOR operation. In June 2002, threesystems including six GCS and 28 airvehicles conducted a further 139 sor-ties in support of the multilateral bri-gade in Macedonia. A basic systemconsists of a GCS, launch catapult,four air vehicles and associated sup-port equipment and can fit in a C-130.The German army plans to deploy 13Luna scout units, each with fourground control systems and twelve airvehicles.

Aladin Mini-UAVThe first Aladin mini-UAV system

was delivered to the Bundeswehr inApril 2003. In contrast to the Lunawhich serves with artillery reconnais-sance battalions, the Aladin is in-tended for use with armored andmechanized reconnaissance units.The Aladin is smaller than the Luna,also manufactured by EMT and wasoriginally developed to be compatiblewith the Fennek scout vehicle nowbeing acquired by the German andDutch armies.

The initial contract is for six sys-tems each consisting of a GCS and airvehicle, and intended for deploymentwith the International Security Assis-tance Force in Afghanistan. The Ger-man army is currently committed toacquiring 202 Fennek. The Dutcharmy is acquiring over 400 Fennek, so

there could be an export market aswell. The acquisition objective forAladin is currently pegged at 115 sys-tems starting in early 2005, with aportion of the order compromising anupgraded Aladin based on lessonsfrom their employment in Afghani-stan. A contract for 115 Aladins wasawarded to EMT in April 2005 at acost of Euro 25 million ($32 million).

EMT is also offer ing theBundeswehr a micro-UAV called Mi-kado with a weight of only half a kilo-gram. EMT displayed two new UAVsat Eurosatory 04. The X-13 UAV is anattempt to enlarge the EMT UAVsinto the close-range UAV/tacticalUAV arena. The take-off weight ofthe X-13 is 130 kg, considerably morethan the previous EMT UAVs, andwith an extended endurance of sixhours and operating range of 200km.The system is designed primarily toaddress a German navy requirementdue to the failure of the earlierSEAMOS helicopter UAV. Fancopteris a different approach to themini-UAV requirement, and as thename implies is a small, verticaltake-off design using an electric mo-tor. The take-off weight is under onekg, and it has an effective range ofonly 500 m and an endurance of 15minutes. It is being considered as aninfantry small-unit scout due to itsvery limited capabilities. The Germanarmy currently has a requirement for aclose-range vertical take-off UAV ca-pable of being operated indoors. Thisis intended for special forces units,and Fancopter is aimed at thisrequirement.

German MALE RequirementThe BWB development agency

concluded a study in 2004 over its re-quirements for an endurance UAV.The plan notes the requirement for asystem with 24 hour endurance and tooperate without restrictions innon-segregated airspace. The BWBwants a mixed sensor array includingE-O, IR and SAR with data fusion atthe ground control station. The sensorarray needs to be detailed enough toacquire and track small targets such as



a hostile infantry platoon, and be ableto track such targets through a forestcanopy. BWB wants a modular pay-load option with plug and play whichwould permit support of other mis-sions such as electronic warfare, NBCrecon, and other alternatives. BWBhas noted that the requirement fol-lows current NATO Staff Require-ment approaches. General Atomicshas teamed with Diehl BGT Defenseand Rheinmetall Electronics to offerthe Predator to satisfy various Ger-man requirements. In the autumn of2006, Germany began to discuss a co-operative venture with France,though substantially different thanthe original EuroMALE scheme.Germany would like to exploit thetechnology developed for theBarrakuda effort, and use the coresystems as the basis for a MALE UAVwith longer wings for enduranceflight. This effort was originallycalled Agile UAV, but in 2007 was re-named as Advanced UAV. The con-cept is to develop a modular UAVwith a fuselage core to which wouldbe added either sailplane wings for anendurance UAV for shorter wings fora tactical UAV/UCAV. The enduranceUAV would have a different nosewith a satellite uplink antenna. Thesystem would also be supported withmodular payloads. The concept waspublicly displayed by EADS at theJune 2007 Paris air show. Acompeting team from the NeuronUCAV consort ium including

Dassault, Alenia and Saab areexpected to offer a competitor.

The dual configuration also ad-dresses a German perception of theUAV field that differs from the cur-rent US concepts, a distinction be-tween reconnaissance andsurveillance. The Germans see a needfor a loitering system such as Predatorfor persistent surveillance. However,they also see the need for a fast,near-supersonic, penetrating UAV formore demanding air defense environ-ments to carry out deep reconnais-sance missions in a timely fashion.This is based in part on past experi-ence with the CL-289 which is used inthis reconnaissance, vs. surveillancefashion.

EuroHawkGermany has a requirement for an

endurance UAV for strategic recon-naissance and maritime patrol and hasexamined the RQ-4AGlobal Hawk asa possible candidate for this require-ment. The EuroHawk is envisioned asa maritime surveillance version of theGlobal Hawk which substitutes anELINT package for the current elec-tro-optical sensor package. In 2005,EADS and Northrop Grumman werefinalizing their arrangements forwork-shares on this and relatedEuropean MALE/HALE UAVefforts.

Plans to conduct trials of a GlobalHawk fitted with an EADS sensorpackage were delayed due to the com-

mitment of the aircraft to combat op-erations in 2003. Instead, the sensorwas test fit to Global Hawks at Ed-wards AFB. A Global Hawk and wasfinally deployed to Germany on 15October 2003 for a series of six testflights from Nordholz naval air basenear Cuxhaven in Germany. Al-though the original plans were to testa synthetic aperture radar, the pro-gram shifted to the trials of an ELINTsensor instead due to shifts in Germanrequirements. The Luftwaffe consid-ered other platforms for this missionas well including the Predator andAirbus A320 but rejected them. Thetrials concluded after about 30 hoursof flight time. The short term objec-tive is to acquire four-six GlobalHawks to replace four AtlanticELINT aircraf t , though theEuroHawk could also be used for abroader range of surveillance require-ments. The German partner forNorthrop-Grumman is EADS-Dornier. The German BWB releaseda restricted RFP to EADS/NorthropGrumman in September 2004 to bidfor five EuroHawk HALE systemsand the combined response was deliv-ered in late March 2005. The programplans were for the delivery of the firstEuroHawk in 2007, and the second in2008-09 but these have changed. Theprogram value is expected to be atleast Euro 350 million ($450 million)for the first five systems. However,funding shortfalls have delayed thiseffort. An MoU was finally signed inMay 2006, the first step towards arisk-reduction contract. The plan nowis to deliver a single system by 2010to provide interim capability toconduct SIGINT operations in placeof the old Breguet Atlantiques now inservice.

Germany is also considering a fol-low-on buy of up to six moreEuroHawks which would be fittedwith a synthetic aperture radar for im-aging intelligence missions. Thiswould take place after the ELINTversion.

EADS has also offered a proposalto the Bundesmarine to equip theEuroHawk with a new phased-array



Sensocopter

surveillance radar to satisfy the mari-time patrol aircraft requirement. TheGerman Navy recently announcedplans to retire its fleet of Atlantic mar-itime patrol aircraft, and as an interimsolution to purchase surplus DutchP-3C Orion aircraft. A navalizedEuroHawk would presumably re-place these if accepted, since the radarhas not yet been developed.

SEAMOS Naval UAVDornier, now part of EADS, has

been working on VTOL UAVs sincethe 1960s. In 1986, the firm began towork on a derivative of the GyrodyneQH-50D as a tes t bed for aBundeswehr requirement under theGEAMOS (Gefechtsfeld Aufklar-

ungsmittel und Ortungssystem) pro-gram. After demonstration flights,Dornier was awarded a developmentcontract in 1992 to design a naval de-rivative for use from frigates for re-connaissance, renamed SEAMOS.The phase one development contractfollowed in December 1995. Ship-board trials began in 2002, and theprogram was monitored by otherNATO navies including France, Italy,Britain and the US. However, prob-lems with the SEAMOS led to its can-cellation in 2003. The Bundesmarinehas subsequently begun to look at theEADS ORCA-1200 naval helicopterUAV, and has also examined the USRQ-8 Fire Scout. Bell Helicopter hasteamed with SAGEM in France andRheinmetall in Germany to marketthe Eagle Eye tilt-rotor in Europe fornaval requirements.

The requirement is to begin de-ploying the SEAMOS on a scale of

two UAVs per each K-130 corvettebeginning in 2006-2008; this sched-ule has slipped. To date, there are fiveK-130 planned, though original re-quirements called for 15.

BarrakudaEADS-Germany has been funded

by the German BWB to develop alow-observables UCAV named theBarrakuda. A series of a high-speedtaxi trials were conducted near theplant’s Machning site in early 2006,and there have been reports that bothSpain and Switzerland have been in-volved in the program. The aircraft ispowered by a Pratt & Whitney Can-ada JT15D-5C turbo-fan and atwin-engine version is also being con-sidered. The German government hasnot formally described the program,though it is widely reported that thefirst flight was scheduled for 2005 butdelayed until May 2006 and that oper-ational research is expected to beginby 2008. It is suggested that the pri-

mary role for the Barrakuda is to serveas a replacement for Germany’s Tor-nado reconnaissance aircraft. Ger-man officials have stated that they seeseveral possible contenders for thisrequirement, including Barrakuda,Predator B, Eagle Eye, andEuroMALE. The Barrakuda proto-type was lost during landing at SanJavier AFB in Spain on 23 September2006 during flight trials.

Germany has been promotingBarrakuda as an alternative to theFrench Neuron effort. In addition,EADS-Germany has been pushing touse the core technology developed forBarrakuda as an alternative to theEuroMALE configuration proposedby EADS-France for a joint MALEUAV. EADS has indicated that a sec-ond prototype will be built but proba-bly not in the Barrakuda UCAVconfiguration but rather as a fastreconnaissance system.

Teal Group Analysis

Germany has been stepping up itsUAV efforts over the past severalyears as UAVs have proved to be ex-tremely useful in recent peacekeepingoperations. The Tucan KZO is one ofthe larger efforts at the moment, yetone of the less relevant since it is pri-marily oriented towards an artilleryfire support role which has little con-nection to recent peacekeeping mis-sions. Germany at the moment is

considering a reorganization of itsUAV assets to make them more usefulfor immediate requirements, and thiscould result in a re-tasking of theTucan KZO system to a general ISRrole.

Germany has been in the forefrontin the use of mini-UAVs in Europe,primarily the EMT mini-UAVs. Hav-ing already demonstrated the value ofthe Luna system in Kosovo, the

Bundeswehr is now planning toacquire the smaller Aladin for assign-ment to the Fennek mechanized scoutunits. This could have some spin-offinto the export market. The Germanspecial forces are also likely to ac-quire some mini-UAVs.

Germany’s remaining large re-quirements are for both MALE andHALE endurance systems and for amaritime UAV for operation from its



AGILE

new K-130 corvettes. A strategic en-durance UAV seems like a likely ac-quisition and one of the main issues iswhat roles will finally emerge. At themoment, it would appear thatEuroHawk will be acquired initiallyfor the strategic ELINT role, but alater maritime patrol version is a realpossibility, particularly once the USNavy settles down on its BAMS re-quirement. Most likely, the ELINTversion will be acquired within thetime frame of this forecast, while themaritime patrol UAV would be mostlikely late in this forecast period.

Germany has a standing require-ment for a MALE UAV but has beenreluctant to join a French-dominatedEuroMALE consortium. In the sum-mer of 2006, Germany proposed us-ing the core technologies of itsBarrakuda demonstrator as the basisfor a European MALE UAV program,and in November 2006, EADS sug-gested that this was being finalized

but no agreement has been reached todate beyond a modest risk-reductioncontract which is simply another wayto buy time until a consensus can bereached. It is possible that Germanywill acquire a modest number of Pred-ators to provide immediate capability,followed by a domestic programbased on the AGILE UAV programlater in the forecast period.

The Bundesmarine is fairly inter-ested in a naval UAV, but its approachto this requirement is not yet clear. Itcould opt to join a European venturewith the French, opt for a US systemsuch as Eagle Eye or Fire Scout, orbegin a national effort as a method toreinforce its flagging defense aero-space sector. Lack of a clear approachsuggests that this procurement effortwill slide to late in the forecast period.

The prospects for the BarrakudaUCAV demonstrator are poor. Ger-many has been trying to tempt otherEuropean countries away from part-

nership with the French on Neuron,but aside from Spain and Switzerland,the other major aerospace players ap-pear to be going their own way. It ispossible that over the next few years,a consensus will be reached to mergethe demonstration programs prior tocommitment to a dedicated engineer-ing development effort. In the mean-time, Germany seems committed tousing the Barrakuda technology tosatisfy its immediate MALE require-ment as well as a fast jet-powered tac-tical reconnaissance UAV as well toreplace the aged CL-289.

Germany so far has shown very lit-tle interest in civil UAVs. Typical fed-eral requirements such asfire-fighting and border patrol do nothave much resonance. It is possiblethat Germany might participate insome European civil UAV programfor EU border security, but the do-mestic requirement at the momentseems very restrained.

Germany 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

EMTGermany (Luna) 30 — — — — — — — — — 30Germany (Aladin) 110 110 — — — — — — — — 220Northrop GrummanGermany (EuroHawk) — — 1 — 1 1 1 1 — — 5Undetermined Mfg.Germany (MALE UAV) — — 1 2 2 — — — — 2 7Germany (Recon UAV) — — — — — — 1 1 2 2 6Germany (Naval UAV) — — — 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 15Germany (Mini/Micro UAV) — 5 40 50 50 50 50 — — — 245

Greece

The Greek firm HAI has adver-tised a small mini-UAV called Pega-sus. This program was sponsored bythe chief of the Greek Air Force.About 10 were built in 1990 for eval-uation by the Greek Army. The Greekfirm EADS-Sigma developed aclose-range UAV called Nearchos inthe mid-1990s. The Nearchos pro-gram was subsequently supported bya number of government initiativeswith the Technical University ofCrete and the National Technical Uni-versity of Athens with funding from

the General Secretariat of Researchunder the Ministry of Development.The air vehicle has been used as atest-bed for a collision avoidance sys-tem and also a remote fire detectionsystem.

In December 1995, the Greekarmy released a tender for four UAVsystems with an operational radius of100 km. The tender was reissued inSeptember 1997 with clarifications.In August 2001, the Greek press re-ported that the air force would pro-ceed with the manufacture of a

squadron of the Pegasus UAVs.While this may have pleased theGreek air force development agen-cies, the air force wanted a more ro-bust and capable system. Theyselected the SAGEM Sperwer in2002, ordering a total of three sys-tems. One system was delivered at theend of 2004 and became operationalin 2005. A second system was deliv-ered in early 2006. In the summer of2006, Greece ordered a further twosystems.



Teal Group Analysis

The Greek armed forces have notbeen a technology innovator, and theselection of the Sperwer in 2002probably represents the only tacticalUAV system that the Greek air forcewill acquire in this forecast period.

Greece is likely to participate in jointEuropean UAV efforts such as Neu-ron, and a small purchase of amini-UAV system and a naval UAVsystem late in the forecast period ispossible.

The large scale destruction of thewildfires that plagued Greece in thesummer of 2007 may encourage amore active program to examine acivil UAV program for fire monitor-ing.

Greece 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini UAV — — — — 10 10 30 30 — — 80Tactical UAV 5 — — — — — — — — — 5Naval UAV — — — — — 1 3 2 2 — 8

Hungary

Hungary has shown little interestin UAV development to date. Re-cently, the Hungarian Ministry of De-fense’s Electronics, Logistics andAdministration office has helped tofund a private venture UAV effort runby the Italian firm International Avia-

tion Supply based in Brindisi. Thismay indicate interest in tactical UAVdevelopment.

Sofar Mini-UAVIn December 2005, the Hungarian

government decided to acquire two

Sofar mini-UAV systems from WBElectronics in Poland at a cost of800,000. Each system includes threeair vehicles. The Sofar is a derivativeof the Israeli Top-I-Vision Casper 250with a Polish ground control system.

Teal Group Analysis

Hungary has not been very activein this field, but most of the formerWarsaw Pact states in the central Eu-ropean region have embarked on tac-tical UAV programs over the past few

years. Hungary’s limited procure-ment budget has probably been a ma-jor obstacle, but a tactical UAVsystem could play a role in monitor-

ing the border area with the formerYugoslavia.

Hungary 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 6 — — — — — — — — 6 12Tactical UAV — — — — — — — — 4 4 8

Italy

The Italian Army has a standingrequirement for UAVs as part of itsCATRIN corps level communicationand information system. Meteor SpAhas developed two systems for this re-quirement, the Mirach 26 close rangeUAV and the Meteor 150 mediumrange UAV. These are based on theearlier Mirach 20 and Mirach 100 thathad been ordered by the Italian armedservices in the 1980s. The ItalianArmy has ordered one system of eachfor evaluation, with additional pro-curement delayed for several years.The Kosovo air campaign finally con-vinced the Italian armed forces of theneed for such systems, and eight sys-tems each of the Mirach 26 andMirach 150 were ordered in January

2000 with deliveries concluding in2002. In addition, Italy has acquiredfour RQ-1 Predators for the air force.

Italy is currently experimentingwith the Sky-X UCAV concept air ve-hicle for future requirements. Aleniais developing a number of new UAVdesigns running the gamut from tacti-cal UAVs such as Falco throughHALE UAVs such as Molynx.

Past UAV EffortsMeteor SpA has been developing

UAVs since the early 1980s in two ba-sic configurations, a pusher-propellershort-range system, and a turbojetmedium range system. The Mirach 20short range system was produced inlimited numbers (about 40) beginning

in 1987-88 for the Italian army underthe codename Condor, and for theItalian navy as the Pelican. Othervariants with autopilot enhancementsto permit preprogrammed flight in-cluded the Raven reconnaissanceUAV and Parrot data relay UAV. Ver-sions of the Mirach 20 were producedin Argentina as the MQ-4 Agiluchoby Quimar, and in the US by PacificAerosystems as the Heron 26. Quimarwas formerly privately owned, but in1988, was acquired by the Argentin-ean ministry of defense. The Mirach20 became operational with theItalian Army in 1988.

The medium range drone systemwas designated as Mirach 100. Thiswas built primarily as a target drone,



with about 75% of the 600 manufac-tured serving in this role. About 150had been produced up to 1987, in-cluding export to both Libya and Iraq.The Mirach 100 has been license pro-duced in Argentina since 1985 as theMQ-2-2 Bigua by Quimar. The sur-veillance version is usually fitted witha BAE MIRLA IR linescanner. TheArgentinean version was launchedfrom a Pucara tactical strike aircraft in1988 under a program called South-ern Hawk. An extended range versionof the Mirach 100 developed in con-junction with Pacific Aerosystemswas submitted for the US JPO’sUAV-MR program but was notselected.

CATRIN RequirementIn the late 1980s, the Italian army

began development of its CATRINcorps communications and informa-tion system. This system was devel-oped by Alenia, the parent companyof Meteor SpA, and included a re-quirement for a target surveillanceand acquisition system, dubbedSORAO. The main element of theSORAO requirement was a family ofUAVs. Not surprisingly, Alenia se-lected the Mirach 20 and Mirach 100for fur ther development ,redesignated Mirach 26 and Mirach150 respectively. The navigation sys-tems of both were substantially up-graded to include a GPS navigationfeature, and sensor improvements,command upgrades and othermodifications took place.

The Italian army ordered oneMirach 26 system and one Mirach150 system for further evaluation fortheir SORAO requirement. In 1995,Alenia announced that it had receiveda “launch order” for the Mirach 26,but no details have been released onthe scope of this order.

Mirach 26 is currently being of-fered to several potential customers.It has been offered to Netherlands forits requirement in competition withCrécerelle and several other drones;in 1995 it los t to the FrenchCrécerelle. It has also been demon-

strated to Finland, Australia andAustria.

The Kosovo air campaign finallyconvinced the Italian armed forces ofthe need for such systems, and eightsystems each of the Mirach 26 andMirach 150 were ordered in January2000 with deliveries to conclude in2002.

Predator MALE UAV Acquisi-tion

As a result of the Kosovo cam-paign, in May 2000, the Italian airforce announced plans to acquire sixPredator systems as a result of “les-sons learned” during the Kosovo aircampaign. The contract included fourUAVs with payload and two withoutwith delivery beginning in late 2001and ending in 2002 and Meteor willserve as the Italian prime contractor;only five were delivered. One of theair vehicles was lost during training,reducing the force to four. Opera-tional capability was reached in De-cember 2004. Four Predators areoperated by the 32 Stormo, 28Gruppo Velivoli Teleguidata “LeStreghe” which deployed from itshome base, Amendola AFB nearFoggia, to Tallil AFB near AnNasiriyah in Iraq in January 2005.The UAV group reached 1,000 flighthours by early 2006.

In August 2004, Italy announcedplans to acquire another five Preda-tors, but to date this has been limitedto two, one attrition spare and onemore to fill out the original order forsix. Predator assembly in Italy is un-dertaken by Galileo Avionica, a unitof Finmeccanica. In June 2004, theItalian parliament passed legislationto open up Italian airspace to the Pred-ator UAV for operations. Plans to ac-quire two more Predators in 2005floundered due to budget problems,with the plans now shifted to the 2007budget.

CIRA ProgramIn the summer of 2001, Italy’s

CIRA aerospace research facility an-nounced plans to invest about $65million in a seven year program to de-velop UAVs for military and civil ap-plications. The first project, dubbedCirrus will develop a tactical UAVwith an operating radius of 200 kmand 10 hours endurance. A long termeffort, dubbed CR/X3 will be an en-durance design capable of flying forfour days with a 250 kg sensor pack-age. It is expected to fly in 2008.

New UAVsWith the Canadair CL-289 ending

its useful life, Italian and French firmshave been teaming to offer replace-



Sky-X UCAV

ments. Meteor (now Alenia) showedanother version of Mirach 100 de-rived UAV at Eurosatory 2002, theNibbio (Kite). This is intended as ahigh-speed UAV which does not pro-vide real-time intelligence, but is re-covered and then its sensor package isprocessed. EADS showed the Cara-pace UAV at Paris 2003 for the firsttime, which is another reconnaissancederivative of the Meteor Mirach 100target drone offered to replace theCL-289 but with real-time data linkcapability.

Falco Tactical UAVMeteor (now Alenia) displayed its

new Falco UAV for the first time atEurosatory 2002. This is as a tacticalUAV to bridge the capabilities gap be-tween the Predator and smallerUAVs. The Falco first flew in Decem-ber 2003. The Italian army has a re-quirement for a tactical UAV foroperation at brigade level to replacethe Mirach 26 system, and Falco isaimed mainly at this requirement.

In 2007, Alenia announced that thefirst production would take place of16 Falco for an undisclosed customer,widely reported to be Pakistan.

Endurance UAVsIn October 2006, Alenia released

illustrations of its new HALE UAVcalled Molynx designed for a range of3,700 km, an endurance of 25-30hours and a 800 kg payload. In 2007at the Paris air show, Alenia displayedits Sky-Y MALE UAV for the firsttime. The first test flight of the Sky-Ytook place on 20 June 2007. Repre-sentatives indicated that Sky-Y is in-tended to act as a precursor to fullHALE capability as a demonstrator,with the Molynx starting to fly in2009 ready for production by2010-2011. Both Sky-Y and Molynxare intended primarily for civil appli-cations. The development program isexpected to cost about $500-600 mil-lion. Alenia has been discussing thepossibility of teaming with Dassaultand Saab to offer a counter-proposalto the EADS team bidding on theEuroMALE follow-on program.

Alenia is also examining militaryspin-offs of the Sky-Y and Molynxunder the codename Black Lynxwhich would be oriented towards thehunter-killer mission.

Italian Sky-X UCAVThe most impressive of the new

Italian UAV ventures debuting atParis 2003 was a large jet-poweredUCAV demonstrator, the Alenia ITV(Integrated Technology Vehicle). Nosensor package was displayed on thedesign, though it was noted that itcould carry a 300 kg modular pay-load. In 2004, Alenia renamed theITV as Sky-X. Under new programplans, the first set of test flights wereconducted in 2004-2005, and fullyautonomous flights will be achievedby 2007-08. A total of 20 flights wereconducted through May 2005. Flighttesting is expected to continuethrough 2013.

The Italian air force would like tobe able to deploy a UCAV by 2020,but a firm decision has not yet beenmade whether to pursue this as a do-mestic venture such as the AleniaSky-X program, as a multi-nationalventure with other European firms,such as the French-led Neuron pro-gram. At a presentation in 2006, rep-resentatives from Alenia indicatedthat full scale system development ofa full-scale UACV could begin as

early as 2007 which would make se-ries production possible as early as2016.

Alenia is also reported to be coop-erating with the Russian Yakovlevfirm on a UCAV derived from theYak-130 jet trainer, designated asProryv (Breakthrough).

MALPGalileo Avionica is developing a

mini-UAV called MALP (Multi-pur-pose Air-Launched Payload) which isa type of parasite UAV. It is smallenough to be carried on a tacticalUAV such as the firm’s Falco. TheMALP is designed for multiple rolesincluding a reconnaissance role, butalso a potential strike role against en-emy air defense to eliminate threatsbefore the arrival of the main UAV.

Mini-UAVThe Italian army has a requirement

for a mini-UAV for company levelsurveillance. As of early 2004, theArmy had approved of the purchaseof a small number of AeroVironmentPointers to study this mission. TheItalian Marines have a similar re-quirement. In late 2006, the Italianarmy ordered a dozenAeroVironment RQ-11A Ravenmini-UAVs for delivery in 2007.

Selex Sensors (part of GalileoAvionica) displayed a small tail-sitter



Sky-Y MALE

VTOL mini-UAV in 2007 calledAsio.

Teal Group Analysis

Italy has a very active indigenousUAV effort, and has had a state policyto buy Italian where and when possi-ble. After a decade of delay, theKosovo air campaign finally forcedthe Italian armed forces to acquire anew generation tactical UAV. In addi-tion, the turmoil in the Balkans hasprompted Italy to acquire a modestnumber of Predators for the strategicreconnaissance/maritime patrol role.Italy will probably buy a new tacticalUAV late in the forecast period ori-ented towards battalion or regimentalsurveillance rather than the corps

level approach of the CATRIN sys-tem. Mini-UAV acquisition is alreadyunderway, an off-the-shelf purchasefrom the US in the short-term, and adomestic development and acquisi-tion effort in the long term. Italy islikely to try to blend its MALE UAVeffort into a common European pro-gram. There is some interest in ac-quir ing a MALE for civi lapplications, presumably for moni-toring the sea lanes off Malta and inthe Adriatic to interdict illegal immi-gration. The Italian air force has along-term ELINT requirement but

this is likely to follow similar effortselsewhere in Europe such as theGerman EuroHawk program.

Italy is also likely to join anyFrench program for naval UAVs asboth countries have been jointly de-veloping their frigates/corvettes. Itremains unclear whether Italy willcontinue its own Sky-X program in-dependently or whether it will decideto join the French-led Neuron pro-gram. In either event, UCAV pur-chase by the Italian air force is notlikely until after the forecast period.

Italy 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 15 — — — — 30 45 45 — — 185Tactical UAV — — 5 10 10 15 — — — — 40MALE UAV — — — — — 1 1 1 1 1 5Civil MALE UAV — — — — — — 1 1 1 1 4Naval UAV — — — — — — 3 3 3 3 12

Netherlands

The Netherlands delayed its acqui-sition of UAVs for the Army to 1995,having earlier hoped to acquire a tac-tical system in 1993. The 1994-98 de-fense plan earmarked 120 millionguilders ($66.7 m) for the acquisitionof long- and medium-range UAVs.The Crécerelle was considered for therequirement along with the BritishPhoenix, Swiss Ranger and MeteorMirach 26. In July 1995, it was an-nounced that SAGEM was beingawarded a 134.5 million guilder($87.4 million) contract. The DutchMoD spokesman indicated that theSwiss Ranger was considered thenext closest competitor. The systemthat was finally acquired was actuallybased on the Sperwer export variant.Delivery of the Sperwer air vehiclesbegan in 2002 and a total of four sys-tems each with three air vehicles wasdelivered. The first operational de-ployment of the Dutch Sperwers wasin December 2006 when Sperwers

were flown in southern Afghanistanto support NATO peace-keeping op-erations. At least two Sperwer airvehicles were lost during theseoperations in early 2007.

Mini-UAV requirementThe Dutch Army had a short-term

requirement for a mini-UAV systemto support peace-keeping operationsin Afghanistan. As a result, the MoDacquired five Aladin systems fromEMT in Germany, deploying them in2006. The acquisition included fiveGCS and 10 air vehicles. This may befollowed by more Aladins as the sys-tem was designed specifically to in-teract with the Fennekreconnaissance vehicle which is oper-ated by the Dutch army. The Dutchalso bought a small number of ElbitSkylark mini-UAVs in 2006 to pro-vide immediate patrol capability forDutch bases in Afghanistan.

Micro-UAVA number of Dutch firms and uni-

versities have teamed on a programcalled DelFly based on the Delft Uni-versity of technology to developmentmicro-UAVs. The program has fo-cused mainly bio-mimic flying types.

MALE RequirementThe Royal Dutch Air Force has

funded a Dutch consulting firm to as-sist in formulating plans for theMALE UAV. The aim was a systemcapable of 30 hours endurance at25,000 feet with a 500 kg payload.The system would replace recon ver-sions of the F-16 fighter and could beused to replace the P-3C in some per-sistent maritime surveillance roles.The plan was to acquire eight MALEUAVs. In 2007, the Dutch govern-ment decided against the plannedMALE acquisition due to budgetissues.



Teal Group Analysis

The Netherlands has recently ac-quired a tactical UAV for the army, soany further tactical UAV purchasesare unlikely until the end of the de-cade except for possible attritionspares. The use of Aladin mini-UAVsin Afghanistan is likely to spur moreinterest in this direction, and may leadto further acquisition beyond the ini-tial, minimal purchase. The Nether-lands is a partner with Germany in theFennek reconnaissance vehicle pro-gram, and Germany is currently ac-quiring the Aladin mini-UAV tocomplement this system. It is quitepossible that the Netherlands will fol-low suit, as the system would make

the Fennek even more valuable in typ-ical peacekeeping missions. The scaleof the purchase is difficult to foresee.Germany is acquiring fewer Fennekthan the Netherlands, but the Nether-lands is probably less likely to acquireas many Aladin per Fennek as theGermans.

The Dutch navy is currently work-ing on a multi-national frigate pro-gram with Germany. Should there beinterest in a naval UAV, it should ide-ally be linked with this frigate pro-gram. A Dutch interest in a navalUAV, though probably not a highprobability, is possible. The Nether-lands has traditionally had a marine

force, and so applications such as gunfire spotting would be attractive. Inaddition, the Dutch have had strongcommitments to UN operations, and asea-based intelligence capabilitymight be attractive.

The Netherlands signed an agree-ment with France in October 2002 topursue the endurance UAV require-ment based around the French MALEprogram, but in 2007 backed off aMALE UAV purchase in the nearterm. It is quite possible that the Neth-erlands will acquire a modest numberof MALE UAVs late in this forecastperiod.

Netherlands 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 15 25 25 40 40 — — 145Naval VTUAV — — — — — — 2 2 2 2 8MALE UAV — — — — — — — — 1 1 2

Norway

The Norwegian Army examinedthe German EMT Luna X-2000 dur-ing the NATO Strong Resolve winter

exercise in March 2002. Norway alsotested the German Tucan KZO tacti-

cal UAV in late 2003/early 2004 for astanding tactical UAV requirement.

Teal Group Analysis

Norway does not have a large de-fense procurement budget, and futureUAV acquisitions will probably bemodest, on the order of one or two

tactical UAV systems. Some acquisi-tion of a mini-UAV system is alsolikely.

Norway 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 15 15 — — — — — — — 30Tactical UAV 6 6 — — — — — — — — 12

Poland

Poland began a reconnaissanceUAV program in 1994 at PZL-Mielecunder the codename Vektor. ThePoles approached the French firmSAGEM to discuss possible Frenchinvolvement in providing ground sta-tions and avionics. The issue of turbo-jet vs. piston propulsion was notimmediately settled and PZL- Mielechas discussed powerplants withGobler-Hirthmotoren in Germanyand Microturbo in France for a pistonengine and turbojet respectively. The

payload is intended to be 35-40kg andwould provide real-time imagery. Theprogram was being funded by thestate Committee for ScientificResearch.

Another source of funding and ex-perimentation in recent years hasbeen the Instytut TechnicznegoWojsk Lotniczych (Air Force Techni-cal Institute) which has been examin-ing mini-UAVs along with theelectronics firm Radwar. In 2005,they began test-flying prototypes of a

mini-UAV called HOB-bit. Anotherseries of trials have been conductedby WB electronics with the SOFARmini-UAV and the TOPAZ artilleryfire control system as a method forartillery spotting.

Mini-UAV RequirementIn 2005, the Polish army’s Grom

special forces branch announced a re-quirement for a mini-UAV system tosupport its operations. Contenders in-cluded the Orbiter from Aeronautics,



the Raven from AeroVironment, theSofar from WB Elctronics and theBridEye 400 from IAI. The Orbiterwas selected, represented by the Pol-ish firm G&R Zintegrowane SystemyBezpieczenstwa. The system cost wasabout $400,000 and a small numberof systems were apparently acquired.

Several other Polish firms con-tinue to promote mini-UAVs as thereis a presumption that the regular armywill eventually acquire systems. TheBumar-Labedy group, Poland’s larg-

est defense contractor, has teamedwith Elbit to offer a variety of UAVsto the Polish armed forces includingthe Skylark mini-UAV. The Polishfirm WB electronics has already solda modest number of Sofar mini-UAVsto Hungary and they are being offeredas well to the Polish armed forces.

Shadow AcquisitionIn early 2005 it was reported that

Poland would become the first exportcustomer for the RQ-7 Shadow, with

a purchase of about 30 air vehicles.The original requirement was for atleast four systems to equip four Polishbrigades plus spares and training, butin early 2006, the requirement waspegged at a shot-term acquisition oftwo systems (three air vehicles plus aspare each) followed by acquisitionof four more through 2010. The initialdeal was signed in the summer of2006 for the first two RQ-8B systemsand eight air vehicles.

Teal Group Analysis

Poland’s defense budget is ex-tremely modest, and the Polish Armyis having a great deal of difficultyfunding existing programs, includingthe recent F-16 acquisition. The cur-

rent UAV program is probably in-tended more to gain industrialRDT&E experience in this fieldrather than any strong requirement. A

small purchase of a locally developedmini-UAV is likely.

Poland 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 25 50 — — — — — — — 75Tactical UAV 8 — — — — — — — — — 8

Portugal

Portugal has a small scale RDT&Eeffort for a UAV called the Armor.The program is being undertaken bythe state Instituto Superior Tecnio.

The Armor is designed to operate for12 hours for patrol of Portugal’s mari-time exclusion zone. The Portuguesehave worked with the Spanish to co-

ordinate the effort with the SIVAsystem.

Teal Group Analysis

Portugal’s program appears to bevery modestly funded, and it does notseem likely that it is interested in for-eign cooperation beyond the Spanishties mentioned. Should Spain buy

Crécerelle as planned, this might en-tice the Portuguese, but the scale ofthe acquisition would probably bequite small. Portugal may eventuallyshow some interest in a MALE sys-

tem for maritime patrol of its coastalwaters, but this would probably belate in the forecast period, once thelarger European states have acquiredsimilar systems.

Portugal 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

Tactical UAV — — — 4 4 — — — — — 8MALE UAV — — — — — — — — 1 1 2

Romania

Romania purchased a handful ofFrench TSI Vigilant UAVs in theearly 1990s, as well as a small numberof AAI Shadow 600 systems in May1998. The state owned ArsenalulArmatei and Electromecanica Ploestihave developed a small remotely pi-loted target, the ATT-02, which could

be sued to form the basis for an indig-enous tactical UAV.

Shadow UAV PurchaseIn May 1997, Romania reached an

agreement with AAI Corp. in the USfor the purchase of the Shadow UAV.The contract was valued at $23 mil-

lion and will be funded through theUS DoD Defense Export Loan Guar-antee program. The six UAVs weredelivered in the spring of 1998. TheShadow 200 UAVs were operatedwith Romanian forces deployed toIraq in 2005.



Teal Group Analysis

Romania has a very modest de-fense procurement budget and itsUAV requirements are likely to be

very modest during this period. Whilethe acquisition of a tactical UAV to re-place or supplement the small

Shadow 200 force is possible, itwould probably be on a very smallscale.

Romania 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — — — 6 — — — — 6

Russia

The former Soviet Union had anextensive UAV development effortwhich like the rest of the aerospace in-dustry, has suffered a significant de-cline since the end of the Cold War.The Russian army has deployed a newgeneration tactical UAV, the Schmel,but efforts to field new enduranceUAVs have languished due to a lackof funding.

Air Force UAV DevelopmentThe first Soviet UAV reconnais-

sance system was the Tupolev DBR-1strategic reconnaissance systembased around the large TupolevTu-123 Yastreb and 52 air vehicleswere built in 1964-72. The systemwas retired in 1972 as it was uneco-nomical; by this time its strategic re-connaissance role had been taken bysatellites and it had become too vul-nerable to air defenses.

The VR-3 Reys (Voyage) is cur-rently the standard unmanned recon-naissance system of the Russian AirForce. Development began around1970 and about 152 systems and 950of the associated Tupolev Tu-141

Reys air vehicles were manufacturedby the time production ended in 1989.It was a conventional system for theperiod, relying on wet film sensorsand infrared line scanners with no realtime capability. The VR-3 was ex-ported to several of the former War-saw Pact countries in the early 1980s:

Czechoslovakia received the systemin 1984, and it was also exported toRomania. Other customers includedSyria, and Iraq. In 1985, an improvedversion of the system, called Reys-D,entered development with the ex-tended range Tu-243 UAV. Produc-tion was ready in 1994, and it was firstpublicly displayed at the 1995 MAKSMoscow air show.

Army UAV DevelopmentThe first Soviet tactical UAV was

the TBR-1 based around theLavochkin La-17MM subsonic targetdrone. It was withdrawn from servicein 1973. In 1982, the Soviet GroundForces cited a requirement for recon-naissance UAV systems, based in parton Israeli experiences in the 1982war. The overall designation for thisrequirement was Stroy, with threecomponent systems being required:the Stroy-P (Polk: regiment); Stroy-A



Pchela

Tupolev Reys

(Armiya: army) and Stroy-F (Front)intended for the three tactical organi-zational levels as the names implied.The Stroy-P requirement was to besatisfied by the Yakovlev Pchela, theStroy-A by the Sokol Diate l /Yakovlev Diatel-2, and the Stroy-F bythe Tupolev Korshun. In the event,only the Pchela reached deploymentstage

Development of the first Soviettactical, real-time UAV, codenamedPchela (Bee) and the associatedStroy-P system was undertaken by theYakovlev design bureau (UAV) andthe NII Kulon (system) forming theMalakhit consortium. The first flighttests of the system took place in theautumn of 1982, and 73 Pchela-1MUAVs were ordered in 1983-84 tohelp the Soviet army develop tacticsand UAV doctrine. The Pchela systemwas refined through the 1980s, andthe upgraded system is designated asSterkh with the Shmel (Bumblebee)air vehicle. The Sterkh system was ac-cepted by the Russian army for use asa tactical UAV system in 1994, andsmall scale orders followed in 1992.The system was operationally de-ployed during the war in Chechnya.Syria placed the first export order forthe Sterkh system although there islittle evidence they were delivered.

Upgraded Stroy-PKulon and their partner Vega OAO

in 2007 began to promote a moreelaborate version of the Stroy-P sys-tem called Stroy-PD. This adds thepropeller-driven, twin-engine Yuliaair vehicle. The Yulia adds capabilityto the system by providing greater en-durance and range and adding to thevariety of sensors added to the sys-tem. Yulia has an operating range of400 km vs the 100 km operating rangeof Pchela. Part of the range extensionis made possible by using one or moreYulia air vehicle as data relays for thesystem; with the ATR-E relay system,the Yulia can communicate with theGCS from as far as 300 km away, andup to 250km with a neighboring YuliaUAV. The extended range is beingpromoted as a means for Story-PD to

support deep attack systems such asthe Iskandr-M tactical ballisticmissile.

The Yulia air vehicle has a moreextensive range of sensors than thePchela including a Raduga two-chan-nel line scanner, a GOES-630 ballmounted E-O sensor, laserrangefinder, and a RSAM402K3 syn-thetic aperture radar. The Radugaline-scanner operates in the 1.1 and8-12 micron bands, and has a 120 de-gree viewing angle. The GOES-630is a standard, stabilized, ball mountedsensor package including a TV chan-nel, a thermal imaging channel, and a1.57 micron laser rangefinder. TheM402K3 SAR has an effective oper-ating range of 20 km over land and 80km over ocean covering a 10kmswath over land and a 40km swathover the ocean.

Future DesignsVarious Russian firms had UAV

programs underway at the time of theSoviet collapse, most of which are inlimbo. In addition, there were numer-ous private ventures by Russian firmsin the 1990s, attempting to win for-eign sales to underwrite the develop-ment efforts.

Russia’s primary UAV systems de-veloper NII Kulon in Moscow, hasbeen managing the development of

two UAV systems: the Yulashort-range tactical army UAV sys-tem based around the Moskit propel-ler-driven mini-drone and theMalakhit -F system (formerlyStroy-F) based around the largeSukhoi Filin air vehicle or TupolevKorshun air vehicles. The Filin is in-tended as a replacement for the exist-ing VR-2 Str izh operat ionalreconnaissance drone used by theRussian air force, and for the armyStroy-A requirement as well.

GrANT Civil UAV/MoshkaraELINT UAV

A spin-off company of theKyshtym Radio Plant cal ledNovik-21st Century debuted theirnew civil surveillance UAV calledGrANT DPLA (Grazhdanskiy

aerodinamicheskiy nablyudatel

televizionniy: Television guided civilaerodynamic UAV) at the 2003 Mos-cow Air Show. This is basically alarge model airplane with a pullerprop configuration fitted with a small,commercially available video cam-era. The control system is laptopbased and called Kotleta (Cutlet). Thesystem is aimed at civilian applica-tions, and has an effective operatingradius of about 70 km. Other UAVsare also being offered although theywere not displayed. Novik is also de-



Irkut TUAV

veloping a somewhat more sophisti-cated UAV called Otshelnik whichwas not displayed at MAKS-03 butwhich was advert ised. I t is apusher-type configuration with twinbooms tail.

The GrANT program is a spin-offof an earlier, army sponsored pro-gram codenamed Moshkara that wasa joint effort by the Kyshtym RadioPlant and the Voronezh NII-Svyazaimed at developing a mobile ELINTUAV. The program began in1999-2000 and test flights took placein the winter of 2000. The role of thesystem is to provide an orbiting inter-cept antenna to detect and interceptenemy radio communications. Theoperating range of the UAVs in thisrole is 50 km, and they operate at analtitude of 3,000 meters.

Novik is also marketing the smallhand-launched Granit-F mini-UAV,aka BRAT (blizniy razvedchik

aerodynamicheskiy televizionniy:Short-range TV flying scout). Thiswas developed with Impuls, a Mos-cow firm better known for its radiodesign. The Granit-F weighs onlythree kg with a payload of 0.3 kg. It ispowered by a small electric motor anduses a conventional aircraft configu-ration with puller prop. The applica-tions described for the system areprimarily civilian in application

though it could be used for militarysurveillance such as the Moshkaretsproject mentioned above.

Irkut Tactical UAVThe Irkut Corporation, a new orga-

nization based on the Irkutsk aviationplant, had a tactical UAV on display atMAKS-03 called MUAS (Multipur-pose Unmanned Aerial System)which is a license manufactured de-rivative of the Israeli Aerostar tacticalUAV by Aeronautics UAV SystemsLtd. of Petah Tikvah, Israel. A bro-

chure released by the firm claims thatserial manufacture would begin inMarch-April 2004. The system isaimed at Russia’s Ministry of Emer-gency Situations for monitoring,search-and-rescue and similar para-military roles. Abasic system consistsof four air vehicles, a ground controlstation, a data exchange station andrelated support and maintenanceequipment.

Luch/Vega 9M62 Tipchak Tac-tical UAV

Two Russian firms, the Vega Ra-dio engineering corporation and theLuch aviation design bureau fromRybinsk have teamed to develop anew tactical UAV called 9M62Tipchak, unveiling the system at theAugust 2005 Moscow Air Show. Thebasic system consists of six air vehi-cles and four associated ground sup-port vehicles: a launch vehicle,antenna vehicle, maintenance vehi-cle, and ground control station vehi-cle . The Tipchak UAV is aconventional pusher propeller typeweighing 50 kg with a 14.5 kg pay-load.

Sukhoi UAVsThe Sukhoi booth at the 2003

Moscow Air Show had three modelsof endurance UAVs called Zond-1,



Tipchak

Sokol Baruk

Zond-2 and Zond-3. The Zond-3 isthe smallest of the three and appearsto be an analog to Predator. It employsa pusher prop, has a dielectric panelon the nose presumably for a satelliteuplink antenna, and has a ball-shapedstabilized E-O platform under thenose as its primary sensor. TheZond-2 is significantly larger and ispresumably a Global Hawk analog. Itis turbo-jet powered with a V butter-fly tail. It has a very large dielectricpanel over the upper nose for a satel-lite uplink antenna, and there is a largesensor tray under the fuselage with di-electric panels that suggest a SLAR orother sensor package. Zond-3 is es-sentially the same as Zond-2 exceptthat is had a large triangular radar an-tenna mounted on a fairing over thecenterline of the fuselage, presum-ably for use in a remote AWACS role.There was no evidence that these areanything more than conceptual de-signs.

Orel Strategic UAVThe Russian air force has been

sponsoring a high endurance UAVunder the code name Orel. The sys-tem is intended to have an enduranceof 24 hours, a maximum altitude of20,000 m, and a take-off weight ofabout two metric tons. The programwas being competitively undertakenby the Tupolev, Myasishchev andYakovlev design bureaus but it nowappears to be in limbo.

Yakovlev ProryvIn 2006, Yakovlev unveiled a new

family of UAVs codenamed Proryv.The idea is to use a common centralcore with the basic Al-222 turbojetpropulsion system, common sensorsand flight control system, but with atleast three wing configurations. Twoare designed for subsonic surveil-lance missions, the Proryv-R recon-naissance UAV and the Proryv-RLDSIGINT UAV. The later is fitted witha large over-fuselage antenna forSIGINT collection. The third memberof the family, the Proryv-U is de-signed as an attack UAV with sweptwings, and higher speed.

Baruk Hunter-KillerThe Sokol plant unveiled its

Dan-Baruk hunter-killer UAV at theMAKS-07 air show in Moscow.Sokol is the design bureau associatedwith the Sokol aviation plant inKazan and in the past has manufac-tured the Dan target drone as well asmissiles and helicopters.

The Dan-Baruk is a pusher-propdriven conventional aircraft designwhich is intended for tactical recon-naissance. The E-O sensor is locatedin the nose of the aircraft behind anangled panel rather than in the moretypical ball mount. The air vehicle isalso fitted with a small nose-mountedradar. While this is unremarkable byitself, the air vehicle has been de-signed from the outset to includestrike features. The air vehicle can befitted with pods to dispense munitionsagainst targets encountered during itssurveillance mission. The brochurereleased at the show indicated the useof the Motiv submunition which is aRussian equivalent of the USAFSFW.

UCAVIn the mid-1970s, the Sukhoi bu-

reau began work on a UCAV code-named Korshun that was controlled inthe air from a Su-24 Fencer strike air-

craft, and could deliver a payload ofup to 500 kg. There are very few de-tails about the fate of the design.

The newest of the Tupolev UAVs,the Tu-300, was unveiled at theMAKS-95 air show in Moscow. Al-though following the configuration ofthe earlier Tu-141 and Tu-243, it has adistinctly different sensor arrange-ment in the nose and was apparentlyintended as a UCAV.

MiG has built a full-scale model ofa proposed UCAV which was re-vealed in 2007. It was not cleared forexhibit at MAKS-07, but MiGbrought a TV crew to the hanger andallowed them to film it for a broadcaston Moscow television. The Skat(skate, stingray) is configured muchlike the Boeing X-45 UCAV thoughthe air intake is significantly largerand more vertical. Propulsion will bea Klimov turbojet based on the RD-33providing 5,000 kgf thrust. The Skatis fitted with an internal bomb-bay ca-pable of carrying two air-to-surfacemissiles or two 250 or 500 kg bombs.The performance parameters are arange of up to 4,000km, ceiling of12,000m and a speed of 800 km/h.



Tupolev Tu-300

Teal Group Analysis

Russian UAV systems have beenshrouded in secrecy for many years,and it has only been in the past fewyears that any significant amount ofinformation has emerged. Even now,there are many unanswered questionsabout their programs. It would appearthat over the past decade, most Rus-sian UAV programs are either inlimbo, or barely funded. The Russianarmed forces have been sufferingthrough a “procurement holiday”since the late 1990s with few or nosystems being manufactured. TheShmel has been offered for sale ashave several other UAVs at interna-tional air shows for the past severalyears, but with little evidence of sales.

Part of the problem has been thatmany of the systems were basedaround older UAV concepts usingwet-film recovery systems instead ofoffering real-time intelligence.

In the past few years, the Russiangovernment has been attempting torestart production of advanced aero-space systems. Most of the UAV ef-forts will have to be started fromscratch, as the older programs are forthe most part based on outdated re-quirements and technology. Thewhole panoply of types is likely in-cluding tactical UAVs, enduranceUAVs, and UCAVs. Russia has somegenuine requirements in the area ofcivil UAVs, particularly for border

patrol, pipeline security and otherparamilitary applications. There is astanding requirement for a modestnumber of systems for the MVD statepolice for use in patrolling theupcoming Olympic winter games inSochi.

Recent Russian air shows haveshown more of a focus on civil re-quirements than on military pro-grams. This is more likely due to adecision to classify military UAV pro-grams due to their use in the intelli-gence role, with the exception ofsystems that are being offered forexport.

Russia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — 5 10 10 20 20 20 — 85Mini-UAV — — 15 — — 45 60 60 60 60 300MALE UAV — — — — — 1 2 2 2 2 9HALE UAV — — — — — 1 1 1 1 1 5Civil/Police UAV 5 — 15 — 35 — 15 — 15 — 85

Serbia

Prior to the break-up of the formerYugoslavia, the Yugoslav People’sArmy was funding development of atactical UAV with a real timeTV/FLIR system called VBL-200.Take off was by a solid-rocket boosterand recovery by parachute. The cur-rent status of the program is un-

known. The program was beingmanaged jointly by the JNA R&D In-stitute and the Krusik Company inValjevo. It was offered for export inthe la te 1990s by the SDPRgovernment export agency.

Utva Aircraft in Pancevo has de-veloped a small UAV called Gavran

(Raven) and conducted flight trials ofthe Gavran I starting in May 2000.Initially, the Yugoslav governmentplanned to award a production con-tract for the larger Gavran II for a jointarmy/police requirement, but it wascancelled due to a lack of funds.

Teal Group Analysis

Under current circumstances,UAV procurement by Ser-bia-Montenegro (former Yugoslavia)

is not very likely for some years tocome, and is likely to be on a smallscale.

Spain

Spain has had a modest tacticalUAV program going on now for a de-cade, called the SIVA (Sistema

Integrado de Vigilancia Aerea). SIVAis the military version of the ALO(Avion Ligero de Observacion) civil-ian UAV.

The SIVA program began in 1993as an effort to develop a UAV systemsuitable for both military and civil ap-plications. The military uses are con-

ventional surveillance tasks. The civilapplications are expected to includeforest fire surveillance, and maritimepatrol of Spain’s economic exclusionzone, as well as some coast-guardtasks.

The Spanish firm Ceselsa formed apartnership on the program withDornier Aerospace, which is provid-ing much of the technical support onthe GCS portion of the program.

Tadiran of Israel is providing the sen-sor package. The final prototype con-figuration of the SIVA was scheduledto fly in December 1995. The pro-gram is now being managed by theInsti tuto Nacional de TecnicaAerospacial, but there has been littleevidence of any sales of either themilitary or civil version over the pastdecade.



Searcher II AcquisitionIn April 2007, Spain announced

plans to acquire a single IAI MalatSearcher II system for deploymentwith Spanish troops in Afghanistanwhich will include four air vehicles.The cost was put at about $17 million.

Basque Fishery PatrolIn 2006, the Basque regional gov-

ernment used a small 20 kgAerovision Fulmar UAV to conduct ademonstration of fisheries patrolfrom August to December.Aerovision is based in San Sebastian,Spain and has been supported byBasque government research centerssince its organization in 2003 as partof a local development incentiveprogram.

Teal Group Assessment

Like many countries aspiring tocreate an aerospace business, Spainhas selected a UAV program as oneaspect of this effort. This is an attrac-tive option since development costsare relatively modest, and technologi-cal risk is relatively low. SIVA is sup-posed to satisfy the requirements ofall three services, though there hasbeen little evidence of a firm procure-ment requirement. In recent years, theSpanish defense ministry has beendiscussing a possible acquisition ofthe Sperwer from SAGEM in France

but this apparently fell through. Spainacquired a single Searcher system in2007 to support its immediate needsin peacekeeping operations, and itseems likely that a further purchasewill occur later, though it may or maynot be additional Searchers.

In the mid term, Spain has aMALE requirement, tied in somemeasure to the need to monitor illegalimmigration across the Gibraltarstraits. Spain has discussed participa-tion with France on the EuroMALEprogram, but has also discussed the

possibility of acquiring a US systemsuch as Predator or Global Hawk forthis requirement. Global Hawk seemsexcessive for this requirement, and itdoes not seem likely that the USwould approve this given the strainedrelations with the current Spanishgovernment. A more likely candidatewould be Predator, or perhaps a smallnumber of Predator in the short-term,followed by participation in a jointEuropean effort in the long term.

Spain 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 20 — — — — — — 20Tactical UAV 4 — — — — — 4 4 — — 12Naval VTUAV — — — — — — 2 2 — — 4Civil (MALE) UAV — — — — — 2 — — — — 2

Sweden

Sweden has generally been activein recent years in UAV technology,but more often than not this has beenconfined to technology demonstra-tion rather than procurement. Swedencurrently has three active UAV pro-grams, two of them being undertakencooperatively with France. Swedenhas been working with France on theNeuron UCAV and EuroMALE en-

durance UAV, while it is developingits own tactical UAV under theTUMAV program. Two other re-search/demo projects, SHARC andFILUR, are both supporting the Neu-ron and TUMAV effort. Saab re-ceived a contract in 2002 for theFILUR (Flying Innovative Low-Ob-servable Unmanned Research) effort,which aimed at testing a stealth air ve-

hicle for future UAV requirements by2005. The demonstrator will have awingspan of 2.5 meters and by pow-ered by an AMT Olympus enginewith a thrust of 0.19kN. This demon-strator provided airframe design in-formation for TUMAV and alsoassisted in the UCAV effort. SaabAerospace has been promoting itsNetDefense concept for the Swedish



SIVA

FMI2020 program, a Ministry of De-fense study of Swedish defense re-quirements two decades from now.The Saab concept involves theextensive use of tact ical andendurance UAVs, integrated into acommand and control network.

VTOL UAVSweden purchased a small number

of British ML Aviation Sprite heli-copter UAVs in the 1980s for evalua-tion. In 1992, the Swedish MoDprovided small scale funding to Tech-nology Management Co. (TechMent)to develop a small helicopter-config-uration UAV for carrying a small TVcamera for battlefield surveillance.

The program was called the RPG(Remotely Piloted Gyroplane) orMidget, and it first flew on one Janu-ary 1992. The system is capable ofcarrying only a small payload to about30 kg. The program was a technologydemonstrator and did not lead to serialproduction.

In 2006, Saab unveiled its own he-licopter UAV, the Skeldar 150, built incooperat ion with Cybaero ofLinkoping based on their Apid 5 heli-copter. This is a small 150 kg tacticalUAV with a belly-mounted E-O pack-age. The Apid 5 was developed for a

UAE UAV requirement. First flightsof the Skeldar took place in April2006. Saab has indicated that Skeldaris intended mainly in the “land do-main” and would have to be modifiedto permit naval use.

Tactical UAVThe Swedish army had a

long-standing requirement for a tacti-cal UAV for operations at battalion orbrigade level.

In late 1997, the Swedish armedforces selected a version of the SagemCrécerelle/Sperwer under the desig-nation Ugglan for Swedish army use.The contract was for three systems.The first system was delivered in1998, and the remaining two in 1999.Sweden had a standing requirementfor another UAV system for brigadeor battalion level use with plans to ac-quire the system in the 2002-2004time frame, but this requirement slidpast these dates. This requirement isnow being dubbed TUMAV (TacticalUnmanned Multirole Air Vehicle).The program aimed at fielding a UAVin the 500 kg class to replace theUgglan sometime after 2005, and theFMV plans to develop the UAVjointly with at least one other partner.Swedish officials have stated that it

would be developed “not with one ofSweden’s traditional partners” whichimplies that it would involve anon-European/American firm, possi-bly Israeli or South African. TheTUMAV is expected to be ready forproduction around 2010. In 2006,Saab announced it was developing atactical UAV with its own funds.However, in 2007, Saab indicated thatit was seeking a form of cooperativedevelopment as it did not want towaste resources developing a new airvehicle. It aims to acquire the rights toan existing air vehicle and to adaptthat air vehicle to a new system,somewhat akin to the practice withSkeldar. Saab indicated that the timeline for the program is to support theEU Rapid Reaction Force Nordicbattle Group 11 which would mean aninitial operating capability in 2009-10

Endurance UAVIn 2000, the Swedish Forsvarets

MaterielVerk (FMV) developmentagency began examining enduranceUAVs as an aspect of its research onnet-centric warfare. Four UAVs wereconsidered including the Predator,Altus, Hermes 1500 and Eagle. So far,Sweden has not made any firm com-mitments whether it will acquire Ea-gle as part of a joint European effortor wait until a more definitiveEuroMALE is ready. EuroMALEcould be the Eagle 2, but Swedish of-ficials have also indicated that Swe-den may opt to develop its own sys-tem. The acquisition objective is2012.

Stealth UAVThe Swedish Ministry of Defense

has also actively supported an effortto develop UAV technology in Swe-den. Saab received a contract in 2002for the FILUR (Flying InnovativeLow-Observable Unmanned Re-search) effort, which is aimed at test-ing a stealth air vehicle for futureUAV requirements by 2005. Thedemonstrator has a wingspan of 2.5meters and by powered by an AMTOlympus engine with a thrust of0.19kN. The maiden flight of the



Skeldar

Filur was undertaken in October2005.

UCAVSweden was among the first Euro-

pean countries to sponsor UCAV de-velopment. Saab Aerospace has beenconducting a study program on astealthy UCAV dubbed SHARC(Swedish Highly Advanced ResearchConfiguration). The program will in-clude wind-tunnel models, but Swe-

den has no specific requirement forsuch a system until it begins to lookfor a Gripen replacement later in thedecade. In September 2003, Swedenbegan negotiating with the DGA inFrance about becoming a partner inthe Neuron UCAV effort. Sweden isexpected to absorb about 25-30% ofthe development costs, making it thelargest partner except for France.Sweden has apparently pledged about50 to 70 million to the Neuron pro-

gram, and is expected to be mostheavily involved in the flight controlaspects of the study. The Neuron ef-fort began initially as a Dassault pri-vate venture but is now emerging as amulti-national effort. Further detailswill be found above in the FrenchNeuron UCAV section. Swedensigned up for the Neuron program in2006.

Teal Group Analysis

Sweden has shown a fair amountof interest in UAVs in terms of stud-ies, but so far, little of this has trans-lated into actual procurement. Itwould appear that the Swedish MoDis envisioning the acquisition oflarger numbers of UAVs late in theforecast period as part of an effort tomove towards a local netcentric war-fare doctrine. Saab has been very ac-tive in promoting UAVs as it views itsGripen fighter as perhaps the lastmanned fighter Sweden will acquire.

During the 1990s, the Swedisharmy had a requirement for 10 tactical

UAV systems (3-5 air vehicles each)but to date has funded only three. Thearmy is likely to acquire a few moreduring the forecast period, though theoriginal objective is unlikely to bemet due to cut-backs in the size of thearmy.

A naval UAV may be attractivesince the confined Swedish watersmake some traditional naval sensors(radar and sonar) relatively ineffec-tive in coastal missions. This is morelikely to be a combination of shortrange ship-based UAVs like Skeldar

and medium endurance UAV formaritime patrol.

Sweden has generally had an ac-tive air reconnaissance effort, and soparticipation in a European endur-ance UAV effort seems possible if notlikely.

Sweden‘s interest in UCAV con-cepts is likely to lead to further fund-ing for SHARC or its follow-ons.Procurement of a UCAV seems possi-ble, but it would probably not beginuntil after the forecast period here.

Sweden 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — 5 20 20 40 — — — — 85Tactical UAV — — 5 10 10 — — — — — 25Naval VTUAV — — — 2 2 2 — — — — 6MALE UAV — — — — 2 2 — — — — 4

Switzerland

Switzerland had an active tacticalUAV program in the mid-1990swhich resulted in the ADS 95 Ranger.It does not have a known long-termrequirement for additional UAVs.

ADS 95 RangerIn 1985, the Swiss army acquired

an IAI/Malat Scout UAV system withfour air vehicles for trials to help de-fine their own UAV requirements.The Scout had several performanceshortfalls; the Swiss required a higheroperational ceiling, greater payload,less noisy engine, better all-weathercapability, and an emergency para-chute retrieval system. In 1986, the

Swiss government agreed to a jointdevelopment program betweenIAI/Malat and Contraves-Oerlikon.Developmental systems built for thetrials were introduced into Swiss ser-vice in 1993 on an interim basis. InApril 1995, Oerlikon Contraves wasfinally awarded a major procurementcontract for Ranger after several de-lays. The total contract value is statedto be SFr 280 million ($240 million)with delivery in 1998-00. The con-tract was for 28 air vehicles, and anundisclosed number of systems. Pre-vious statements have indicated thatfive systems were sought.

The first full system was deliveredin mid 1998 and deliveries continuedthrough 2000. Deployment of theRanger was delayed in 1999 due tosystem software problems and an un-expected complication with the sys-tem data-link. The data link operateson frequencies that are used withSwitzerland’s new Universal MobileTelecommunications System for mo-bile phones. An upgrade shifted thefrequency band.

Super RangerThe Swiss Army XXI plan envi-

sions the acquisition of more Rangersas well as a new medium endurance



UAV at a total cost of SFr 1.1 billion($810 million). Ruag Aerospace un-veiled its Super Ranger at the June2007 Paris Air Show which is aimedat this requirement. This is an en-larged version of the Ranger with thewingspan increasing from 5.7 to 9.5m, payload from 45 kg to 150 kg, andendurance from nine hours to 20hours. Two prototypes began con-struction in 2007 with an aim to beginflight testing in 2008.

Teal Group Analysis

Switzerland is likely to acquire an-other batch of Ranger in the forecastperiod. Switzerland might be a candi-date for a micro/mini UAVs later inthe decade.

Switzerland 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 20 40 — — — — 60Tactical UAV — — 15 15 — — — — — — 30

Turkey

Turkey has had a standing require-ment for a significant number of tacti-cal UAVs for more than a decade.Like many Turkish defense pro-grams, these ambitious objectiveshave declined in the face of severe de-fense budget shortfalls.

Past UAV AcquisitionTurkey was provided with some

older CL-89 reconnaissance dronesfrom Germany in 1991. In late 1992,the Turkish ministry of defense ac-quired test batches of GeneralAtomics Gnat-700, AAI Falcon 600and IAI Searcher UAVs for a local re-quirement. The two American com-panies received contracts for $30million each for a ground control sta-tion and six air vehicles each. How-ever, Turkey ran into serious fundingdifficulties after the first three weredelivered. In the end, Turkey receivedtwo ground control stations and sixGnat 750 air vehicles in 1994 and or-dered two more air vehicles asattrition spares in 1998.

Turkey has had an indigenousUAV program being undertaken byTurkish Aerospace Industr ies

(TAI)/TUSAS Turkye Havacilik veUzay Sanayii AS called UAV-X1Witness. TUSAS was established in1987 to manage the Turkish co-pro-duction of 160 F-16C/D Peace Onyxfighters. It is jointly owned by Turk-ish companies (51%) and GeneralDynamics/GE (now Lockheed-Mar-tin: 49%). The main facility is locatedat Murted air base. The UAV-X1 was

developed and tested in 1989-92 butthere was no large scale production.Work on the UAV-XI served as the ba-sis for the Turna and Keklik targetdrones which were developed startingin August 1995. The Turna is a con-ventional design using a pusher propand has been offered both as a targetdrone and as a potential reconnais-



Turna

Ranger

sance UAV. TAI worked on at leasttwo other UAV programs, theUAV-X2 Baykus tactical UAV andthe Pelikan and Marti semi-scale

UAVs used to train UAV pilots. TheBaykus flew in 2003, but no ordershave been noted.

Changes in Turkish UAV Requirements

(UAV Systems) 1998 1999 2001 2002 2004Short-range 14 n/a — — —Medium-range 8 n/a 5 5 6Endurance 5 n/a 6 2 3Total Systems 27 19 11 7 9Total UAVs 162 114 54 40 28

Turkey announced an interna-tional UAV requirement in 1998 withan aim to team a foreign firm with aTurkish firm. The objective wasabout 10 systems, each with six airvehicles and one GCS. There wassome debate over the mix of systems,whether they would be medium en-durance to complement the Gnat 750or all close-range tactical UAVs. Therequirement was redefined in 1998 to14 short-range, eight medium-range,and five endurance UAV systemswith a likely program cost of$350-700 million. Each system wasexpected to include at least one GCSand six air vehicles. The 1998shortlist of competitors for the re-quirement included an Israeli consor-tium of Elbit/Silver Arrow/IAI;General Atomics, and China’sCATIC. However, budget realitiescaused this program to be choppedback in early 1999 to 19 systems. Bythe time the requirement was reissuedin 2001, the program had beenchopped back to nine systems and 54air vehicles consisting four long- andshort-range systems for the Army,three long-range for the Navy, andtwo long-range for the air force. In ad-dition, the reissued RFP opened upthe competition yet again. Five re-sponses were received from localfirms which will be teamed with inter-national firms. The foreign biddersincluded General Atomics, the IsraeliUAV Partnership (IUP) of IAI andElbit. The requirement was trimmedback yet again and by 2002 waspegged at 28 tactical and 12 strategicair vehicles, the 28 TUAV going to thearmy and navy, and the 12 strategicUAVs going to the air force. The 2002

UAV program was again cancelled inMay 2004, and then resurrected inOctober 2004. Under the October2004 program, Turkey would pur-chase three off-the-shelf MALE UAVsystems for the army, air force andnavy (4+4+2 air vehicles) as well assix TUAV systems from the TurkishTUSAS firm.

TUSAS has been developing aMALE UAV called Tiha (TurkInsansiz Hava Araci: Turkish UAV)since 2004 with plans to build threeprototypes. The configuration is a 17meter wing with pusher propeller.TUSAS/Turkish Aerospace Industrydisplayed illustrations of this MALEat the 2007 Paris Air Show. The Pred-ator and IAI Heron were competitorsfor the MALE requirement and inApril 2005, Turkey selected theHeron with a $183 million contractgoing to IAI Malat for 10 systems.

Turkish Tactical UAV Develop-ment

In February 2005, Turkey an-nounced that it would sponsor a pro-gram to develop a new tactical UAVto meet the requirement for six sys-tems and 18 aircraft. Under the pro-gram, TUSAS would develop onesystem and build three air vehiclesunder a $30 million contract, with thefirst flight in 39 months and deliverycompletion in 51 months. Followingthis, a further five systems and 15 air-craft would be delivered by 2010.Aselsan has been contracted for thesensors on board the Israeli Heron,and presumably they would developthe sensors for the Turkish UAV aswell. Recent Turkish statements sug-gest that the new UAV would be a me-dium endurance type, not ashort-range tactical UAV. However,in July 2006, Turkey announced plans



TAI MALE

to jointly acquire tactical UAVs withPakistan. This will involve the use ofPakistani airframes and Turkish elec-tronics. The initial acquisition isstated to be 6-7 systems.

Mini-UAV RequirementIn August 2005, the Turkish De-

fense Industries Undersecretariat re-leased an RFP to Turkish firms for theacquisition of 19 mini UAVs. Thebidding is apparently limited to Turk-ish firms. A joint venture calledKalebaykar was formed in response,and developed the Bayraktarmini-UAV. Development startedaround 2003 and in first flew in Octo-ber 2005. The Turkish MoD awardeda contract for 19 systems in 2006 fordelivery in 2007.

The Turkish firm Vestel DefenseIndustry had the first display of theirnew tactical UAVs outside Turkey atIDEX-07. The larger of the two is theEFE, an electric powered mini-UAV

with a 2.5 hour endurance, and 15 kmoperating radius. The smaller of thetwo is the Ari hand-launched UAVwhich has a 30-minute endurance and

a mission radius of one km with ahalf-pound sensor pack.

Teal Group Analysis

Turkey‘s defense budget has had aroller-coaster ride of economic boomand economic bust over the past de-cade, not helped by the 1999 earth-quake. The most recent economiccrisis of early 2001 has thrown its am-bitious defense procurement programinto a tail-spin with many recent pro-curement decisions now under ques-

tion. A total of 32 major defenseprograms worth about $19.5 billionhave been delayed or suspended. Fur-thermore, the IMF has conditionedfurther loan guarantees on defensecutbacks.

In this environment, Turkey‘sUAV program has been continuallycut back and delayed. While Turkey is

likely to acquire the Heron UAVs inthe forecast period, the pace of its in-digenous UAV program is likely to bemuch more prolonged than the cur-rent, ambitious schedule, particularlyif the program aims at deploying aMALE UAV.

Turkey 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 30 30 — — — — — — 30 30 120Tactical UAV — — — — — — — 6 12 — 18Tiha MALE UAV 1 — 1 — 1 — — — 1 2 6Heron MALE UAV 4 10 10 — — — — — — — 24

Ukraine

Ukraine does not appear to have anactive UAV program, but Ukrainianfirms have begun to display tacticalUAVs at various international exhibi-tions, oriented primarily to the exportmarket.

Ukrainian UAV ProgramsThe Vzlet Design Bureau in Kiev

has offered two UAVs since 2005, amini-UAV designated Remez-3 and a

tactical UAV called Albatros-4. TheRemez-3 is a small, catapult launchedUAV weighing 12 kg with a range offive km. The configuration is a canardstyle with pusher prop. The Albatrossis also catapult launched and uses apusher prop. The basic system is twoair vehicles, a ground control stationand associated launch and handlingequipment.



Kalebaykar

Strelets

Two other families of tacticalUAVs have also been offered by otherfirms. The R-400 is a conventionaltactical UAV with a twin boom con-figuration and pusher props. It comesin three variants distinguished by dif-ferent power-plants. These optionsresult in various weight and endur-ance differences ranging from a 6kg

payload and four hour endurancewhen using a 4.5 hp engine to 15 kgpayload and seven hour endurance inthe 14 hp version. A smaller designusing a conventional puller prop con-figuration was also displayed, theR-100 with four engine options rang-ing from three to 14 hp. This providesa payload ranging from three to 10 kg

and an endurance of two to fourhours.

Teal Group Analysis

At the moment, the prospects forUkrainian government support of thebudding Ukrainian industry seemslim due to perennial shortages offunds. The Ukrainian armed forces

still operate older Soviet era UAVssuch as the Strizh. It is possible thatthe armed forces will begin to acquiremini-UAVs and a tactical UAV sys-

tem late in the forecast period, in partto bolster the local UAV industry.

Ukraine 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 10 40 50 — — — — — — 100Tactical UAV — — — — — — — 6 6 6 18

United Kingdom

The British MoD selected a UAVpackage from Thales UK as the win-ner of its Watchkeeper UAV programin July 2004. The Watchkeeper em-ploys the Elbit/Silver Arrow Hermes450 UAV, redesignated as the WK450in the British version.

Britain has several long term UAVrequirements which are likely to in-clude a mini-UAV, an endurance UAVand one or more naval UAV systems.

Phoenix Tactical UAVPhoenix is the first British de-

signed UAV artillery reconnaissancesystem to enter Army service and isintended to provide the Royal Artil-lery with a deep target spotting capa-bility. Development began in 1982 tosupersede the canceled 1970’sWestland Supervisor program and toreplace the Canadair CL-89 Midgeunder the Army Endorsed Staff Tar-get—GSR 3846 effort. Programplans slipped eight years and limitedproduction did not begin until 1994.The program objective was believedto be about 10 systems and over 100air vehicles. Due to long delays andserious technical shortcomings, theprogram was subjected to intensescrutiny by the British MoD in 1995,and came near to being canceled.However, in Apri l 1995,

GEC-Marconi was given a warningand a one year’s reprieve to get theprogram back on track or face cancel-lation. A contract was signed in Octo-ber 1996 under which GEC-Marconiwas committed to maintaining an ac-ceptable level of airframe availability.(Marconi merged with BAE Systemsin 1999.) Service entry took place inDecember 1998.

The Phoenix was first deployed incombat over Kosovo in 1999, losing12 of the 27 UAVs deployed. This led

to a requirement for additional sparesfor the system. The losses includedtwo lost to enemy air action and threelost during training. The Phoenixcontinued to be plagued with prob-lems with 23 air vehicles destroyedand 13 more damaged but repairableduring 138 sorties in the 2003 Opera-tion Telic in Iraq of which only about15% were due to combat action. TheIraq operations also showed otherproblems, particularly its poor hotweather performance which rendered



Watchkeeper

the system almost useless in May andafterwards when the temperaturesrose. Nevertheless, the use of Phoenixover Iraq convinced the British Armyof the need for a durable tactical UAVsystem beyond the narrow artilleryobservation requirement of the Phoe-nix. Phoenix operations in Iraq havebeen very troubled due to poor perfor-mance in the hot temperatures. In ad-dition, the system has proven to bevery vulnerable to radio interferenceproblems with its command data-link.

Watchkeeper Tactical UAVProgram

Problems with the Phoenix led theBritish MoD to begin funding a newgeneration UAV effort in the late1990s. In 1998, the MoD’s DERA or-ganization at Farnborough displayedits new Observer short-range UAVbased on the Cranfield AerospaceXRAE1 drone as a test-bed for futurerequirements. The first flight tookplace in late 1998 and was intended toserve as a demonstrator for a futureBritish Army system. Eventually, tworequirements were drawn up, one fora unit UAV called Sender whichwould have a range of 30 km and re-port to battalion and other small unitcommanders, and a 150km formationUAV called Spectator which wouldreport to division and higher forma-tions. The industry was briefed on theSender requirement in June 1999 andseveral companies bid. The MoD nar-rowed down the group to four teams:BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin UKGovernment Systems, NorthropGrumman, and Racal Defence whowere awarded £10 million contractsfor a 12 month study effort.

In late 1999, the four contractorteams were notified that the Senderrequirement could be merged with theSpectator requirement, which wouldsignificantly change the range and en-durance requirements for the pro-gram. This did in fact occur in 2000,with the overall program then beingrenamed as Watchkeeper.

The MoD planned to select thewinner in 2004, provide some limitedcapability in the British Army by

2006 and see the full system in thefield by 2007. The ComprehensiveSpending Review in 2002 recom-mended pushing up the initial capa-bility date to 2005. These objectiveshave slipped considerably.

The MoD down-selected to twocompeting teams in the January 2003for the System Integration AssurancePhase (SIAP). The teams were:Northrop Grumman teamed withGeneral Dynamics, BAE Systems,Ultra Electronics, Detica andSTASYS based around the Fire ScoutUAV and the Swiss Ranger, and thesecond team headed by Thales-UKincluding Aerosystems Int’l, Elbit,and QinetiQ offering the Israeli Her-mes 180 and Hermes 450 UAVs. On20 July 2004 the MoD announced thatThales-UK had been selected as thepreferred bidder, initiating the con-tract negotiation phase. The full saledevelopment contract was finallyawarded on 4 August 2005. The pro-gram had an In-Service-Date of 2007,but in 2005, the date was pushed backto 2010. The UK MoD estimates thetotal program cost on the order of£800 million ($1.4 billion). Elbit offi-cials stated that they expected a con-tract valued at about 300 millionpounds later in 2005. There have beensome discussions about the purchaseof a small number of Predator BUAVs as a stop gap, as well as servicelife extensions of the Phoenix TUAV.

In March 2005, the MoD an-nounced that the Watchkeeper wouldbe limited to a single type of UAV, theWK450, rather than both the WK180and WK450; this led to a cost savingsof about 100 million pounds. TheWK450 air vehicle has almost twicethe endurance of the WK180 (17hours), but carries multiple payloadsincluding a SAR/GMTI radar. TheWK450 is capable of fully autono-mous ramp or runway launch and isalso C130 deployable.

An initial test flight of the Hermes450 was conducted in UK controlledair space in September 2005. Due tothe long delay in f ieldingWatchkeeper compared to the initialplans, in 2007, the MoD announced

plans to add 55 million pounds to fielda small number of Hermes 450 UAVsto provide immediate capability evenif not in ful l Watchkeeperconfiguration.

The latest announced plan was tobegin fielding the Watchkeeper in2009 with Battery 1, followed by Bat-tery 2 in 2010 and Battery 3 in 20011.The full scope of the program has notyet been disclosed.

Naval UAVThe Royal Navy has already

signed an agreement with the USNavy to examine the tactical controlsystem being developed for thenavy’s program, with the effort beingundertaken by DERA Malvern.

In August 2002, the UK DefenceProcurement Agency asked industryto consider novel solutions such asthe use of UAVs to satisfy the Mari-time Airborne Surveillance and Con-trol (MASC) requirement.

The Royal Navy has continued tostudy its requirements under the cur-rent JUEP (Joint UAV Experimenta-tion Program). The MoD has leasedsome Boeing ScanEagles for thesetrials which were conducted in2004-05.

Expectations of a Royal Navy re-quirement for a VTOL UAV led to aJuly 2007 deal between Thales UKand Schiebel for a partnership in of-fering the Schiebel S-100 Camcopteras a contender in any such program.

Global Hawk DemonstrationThe UK approached the Pentagon

in early 2004 for a demonstration ofthe Global Hawk in the UK as a possi-ble replacement for the RAF’s Can-berra PR9 aircraft under the newLong Range-Long EnduranceRequirement.

Predator AcquisitionPredator was one of the systems

originally offered to satisfy the Brit-ish Watchkeeper requirement but notpart of the final bid package. In early2004, British officials began discus-sions with the US about borrowing orleasing Predators for use by British



units in Iraq. The RAF formed the1115 Flight in 2004 near the USAF15th Recon Squadron in Nevada fortraining on the Predator. The RAF es-tablished a 3-year urgent operationalrequirement in 2004 for the lease ofseveral Predator Bs which have beenoperated in Iraq over Basra and otherareas. A British operated MQ-1 Pred-ator was involved in an air strike inlate 2004 using one of the leased air-craft. British officials in April 2006indicated that British operator Preda-tors had been involved in at least sixstrike missions in Afghanistan andIraq. The UK also conducted a seriesof trials dubbed Falcon Prowl in early2005 using a Predator B fitted with aGoodrich DB-110 recon system as apossible candidate for the RAF LongRange Long Endurance (LRLE) re-quirement to replace the CanberraPR9 photo recon aircraft some timeafter 2006.

On 27 September 2006, the USCongress was notified of the pro-posed sale of two MQ-9 Reaper airvehicles with associated GCS andsupport equipment at a cost of about$77 million. The first was scheduledfor delivery in 2007 to 39 Squadron atRAF Waddington.

British UCAVThe British Ministry of Defence

began a major study of its FOAS (Fu-ture Offensive Air) requirement in thelate 1990s. This emerged in 2006 asthe Taranis program and this is cov-ered in detail in the European UCAVsection of this report.

BAE HertiBAE as part of its previously clas-

sified UAV work has been developinga MALE UAV under the codenameHerti. This is a pusher-propeller con-figuration, and conducted the first au-tonomous flight in UK controlledairspace in August 2005. BAE is de-veloping the Herti as a multi-purposesystem for a variety of applicationsincluding border patrol, maritime pa-trol and pipeline surveillance, sug-gesting a largely civil orientation dueto the selection of the Thales Hermes

for the Watchkeeper military UAVprogram.

Desert Hawk Mini-UAVIn 2004, the UK acquired four

Desert Hawk mini-UAV systemsfrom Lockheed Martin to supportBritish peace-keeping missions. InFebruary 2006, Lockheed Martin wasawarded a $2.65 million contract toupgrade the Desert Hawk into theDesert Hawk III configuration whichwere delivered in March 2006, andwere deployed for use inAfghanistan.

In October 2006, the US Army lentthe British forces in Iraq a total ofthree RQ-11 Raven mini-UAV sys-tems due to problems encountered inthe use of Desert Hawk 1+ in Iraq.

British Taranis UCAVThe British Ministry of Defence

began a major study of its FOAS (Fu-ture Offensive Air) requirement in thelate 1990s. This is intended to be a fu-ture air attack system to replace Tor-nado aircraft in their ground strikeand long range penetration missionsby 2015/2020. The missions assignedto FOAS are offensive air operations,secondary air space interdiction mis-sions above the battlefield, anti-sur-face naval warfare, strikes to suppressair defense systems, and tactical re-connaissance. Another objective is acapability to perform close-up airsupport and air defense missions. TheFOAS will cover all these missions bycombining the use of conventionalmanned aircraft, uninhabited combatair vehicles (UCAV) and second gen-eration cruise missiles. In November1998, Air Chief Marshal Sir JohnAlison, commander of RAF StrikeCommand, stated that he thought thatUCAV technology is not far enoughalong to replace the Tornado. In 2002,the British Ministry of Defence beganpreliminary discussions about be-coming a potential partner with theUS on the engineering manufacturingdevelopment of the A-45 UCAV.

This was intended to be a future airattack system to replace Tornado air-craft in their ground strike and long

range penetration missions by2015/2020. The missions assigned toFOAS were offensive air operations,secondary air space interdiction mis-sions above the battlefield, anti-sur-face naval warfare, strikes to suppressair defense systems, and tactical re-connaissance. Another objective is acapability to perform close-up airsupport and air defense missions. TheFOAS will cover all these missions bycombining the use of conventionalmanned aircraft, uninhabited combatair vehicles (UCAV) and second gen-eration cruise missiles. This was ex-pected to be a cooperative programinvolving about fifteen partners oneach side of the Atlantic with an esti-mated cost at almost FFr100 billion($16 billion). So far, nothing hascome of the international aspects ofthis effort.

An evaluation system efficiencyand a development agreement by theBritish Ministry of Defence tookplace in 2000. In February 2001,Geoff Hoon, the defense secretary,decided against the development of astrike aircraft to replace the Tornado.Although he did not rule out the pos-sibility of eventually pursuing such aprogram, he indicated that the combi-nation of the Eurofighter and JSFwould meet British defense needs. In-stead, the program would focus onother strike alternatives, especiallycruise missiles and UCAVs. Theprogram has not been formallyinitiated to date.

At Farnborough 04, the CEO ofBAE Systems, Mike Turner, statedthat Britain may opt to go it alone onUCAV development as a means topreserve aerospace design and devel-opment capabilities at BAe, spon-sored by Britain’s Defence IndustrialPolicy (DIP). Turner expects Britainto fund the UCAV effort as one of sixplanned Technology ValidationProgrammes (TVP) of the AerospaceInnovation and Growth Team(AIGT). BAE’s Warton design teamwas responsible for a stealth demon-strator codenamed Replica that couldbe used to form the basis for theUCAV. Although a British UCAV



could be fostered under the existingFOAS (Future Offensive Air Strike)program, Turner stated that currentdiscussions are focused on astand-alone UCAV effort. Britain hasconsidered joining the US UCAS-program, but so far no firm commit-ment has been made and Turner’sstatements suggest that the MoD wasleaning the other way.

In 2005, the FOAS program wascancelled and in its place, a new pro-gram codenamed SUAVE (StrategicUnmanned Air Vehicles Experiment)was introduced. As the name implies,the new study program is focused pri-marily on unmanned platforms in-cluding both UCAV and cruisemissile options. BAe has apparentlybeen contracted to examine stealthUCAV technologies under the code-name Nightjar, and extension of theearlier Testbed/Replica demonstra-tion program of the 1990s. In 2005,BAE revealed that it had been work-ing on sub-scale UCAV demonstra-tors all along, designated CORAXand Raven. This effort, in conjunctionwith Qinetic, Smiths Aerospace and

Rolls-Royce, is continuing under theUK’s Defence Industrial Strategy.Qinetic has been examining autono-mous UCAV flight control using asurrogate BAC-111 test-bed.

In March 2005, the British MoDannounced plans to join the USDARPA effort to participate in theJ-UCAS effort. The UK-DARPA ini-tiative includes a $40 million invest-ment in the real-time distributedsimulation center at Wright-PattersonAFB. The program is expected to runthrough 2009 and will primarily in-volve the Defense Science and Tech-nology Laboratory, part of the UK’sDERA.

In spite of the public debate, theMoD was surreptitiously developinga UCAV program in conjunction withBAE, including a stealth demonstra-tor called Rave. In December 2006,the program became open with an-nouncement of a 124 million pound($240 million) contract to BAe to de-velop a UCVA designated Taranis(the Celtic god of thunder). The prin-cipal partners in the program areSmiths Aerospace, Rolls-Royce and

QinetiQ. The current schedule callsfor taxi tests in 2009 and first flight in2010.

Civil UAVAt the moment, UAVs cannot op-

erate in British airspace except underrestricted conditions. In 2006, the UKgovernment began funding theAstraea Project which is aimed at de-veloping technologies, systems, facil-ities and procedures to allow UAVs tooperate routinely in UK air space. Theinitial funding for the effort waspegged at 32 million pounds.

In the summer of 2007, the UKHome Office began a program to ex-amine a nationwide program to dem-onstra te UAVs for policeapplications. In the short term, the ef-fort is aimed at exploring possibleroles for UAVs, both for routine pa-trolling and for emergency services.A trials program was started by theMerseyside police and West Mid-lands emergency services using aMicrodrone MD4-400 UAV todemonstrate UAV activities.

Teal Group Analysis

Britain’s UAV program has beenin turmoil over the past few years dueto continued delays and backpedalingon Watchkeeper and delays in issuingthe development contract. In Febru-ary 2005, senior MoD officials seemto rule out much in the way of otherUAV acquisition until at least 2015due to a high level of uncertainty overrequirements. To further add to theconfusion, a variety of classifiedUAV efforts were revealed in early2006, mainly UCAV demonstratorswhich raise the issue of whether someof the earlier statements were merelycover for black programs.

Britain has traditionally had astrong ISR commitment, and it is

fairly surprising that this has taken aback seat to the tactical requirements.While Watchkeeper will eventuallysatisfy some of these needs, it is likelythat the RAF will expanded the Pred-ator B beyond the current small acqui-sition to provide to provide a basis forendurance recce requirements andhunter-killer requirements.

Bri ta in has already boughtmini-UAVs in small numbers, andcontinued peace-keeping operationsin Iraq and Afghanistan are likely tolead to some mini-UAV acquisitionseven if not in the current plans.

British naval UAV activity is alsolikely due to the traditional navy/ma-rine connection and Britain’s tradi-

tional maritime interests. It issurprising that Britain has shown solittle interest in a naval UAV to date.

The SUAVE program is a longterm effort by the UK to address itsfuture strike requirements and couldeventually involve the acquisition ofUCAVs stemming from the Taranisprogram.

So far, Britain has shown little spe-cific interest in civil UAV efforts,though the 2007 floods might encour-age the development of a domesticemergency response UAV capability.However, the greater likelihood isthat the UK will use its military assetsfor this requirement.



United Kingdom 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 20 35 35 35 35 — — 160Watchkeeper 2 2 1 10 20 20 20 20 20 20 135Naval VTUAV — — — — — 5 5 5 5 5 25MALE UAV — — — — — — 4 4 — — 8HALE UAV — — — — — — — — 1 1 2Taranis UCAV — — 1 — — 1 — — — — 2Small Civil UAV — — — — — — — — 12 12 24





Rest of the World UAV Market

Market Overview

International UAV ProgramsIsrael, which was the pioneer for

many of the current tactical UAV ef-forts, has continued to be a majorplayer in UAV sales to armed forcesaround the globe. One of its most im-portant sales in recent years was to In-dia, which is part of a broader effort tointerest India in joint military technol-ogy ties. India is interested in a robustreconnaissance capability in the diffi-cult terrain of Kashmir, and decidedto buy some off-the-shelf IsraeliUAVs rather than wait for its indige-nous programs to mature. Pakistan isemploying indigenous UAVs as wellas imported Chinese UAVs along thetroubled frontier with India. Coun-tries in the Mid East and Asia in-volved in recent conflicts have showna quick appreciation for the value ofUAVs. Iran has begun to include itsown UAVs in wargames along theGulf, and Syria operates RussianUAVs.

In the Pacific, Japan has an activeUAV program, including an endur-ance UAV, a VTOL tactical UAV and

a more conventional tactical UAV.Australia has shown special interestin endurance UAVs due to the sheerscale of its zone of strategic interest.With conditions in Indonesia being sounsettled, Australia is considering theGlobal Hawk as a means to monitortrouble spots along its northern mari-time frontier. China has displayed avariety of UAVs at international tradeshows, though there is little evidenceto what extent such systems havebeen deployed in the army.

Likely Export CustomersTactical UAVs are a new technol-

ogy that does not readily fit within ex-isting force structures. In general,new technologies such as these tendto be adopted by the more technologi-cally advanced armed forces. Themost likely candidates are the NATOcountries, the former Warsaw Pactcountries, and select advanced armedforces around the world. This lattercategory would include countries inthe Pacific such as Japan, Australia,

South Korea, India, Thailand, Singa-pore, and Taiwan. Some of thesecountries have already bought tacticalUAVs (Thailand) and others have ac-tive programs (Korea, Japan, and In-dia).

The other main area outside Eu-rope and the Pacific for the export ofadvanced military technology hasbeen the Middle East. Israel was thepioneer of this technology, and itsneighbors have also adopted UAVs(Egypt from the US, Syria and Iraqfrom the former Soviet Union). TheGulf States have traditionally been amajor purchaser of US technology.However, these armies are not partic-ularly well known for tactical innova-tion and are unlikely to acquire UAVsfor their armed forces until UAVs arewell established in European and theUS armed forces. While the GulfStates may not be a significantnear-term market for tactical UAVsfor the army or navy, there is the pos-sibility that UAVs might be applied toparamilitary problems. Many of these


RoW UAV Forecast

RoW=World less US and Europe

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20170

100

200

300

400

500

600


$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200(Expenditures, $ Millions)

Mini Tactical MALE HALE

Naval Civil Expenditures

states have border problems andUAVs might be attractive as alow-cost, low-risk alternative for bor-der patrol. Both Saudi Arabia and Ku-wait are known to have requirementsfor UAVs that seem to be more closelyoriented towards patrol duties thantraditional military surveillance mis-sions. In addition, such systems mightbe applicable to other state needs inremote areas, such as patrolling alongoil pipelines. Oman, Qatar, and theUAE are all said to be interested inUAVs.

Unlikely UAV CustomersNeither sub-Saharan Africa nor

South America has been lucrative ar-eas for high technology military sys-

tems (with certain limited exceptionssuch as South Africa). In the case ofAfrica, the sub-Saharan countries arewretchedly poor with few exceptions(Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya)and have difficulty maintaining evenmodest armed forces.

In the case of South America, theUS State Department has discouragedUS arms sales into the region withsome exceptions. Several of the coun-tries (Argentina, Chile and Brazil)have embarked on important pro-grams to build up their aerospace in-dustries. However, these efforts havefocused on more traditional areas ofdevelopment. Brazil is the soleknown exception, being involved inan abortive RPV program in the late

1980s. South America raises the issueof other potential uses of UAVs.Brazil has an active government pro-gram to undertake environmental sur-veys of the Amazon basin. Althoughthe program is now oriented towardsthe use of satellites, it is conceivablethat it could use UAVs in some roles.The second potential role of UAVs(that might receive US governmentsupport as well) would be surveil-lance of the drug crop. Surveillance ofdrug crop fields by helicopters has be-come increasingly dangerous, and itis conceivable that the US govern-ment would support an effort to de-velop a UAV to fulfill this mission.

Middle East

Bahrain

Bahrain apparently purchased asmall number of Teledyne Ryan

Scarab UAVs in the late 1980s, andlater acquired some BAI

Aerosystems Exdrones for internalsecurity missions.

Teal Group Analysis

Bahrain may consider the acquisi-tion of a medium endurance or tacti-cal UAV system in the next decade formaritime surveillance and patrol, but

its requirement is likely to be modestin scope. Bahrain has been discussingpossible coast guard applications forendurance UAVs, and is a possible

customer for a MALE or HALE sys-tem for this role.

Bahrain 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total

Tactical UAV — — 6 — — — — — — — 6Coast Guard MALE UAV — — — — — — — 2 — — 2

Egypt

Egypt is one of the few Arab ar-mies to have shown interest in UAVs,probably inspired by Israeli successesin this field. Egypt purchased 20 De-velopmental Sciences’ R4E-50Skyeye (now BAE Systems), a UAVthat had been developed for the USArmy’s 1987 IEW-UAV program. In1988, Egypt also acquired 56Teledyne Ryan 324 Scarabs for itsmedium range reconnaissance re-quirements. The Scarab apparentlyhas an operational tempo of about one

flight per month to maintain crew pro-ficiency. In April 1997, Egypt re-ported that it was on the verge ofmanufacturing its own reconnais-sance UAV called the Saham-1 (Ar-row).

The Egyptian navy ordered a smallnumber of Austr ian SchiebelCamcopter helicopter UAVs for navalsurveillance, and deliveries werecompleted in 2002.

Since the mid-1990s, Egypt hashad a requirement for at least two

UAV systems, an army electronicwarfare UAV and a new air force re-connaissance UAV.

In 2005, the Egyptian governmentapproached BAE and NorthropGrumman about modernizing its twoUAV squadrons of Scarabs andSkyeyes. BAE proposed the additionof one new squadron, but was appar-ently turned down. In 2007, Egyptcontinued negotiations with an aim tokeeping the Skyeye and Scarab in ser-vice rather than replacing them.


Page 102 Rest of the World UAV Market

Teal Group Analysis

Egypt was the first Arab country toshow much interest in UAVs. Thiswas probably due to experiences inthe wars with Israel, and specificallythe great utility of photographic re-connaissance missions by SovietMiG-25s during the 1973 war. The

current program is focused on keep-ing its older systems in service. Whilethis may be possible for a time, boththe Skyeye and Scarab are relativelyold and at some point will require out-right replacement. The forecast herepresumes that a new tactical UAV and

new MALE UAV will be acquiredlate in the forecast period for thisfunction.

Egypt 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 20 20 20 20 — — — 80Tactical UAV — — — — — — 6 6 6 6 24MALE UAV — — — — — — — — 3 3 6

Iran

Iran has a significant domesticUAV effort and one or more of thesetactical UAV systems have reachedthe procurement and deploymentstage, being used in recentwar-games. Some UAVs were used totrail the US Navy in the Gulf in 1997.In addition, Iran has provided smallnumbers of Misrad UAVs toHezbollah in Lebanon which has usedthem to harass Israeli positions acrossthe border on at least three occasions.The first use was on 7 November

2004 using a UAV dubbed Mirsad-1,but apparently a standard IranianMohajer-1 of the type built by QodsAviation Industries. The second was aflight on 11 April 2005. The third wasan Ababil UAV shot down by Israeliaircraft over the Mediterranean on 8August 2006 during the 2006 Leba-non war. On this last occasion, theUAV was used as a crude cruise mis-sile, armed with about 100 pounds ofexplosive.

In March 2007, the Yemeni gov-ernment reported shooting down anIranian Ababi l UAV in theHadramawt area. There is some sus-picion that the UAV was operated bythe pro-Iranian al-Houthi group in thearea, not actually by Iran.

The Ababil I tactical UAV was firstoffered for export by the Iran AircraftManufacturing Industries in Dubai in1997 and the Ababil II tactical UAVwas first offered for sale in 1999.

Teal Group Analysis

Iran‘s acquisition of UAVs is ham-strung by its pariah status and its lim-i ted hard currency defenseprocurement funding. Its indigenous

programs are relatively unsophisti-cated, but point to a genuine interestin this technology. Some further ac-quisition of tactical UAVs over the

forecast period is likely, though a lackof information on these programsmakes any estimate extremely specu-lative.

Iran 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — 10 30 30 30 — — — 100MALE UAV — — 6 6 6 — — — — 6 24

Israel

Israel pioneered the tactical use ofmini-RPVs with the Scout and Mas-tiff programs of the early 1980s. TheMalat division of Israel Aircraft In-dustry dominated early UAV devel-opment in Israel, though in recentyears, several other firms have devel-oped privately funded UAVs. At-tempts to merge the privately ownedSilver Arrow with the publicly ownedIAI Malat plant were frustrated in1997 by an IAI worker’s strike, andSilver Arrow is now part of Elbit. Inspite of its extensive array of UAVcompanies, Israeli domestic UAV re-

quirements to date have been verymodest, with Israel seldom operatingmore than about 30 UAVs (at least ac-cording to public information). In-deed, the shortfa l l in UAVcapabilities led the Israeli govern-ment to contract out UAV work for se-curity patrols over Gaza and the WestBank.

The Israeli air force 200 Squadronflies the Malat Scout and SearcherUAVs and is based at PalmachimAFB. The new Silver Arrow Heron450 purchased in 2000 permitted thecreation of a second Air Force UAV

squadron. The Israeli army also hasformed a UAV squadron for tacticaloperations, which has increased theIsraeli order of battle from one tothree squadrons. The Navy joined inUAV operations in January 2006,fielding a small unit in conjunctionwith the IAF for coastal surveillanceusing two Heron (Mahatz).

Early Israeli RPV DevelopmentDuring the 1973 Mid-East war, the

Israeli Defense Force used two typesof US RPVs, the Teledyne RyanModel 124I for strategic reconnais-


Rest of the World UAV Market Page 103

sance, and the Chukar target drone asa SAM decoy. Development of thefirst Israeli RPVs was the brainchildof Alvin Ellis, who had worked on au-topilot design for the Teledyne RyanFirebee series in the 1960s. Ellis waspresent at trials of a Firebee recon-naissance version using video cam-eras for real-time surveillance. Hisexperiences convinced him thathigh-speed RPVs like the Firebeewere unsuitable for real-time obser-vation at low altitude, and that asmaller and slower mini-RPV wouldbe more suitable. Ellis returned to Is-rael in 1967, and with a colleague atIAI, Jehuda Manor, began the privatedevelopment of a mini-RPV calledthe Owl. Ellis proposed commercialdevelopment of a mini-RPV to IAI,but was turned down. Asecond proto-type of the Owl using an inexpensiveSony video camera was demonstratedto Tadiran in February 1974, leadingto a development contract. TheTadiran mini-RPV was code namedMastiff and the first prototype wasdemonstrated in 1975. Through 1979,interest in the Mastiff was minimalwith only two sold. The Israeli airforce formed its first UAV squadronin 1971 at Palmachim AFB and beganusing it for real-time observations in1980 with the acquisition of the Mas-tiff. There were a small number of

Mastiff 3 UAVs in service during the1982 Lebanon war.

Unwilling to leave the market en-tirely to Tadiran, in 1976 Israeli Air-craft Industries (IAI) decided toembark on an RPV program, aimedprimarily at the Israeli Air Force.Their Scout 2 RPV was first displayedin 1981 and some developmentalmodels may have been used in the1982 war.

Details of the scope of productionof early Israeli UAVs are sparse. The

Mastiff was sold to the Israeli Army,the US Navy and Taiwan (two sys-tems). The Scout UAV system wassold to the Israeli Army, Israeli AirForce, and several other countries in-cluding Singapore (operated by 128Squadron), South Africa and Switzer-land (one system, four air vehicles).The South African firm Armscor wasinvolved in licensed production of theScout, and this system was employedin combat over Mozambique in 1983where at least one was shot down.

During development of the Mastiffand Scout, aeronautical research byTadiran and IAI at the Haifa Instituteof Technology convinced the Israeligovernment that the two separate de-velopment efforts were too similarand wasteful. The Israeli governmentinstructed IAI and Tadiran to consoli-date their efforts. This led to the for-mation of the Mazlat joint company,with IAI providing the air vehicle andTadiran, the ground control system.In 1989, Israel Aircraft Industries ac-quired the Tadiran share of Mazlat,and the new subsidiary was renamedMalat Systems.

New IAI Tactical UAVsIn 1988, the IAI Malat Systems di-

vision began work on a third genera-tion UAV, the Searcher. This is



IAI Searcher

Elbit Hermes 1500

intended as a long-endurance UAV,and is significantly larger than theearlier Scout and Mastiff, but smallerthan the BQM-155 Hunter. The sys-tem was first announced in 1989 andthe first prototype was displayed inSingapore in January 1990. Testingby the Israeli Defense Force was com-pleted in November 1991. Besidesconventional electro-optical sensors,the Searcher can be fitted with nuclearmonitoring equipment.

Searcher production started in1992 to replace the Mastiff and thefirst deliveries to the air force weremade in July 1992. The first foreignorder for the Searcher came in Febru-ary 1992 of one ground station andfour air vehicles at a cost of about $10million for the Royal Thai Army. Re-cent orders include Singapore.

IAI HeronIAI’s latest design is the Heron

(Mahatz in Hebrew), designed forlong endurance roles. The airframe ispartly composite, and it has an8.5-meter wingspan with a wet wingdesign. Israeli sources indicate it isbeing offered “for several programs.”It had its first flight on 18 October1993. In June 1995, IAI announcedthat it is planning to fit the Heron withthe Elta EL/M-2022U surveillanceradar for naval surveillance roles. In1994, IAI announced it was workingon a high-altitude UAV patterned onthe Heron. The Heron has formed thebasis for the Eagle 1 being developed

in Europe for France‘s endurance re-quirement. The first sale of the Heronwas to India. In 2005, IAI announcedthat the Israeli air force was planningto acquire “several dozen” Herons toreplace the existing Searcher inven-tory. The contract announced in May2005 was for $60-80 million for eightair vehicles and the associated GCS.

Heron has been exported to sev-eral countries with Turkey ordering10 systems in 2005, and the IndianNavy ordering four in 2004.

Elbit/Silver Arrow HermesSilver Arrow, a newcomer to the

Israeli UAV market in the 1990s is

jointly owned by the Israeli electron-ics firm Elbit and Israeli defenseoptronics firm El-Op which pur-chased the remaining 50% stock inMay 1998. In 1995, Elbit unveiled theHermes 450 endurance UAV at theParis Air Show. The -450 designationindicates the maximum take-offweight of the air vehicle. Silver Ar-row has also developed the heavierHermes 750 design. Silver Arrow hasalso demonstrated a long endurancedrone, the Hermes 1500, which has amission radius of 200 km and an en-durance of over 40 hours with a400-kg payload. This UAV is pow-ered by a pair of Rotax 914 100 hp en-gines. It was first rolled out in thespring of 1998.

Silver Arrow showed two newUAVs at the 1995 Paris Air Show, theDarter, a small battlefield surveil-lance drone with a combat radius of90 km and endurance of 10 hours, andthe Colibri, a small drone intended tobe used for UAV crew training. In1997, it unveiled the Sniper closerange UAV, with a 50-km radius,6-hour endurance and 20-kg sensorpackage using the Hermes typeground control station. Silver Arrowhas also developed another tacticalUAV called Hermes 180.



IAI Heron

Elbit Hermes 450

Elbi t was a partner withThales-UK in the Bri t ishWatchkeeper UAV program, offeringits Hermes 180 and -450 under thenames WK-180 and WK-450. In July2004, the British MoD announcedthat this team was the preferred bidderover a team headed by NorthropGrumman. Due to immediate needsby British forces overseas, theWatchkeeper program was acceler-ated in 2007 by directly acquiringHermes 450 systems from Israel.They were first operationally de-ployed in September 2007.

Harpy Anti-Radar DroneIn 1997, the first details of Harpy

anti-radar drone sales were madepublic. The Harpy is an IAI-MBT Di-vision derivative of the Dornier DARair vehicle, fitted with a passive radarseeker and a small warhead. It has re-portedly been in production since1988 for the IDF. A joint venture tointerest the US in the system in con-junction with General DynamicsConvair in 1988 was unsuccessful,reportedly after GD became disturbedby IAI approaches to Hughes.

In April 1997, it was announcedthat South Korea is purchasing 100 ofthe drones at a cost of 40 billion won($45 million) with deliveries through1999. Turkey acquired 108 Harpiesfor the air force, and has plans to ac-quire a further 46. IAI also noted thatthe drone has been sold to India, butdetails of the scope of the sales havenot been revealed. In June 1997, itwas reported that sales of the Harpy todate have totaled more than $200 mil-

lion, which suggests that productionwill total about 450 air vehicles. Inlate 2000, IAI announced that it haddeveloped a datalink system forHarpy which would allow a user tolaunch several harpies into a targetarea, and receive periodic updates andinstructions based on other intelli-gence sources. Israel also sold Harpyto China in 1994 and this caused a ma-jor row with the US in 2005 when itwas disclosed that Israel was also pro-viding China with updates. The up-grade was supposed to include adatalink to allow army units to directthe Harpy against specific targets.

Stalker UCAVIn February 2002, Israeli officials

indicated that development work hadbegun on a “sensor-to-shooter”UCAV called Stalker. The system ap-pears to be a demonstrator as it is de-scribed as being powered by a 22 hpengine with a take-off weight of only120kg and a payload of only 25 kg.

Moab BMD UAVThe US Ballistic Missile Defense

Organization had about $15 millionin the FY96 budget to fund collabora-tive efforts between the US and Israelto examine the use of a boost-phaseinterceptor (BPI) type weapon,launched from a high altitude UAV.Rafael is currently examining such amissile, called Moab (a.k.a. Moav),which uses seeker technology fromthe Python 4 AAM mated to a newhigh-speed booster that gives it a 2m/sspeed and a range of 80-100 km. In1994, the Israeli government awarded

a development contract for theassociated HA-10 UAV to IAI for theair vehicle, Rafael for the Moab mis-sile and Wales for system integration.This program was cancelled in May1999.

The program was revived in 2001,with the UAV being developed byIAI’s Malat division. Current planscall for a UAV with a 3,000-4,000 kgtake-off weight and a wingspan ofabout 20 m.

I-View Close-Range TUAVOne of the new IAI UAVs shown

at the Paris Air Show in 2003 was theI-View. This is a close-range tacticalUAV which is intended to fill the gapfor requirements under the Searcher.While the Searcher has a 100 kg pay-load, the I-View has a 30 kg payload.Likewise, range and endurance isless. The layout is conventional with a“V” butterfly tail and a front mountedpuller propeller. The UAV has a con-ventional wheeled undercarriage.I-View was offered in a teaming ar-rangement with Boeing for the Aus-tralian TUAV requirement and wasselected in late 2005.

New Israeli Skyrider Mini-UAVRequirement

The Israeli Defense Forces havehad a program underway since 2002for a mini-UAV for army and otheroperations. The program formallystarted in 2004 when the Elbit Sky-lark was selected for a technologydemonstration. A contract for serialproduction was slated for late in 2005but has been continually delayed asadditional companies have enteredthe competition.

In 2002, the Israel Defense Forceestablished a requirement for amini-UAV for support of army pla-toons and companies. Rafael’s entryin the competition was different frommost UAVs in this category, it was de-signed to be tube launched like a mu-nition. The system was man-portableand designed for short-range,short-endurance for small tacticalunits. Once out of its launch tube, theUAV wings fold into position and the



I-View

Skylark is powered by a conventionalpusher prop. The usual tactical orga-nization would be a two man teameach carrying one UAV and launcheran a mission control unit. At Paris-05,Rafael displayed a reconfigured a re-named version of this mini-UAV, nowdubbed SkyLite. This retains the ba-sic configuration of the earlier Sky-lark, but the new launch tube has asquare rather than round cross-sec-tion. This is a relatively heavy UAVfor the mini-UAV category, coming inat six kg. Rafael delivered a numberof Skylite B UAVs to the IDF for usein the August 2006 fighting in Leba-non.

The Elbit Skylark entry was amore conventional design with alaunch weight of 5.5 kg and a twohour endurance. It is controlled froma man-portable GCS with aline-of-sight range of 5-10 km. Incontrast to the unconventional Rafaeldesign, the Elbit design places less fo-cus on transportability of the system,and more on actual performance ofthe UAV. The UAV can be handlaunched or launched using a bungeesling-shot. The airframe is a light-

weight sai lplane with greaterwing-span and lift than the Rafael de-sign. The Elbit Skylark has its E-Osensor suspended in a pod under thewing. The Skylark was used opera-tionally by the IDF in the August2006 Lebanon fighting.

The Elbit/Silver Arrow Seagull isanother Elbit mini-UAV using a fly-ing wing design. The air vehicle issmall and light (5.5 kg, 2.14m wing-span) with a four hour endurance. TheEMIT Sparrow-N Mini-UAV was thethird Israeli mini-UAV to debut at theParis 2003 air show. Unlike the Sky-larks, this system uses a bungeelauncher similar to that of the GermanLuna program. The configuration isconventional with a rear mountedpusher prop. The air vehicle has a E-Opayload in the nose like the IAI Sky-lark. It uses inflatable bladders tocushion the landing rather than aparachute. The IDF finally selectedthe Elbit design for its Skylark tech-nology demonstration in 2004. Oneof these was lost in action when itcrashed while supporting a specialforces unit near Nablus on 20 Febru-ary 2006. Elbit has subsequentlydemonstrated an enlarged version, the

Skylark II with a larger payload andgreater endurance.

In the intervening period, severalother Israeli firms have been enteringthe Mini-UAV field. TOPiVision,based in Holon, debuted their Cas-per-200 mini-UAV at Paris-05. This istypical of this class of UAV with elec-tric propulsion and a model sailplaneconfiguration, weighing 2.3 kg. It isdesigned to be entirely portable in asingle back-pack and the GCS is asmall control station similar in size toa lap-top. The camera is mounted inthe fuselage nose with a swivelingball structure to permit a wide angleof camera swivel. The usual operatingaltitude is 70-250 meters and it flies at15-45 knots. The endurance was notgiven, but in view of its 1:15 glide ra-tio, it could presumably be poweredinto an area and coast back to con-serve power.

Aerostar is offering their Orbiterfor the mini-UAV requirement. It issomewhat different from other UAVsin the class in being significantlylarger while still being portable in aback-pack. It also uses electric pro-pulsion, but is about three times theweight of the Casper 200 at 6.5 kg.



Rafael SkyLite

Rafael Skylark I

Aerostar representatives argued thatthe larger weight and size are neces-sary to provide an adequate stabilizedsensor package. They contend thatmost of the smaller mini-UAVs areconstrained by their small size whichinvariably means cameras which lackstabilization or adequate fields ofview. The sensor in the Orbiter is aControp D-Stamp stabilized CCDcamera.

IAI’s Malat division is offeringtwo mini-UAVs. The BirdEye 400 is aback-back contained flying wing de-sign with electric propulsion and anoverall take-off weight of 4.1 kg. Theground control station is a hardenedlaptop. Malat is also offering the BirdEye 100, which uses the same systembut is a smaller air vehicle with a moreconventional aircraft configurationweighing 1.3 kg. Malat is also work-ing on a micro-UAV dubbed Mos-quito which can operate using thesame Bird Eye system but the air ve-hicle weighs only half a kilogram.

IMI entered the contest in early2006 with a small electric poweredmini-UAV called Rainbow.

IDF Acquires New UAVsIn 1997, it was reported that the

IDF was purchasing an undisclosednumber of Hermes 450S UAVs butother accounts suggest that this didnot occur until February 2002.

In May 2005, it was reported thatIAI was selected to supply the Israeliair force with a version of the IAI

Heron, variously called Mahatz 1 andShoval, as its next TUAV with inten-tions to replace the Searcher. The re-quirement is stated to be eight airvehicles along with associatedground control equipment and sen-sors, at a cost of about $50 million.

Hunter-Killer UAVThere have been repeated press ac-

counts of the Israeli use of armedUAVs, but little public discussion oftheir configuration or operations.They have apparently been used onseveral occasions for strikes againstHamas operatives in the Gaza strip.The first reported case was the attackon Sheikh Ahmed Yassin of Hamas inMarch 2004. During the August 2006fighting in Lebanon, there were nu-merous reports of the use of armedUAVs. Reports suggest that the Heronis the main airframe used in these op-erations, and that both Spike NT andHellfire missiles have been em-ployed.

Eitan/Heron 2 HALE UAVIAI’s Malat division has been

working for some time on a long en-durance UAV about three times thesize of the current Heron-1. The pro-gram is called Eitan (Strength) andtwo prototypes began flying around2005. The air vehicle has a 26 meterwingspan, 5,000 kg take-off weight,and 50 hour endurance. It is poweredby a Pratt & Whitney CanadaPT6A-67 1,200 hp turboprop and isintended for long range reconnais-sance. Presumably it is intended tosupplement the Ofeq spy satellite pro-gram which has encountered launchdifficulties in recent years, especiallyover crucial targets such as Iran. In2006, Israeli press accounts indicatedthat Eitan is also being viewed as apotential armed UCAV to deal withdistant objectives such as Iran. TheEitan was first unveiled at the ParisAir Show in June 2007.

There have also been press ac-counts that Eitan would be employedfor long-range naval patrol, and Israelis also contemplating an aerial refuel-ing version.

Maritime Patrol UAVThe Israeli MoD began consider-

ation of a maritime patrol version ofthe Gulfstream Aerospace G550bizjet converted into a UAV. Asimilarconcept has already emerged as a con-tender for the US Navy BAMS UAVeffort. Israel is planning to acquire areplacement for the IAI 1124 Seascanmaritime patrol aircraft, and arobotized Gulfstream is one of the op-tions under consideration. Israel is al-ready contracted to acquire four G550



Rafael Skylark II

IAI Bird Eye

aircraft under a $473 million contractwith Gulfstream. Elbit/Silver Arrowhas unveiled a version of its Hermes1500 MALE UAV for this role aswell, and the IAI Malat Eitan is beingconsidered for maritime patrol aswell. In the interim, the Israeli navybegan operating two Herons with IAFsupport starting in early 2006.

Lebanon Air CampaignDuring the f ight ing with

Hezbollah in Lebanon in August2006, the IDF conducted 16,000hours of UAV operations of which

13,000 hours were intelligence mis-sions. The Hermes 450S was creditedwith 15,000 hours of flight time withthree lost during operations. The pri-mary UAVs in use were theSearcher-2, the Hermes 450S “Zik”and the Heron-1 “Shoval”. Besidesthe tactical UAVs, the IDF also re-ceived low-rate production versionsof the Elbit Skylark and RafaleSkylite B mini-UAVs.

Civil UAVIsrael has conducted a number of

demonstrations of civil UAVs. The

government has leased AerostarUAVs from Aeronautics DefenseSystems to conduct police surveil-lance over the Gaza strip and WestBank. In 2006, the Israeli Highwaypatrol leased Aerostar UAVs to con-duct a demonstration of the use ofUAVs in police highway patrol mis-sions. The demonstration was widelyregarded as successful due to the rela-tively low operating costs of the UAVvs. manned aircraft.

Teal Group Analysis

The maturation of Israeli tacticalUAV systems as well as their demon-strated utility in recent conflicts willhelp Israel garner new export orders.Although Israel’s share of the worldmarket has dropped compared to the1990s, this is of less significancesince the overall size of the market inUAVs is expanding. Israeli firms havehad a string of successes in recentyears including some significant salesto India, the I-View sale to Australia,Shadow 200 in the US, andWatchkeeper in the UK.

The Israeli armed forces have avery modest UAV force, currentlybuilding up to three squadrons (twoIAF, one Army). UAVs have provedto be very useful in recent peacekeep-ing operations during the Palestinianintifada and the 2006 Lebanon war,

and this is likely to lead to a stream ofsmall orders as attrition spares.Should Israel continue with its plansto build a security fence along thefrontier with Palestine, an expansionof the UAV force for border patrol islikely, with the UAVs probably beingcontrolled by the border police. Israelhas been acquiring the Heron MALEUAV and is likely to field a squadronof the new Eitan HALE UAV.

Israel has shown considerable in-terest in the development of an endur-ance UAV to serve as a platform for aboost-phase anti-missile system.Such a project is expensive, and so farthe US has proved to be only mildlyenthusiastic about funding such aventure due to the conviction that theUS Air Force Airborne Laser is abetter approach. Israel may decide to

fund this indigenously, but the costand complexity implies that it may bea decade before such a system is readyfor deployment.

Given Israel’s traditional role as apioneer in this technology, it wouldnot be surprising to see Israeli firmspush ahead in many of the new areasof UAV development, if for no otherreason than to spur export sales. AUCAV effort comparable to the USX-45/X-47 is probably outside Is-rael’s budget, but development of ahunter-killer strike UAV has alreadytaken place using existing TUAVs asplatforms, and the development of adedicated strike UAV is possible. Is-raeli firms have developed mini- andmicro-UAVs, but aside from the Sky-lark program, most of these are proba-bly intended for the export market.

Israel 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 100 — — — — 100 100 100 100 — 500Army UAV — — 15 15 — — — — — — 30Strike UAV — — — 5 5 5 5 — — — 20Police TUAV — — 10 10 10 5 — — — — 35Heron-1 UAV 8 — — — — — — — — — 8HALE UAV 2 2 — — — — — — — 2 6HALE/BMD UAV — — — — — 1 2 — — — 3

Jordan

Until recently, Jordan has not beensignificantly involved in any knownUAV operations. In 2005, JordanAerospace Industries announced itwas teaming with the KADDB (KingAbdullah II Design and Development

Bureau) weapons organization tobegin local development and manu-facture of UAVs under the name Jor-dan Advanced Remote Systems. Theconsortium debuted a family of UAVsat the IDEX-05 in the UAE in Febru-

ary 2005. The booth had three UAVs,ranging from a back-pack mini-UAVto a small tactical UAV. The JordanSilent Eye is a small, hand-launchedmini-UAV operating at about 300 feetwith an operating radius of about 10



km. The Jordan Falcon is a small tac-tical UAV using catapult launch andparachute recovery. It has a endur-ance of four hours and has a payloadof six kg with a nose mounted color

TV or infrared sensor. The Jordan Ar-row is similar in size to the JordanFalcon but is intended to be a con-trolled aerial target rather than a re-connaissance UAV.

Teal Group Analysis

Jordan’s indigenous UAV effortappears to be aimed both at domesticrequirements as well as at addressinga modest market for UAVs in the re-

gion. The Jordanian armed forces arelikely to acquire modest numbers ofthe two new UAVs under develop-ment, though it remains to be seen

whether JAI’s ambitions will bematched to successful technology.

Jordan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 20 — — — — — — — — — 20Tactical UAV — 6 — — — — — — — — 6

Kuwait

Kuwait has a formal requirementfor a surveillance UAV, but details arelacking. Kuwait has traditionally hadinterest in surveillance systems thatcould be used to patrol its border withIraq, and it is likely that this was pri-

mary orientation of its current re-quirement. No details are knownwhether it has already studied exist-ing systems, but General AtomicsGnat, Kentron Seekers and Flight Re-fueling Raven teams toured the Gulf

region giving demonstrations in themid 1990s.

Teal Group Analysis

Kuwait is a possible candidate fora medium endurance UAV system,

primarily for maritime surveillanceand border patrol.

Kuwait 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

MALE UAV — — 2 2 — — — — — — 4

Qatar

Qatar had a requirement for a tacti-cal UAV system in its 1999 defenseplan. This never materialized.

Teal Group Analysis

Qatar may finally procure a tacti-cal UAV system over the next decade,

but the size of the acquisition is likelyto be modest.

Qatar 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — — — 6 — — — — 6

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia has had a formal re-quirement for a surveillance UAV fornearly a decade but has taken little ac-tion on it. It is believed that the gen-eral details of the requirement call fora range of 100-200 km and an endur-ance of 4-6 hours. Systems that havebeen demonstrated are believed tohave included General Atomics Gnat750, Kentron’s Seeker and the FlightRefueling Raven. Saudi Arabia has

also examined several UAVs for po-tential applications in patrolling bothdesert border areas and its maritimefrontier.

MIKSASaudi Arabia has been negotiating

with Thales (formerly Thomson-CSF) since the 1990s for a major bor-der security system called the SaudiBorder Guard Development program,

though more commonly calledMIKSA, the acronym for the Ministryof the Interior Kingdom. The programis supposed to involve 225 border sur-veillance radar stations, about 20 sur-veillance helicopters, a number ofsurveillance cameras, 400 borderfrontier posts with associated com-munications, and caserns for about20,000 border guards. The value ofthe project has been pegged at 7 bil-



lion ($8.7 billion). The program is ex-pected to last 12 years.

Although France had expected towin a sole source contract, during theMarch 2006 visit of President Chiracto Riyadh, the French were informedthat the competition would be thrown

open to international bidding. Com-petition is expected to include BAESystems, EADS, Finmecannica, andRaytheon.

The program is expected to incor-porate UAVs for some of its surveil-lance needs, though the scope of the

program is likely to vary from pro-posal to proposal. The RFI were duein August 2006 with a formal re-sponse to the RFP in late December2006.

Teal Group Analysis

Saudi Arabia’s main interest inUAVs is for a system suitable for con-ducting border patrols in the desertwastes under the Miksa program.These missions are now performed bymounted ground units and to some

extent by helicopters. This is primar-ily a policing role to prevent smug-gling but might be expanded toinclude commercial oriented surveil-lance such as pipeline patrol. Thiscould be a very substantial program,

but so far, the extent to which UAVswill play a part is not at all clear.

Saudi Arabia has also discussedpossible maritime patrol require-ments, though this is more of a coastguard approach than a naval one.

Saudi Arabia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 60 120 300 — — — — — — 480Tactical UAV — — 18 18 18 — — — — — 54MALE UAV — — — — 6 6 6 — — — 18Navy MALE UAV — — — — — 2 2 2 — — 6

United Arab Emirates

The UAE tested a South AfricanSeeker UAV system in the late 1990sand there were reports that theemirates would acquire a small num-ber of these systems. A total of fiveSeekers were delivered in 2003,though it is unclear if this was systemsor air vehicles.

A holding company in the UAE,AES Ltd. has been offering small tac-tical UAVs based on Italian designssuch as the Nibbio and Falco. Therehave been reports that the UAE pur-chased 60 Bourdon solar poweredmini-UAVs from the French companyTechnisolar in 2002, but details arelacking.

AUAE based aircraft maintenancefirm is teaming with Korean, Swed-ish, Austrian and other foreign firmsto establish a UAV business. Calledthe UAV Research and TechnologyCenter and based in Abu Dhabi, thefirm is team with the South KoreanUcon System based in Taejon to offertheir mini and tactical UAVs. TheUAE Armed forces first contractedUcon in August 2004 to develop aGCS for UAVs, and signed a MoUwith the UAV R&T center in April2005. At the IDEX-07 in Abu Dhabi,

the firm had two displays, one in theKorean area, and another with theUAE UAV program. UAVs on dis-play included the RemoEye 002 andRemoEye 006 mini-UAVs and theRemoEye 015 small tactical UAV

The Center is also working withthe Austrian Schiebel firm whichmanufactures helicopter UAVs. Theirjoint effort is the Al Saber UAV whichpackages the Schiebel Camcopter

with a new mobile launcher system.The basic launch vehicle is a UAENimr 6x6 tactical vehicle, while theGCS and resupply vehicles are basedon the HMMWV. Full-scale exam-ples of both the GCS and re-supplyvehicle were shown at IDEX-05 andagain at IDEX-07. The UAE placedan order with Schiebel for 60 S-100helicopter UAVs in 2006 with optionsfor 20 more. The first 30 were deliv-



Yabhon

ered in late 2006, and two were de-ployed with UAE peacekeepingtroops in Afghanistan. Some local as-sembly is expected in the UAE.

The Center has also teamed withCybaero from Sweden on their Apid55, a small helicopter UAV and withGAMCO on their target drones andtactical UAVs. These efforts werecovered at the IDEX-05 show but notrepeated in 2007, which may indicate

that the program is in limbo due to theuse of the Camcopter.

A second UAV venture is beingsponsored by the UAE basedADCOM Group which has been op-erating an advanced target system di-vision since 1992, now called“Advanced Target Systems”. Thesystems on display at IDEX-05 weremostly target drones except for onereconfigured as a tactical UAV under

the name Yabhon-M. Since theIDEX-05 show, ATS had added twomore UAVs to their inventory, theYabhon-R and the Yabhon-RX. TheYabhon-RX is a significantly en-larged design with a 60 kg payloadcompared to the other two designswhich are in the 30kg range. It is alsoa long endurance design, with a statedperformance of 42 hours.

Teal Group Analysis

The UAE government has been ac-tively supporting local firms to de-velop UAV capabilities. This is part ofnational industrial policy, and is pred-icated on the idea that the UAE couldbecome a significant exporter of tacti-

cal UAVs to other Arab states in theregion.

The UAE has generally been fairlyadventurous in its own defense acqui-sitions, and it has a long standing pro-gram to monitor Iranian activity onsome of the contested islands in the

Gulf. A tactical or endurance UAVsystem would mesh with this objec-tive, but the scale of such a programwould likely be modest. Much of theother activity may be aimed at the re-gional export market of other Arabcountries.

UAE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV (Al Saber) 20 20 20 — — — — — — — 60MALE UAV — — — — 3 3 — — — 6 12

Africa

Algeria

In 1997, the South African firmKentron was granted a marketing per-mit from the South African govern-ment for the sale of Seeker UAVs to

Algeria. According to company offi-cials, the potential sale had not pro-ceeded beyond prel iminarydiscussions. In October 2000, South

African officials indicated that theSeeker would go into operational ser-vice with an undisclosed export cli-ent, and this is believed to be Algeria.

Teal Group Analysis

Algeria is a likely client for a tacti-cal UAV system based on the lessonsof its recent civil war.

Algeria 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV 6 — — — — — — — — — 6

Angola

There have been reports that An-gola has contracted UAV services

from Israeli firms for patrollingoff-shore oil terminals. There have

been no known military UAV pur-chases.

Teal Group Analysis

Angola is a possible candidate forcoast-guard type patrol UAVs, but in

the foreseeable future, it is morelikely that UAV activity will be pri-

vately funded for security applica-tions.

Angola 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — 5 5 — — — — — — — 10



Botswana

Botswana acquired three shortrange UAVs or UAV systems fromElbit’s Silver Arrow branch in 2001.

The plan was to deploy them for pa-trolling the borders with South Af-rica, Namibia and Zimbabwe. Recent

reports have also stated that Bot-swana acquired a “small numbers” ofHermes-450 UAVs from Elbit.

Teal Group Analysis

Botswana is unlikely to acquireany more tactical UAVs beyond its

initial purchase in 2001 for anotherdecade.

Ivory Coast

Ivory Coast acquired an undis-closed number of tactical UAVs fromthe Israeli firm Aeronautics DefenseSystems in 2005 during the civil war.

They were found by French peace-keeping forces during the fightingand destroyed. The French govern-ment protested to the Israeli govern-

ment about the sale, asking them toenforce the arms ban.

Teal Group Analysis

The Ivory Coast is probably un-likely to purchase any UAVs for theforeseeable future.

Libya

Libya acquired Border EagleUAVs from Integrated Dynamics inPakistan in late 2006. The company

has sold about 15-20 air vehicles tofive clients at a value of about

$300,000 which suggests that the saleto Libya was fairly small.

Teal Group Analysis

Libya is currently rebuilding itsforces since the arms embargo waslifted in 2003. At the moment, itsplans seem to be focused mainly on

acquisition of conventional arms toreplace old weapons in service. It ispossible that Libya will acquire amodest number of tactical UAVs and

mini-UAVs in the forecast period, butLibyan arms acquisition is notori-ously erratic and larger sales mightoccur.

Libya 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini- UAV — — — 10 35 — — — — — 45Tactical UAV — — — — — — 5 15 — — 20

Morocco

Morocco has purchased an undis-closed number of Developmental Sci-ences R4E-50 UAVs in the 1980s.

Teal Group Analysis

Morocco has purchased smallnumbers of UAVs, probably to sup-port its military operations against thePolisario movement in the wastes of

the Western Sahara. With this borderwar over, its short-term needs for suchsystems may have ended. However,Morocco may acquire another tactical

UAV system late in the forecast pe-riod to replace it.

Morocco 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV — — — — — — — 5 5 5 15

Nigeria

Nigeria has not operated UAVs asfar as is known, but in 2005-2006, thegovernment began to examine the

need for UAVs as a possible responseto the growing problems of illicit“bunkering” of fuel. Nigeria depends

on its oil and gas revenues, but in theproduction areas, local civilians haveregularly determined ways to open up



pipelines and steal gas and oil. Insome cases, this has led to massive ex-plosions which have killed dozens ofpeople and wrecked the pipelines.The aim would be to use the UAVs topatrol the pipeline to spot these activi-

ties. In 2006, there were reports thatNigeria had contracted AeronauticsDefense Systems from Israel threetactical UAV systems plus threeSeastar systems for maritime patrol.

Teal Group Analysis

Nigeria’s armed forces, once oneof Africa’s most modern, have fallenon hard times in recent years and have

acquired little new equipment. How-ever, the importance of oil productionto the nation’s wealth may force Nige-

ria to either acquire and operate itsown UAV force, or to lease such ser-vices.

Nigeria 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — — 10 — — — 10 20Tactical UAV 24 — — — — — — — — — 24

South Africa

South Africa has had a well-estab-lished surveillance and target UAVprogram since the 1980s, largelythrough collaborative efforts with Is-rael. In recent years, South Africa hasstruck out on its own in this field, andhas been making serious efforts to be-gin exporting its systems. The mostsignificant manufacturer of these sys-tems is the state-controlled KentronDivision of Denel, but private compa-nies such as ATE have also becomeinvolved.

Seeker Tactical UAVThe South African government ac-

quired two Israeli Scout UAV systemsin 1980, and the Scout was employedin combat over Mozambique in 1983.Dissatisfied with the Scout, the SouthAfrican air force commissionedKentron to develop a local derivativethat entered development in 1982.The Seeker UAV is heavily influ-enced by Israeli designs. It first en-tered service in 1986 and waspublicly revealed in 1988

The Seeker was deployed with the10 Squadron at Potchefstroom andsaw combat service during the fight-ing in Angola. The squadron was dis-banded in 1991 and its assets put instorage; this was apparently aboutthree systems and ten UAVs. Totalproduction is believed to have been16 UAVs for the SAAF.

The South African Air Force latercontracted Kentron to operate the sys-tem when necessary to cut down on

costs. Two Seeker systems have beenbuilt for undisclosed clients (somesources claim two clients).

In 2004, Denel began to advertisean upgraded version of Seeker calledSeeker 2.

LarkThe Lark was developed in the late

1980s as an air defense suppressiondrone to combat air defense radarslike those encountered during thefighting in Angola. It was first pub-licly revealed in 1991 under the des-ignation ARW-10. Lark appears to beconnected to the Israeli Harpy pro-gram. The first flight tests were con-ducted in November 1984, and it

reached the final stage of develop-ment in 1995. I t has beentest-launched from ships as well asground stations. Although based on aSADF requirement, it is not yet clearif there remains an actual procure-ment objective.

UAOSAdvanced Technologies & Engi-

neering Co. (ATE) developed the Un-manned Aerial Observation System(UAOS) on the basis of a South Afri-can National Defence Force(SANDF) contract for a small systemthat can be launched without a run-way to support self-propelled artillery



Kentron Seeker

units. This is part of a broader pro-gram called AS2000 aimed at fieldingan integrated artillery C3I system.The air vehicle first flew in March1995, and government funding beganthat year as well. Company spokes-men state that procurement wasscheduled to begin in 1997.

In 1997, ATE announced that theSouth African National DefenseForces are examining a new designfor their artillery spotting role,dubbed the Super Vulture. This is animproved version of the original Vul-ture for the UAOS requirement. Aproduction decision on the Vulture

UAOS was scheduled for 2000, butwas put off due to the decision to con-sider the upgraded Super Vulture forthe requirement.

Seraph Stealth UAVAt its 2002 aerospace show,

Kentron unveiled its Seraph stealthUAV. This is an outgrowth of the ear-lier Flowchart program, and is aimedat deploying a reconnaissance UAVcapable of speeds of up to Mach 0.85with an endurance of about 100 min-utes. The program appears to be basedon export potential rather than aSouth African requirement, and may

be an attempt by Kentron to recoupear l ier investments inlow-observables technology. In 2005,Denel ads showed the Seraph in a Ser-aph II UCAV configuration launchinga Mokopa anti-tank missile.

Bateleur MALE UAVDenel began advertising its new

Bateleur MALE endurance UAV inlate 2004. This air vehicle has an en-durance of 18-24 hours and an operat-ing radius of 750 km. So far, Denelhas shown a preliminary mock-up ofthe design, but it is not expected to flyuntil 2006.

Teal Group Analysis

South Africa has had its defensedevelopment programs heavilyshaped by its contacts with Israel, andits relatively extensive efforts in theUAV field are another sign of this.The Seeker is a fairly conventionaldesign, and has been built in modestnumbers for an air force requirement.The Vulture UAOS is a new system

with somewhat more limited rangeand payload capability tied to an am-bitious Army artillery modernizationeffort; acquisition was delayed untilrecently. Although a clever concept, itis hard to see a domestic requirementfor the Lark anti-radiation UAV thatwould justify procurement under cur-rent circumstances. A more likely av-

enue for South African developmentwill be a hunter-killer UAV later in theforecast period. South Africa has alsobeen asserting a regional power pro-jection policy, and the eventual acqui-sition of an endurance UAV forstrategic reconnaissance would fitthis policy, presumably the newBateleur.

South Africa 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — — 20 20 20 — — 60Tactical UAV — — — — — — — — — 6 6MALE UAV — — 1 1 1 1 — — — — 4

Asia-Pacific

Australia

In recent years, Australia has be-gun a fairly robust UAV program,with plans to acquire systems rangingfrom mini-UAVs to HALE UAVs.

The Australian armed forces havenot operated any significant numberof reconnaissance UAVs except fordemonstration purposes until re-cently. In September 2003, the Aus-tralian Army operated four UAVsfrom Aerosonde Ltd of Melbourneand used them to conduct reconnais-sance in the Solomon islands duringpeacekeeping operations there. TheseUAVs belong to the Defense Scienceand Technology Organizat ion(DSTO) which has been operatingfive Aerosonde UAVs to test sensorpayloads for future UAVs and to ex-

amine tactical UAV requirements. InMay 2005, Lockheed Martin an-nounced a partnership withAerosonde to exploit the mini-UAVmarket.

The government-owned Aero-space Technologies of Australia(ASTA) had manufactured theJindivik target drone since the 1950s,but production was halted in 1993 andthe ASTA Systems Division wasclosed. A UK order for 18 Mk 4AJindiviks led ASTA to reopen the linein 1995.

Mini-UAVThe Australian firm Codarra Ad-

vanced Systems sold at least fiveshort-range UAVs to the Australian

government in 2000. These appar-ently went to the Australian SpecialAir Services to explore their utility inspecial operations.

In November 2005, the ADF se-lected the Elbit Skylark mini-UAV toprovide support for the army’s AlMutthana Task Group in southernIraq, and has also operated the RQ-11Raven.

In the longer term, the ADF sees aneed for a mini-UAV force of about88 systems, each with four air vehi-cles.

Tactical UAVIn 1997, the Australian MoD be-

gan Project Warrendi, part of JointProject 129 for air surveillance. The



aim was to study the possible use ofUAVs to enhance the ADF’s ability todetect, locate, identify and monitorincursions into Australian territoryand territorial waters.

The program later was defined intotwo principal categories: (Broad AreaAerial Surveillance) and FAAS (focalarea aerial surveillance). The BAASrequirement was dropped in 2002,leaving only the FAAS portion.FAAS encompasses tactical UAV re-quirements while BAAS is aimed atmedium-endurance UAV require-ments. The procurement objective forFAAS was for 15 TUAVs.

Under the current JP 129 plan, theprogram calls for tender submissionsby November 2004, evaluation com-pleted in April 2005, source selectionin July 2005 and first system handedover by August 2007. The procure-ment phase of the effort is expected tocost A$100-150 million. The UAV isexpected to be deployed at brigadelevel, and the objective is for an initialorder of three systems with an even-tual goal of up to five systems, eachwith multiple air vehicles. The Aus-tralian MoD has also stated that the JP129 program could be extended to in-clude system upgrades for the UAVs,and also to expand the program tohandle a ship-board TUAV require-ment.

Some of the identified teams bid-ding on the requirement included:

• Hermes 180 (ADI Ltd /Thales andElbit Systems/Silver Arrow)

• Hermes 450 (ADI Ltd /Thales andElbit Systems/Silver Arrow: sec-ond separate bid)

• Sperwer and Aerosonde UAV

(Tenix Defence teamed withSAGEM and Saab Systems he

• Shadow 200 (BAE Systems Aus-tralia teamed with AAI)

• I-View (Boeing Australia teamedwith IAI’s Malat Division)

• Fox-T and/or Eagle 1 (AustralianAerospace teamed with EADS)

• Aerostar (Point Trading Coteamed with Aeronautics of Israel)

• Night Intruder 300 (KoreanAerospace)

In the event, only three firms actu-ally submitted bids in November2004: ADI/Elbit; BAE/AAI, andBoeing/IAI. The selection was sched-uled for June/July 2005 but this hasslipped. The program cost is expectedto be A$100 million ($75 million) fortwo systems each consisting of twoGCS and four air vehicles.

In December 2005, the ADF se-lected the IAI I-View-250 at a cost ofA$145 million (US$110 million).The plan is to form a new TUAV regi-ment, the 20

thSurveillance, target &

Acquisition Regiment with two bat-teries, each battery including twoGCS and four air vehicles. The plan isto activate the units in 2008 atGallipoli Barracks, Enoggera,Queensland. Boeing-Australia isslated to provide support for the sys-tems. The contract for the programwas delayed in July 2006 due to diffi-culties over the terms of the supportfor the system being managed byBoeing-Australia, and as a result, theteam of ADI/Elbit offering the Her-mes 450, the second-placed bidder,were asked to re-submit its bid. Thecontract was finally signed with Boe-ing Australia in December 2006, butthe delays have meant that the sys-tems will not become operational un-til late 2009. The contract value wasplaced at A$103 million ($80.3 mil-

lion) of which about A$74.5 milliongoes to IAI and the rest to BoeingAustralia for the integration of theL-3 Systems tactical data-link.

To provide interim capability inJuly 2006 the ADF began negotiatingwith Boeing over the possible acqui-sition of one or two ScanEagle UAVto support operations in Afghanistanand Iraq. A six-month contract wassigned for ScanEagle lease at a cost of$12.7 million. The operations beganin November 2006 and lasted aboutsix months.

UAV Study EffortsThe Australian firm Sonacom and

the University of Sydney’s Depart-ment of Aeronautical Engineering de-veloped the Mirli UAV in 2000-2001for naval applications as part of theBAAS effort. Flight trials began in2001.

BAE Systems Australia and theUniversity of Sydney’s AustralianCentre for Field Robotics have beenfunded to examine the ANSER (Au-tonomous Navigation and SensingExperimental Research), an effort tomanage the operation of multipleUAVs simultaneously on surveillancemissions.

In May 2004, the Australian gov-ernment announced plans to conducta national UAV technology demon-stration program aimed at developinga 100-150 kg air vehicle. The pro-



I-View

gram is being funded by the Depart-ment of Industry, Tourism andResources as part of the AerospaceIndustry Action Agenda released bythe government in April 2004.

HALE UAVThe Australian air force has stud-

ied its requirements for aerial surveil-lance, reconnaissance and firesupport for the land forces under pro-ject AIR 87 including the applicationsof UAVs to the requirement. Thearmy is also known to have aerial sur-veillance on its list of priorities sincethe 1993 Defense review as part ofProject Ninox. Program plans calledfor an RFP in 1996 and a contractaward in 1998 which did not occur.Australia examined several potentialcandidates, but the program went intolimbo with Project Air 7000 largelytaking its place.

Australia joined the US RQ-4AGlobal Hawk program as a potentialelement of the Joint Project 129Broad Area Airborne Surveillance.This effort was subsequently re-named as Phase 1 Project Air 7000New Maritime Patrol and ResponseCapability (now MUAS: Multi-Mis-sion Aerial System) and the main goalis to replace the existing AP-3C mari-time patrol aircraft force of about 13aircraft. A Global Hawk was de-ployed in Australia for trials in 2001.Phase 2 of PA 7000 is a later mannedmaritime patrol aircraft.

Australia would like to acquire 4-6aircraft and a decision was scheduledfor 2004-2005. Australia deferred itsplanned acquisition of the GlobalHawk in 2003 by at least two years toconsider merging its land and mari-time surveillance requirements into asingle aircraft. In 2004, Australia de-cided to open the bid and considerGeneral Atomics Predator C/Marineras well. Northrop announced its Aus-tralian team at the 2005 Paris air showwhich includes Tenix Defense, SaabSystems-Australia, L-3 Communica-tions-Melbourne.

The aim recently was to fund theaircraft in FY06/07 instead of FY04with an aim to deploy them in

2009-2011 instead of 2007. Australiahas also been considering the longterm potential for the HALE UAV inconjunction with the Wedgetail air-borne early warning radar aircraft.The PA 7000 requirement is expectedto have a price-tag of A$1 billion(US$770 million). Australia plannedto conduct a series of trials of theGlobal Hawk and Mariner from Lear-month over the northwest coastalshelf in 2005 to help make this deci-sion. A Global Hawk transited fromQatar to Adelaide in February 2006for a demonstration in the region in-cluding Singapore and Japan. In May2006, the government awarded Gen-eral Atomics a $2.6 million contractfor a six-month demonstration fromRAAF Base Edinburgh, north ofAdelaide. This base has hosted about10 transit flights of Global Hawkfrom forward bases in Qatar back toUS bases in California. A GeneralAtomics Mariner was used in demon-strations transmitting imagery to theHMAS Pirie, flying about 75 hoursstarting in late August 2006. Due tooperational commitments, no GlobalHawks were available so a simulationwas conducted from the NorthropGrumman Cyber Warfare IntegrationCenter in San Diego for 10 days inOctober 2007.

The US Air Force has made a pro-posal for a multi-national GlobalHawk regional force to be based onGuam. The fleet could be jointlyfunded with the UAVs providing re-gional surveillance, or the individualcountries could field their own GlobalHawks but operate them jointly. Theproposed partners are Australia, Ja-pan and Singapore.

During the summer of 2006, theAustralian government began to dis-cuss the possibility of tying its acqui-sition to the US Navy BAMSmaritime UAV effort, and did becomepart of the BAMS effort. This has hadthe effect of pushing back any finaldecision since it will be tied to the USNavy decision which is supposed totake place in the final quarter of 2007.

Australian officials have also be-gun to discuss the need for a larger en-

durance UAV capable of lofting anactive electronically scanned arrayradar (AESA) as a long-term objec-tive.

Coastwatch Border ProtectionUAV

The Australian government hasestablished a new Coastwatch/CivilMaritime Surveillance 2005/CMS 04border protection program to exam-ine new technological approaches tocivil maritime patrol. Since 1994, thisrequirement was satisfied by a con-tract with Surveillance Australia us-ing Bombardier Dash 8 turboprops.The Australian government has re-cently shown more interest in shiftingat least in part to UAVs for this role,and the annual budget for the programis pegged at about A$70 million(US$46 million). General Atomicshas teamed with the Australian basedNational Air Support firm to offer thePredator B/Mariner for this require-ment. Other bidders are expected tobe Aerosonde, EADS, IAI, andNorthrop Grumman. This program isviewed as a civil program, distinctfrom the Joint Project 129 effort. ARequest for Tender was scheduled forthe 2004-05 time frame. GeneralAtomics has teamed with NationalAir Support which currently providesfixed wing aircraft for the Coastwatchprogram. General Atomics is offeringthe Mariner (Predator C) UAV for thisrequirement.

The Australian governmentsigned a $1 billion (US$740 million)contract with the National Air Sup-port subsidiary of Surveillance Aus-tralia for Civil Maritime Surveillancewith the contract running from 2008to 2020. The Surveillance Australiabid included the use of the MarinerUAV. The scale of the purchase so faris unclear in terms of time-frame orscope of purchase.

The federal government has alsosponsored workshops at theQueensland University of Technol-ogy to begin to examine futurecivil/government roles for UAVs in-cluding wildfire detection, crop



spraying, border surveillance andother applications

UCAVThe Defence Science and Technol-

ogy Organization (DSTO) launched aprogram in 2004 to begin exploringswarming UCAVs for future defenseneeds. The study program is beingconducted in conjunction with BAESystems Australia, and has beendubbed FURI (Future UAV for Re-connaissance and Interdiction). The

program is expected to include adata-fusion effort by BAE SystemsAustralia, and a collaborative effortbetween BAE and the University ofSydney using the Brumby UAV andAerosonde UAV to test ELINT pack-ages on UAVs in conjunction withdata-fusion to demonstrate targetingcapabilities of UAVs.

Australian air force officials in2006 began to discuss cutting the fu-ture F-35 JSF fighter acquisition from100 to 65-70 with the remaining

money to be diverted to a UCAV in-stead.

Naval UAVAustralia is expected to have a re-

quirement late in the forecast periodassociated with its Sea 4000 Air War-fare Destroyer. The program is ex-pected to include the capability tocarry up to three vertical take-off na-val UAVs. The overall requirement isfor three of the ships with the first en-tering service in 2013.

Teal Group Analysis

The troubles in Indonesia haveforced Australia to reassess its de-fense policy. Reconnaissance of thenorthern frontier towards Indonesiahas assumed a high priority, not onlydue to security concerns, but potentialimmigration concerns in the event offurther turmoil. In the short-term,Australia is looking at Global Hawkor Mariner to fulfill its enduranceUAV requirement.

The Australian army is also likelyto support the JP 129 tactical UAV ef-fort after its experiences in East

Timor and the Solomons where UAVsshould prove useful in extreme ter-rains for peacekeeping missions. Sofar, this is a fairly modest program in-volving about two dozen air vehicles.Australia has also begun to acquiremini-UAVs on a crash basis and amore structured program with addi-tional mini-UAVs seems likely.

The application of enduranceUAVs for coastal patrol also seems apossibility, though given Australia’spast track record on schedules, thiswill probably slip to late in the fore-

cast period. It is not at all clear whythe Coastwatch and endurance UAVprogram have not been integratedgiven their similarities. The federalgovernment has begun studies of fu-ture UAV applications, but these seema fairly distant requirement at the mo-ment and probably beyond the currentforecast period.

Australia is considering the use ofUCAVs for its future strike require-ments, but 2018 is cited as the earliestpossible date for use, so is outside thetime frame of this forecast.

Australia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 40 80 80 100 — — — 300Tactical UAV 12 12 — — — — — — — — 24Navy VTUAV — — — — — — — 3 3 3 9HALE UAV — — — — 1 1 1 — — — 3Coastwatch MALE UAV — — — — — — — — 1 1 2

China

China has had an active UAV pro-gram since the mid-1990s. However,data on the actual extent of UAV pro-duction is nearly non-existent, andthere is no information on the pro-curement objectives of the PeoplesLiberation Army or Air Force. Chi-nese aerospace firms have been dis-playing an increasing number ofUAVs at international trade shows inrecent years.

Early Chinese UAV ProgramsChinese earliest known UAV pro-

gram was a reverse engineering of theNorthrop BQM-34 Firebee drone ob-tained from Vietnam in the late 1960s.

In recent years, China has offered amodernized version configured forreconnaissance. This program hasbeen supported by the Beijing Uni-versity of Astronautics and Aeronau-tics.

AVIC Tactical UAVsThere have been a large number of

Chinese UAVs displayed at variousair shows and exhibits from severaldifferent plants and in recent years,the AVIC-1 aviation consortium hasabsorbed many of the Chinese firmsworking on UAVs. Aisheng Technol-ogy Corporation (ASN) in Xian, nowpart of AVIC-1, has displayed its

ASN-206 tactical UAV system at sev-eral international shows since the late1990s. This is a conventional TacticalUAV in pusher-configuration withtwin booms. It is launched from therear of a truck using a zero-lengthRATO and has a take-off weight of222 kg. The payload is a stabilizedsensor platform with a CCD cameraor several other options includingColor/B-W TV, LLLTV, IR line-scan-ner, frame camera, panoramic cameraor others. The ASN-206 has an endur-ance of 4-8 hours and an operatingrange of 150 km. This appears to beone of the more serious tactical UAVefforts for the PLA.



AVIC-1 is also marketing theASN-105B, another tactical UAVformerly marketed by CATIC. This isa conventional puller-prop design,marginally smaller than the ASN-206with a take-off weight of 170kg. Theair vehicle apparently shares a sensorpackage with the ASM-206, withmost of the same features on offer.The system configuration is a bitmore typical of contemporary UAVsthan is the ASN-206 which is basedaround a single air vehicle per system.In contract the ASN-105B has six airvehicles per system along with a mo-bile GCS, “main” (stationary?) GCS,photo-processing shelter, TV/IR in-terpretation shelter and a launcher.Like the ASN-206, the ASN-105Buses a zero-length RATO launchmethod.

A third tactical UAV on offer fromAVIC-1 is the ASN-15. This is actu-ally in the mini-UAV category with alaunch weight of 6.5 kg. The configu-ration is conventional using a sail-plane air frame with the fuselagesuspended under the wing. Propul-sion is a small model airplane motorwith puller prop configuration. Thesystem can use either hand or rail

launch and either belly landing orparachute. Endurance is one hour andthe operating range is 10 km. Thestandard sensor packages includeCCD camera with real-time videodownlink or a film camera. The stan-dard configuration is a system withthree air vehicles, and a ground con-trol station with a transmitter, videoreceiver, video cassette recorder,monitor and display. The system ap-pears to be small enough to be carriedon a small vehicle, or perhaps forman-portable use.

AVIC displayed models of twonew UAVs at Paris-07, an exoticUCAV and an endurance UAV. Thesehad been shown at previous shows inChina, but there is little informationas to whether these are merely con-ceptual schemes or actual develop-ment programs. The Anjian (DarkSword) is a large, stealthy UCAV.Chengdu Aircraft Corporation(CAC) is also offering an enduranceUAV patterned roughly on GlobalHawk.

CPMEIC Tactical UAVsThe Chinese CPMEIC missile ex-

port agency has displayed their PW-1

tactical UAV at aerospace shows in2005. This is a conventional tacticalUAV design using twin boom tailsand a rear pusher prop configuration.The UAV weighs 130 kg with a 20 kgpayload. The UAV uses a RATOzero-launch system, being launchedfrom a 6x6 truck. The air vehicle hasan operating altitude of 1,000 to 3,000m, an operating radius of 100 km anda six-hour endurance.

CPMEIC displayed two new tacti-cal UAVs at the MAKS-07 air shownear Moscow in August 2007, theSH-1 and SH-2. These are both fairlyconventional tactical UAVs. TheSH-1 is the larger of the two and a fly-ing wing design with a pusher prop.The SH-3 uses a twin boom designwith an inverted V tail and a pusherprop. The SH-1 system was describedin more detail and the brochure showsa conventional GCS mounted in ashelter on a truck which can controltwo SH-1 UAVs simultaneously

Other Chinese UAV ProgramsThe Guizhou Aircraft Plant dis-

played a stealthy WZ-2000 tacticalUAV in 2000, but this appears to be aprototype only. Chinese universitieshave also displayed many UAV de-signs, most of which appear to be stu-dent design studies rather thanseriously funded engineering devel-opment efforts. The Nanjing Univer-sity of Aeronautics and Astronauticsappears to be a major center for AUVengineering efforts and has displayedits designs at international air shows.These included the Green Dove-03micro-UAV, Skylark-01 micro-UAV,Yujinling helicopter mini-UAV, andGoldfinch-06 micro-UAV. None ofthese designs appear to be intendedfor manufacture and were intendedmore to demonstrate the academicprograms at the university.

Teal Group Analysis

Any assessment of Chinese acqui-sition of military UAVs is bound to be

extremely speculative given the lackof data on the Chinese programs.

China has shown an interest in keepabreast with international develop-



AVIC HALE

ments in military technology, and theUS use of UAVs in Afghanistan in2001-02 and in Iraq in 2003 has nodoubt been noticed. China is likely todeploy some number of tactical UAVsover the next decade, and an endur-ance UAV and strike UAV programare both likely as well.

Chinese aerospace industry in re-cent years has become less central-ized with several differentorganization structures competingwith one another in the export market,and probably within the domesticmarket as well. So for example, firmsassociated with the missile industry

have been developing UAVs, as wellas separate firms under the aviationministry. This sometimes causes con-fusion as multiple Chinese UAVs willhave similar technical parameterssince they are addressing similar mar-ket niches.

China 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 15 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 415Tactical UAV 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 50MALE UAV 2 — — 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 30HALE UAV — — — — — — — — 1 2 3

India

Indian UAV ProgramsIndia has attempted to step up its

UAV program largely due to experi-ences along the frontier with Pakistanin Kashmir. Although India has an ac-tive indigenous program, it has re-cently turned its attention to theimport of UAVs primarily from Israelto provide immediate capability.

India has had at least two indige-nous drone programs. The LakshyaPTA (Pilotless Target Aircraft) is aturbojet powered target drone andlimited series production was sched-uled to start in 1994 in cooperationbetween the state Aeronautical De-velopment Establ ishment inBangalore and Hindustan Aeronau-tics Inc. ADE and HAL are also work-ing on a reconnaissance UAV calledNishant based on an Indian Army re-quirement. Final tests were conductedin 2003, and it was scheduled to be in-ducted into Indian service in late2003. More recent statements indi-cate that Nishant will be inducted intoservice in 2007, but like many Indianmissile programs. Nishant may fallinto the limbo of perpetual schedulechanges with deployment alwaysseeming to arrive a year or two furtherdown the road. In 2004, the Indianarmy decided to acquire 12 NishantUAVs at a cost of $3.5 million each.This appears to be intended to supportthe indigenous development effortsince at the same time Indian officialsindicated that continued UAV pur-chases from Israel were likely.

In the 1980s, ADE developed theexperimental Kapothaka reconnais-sance UAV, but this never progressedbeyond a test-bed so far as is known.This appears to be a competitive ef-fort with another reconnaissancedrone program called Falcon, beingmanaged by the Indian Defense Re-search and Development Organiza-tion (DRDO). DRDO built severaltest airframes in the early 1990s be-fore settling on a 120 kg air vehiclefor the Falcon requirement. The Fal-con was first test flown in early 1995.

Indian officials have admitted thatthe Nishant could not fulfill all Indianrequirements so that some import waslikely. In 2003, India announcedplans for a tactical UAV programaimed at acquiring 16 short-rangeUAVs at a program cost of $87 mil-lion. This apparently refers to the IAFrequirement.

Israeli UAV ImportIndia began negotiating with Israel

for the purchase of the Seeker UAV inthe mid-1990s. In early 1997, Indiaconcluded a deal with IAI for the pur-chase of 12 Searcher UAVs followedby a further order in 2000 due to attri-tion. The Indian-Israeli deal wasbased on a broader cooperative ar-rangement with Israel offeringoff-the-shelf systems to give the In-dian armed forces some immediatecapability, while offering to assist In-dia on its long delayed Falcon UAVeffort. At the time, India had a stated

requirement for 60 systems. Pakistanhas also claimed that India operates aSouth African UAV, probably theKentron RPV-2 Seeker, but this couldalso be a misidentification of similarIsraeli UAVs. The Indian Air Forcedeployed two UAV squadrons usingIsraeli UAVs during OperationParakam, the forward deployment onKashmir border in 2002. The statedrequirement was to increase the Airforce order of battle from two squad-rons to five UAV squadrons, with abudget plan of about Rs 657 crore.

Pakistan estimated that India oper-ated 30-40 UAVs in the recent Kash-mir dispute. Other estimates varyconsiderably: one sources indicatedthat India acquired a total of about100 UAVs of various Israeli typesother sources claim up to 150. An In-dian account places the total pur-chases in 1999 to 2005 as 12 Searcher1, eight Searcher 2 and 16 Herons forthe Army; 16 Search 2 and eight Her-ons for the Air Force; and eightSearcher 2 and four Herons for theNavy for a total of 12 Search 1; 32Searcher 2, and 28 Herons.

India also acquired the largerHeron UAVs from Israel for army,navy and air force use. The navy hasbeen operating these over theAndaman sea from Kochi near theheadquarters of Southern NavalCommand, but they may also be de-ployed with other naval commands inthe future.



Tactical UAV RequirementRecent Indian MoD procurement

plans have advocated a substantial in-crease in tactical UAV acquisition.The short term requirement is statedto be 200-250 tactical UAVs at a costof $300 million and a long term objec-tive of about 500 UAVs. There werereports in January 2004 that India wasplanning to place an order with IAIfor a package of Searcher 2 UAVs,Heron UAVs, and Harpy anti-radardrones at a cost of $300 million. Asmentioned below, India now plans adomestic initiative, but Indian offi-cials have also stated that continuedpurchases from Israel are likely.

New Indian UAV ProgramIn the wake of continued problems

with its existing domestic NishantUAV program, in 2005 the Indian

Aeronautical Development Estab-lishment in Bangalore announcedplans to initiate a new program under-taken with assistance from Israel’sIAI Malat division.

The program will encompass threeUAVs: the Rustam medium-altitudelone endurance (MALE) UAV, theGagan Tactical UAV and the Pawanshort-range UAV. The program is ex-pected to start with the RustamMALE requirement and the develop-ment effort is expect to cost about$100 million for a four year programand the construction of four proto-types. Gagan is expected to be an off-shoot of the existing Nishant programwith a 250km operating range andcost about $55 million for a 3.5 yeareffort with four prototypes flying bythe autumn of 2008. Pawan is ex-pected to be similar to the Israeli

Eye-View with a range of about 150km, aimed at divisional level require-ments. The plan is to use Israeli elec-tro-optics and a foreign powerplant toaccelerate the program. The programcost is pegged at $35 million and isexpected to be completed in two yearswith four prototypes being con-structed.

Naval UAVIn December 2006, Navy chief

Admiral Sureesh Mehta announcedthat the Indian Navy planned toaquire small helicopter-type UAVsfor ship-borne use.

UCAV ProgramIn February 2007 at the Aero India

show, the DRDO announced plans tostart a 15 year, $5.6 billion program todesign and build 100 strike UCAVs.

Teal Group Analysis

During the Kashmir crisis over thepast few years, both India and Paki-stan have made use of UAVs due tothe difficulties of the terrain in thearea. This has convinced India of theutility of UAVs, and the Air Forcecurrently has two UAV squadrons.However, Indian defense procure-ment policy is frequently torn be-tween the desire to build up thedomestic aerospace industry and the

need for immediate military capabili-ties. The defense projects managed bythe Indian defense research establish-ment have a habit of going on for de-cades and resulting in products whichare outdated by the time they enterservice. As a result, the combat armsare usually in favor of import of keytechnologies, or license production.

India is likely to continue to ac-quire a modest number of tactical

UAVs, probably from Israel. The In-dian Air Force would like to expandfrom the current two UAV squadronsto five squadrons. This effort is likelyto include the acquisition of endur-ance UAVs for at least one of thesquadrons. The Indian army is alsolikely to get involved in acquisition ofshort-range tactical UAVs as outlinedin the Pawan program, though thesemay end up being Israeli systems.

India 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini- UAV — 20 20 — — — — 30 50 150 270Army Tactical UAV — 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 90AF Tactical UAV 10 10 10 10 — — — — 10 10 60Navy UAV — — — 12 — — — — 6 12 30MALE UAV — — — — — — 10 10 — — 20

Indonesia

The Indonesian Army’s BAISStrategic Intelligence Agency ac-quired a single system of EADS (for-merly CACA Systems) FoxAT2-MLCS tactical UAVs consistingof one GCS and four air vehicles.There have also been unconfirmed re-ports that Indonesia acquired someBlue Horizon UAVs, though it is not

clear if these came directly fromEMIT in Israel, or from license pro-duction by firms in Singapore. AlocalIndonesian firm, PT Wesco Aero-space, has developed the SS-5 UAVwith government support with firstflight trials in September 2004. Thesystem is also known as the PTTA(Pesawat Terbang Tanpa Awak). The

firm is expecting an order for the sys-tem, expected to cost $6.5 million forfour air vehicles and a GCS. The In-donesian armed forces made plans todeploy the JSS-5 to Aceh as part of aneffort to stamp out a secessionistmovement in the province.

In November 2006, the Indonesianair force announced plans to acquire



four IAI Searcher 2 UAVs via theKital Philippines trading company ata cost of $6 million. The sale was crit-

icized in parliament as the country hasno formal diplomatic ties with Israel.

Teal Group Analysis

Indonesia has shown modest inter-est in UAVs to date, but its current cri-ses in the outlying islands has led tomore attention to this capability. In-donesia has been criticized for its

conduct of military operations againstinsurgents in the disputes, whichprobably accounts for the local effortsto develop UAV capability since therehas been some reluctance of Euro-

pean firms to sell to Indonesia, and re-luctance of Indonesian agencies toacquire Israeli systems.

Indonesia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV 4 — — — — — — — 4 — 8

Japan

Japan has had an active indigenousUAV development effort since the1980s. However, there is little evi-dence of any extensive production ofthese designs for the JapaneseSelf-Defense Force (JSDF) until re-cently.

Army FFOS UAVThe Japanese Ground Self-De-

fense Force contracted Fuji in 1991 tobegin a program for a helicopter UAVfor use in artillery spotting. The pro-gram is officially called the FlyingForward Observation System. Proto-types were completed in 1992 and en-tered trials in 1993. A total of sixprototypes were completed by TRDIin 1993, with flight trials beginning inearly 1994. Fujitsu provided the FLIRfor the system, Hitachi a terrain refer-ence system and NEC the day sensorand optical processing equipment.The system has a range of 30 milesand flies at an altitude of about 2,000feet. Flight testing lasted through thesummer of 1995. The system was ac-cepted for service by the JSDF, andthe first system was scheduled for de-livery to the army in 2004. In 1997,Fuji advertised a civil version of thisUAV as the RPH2. Potential civilianuses include agricultural crop spray-ing, surveying, environmental moni-toring, and searching for the coastguard or other police activities.

Fuji is also working on a vectoredthrust “tail-sitter” UAV, but this is atechnology demonstration effort for

the TRDI, not linked to any specificoperational requirement.

Compact Multi-role UAVIn late 1988, the JASDF decided to

develop a “stealth” television recon-naissance drone that would use con-trol technology developed for theJ/AQM-1 target drone. Fuji was pro-vided a $10.6 million contract to be-gin the engineering development ofthe program. The airframe wasall-composite and was said to resem-ble a mini-Space Shuttle. Propulsionis an improved version of theMitsubishi TJM-3 turbojet . Ahigh-performance television cameraand long-range transmission systemwas under development by Fuji. Pro-totype drones were completed during1993. The system would be capableof being air launched, or launchedfrom ground stations. The systemsubsequently evolved into the current“Multi-Role UAV” program. TheTRDI research institute has been test-ing a small jet-powered multi-roleUAV developed by Fuji Heavy Indus-tries through the late 1990s. The UAVhas been tested for launch from aF-4EJ from Gifu AFB. The system isapparently intended for several mis-sions including reconnaissance, chaffcorridor dispensing, and possibly as atarget drone. TRDI is also sponsoringthe conversion of surplus F-104 fight-ers into reconnaissance UAVs.

New Japanese UAV ProgramIn September 2003, the Japanese

press reported that the DefenseAgency had begun a multi-year pro-gram to develop a new tactical UAV.The program is expected to cost about¥9 billion ($80 million) over fiveyears with an initial allotment of ¥300million in 2004. The aim is to field atactical UAV system by 2009.

FABOTSubaru has been developing an au-

tonomous take-off and landing sys-tem for potential use on small UAVsin conjunction with other elements ofits parent Fuji Heavy Industries, Ja-pan’s premier UAV developer. TheFABOT (Fuji Aerial Robot) wasmounted in a manned powered sail-plane as a practical method around theusual problems of operating a UAV incontrolled air space without specialclearances. This permitted extensiveexperimentation without the constric-tions currently in place over UAV op-erations. The system relies on GPS,gyro and other air data sensors, and aflight control computer linked to theair vehicle controls by means of addi-tional actuators. The system providesthree main flight control functions:navigation data generation, guidancecommand output and actuator com-mand generation. The system re-quires a small station at the landingstrip including a GPS receiver and alaptop for monitoring, but these areconsiderably less extensive than the



equipment traditionally need for in-strumented landing systems (ILS).The FABOT system was tested undernormal conditions as well as underhigh cross-winds. The system isviewed as having two primary appli-cations: flight control of highly au-tonomous UAVs and a flight controlsystem to act as a cheap alternative toILS on light civilian aircraft.

Endurance UAVIn 2003, the US C-in-C PAC and

Japanese Joint Staff Office initiated abilateral study dubbed NSP (NotionalSensor Platform). The study will ex-amine the possible applications of ahigh-altitude, long-endurance UAVfor conducting maritime surveillancein the sea of Japan. The programdovetails with an earlier effort by theJapanese Coast Guard started in 2000to develop a long-range surveillancecapability to reach out as far as 3,500miles from Japan to the Strait ofMalacca to support a variety of mis-sions including anti-piracy patrols.

Japan began development of an in-digenous endurance UAV in FY03,spending about 2.4 billion yen ($23million) through 2005. There are con-tradictory reports about the currentprogress of the program. Some ac-counts indicate that the Japanese De-fense Agency has decided to go withthe RQ-4 Global Hawk for this re-quirement, citing an immediate needto have the capability to monitor de-velopments in North Korea. Accord-ing to these accounts, funding wouldbegin in FY06 with an aim to deploythe first system by FY07. Japan re-ceived formal permission to acquirethe Global Hawk in June 2005.

Other Japanese press accountsclaim that the TRDI is continuing toreceive funding to build two proto-types of an endurance UAV with anaim to begin testing them by 2012 at acost of 22 billion yen ($200 million).It is possible that both accounts arecorrect as it is not unusual for Japan to

buy US systems but continue to de-velop indigenous analogs as a methodto encourage its defense industries.Japan has been developing an Infra-red Ballistic Missile ObservationSensor System for trials on a UP-3Caircraft, but there has been no firm de-cision over whether it would eventu-ally be carried by manned orunmanned aircraft.

Agricultural Helicopter UAVIn 1983, Japan’s Ministry of Agri-

culture, Forestry and Fisheriesawarded a contract to Yamaha to de-velop a crop-dusting UAV helicopterbased on the firms previous develop-ment efforts. This program was partof a broader government effort to sup-port the Japanese rice industry whichsupplies about 95% of internal Japa-nese needs. The Japanese govern-ment has had a long standing programunderway to subsidize the industry asa matter of national policy as Japanraises only about 40% of its crops do-mestically due to its constricted geo-graphic conditions. Rice was selectedas a matter of national interest due toits traditional role in Japanese society.One of the significant problems inmaintaining rice production in Japanwas to address the issue of decliningfarm labor. As fewer and fewer Japa-nese remain in the rural farm commu-nities, the Japanese government hasattempted to substitute technology formanpower where ever possible. Atfirst, crop-dusting of the rice industrywas accomplished using helicopters.The Japanese rice industry encom-passes about 1.7 million hectares ofland and by 2000, helicopters werecrop-dusting about 0.77 million hect-ares. This work is hazardous due tothe presence of power lines, and alsorelatively expensive.

Yamaha was selected for this ven-ture in part due to its experience withmotorcycle engines which were themost likely basis for the propulsion ofan economical VTUAV. Serial pro-

duction of the R-50 VTUAV began in1987, and the vehicle was substan-tially redesigned as the RMAX whichreached production in 1991. Othercompanies also tried to enter this fieldsuch as the Fuji Heavy IndustriesRPH-2, but the Yamaha designs havedominated the market.

Fuji Heavy Industries began man-ufacturing their own VTUAV, theRPH-2 in 1998, but productionthrough 2003 was only 17 air vehi-cles. This is a commercial derivativeof their military FFOS VTUAV. Sofar, one of the primary application forthe RPH-2 has been governmentemergency services with the systemused by the Japanese MeteorologicalAgency since 2001 for volcano obser-vation.

By 2002, Yamaha RMAXVTUAVs totaled 1,600 of the 2,000Japanese agricultural VTUAV in ser-vice though in fact the figure is closerto 1,800 counting VTUAV sold underother brand names but built usingYamaha components. The continuingincrease in VTUAV cut into mannedcrop-dusting with VTUAV’s ac-counting for 337k hectares in 200 and649k hectares in 2004 compared tothe decline in manned helicopter cropdusting of 777k hectares in 2000 andonly 347k hectares by 2004. Accord-ing to Yamaha, the annual productionrequirement for this class of UAVs isabout 300 units with a value of about$100 million. There are about 6,000licensed pilots for these VTUAV inJapan. The method used to avoid air-space restrictions has been to restrictthe operating altitude of theseVTUAV to 150 meters.

Yamaha and other firms are at-tempting to increase the use of theseair vehicles for other applications in-cluding surveying, surveillance of di-saster/high risk environments such asvolcanoes and nuclear power-plants,and inspection of bridges.



Teal Group Analysis

Japan has traditionally supported avigorous defense RDT&E effort.This is in part due to traditional Japa-nese defense industrial policy. Be-cause of the 1% of GDP allotted to de-fense and the relatively small size ofthe JSDF, there is usually a significantpool of funds available. Much of thisis directed towards domestic procure-ment efforts as part of state industrialpolicy to bolster Japan‘s high tech in-dustries, especially in aerospace andshipbuilding. It is somewhat surpris-ing that Japan has shown such modestinterest in UAVs over the past decade.

The recent crisis in neighboringNorth Korea has led to an accelera-

tion in certain aspects of the Japanesedefense effort, including the launch ofJapan‘s first spy satellite. This haslead to greater interest in UAVs, espe-cially those that could prove useful inmonitoring events in Korea. The ac-quisition of an endurance UAV formaritime surveillance would be themost likely avenue, but some acquisi-tion of tactical UAVs for army mod-ernization also seems likely. In viewof Japan‘s traditional enthusiasm forrobotics, it would not be surprising tosee a technology demonstration effortin the UCAV field, and some experi-mentat ion with micro andmini-UAVs.

Japan is the only country with asignificant civil UAV industry,mainly oriented towards domestic ag-ricultural requirements. This programhas been bolstered by governmentsupport and seems likely to continuegiven Japan’s long term commitmentto the rice industry. It is less clear thatthe VTUAVs used in agriculture havemuch chance of diffusing into othercommercial areas as there are no pres-ent guidelines for their access to airspace beyond the current 150 meteraltitude limit.

Japan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 15 60 75 100 100 100 100 — — 550FFOS VTUAV 20 — — — — — — — — — 20Tactical UAV 5 5 5 15 15 15 15 — — — 75Naval VTUAV — — — — 3 6 12 12 12 12 57MALE UAV — — — 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 17HALE UAV — — 1 — 1 1 1 1 3 2 10Coast Guard MALE UAV — — — — — — 1 2 2 2 7Commercial VTUAV 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 3,000

Korea (ROK)

The Republic of Korea has had anactive UAV development effort forover a decade, but little of this hastranslated into actual hardware for themilitary until recently.

In December 1995, it was reportedthat South Korea was on the verge ofsigning a contract with Israel for theacquisition of unspecified UAV sys-tems as part of a $32.5 million recon-naissance program. The UAVs wouldbe acquired in 1997-2000. In August1997, it was reported that South Ko-rea had signed a $50 million contractfor the Searcher UAV with deliveriesto begin in early 1998.

A UAV program was establishedby the Ministry of Science and Tech-nology (MOST) in 2002. The Koreanindustrial plan is to attempt to secureabout 5% of the international UAVmarket by 2012. Korean analysts be-lieve that a significant civilian marketis likely to emerge by then, and Korea

would like to tailor its requirements inthat direction.

Tactical UAV ProgramsDaewoo Heavy Industries in

South Korea began at least three UAVprograms in the early 1990s. TheTRPV-1 Doyosae (Snipe) is amini-UAV carrying a very small TVcamera for real-time surveillance.Development started in 1988 for aKorean Air Force reconnaissance re-quirement. The first flight was 1993;the program was intended mainly togain some experience in UAV tech-nology. By 1994, the Korean govern-ment’s Agency for DefenseDevelopment (ADD) sponsored earlytactical UAV development withDaewoo and Korean Aerospace In-dustries working on a new UAV re-quirement called Bijo (a.k.a. Beejoe),which emerged in 1999 as the NightIntruder 300 tactical UAV. KoreanAerospace Industry is now the lead on

the program, and the Night Intruder300 was offered to Australia for itsJoint Project 129 UAV requirement,but missed the final bid. The Night In-truder 300 has a twin boom configu-ration, fixed undercarriage and rearmounted pusher prop with the E-Opayload suspended under the fuse-lage. It has a payload of 45 kg and anendurance of six hours. The KoreanMoD awarded a production contractfor the Night Intruder 300 in Septem-ber 2001 with first deliveries in No-vember 2003. A total of five systemswere delivered when the programended in late 2005. Each system con-sists of six air vehicles plus the associ-ated GCS and support equipment.The Night Intruder program had beenbased in KAI’s Changwon plant, butthe program was consolidated into theSacheon plant in 2005 after the engi-neering staff fell from about 70 to 20.

Korean Air Lines Aerospace dis-played a small tactical UAV in Sep-



tember 2007 which it states is aimedprimarily at the civil UAV market.

VTOL Tactical UAVDaewoo provided some funding to

the Russian Kamov helicopter firmfor work on the helicopter-type Ka-37UAV. This work was stated to be for acivilian requirement called the Agri-cultural Remote Controlled Helicop-ter (ARCH) involving agriculturalwork (crop spraying). Daewoo wasalso reported to be working on its ownARCH contender which flew in 1992.Daewoo has estimated that the marketfor ARCH is about 500 air vehicles.

Mini-UAVsThe ROK Army released a request

for information to domestic and inter-national manufacturers in February2007 for a s ingle system ofshort-range UAVs.

The South Korean firm Ucon isplanning to market the Duramimini-UAV developed by the KoreanAerospace Research Institute underthe name Remo Air 015. This is a longendurance meteorological UAV simi-lar in concept to the Saab/Aerosonde.The firm already markets a smaller airvehicle called the Remo Air 06 whichis roughly comparable to the USPointer mini-UAV. This mini-UAV isaimed at a South Korean Army re-quirement for a platoon and companylevel surveillance system for opera-tions along the DMZ. Ucon is also as-sociated with the UAE UAVprograms.

A potential competitor in this fieldis Y4K Telecom’s NMAS/Sky In-spector mini-UAV. This firm is work-ing with German and Russianpartners on the program, and thesmall UAV is aimed at both civilianand military applications.

KARI has also been sponsoringwork on micro-UAVs include theKonkuk University Spot MAV, andBatwing UAV.

Smart UAVThe Korean Aerospace Research

Institute (KARI) teamed with BellHelicopter in July 2002 to launch itsSmart UAV program. This is basedaround the Eagle Eye Tilt rotor UAVand is aimed at developing a reliableUAV for the civil market that can op-erate in controlled airspace. Govern-ment funding for the program is statedto be $120 million through 2012, withthe initial phase 1 costing about $22million. Phase 2, scheduled to beginin 2005, involves the design of a localtilt-rotor UAV and Phase 3, starting in2009 will deploy prototypes and con-duct flight demonstrations.

Endurance UAVSouth Korea formally asked the

US for the sale of four RQ-4 GlobalHawks in mid-2005. The US re-sponse to date is that the sale may beprohibited due to MTCR concerns.The sale was denied in 2006, and soKorea may request other US systemssuch as the Predator or take a look atother alternatives.

In November 2005, it was an-nounced that Korea Aerospace Indus-tries would undertake work on aMALE UAV with government spon-sorship, with the timeline being a startin 2006 and a 10 year developmentcycle. An air vehicle is expected to flyin 2008. The R&D program is ex-pected to cost $440 million. The gov-ernment also expects to spend about$210 million on a HALE UAV devel-opment effort starting in 2008.

Naval Endurance UAVIn late 2005, the Korean Agency

for Defense Development ap-proached the US Navy about formalparticipation in the BAMS HALEUAV program with an aim towardsacquiring such a system when it be-comes available.

Airship UAVThe Korean Aerospace Research

Institute (KARI) has been working ona powered airship UAV since 2000.The program began with a 10 meterlong pilot, followed by a 50 meterVIA-50 prototype that first flew inSeptember 2003. Phase 2 of the pro-gram began in December 2003 andaims at displaying a system capable ofremaining on station for 72 hours at65,000 feet. This phase is expected tocost $34 million of which about $9million will come from Korean firmsinvolved in the program. The finalphase beginning in late 2007 is aimedat developing and testing a 200 meterlong airship powered by solar panelsand regenerative fuel cells with an en-durance of up to one month at an alti-tude of 65,000 feet. The main role forthe system is seen as being civilianearth observation and telecommuni-cation relay roles.

UCAV ProgramKARI and MOST are expected to

begin funding a Korean UCAV pro-gram starting in 2005. The program isexpected to be a local developmenteffort.



Remo Eye 002

Teal Group Analysis

Korea was one of the first Asiancountries to show strong interest inUAVs, and to actually have a dedi-cated civilian UAV requirement. TheKAI UAV programs are probably be-ing supported by the government aspart of its general policy to bolster ad-vanced RDT&E efforts. UAVs areprobably regarded as a goodfoot-in-the-door for a country likeKorea, and a possible export productin the region.

There are several obvious tacticalapplications for UAVs by the ROKArmy. There has been long-standinginterest in surveillance to locateNorth Korean multiple rocket launch-ers and missile sites, and a tacticalUAV system would have applicationsto this mission.

North Korea has periodicallystaged small raids along the coast, andhas often infiltrated agents into SouthKorea by small boat. A persistent en-

durance UAV for surveillance couldhelp address this problem.

Much of Korea’s UAV acquisition,especially big ticket items like endur-ance UAVs, will probably occur laterin the forecast period as the economictroubles at the turn of the centurypushed back several high priority de-fense programs such as the F-15Kpurchase, and this is likely to absorbthe defense procurement funding forthe next several years.

Korea (ROK) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 10 — — — — 30 30 30 30 100 230Tactical UAV — — — 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 45Naval VTUAV — — — 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 21MALE UAV — — — — 2 2 2 2 2 2 12HALE UAV — — — — — — 1 1 1 1 4

Malaysia

In 2001, BAE Systems received a$8.5 million contract from the Malay-sian Ministry of Defense to develop apackage to convert the two-seat Eagle150 aircraft into a surveillance UAVin conjunction with the local firm ofComposite Research TechnologyMalaysia (CTRM) which manufac-tures the aircraft. The three convertedaircraft were intended for trials to de-termine their suitability to the mari-time surveillance role. If the programis successful, the Malaysian MoD hasexpressed interest in acquiring a sig-nificantly larger number. The firstsuccessful flight of the UAV was con-ducted in September 2001. The sys-tem is “ready for production whendemand requires”, that is, there hasbeen no actual procurement funding.

Other accounts indicate that at leastone has been sold to the Royal Malay-sian Air Force.

Exxcelnet Sdn Bht. (partner withCTRM) has begun an effort to de-velop UAVs, with the emphasis atfirst on its Mini-UAV, a 6.5 kg air ve-hicle with eight foot wingspan for aMalaysian Customs requirement. Theaim is to design a system within aprice-tag of about RM 1.8 million($500,000). The Mini-UAV first flewin 2003. Excelnet has begun work ona tactical UAV which was expected tobe available in 2005. The aim was todevelop a system with a unit cost of$7.5 million per system. The marketis stated to be oil and gas companiesin Africa and South American for sur-veillance and security.

In late 2005, the Army decided tofoster a UAV program and in Decem-ber 2005, CTRM, Ikramatic and Sys-tems Consultancy Services pooledtheir resources to form a new UAVteam. The plan is to base the newUAV around the Eagle SR2 demon-strator with a new design weighingabout 200 kg with a 25-50 kg payload.Besides army interest, the Malaysiannavy has stated potential interest inthe system for coastal patrol. In May2007, the MoD awarded the firms a$1.4 million contract for further de-velopment work on what is nowdubbed the ALUDRA (Allianced Un-manned Developmental ResearchAircraft)

Teal Group Analysis

Malaysia seems to be trying theusual approach of funding a UAV de-velopment to bolster the local aero-space industry. It is not clear if the

Eagle UAV program is entirely practi-cal or based on an actual requirement.Malaysia‘s traditional security prob-lems along the coast would seem to

augur well for a medium enduranceUAV for surveillance. Malaysia isalso a probable candidate for smallnumbers of tactical UAVs.

Malaysia 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 30 40 — — — — 70Tactical UAV — — — 10 10 — — — — — 20MALE UAV — — — — — — — 2 2 — 4



Pakistan

Pakistan has had a modest UAVdevelopment effort since the 1990saimed at providing small tacticalUAVs for border surveillance in thetroubled Kashmir region. These havebeen designed by firms associatedwith the National Development Com-plex, directed by Pakistan‘s NationalEngineering and Scientific Commis-sion. These include the Vector Mk 2,Nishan Mk 2 and Hornet Mk 6, manu-factured by Integrated Defense Sys-tems (IDS). These have beendisplayed at international trade showsfor potential export.

The Vector is a conventional de-sign using a twin book configurationand pusher prop propulsion. The airvehicle has a wingspan of 7.09 metersand an empty weight of 66 kg. It ispowered by a 25 hp twin cylinder gas-oline engine. It can carry a 25 kg pay-load. It has an operating range ofabout 150 km and an endurance of 4.5hours. The fuel capacity is 25 liters.Flight control consists of an ID-AP4digital gyro autopilot with headingand height control. The datalink backto the ground control station is aID-TM6 telemetry module which in-cludes a GPS system. The normalpayload is a real time daylight cam-era, but apparently other packages areavailable including acoustic sensorsand radar.

The Hornet is a short-range ad-junct to the Vector. The Hornet appar-ently stems from earlier work onaerial targets. It has a wingspan of3.87 meters, an unloaded weight of 30kg, a takeoff weight of 46 kg, and afuel capacity of 15 liters. It is poweredby a 22 hp two-cylinder engine. Thepayload capacity is 12 kg and typi-cally includes four smoke flares or sixinfra-red flares, and a real time videocamera. The system has an operating

range of 20 km, and an endurance ofone hour 35 minutes. The flight con-trol and telemetry system is the sameas used on the vector.

AWC UAVsThe Air Weapons Complex

(AWC) manufactures the Bravo andVision tactical UAVs for the Pakistanarmy. Pakistan has bought an undis-closed number of the recon UAV ver-sion of the Meggitt Banshee 400 in2001.

Mini-UAV ImportIn march 2006, Pakistan an-

nounced plans to acquire the EMTLuna mini-UAV from Germany

TUAV ImportPakistan has repeatedly used

UAVs in its recent border disputes

with India since 2000, and has im-ported some UAVs from China.

In March 2006, Pakistan an-nounced that it would acquire GalileoFalco tactical UAVs from Italy. Thesize of the initial purchase is four sys-tems.

Predator RequirementThe Pakistan government has

placed an official request with the USgovernment for potential purchase ofthe I-Gnat and/or RQ-1A Predator foruse as a strategic ISR asset.

Integrated Dynamics UAVsPakistan’s Integrated Dynamics

has sold about 15-20 UAVs to cus-tomers in Spain, Australia, South Ko-rea, Libya, and the US through theend of 2006. The air vehicles aresmall, costing about $20,000.

Teal Group Analysis

Pakistan has a clear requirementfor additional tactical UAV systems,but the main issue is where thesecould be obtained. Israel is an impos-

sible choice given Pakistan‘s politics,and Israeli clones such as the SouthAfrican programs are problematic.China is Pakistan‘s traditional sup-

plier, but its own experience in thisfield is limited. Pakistan has recentlybeen turning to Europe and the US. In2003, the chief of the air force sug-



AWC Vision 1

gested that Pakistan needed two orthree dozen Predators. At the mo-ment, the supply of the Predator

seems a bit far-fetched due to cost andtechnology concerns.

Pakistan would probably like toacquire an endurance UAV in this

time frame, and there is some possi-bility this could occur if China devel-ops such as system.

Pakistan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 20 20 20 — — — — — — — 60Tactical UAV 12 — — — — 6 6 — — — 24MALE UAV — — — — 1 1 1 — — — 3

Philippines

The Philippines is reported to havespent about $1 million in September2001 with the Israeli firm EMIT Avia-tion Consultancy for a small numberof Sting I, Sting II and Blue Horizontactical UAVs. These have been usedfor the base at Basilan to supportanti-guerilla operations. The Philip-pines Army has its own UAV devel-

opment effort, but few details of theprogram have been revealed.

Maritime Aerial Reconnais-sance and Surveillance(MARS) UAV Program

in January 2006, the Philippinepresident signed an executive order toinitiate a maritime surveillance pro-

gram. The program is aimed at field-ing a small fleet of UAVs forprotection of the maritime economiczone, counter-terrorism, internal se-curity, and disaster assistance and besuitable for use by both military andcivil authorities.

Teal Group Analysis

The Philippines is a likely candi-date for a modern tactical UAV sys-tem to support counter-insurgencyoperations. In addition, a requirementprobably has recently emerge for a

maritime patrol UAV. The main issuewill be funding as the Philippines hasa long list of urgent defense require-ments without the means to fund

them. The tactical UAV requirementis likely to be met first.

Philippines 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 20 40 — — — — — — — 60Tactical UAV — — — — 6 6 — — — — 12

Singapore

Singapore acquired the IsraeliScout UAV system which was oper-ated by 128 Squadron at Murai CampSingapore purchased about 40Searcher air vehicles from IAI in themid-1990s as a replacement for theScout under a $90 million contract,but refused to accept further deliver-ies after the first batch of systemsfailed to live up to requirements.There have been reports that a finewas levied by the Singapore govern-ment over the problems.

In 2003, the Singapore Ministry ofDefense set up a Future Systems Di-rectorate, and one of its tasks is to ex-amine future UAV requirements. Todate, most of the Singapore UAV ef-forts have been commercial venturesaimed at the potential export market.In May 2006, the Singapore Air Force

set up a UAV Command at MuraiCamp which will be responsible forthe 119 and 128 Squadrons equippedwith Searcher UAVs and the new 116Squadron equipped with the recentlypurchased Hermes-450 UAVs. Thenew command is tri-service.

Initial Development EffortsSingapore Dynamics has shown

models of various configurations oftactical UAVs over the years, thoughthere has been little evidence that anyhave gone into production. In 2000, itdisplayed the Blue Horizon tacticalUAV at the Asian Aerospace show.This is a license manufactured ver-sion of the Israeli EMIT Blue HorizonUAV and part of a $14 million tech-nology transfer deal in 1998.

Singapore Mini-UAV Develop-ment

Singapore Technologies Dynam-ics displayed a VTOL Mini-UAV atthe 2002 Eurosatory show, nowcalled Fantail. This project is beingundertaken in cooperation with MicroAutonomous Systems LLC. Whilemost micro UAVs are winged designsusing conventional flight profiles, theVTOL Mini-UAV uses a mid-bodypropeller to permit it to take off verti-cally, and then transition to horizontalflight for high speed dash. It can thenrevert back to a vertical hover posi-tion for surveillance. The system isquite small, weighing only 2.3 kg ontakeoff, and has an endurance de-scribed as being “up to one hour”. Thepayloads are described as being theusual types of sensors such as day-



light or low-light video, uncooled IRcameras, microphones, or other typesof sensors. There is a small transpar-ent dome at the front of the vehicle forthese sensors, though presumablythey could be rear mounted as well.The Singapore Army has expressedinterest in the design for potential ur-ban operations, and France reportedlyis examining the system as well. Theflight testing of the Fantail began inMay 2005 with the expectation that itwill demonstrate the transition fromvertical to horizontal flight in 2007.The plan is to transition to productionin late 2007.

Also under development is theSkyblade, a more conventionalhand-launched, battery poweredUAV with a two meter wingspan. Ithas also been demonstrated in Austra-lia. The Singapore Defense Forceplaced an order for the Skyblade inlate 2004 for delivery in 2005. Thecost is $200,000 per system which in-cludes three air vehicles and oneGCS. In 2005, ST Aero unveiledSkyblade II which introduces an in-terchangeable sensor payload andother changes requested by the Singa-pore MoD. In late 2005, the Singa-pore MoD announced plans to buyseven Skyblade II mini-UAV systemsin 2006 and to gradually increase thepurchase to 20 systems by 2008.

A third version was demonstratedin 2006, the Skyblade III which usesan electric rather than gasoline en-gine. ST Aero is also developing asomewhat larger version calledSkyblade IV which is rail-launchedand has its endurance extended to six

hours. It appears to be similar to theEMIT Sparrow and may be a licenseproduced version or derivative. Curi-ously enough, Cradance Service ofSingapore unveiled a version of theEMIT Sparrow called the Sparrow-Nat the 2005 arms show in Bankok.

LALEE Endurance UAVIn 2001, Singapore announced

plans to award a contract to RutanAviation to assist in the local develop-ment of the LALEE (low altitude longenduring endurance) UAV. The UAVis intended to provide long range sur-veillance for Singapore warships.Singapore officials have stated thatthey may examine the Global Hawkfor this role, but for the moment planto focus on a local initiative.

MAV-1Singapore Technologies Aero (ST

Aero) unveiled its MAV-1 (MiniatureAir Vehicle-1) jet powered tacticalUAV in 2004. This UAV is expectedto enter flight trials in 2004, and thefirm has stated that it has the capabil-ity to develop a UCAV based on theMAV-1. ST Aero is best known as ajet repair and maintenance firm.

Hermes-450 PurchaseIn June 2007, Singapore an-

nounced that a contract had beensigned with Elbit for an undisclosednumber of Hermes-450 UAVs.

Global HawkIn September 2005, Singapore re-

ceived a formal briefing on the GlobalHawk. Singapore is currently exam-

ining future surveillance require-ments and at the moment is leaningtowards the use of Gulfstream G550aircraft with AEW and SIGINT pack-ages. However, there is long-term in-terest in an endurance UAV forpersistent surveillance and maritimepatrol. A Global Hawk transited fromQatar to Adelaide in February 2006for a demonstration in the region in-cluding Singapore and Japan. The USAir Force has made a proposal for amulti-national Global Hawk regionalforce to be based on Guam. The fleetcould be jointly funded with theUAVs providing regional surveil-lance, or the individual countriescould field their own Global Hawksbut operate them jointly. The pro-posed partners are Australia, Japanand Singapore.

Maritime OperationsDuring 2004, Singapore officials

began discussions with neighborsover the operations of UAVs over theSouth China Sea to familiarize airtraffic control officials with their use.The idea is that this could open up theregion to wider use of UAVs for mari-time patrol, an operation that cur-rently runs afoul of internationalaircraft lanes.

Maritime RequirementThe Singapore Navy has a stand-

ing requirement for a Navy UAV forshipboard operations. Two systemsunder consideration are the MQ-8Fire Scout and the Boeing ScanEagle.

Teal Group Analysis

Singapore has been attempting tobreak into the defense export marketfor a number of years, and UAVswould seem to be an excellent en-try-level niche. The Singapore de-fense forces probably will have a

requirement to replace some SearcherUAVs later in this decade and willprobably purchase locally to supportthe industry.

Singapore will probably acquirean endurance UAV, but if it follows

the course of indigenous develop-ment as is currently planned, thiswould probably push the acquisitiondate late in the forecast period here, ifnot beyond.

Singapore 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 15 15 — — — — — — — — 30Tactical UAV — — — — — — — 10 10 — 20Naval VTUAV — — — 6 — — — — — — 6MALE UAV — — — — — — — 1 1 — 2



Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka acquired threeSuperhawk UAV systems from Israelin 1996, but after losing all three intraining, acquired another two air ve-hicles. These have been described atSuper Scouts in other accounts. Thefourth UAV was lost in May 1997 onan operational sortie. The contract

cost about $7.6 million. The UAVswere very successful in operationsagainst the Tamil Tigers in coun-ter-insurgency operations, and therehave been unconfirmed reports thatSri Lanka subsequently tested or ac-quired a small number of IAISearcher tactical UAVs. According to

Ceylonese accounts, most or all Is-raeli UAVs had been shot down,crashed or rendered otherwise inop-erative by 2006. A small, locally de-veloped UAV called Superstar hasalso been put into air force service,and one crashed in March 2006 nearthe Vanni air base.

Teal Group Analysis

Sri Lanka‘s budget is very smalland has been stretched to the maxi-mum by the civil war with the Tamil

Tigers. Tactical UAVs have provenuseful in this conflict for surveillance,

and some modest future purchase ispossible.

Sri Lanka 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Tactical UAV 6 — — — — — — — — — 6

Taiwan (ROC)

Taiwan has developed tacticalUAVs in recent years including theCSIST Kestrel tactical UAV and thelarger Chung Hsiang. In 2005, thegovernment announced plans to ac-quire three battalions of UAVs in the2005-2010 time-frame.

CSIST UAV ProgramsThe Chung Shan Institute of Sci-

ence and Technology (CSIST) begana UAV effort in 1994 as an offshoot to

a government funded program tostudy autopilots. The first UAV wasthe Kestrel I with a 20 kg payload.Two were built and were followed bythe Kestrel II with some six built since1998.

The Kestrel II is a fairly conven-tional tactical UAV with eight hoursendurance and a 30 kg payload, and ithas been offered for export at interna-tional air shows. CSIST also built alarger UAV, the Chung Hsiang,

though less detail has been releasedabout this program. As of early 2003,both types were only in prototypestage and were first used in the May2003 Hankuang No. 19 wargames.CSIST is also developing an armedUAV equipped with the AGM-114Hellfire or similar missiles, based onthe 2005 requirement.

Another locally developed tacticalUAV dubbed Thunder Tiger was un-veiled at the Taipei Aerospace Tech-nologies Exhibition in 2003.

VTUAVCSIST has developed a helicopter

UAV known as Hummingbird and hasattempted to interest the Taiwanesearmy. The Hummingbird stems froma proof-of-concept study using theEagle 600 two-seat helicopter.

Fireant Mini-UAVThe Taiwanese firm Pegasus Avia-

tion has developed a mini-UAVdubbed Fire Ant and has recentlypartnered with AIDC to market thesystem to the Taiwanese defenseforce. The Fire Ant has a wingspan ofeight feet, a payload of 2-10 kg and asystem cost of about $1 million.



Kestrel II

Teal Group Analysis

Taiwan has generally been sup-portive of advanced technology ef-forts by its aerospace industry.Tactical UAVs have some distinctlimitations given Taiwan‘s strategic

predicament, but a coastal surveil-lance UAV might prove a useful effortboth for the industry and the navy.CSIST has been trying to interest the

Army and Coast Guard in these pro-grams since the late 1990s.

Taiwan 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 30 90 — — — — 120Tactical UAV 10 10 25 — — — — 20 20 — 85Naval UAV — — — 6 6 6 — — — — 18MALE UAV — — — 2 2 2 — — — — 6

Thailand

In 1982, Thailand acquired asquadron of six R4E-30 SkyEyeUAVs from Developmental Sciencesfor use by the Royal Thai Air Forcefor surveillance work. These air vehi-cles were in need for replacement bythe early 1990s. Thailand examined anumber of systems, and in February1992 selected the Israel i IAISearcher, ordering one ground station

and four air vehicles at a cost of about$12 million for the Royal Thai Army.

In 1995, Thailand announcedplans to spend 300 million baht($12.1 million) on the Shadow 600UAV. However, shortly afterwardsthe program came under fire fromgovernment auditors over the issue ofwhether the system was actually inproduction. The Searcher system has

been used for anti-drug operationsalong the Burmese frontier. Attritionof the four systems has led the Thaigovernment to consider a local initia-tive to manufacture UAVs. The De-fense Ministry and the ThailandResearch Fund have committed 84million baht ($2 million) for a devel-opment effort in 2004-07, with the lo-cal TUAV being called Puksin.

Teal Group Analysis

Thailand has had a modest interestin UAVs, mainly to perform recon-naissance in remote regions wherethere are problems with drug smug-

gling and local warlords. The Search-ers will probably need replacementwithin this forecast period. Thailandmight also consider the use of an en-

durance UAV system for coastal sur-veillance.

Thailand 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 20 20 — — — — 40Tactical UAV — 6 — — — — — — — — 6MALE UAV — — — — — 1 1 — — — 2

The Americas

Argentina

The Argentine firm Nostromo De-fense announced that it had begunsmall scale manufacture of its Yarara

small tactical UAV in late 2006,building six for an undisclosed cus-tomer in the US.

Teal Group Analysis

Argentina has had an active localaerospace industry for many years,but funding difficulties and cut-backshave trimmed earlier ambitions.

UAVs may prove to be an attractiveentry point for the industry, and smallscale purchases of both tactical andmini-UAVs are certainly possible in

the forecast period. Chile’s recent ac-quisition of mini-UAVs will probablyencourage an Argentine purchase.

Argentina 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — 25 — — — — — — — — 25Tactical UAV — — 4 4 — — — — — — 8



Brazil

Brazil embarked on a number ofmissile and aerospace programs in the1980s, most of which appear to havebeen canceled or simply ended due toa lack of government interest. TheAcaua UAV program was amongthose efforts that were cancelled.

In 2003, the Brazilian agriculturalresearch corporation Embrapateamed with the Sao Paulo University

to develop a small agricultural UAVcalled Arara. The air vehicle weighs35 pounds and has a small CCD cam-era that can download real-time im-ages to the control station. The Ararais designed to survey plantations,identify crop distribution, soil flowand pest infestations. A total of sixprototypes were built for trials. Theaim is to develop a civil UAV that is

cheap enough for landowners to usefor land observation.

In 2007, the Brazilian firm FlightSolutions unveiled its Watchdog tac-tical UAV. The firm is also workingon a mini-UAV and on a helicopterUAV.

Teal Group Analysis

Brazil‘s defense industries havebeen in a shambles since the late1980s when Iraq defaulted on pay-ments for Brazilian military equip-ment. A tactical UAV program will bemost likely late in the forecast period,and a mini-UAV program may bestarted to encourage the local indus-try. Brazil might eventually develop arequirement for a UAV to comple-ment its SIVAM effort. SIVAM is anintegrated air defense, surveillance,and air traffic control (Sistema de

Vigilancia da Arnazorsia) for moni-toring the Amazon region. It was ini-tially conceived as a combinedmilitary early warning and civil ATCprogram, subsequently evolving intoa complex network of satellite, air-borne and ground-based sensorsaimed primarily at monitoring thethreatened local environment.SIVAM is now intended to help thegovernment track deforestation, pol-lution, illicit mineral extraction andillegal narcotics cultivation. The data

will be collected at four evaluationand control centers in the Amazon ba-sin, then process and transferred tothe appropriate government agency.Brazil is currently using five EricssonEireye airborne radar aircraft but it isconceivable that an endurance UAVmight be considered for this role if theprogram matures.

Brazil 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 207 Total

Mini-UAV — — — 15 35 — — — — — 50Tactical UAV — — — — 4 4 — — — — 8MALE UAV — — — — — — — 1 1 — 2

Canada

Canada had very active, corporate-and government-sponsored UAV de-velopment effort over the past two de-cades, by Canadair, now part ofBombardier. Neither the CanadianArmy nor the Canadian navy haveshown deep interest in UAVs until re-cently, mainly connected with thesupport of peacekeeping missions.Canada had a standing requirementfor a new generation UAV systemsince the mid-1990s called UASTAS(unmanned airborne target acquisi-tion system). This is a close-rangetactical UAV with an operational ra-dius of 50-150km. The requirementhad been pegged at one operationaltroop with two ground control sta-tions, and a budget of about C$60 mil-lion. The plan was to release the RFPin the summer of 1999, but budgetproblems forced the government to

postpone the program. As mentionedbelow, this eventually emerged as theSperwer acquisition effort.

CL-89 MidgeThe first Canadian tactical UAV

was the CL-89 Midge(AN/USD-501) which began devel-opment in 1961 as a joint Canadair/Canadian government program. Pro-duction began in 1967 and more than500 were manufactured for the Brit-ish, German, French and Italian ar-mies.

CL-289The CL-89 was followed in 1976

by a joint Canadian/German program,the CL-289. The CL-289 is a turbo-jet-powered reconnaissance alsoknown by its NATO designationAN/USD-502 and its French designa-

tion Piver 289 (Programmation et In-terpretation des Vols d’Engins de Re-connaissance). A corps-level system,it is a follow-on to the earlier divi-sion-level CL-89 (AN/USD-501)with longer range, more sophisticatedguidance system, and a real-time datalink. France procured 55 air vehiclesand two ground station systems,while Germany procured 188 air ve-hicles and eleven ground stations sets.Production for French and Germanrequirements was completed in June1993. Battery sets (comprisingground equipment and about 17 airvehicles) had a hardware unit cost ofDM 89.9 million, and when docu-mentation, test equipment, etc. werefactored in the cost rose to about $85million per battery.



CL-227 SentinelThe Canadair CL-227 Sentinel en-

tered development around 1976 as aprivate corporate venture. The Cana-dian government agreed to share finaldevelopment funding on the programin May 1985. Unlike the earlierCanadair UAVs, the CL-227 is a ver-tical take-off type, primarily thoughnot exclusively oriented towards na-val applications. It was first demon-strated to the US armed forces inSeptember 1989 at Point Mugu, CA.It was subsequently involved inNATO Comparative Testing includ-ing demonstration with a Texas In-struments FLIR sensor to the USArmy at Ft. Huachuca in 1990. InMay 1990, the UAV JPO awardedCanadair a demonstration contract fortrials of the CL-227 Sentinel (calledSea Sentinel in its maritime version)for the MAVUS I (Maritime VTOLUAV System) demonstration.

Under the initial demonstrationcontract, the Navy conducted opera-tional demonstration of the CL-227aboard the USS Doyle with participa-tion of the navies of Canada, Ger-many, the Netherlands, France andthe United Kingdom and completedthe demonstrations in FY92. In June1993, the CL-227 Sentinel/MAVUSprogram was extended through Au-gust 1994 with the award of a $10 mil-lion Navy contract. The contractcovered the demonstration of the Si-erra Nevada Corp. Common Auto-matic Landing System (CARS). TheFY94 program for the maritime UAVrequirement included the MAVUSII/Canadair Sentinel demonstrationprogram of the CARS automatedtake-off and landing system. In 1994,Canadair received a $6.8 million con-tract to integrate an improvedturbo-shaft engine into the Sentinel,substituting the WTS-125 (an im-proved version of the WilliamsWTS-117 gas turbine) for theWTS-34.

Separate from the US program,France funded a technology demon-strator program using the Sentinel in anaval role. The program began inMarch 1994 and tests were conducted

from a French corvette. The Frenchprime on the program wasThomson-CSF (now Thales). Therole of the system was for drug inte-gration, maritime patrol, search andrescue and electronic warfare. Thisprogram did not proceed beyond thetrials.

SperwerIn 2003, Canada bought a single

Sperwer system to fulfill an urgentshort-term requirement for its Un-manned Airborne Surveillance andTarget Acquisi t ion System(UASTAS) program to support itspeacekeeping force in OperationAthena in Afghanistan. Two of thefour air vehicles crashed and the othertwo were found to have stress crackswhich prevented further operations.Canadian officials have stated thatthey expect to acquire about five ad-ditional Sperwer air vehicles to makeup the losses and may acquire a sec-ond system. Denmark’s decision toshed its troublesome Sperwers has ledto a recent Canadian plan to acquiretheir remaining assets to bolster theCanadian fleet. This is expected to in-clude three GCS and 10 air vehicles..

ISTAR Omnibus UAV ProgramIn 2004, the Canadian Department

of National Defense set up a jointUAV program office aligned with theCanadian Forces ExperimentationCentre (CFEC) to oversee a new UAVacquisition effort called OmnibusLand Force Intelligence SurveillanceTarget Acquisition and Reconnais-sance Project. The CND has estab-lished requirements for three types ofUAVs: a mini-UAV, a tactical UAV toreplace the Sperwer, and a me-dium-endurance UAV. The Armyplans to form a UAV detachment ofthe 1

stRoyal Canadian Horse Artil-

lery Regiment’s counter-battery unitin 2005-2006.

Canada tested three Silver Foxmini-UAVs for the mini-UAV mis-sion, and awarded Thales a contractfor C$649,000 on 5 April 2004 withdelivery in July 2004. Canada has al-ready examined the Pointer

mini-UAV. The Silver Fox mini-UAVprogram is a collaborative study ef-fort between CFEC and the three ser-vices. Funding in the FY04-05 budgetwas C$2.5 million for the MALEdemonstration and C$800,000 for themini-UAV program. In June 2006,Canada acquired Elbit Skylark 2mini-UAVs for immediate needs inAfghanistan. In the longer term, theCND is expected to release a tender inthe second half of 2006 for fivemini-UAV system each with 6-10 airvehicles for service by 2008.

CDND began studies of an endur-ance UAV in 2002 with demonstra-tions of an Eagle 1/Heron from IAIoff Vancouver. CDND has also nego-tiated for the tests of the Altair versionof Predator for the endurance require-ment. The endurance program ispegged at about C$250 million ($183million US) which is expected to totalfour to eight air vehicles. CanadianForces awarded General Atomics acontract in February 2004 to deployan Altair UAV in support of the Atlan-tic Littoral ISR Experiment (ALIX)in August 2004. The aim is to helpfurther acquaint the various branchesof the Canadian forces with endur-ance UAV capability and to help de-fine the endurance requirement.Current objectives are to prepare ten-der documentation for release inmid-2007 with an objective to acquirefive systems: one for off-shore opera-tions, one each for Atlantic, Pacificand Arctic operations and a fifth sys-tem for training. In February 2006,General Dynamics-Canada hasteamed with General Atomics to offerPredator-B for this requirement.

Skylark AcquisitionThe Canadian army acquired five

Elbit Skylark I mini-UAV systemswith an option for five more in June2006 to support operations in Af-ghanistan. The contract was to ThalesCanada which has been acting asElbit’s partner on the program. Theydeployed in September 2006 with Ebattery, 2 Royal Canadian Horse Ar-tillery near Kandahar. They weregrounded in November 2006 due to



operational malfunctions and prob-lems with the viewability of the lap-top GCS screen.

Endurance RequirementsThe CDND has established a re-

quirement for a MALE UAV withplans to acquire up to 8-9 systems un-der the program name of Joint Air-borne ISR Capability (JAIC). The

aim is to provide capability in theshort term and the system will be ori-ented mainly towards army needs.The plan was to award a contract in2007. In March 2007, the CDND pro-posed going sole-source for the Gen-eral Atomics Predator, but there wassome opposition ion the governmentto this approach.

In the longer term, the air force hasa long term objective called JUSTAS(Joint Unmanned Surveillance andtarget Acquisition System) which isexpected to be a MALE or HALEconsisting of two systems, based onthe Atlantic and Pacific Coast withabout three air vehicles each. The ob-jective

Teal Group Analysis

Canadian experiences with UAVsin Afghanistan have sparked new in-terest in the use of UAVs for a varietyof missions. Combat use of UAVs inAfghanistan has sparked Canadianinterest in further systems. Acquisi-tion of additional mini-UAVs may oc-cur to deal with the problemsencountered with the Skylark. Theuse of the Sperwer in Afghanistan has

led some army officers to promote ac-quisition of a MALE UAV instead,preferably with some armed attackcapability. A short-term acquisition ispossible, but from past experience,Canadian procurement policies tendto lead to prolonged programs. It isunclear whether the army JAIC re-quirement will be merged with the airforce JUSTAS requirement. Al-

though the aim of the program was tofield JAIC immediately and then ac-quire JUSTAS about five years later,delays in JAIC could lead to an even-tual merger or attempt to coordinatethe requirements.

Canada 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — 30 30 — — — — 60MALE UAV (JAIC) — 2 3 — — — — — — — 5MALE UAV (JUSTAS) — — — — — — 5 — — — 5

Chile

Chile has not yet begun any majorUAV effort, but there have been indi-cations that a UAV program is immi-nent. Elbit conducted a number of

flight demonstrations of its Skylarkmini-UAV in Chile in 2006 and therehave been reports that a small numberare being acquired.

Teal Group Analysis

Chile is one of the few SouthAmerican countries to maintain a rel-atively modern air force, and a small

scale acquisition of UAVs over thenext decade is possible

Chile 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV 15 — — — — — — — — 45 60Tactical UAV — — — 4 6 — — — — — 10

Mexico

Mexico’s Hydra Technologies be-gan manufacture of the S4 Ehecatl forthe Mexican Air Force and Navy in2006, and it went operational in 2007.It is a tactical UAV with the mission

thread being provided by General Dy-namics Advanced Information Sys-tems. The primary mission for thesystems is border surveillance withthe air force undertaking surveillance

missions along the southern frontier,and the navy responsible for coastalpatrol missions. The new UAV sys-tem was first publicly revealed at the2007 Paris Air Show.

Teal Group Analysis

Mexico has quietly become thefirst country in Latin America with aUAV force, designing and building a

new system with modest US technicalassistance. The primary aim of thesystem is paramilitary surveillance,

and the air force and navy have beentasked with operating the system dueto the recognition that they are better



situated to operating such systemsthan would be federal police agen-cies. At the moment, there are no spe-cific plans to extend its use to the

army, though this is possible. Contin-ued acquisition of a few more systemsover the next few years is likely, but to

date, no acquisition details have beenreleased.

Mexico 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total

Mini-UAV — — — — — — 35 — — — 35Tactical UAV 6 6 6 6 — — — — — — 24





Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors

Market Overview

The Demand for ISR

In February 2005, Deputy Direc-tor of Air Force Strategic PlanningChristopher Bowie said: “In the1960s, spending [for C4ISR (com-mand, control, communications,computers, intelligence, surveillanceand reconnaissance) and airlift] rep-

resented about a third of our effort. Itnow stands at about 45 percent, and isprojected to grow to half.” He alsoclaimed the Air Force is now onlyspending 25 percent of its budget on“shooter” forces: fighters, bombers,ICBMs and so on, with plans calling

for this segment “to shrink evensmaller, to about one-fifth of our bud-get…. So we will spend double onISR and mobility what we spend onshooters.”

The UAV Market

After years of talk, and periodicbouts of media hype, the US UAV(unmanned aerial vehicle) market isfinally showing real growth. This is

not to say that UAVs will totally re-place manned platforms, for recon-naissance or any other mission, butthat after recent combat action, culmi-

nating in Afghanistan and Iraq, UAVshave proven their utility. UAVs havealso recently proven effective in ur-ban fighting.

The Market Upside

UAVs are one of the most dynamicgrowth sectors of the aerospace in-dustry. Teal Group estimates thatUAV electro-opt ical / infrared(E-O/IR) system spending availableto US manufacturers will grow from$438 million in FY07 to $774 million

in FY15 (a 77% increase in eightyears).

The most significant catalyst tothis market has been the enormousgrowth of interest in UAVs by the USmilitary, tied to the general trend to-wards information warfare and net-

work-centric systems. UAVs are akey element in the intelligence, sur-veillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)portion of this revolution, and theyare expanding into other missions aswell with the advent of hunter-killerUAVs.

Reality Check

However, to put UAV funding inperspective, although the United

States will spend about $385 millionfor UAV E-O/IR in FY07 and $662

million in FY16 – including allRDT&E and procurement funding –


UAV E-O/IR Funding ForecastRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY160

200

400

600

800(FY07 $ Millions)

Global Hawk BAMS Predator/Warrior

UCAV Tactical Mini/Micro

Other US International

it spent about $800 million FY06 justfor manned fighter targeting systems,largely for Sniper, ATFLIR andLitening pods. Looking at the overallE-O/IR market, US spending onmanned systems was about $2.2 bil-lion in FY06 and will be about $2.1

billion in FY15, which puts UAVE-O/IR in perspective, as a substan-tial but by no means dominant seg-ment of the market.

On the other hand, UAV sensorsystem growth rates will exceed al-ready mature manned system mar-

kets, compared with little or nogrowth for already-mature mannedsystem markets. Thus, although it willnever be the biggest market, UAVE-O/IR will be one of the fast-est-growing.

Persistent Surveillance and Endurance UAVs

Persistent surveillance has be-come a buzz-word for supporters ofendurance UAVs such as GlobalHawk and Predator. While mannedplatforms such as P-3C Orions have arelatively long endurance (about 6hours), several UAVs can stay air-borne for a day or more. This multi-

plier effect is one of the strongestarguments for endurance UAV recon-naissance and surveillance.

Due to this persistence, the singleGlobal Hawk operational in Iraq in2003 flew only 3% of all aircraft im-agery-collection sorties and only 5%of high-altitude missions, but col-

lected data on 55% of all air de-fense-related time-sensitive targets. Itreportedly located at least 13 sur-face-to-air missile (SAM) batteries,50 SAM launchers, 300 canisters, and70 missile transporters. It also imaged300 tanks, 38% of Iraq’s total knownarmor force.

Sensor Payloads

Typical Medium Altitude Endur-ance (MALE) UAVs (e.g., Predator)fly at about 30,000 feet for 24 hours ormore, with sensor payloads weighingbetween 250-400 kg. High AltitudeEndurance (HALE) UAVs (e.g.,

Global Hawk) fly at up to 60,000 feetfor 24 hours or more, with sensor pay-loads weighing up to 1,000 kg ormore (900 kg for the RQ-4A GlobalHawk; 1,350 kg for the RQ-4B). Typ-ical tactical UAVs weigh between

150-500 kg, with sensor payloadsweighing between 20-100 kg.

Funding Forecast

US UAV E-O/IR RDT&E

RDT&E (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

Global Hawk E-O/IR 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 300BAMS E-O/IR 7 12 13 22 20 16 8 8 11 9 126Predator & Warrior ER/MP E-O/IR 16 19 17 11 9 9 7 9 9 9 114UCAV E-O/IR 8 10 14 18 14 16 20 20 18 14 152Naval UAV E-O/IR 10 11 9 8 6 11 10 8 7 6 86Tactical UAV E-O/IR 13 15 19 20 24 30 30 33 34 34 252Mini/Micro-UAV E-O/IR 16 25 23 23 22 28 29 32 32 31 261Other UAV E-O/IR 45 43 47 51 45 59 62 58 66 65 541

Total 145 165 172 183 170 199 196 198 207 198 1,832

US Airborne Hyperspectral E-O/IR Technology RDT&E+Procurement (also for non-UAVs)

RDT&E+Proc. (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

SPIRITT & USAFHyperspectral (speculative) 35 44 50 58 64 62 80 80 80 86 639

USN & ArmyHyperspectral (speculative) 28 32 42 54 68 66 86 98 115 145 734

Total 63 76 92 112 132 128 166 178 195 231 1,373

US UAV E-O/IR Procurement

Procurement (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

Global Hawk E-O/IR 39 79 94 90 92 80 57 41 45 49 685BAMS E-O/IR — — — — — 12 14 26 28 22 102Predator & Warrior ER/MP E-O/IR 48 58 72 83 140 106 103 83 82 72 847


Page 138 Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors

UCAV E-O/IR — — — — — — — — 16 20 36Naval UAV E-O/IR — 1 5 5 6 6 7 8 8 8 54Tactical UAV E-O/IR 19 14 25 3 16 13 13 17 32 34 184Mini/Micro-UAV E-O/IR 98 118 124 128 114 88 90 120 130 135 1,145Commercial UAV E-O/IR 2 2 2 2 2 14 26 26 34 44 154Other UAV E-O/IR 34 40 50 55 65 65 70 70 75 80 604

Total 240 312 372 366 435 384 380 391 450 464 3,811

International UAV E-O/IR Procurement

Procurement (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

HALE UAV — — — 8 6 9 6 8 5 11 51MALE UAV 7 8 6 9 8 15 17 23 16 9 117UCAV — — — 17 — 31 34 — 32 — 113Naval UAV — — — — 7 5 7 9 10 11 49Tactical UAV 18 17 11 18 20 20 18 17 17 15 171Mini/Micro-UAV 8 10 11 13 14 12 17 18 17 12 131Civil UAV 19 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 218

Total 53 56 50 87 77 114 121 96 117 80 851

Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensors

Global Hawk Basic and Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Network Centric Systems, El Segundo, CAUnit Cost: ISS – $8 million (without HISAR); EISS – $12 million (without HISAR) (according to NorthropGrumman, 7/06); Ground station – $14 million (GAO estimated cost, 4/06): RQ-4A with sensor – $82 million(up from original estimate of $60 million); Northrop Grumman claimed costs (6/06): Block 10 RQ-4A with sen-sor – $31.6 million; Block 20 RQ-4B with sensor –$45.9 million; Block 30 RQ-4B with sensor – $54.2 million;Block 40 without sensor [MP-RTIP] – $39.2 million (we suspect these are low-end accounting estimates)


Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors Page 139

UAV E-O/IR Funding ShareRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY160%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Global Hawk BAMS Predator/Warrior

UCAV Tactical Mini/Micro

Other US International

OverviewThe USAF’s Global Hawk High

Altitude Unmanned Aerial Vehicleconducted its first flight in February1998, and a second Global Hawkmade its maiden flight in November1998. A total of five prototypes werebuilt through 1999, with two morepre-series aircraft procured withFY01 EMD funds. Series productionwas first funded in the FY02 budget.

Unlike the Predator and PredatorB, Global Hawk is to remain un-armed, and will serve entirely as a re-connaissance platform, similar to theU-2.

In mid-2005, the Air Force’s planfor a series of evolutionary upgradescalled “spirals” was shifted back to amore tradi t ional procurementscheme, with Global Hawks stabi-lized into blocks. The older “A” mod-els are now designated Block 0 and10, while the larger payload RQ-4Baircraft will be Block 20, 30, and 40.Those blocks will primarily refer tochanges in payloads and not changesin the air vehicle.

The initial Global Hawks pro-duced under the advanced concepttechnology demonstration (ACTD)and a follow-on contract are known asYRQ-4A Block 0. Four of these air-craft survive, but are not expected tosee much more operational use.

The USAF took delivery of the lastof seven initial RQ-4A Block 10 air-craft in June 2006. Three of thesehave been accepted operationally:two at a forward operating location(believed to be Al Dhafra in the UAE)and a third has not flown since it wasdelivered to Beale Air Force Base(AFB) in late 2004, where it is in useas a maintenance trainer. The remain-ing aircraft have been delivered to theUS Navy for the Global Hawk Mari-time Demonstration (GHMD) pro-gram. The Block 10 has minorimprovements over the YRQ-4A. InFY07, the Block 10 aircraft are ex-pected to be able to maintain a single24-hour orbit over the Middle East.The Air Force will apparently procuremore Block 10s to fill out its LRIP re-

quirement, until the larger RQ-4B isready.

The ini t ia l version of thelarger-winged RQ-4B, the first ofwhich is due to fly in 2006, is theBlock 20. Six of these aircraft are tobe delivered, followed by 26 Block 30aircraft. The RQ-4B has a 3,000 lb.payload capacity versus 2,000 lbs. forthe RQ-4A, and a power increasefrom 10 KVA to 25 KVA available forsensors.

The Block 20 will mount the En-hanced ISS (EISS), and a limited sig-nals intel l igence (SIGINT)capability. Block 20 will have an opensystems architecture (OSA), and asensor management system rigor-ously separated from the vehicle man-agement system (VMS), with powerand local area network connectionsfor changing out or upgradingsensors.

The Block 30 will add the Air-borne Signals Intelligence Payload(ASIP) SIGINT package.

The Block 20/30 versions are ex-pected to be supporting imagery intel-ligence (IMINT) orbits in FY09,including the first Global Hawk unitsto be deployed to the Pacific and Eu-ropean commands. By FY12, with 26vehicles delivered, the Block 20 andBlock 30 variants will be supportingfour IMINT orbits and two multi-in-telligence orbits with SIGINT.

The final version of Global Hawkwill be the Block 40, with theMulti-Platform – Radar TechnologyInsertion Program (MP-RTIP) radar.The 15 Block 40s will carry only theradar, which will require almost allthe weight, power and cooling capac-ity on the aircraft.

Integrated Sensor Suite (ISS)Raytheon (El Segundo, CA) de-

veloped the 400 kg Global Hawk In-tegrated Sensor Suite (ISS), whichcombines the HISAR Synthetic Aper-ture Radar (SAR) with MTI (MovingTarget Indication), along with E-Oand IR sensors. The E-O/IR systempairs a Raytheon third-generationFLIR with a Kodak digital CCDvisible light camera.

Air Vehicle (AV) #6 was deliveredin April 2002, along with the thirdISS. The first full ISS was lost whenAV #5 crashed. The second ISS waslost in July 2002 when the secondGlobal Hawk crashed over Afghani-stan due to engine problems. The AirForce has asked Raytheon for accel-erated completion of additional ISSsafter each loss.

Global Hawk ISS Too Expen-sive

In 2002, the USAF askedRaytheon to lower ISS costs. Other-wise, the Air Force suggested re-com-peting sensors or building U-2sinstead. Raytheon claimed only 9more ISSs were planned beforeMP-RTIP, and cited this as a reasonfor continuing the ISS as is. However,Teal Group forecasts many moreGlobal Hawks and ISSs beforeMP-RTIP is ready, which will notmeet its 2002 projected in-servicedate of 2008.

Global Hawk costs as of May 2002(according Air Force sources) were:Global Hawk+ISS+ground stationhad grown from $18-20 million to$48 million; with non-recurring ex-penses, the total reaches $70 millionper Global Hawk. The ISS cost about$12 million in mid-2002 (a decreasefrom $13 million in early 2002).

Enhanced ISSThe Enhanced ISS is an upgraded

sensor suite developed for the largerRQ-4B. It reportedly has a 50%greater range than the Basic ISS, forboth E-O/IR and SAR. E-O/IR im-provements include an improved tele-scope with better optics and real-timefocus control. The SAR has an in-crease in transmitted power and alarger antenna.

The Block 20 EISS will use mostof the RQ-4B’s additional power foran interim “clip-in” signals intelli-gence (SIGINT) sensor, Hyperwide,developed by BAE Systems. Block30 will replace this with the ASIPSIGINT suite.



Enhanced ISS LRIPIn October 2004, the Air Force

Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, awardedNorthrop Grumman a $207.7 millionfirm-fixed-price (FFP) contract mod-ification to fund Global Hawk LRIPLot 3, to include one Global HawkRQ-4A production air vehicle withone basic ISS, two RQ-4B air vehi-cles, one Global Hawk production airvehicle with one Enhanced ISS and

Clip-in Sensor (Hyperwide), one Mis-sion Control Element (MCE), onelaunch recovery element, one basic

ISS, and support equipment andspares. The work is to be conducted inSan Diego, CA, and is to be com-pleted by October 2005. Contractfunding will come from the Air ForceAircraft Procurement (APF) account(F33657-03-C-4310/PZ02).

Lot 4 LRIP Advance Procure-ment

In March 2004, the ASC issuedNorthrop Grumman a $50.7 millioncontract to provide for long leadparts/advance procurement for LRIPLot 4 items, including RQ-4B air ve-hicles with Enhanced ISSs and

Clip-in Sensors (Hyperwide), onemission control element (MCE), onelaunch recovery element, and supportequipment and spares. Contract fi-nancing will come from the Air ForceAircraft Procurement (APF) account(FA8620-04-C-3410).

New Data ArchitectureIn mid-2005, the Advanced Infor-

mation Architecture (AIA) was beingadded to the Global Hawk, which re-places the mission recorder with aserver that can connect to radio. Thisallows individuals on the ground todownload data directly from GlobalHawk onto a PDA, similar toMapQuest. AIA was an idea thatcame from recent military operationswhere Global Hawk was deployed,and procurement has beenaccelerated.

Australian Global HawkAustralia joined the US RQ-4A

Global Hawk program as a potentialelement of its Joint Project 129,Broad Area Airborne Surveillance,subsequently renamed as Phase 1 ofProject Air 7000, New Maritime Pa-trol and Response Capability. Themain goal is to replace the existingAP-3C maritime patrol aircraft forceof about 13 aircraft. A Global Hawkwas deployed in Australia for trials in2001. Phase 2 of PA7000 is a latermanned maritime patrol aircraft.

Australia wanted to acquire 4-6 airvehicles and a decision was sched-uled for 2004-2005, but Australia de-ferred its planned acquisition of theGlobal Hawk in 2003 by at least twoyears to consider merging its land andmaritime surveillance requirementsinto a single platform.

Australia has also been consider-ing the long term potential for theRQ-4A Global Hawk in conjunctionwith its Wedgetail airborne earlywarning radar aircraft. The PA7000requirement is expected to be worthA$1 billion (US$770 million)

In mid-2006, the Global hawk de-cision date was set for 2007-2008,with the system entering service in2009-2011.

Global Hawk Sensor Pods Pro-posed

In June 2005, at the Paris AirShow, Northrop Grumman unveiledexternal sensor pods for the RQ-4B,which could carry a pod holding up to1,000 lb (455 kg) on a station on eachwing, according to Ed Walby, directorof business development forNorthrop Grumman’s High Altitude,Long-Endurance Systems Enter-prises. The pods could carry sensorsto complement the Raytheon ISS.Northrop Grumman conducted pre-liminary wind-tunnel testing of a podon a scale-model Global Hawk.

While the Global Hawk design hasalways included hard-points on thewings to accommodate pods, Walbysaid there has been no requirement forpods so far from the USAF. NASAhas reportedly been interested in us-

ing Global Hawk to deploy pods withtemperature-sensing devices abovethe Earth to measure patterns ofglobal warming and cooling. Suchmeasurements would help to predicthurricanes and typhoons moreaccurately.

Sensor DetailsIn July 2006, much technical detail

regarding Global Hawks sensors wasreleased.

The Block 10 RQ-4AHISAR has apeak power output of 3.5kW andweighs 290 kg, and requires 4.7 kWof 400Hz power and 1.3kW of 28VDC power. The Block 10 ISS weighs100 kg and requires just over 0.58 kWof 28V DC power.

The Block 20 RQ-4B has un-changed power requirements for theEISS, but the upgraded HISAR has apeak power output of more than3.5kW, with an increased powertransmitter.

The Block 10 ISS and Block 20EISS both use the same Recon-Opti-cal, Inc. E-O camera and a RaytheonIR sensor. The E-O system uses acommercial, 1,024 x 1,024 pixel Ko-dak digital silicon charge coupled de-vice, and a Raytheon 640 x 480 3-5micron indium antimonide FPA. BothE-O and IR sensors are fed by a fixed1.75m focal length reflecting tele-scope with a beam splitter and254mm reflecting mirror. The differ-ence between the ISS and EISS is inthe material of the mirror, which canbe more precisely focused, and the in-troduction of a real-time precise focuscapability. Both systems use astep-stare scanning telescope andback-scan mirror, to provide theneeded >6,000 pixel width. The entiresystem uses a gimbal mount derivedfrom Raytheon’s AN/AAQ-16/29,that can roll +/-80 degrees or move+/-15 degrees in pitch and yaw. It isstabilized to 3mrad, rather than the“standard” 20mrad, and can cover upto 104,000 km/day in wide-areasearch mode. Data throughput forboth Block 10 ISS is around400Mb/s, and can be compressed to



about 40Mb/s using JPEGtechniques.

Production Forecast

User (Platform) Through 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

ISSUSAF (Block 0 RQ-4A) 4 — — — — — — — — — — 4USAF (Block 10 RQ-4A) 5 2 — — — — — — — — — 7EISSUSAF (Block 20 RQ-4B) — 1 3 2 — — — — — — — 6USAF (Block 30 RQ-4B) — — 2 4 5 5 4 3 2 2 2 29

Total 9 3 5 6 5 5 4 3 2 2 2 46

Global Hawk SYERS (Senior Year E-O Reconnaissance System)

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: Raytheon, El Segundo, CAUnit Cost: $5 million for SYERS Multispectral Upgrade; much more for a complete system

OverviewSYERS (Senior Year Electro-Op-

tical Reconnaissance System) is anelectro-optical/infrared long-rangoblique photographic (LOROP) re-connaissance system carried on theUS Air Force’s U-2 reconnaissanceaircraft, and, since 1997, aboard twoUK RAF Canberras. SYERS 2 up-grades may continue, but recent AirForce plans are to retire the U-2 early,from FY08 to FY13, and shift its mis-sion to the Global Hawk.

Flight testing was completed inJuly 2000 for a major upgrade whichadds a 7-band multispectral capabil-ity (but only 3 at any one time) andreal time data transmission. It alsoadds stabilization, to improve resolu-tion. IR resolution will now reach pre-vious E-O levels, and E-O resolutionwill improve by 20 percent. SYERScameras have a slant range of “around100 miles”, according to US sourcesin 2001. SYERS now allows preci-sion-guided munitions targeting.

SYERS 2 was reported to have a“National Imagery InterpretabilityRating Scale” (NIIRS) of 7 in 2006,

from typical U-2 altitudes. Thismeans ports, ladders, and vents arevisible on electronics vans, as well asfittings on a grounded fighter aircraft.

As of 2001, SYERS data wasrouted through Mobile Stretch(MOBSTR) image compressionground stations. SYERS can down-load still frames in near-real time, butnot video images. Imagery is thenrouted via satellite for processing atBeale AFB, CA.

Sensor Support Contract toRaytheon

In November 2006, the US AirForce snuck in a fairly substantial$113 million contract option toRaytheon, to provide continued fieldsupport for U-2 sensors and datalinks. Reports of the Dragon Lady’sdeath have apparent ly beenexaggerated….

Heavy Use Since 9-11Since September 2001, the U-2

has seen a 30% increase in sustainedoperations tempo, according to Lt.

Gen. David Deptula, deputy chief ofstaff for Air Force ISR, in written tes-timony to the HASC in April 2007.By April 2007, Dragon Ladies hadflown more than 3,700 missions and32,900 hours supporting the “war onterror”, with two aircraft lost, one inthe Pacific and one in the MiddleEast.

U-2/Global Hawk ScheduleBy April 2007, the Air Force had

decided to delay U-2 retirement byabout a year, and to tie retirements toGlobal Hawk stand-up events, undera High-Altitude TransformationFlight Plan. The 33 remaining U-2swill be retired between FY08 andFY13, if Global Hawk stays on sched-ule. The last U-2s to be retired will bethose with a SIGINT capability, asthis is both in greatest demand todayand not provided by other resources,including Global Hawk.

Teal Group Analysis

U-2s are still the most importantreconnaissance/surveillance plat-forms in the US inventory. In Opera-tion Allied Force over Kosovo, U-2scollected 80 percent of the total imag-ery, and imaged all targets both pre-

and post-strike, with about 35 U-2Ss(including four two-cockpit trainers)and 2 ER-2s (NASA) in service.Since September 2001, the U-2 hasseen a 30% increase in sustained op-erations tempo. By April 2007,

Dragon Ladies had flown more than3,700 missions and 32,900 hours sup-porting the “war on terror”, with twoaircraft lost, one in the Pacific and onein the Middle East. A long future hadbeen planned—until 2020 or 2025 at



least—with four major U-2 sen-sor/avionics upgrades recently com-pleted: ASARS-2A AIP, RAMPS,SYERS, and SPIRITT (still indevelopment).

However, Global Hawk’s support-ers have lobbied for an early shift ofresponsibility for high altitude recon-naissance away from the U-2. ThoughGlobal Hawk payload is less than theU-2’s, endurance is longer, andmoney might be saved by retiring theU-2 ($1 billion was suggested in theQDR). On the other hand, GlobalHawk costs have consistently grown(doubling or tripling, in most cases),and it is still not proven for allmissions.

By April 2007, the Air Force haddecided to delay U-2 retirement byabout a year, and to tie retirements toGlobal Hawk stand-up events, undera High-Altitude TransformationFlight Plan. The 33 remaining U-2s

will be retired between FY08 andFY13, if Global Hawk stays on sched-ule. The last U-2s to be retired will bethose with a SIGINT capability, asthis is both in greatest demand todayand not provided by other resources,including Global Hawk.

It is worth realizing, however, thatin five years Global Hawk will likelycost at least as much as the U-2 forhandling the same missions. Some ca-pabilities will be added and some willbe lost, but $100 million a piece (withall sensors), the $5 billion for 50 newGlobal Hawks will dwarf the $1 bil-lion savings from retiring the U-2, es-pecially considering the U-2 airframeis good to fly through 2025….

SYERS is one of the first opera-tional military multispectral recon-naissance systems (up to threespectral bands at one time for SYERS2), and many see multispectral andhyperspectral reconnaissance as the

wave of the future. Instead of simplyincreasing resolution, analyzing andcomparing several different spectralbands allows many new capabilities.Detection of camouflaged targets ispossible, as is detection of buried ob-jects (mines) and targets under fo-liage. In the future, automatic targetrecognition will be possible bycomparing several bands of data.

SYERS 2 upgrades may continueat least for a couple more years, since,along with ASARS-2, all SYERS 2upgrade technology is transferrable toGlobal Hawk. But we have abbrevi-ated our forecast as it is now impossi-ble to predict when the Air Force willcut U-2 RDT&E funding for good. Asof FY07, funding for all U-2 C4ISRprograms will be awarded on a yearlybasis, with no pre-programmedfunding after FY06.

Global Hawk SPIRITT & USAF Hyperspectral Systems

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: BAE Systems, Communication, Navigation, Identification and Reconnaissance (CNIR),Greenlawn, NYUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThe Spectral Infrared Remote Im-

aging Transition Testbed (SPIRITT)ATD (Advanced Technology Devel-opment) is a hyperspectral elec-tro-optical reconnaissance system indevelopment for the US Air Force.We see a growing future formultispectral and hyperspectral re-connaissance, although delays havebeen present, and SPIRITT is apioneer program.

BAE Systems won the SPIRITTdevelopment contract in April 2001,and a funct ional SPIRITThyperspectral imager was test flownin late 2005. No onward developmentplans have been made public (Phase 2is no longer scheduled), but the AirForce wil l cer tainly continuehyperspectral system development.

Hyperspectral Imaging (HSI)Hyperspectral imaging (HSI), also

called imaging spectroscopy, refers tothe imaging of a scene over a largenumber of discrete, contiguous spec-tral bands, such that a completereflectance spectrum is obtained.Most materials on the earth’s surface(or above and below) contain charac-teristic or diagnostic absorption fea-tures. Hyperspectral imagers measurethese reflectance characteristics inmany different spectral bands, to de-termine features not visible to thehuman eye, or IR or radar sensors.

The result is often represented asan image “cube”, with 100+ sliceslayered like a piece of cake. Spectrumcoverage usually spans the visibleand infrared, with ultra-violet veryrarely included. 100 spectral bands isthe number commonly quoted to dis-criminate hyper- from multispectral.Multispectral sensors measure more

than dual-band E-O/IR (two spectralbands). The U-2’s recently upgradedmultispectral SYERS (Senior YearElectro-optic ReconnaissanceSystem) measures 7 bands.

Flight TestsIn December 2005, SPIRITT was

first tested in a “tactical environ-ment”, in Mojave, CA, carried aboarda Proteus aircraft at altitudes up to50,000 feet. SPIRITT integrated fourdifferent sensors through oneaperture.

SPIRITT Program ScheduleThe second SPIRITT Phase I ATD

demonstration flight test is plannedfor 3QFY06. Phase 2 ATD develop-ment is no longer scheduled, but wasearlier planned to run from 3QFY04to FY07, with Phase 2 flight tests in2007.



Teal Group Analysis

The US Air Force’s SPIRITT(Spectral IR Remote Imaging Transi-tion Testbed) is still essentially a de-velopment system, with BAESystems winning the Phase 1 ATD de-velopment award in April 2001. TheNavy’s LASH (Littoral AirborneSensor/Hyperspectral) sensor, con-tracted in 1999 for a 5-year develop-ment program, preceded SPIRITT,and has now essentially become aBAE Systems program also, as BAEacquired Science & Technology In-ternational (STI), Honolulu, HI, theLASH developer, in 2004.

SPIRITT was originally plannedfor the U-2, but with BAE Systems’development award in April 2001, theinitial planned platform shifted toGlobal Hawk. With the U-2 nowscheduled for retirement from FY08to FY13, we believe any unclassifiedproduction program would only befor Global Hawk. On the other hand,the U-2 may already be carrying aclassified SPIRIT derivative….

Multispectral and hyperspectralreconnaissance may well be the waveof the future, but development hasbeen fairly slow over the past half-de-cade. Perhaps we just expected toomuch, too soon. Although there is notyet a single hyperspectral system inseries production (at least not an un-classified system), airborne andspaceborne reconnaissance have al-ready begun a fundamental shift fromconcentrating solely on high spatialresolution from a single sensor, to us-ing different spectral data. This shiftis well underway with the use of

dual-band E-O/IR sensors and SAR(Synthetic Aperture Radar). Kosovo,Afghanistan, and Iraq re-emphasizedthe need to detect camouflaged andhidden threats and mines. These con-flicts essentially strengthened the di-rection of where research was alreadyheaded. In 2000, the Joint Staff’s“quick look” study on Operation Al-lied Force recommended pursuingful l spectrum reconnaissancecapabilities.

Instead of simply increasing reso-lution, analyzing and comparing mul-tiple spectral bands gives many newcapabilities. Detection of camou-flaged and stealthy targets is possible,as is detection of buried and underwa-ter objects (mines) and targets underfol iage (FOPEN/GPEN: Fo-liage/Ground Penetration). Addition-ally, in “blood hound mode”, specificspectral signatures can be searchedfor – such as a black pickup truck. Inthe future, automatic target recogni-tion will be made much easier bycomparing several bands of data.Other HSI advantages include betterdiscrimination versus decoys andflares (which are getting smarter). Fi-nally, another potential benefit ofmulti- and hyperspectral imaging istarget ranging. The spectral signaturein certain bands is strongly modifiedby CO2 in the atmosphere, which ispresent in essentially constantamounts. The observed signature ofobjects (e.g., an airplane) is modifiedby the amount of CO2 betweenimager and target.

However, many hyperspectralprograms have now been put on aback burner, at least regarding pro-duction plans, and look likely to re-main in basic development for severalmore years. Instead of improved de-tection, improved data distribution isgetting much of the increased fundingin airborne ISR today. Single anddual-band electro-optical data collec-tion has grown hugely as improveddigital sensors have become ubiqui-tous, and datalinks and processinghave been a more urgent issue thanhyperspectral sensors.

Indeed, this has been the majorproblem with advancinghyperspectral imagers – data process-ing and transmission. There is a lackof bandwidth to transmit 50-100times the data as might be producedby a standard E-O/IR sensor, and ade-quate processing and software havenot been developed to discern realthreats from false alarms, which havebeen rife in testing.

But we believe SPIRITT develop-ment will continue, if perhaps under anew program name (though we areforecasting Phase 2 development,perhaps as a classified program), andfunding should continue to increasefrom current low levels, if not asquickly as we forecast a couple ofyears ago. Our forecast includes bothRDT&E and procurement funding,but when this shift will occur is now afew more years down the road. Untildevelopment advances, our fundingforecast is highly speculative.

Navy BAMS E-O/IR Sensor

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: In CompetitionUnit Cost: $2-3 million (speculative)

See BAMS program description in

Synthetic Aperture Radars (SARs)

chapter.

BAMS Mariner E-O/IRIn May 2007, FSI was integrating

a retractable E-O/IR sensor ball into

Lockheed Martin’s US Navy BAMScompetitor, the Mariner UAV (basedon General Atomics’ Predator B).This is noteworthy, as so far Raytheonhas supplied nearly all E-O/IR pay-loads for the lucrative Predator mar-ket. If FSI breaks in, this would open

more competitions with Raytheon,where FSI would be well-placed tocompete on price.

The Australian government is alsoworking with Lockheed Martin forthe pre-SDD phase. Mariner will alsohave an Automatic Identification



System (AIS) to identify ships at sea,and 34 antennas for communications.Mariner’s payload is 1,350 lbs. inter-nally, with an extra 800 lbs. for futureupgrades, and a 4,000 external pay-load. If Lockheed Martin is awardedBAMS SDD, the first UAV would be

delivered to the Navy in 2013,followed by IOC in 2014.

Other BAMS E-O/IR Sensor Of-ferings

Northrop Grumman’s GlobalHawk competitor will carry the

Northrop Grumman Night Hunter IIE-O/IR system, as well as the Auto-matic Identification System (AIS).

Boeing’s BAMS 550 unmannedbusiness jet proposal will carry aRaytheon E-O/IR system.

Production Forecast


BAMS E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)USN (BAMS) — — — — — — 2 2 4 4 3 15

Coast Guard Deepwater Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensor

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Not yet in CompetitionUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThe US Coast Guard’s $25 billion,

20-year Deepwater program,awarded to a team led by LockheedMartin and Northrop Grumman (andmany other suppliers), is to includeprocurement of 76 UAVs, includingGlobal Hawks (perhaps leased) orother endurance UAVs, and 60-70Bell Eagle Eye Vertical takeoff andlanding UAVs (VUAVs).

A significant Deepwater road-block until 2003 was the lack of FAAcertification for the operation ofGlobal Hawk over the US, but thiswas achieved in 2003. Nevertheless,Global Hawk acquisition probablywon’t occur until 2016 at the earliest.In the interim, the USCG has spokenof paying for data from UAVs oper-ated from two land bases. These may

be DoD operated facilities. The even-tual requirement will probably totalabout four-eight air vehicles.

Deepwater Global Hawk sensorscould be slightly cheaper than equiva-lent size military sensors, because tar-geting may not be as crucial. On theother hand, the Navy’s BAMS sensorwould make an obvious choice forDeepwater.

Predator AN/AAS-52(V) MTS-A/B (Multi-Spectral Targeting System)

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Systems, McKinney, TXUnit Cost: $1 million (Predator A/MTS-A); $1.8 million (Predator B/MTS-B)

OverviewThe RQ-1A Predator is the US Air

Force’s first medium endurance(MALE) UAV. The Predatorstemmed from the earlier Tier 1 andTier 2 Medium Endurance UnmannedAerial Vehicle (MAE-UAV, previ-ously called UAV-E and Tactical En-durance UAV). The Tier 1 wasdeveloped primarily under CIA fund-ing, and was operationally deployedfor surveillance missions over the for-mer Yugoslavia in 1993-94. It usesthe General Atomics Gnat 750 air ve-hicle. The upgraded version, the Gnat750-TE Predator, won the DoD’s Tier2 competition with a developmentaward in January 1994, and in 1997was redesignated as the RQ-1A. The

Predator was first deployed overBosnia in the summer of 1995. TheUS Air Force assumed operationalcontrol of the Predator in September1996.

The armed forces reached finalagreement on the system’s joint oper-ational requirements document in thesummer of 1997, and Predator be-came the first ACTD program to beapproved for procurement in August1997. The first series production con-tract for two ground control stationsand 8 air vehicles was awarded toGeneral Atomics in August 1997.Early production air vehiclesmounted WESCAM’s Model 14Skyball FLIR, but this has long sincebeen supplanted by Raytheon sen-

sors. The US Air Force had a require-ment for 12 systems and 101 air vehi-cles, but this is being increased toaccommodate improved types such asthe MQ-9A.

Armed Predator: MTS-AWhen armed with Hellfire missiles

for the hunter-killer role, the RQ-1Ais designated as the MQ-1B. Thearmed Predator f irs t mountedRaytheon’s AN/AAS-44(V) FLIRwith laser designator, but since De-cember 2001 all new Predators havereceived Raytheon’s upgradedAN/AAQ-52(V) Multispectral Tar-geting System (MTS-A), an un-der-nose-mounted sensor ball



incorporating a laser designator andcolor E-O and IR cameras.

MTS full-rate production unit costis hoped for at about $1.5 million, butearly units have cost $2.2 million. TheMTS and associated improvementshave raised Predator air vehicle costfrom $2.5 to $4.5 million.

Predator B: MTS-BAnew turboprop-powered version

of the Predator was announced in2000, the Predator B, which was firstacquired by NASA for research pur-poses. Three Predator Bs were fundedin FY02 (with none in FY03) for test-ing and evaluation.

In May 2004, the Air Forceawarded a 36 month Predator B SDDcontract to General Atomics-Aero-nautical Systems (GA-ASI), whichwill lead to IOT&E in the second halfof 2007 and a full-rate production de-cision at the beginning of 2008.

Predator B is four times larger thanthe MQ-1A, and is essentially a newaircraft. In its hunter-killer version forthe Air Force, carrying at least twoHellfire missiles and providingself- target ing with theAN/AAS-52(V) MTS-B, it is desig-nated as the MQ-9A Predator B. TheAir Force is planning to acquire theMQ-9A alongside the MQ-1APredator.

The Predator ’s upgradedAAS-52(V) MTS-B sensor adds a 56cm diameter folded optics telescope,viewing through a mammoth 56 cmaperture, to allow surveillance fromthe 48,000 maximum altitude of thePredator B.

Another new MTS-B sensor to betested on the Predator B is Foglite, ashort-wave IR LIDAR claimed to becapable of penetrating moderatecloud cover, smoke, dust, foliage andcamouflage. It will be mounted in theMTS-B laser designator bay, and willbe used to identify and designate tar-gets. General Atomics is apparentlymanaging Foglite’s development.

General Atomics’ AN/APY-8Lynx Radar is also being integratedon Predator B, although a competitionfor the production radar is expected.

The radar and MTS-B are bothcarried by the Predator B simulta-neously, in addition to the 1,730 kgexternal weapons payload on threestores stations under each wing.

MTS-B Production ContractsIn early 2004, the Naval Surface

Warfare Center Crane Div.(NSWC-CD), Crane, IN, awardedRaytheon Systems a $17.4 million(FFP) job order under an earlier con-tract, to finance the production ofeight MTS-B systems for the PredatorB. The work is to be conducted inMcKinney, TX, and is to be com-pleted by December 2005. Contractfunding is expected to come from theNavy Other Procurement (OPN) ac-count (N00164-00-G-0007).

In September 2004, NSWC-CDawarded Raytheon Systems a $11.6million contract in preparation forMTS-B production. Work is to beconducted in McKinney, TX and is tobe completed by June 2006.

MTS-A Retrofit for all Preda-tors

In mid-2004, the ASC awardedGeneral Atomics a two-year contractto retrofit all 79 extant Predators tothe MQ-1L Block 10+ configuration.This will give all air vehicles the abil-ity to designate targets for Hellfiremissiles with new MTS-A sensors, aswell as several other upgrades, in-cluding a higher-performance Rotax914 UL engine allowing a maximumaltitude of 26,000 feet.

In July 2004, NSWC-CD awardedRaytheon Systems a $26.6 millionfirm-fixed-price (FFP) purchase or-der under an earlier BOA, to financetasks for MTS, including 17 turretunits and associated line items sup-porting the Predator and Navy H-60series programs. The work is to beperformed in McKinney, TX, and is tobe completed by June 2006. Contractfunding will come from Navy Air-craft Procurement (APN) account(N00164-00-G-0007).

MTS-A Tested for BAMSIn April 2004, Raytheon tested the

MTS-A, mounted along with theSeaVue SAR, on the General AtomicsMariner UAV. Mariner is derivedfrom the turboprop Predator B, and isbeing offered for the US Navy BroadArea Maritime Surveillance (BAMS)program. See Global Hawk above forfull BAMS program description.

Other International PredatorRequests

Pakistan approached the US in2002 about acquiring Predator forborder surveillance.

In early 2004, British officials be-gan discussions with the US aboutborrowing or leasing Predators foruse by British units in Iraq. Greece isalso interested in Predator

Italy Buys WESCAM for Preda-tors

Italy reportedly bought at leastthree WESCAM three-cameraE-O/IR sensors for its PredatorUAVs. It also bought L-3 Ku-bandsatellite datalinks in 2005.

Italian Predator UpgradesIn 2006, the Italian MoD report-

edly upgraded its six Predator UAVswith two Lynx II SARs. It also up-graded the E-O/IR systems, to replaceL-3 WESCAM Model 14 Skyballs(presumably with Raytheon MTSsystems).

MTS-A/MTS-B ContractsIn February 2007, the ASC

awarded Raytheon a $70.4 FFP con-tract to finance the production of 60MTS-AS systems for the MQ-1 Pred-ator and five MTS-B systems for theMQ-9 Reaper. The work is being con-ducted in McKinney, TX, and is to becompleted in August 2008. Contractfunding will come from APF account(FA8620-06-G-4041/0002).

In September 2007, the ASC is-sued Raytheon an $86.1 million FFPcontract against the ongoing FY06BOA to finance the production of 27MTS-A, 19 MTS-B, 54 MTS-Aretro-fits, three MTS-B pre-production



retrofits, and associated shop replace-able unit (SRU) spares, all for thePredator/Reaper UAV. The work isbeing performed in McKinney, TX.Contract funding is coming from APFaccount (FA8620-06-G-4041/Order0004).

MTS ImprovementsIn mid-2007, the Block 15 Preda-

tor was receiving an improved MTSsensor, reportedly with a “dual-nosecamera”. Another upgrade was add-ing the ability to automatically gener-ate target coordinates for GPS-guidedbombs.

Canadian MALE RequirementIn August 2007, Canada an-

nounced an interim requirement for aJoint Airborne ISR Capability(JAIC), which would procure an un-determined number of MALE UAVsto serve on deployments in Afghani-stan and elsewhere. The RFP is to bereleased in early 2008, with IOCplanned for June 2009.

Mandatory JAIC sensor require-ments are a color E-O/IR/low lightlevel system, a laser target designator,and a SIGINT package. Additional“rated” requirements are for a

SAR/GMTI and a weapon deliverycapability.

JAIC will essentially be anoff-the-shelf procurement, to be fol-lowed by a longer-term UAV programwith IOC in 2013-2016, the Joint Un-manned Surveillance and Target Ac-quisition System (JUSTAS). ThePredator-B with the MTS-B, ASIPvariant, and Lynx SAR are the mostobvious systems, though IAI will alsoreportedly offer a Heron/Heron TPsystem.

Teal Group Analysis

The armed MQ-1A Predator hasbeen a great success, and productionof the MTS-Ais in full swing. Despitethe four-times larger MQ-9A Preda-tor B not yet being fully tested, sev-eral MTS-B production contractshave already been awarded to

Raytheon. Production of both of thesesystems has already expanded to in-ternational Predators. The MTS-B es-pecially seems to be a relative pricebargain compared to Raytheon’smore custom-designed IntegratedSensor Suite (ISS) for the Global

Hawk. MTS-B provides a very largeaperture, long-range, high-altitudesensor, potentially integrated with asynthetic aperture radar (SAR), for alow off-the-shelf cost.

Production Forecast


AN/AAS-52(V) MTS-AUSAF (Predator) 106 24 24 24 24 41 26 27 20 20 20 356USAF (Predator Retrofit) 48 — — — — — — — — — — 48Italy (Predator Retrofit) 6 — — — — — — — — — — 6Undetermined (Undetermined) 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 38Total (MTS-A) 164 26 28 28 28 45 30 31 24 22 22 448AN/AAS-52(V) MTS-BUSAF (Predator B) 12 2 3 2 9 11 9 10 7 8 8 81Undetermined (Undetermined) — 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 2 4 2 32Total (MTS-B) 12 4 7 6 11 15 13 14 9 12 10 113

Predator RAPTOR

Status: Not in CompetitionManufacturer: Goodrich, Chelmsford, MAUnit Cost: $6-8 Million

OverviewFrom November 2004 to February

2005, the RAF tested a RAPTOR podon a Predator B UAV prototype, un-der the Falcon Prowl Joint UAV Ex-perimentation Program (JUEP).

RAPTOR is based on the Good-r ich (was BF Goodrich, was

Raytheon Optical Systems, wasHughes, was Itek Optical Systems),Chelmsford, MA, DB-110 dual-band(E-O/IR) long-range oblique photog-raphy (LOROP) system, equippedwith a real-time in-flight data link. Itwas developed as a podded system forthe UK Tornado RAPTOR require-

ment, but has also sold for JapaneseP-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft.In June 2004, Poland contracted for 7pods for their 48 new Block 52 F-16s,opening a much larger potential inter-national market. Greece reportedlyprovided another order in September2006. We see moderate future sales.



[Predator] Imaging Laser Radar Development Contract

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Lockheed Martin, Grand Prairie, TXUnit Cost: Undetermined

In May 2006, the AFRL issuedLockheed Martin in Grand Prairie,TX, a $7.8 million CPFF modifica-tion to a FY01 CPFF contract to fundtasks for the Predator Imaging LaserRadar program, which demonstrates a3-dimensional imaging laser radar

sensor suitable for installation on aUAV such as Predator. The project isresponsible for demonstrating thatsuch a sensor can be produced in sizeand weight that is compatible with aUAV while maintaining sensor per-formance that meets mission require-

ments. The work is to be conducted inGrand Prairie, TX, and is to be com-pleted by May 2009. Contract fund-ing will come from the Air ForceAerospace Sensors program (PE#0 6 0 2 2 0 4 F )(F33615-01-C-1419/PO10).

Army RQ-1C Warrior ER/MP E-O/IR Sensor

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: In CompetitionUnit Cost: $0.8-1.2 million (L-3 WESCAM sensor for I-GNAT); $1 million (production sensor) (speculative)

OverviewThe Army has plans for a new

UAV to replace the Hunter, called theER/MP (Extended Range/Multi-Pur-pose) UAV. Acknowledging theShadow’s limited payload capacity,the bigger ER/MP (also bigger thanthe Hunter, and with a 200 km rangeand requirements for a much longerendurance) will allow a greater diver-sity of sensors. ER/MP will serve forattack, reconnaissance and communi-cations relay, and will carry a varietyof missiles including Hellfire,Stinger, Viper Strike, the Joint Com-mon Missile and the AdvancedPrecision Kill Weapons System.

SDD contracts for the SAR andE-O/IR payloads were originally ex-pected late in FY03, but this was de-layed. Significant funding in theArmy’s Advanced Payload Develop-ment and Support project also cov-ered development of a laserdesignator, 3-D mapping, ahyperspectral sensor, and a LIDAR(light detection and ranging) payloadto generate high-resolution elevationdata for detailed mapping. As manyas four LIDAR payloads may also bedownsized for the Hunter UAV.

In 2005, the General AtomicsWarrior Predator derivative won theER/MP competition. The Army plansto acquire 7 or more systems, eachwith 12 air vehicles.

I-Gnat Test Vehicles OrderedIn May 2003, the US Army

awarded a contract for three GeneralAtomics I-Gnat UAVs, based on thePredator, to help define its UAV re-quirements. These I-Gnats are basi-cally the same as the Predator exceptthey lack the satellite datalink (pro-duction ER/MPs will have a satellitedatalink). The Army bought L-3WESCAM E-O turrets and GeneralAtomics Lynx SAR radars as testsensors.

At least one of the I-Gnats was de-ployed to Iraq in 2004 to help defineArmy requirements, and I-Gnat hasbeen operating since then.

Program AcceleratedFollowing cancellation of the

RAH-66 Comanche helicopter inearly 2004, the Army decided to ac-celerate development of the ER/MPby two years, and arm the UAV aswell. Each ER/MP system will com-prise 12-18 air vehicles and fiveground stations. ER/MP funding inthe DoD budget is planned at $1.0 bil-lion from FY04-FY09.

The ER/MP RFP was expected inAugust 2004, but was delayed whilethe Army considered whether theER/MP would duplicate one of thefour different Future Combat System(FCS) UAVs (the FCS Class IVUAV). But by September they de-cided the ER/MP would offer unique

abilities, including its use of the Tacti-cal Common Data Link (TCDL),rather than the FCS’s Network DataLink (NDL).

Flight DemonstrationDown-select

In late December 2004, the Armychose Northrop Grumman and Gen-eral Atomics for the ER/MP six-weekSystem Capability flight demonstra-tion. Boeing’s ER/MPentry was elim-inated. Following the f l ightdemonstration, the Army will chooseone team for SDD in April 2005.

General Atomics (“Team War-rior”) is offering a version of the Pred-ator with a Heavy Fuel Engine (HFE),and is teamed with AAI Corp.(Shadow TUAV) and Sparta. TheHFE reportedly enables a maximumflight altitude above 25,000 feet withincreased horsepower and fuel effi-ciency, and also reduces maintenancecosts and increases service life.

Northrop Grumman’s IntegratedSystems Sector is offering an armedversion of Israel Aircraft Industries’Heron UAV, slightly larger than theRQ-1A Predator, dubbed Hunter II(Hunter itself is an Israeli design).Northrop Grumman has referred tothe Hunter II as a “plused-up Heron interms of capabilities”. Hunter II willreportedly include the avionics andouter mold line of the Heron, but keepthe shape and tooling of the Hunter



series. Northrop Grumman and IAIare also teamed with Aurora FlightSciences (Manassas, VA).

ER/MP E-O/IR/LD SolicitationIn January 2005 (following an ear-

lier solicitation in July 2004), ArmyCECOM announced that it intends toissue a request for proposals for theSystem Development and Demon-stration (SDD) of a multi-missionE-O/IR/Laser Designator payload forthe US Army’s ExtendedRange/Multi-Purpose (ER/MP) UAV.This will be a best value, full and opencompetitive procurement based onbanded operational requirements.The contract will be for the SDDPhase and contain one range quantityproduction option. The contract willcontain a mix of Firm-Fixed-Price(FFP) and Cost-Plus-Fixed—Fee(CPFF) line items for SDD with theLRIP option being FFP. The acquisi-tion will be a 24 month effort for de-livery of 10 SDD units and their

associated supportability to include:logistics, qualifications testing andtraining.

The payload will be integrated andflight-tested in a contractor furnishedtest-bed aircraft prior to integrationinto the Army UAV system. At thecompletion of an Operational Assess-ment and successful Milestone C de-cision, the variable quantity optionfor up to 10 units maybe exercised.The offerors will be required to estab-lish Associated Contractor Agree-ments with the Army’s ER/MPvendor.

The ER/MP E-O/IR/LD payloadwill be one of three initial payloads,the other two being a Synthetic Aper-ture Radar/Ground Moving Target In-dicator (SAR/GMTI) payload and aWarfighter Information Net-work-Tactical (WIN-T) communica-tions payload (WCP). Furtherinformation regarding the ER/MPsystem is available in the ER/MP sys-tem technical requirements docu-

ment. SOL is W15P7T-05-R-S610,due February 2005. POP is US ArmyCommunications-Electronics Com-mand, CECOM Acquisition Center -DAAB07, ATTN: AMSEL-AC,Building 1208, Fort Monmouth, NJ.

Sensor StatusIn mid-2007, the ER/MP UAV was

being developed with three inter-changeable threshold payloads (Mis-sion Equipment Packages (MEP)),including an E-O/IR sensor with laserrangefinder/designator, a syntheticaperture radar with moving target in-dication (SAR/MTI), and a heavycommunications relay payload. TheER/MP will simultaneously carry andcontrol two different MEPs.

In mid-2007, the Army was devel-oping its own E-O/IR system for War-rior, though the Raytheon MTS couldbe bought if development delaysoccur.

Production Forecast


RQ-1C Warrior ER/MP E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)US Army (Warrior ER/MP) — — — 12 12 36 24 12 12 12 10 130

US Civil Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensors


Production Forecast


US Civil Endurance UAV E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)US Civil (Large UAV) n/a 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 35

SensorCraft ISR UAV E-O/IR Sensors


See SensorCraft program descrip-

tion in Synthetic Aperture Radars

(SARs) chapter.



Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHARE) UAV E-O/IR Sensors


Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Worksis reportedly developing a high-alti-tude, stealthy, but relatively conven-tional UAV for the US Air Forceunder a secret program, intended toreplace some of the penetrating re-connaissance capability to be lost

when the U-2 retires, and funded inpart with planned J-UCAS funding.Lest we forget, Global Hawk wouldbe a sitting duck if we ever fight a na-tion “our own size”, technologicallyor militarily. Global Hawk is most ef-fective for achieving total informa-

tion dominance against developingnations unable to fight back withmodern weapons.

PHARE sensors would likely up-date U-2 capabilities, includingE-O//IR, SAR, and SIGINT.

UCAV E-O/IR Sensors

US Air Force/Navy UCAV E-O/IR Sensors

Status: CancelledManufacturer: UndeterminedUnit Cost: Undetermined

Air Force UCAVIn the mid-1990s, the US armed

forces began to examine the conceptof unmanned combat air vehicles.Unlike current UAVs that are in-tended primarily for reconnaissancemissions, Unmanned Combat Air Ve-hicles (UCAVs) are combat UAVsthat can be employed on strike mis-sions. In March 1999, Boeing’s Phan-tom Works was selected to proceedwith the demonstration phase of theUSAF/DARPA UCAV program.USAF initial operational evaluationof the first production version wasinitially expected in 2007-2008.

Boeing’s X-45A UCAV weighs19,000 lbs., with a 3,000 lb. payload(sensors and weapons) and a range of650 nm. Planned UCAV sensors orig-inally included a primary SAR,Link-16, and electronic surveillance.Raytheon was awarded a contract forSAR/ELINT development for theX-45B in early 2002. Weapons wereto include the Small Diameter Bomb(SDB) and JDAM (the X-45A cancarry two 7,000 lb. JDAMS).

The Boeing X-45A demonstratorwas delivered in September 2000 andmade its first flight in May 2002: 14minutes, no problems, climbing to7,500 ft. The second flight occurred

in June, for 32 minutes at speeds up to195 knots.

A larger X-45B, which was to bevery similar to the initial operationalcapability Block 10 UCAV, wasplanned for its first flight in 2005. Theeven larger X-45C was to have a4,500 lb. payload.

Navy UCAV-NThe Navy referred to its concept as

the UCAV-N. The Navy awarded $2million study contracts to Boeing andNorthrop Grumman in 2000, withtheir designs designated the X-46Aand X-47APegasus respectively. Fur-ther Phase IIA $10 Million contractswere awarded to each in May 2002.

UCAV-N was similar in concept tothe Air Force’s UCAV, but was moresurveillance-oriented. This raisedquestions about the necessity for a“combat” UCAV. A carrier-basedUAV, if ever developed, could possi-bly take over the UCAV-N mission. Itseems the Navy was tagging alongwith the (Air Force/Army) crowd,without a definite operationalrequirement.

Northrop Grumman’s UCAV-Ncompleted its first taxi test in July2002. The first flight was originallyscheduled for late 2001, but was de-

layed due to upgrades for adual-redundant avionics system.

J-UCAS Joint ProgramIn 2003, the Navy’s UCAV-N and

the Air Force’s UCAV programsmerged into the J-UCAS (Joint Un-manned Combat Air System),planned as a Joint Strike Fighter-likecompetition between Boeing and ateam of Lockheed Martin andNorthrop Grumman.

The US Air Force had envisionedone of the first missions of the Block10 A-45 UCAV as a lethal Suppres-sion of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD)platform, but in 2003 planned a po-tential non-lethal electronic attackrole instead (lethal SEAD is alreadycarried out by the F-16CJ). The Block20/30 A-45 could be developed for a“pre-emptive” or “reactive” SEADrole, or carry out “full electronic at-tack” missions, which would includeinformation warfare (computer andnetwork attack) missions as well astactical jamming. Some even see a di-rected energy (microwave) attackcapability.

J-UCAS PlansIn May 2003, DARPA instructed

Boeing and Northrop Grumman todevelop new UCAV designs capable



of a range of 1,300 nautical miles anda payload of 4,500 pounds with lowobservable airframes. The Spiral 0 ef-fort will include 2 X-45As and 1X-47A. Spiral 1 will involve thelarger X-45C and X-47 demonstra-tors, and include demonstrations oflow-cost low observability features,catapult launches for the naval vari-ants, arrested landings and other dem-onstrations of system capabilities.

This effort will be followed by atwo year operational assessmentscheduled to begin in 2007. The de-velopment program is expected to lastseven years with operational deploy-ment of the Air Force A-45 around2010 and the Navy system around2015.

EA Becomes First PriorityIn April 2004, Pentagon officials

chose to prioritize electronics devel-opment for J-UCAS, choosing elec-tronic attack, sidelining Navypriorities for ISR.

J-UCAS Revolutionary Tech-nologies Solicitation

In June 2004, the Joint UnmannedCombat Air Systems (J-UCAS) Of-fice at DARPA, Arlington, VA, an-nounced it is soliciting ideas that willhelp achieve its objectives to developand demonstrate unmanned air com-bat capabilities for high-threat com-bat missions and environments,including the Suppression of EnemyAir Defenses (SEAD), surveil-lance/reconnaissance, precisionstrike and other related missions, be-ing conducted within the emergingglobal command and control archi-tecture. Such ideas can range frommodest hardware and or softwarecomponent projects to majorsubsystems developments.

Enabling system level technologyareas of interest encompass advancedsensors; digital wireless communica-tions, including networks; informa-tion processing and integration;intelligent algorithms and related

software for mission management,data fusion, image registration, tar-geting and other system level func-tions; digital avionics; and other areasthat can improve or enhance systemcapabilities. Unmanned air vehicleplatform technologies, includingthose that impact vehicle manage-ment, survivability, and platform per-formance, including enhancedpropulsion, also fall within the scopeof this solicitation.

Additional ideas of specific inter-est to the J-UCAS Office for nearterm application include automatedair refueling; avionics performanceand reliability enhancement technol-ogies (eg., spray cooling); advancedflight stability and control; and othertechnologies to reduce weight andcost. Proposals should fall within thegeneral scope of the topics describedherein and extend the state of the art inorder to be considered acceptable.

The J-UCAS Office’s goal for thisBroad Agency Announcement(BAA) is to solicit revolutionary re-search and development that will sup-port its Office mission. Such effortsmay involve high technical risks,which if enabled would provide com-mensurate high payoffs. Offerorsshould initially be prepared to supportthe technical feasibility of their con-cept or idea, and then be prepared todemonstrate and discuss successivephases leading toward technology de-velopment and integration withJ-UCAS system elements. SOL isBAA04-24, POC is MarkBennington, Contracting Officer, tel:(703) 696-2411, fax: (703) 696-2208,email: [email protected].

J-UCAS Development Con-tracts to Northrop and Boeing

In August 2004, DARPAobligated$30 million to Northrop Grumman asan increment to a $1 billion othertransaction to design and developthree X-47B air vehicles, three mis-sion control systems and a commonoperating system, and to conduct op-

erational experimentation and assess-ment. The work is being conducted inSan Diego, CA (70%); Palmdale, CA(10%); East Hartford, CT (3%); andin Costa Mesa, CA; Clearwater, FL;Irvine, CA; Cedar Rapids, IA; GrandRapids, MI; Buffalo, NY; St. Louis,MO; Rockford, IL; Burnsville, MN;and Torrance, CA (each location lessthan 1%), and is to be completed inSeptember 2009. Contract funding iscoming from the DARPA AdvancedAerospace Systems program (PE#0603285E) (HR0011-04-9-0009).

In October 2004, DARPAawardedBoeing Integrated Defense Systemsin St. Louis, MO a $766.7 millionmodification to a FY99 other transac-tion to fund the design, development,and fabrication of three full-scaleX-45C J-UCAS air vehicles and twomission control elements. In addition,the contractor is to integrate themwith the J-UCAS Common OperatingSystem to meet Air Force and Navymission capability objectives, andconduct an operational experimentand assessment. The work is to beperformed in St. Louis, MO (80%); ElSegundo, CA (4%); Cincinnati, OH(2%); Goleta, CA (2%); Lynn, MA(2%); and in multiple other locations(one percent or less at each), and becompleted in March 2010. Contractfinancing will come from the DARPAAdvanced Aerospace Systemsprogram (PE# 0603285E)(MDA972-99-9-0003).

J-UCAS CancelledIn December 2005, the DoD or-

dered the J-UCAS program split intwo with the Air Force shifting its at-tention to a classified program, andthe Navy responsible for the remnantsof the UCAV program. The Air Forceis likely to examine a strategic stealthstrike platform under its New Genera-tion Long Range Strike (NGLRS)program. The Navy effort is aimed atfielding the carrier-borne strikeN-UCAS in FY18.



Teal Group Analysis

With the arming underway ofmany UAVs in US service, from tacti-cal to endurance, the UCAV fundingline will provide for research and de-velopment of E-O/IR sensors which

can be applied to nearly every USUAV. Thus, of all the funds that maybe cut for UCAVs, platform develop-ment may suffer, but we believe sen-

sor and C4I funding will remain fairlystrong.

US Navy UCAS-D E-O/IR Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Not yet in CompetitionUnit Cost: $2-4 million (in full rate production)

E-O/IR in Weapons BayPlanned

In August 2007, NorthropGrumman’s UCAS-D reportedly wasto include E-O/IR imaging sensors inits weapons bay, to provide the abilityto accommodate alternative sensors.This system could be heavily basedon the F-35 Joint Strike FighterE-O/IR system, Lockheed Martin’sElectro-Optical Targeting System(EOTS), which is also an internalventral mount.

The F-35 E-OTS has a single aper-ture between the radome and frontwheel well. The sensor aperture win-dow blends into the airframe, allow-ing full-time operation. EOTS is usedfor ground surveillance and targeting,and also extends the range ofNorthrop Grumman’s DistributedAperture System (DAS) for situa-tional awareness and missile warningin the lower hemisphere (DAS mightnot be necessary on an “expendable”UCAV). As of early 2002, EOTSshared 65% identical hardware with

Lockheed Martin’s Sniper pod; theother 35% involves different softwareand repackaged Sniper submodules tobe carried in the JSF nose.

EOTS Development ContractIn December 2001, Lockheed

Martin won a $171 million subcon-tract from BAE Systems for EOTSdevelopment, which includes workuntil nearly 2010. It also includes pro-duction options for the first 22 JSFaircraft. EOTS will be flown in anF-35 nose section around 2005.

JSF E-O for Other StealthyPlatforms

In February 2005, Lockheed Mar-tin discussed the possibility of devel-oping the JSF E-O/IR system forother stealthy platforms, such as theB-2 bomber and F-117 StealthFighter. Oddly, Don Bolling, businessdevelopment manager for JSF EOTS,said he did not see a high probabilityof installing EOTS on the F-22ARap-

tor, claiming it would entail “a majormodification”.

Lockheed Martin proposed addingEOTS to the B-2 as part of its currentAN/APQ-181 radar upgrade. The AirForce’s non-stealthy B-52H andB-1B bombers are currently being fit-ted with Litening and Sniper pods, soa stealthy EOTS fitment for thestealthy B-2 seems a natural choice.

EOTS TestingIn February 2005, BAE Systems

Avionics, Crewe Toll, Edinburgh, de-livered the first laser system to be in-tegrated into EOTS, for rangefindingand target designation.

In August 2005, Lockheed Martincompleted building the first threeEOTS systems; a total of ten units willbe built for testing. Flight tests wereto begin aboard Northrop Grumman’sCombined Avionics Test Bed aircraftin June 2006, with the first flightaboard a JSF in 2008.

The first EOTS production con-tract is expected in 2007.

Production Forecast


US Navy UCAS-D E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)US Navy (UCAS-D) — — — — — 2 — — — 4 5 11

Tactical UAV E-O/IR Sensors

US Navy MQ-8B Fire Scout BRITE Star II

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc.Unit Cost: $650,000



VTUAV DevelopmentThe US Navy has sponsored sev-

eral technology demonstration effortsto develop a UAV better suited toshipboard launch and recovery thanconventional UAVs. In the summer of1997, the Navy began the process ofdeveloping an operational require-ments document (ORD) for a VerticalTakeoff and landing Tactical UAV(VTUAV).

The Navy initiated a VTOL UAVprogram in its FY00 budget, and theFY01 budget showed $325 million tobe spent by FY05. In February 2000,the Navy selected the NorthropGrumman Fire Scout, based on theSchweizer Aircraft Model 379 lighthelicopter. The requirement was ini-tially for 23 systems (12 Navy, 11 Ma-rine) with four air vehicles each, withoptions for up to 56 systems with a to-tal program cost of $1.3 billion.

Development PayloadInitial sensor package plans in-

cluded an IAI-Tamam stabilized sen-sor bal l based on the MOSPMulti-mission Optronic StabilizedPayload, with an E-O/IR sensor andlaser rangefinder/designator. FireScout payload capacity is 200 lbs.

VTUAV CancelledBut in late 2001, the Navy an-

nounced plans to cancel the FireScout program, and to buy fourGlobal Hawk UAVs instead. Onlythree Fire Scout systems were to beacquired from the original contact,and presumably be used for trialspurposes.

One of the primary reasons for thedeath of the Fire Scout was its rela-tively short endurance and corre-sponding lack of persistence. NavyVice Admiral Dennis McGinn, Navyrequirements chief explained in De-cember 2001: “My sense is that thepayload is a bit too small, the rangeand endurance are too limited, and be-cause of its [slow] speed at low alti-tudes, it is vulnerable to a much widervariety of ground-based defensesthan most UAVs.” The Fire Scout’s

rotor also produces a large radar re-flection, part of its vulnerability.

Fire Scout Reborn for LCSIn August 2002, the DoD formally

appealed the House authorizors’ pro-posal to cut FY03 VTUAV funding,and Navy funding continued for test-ing of existing Fire Scout air vehicles.Also in August 2002, the Navy askedcompanies submitting proposals forhigh-speed littoral warships to planaround the VTUAV as a key missionsystem.

Proving that persistence can payoff, Fire Scout is again a funded Navyprogram, with one RQ-8 system nowplanned for each Littoral CombatShip (LCS). Fire Scout was tested inApril 2003 aboard a surrogate LittoralCombat Ship (USS Denver) to exam-ine its suitability for this futurerequirement.

The Navy planned to procure 8RQ-8B Fire Scouts using FY04 fund-ing, to serve as the basis for trials.This LRIP II batch is scheduled for acontract award in 2QFY04, with de-livery from 4QFY05-3QFY07. Un-der current plans, the Navy willconduct a critical design review ofFire Scout in 1QFY05. The aim is toprovide early operational capabilityon an initial LCS ship by 1QFY07 andinitial operational capability by1QFY08 using the LRIP II aircraft.Assuming the program proceeds ac-cording to plan, full rate productionwould take place starting in 1QFY08.

The Navy is also considering ahunter-killer version as the MQ-8Seascout.

FLIR Systems Inc. to ProvideThree Sensors

In November 2004, NorthropGrumman awarded FLIR Systems,Inc. an FFP contract for three BRITEStar E-O/IR/LD sensors for Navy Lit-toral Combat Ship SDD Fire Scouts.Deliveries are to begin in 2005.

Presumably, these systems will betested by the Navy and compared withFire Scout’s earlier IAI-TamamMOSP sensors. Teal Group did notexpect Northrop Grumman or the

Navy to stick with an all-Israeli sen-sor, but Northrop and Tamam are nowco-developing a MOSP follow-on,the Raven Eye II. FLIR Systems hasnot won a production contract yet,and we are sure Northrop Grummanwill try their hardest to prevent it. Wesuspect Raven Eye II will be pro-duced at least for the Navy LCS FireScouts.

On the other hand, FLIR Systemshas a reputation for providing inex-pensive, capable systems for small in-ternational procurements, and thiscould help Fire Scout’s prospects inthe wide open international navalUAV market.

Test Payloads: BRITE StarThe Fire Scout system is designed

to accommodate modular payloads tosuit evolving operational require-ments. The RQ-8A air vehicle hasbeen fitted with a UAV Multi-missionOptronic Stabi l ized Payload(UMOSP) developed by Israel Air-craft Industries’ Tamam Divisionwith electro-optical sensors includinginfrared imager and a laserrangefinder/designator.

The MQ-8B for the System Devel-opment and Demonstration (SDD)phase for the US Navy Littoral Com-bat Ship (LCS), the payload will in-clude FLIR Systems BRITE Starthermal imaging laser designator sys-tem. BRITE Star includes 3-5 micronindium antimonide focal plane arraythermal imager, a high-resolutionCCD-TV camera and a laserdesignator/rangefinder.

USMCThe Navy has been trying to en-

courage the US Marine Corps to ac-quire Fire Scout as a replacement forthe Pioneer, but under current plansthe Marines envision starting theirown program in FY06 for a newtactical UAV.

German Navy Tests Fire ScoutSince the 1980s, the German Navy

has been developing a rotary-wingUAV derived from the US Navy’s1960s-era Gyrodyne (St. James, NY)



QH-50, for its Seamos (sea reconnais-sance and location system) program.Production was to start in 2005, fornew K130 corvettes, which will re-quire a rotary-wing UAV (they are notbeing designed for a mannedhelicopter).

The Seamos QH-50 program hasnow been shelved, and Germanytested a Fire Scout from a frigate in2003. Unmanned versions of theEurocopter EC120 Colibri helicopterare also being considered. Seamoswas developed with a 1,100 kg (2,425lbs.) maximum take-off weight, butthe new requirement could specifyhalf that.

COBRA TestingIn July 2007, NAVAIR announced

it intends to issue a cost type order un-der an existing BOA (N00019-05-G-0009) with Northrop Grumman, SanDiego, CA, to provide ground testingand flight demonstration of theCoastal Battlefield Reconnaissanceand Analysis (COBRA) Block 1 Sub-system for Fire Scout.

Other International InterestSpain has begun examining Fire

Scout as a contender for its F-100frigate.

Japan has also expressed interestin the Fire Scout, and several otherEuropean and Asian navies have re-

quirements for ship-launched navalUAVs in the next few years.

BRITE Star II for LCS FireScout

As of mid-2007, the BRITE Star IIsensor was part of the baseline modu-lar mission payload for the LCS FireScout. In May 2007, the LCS FireScout attained Milestone C approvalfor LRIP, with payload flights in late2007 and IOC in 2008.

Note that sensor costs have likelyrisen, due to today’s Fire Scout em-phasis on targeting (as with theArmy’s BRITE Star II for the ArmedReconnaissance Helicopter [ARH]),instead of a simple ISR sensor.

Production Forecast


BRITE Star IUS Navy (MQ-8B Fire Scout) 3 — — — — — — — — — — 3BRITE Star IIUS Navy (MQ-8B Fire Scout) — — 1 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 10 68

US Army MQ-8B FCS Class 4A (Fire Scout) E-O/IR Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: In CompetitionUnit Cost: $500-700,000 (speculative)

OverviewThe Army began considering the

use of Fire Scout as a test-bed for theirUCAR (Unmanned Combat ArmedRotorcraft) program in 2002-2003.However, in August 2003, the Armychose Fire Scout RQ-8B as the basisfor its Class IV UAV for the FutureCombat System (FCS) program, andBoeing and SAIC awarded NorthropGrumman a $115 million SDD con-tract in early 2004.

Most of the sensors the FCS FireScout will carry will be provided bythe FCS Class IV UAV program, suchas the General Atomics Lynx 2 Syn-thetic Aperture Radar SAR. FireScout communications are to be Gen-eral Dynamics [GD] Joint TacticalRadio System (JTRS) Cluster 5,air-to-ground communications.

In September 2007, the SASCasked the Army to speed procurement

of Fire Scout. Army plans call for ad-ditional engine and sensor testingprior to a 2010 flight test, with de-ployment between 2012 and 2014.But the Army has already received atleast six air vehicles, and final testingdelays have resulted largely due to de-layed FCS network and JTRS devel-opment. The SASC believes FireScout is essentially ready to go.

Army UCAR: Replaced by FireScout

In May 2002, DARPA awardedfour Phase I 12-month developmentcontracts for the Unmanned CombatArmed Rotorcraft (UCAR) to BellHelicopter Textron and LockheedMartin, Raytheon and Sikorsky, Boe-ing, and Northrop Grumman. In Oc-tober 2003, DARPAchose two teams,led by Lockheed Martin and NorthropGrumman, for 15-month Phase II

UCAR development, to continuethrough the end of FY04. UCAR airvehicles were originally planned tocost one-third as much as a Comanchehelicopter, or about $8 million.

In April 2004, Lockheed Martinadded Raytheon Unmanned & Re-connaissance Systems to its UCARteam, to provide sensor systems.Raytheon had been one of the originalPhase I primes, teamed with Sikorsky.In September 2004, Lockheed Mar-tin’s UCAR completed airborne andground demonstrations of potentialFLIR and LADAR sensors. Addition-ally, Raytheon completed airborne ra-dar and ground-based distributedaperture sensor demonstrations prov-ing the feasibility of millimeter-waveradar and a wide-angle IR sensor in alow-flying aircraft.

In December 2004, DARPA fi-nally cancelled its UCAR program,



following the Army’s decision to notparticipate. DARPA stated it couldnot continue without a service part-ner. However, DARPA announced it“remains committed” to developingthe next generation of autonomousmilitary systems.

Now, the Army has replaced itsUCAR needs with an armed FireScout. The Army systems will haveweapons capability, perhaps includ-ing the Advanced Precision KillWeapon System (APKWS) or ViperStrike. Northrop Grumman ViperStrike is a precision munition whichhas GPS guidance and a semi-activelaser seeker.

E-O/IR/LD Sensor SolicitationIn May 2004, the program man-

ager for Robotic and Unmanned Sen-sors (PMRUS), Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM),announced it was seeking sources ofan E-O/IR/LD (laser designator) tur-ret that could, with minimal develop-ment, form the multi-mode payloadfor the service’s tactical UAV systems(including fixed and rotary-wing plat-forms). Candidate turrets are ex-pected to be 25-40 cm in diameter andweigh 18-60 kg. PM RUS issued asimilar request to suppliers ofsynthetic-aperture radars (SARs).

The E-O/IR/LD package must beable to detect, recognize, measure therange of and designate a target thesize of an armored personnel carrier(3.5 x 3.5 m) from an altitude of10-12,000 feet at 70 kt and a slantrange of 8 km (threshold) or 16 km(objective). Identification of such a

target is required from a distance of 4km (eight km). The payload will con-duct autonomous preplanned opera-t ions with the capabil i ty forinstantaneous retasking throughout amission. Operating modes will in-clude staring, strip and spot wide-areasearch, together with precisionvideographic registration. Require-ments include continuous zoom whenin E-O mode and multiple fields ofview when in IR mode, selectable bythe mission payload operator (MPO).

Both sensor types must be capableof performing progressive scan videoto support the formation of image mo-saics in step-stare mode. The payloadwill slew through 360 degrees oncommand from the MPO, and providecoverage of at least 200 km2/h in anarrow field of view. The E-O sensorwill provide color imagery over theful l vis ible spectrum and ablack-and-white output whenselected by the MPO.

The LD will designate stationaryor moving targets for attack byair-to-surface weapons employinglock-on-after-launch mode at allranges of up to 8 km (16 km). Addi-tional desirable capabilities includeauto-track, auto-search and aided tar-get cueing, recognit ion andidentification.

ASTAMIDS for Army FireScout

In April 2005, the Army Commu-nications-Electronics Command(CECOM), Alexandria, VA, obli-gated $5.5 million to NorthropGrumman Systems in Melbourne,

FL, to fund the incorporation of re-connaissance, surveillance and targetacquisition (RSTA) and laser desig-nat ion funct ional i ty into theASTAMIDS Block I. The work is be-ing conducted in Anaheim, CA(62.2%); Herndon, VA (26.3%); andMelbourne, FL (11.5%), and is to becompleted by October 2009. Contractfunding is expected to come from theArmy Landmine Warfare/Barrierprogram (PE# 0604808A)(DAAB15-03-C-0013).

ASTAMIDS is a program to pro-vide the tactical commander and thestability and support operations(SASO) commander with an airbornecapability to detect mine threats. Itidentifies minefield locations andalerts the commander to locationswhere he can or cannot maneuverfreely. The system is being developedfor UAV or helicopter application,and will be initially mounted in thenose of a Fire Scout UAV.

Army Modular SensorsThe FCS Fire Scout will provide

modular mission packages includingan E-O/IR sensor, NorthropGrumman’s COBRA mine detectionsystem (based on ASTAMIDS), aTactical Synthetic Aperture Radarwith Moving Target Indicator(TSAR/MTI), a four-channel JointTactical Radio System (JTRS) com-munications relay package, a SignalsIntelligence (SIGINT) package, atraining sensor, and a Mine, Chemicaland Radiological detection.

Production Forecast


US Army Fire Scout E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)US Army (MQ-8B Fire Scout) 4 2 — — — — 15 15 15 15 15 75

USCG Bell Eagle Eye Star SAFIRE III

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc.Unit Cost: $600,000



Deepwater DevelopmentThe US Coast Guard’s $25 billion,

20-year Deepwater program,awarded to a team led by LockheedMartin and Northrop Grumman (andmany other suppliers), was to includeprocurement of 76 UAVs, includingGlobal Hawks (perhaps leased) orother endurance UAVs, and 60-70Bell Eagle Eye Vertical takeoff andlanding UAVs (VUAVs).

In November 2002, the US CoastGuard selected the Bell Textron

HV-911 Eagle Eye (now TR911D)over the Northrop Grumman RQ-8Fire Scout for its vertical take off andlanding UAV (VUAV) requirement.The USCG is considering the acquisi-tion of 69 UAVs and up to 50 groundcontrol stations.

Eagle Eye has a 200-lb payload ca-pacity.

The new USCG cutters were to be-gin deployment around 2006, but thishas been delayed.

FSI for Deepwater UAV+MPAIn July 2002, Lockheed Martin

tentatively selected FLIR SystemsInc. (FSI) to provide an undeterminednumber of FLIRs for Deepwaterprogram.

The Coast Guard now plans to buyFSI Star SAFIRE III E-O/IR sensorballs for Eagle Eye, and Star SAFIREII sensors for CN-235-300 maritimepatrol aircraft.

Teal Group Analysis

Should the Coast Guard Deep-water UAV program proceed asplanned, it will be the first large scalecivilian use of UAVs in the UnitedStates. The selection of the BellTextron Eagle Eye for the VUAV re-quirement is a major boost for thisprogram, which has been offered forover a decade to the Navy and other

services. What remains to be seen iswhether the air vehicle will prove tobe robust and reliable enough to oper-ate in the demanding navalenvironment.

One need only examine the relatedOsprey tilt-rotor transport program toappreciate the not inconsequentialtechnological risks of such a venture.

As a result, the forecast here shouldbe regarded as optimistic.

Should the program succeed, thiswill significantly boost the export po-tential of the Eagle Eye and probablymake it more attractive for use by theDepartment of Defense.

Production Forecast


Star SAFIRE IIIUSCG (Eagle Eye UAV) — — — — — — — 2 4 4 6 16

US Commercial UAV E-O/IR Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: UndeterminedUnit Cost: $250-600,000 ($350,000 average) (speculative)

OverviewSee platforms chapters for details

of future commercial UAV use. Pay-

loads will vary by UAV size and ap-plication.

Production Forecast


US Commercial UAV E-O/IR Sensors (Undetermined)Undetermined n/a 5 5 5 5 5 30 60 60 75 100 350

US Army Shadow 200 TUAV E-O/IR Sensors

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: IAI-Tamam; Northrop GrummanUnit Cost: $250,000

OverviewThe Army’s TUAV (Tactical

UAV) program is a UAV system in-tended to provide real-time recon-

naissance, surveillance, and target ac-quisition information to US Armybrigades. The primary sensor is an in-expensive EO/IR suite, with a syn-

thetic aperture radar (SAR)/groundmoving target indicator (GMTI) sen-sor also planned. These payloads willnot be fitted to the TUAV simulta-



neously, but will use a common pay-load configuration to permit easysubstitution.

The TUAV is a small UAV, with afairly small payload capacity. TotalTUAV air vehicle weight is 300 lbs,with a payload objective (unlikely tobe achieved) of 100 lbs. The Block IIproduction Shadow 200 payload is 60lbs. and 1 cubic foot.

The E-O/IR payload has changedfrom Inframetrics’Mk III E-O/IR (forearlier Shadow 200 UAVs) toIAI-Tamam’s (Israel Aircraft Indus-tries) POP 200 (Plug-in OptronicPayload) for the Block I LRIP andlater production air vehicles.

Current plans have NorthropGrumman teaming with Tamam toproduce POP systems under a newname, Raven Eye I/II (for systemsproduced by Northrop Grumman).

Production PlansIn December 1999, the Army

awarded the TUAV air vehicle con-tract to AAI Defense Systems, fortheir Shadow 200 UAV. The firstBlock I LRIP air vehicle was deliv-ered in late 2000, a second LRIP con-

tract for four systems was awarded inMarch 2001, and a third in March2002. A favorable Milestone III deci-sion was made in September 2002,leading to the award of a full produc-tion contract in December 2002.

The Army has changed its pro-curement objective several times overthe past few years. It was set at 44 sys-tems up to FY03, and then raised to 60systems. In the FY05 budget submis-sion, it was reduced again to 39 sys-tems, with procurement fundingending in FY07 instead of FY09. TheArmy is continuing to fund improve-ments in the TUAV system includingincreased payload, improved sensors,TCS (Tactical Control System) im-provements and other features.

By March 2004, the Army had ac-quired 24 TUAV systems (with 72 airvehicles), with five systems opera-tional in Iraq.

New Sensor PlannedIn 2004, under the Army’s new

FCS plans, an interim Class II tacticalUAV will be deployed by 2010.Likely to be an upgraded RQ-7B

Shadow 200, this will include a newE-O/IR/Laser Designator capability.

Combat DeploymentThe Shadow UAV was first used in

combat in 2003 during OperationIraqi Freedom with the 104th MI Bat-talion of the 4th Infantry Division.The 4th Infantry Division did not de-ploy during the initial combat phase,but saw fighting later in the peace-keeping operations in Iraq. The divi-sion used the Shadow on a number ofmissions including the division’s firstmajor operation, a June raid on Tikrit.

Shadow LaserIn mid-2006, Army Shadow plans

were on schedule to install a laser tar-get designator on the UAV. The Armyalso plans to arm Shadow.

FLIR Systems, Inc. MicroSTARII Tested

Although reports are vague, it ap-pears that FLIR Systems, Inc.’sMicroSTAR II has flown on theShadow 400 and 600 tactical UAVs,as well the on the Camcopter, Falco,and Sentry HP.

Production Forecast


IAI-Tamam POP 200US Army (Shadow 200) 205 60 30 50 5 55 — — — — — 405US Army TUAV E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)US Army (TUAV) — — — — — — — — — 60 60 120

US Marine Corps Shadow 200 MCTUAS E-O/IR Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Not yet in competitionUnit Cost: $250,000

Sea Viking 2006 SolicitationIn September 2004, the United

States Marine Corps, WarfightingLab, Quantico, VA, announced it isseeking potential sources, large orsmall businesses, capable of demon-strating UAV capabilities for Sea Vi-king 2006, an advanced warfightingexperiment. Respondents must dem-onstrate at a minimum that they canprovide the following UAV capabili-ties – Surveillance and Reconnais-

sance: visual imagery capable of de-tecting/identifying/locating (withbetter than 100m accuracy) tacticalelements of threat forces; Range:150nm; Endurance: 6-8 hours;Launch/Recovery: able to launch andrecover by MEU forces operatingashore; Responsiveness: able to re-spond to unplanned RSTA missions(quick set-up, mission programming,and launch process); Retaskable: ableto be retasked while in flight; Com-

munication/Data Link: able to com-municate and display imagery to thesea based command post with noground infrastructure.

Other UAV capability objectivesinclude (but are not limited to) theability to communicate and displayimagery to forces ashore simulta-neously with the sea- based commandpost, to launch and recover from am-phibious ships, to image the targetedarea from 10,000 feet AGL or above,



and to provide target designation.Participation in Sea Viking 2006could involve six days of 24-hour op-erations for each of the ISR LimitedTechnical Assessments (LTAs) andthe Limited Objective Experiment(LOE).

The tentative time periods for theLTAs and the LOE are below: UAVLTA, 1 September 2005; UAV LTA, 2December 2005; and ISR LOE,March 2006. The UAV system willpose as a surrogate for a future MarineExpeditionary Brigade (MEB) UAVcapable of sea-based operations. TheUAV system must be capable of con-ducting its mission without relying onany ground infrastructure. The Gov-

ernment will use responses from thisSources Sought Synopsis to make ap-propriate acquisition decisions. Thisis not a solicitation announcement forproposals nor will a contract follow asa result of this announcement. SOL isSea-Viking-2006, due October 31,2004.

Sensor PrioritiesIn July 2006, the Marine Corps

outlined its priorities for Tier II UAVsensors, with E-O/IR, a laser pointer,and a communications relay at thetop. Follow on payloads would beSIGINT and a chemical, biological,radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)detection package.

FLIR Systems, Inc. MicroSTARII Tested

Although reports are vague, it ap-pears that FLIR Systems, Inc.’sMicroSTAR II has flown on theShadow 400 and 600 tactical UAVs,as well the on the Camcopter, Falco,and Sentry HP.

Shadow to Replace PioneerIn December 2006, the USMC an-

nounced they would replace their Pio-neer UAVs with a purchase of 6 AAIShadow Unmanned Aerial Systems(compared to the Army’s 83 UASplans). Shadow will replace Pioneeras they are procured.

Production Forecast


USMC Shadow 200 MCTUAS E-O/IR Sensor (Undetermined)USMC (Shadow 200) — — 5 25 — — — — 10 — — 40

USMC RQ-2A Pioneer POP 200

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: IAI-TamamUnit Cost: $250,000

OverviewThe RQ-2A Pioneer is a remotely

piloted vehicle developed in Israel byIAI (Tel Aviv, Israel) for surveillancerequirements. The US Navy acquiredit in the late 1980s as an interim tacti-cal UAV system pending develop-ment of the UAV-SR (now BQM-155Hunter) for use off US Navy ships andby the US Marine Corps. In the late1990s, the Navy’s Fire ScoutVTUAV was planned to replace thePioneer, but Fire Scout was cancelled(until reborn for the LCS), and theNavy began looking at furtherPioneer upgrades.

Production to date has included atleast nine systems and slightly over100 air vehicles, with AAI Corp.(Hunt Valley, MD) the US prime.Congress ordered the Navy to halt fu-ture purchases in FY88 due to the de-cision to press ahead with a JointTactical UAV (BQM-155 Hunter).However, the Navy purchased 12 at-trition replacements after the Gulf

War, a further 20 air vehicles in FY94,and 15 air vehicles in 1996, to keepexisting units operational until a newUAV system arrives in service.

A total of at least four Pioneerswere lost during air operations overKosovo in 1999, including two incombat.

The E-O/IR sensor package ismounted centrally under the fuselage.The payload bay is 0.1 m3 and is pro-vided with up to 500 watts of power.The basic sensor is an El-Op Moked200 gyrostabilized daylight TV cam-era. In addition, the Pioneer has alsobeen fitted with a gyrostabilizedFLIR such as the El-Op MKD-400,for night and adverse weathersurveillance.

$100 Million Pioneer Improve-ment Program (PIP)

After the Fire Scout UAV wascancelled, the Marine Corps tookover the remaining 47 Pioneer air ve-hicles and the Navy agreed to fund a

$101 million Pioneer ImprovementProgram (PIP). The ground controlstation, sensor payloads, launchers,and engines will all be replaced. Onlythe two-year-old avionics system willremain, which is a common systemwith the Army’s Shadow 200 TUAV(also built by AAI). The Marines thenplanned to operate Pioneer until atleast 2010 or 2011.

AAI Corp. was to award subcon-tracts for most upgrade work, includ-ing an E-O/IR sensor, laserdesignator, and laser spot tracker.Most systems wil l be boughtoff-the-shelf to minimize develop-ment work.

The first improvements (con-ducted in spirals), adding the TacticalControl System (TCS), were to bemade by 2003. The second spiral wasto include improvements to the air ve-hicle, including a new E-O/IR pay-load. The final spiral was to add thelaser designator and satellite commu-nication data links. The fully-up-



graded version was to be ready by2005.

In early 2002, the HASC recom-mended a $7 million plus-up for theUSMC, for the “Marine Shadow”UAV program: a Pioneer UAV modi-fied by AAI with the Army’s ShadowTUAV control system.

Pioneer Upgrade ContractsIn February 2004, the Naval Air

Systems Command (NAVAIR)awarded Pioneer Unmanned AerialVehicle in Hunt Valley, MD an $11.2million cost reimbursement deliveryorder (DO) against a FY01 BOA, toprovide for the manufacture and de-livery of two replacement groundcontrol stations (GCS) for the PioneerUAV system. NAVAIR also awardedan $8.5 million cost reimbursementDO against the same BOA to financethe production of components con-sisting of payloads, receiver systems,

engines, IFF transponders, GCS andaircraft components for the PioneerUAV.

The work under the first action isto be divided among facilities in HuntValley, MD (65%); Holon, Israel(20%); and Patuxent River, MD(15%), and be completed in August2005. Places of performance for theUAV componentry order includedBen Gurion, Israel (55%); Hunt Val-ley, MD (25%); and Johnson City, NY(20%), with a completion date ofMarch 2005. Contract financing forthe two contracts will come from theNavy Weapons Procurement (WPN)account (N00019-01-G-0128).

POP 200 ChosenIn 2004, the Marines Corps chose

an off-the-shelf solution for the PIPE-O/IR sensor – the IAI-Tamam POP200 (Plug-in Optronic Payload). Theprocurement is expected to integrate

with sensor purchases for the USArmy’s Shadow 200 UAV.

Pioneer Retired Early?In early 2004, the Navy was re-

vamping its overall UAV plan, basedon experience in Iraq. At the time,new plans called for an early retire-ment for Pioneer systems. In June2004, the House and Senate alsocalled for shifting future Pioneer PIPfunding, to instead begin procuringShadow 200 TUAVs for the Marines.

Shadow to Replace PioneerIn December 2006, the USMC an-

nounced they would replace their Pio-neer UAVs with a purchase of 6 AAIShadow Unmanned Aerial Systems(compared to the Army’s 83 UASplans). Shadow will replace Pioneeras they are procured.

US Army Hunter Raven Eye II

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Northrop Grumman & IAI-TamamUnit Cost: $400-500,000

OverviewIn April 2002, the Army released a

solicitation for new sensors for itsHunter UAVs, under the HunterStand-Off Killer Team (HSKT)ACTD. The ACTD looked at teamingbetween UAVs and manned helicop-ters. Requirements included a500-10,000 ft range, 360 degree FOV,10 km detection range and 2.5 kmidentification range. The Army wasseeking to pinpoint targets with 10 maccuracy, but better than 80 meters isthe requirement.

Hunters currently mount IAI’sMOSP E-O/IR sensor.

The Army had about 50 Hunter airvehicles. The Hunter’s first combatuse was in Kosovo in 1999, where atleast 4 were shot down.

Hunter to Fly DHS Border Con-trol

Following successful testing withIsraeli-built Elbit Systems Ltd. Her-mes 450 UAVs, in November 2004the Department of Homeland Secu-rity (DHS) announced it will fly sur-vei l lance missions over theTexas/Mexico border using HunterUAVs.

MQ-5B Hunters for ArmyThe new MQ-5B Hunter has been

developed since 2005 out of NorthropGrumman’s Hunter-based competitorfor the Army’s ER/MP program. Ithas a new heavy fuel engine, arma-ment, and a greater payload (1,950 lbs[was 1,600 lbs]) and endurance (21hours with an additional fuel tank[was 11 hours]). The MQ-5B hasbeen called an “interim ER/MP”, in-tended to fill the gap until the first

Warrior ER/MP unit is fielded in2011.

As of April 2006, the Army hadtaken delivery of 18 new MQ-5Bs,and had contracted for 11 RQ-5Bs tobe modified to MQ-5B standard. Ato-tal of 40 MQ-5Bs are planned by theArmy, with the first operational unitto be deployed to Iraq in 2006.

The MQ-5B mounts the RavenEye II E-O/IR payload, developed byNorthrop Grumman and IAI-Tamam.It combines a cooled mid-wave FLIR,a zoom color TV camera, and a laserrangefinder-designator.

Unlike the ER/MP, the new Hunt-ers are not configured for satellitecommunications.

Northrop Grumman also plans tomarket the MQ-5B for homeland se-curity and international sales.



Production Forecast


Raven Eye IIUS Army (MQ-5B Hunter) 32 — — — — — — — — — — 32

USAF FINDER UAV E-O/IR Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Goodrich, Sensor Unlimited (SUI)Unit Cost: Undetermined

In December 2006, Goodrich an-nounced it will supply the short-waveIR (SWIR) payload for the USAFUAV Battlelab’s AC-130 SpectreFlight Inserted Detector Expendablefor Reconnaissance (FINDER) dem-onstration. The FINDER UAV will belaunched from under the wing of a

Spectre gunship, to provide close-intargeting support. Tests are to occur in2007. FINDER was originally devel-oped to be launched from under thewing of a Predator UAV.

The gimbaled SWIR payload willinclude a 640x512 Indium GalliumArsenide FPA, dual field of view lens,

and laser pointer. The SWIR sensordetects reflected rather than transmit-ted IR energy, and will ideally allowthe gunship to determine whetherground personal are armed orunarmed.

Mini-UAV E-O/IR Sensors

US Army A160 Hummingbird FCS Class II UAV ARGUS

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: BAE SystemsUnit Cost: Undetermined

UAV ARGUS-IS Wide FOV Sur-veillance Solicitation

In February 2007, the InformationExploi tat ion Off ice (IXO) atDARPA, Arlington, VA, announced itis soliciting proposals for the Autono-mous Real-time Ground UbiquitousSurvei l lance-Imaging System(ARGUS-IS) program under thisBAA. SOL is BAA07-23, due April2007.

Current UAS high-resolution elec-tro-optics (E-O) offers a narrowhigh-resolution field of view (FOV).This narrow FOV is a limiting factoron the utility of the E-O system. TheUAS that are available offer persis-tence; however, the effectiveness ofthe E-O system is limited by the sen-sors and available processing.ARGUS-IS will advance technolo-gies and systems that will enable widearea persistent surveillance andthereby provide greatly enhanced sit-uational awareness to the warfighter.These technologies and systems willbe transitioned to various partnersand customers. The objective of the

ARGUS-IS program is to develop asystem that provides a real-time,high-resolution, wide area video per-sistent surveillance capability andtransition this capability to themilitary.

The ARGUS-IS program is seek-ing to provide an expanding range ofcapabilities enabling wide area per-sistent surveillance. ARGUS-IS iscomposed of three major technologycomponents/subsystems, a GigapixelSensor Subsystem, an Airborne Pro-cessing Subsystem and a Ground Pro-cessing Subsystem. Integrating theGigapixel Sensor and Airborne Pro-cessing Subsystems together formsthe ARGUS-IS Airborne Subsystem.The packaging of the airborne sub-systems should be compatible with avariety of UAS including ExtendedRange/Multiple Purpose (ER/MP),Aerostat, and A-160 (Hummingbird).The ARGUS-IS system will be testedand evaluated during a series of flightexperiments utilizing a surrogateUAV. It is expected that a 200-mega-bit per second data link will be uti-

lized for these flight experiments.POC is Michael Blackstone, Con-tracting Officer, fax: (703) 741-0081,email: [email protected].

ARGUS-IS/A160 HummingbirdIntegration

In June 2007, the Information Ex-ploitation Office (IXO), DARPA,Arlington, VA, announced it intendsto award a sole source contract to theBoeing Co., Advanced Systems,Huntington Beach, CA, for the pro-curement and redesign of an A160pod and the procurement of an A160Hummingbird for integration andground/flight test research activitiesfor DARPA’s Autonomous Real-timeGround Ubiquitous Surveillance -Imaging System (ARGUS-IS). Ques-tions shall be submitted to, email: [email protected]. SOL is07-42, due August 2, 2007. POP is3701 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington,VA 22203.



USAF ARGUS Contract to BAEIn September 2007, AFRL-Wright

awarded BAE Systems a $17.9 mil-lion contract for the ARGUS (Ad-vanced Remote Unattended Sensor)program, expected to see applicationon a UAV. The work that is to be con-ducted will most likely dovetail with a

similar program being conducted atthe Defense Advanced Research Pro-jects Agency (DARPA) calledARGUS-IS (Imaging System). Thiseffort seeks to provide an expandingrange of capabilities enabling widearea persistent surveillance. It is com-posed of three major subsystems, a

Gigapixel Sensor Subsystem, andAirborne Processing Subsystem, anda Ground Processing Subsystem. Thework is being conducted in Washing-ton, DC. Contract funding is expectedto come from the Air ForceAerospace Sensors element (PE#0602204F) (FA8650-07-C-7732).

Marine Corps ScanEagle Photon IR Sensor

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc.Unit Cost: $40,000

OverviewIn July 2004, the Marine Corps

awarded Boeing a contract to providetwo ScanEagle “mobile deploymentunits” for use with the First MarineExpeditionary Force (one MEF).ScanEagle is mid-way in size be-tween the Pioneer and Dragon Eye,and has performed well in the harshenvironment in Iraq. In 2006, Boeingwill introduce a Block upgrade forScanEagle which will include in-creasing endurance to 30 hours, upfrom an already good 20 hours.

FLIR Systems, Inc. PhotonThe FLIR Systems, Inc. 170 g,

320x240 IR Photon camera core/pay-load has been fitted to the Aerosonde,Airfoil, Bat, Desert Hawk, Evolution,Helicam, Puma, RMAX, ScanEagle,and Swift mini-UAVs.

New Data Link TestedIn 2005, ScanEagle was tested

with a Harris SecNet-11 communica-tions relay package that made it possi-ble to send secure streaming videoand voice-over-IP communicationfrom a ground control station to aScanEagle 30 km away, which theninstantaneously relayed it to groundtroops 10 km from the UAV. Thelong-endurance ScanEagle makesthis extended line-of-sight communi-cations relay function especiallyuseful.

Stabilized PayloadsAs standard payload, ScanEagle

carries either an electro-optical or in-

frared camera. Plans are underway tooutfit it with a dual bay payload to al-low the aircraft to carry both camerassimultaneously, so that Marineswon’t have to recall the UAV tochange from the IR camera to a colorcamera when the sky goes from duskto dawn.

ScanEagle is the first small tacticalUAV with an inertially stabilized tur-ret. The gimbaled camera allows theoperator to easily track both station-ary and moving targets, providingreal-time intelligence to users.

Boeing is also looking at a modu-lar payload that will carry electro-op-tics, including a video camera with a25:1 mechanical zoom and IR capa-bility, which can be changed veryquickly.

The payloads are housed in thenose section. The operators can swapthe payloads in the field in a few min-utes. The sensors installed in the tur-ret allow the operator to trackstationary or moving targets withouthaving to re-maneuver the air vehicle.

ScanEagle has a 900MHz UHFdatalink and a 2.4GHz S-banddownlink for video transmission.

Other PayloadsOther payloads include biological

and chemical sensors, laser designa-tors and a magnetometer for identifi-cat ion and locat ing magneticanomalies.

The nose of the ScanEagle vehiclehouses a gimbaled and inertially sta-bilized turret. An upgraded Block Dvariant houses a new sensor turret

which accommodates larger cameras.The sensor turret can be fitted with aDRS E6000 high resolution uncooledthermal imager module providing640 x 480 pixels with a 25 micronpitch.

Flight and Camera ControlScanEagle flight is autonomous,

with a joystick control for the camerabut not the aircraft. Navigation is“point and click”, and the system canreturn its camera automatically to anypreviously viewed point.

Although ScanEagle ground con-trol has two consoles, each capable ofcontrolling up to four aircraft, whenmultiple ScanEagles are flying, pay-load access is limited to one aircraft.Boeing has proposed developing amultiplexing payload control.

Sniper Detection and RadarProposed

In January 2007, the US Air Forceinitiated an assessment study for thedeployment of a sniper gun fire detec-tion and location system supplied byShotSpotter Inc of Santa Clara, Cali-fornia. The integrated air vehicle andShotSpotter system provides addi-tional force protection for militaryconvoys and military bases againstsniper fire.

Other development programs areunderway to examine the installationand deployment of other payloads in-cluding a lightweight high-resolutionradar.



Production Forecast


Photon IRUSMC (ScanEagle) n/a 75 150 120 120 65 120 120 — — — 770

RQ-11 Raven ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc. (Indigo Systems)Unit Cost: $30,000 (speculative)

OverviewRaven is a small (six lbs.) bat-

tery-powered UAV used by pla-toon-sized Army elements to providecurrent information on close-in troopmovements at night. The system isequipped with the ThermoVision Mi-cron IR camera (formerly known as“Omega”) and data links, with an en-durance of 90 minutes. The camera isproduced by the Indigo Systems divi-sion of FLIR Systems, Inc.

Raven payload capacity is 200grams.

As of early 2007, each Raven sys-tem consisted of three aircraft, one

ground control station, batteries, andthree sets of sensors: one high-resolu-tion day camera, one high-resolutionnight imager, and one side-view ther-mal imager.

In mid-2007, British forces in Af-ghanistan were also using Raven.

Micron IR SensorThe Micron IR uses an uncooled

bolometer FPA operating in the 7.5 to13.5 micron band, weighs 120g, andproduces 160x120 (RS-170A) or160x128 CCIR) video outputs. The

USMC Dragon Eye also carries theMicron IR sensor.

Raven-B Supersedes DragonEye for USMC

In December 2006, the MarineCorps decided to shift procurementfrom its ongoing Dragon Eye UAV tothe new Raven-B, with 467 Raven-Bsystems funded through FY13. TheMarines had already received 242Dragon Eye systems.

Raven-B has a stabilized payload.

Production Forecast


ThermoVision Micron IRUS Army (RQ-11 Raven) n/a 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 — — — — — 5,000USMC (RQ-11 Raven) — — 145 275 120 — — — — — — 540

Marine Corps Dragon Eye ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc. (Indigo Systems)Unit Cost: $30,000 (speculative)

OverviewIn 1997, the Marine Corps decided

to reactivate some of their Exdronesfor trials from ships under the codename Dragon Drone, for a require-ment now dubbed Dragon Eye.

In 2001, the Navy awarded BAIand AeroVironment contracts for thecompetitive development of DragonEye prototypes. A winner for produc-tion was awarded in late 2002, withthe first production systems availablein early 2003.

Dragon Eye weighs 5-1/2 poundsand has a 45-inch wingspan. It is eas-ily disassembled and fits in a back-

pack. It has an endurance of slightlyless than an hour, with a video trans-mission range of 10 km. It is hand orbungee-cord launched.

Dragon Eye carries dual sensors –a movable camera in the nose and afixed side-looking camera. Three in-terchangeable cameras are available –day E-O, low-light TV (LLTV), andIR.

Future Dragon Eye developmentsoriginally included a Block III ver-sion which was to have vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) capability.

Dragon Eye SensorsDragon Eye initially carried a day-

light E-O camera, although by 2004 itwas carrying the same ThermoVisionMicron IR camera as the Army’s Ra-ven UAV. This may be in addition tothe daylight E-O sensor, as total sen-sor payload is reportedly aboutone-half pound (225g) – greater thanneeded for the Micron. The Micronuses an uncooled bolometer FPA op-erating in the 7.5 to 13.5 micron band,weighs 120g, and produces 160x120(RS-170A) or 160x128 CCIR) videooutputs.



Procurement PlansIf the program proves successful,

the Marines plan to acquire 1,000Dragon Eyes and 331 Dragon controlstations at a hoped-for cost of about$3,000 per air vehicle and $10,000per control station, with funding fromFY02-FY04 (about $2 million inFY02, $2 million in FY03, and $9million in FY04). These could be de-ployed as early as 2003.

However, more recent cost esti-mates allow $60-70,000 for each sys-tem, which includes 3 air vehicles anda control station, “in full-rate produc-tion”. This is about three times theUSMC’s originally-planned cost.

Other Dragon Eye TestsIn January 2002, the Navy suc-

cessfully conducted the initial de-ployment of a prototype Sea-ALLUAV, a naval variant of Dragon Eye.

The Army has also expressed in-terest in Dragon Eye, and announcedin June 2002 that it had purchased twoDragon Eyes and a ground stationfrom the Marines Corps. It will test

Dragon Eye over Kosovo in the sum-mer of 2002.

Iraq LessonsThe first generation IR sensor

night camera was equipped with alow-light camera, but the MarinesCorps replaced it in 2005 with a com-mercial off-the-shelf IR camera,which has been very successful, butnow the Marines want sharper resolu-tion, Giscard added.

The first generation Dragon Eyealso had one-time use disposable bat-teries. Although the batteries workedwell, the Marines unit had to carry4,500 batteries and disposing of themwas an issue. Dragon Eye now uses arechargeable battery.

Plans are also underway to up-grade the communications systems.Currently there are four uplinks andfour downlinks. A problem arosewhen several Marine battalions flyingDragon Eye along with the Armyunits flying Raven shared the samefrequencies. The upgrade would bean integrated communications suite

with eight up/down links so that Ma-rines would be able to change fre-quency while Dragon Eye is flying,Giscard said.

One more challenge that small sur-veillance UAVs are encountering isflying missions in urban environ-ments, between buildings and downalleys (“urban canyons”). BecauseUAVs rely on line-of-sight for con-trol, buildings prevent the craft fromgetting a signal. One idea is to havealoft one UAV that orbits and relaysinformation to and from the groundcontrol and a UAV.

Raven-B Supersedes DragonEye for USMC

In December 2006, the MarineCorps decided to shift procurementfrom its ongoing Dragon Eye UAV tothe new Raven-B, with 467 Raven-Bsystems funded through FY13. TheMarines had already received 242Dragon Eye systems. Raven-B has astabilized payload.

Production Forecast


ThermoVision Micron IRUSMC (Dragon Eye) 242 — — — — — — — — — — 242

Pointer and Exdrone ThermoVision Micron IR Sensor

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc. (Indigo Systems)Unit Cost: $30,000 (speculative)

The US UAV Joint Program Officehas sponsored two separate programsto examine very low cost UAVs(UAV-VLC). The aim of the pro-grams was to examine the operationalutility of very small UAVs, as well asto use the UAVs to help define the re-quirements of larger systems. Thetwo UAV-VLCs are the FQM-151APointer and the BQM-147 Exdrone.Both were deployed operationally in1991 during Operation Desert Stormwith the US Marine Corps, and thePointer was still in use in Iraq andAfghanistan in 2004.

In 1994, the Army began experi-menting with the BQM-147 Exdronein a proof of concept under which theUAVs were deployed forward of a he-licopter to provide real time recon-naissance.

The Pointer carries either an 8-12micron LWIR sensor or a color visualcamera. It has a 90 minute endurance,8.4 foot wingspan, and the airframewith batteries weighs 8.3 lbs.

Payload capacity is 900 grams.

SOCOM Pointer ProcurementIn May 2002, the US Special Op-

erations Command ordered at least 28new Pointers (and possibly more than80) for use in Afghanistan. All wereto be delivered by August 2002. Theywill mount E-O and IR cameras.

The Army got a $5 million FY03plus-up for Pointers, from the HASC,in May 2002.

ThermoVision Micron forPointer

In 2004, an undisclosed number ofThermoVision Micron mini IR cam-eras had been procured for Pointers.



Probably, all air vehicles have beenupgraded.

Air Force Desert Hawk (was Sentry Owl) E-O Sensors

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: FLIR Systems, Inc.Unit Cost: $40,000 (speculative)

OverviewIn May 2002, the USAF ordered

10-pound “Sentry Owl” mini-UAVS,quickly developed by Lockheed Mar-tin’s Skunk Works (in developmentsince 1999, but with little funding un-til recently). The Air Force was to buyfewer than 100 six-air vehicle sys-tems, but development plans for anupgraded Desert Hawk III were alsounderway in 2007.

Now called Desert Hawk, the pro-duction system was planned for secu-

rity forces at front-line bases inAfghanistan. It flies at a few hundredfeet altitude for an hour or more. It isbungee-launched, with a greater than3 km range. It is a member ofLockheed Martin’s FPASS family ofmini-UAVs.

In mid-2007, British forces in Af-ghanistan were also using DesertHawk.

Desert Hawk can carry either acolor TV or IR sensor.

The FLIR Systems, Inc. 170 g,320x240 IR Photon camera core/pay-load has been fitted to the Aerosonde,Airfoil, Bat, Desert Hawk, Evolution,Helicam, Puma, RMAX, ScanEagle,and Swift mini-UAVs.

US Mini-UAV E-O/IR Sensors

Status: Not yet in CompetitionManufacturer: UndeterminedUnit Cost: $40-50,000 (speculative)

OverviewSee platforms chapters for details

of future US Mini-UAVs.

Production Forecast


US Mini-UAV E-O/IR Sensors (Undetermined)Undetermined

(Undetermined) n/a — — — — — — — 1,500 1,500 1,500 4,500

Micro-Air Vehicle (MAV) E-O/IR Sensors

FCS Class I MAV E-O Sensors (DRS)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: DRS Sensors & Targeting Systems, Cypress, CAUnit Cost: $20-60,000 (speculative)

OverviewIn December 2006, DRS received

a $7 million contract to produce light-weight E-O/IR sensors and proto-types of an E-O/IR system for theDARPA-funded Honeywell FCSClass I UAV MAV.

In mid-2007, flight tests were un-derway on a new gimbaled sensor thatcould remain on target while the smallhovering MAV is buffeted by wind.The current sensor load is a dual pay-load, either two E-O or two IR cam-

eras, one to the front and one to therear, which has had stability prob-lems. The new gimbaled sensor willreduce weight as well.



Production Forecast


US Micro-UAV E-O/IR Sensors (Undetermined)Undetermined

(Undetermined) n/a — 150 130 190 150 — — — — — 620

Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) E-O Sensors

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: UndeterminedUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewAs the Micro Air Vehicle (MAV)

has grown in size, the original, trulytiny UAV concept has been tenta-tively renamed the Nano Air Vehicle

(NAV). Beginning in early 2007, aDARPA program for an ultra-light-weight system with a 7.5 cm wing-span and a weight less than 10 g was

being developed by AeroVironment,Lockheed Martin Advanced Technol-ogy Laboratories, and MicroPulsionCorporation.

International UAV E-O/IR Sensor Programs

Sensors Overview

Few European Programs Avail-able to US, Few Sensors Of-fered

Unlike in the US, European manu-facturers have developed a largenumber of well-established tacticalUAV programs. Many “flagship” na-tional systems have begun productionthis decade, and offer little opportu-nity for new sensors in the next 5years. When E-O/IR upgrades arebought, perhaps later in the decade,European or Israeli providers willtypically be the favorites. Many ofthese upgrades will be highly nationalprograms, with no pretense of an openmarket for international suppliers.

Europe has also come on strong inthe past year or two with either indig-enous or semi-indigenous enduranceUAV and UCAV programs. Oftenthese are based on Israeli platforms,but with European sensors (especiallyfrom EADS and Thales). Again, fewopportunities exist for non-Europeansensors, except Israeli sensors insome cases.

In UCAVs especially, Europe ismaking an effort to be self-sufficient,

with several new technology pro-grams underway. If air vehicles arebuilt, they will likely see well-pro-grammed indigenous sensor develop-ment when nearer to service. Openinternational sensor competition forthese programs is highly unlikely.

Conversely, the Europeans havenot actively marketed UAV E-O/IRsensors abroad. In part this is due tothe accepted dominance of inexpen-sive Israeli sensors; in part due to thevery small market, in terms of overallfunding, from a few dozen E-O/IRsensor balls costing $100-400,000each. Even US UAVs – including thenew Army Shadow TUAV – have typ-ically mounted Israeli sensors ratherthan develop their own. US compa-nies have not yet had success sellingtactical UAV sensors internationally,although this may change today, andthe Europeans have made even fewerattempts.

Israeli E-O/IR DominanceLong the pioneer in tactical UAVs

– including providing Pioneer andHunter UAVs to the US – Israel’s plat-

form dominance has recently waneddue to indigenous efforts around theglobe. Today, Israel often participatesas a partner (such as with the EADSEagle platform and Shadow UAVsensor, or the Elbi t /ThalesWatchkeeper), rather than as the soleprovider of platform and sensorequipment. Israel has also turned tosmaller non-Western markets.

However, Israeli remains theworld leader in the tactical UAVE-O/IR sensor market, at least interms of numbers. Inexpensive mod-ular sensor balls from IAI/Tamam(MOSP and POP) have long been theworld’s best-selling plug-in opticalpayloads (POP...). Sales will con-tinue, and Teal Group forecasts the in-creasing number of world UAV saleswill balance the declining absolutemarket share for Israeli sensors,meaning continued stable or growingrevenues for Israel i sensormanufacturers.



Israeli E-O/IR Programs

IAI-Tamam Plug-in OptronicPayload (POP)

The POP is IAI-Tamam’s tacticalUAV popular E-O/IR payload, with aunit cost of about $250,000. Designedto meet short distance observation re-quirements, the POP has also been se-lected for var ious aircraf t ,helicopters, security systems andgun-sights. The basic POP configura-tion contains color CCD and FLIRcameras, with optional video trackingand laser pointing.

POP has sold very widely, includ-ing for the US UAVs. The POP 200has been bought for the Army’sShadow 200 TUAV and, in 2004, forthe US Marine Corp’s Pioneer Im-provement Program. Strong sales willcontinue.

IAI-Tamam Multi-missionOptronic System Payload(MOSP)

The MOSP is IAI-Tamam’s endur-ance UAV E-O/IR payload, with aunit cost of about $400,000. Withvery high stabilization, the MOSPcanbe delivered with a wide range of sen-sors, including CCD, FLIR, LaserRange Finder (LRF), laser designa-tor, laser pointer and video tracker.

MOSP has also been highly suc-cessful, including for US UAVs, withmore than 400 systems delivered bythe end of 2004.

IAI-Tamam MiniPOP andMicroPOP

IAI-Tamam has recently addedtwo new, smaller sensor balls to itssuccessful POP line. MiniPOP wasintroduced at the Paris Air Show inJune 2005, and is a dual axis,gyro-stabilized, 21 cm high sensorball with a modular plug-in sensor“slice”, which can be easily replacedin the field in minutes. This allowseasy upgrades, as well as swapping inand out day E-O, IR, laser pointers,etc., important for limited payloadUAVs which can not carry severalsensors at the same time. MiniPOPweighs less than 7 kg.

MicroPOP is an even smaller sen-sor ball introduced in 2006, typicallywith a single small sensor.

IAI-Tamam Long Range Obser-vation System (LOROS)

The LOROS is IAI-Tamam’shigh-end product, with a unit cost per-haps between $750,000 and $1.25million, designed to meet verylong-range reconnaissance require-ments. In addition to a variety ofE-O/IR sensors, the gimbaled InertialNavigation System (INS) pinpointstarget coordinates.

LOROS has been less successfulthan POP and MOSP, simply becausemore expensive and sophisticatedsystems are most often developed asspecific national programs, such asthe Global Hawk’s Integrated SensorSystem (ISS). Firms such asRaytheon and Lockheed Martin havealso long developed relatively expen-sive and capable modular E-O/IR sys-tems for helicopters and mannedaircraft. These larger systems are thenavailable for more expensive UAVapplications, such as Raytheon’sAN/AAS-44 and AN/AAS-52 forPredator, which supplantedWESCAM’s earlier, more inexpen-sive, Model 14TS (which had beenbought as a direct commercial sale).

Elbit Compass forWatchkeeper

In 2006, Elbit’s Elop division wasoffering the Compass payload forTUAVs. Weighing 38 kg, it includesthe latest third-generation mid-waveinfrared technology, and a completelaser suite including a designator,rangefinder, and illuminator. Elopsays that because it is focused on mo-bile sensors, and it produces all itscomponents in-house, including op-tics and focal plane arrays, it excels instabilization and in packing multiplesensors into a single payload ball. Thecompany also touts its “smart-imag-ing” technology: a family of proces-sors and algorithms that can enhance

the image and counter the effects ofhaze and turbulence.

In December 2005, Compass wasselected for Britain’s WatchkeeperWK450 UAVs. One of Britain’sWatchkeeper program’s biggest sell-ing points is its dual payload system,allowing a combination of E-O/IR,SAR, and SIGINT sensors. TheWatchkeeper WK450 UAV is basedon Elbit’s Hermes 450.

Elbit Skylark Stabilized SensorIn early 2005, the first of Elbit’s

Skylark mini-UAVs produced for theIsrael Defense Force (IDF) and othercustomers. Its E-O payload is stabi-lized – one of the few stabilized pay-loads of its size – with a 10:1 opticalzoom capability. It is able to lock on toa target using its gimbaled seeker andthe air vehicle’s navigation system.

Rafael SkyLiteRafael uses its missile expertise to

give the SkyLite a two-axis gimbaledand stabilized seeker, mounted in thenose. Rafael claimed in 2005 that itwas the only dual-band day-plus-IRseeker in the mini-UAV market, usingtechnology that Rafael will also usefor air-to-surface and anti-tank weap-ons. SkyLite can lock its sensor on toa target and recapture it if it is ob-scured by smoke or obstacles.

Controp Stabilized D-STAMPIn early 2005, Israel’s Controp in-

troduced its under-1,000g D-STAMP(Daylight STAbilized Miniature Pay-load) for mini-UAVs. Controp claimsD-STAMP is the first stabilized sen-sor payload that provides a “pointingcapability” for mini-UAVs. Mostmini-UAVs have a fixed sensor, andthe UAV must be pointed at ISR tar-gets, resulting in “a very shaky pic-ture”, according to a Controp official.Controp claims there have been inter-national sales in addition to purchasesby the Israel MoD and Israeli indus-trial partners. Claims include the Or-biter mini-UAV and some models ofthe Skylite and Aerostar UAVs.



Once a camera is stabilized it canprovide higher resolution through alonger focal length, as D-STAMPdoes, according to Controp. The sen-sor also has an electronic zoom up to10X, which enables the operator tochoose a wide field of view for maxi-mum coverage, and then zoom to atarget, she added. Controp currently

lists D-STAMP as having an “optionfor night observation capability”, butwould not say when this will be avail-able. D-STAMP weighs less than apound and a half.

Controp: Other SensorsControp has supplied the 26 kg

DSP-1 multisensor turret for Israeli

Scout and Searcher UAVs, as well asits FSP-1 for Searcher.

The ESP-600C has reportedlybeen instal led aboard Dogan,Searcher, and Scout UAVs.

French E-O/IR Programs

GlobalScan IRLSCose SARL’s IRLS is reported as a

chosen option for Galileo Avionica’sFalco and Nibbio UAVs

SagemSagem Defense Securite’s 8-12

micron Corsaire IRLS has been sup-plied to the CL-289 program.

Sagem also supplies the sensorsfor the French army’s Crécerelle, in-

cluding CCD piloting and surveil-lance cameras and the 8-12 micronCyclope 200 IRLS

German E-O/IR Programs

Carl Zeiss OptronicsZeiss’s 3-5 micron ATTICA ther-

mal imager is used on the Luna 2000UAV.

Zeiss’s 7.5-10 micron OPHELIUSis used on the German Army’s KZOUAV.

South African E-O/IR Programs

Carl Zeiss Optronics PtyIn June 2007, Denel became Carl

Zeiss Optronics Pty. It produces the

Goshawk family of multisensor pay-loads, which have reportedly servedon Searcher and Sperwer UAVs.

Technology Development Programs

LASH & EPAS & AURORA & Navy & Army Hyperspectral Systems

Status: New DevelopmentsManufacturer: BAE Systems, Spectral Solutions, Honolulu, HIUnit Cost: Varies

OverviewLASH (Littoral Airborne Sen-

sor/Hyperspectral) was a pioneeringpod-mounted hyperspectral elec-tro-optical/infrared reconnaissancesystem developed for multiple plat-forms, including the US Navy’s P-3COrion and, possibly, aerostats andUAVs. In December 1999, the Officeof Naval Research awarded a 5-year,$50 million development contract toScience & Technology International(STI), Honolulu, HI, with additionalfunding in 2003.

EPAS (E-O Passive ASW System)is essentially the follow-on LASH de-velopment program. BAE SpectralSolutions, the renamed/acquired STI,was contracted for the program in2006.

The next generat ion Navyhyperspectral program was being so-licited in April 2007.

In Late 2006, the Army reportedlyawarded BAE Systems a contract forfive AURORA (Adaptive Unsuper-vised Real-time Optical Reconnais-sance Array) sensors for RQ-7

Shadow UAVs. The goal was to com-plete flight testing in 2006 and fieldthe system in mid-2007.

This section also briefly treatsother US Navy and US Armyhyperspectral programs – primarily,low altitude tactical systems, such asfor mine detection. See the GlobalHawk SPIRITT section above for adiscussion of hyperspectral technicalissues.



BAE Buys STIIn April 2004, STI Industries Inc.

reached an agreement to sell its gov-ernment systems division to BAESystems North America for $27 mil-lion in cash. The Honolulu-basedcompany said the sale will let it focuson its medical research and develop-ment unit and its dual-use technologyincubation division. STI GovernmentSystems is the largest of STI’s unitsand employs 125 people in Hawaii.

Army Funding for Mine Detec-tion

In July 2004, the Army Communi-cat ions-Electronics Command(CECOM), Alexandria, VA, on be-half of the RDEC Night Vision andElectronic Sensors Directorate(NVESD), Science and TechnologyDiv., Signal and Image ProcessingBranch, announced it planned to ne-gotiate a sole source contract withScience & Technology International(STI) to assess the viability of the fol-lowing passive imaginghyperspectral electro-optical sensors:the Visible to Near Infrared (VNIR)Advanced Airborne HyperspectralImaging System (AAHIS4), and theShort-Wave Infrared (SWIR)Hyperspectra l VNIR 400nmto1000nm (HVN0410) Sensor. Thecontractor shall also provide en-hancements as necessary to elec-tro-optics airborne minef ie lddetection sensor and algorithm tech-nology used in wide area airborneminefield detection. The contractorshall perform airborne data collec-tions with the electro-optical sensors,develop Automated Target Recogni-tion (ATR) algorithms, conductimage processing, and performphenomenology studies for mine andminefield detection.

Minefield Detection Contract toBAE

In October 2004, the ArmyCECOM element in Alexandria, VAawarded a contract to BAE Systems’Special Solutions LLC in Honolulu,HI, to provide for procurement sys-tems for the Wide Area Airborne

Minefield Detection (WAAMD) pro-gram. CECOM-Alexandria issuedSpecial Solutions a $1.2 million in-crement as part of a $6.1 millioncost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) July 2004contract for imaging hyperspectralelectro-optical sensors and algo-rithms for WAAMD. The work is be-ing performed in Honolulu, HI, and isto be completed by September 2006.Funding will come from Army OtherProcurement (OPA) (W909MY-04-C-0051).

AURORA Production forShadow UAV?

In Late 2006, the Army reportedlyawarded BAE Systems a contract forfive fourth-generation AURORA(Adaptive Unsupervised Real-timeOptical Reconnaissance Array) sen-sors for RQ-7 Shadow UAVs. The 30lb. (13.6 kg) payload includes a sixmegapixel hyperspectral sensor. Thegoal was to complete flight testing in2006 and field the system inmid-2007.

Image analysis is performed onboard by the adaptive spectral pro-cessing and identification system. Amodified 300 kbs Common Data Link(CDL) transmits data.

If all goes well, the Army has dis-cussed including AURORA on theWarrior ER/MP UAV.

Next Generation LASH Con-tract

In March 2007, NAVAIR an-nounced it is issuing a sole sourcecontract with BAE Systems SpectralSolutions, as a result of an Office ofthe Secretary of Defense competitionfor Joint Concepts Technology Dem-onstration projects. The JointMulti-Mission Electro-Optics Sys-tem (JMMES) project was selected.The project is a continuation of R&Defforts that will incorporate improve-ments to the precursor LASH (Litto-ral Airborne Sensor-Hyperspectral)and the existing EPAS (Electro-OpticPassive ASW System) system to ex-tend present anti-submarine warfarecapabilities into new missions formine countermeasures, maritime in-

terdiction operations, surface war-fare, search & rescue, illicit cropdetection, and marine mammalmitigation.

It is anticipated that the currenthardware configuration of EPAS willbe redesigned and prototypes modi-fied and constructed to improvesearch rate capabilities and the accep-tance of a wider range of military/ci-vilian aircraft such as fixed winged,helicopters, airships and UAVs. Soft-ware improvements will also be madeto incorporate new target and cluttercharacteristics. Test and evaluationsupport will be provided to demon-strate to Combatant commands andinternational users the value of theJMMES system under operationalconditions and circumstances. SOL isN00421-07-D-0013.

SWIR HSI FPA SolicitationIn April 2007, the Office of Naval

Research (ONR), Naval ResearchLaboratory (NRL)/Stennis, StennisSpace Center, MS, 39529-5004, an-nounced a requirement for researchand development efforts to fabricate,integrate, test, and deliver two (2)small-pi tch, large-format ,short-wavelength infrared (SWIR)focal plane arrays (FPA) for use indaytime hyperspectral imaging sen-sor development. The required FPAsshall have approximately 2000 pixelsin one dimension and at least 512 inthe other dimension, and shall bemounted in cooling systems.

The required effort will consist ofseveral tasks, which shall include, butmay not be limited to: a) providing thepersonnel, equipment, and facilitiesto design and develop the requiredFPAs and their cryogenic cooling sys-tems; b) acquiring the necessary hard-ware for the focal plane arrays andtheir cooling systems; c) performingintegration and testing efforts on theFPAs in their cooling systems; and d)performing efforts to integrate theFPAs and cooling systems with othersensor subsystems. Detailed require-ments, including detailed specifica-tion/statement of work, deliveryrequirements, and list of contract data



requirements will be included in thesolicitation document.

This solicitation is a full-and-open-competition. All responsiblesources may submit a proposal, whichshall be considered by the agency.The Government anticipates award ofone Firm-Fixed Price contract for therequirements. NRL uses ElectronicCommerce (EC) to issue RFPs andamendments to RFPs. This solicita-tion and any amendments to it will beavailable via the Internet starting ap-proximately fifteen (15) days after

publication of this announcement atthe URL address provided below.SOL is N00173-07- R-RS01, dueApril 2007.

Next Generation Multi-PlatformTurret

In July 2007, NAWC-AD-Patuxent River awarded BAE Sys-tems Spectral Solutions a ceil-ing-priced $49 million indefinite- de-livery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ)contract to fund the design comple-tion and building of five of the next

generation of multi-platform demon-stration turrets with a non-acousticsensor suite, with four earmarked forthe Navy and one for the Governmentof Canada. The work is being con-ducted in Honolulu, HI, and is to becompleted in June 2012. Contractfunding is coming from NavyRDT&E ($46 mil l ion; PE#0603235N) and from the ForeignMilitary Sales (FMS; $3 million)accounts (N00421-07-D-0013).

Teal Group Analysis

The US Navy’s LASH (LittoralAirborne Sensor/Hyperspectral) sen-sor, contracted in late 1999 with addi-tional funding in 2003, continued byEPAS (E-O Passive ASW System) in2006, is one of today’s furthest ad-vanced military hyperspectral sys-tems. As forecast , “LASH”development will again continue,with a solicitation for the next genera-tion system in April 2007.

Multispectral and hyperspectralreconnaissance may well be the waveof the future, but development hasbeen fairly slow over the past half-de-cade. Perhaps we just expected toomuch, too soon. Although there is notyet a single hyperspectral system inseries production (at least not an un-classified system), airborne andspaceborne reconnaissance have al-ready begun a fundamental shift fromconcentrating solely on high spatialresolution from a single sensor, to us-ing different spectral data. This shift

is well underway with the use ofdual-band E-O/IR sensors and SAR(Synthetic Aperture Radar). Kosovo,Afghanistan, and Iraq re-emphasizedthe need to detect camouflaged andhidden threats and mines. These con-flicts essentially strengthened the di-rection of where research was alreadyheaded. In 2000, the Joint Staff’s“quick look” study on Operation Al-lied Force recommended pursuingful l spectrum reconnaissancecapabilities.

However, many hyperspectralprograms have now been put on aback burner, at least regarding pro-duction plans, and look likely to re-main in basic development for severalmore years. Instead of improved de-tection, improved data distribution isgetting much of the increased fundingin airborne ISR today. Single anddual-band electro-optical data collec-tion has grown hugely as improveddigital sensors have become ubiqui-

tous, and datalinks and processinghave been a more urgent issue thanhyperspectral sensors.

Indeed, this has been the majorproblem with advancinghyperspectral imagers – data process-ing and transmission. There is a lackof bandwidth to transmit 50-100times the data as might be producedby a standard E-O/IR sensor, and ade-quate processing and software havenot been developed to discern realthreats from false alarms, which havebeen rife in testing.

Our forecast, highly speculative atthis point, is for another few years ofRDT&E until a serious productionprogram occurs, though the Army’sAURORA could be the first produc-tion system, beginning sooner. Sys-tem details are uncertain at this point,though BAE Systems likely has a lockon at least some initial production,and a large part of continued RDT&Efunding.

Airborne UAV-Specific Solicitations and Contracts

Army Future Force NetworkedSensors

In February 2004, plans for PE#0603710A, Project #K86, Night Vi-sion, Airborne Systems included theNetworked Sensors for the FutureForce Advanced Technology Demon-stration (ATD) project, which willmature multi-mission (RSTA, coun-termine) day/night targeting sensorsand software for small unmanned ae-

rial vehicles (UAV) for the FutureForce.

Technologies to be addressed in-clude automated flight control and ul-tra-light payloads for UAVs. Themission equipment package for theClass II UAV will demonstrate small,lightweight, interchangeable pay-loads (electro-optical/infrared, laserradar) to support target detection,identification, and location of diffi-

cult targets for the Unit of Action. Themission equipment package for ClassI UAVs will demonstrate very small,very lightweight, interchangeablepayloads (electro-optic, thermal,acoustic, chemical) to support intelli-gence, survei l lance, andreconnaissance requirements for theUnit of Action.



ASTAMIDS RSTA and LaserDesignator Integration

In July 2004, Army CECOM, onbehalf of the PEO-Armaments, Pro-gram Manager Close Combat Sys-tems, Countermine Div., announced itplanned to negotiate a sole sourcemodif icat ion to contractDAAB15-03-C-001 3 with NorthropGrumman, Airborne Ground Surveil-lance & Battle Management Systems,Melbourne, FL, for the integration ofReconnaissance, Surveillance, andTarget Acquisition (RSTA) and LaserDesignation (LD) functionality/re-quirements into the Airborne Stand-off Minefield Detection System(ASTAMIDS) platform with minimalmodification to the system, in an ef-fort to provide a RSTA capability on acommon gimbal . SOL isW909MY-04-Q-RSTA, due August2004. POC is Jane Borden, tel: (703)325-1709, email: [email protected]. POP is US ArmyCommunications-Electronics Com-mand, CECOM Acquisition CenterWashington, ATTN: AMSEL-AC-W,2461 Eisenhower Avenue,Alexandria, VA 22331-0700.

UACO Part 2: FCS UAV-Ground Cooperation Solicita-tion

In August 2004, the Army Avia-tion Applied Technology Directorate(AATD), Fort Eustis, VA, announcedit intends to solicit technical and costproposals on a cooperative engage-ment demonstration effort that formsPart 2 of the Unmanned AutonomousCollaborative Operations (UACO)program, an Army Science and Tech-nology Objective (STO). Multiplecontracts were awarded under Part 1of this program earlier in FY04 (So-licitation number W911W6-04-R-0003). This is open to all US con-tractors and not limited t o successfulPart 1 contractors.

The goal of Part 2 of this programis to demonstrate air-ground coopera-tive engagements using small, highlyautonomous UAVs to enhance com-bat effectiveness of mounted/dis-mounted infantry companies. The

team of unmanned vehicles, includ-ing small highly autonomous UAVs,should require minimal operator ef-fort to accomplish the mission. Thecooperative engagement demonstra-tion envisioned is of a Future CombatSystem (FCS) equipped Infantry Co.receiving a mission to conduct amovement to contact. The unit’s des-ignated unmanned system user/oper-ator develops a high-level missionplan that will deploy a team of un-manned vehicles to execute thismission, at least one of these beingrepresentative of a Class II UAV.

As part of the mission, the team ofunmanned vehicles will conduct re-connaissance forward of the unit, de-tect target(s), track them, andcollaborate on the execution orhand-off of an engagement for a cho-sen target. The team of unmanned ve-hicles will assist the unit in executingthe mission with minimum human in-tervention. Offerors will be requiredto propose test vignettes depicting au-tonomous, collaborative capabilitiesin the unmanned team. The opera-tional scenarios may be based on mili-tary operations in urban terrain(MOUT) and/or open and rollingterrain.

Test vignettes may include day andnight operations, and may includeweapons engagement byground-based manned systems. TheGovernment will arrange for the dem-onstration test site. The Governmentwill provide ground-based mannedvehicles, targets, weapons, ammuni-tion and associated support at thistest-site as necessary. The Govern-ment will not furnish any unmannedvehicles. SOL is W911W6-04-R-0015, due September 2004. POC isPat Hagginbothom, tel : (757)878-4818, email: [email protected]. POP is AviationApplied Technology Directorate,ATTN: AMSRD- AMR-AA-C,Building 401, Lee Boulevard, FortEustis, VA 23604-5577.

Multi-spectral UAV Mine-detec-tion Sensor Solicitation

In May 2006, the Army Communi-cation-Electronics-Life Cycle Man-agement Command, AcquisitionCenter-Washington, on behalf of theU.S. Army Research, Developmentand Engineering Command, Commu-nications Electronics Research De-velopment and Engineering Center(RDECOM CERDEC), Night Visionand Electronic Sensors Directorate(NVESD), Science and TechnologyDiv., announced it was seekingsources for a multi-spectral visible tonear-infrared (VNIR) to short-wave-infrared (SWIR) airborne sensor.NVESD is initiating an applied re-search program for a TRL 5 airbornedemonstration of a multi-spectral, re-flection-band (400-2,500 nm), imag-ing brassboard sensor. The sensorwill be used for detection of surfaceand buried landmines from a Class IIIunmanned airborne vehicle (UAV)flying at airspeed of 85 knots.

The proposed sensor will be capa-ble of imaging with anywhere from 4to 6 bands within this spectral regionand have a ground resolved distanceof 3 inches or less. Spectral data foreach ground sample shall be collectedsimultaneously. The sensor should becapable of remaining functional dur-ing exposure to temperatures from-51C to 81C without the use of specialkits or operational procedures withlimited degradation in performancepermitted. Payload shall accept 28VDC from UAV with a + or - 1.2 VoltDC drop. Power usage should not ex-ceed 200 Watts. Output of the sensorshould be co-registered digital imag-ery from the focal plane and not belimited to detections.

Designs are allowed to incorporatean upward-looking sky sensor for at-mospheric compensation. Thereshould be a planned transition path toTRL 6, which incorporates a 35 lbsensor payload weight, to includeproposed sensor head, all electronics,data acquisition and at least 5 hours ofdata storage. The sensor does nothave a requirement for geolocation,but must provide sufficient time tag



information to allow geolocation us-ing UAV resources. NVESD is inter-ested in responses involving any ofthe following capabilities: (1) FPAdevelopment, (2) optics design anddevelopment, (3) camera electronics,(4) brassboard sensors and data ac-quisition. SOL is W909MY-06-R-PM07, due 6/9/06. POP is USArmy C-E LCMC, Acquisition Cen-ter – Washington, ATTN:AMSEL-AC-W, 2461 EisenhowerAvenue, Alexandria, VA 22331-0700.

Microsensor ContractsIn March 2007, The Defense Mi-

croelectronics Activity (DMA),McClellan, CA, awarded a $8.7 mil-lion CPFF contract to Signal Technol-ogy in Plano, TX, to provide forcontinuing procurements for theMicrosensor Phase VI program. Thecontract was the result of a February2007, five-company solicitation. Oneproposal was received. The work isbeing performed in Plano, TX, and isto be completed by May 2008. Con-tract financing is probably comingfrom the Army Sensors and Elec-tronic Survivability element (PE#0602120A) (H94003-07-C-0705).

In May 2006, the DMA-McClellan awarded Signal Technol-ogy a $7.2 million CPFF contract forMicrosensor Phase V. The work wasto be performed in Plano, TX, andcompleted by May 2007 (H94003-06-C-6003).

UAV Sensors ContractIn March 2007, NAWC-AD-

Lakehurst awarded Pedigree Tech-nologies, Fargo, ND, an $8.4 millionCPFF contract to fund the researchand development of electro-optical,radio frequency (RF), and acousticsensors for UAV platforms. The con-tract was competitively awarded via abroad agency announcement (BAA),there were three proposals received.The work is to be performed in Fargo,ND, and is to be completed in Decem-ber 2011. Contract funding is comingfrom the Navy RF Systems Applied

Research element (PE# 0602271N)(N68335-07-C-0271).

Small UAV E-O Sensors Solici-tation

In March 2007, the Office of Na-val Research (ONR) announced thatits Electronic Warfare Discovery andInvention (D&I) program is inter-ested in investing in science and tech-nology (S&T) initiatives that willprovide naval forces (including Navyand Marine Corps) with improvedthreat warning systems, electronicsupport measures (ESM), decoys, andelectronic attack (EA) countermea-sures as well as communication andnavigation countermeasures. ONR312 Electronic Warfare (EW) seekswhite papers for efforts that shall de-velop and demonstrate technologiesfor the next generation componentsand systems in Electronic Warfare.

White papers should address tech-nology developments in one or moreof the following areas. 1). Elec-tro-Optical/Infrared Sensor Elec-tronic Field of Regard, Field-of-View(FOV) and Magnification. The Officeof Naval Research (ONR-312) seeksinnovative technology developmentproposals for small, light-weightelectro-optic and infrared sensorsand/or technology for dynamicallyallocatable field of view (FOV)/mag-nification. The thrust is to developsensor technology enabling low costpersistent surveillance and targeting.It should be suitable ultimately forsmall payload, 5 pounds typically, un-manned aerial vehicles (UAV). Thesensor technology should not be me-chanical gimbals or mechanicalpan-tilt-zoom. The sensors should beoptronically/electronically pointable(i.e., optically agile beam steering).The technology should ultimately becapable of up to +/- 90 degrees point-ing/steering and electronic magnifi-cat ion (3X to 12X) capable .Electronically addressed active opticsshould enable optical sensors that cansteer quickly between lines of sightand change to multiple fields of viewfor reconnaissance applications. Thisincludes wide FOV for surveillance,

high resolution narrow FOV fortarget identification and tracking, andfast electronically addressablepointing for tracking of multipletargets.

Attention/consideration should begiven to knowing where the sensorFOV is directed so image registrationand target geolocation can be deter-mined. Passive visible and infraredimaging sensors/technology are ofparticular interest.

2). E-O-IR Scene Simulation forPersistent Surveillance DevelopmentThe objective is to develop a scenesimulation capability, in the elec-tro-optical and infrared spectralbands, to use for developing and eval-uating automated scene/image under-standing and autonomous sensormanagement algorithms. The effortshould be phased and incremental todevelop initial capabilities in astimely a manner as possible. Maxi-mum possible use of DoD lab existingsimulations/scene generators isencouraged. SOL is ONRBAA07-015, due June 15, 2007.

IR Micro-Sensors SolicitationIn July 2007, DARPA solicited re-

search proposals in the area of Mi-cro-Sensors for Imaging (MISI). Theobjective of this effort is to developtechnologies for extremely lightweight micro-cameras sensitive in thevisible to short wave and in longerwave infrared; and to demonstratesuch camera systems in micro-vehi-cles and head mounted applications.The proposed research should inves-tigate and exploit innovative ap-proaches that wil l enablerevolutionary advances in science,materials, detectors, focal plane ar-rays, micro-packaging, optics, elec-tronics and signal processing leadingto extremely light weight cameras.Specifically excluded is research,which primari ly resul ts inevolutionary improvement to theexisting state of practice.

The primary goal of this programis to establish the micro-systems tech-nology for extremely lightweight,low power cameras with the perfor-



mance necessary for medium toshort-range applications. The compo-nents comprising the lightweightcamera include the optics, packageddetector, electronics and camerahousing. Innovations in optical anddetecting materials; sensor designand fabrication, signal processing,and micro packaging are necessary toachieve goals for extremelylightweight.

Specifically excluded is researchwhich primarily results in evolution-ary improvement to the existing stateof practice. This program addressesdevelopment of sensor technologycri t ical to micro-vehicle andhead-mounted system applications,integration of sensor technology into

a package consistent with the applica-tion, and demonstration of systemprototypes. Micro-air and mi-cro-ground platforms and helmetmounted applications require: sensoroperation at room temperature or withextremely low power cooling andtemperature stabilization, sensor mi-cro-package with operational lifetimeconsistent with military operations,and optics and electronics consistentwith the platform. The first phase ofthe program shall demonstrate thefeasibility of integrating an imagingarray into a micro-package of the sizeand weight necessary for the applica-tion and with performance compati-ble with system goals. This willinclude demonstration of the key

attributes of the proposed approach,and paths to evaluate the risk.

The measured data shall be sup-ported by models and calculationspredicting performance. Options maybe exercised to continue the programafter this initial demonstration. Thesecond phase will consist of an inte-grated system feasibility demonstra-tion for the proposed application.

SOL is BAA06-46, POC is Ray-mond Balcerak, fax: (703) 696-2206.Michael Blackstone is the Contract-ing Officer, tel: (571) 218-4804, fax:(703) 696-2208. email: [email protected], [email protected].

E-O/IR Technology Program Solicitations and Contracts

Target Exploitation Develop-ment & Support (TEDS) Solici-tation

In May 2004, the Air Force Re-search Laboratory (AFRL), RomeResearch Center, Rome, NY, an-nounced that capable sources aresought to continue development andenhancement of the current opera-tional targeting functionality of jointtargeting automation software, tomove towards full automation of allneeded targeting capabilities, includ-ing support to all elements of the jointtargeting community and time-criti-cal and time-sensitive targeting oper-ations, according to the approvedORD entitled, “Final Operational Re-quirements Document (ORD) CAF(JS/J2) 005-00-II-A for the JointTargeting Toolbox (JTT) JROCM#217-02", dated December 16, 2002.

The effort will include makingchanges to improve performance andresponsiveness to operational needs;upgrade the current suite of applica-tions with new versions of Commer-cial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) andnewly developed (Govern-ment-Off-The-Shelf [GOTS]) soft-ware; support integration testing withvarious operating environments; andrespond quickly to user mission needs

concerning the training, initialization,operation and management of thesupported suite of applications.While meeting the needs of the target-ing community-at-large, unique ser-vice capabilities must be providedand interoperability with legacy andevolving systems, databases, andarchitectures must be maintained.

An Indefinite-Delivery/Indefi-nite-Quantity (ID/IQ), Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF)-Completion typecontract is contemplated, with an or-dering period of sixty (60) months.The maximum contemplated order-ing amount is $48 million. Responsesto this sources sought notice are re-quested from small businesses andwill be used for market research pur-poses and possible set-aside. Shouldthe determination be made to selectthis as a small business set-aside, an-other notice will be posted reflectingsuch. SOL is FA8750-04-R-0037,POC is Scott Podkowka, tel: (315)330-4716, fax: (315) 330-1608,email: Scott. [email protected].

Automated Sensor Manage-ment & Data Fusion RFI

In May 2004, the Army Communi-cat ions-Electronics Command(CECOM), Fort Monmouth, NJ,

I2WD announced it is conductingmarket research to receive informa-tion on technology and products indevelopment and/or off-the-shelf thatcan support a multi-sensor MissionManagement (MM) Module, whichwill be used for the Eye-In-the-Sky(EIS) Science and Technology Objec-tive (STO). The MM module will per-form sensor management and datafusion for multiple sensors aboard acommon airborne platform. This willinclude automated data correlationand target-tracking, as well as auto-mated payload management fortasking and cross-cueing of sensors.

The MM module will also inter-face to existing sensors, an onboardaircraft GPS and inertial system, anda data link to a ground station. TheMM Module must be compatible withcurrent and future military sensors aswell as allow connectivity to futureDCGS-A, FCS, 10.2 and other jointmission ground station/architectures.This implies reliance on an open, ser-vice based architecture. The specificsensors used for the payload will bedependent on specific mission re-quirements . SOL is W15P7T-04-I2WD-005, due May 22, 2004.POC is Jane Calicari, tel: (732)427-7077. POP is the US Army



RDECOM, CERDEC, I2W Director-ate, ATTN: AMSRD-CER-IW-BA,Building 600, Fort Monmouth, NJ.This is a pre-solicitation request forinformation (RFI).

Dynamic Tactical Targeting(DTT) Follow-On Solicitation

In October 2004, the InformationExploi tat ion Off ice (IXO) atDARPA, Arlington, VA, announced itwas soliciting proposals for the Dy-namic Tactical Targeting: TacticalExercises and System Test(DTT:TEST) program under thisBroad Agency Announcement(BAA). The DTT program currentlyis developing technology to continu-ously cross-cue a large set of hetero-geneous, partially controllable sensorplatforms to maintain track on knowntargets, while maintaining search ef-forts to find new candidate targets, sothat known targets can be held at riskuntil a commander authorizes en-gagement. Abstractly, the sensors canbe viewed as a pool of resources, andmission needs (search an area,maintain track on a designatedvehicle) as prioritized demands.

DTT is the process that continu-ously, and proactively, assigns re-sources to demands as the situationchanges: new missions are defined,known vehicles move, new vehiclesare found, existing tracks degrade,etc. The DTT program began in 1999,and is ending this year. It developedan initial set of software components,in tegrated into a complete ,closed-loop system, that clearly vali-dated the above premise, but vali-dated the premise only on simulateddata. Simulated data simply cannotcontain all of the artifacts and errorsources present in the real world.

The Tactical Exercises and SystemTesting (DTT:TEST) program hasbeen created to validate the DTTpremise in live exercises, leveragingcompanion efforts in the Army (affili-ated with the Future Combat System)and Air Force (affiliated with the Dis-tributed Common Ground Station).The DTT:TEST program will vali-date the premise that automated tools

can be employed to, 1). align thetransformed sensor data to a commongeospatial reference system, 2). cor-relate data across sources into consis-tent target tracks, 3). predict futuretarget motion, 4). create sensor-spe-cific tasking that develops the mosteffective way to employ sensors in thecontext of anticipated target motion(for targets in track) and remainingsearch tasks (for targets yet to be dis-covered), and 5). allow a commanderand staff to maintain situationawareness and supervise theoperation of the automation.

The DTT:TEST program willbuild and integrate technologies forthese five areas, and exercise them onreal-world sensor data, both recordedand live. Some of these technologiesmay be drawn from those funded bythe original DTT program, but IXO isaware of, and interested in, other,equally mature technologies that mayoutperform those employed by DTTto date. Validation will be accom-plished in live exercises, leveragingcompanion efforts in the Army andAir Force. SOL is BAA05-04, dueJanuary 29, 2005.

Efficient Mid-Wave Infrared La-sers

In February 2006, DARPA solic-ited for Efficient Mid-Wave InfraredLasers (EMIL), the objective ofwhich is to develop new MWIR (de-fined here to be wavelengths between3.8 and 4.8 microns) laser conceptswith fundamentally superior efficien-cies, and to demonstrate MWIR laserswhich approach these efficiencies.Specific program goals include: Wallplug efficiency exceeding 50 percent;CW output power exceeding 1 W;Operation at 300K ambient tempera-ture (TE cooled); Beam quality betterthan two times diffraction limit inboth directions; and Compact physi-cal size. Spectral tunability across theband and narrow line widths are de-sirable laser qualities but are second-ary to the above program goals. Theperiod of performance for each ofthese Phases and the milestone sched-ule will be proposed by offerors

within their technical proposals andwill be factors considered as part ofthe source selection process (see be-low). In general, a shorter phase ispreferable, but each Phase shouldclearly be adequate in duration tomeet its objectives with reasonablerisks and costs. Proposals shoulddiscuss plans for managing thesefactors.

DARPA seeks innovative propos-als in the following areas: I. Modelingand Design of Efficient MWIR La-sers; II. Fabrication of AdvancedStructures for Efficient MWIR La-sers; III. Thermal Management of Ef-ficient MWIR Lasers; IV. PowerScaling of Highly Efficient MWIRLasers. Additional information onthese technology areas is provided inthe Areas of Interest section of theBAA 06-20 Proposer InformationPamphlet. SOL is BAA06-20, dueJune 2006.

Super Resolution Vision Sys-tem

In March 2006, the DARPA Ad-vanced Technology Office (ATO) so-licited proposals under a BAA for theSuper Resolution Vision System(SRVS) program. The objective of theSRVS program is to design, build, andfield a prototype man-portable opticalsystem that will credibly extend therange for target recognition and iden-tification over existing systems. Thekey technical innovation is to exploitan atmospheric turbulence-generatedmicro-lensing phenomenon that cre-ates high-resolution (lucky) image re-gions through collection of a streamof high-speed images to generatebetter-than diffraction limited im-ages. DARPA is interested in propos-als that utilize state-of-the-art opticaland computational technologies toexploit this turbulence-generated mi-cro-lensing phenomenon, which willfacilitate new operational and tacticalopportunities for land forces. Propos-als must culminate in a field demon-stration of a prototype system scaledto in-service system size, weight andpower. DARPA requests proposalsfor the full scope of development



(e.g., an end-to-end system designedby a team of multidisciplinary re-search organizations, plus an integra-tor for coordinat ion andimplementation support). Proposalsaddressing only individual compo-nent-level technologies will be con-sidered non-responsive to this BAA.Primary technical challenges includethe development of image qualitycomputat ional algor i thms foron-the-fly local image quality analy-sis and fusion (image quality map es-timation and fusion of (lucky)high-resolution image regions);rapid, on-the-fly local region shift/jit-ter removal combined with on-the-fly(lucky) region fusion; image stabili-zation and local image shifts removal;and the interface between thehigh-speed camera and computa-tional hardware. Integration chal-lenges include incorporating theresulting system into a compact,man-portable package; system size,weight and power; power manage-ment (use of standard batteries); andenvironmental packaging. The SRVSprogram will build and test a fieldprototype man-portable optical sys-tem that will: Credibly demonstrateimproved recognition range overexisting systems, be less than 2kilograms, be less than 35 cm inlength, and have an optical apertureless than 6 cm. This BAAshall remainopen for one (1) year from the date ofpublication on www.fbo.gov andwww.grants.gov. SOL is BAA06-23.

Force Protection SensorsTechnology

In May 2006, CECOM/RDECOM/NVESD solicited throughthe Broad Agency Announcement(BAA) process proposals for innova-tive application of sensor integrationtechnology that supports, enhances orstands alone with existing Force Pro-tection (FP) sensor technology or ar-chitecture. These technologies shallfocus on the missions of area security,border surveillance and standoff de-tection or manned suicide bombthreats. This BAA will also includeinterest into unique sensor integration

techniques and/or the seamless inter-face into existing FP sensor system ofsystems architecture for area secu-rity/border surveillance (e.g. Cerber-us, the integrated security sensortrailer, or the current Suicide BombDetection sensors Gauntlet). TheFPS-TMD effort is to evaluate anddemonstrate promising technical con-cepts, their technical maturity and op-erational utility for the missionsstated above. The objectives of theFPS-TMD program are: Advance thestate of the art of traditional ForceProtection sensors; Stimulate innova-tive applications of non-traditionalForce Protection Sensors; Seek to le-verage investments in other sensorsand system integration efforts madeby industry, academia, DoD and otherGovernment Agencies; Demonstratethe operational utility of integratedsensors for the suggested FP mis-sions. SOL is W15P7T-06-R-P816,due May 2007. POP is US Army C-ELCMC Acquisi t ion Center -DAAB07 ATTN: AMSEL-AC. Thetechnical point of contact is MichaelJennings, tel: (703) 704-1032; email:[email protected].

NMIR FPA Contract to DRSIn October 2006, the AFRL,

Wright research Site, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, released a $6.3million CPFF contract to DRS Sen-sors and Targeting Systems in Dallas,TX, to fund the development of a128X128 format hqCdTE AvalanchePhotodiode (APD) Near-Mid Infra-red (NMIR) Focal Plane Array (FPA)receiver system. The contract saw so-licitations issued in November 2005and negotiations completed in Octo-ber 2006. The workload is to include asystem trade study to investigate theoverall receiver system and modelFPA/ROIC trade space in terms of theperformance parameters such asReadout Integrated Circuit (ROIC)power dissipation, system noise, thenumber of output channels requiredfor high date rate output, etc. Thework is being performed in Dallas,TX, and is to be completed in Febru-ary 2009. Contract funding will come

from the Air Force AerospaceSensors RDT&E program (PE#0602204F) (FA8650-07-C-7703).

Anti-Sniper IR Targeting Sys-tem Contract

In March 2006, the Marine CorpsMARCORSYSCOM, Quantico, VA,had a requirement for continuation ofresearch and development services tocomplete the Anti-Sniper InfraredTargeting System (ASITS) and moveinto evaluation and production of thesystem for field use. ASITS is a versa-tile bullet tracking sensor system. Theanticipated contract will consist of aBase Year (commencing in FY06)and four (4) one-year Options( through FY10) . MARCOR-SYSCOM intends to award a T&M,ID/IQ task order contract to M2 Tech-nologies, West Hyannisport, MA. M2Technologies is the only companywith the corporate knowledge to con-tinue to work on the ASITS programand any other source other than M2Technologies would result in substan-tial duplication of cost to the Govern-ment and delay in delivery schedule.SOL is M67854-06-R-1015, due4/12/06. POC is Mr. Dwight B.Michael, tel: (703) 432-3740, email:[email protected].

UGV Sensor ContractIn December 2006, the Army

TACOM, Warren, MI, proposed toaward a new contract on a sole source,CPFF basis, using RDT&E funds, toGeneral Dynamics Robotics Systems,in Westminster, MD. General Dy-namics will integrate and test previ-ously developed sensors andalgorithms to allow unmannedground vehicles to safely operateamong civilian vehicles and pedestri-ans. In this program, the contractorwill integrate and test Army ResearchLab robotics-collaborative technol-ogy alliance (ARL-CTA) developedalgorithms on a non-developmentalrobotic test bed vehicle equipped withan FCS autonomous navigation sys-tem. This work is in direct support ofthe program manager for FutureCombat Systems to address “UGV



Safe Operations in FCS Unit of Ac-tion (UAC)”, designated as FCS riskUGV0213. Research will be per-formed in the area of on-vehicle highspeed computing that is capable ofprocessing LADAR data and algo-rithms at rates that all the test bed tosafely move through complex terrainat high speeds, integration of hard-ware and software on a non-develop-mental robotic vehicle; and finallytesting & experimentation of theintegrated system to meet the metricsin FCS risk UGV0213.

The total period of performanceshall be 31 months from contractaward. This action will be solicited ona sole source basis with General Dy-namics Robotics System, Westmin-ster, MD. Award of a cost plus fixedfee contract is anticipated. The esti-mated release date for request for pro-posal W56HZV-07-R-0200 is 22 Jan07 and the estimated closing date is 23Feb 07. The RFP will be available onthe contracting webpage http://con-t r a c t i n g . t a c o m . a r m y. m i l / r e-search/researchproc.html. The pointof contact regarding this RFP isRosalie Williamson, AMSTA-AQ-ASGA, email: [email protected], (586) 574-8089 orDerek McAleer, contracting officer,AMSTA-AQ-ASGA, email [email protected] , (586)574-8093. SOL is W56HZV-07-R-0200, due 2/7/07. POP is ARMYTACOM LCMC, Warren, MI.

Hemispheric FPA SolicitationIn January 2007, DARPA,

Arlington, VA, announced it is solic-iting innovative research proposals todevelop Hemispherical Array Detec-tors for Imaging (HARDI) in theVIS-NIR-SWIR (400-1900 nm)spectral region. The ultimate visionfor the program is to demonstrate a fo-cal plane array integrated on a hemi-spherical surface that will enablehigh-performance imagers with asmall form factor and field of viewthat far exceeds the state of the artpossible with planar focal plane ar-rays. The program’s end objectivesare to demonstrate a focal plane array

prototype that achieves a D-stargreater than 10E13 cm-sqrt (Hz)/Wover a wide spectral range, a 1 cm ra-dius of curvature with million pixels,a large 120 degree FOV, and a 60 Hzframe rate. Proposed research shouldinvestigate innovative approachesthat enable revolutionary advances inorganic and/or inorganic material sys-tems with inexpensive, easily scal-able processing methods.Specifically excluded is research thatprimarily results in evolutionary im-provements to the existing state ofpractice. The objective of the HARDIprogram is to exploit the optical, elec-trical, and mechanical properties ofboth organic and inorganic semicon-ductor materials along with innova-tive processing methods to createcompact, lightweight detection sys-tems. The program goal is to developnew photo-detectors that will allowthe use of fewer optical elements andeliminate the need for image post pro-cessing since the hemispherical pla-nar array will inherently correct forspherical and other opt icalaberrations. The challenge to beaddressed in this program is toachieve high photo-detectorperformance over a wide 400-1900nm spectral band on a curved surface.

Multiple awards are anticipated.Collaborative efforts/teaming are en-couraged. Cost sharing is not requiredand is not an evaluation criterion butis encouraged where there is a reason-able probability of a potential com-mercial application related to theproposed research and developmenteffort. The technical POC for this ef-fort is Devanand Shenoy, fax: (703)696-2206, email : [email protected]. SOL is BAA06-48, due February 2007.

Light Innovation Technologies(LITE) Solicitation

In February 2007, the AFRL, Di-rected Energy Directorate, KirtlandAFB, NM, announced it is interestedin receiving proposals in five techni-cal areas under the Light InnovationTechnologies (LITE) program. Thetotal program budget for these efforts

is $24M over 60 months. The pro-jected start date will be during3QFY07. Proposals are due by March2007. Topic Areas in the solicitationinclude 1). Real-time Optical Surveil-lance Applications (ROSA) Techni-cal POC: Ms. Laura Ulibarri, (808)891-7737; 2). Adaptive Optics Im-provements Technical, POC is LtColScott Hunt, (808) 874-1513 and Dr.Earl Spillar, (505) 846-6740; 3). Ad-vanced Research Adaptive OpticsPrototype, Technical POC is EarlSpillar, DSN 246-6740, (505)846-6740; 4). Hyper/multispectralData Reduction and Archiving (Hy-DRA), Technical POC is Mr. BobKim DSN 263-7806, (505) 853-7806;5). Advanced Architecture ConceptStudy for Advanced Beam Control,Technical POC is Dr. Paul MerrittDSN 263-5477, (505) 853 5477.Contracting Points of Contact are:Primary - Rhoda Parker, Det 8AFRL/PKDB (Directorate of Con-tracting), 2251 Maxwell Ave SE,Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-5773; tel:(505) 853-7282, fax: (505) 846-1546,email: [email protected] Contracting Officer is BarbaraSteinbock, Det 8 AFRL/PKDB (Di-rectorate of Contracting, 2251Maxwell Ave SE, Kirtland AFB, NM87117-5778, tel: (505) 846-2246,email: [email protected]. SOL is BAA-07-DE-02, dueMarch 2007.

PHASER SolicitationIn April 2007, DARPA, Arlington,

VA, released a solicitation for thePhotonic Analog Signal ProcessingEngines With Reconfigurability(PHASER) program, the objective ofwhich is to develop a fundamentalphotonic integrated circuit (PIC),termed Unit Cell, which can act as areconfigurable building block in theformation of a high-throughput,low-power, analog signal processor.The intent of this program is to enablescalable PIC-based analog signal pro-cessors that overcome the limits ofconventional Silicon-based digitalsignal processing technology. Spe-cific program goals include: 1). Defi-



ni t ion of a photonic analogsignal-processing engine Unit Cellthat is composed of waveguide-con-nected, programmable, act ivephotonic elements. These unit cellsshould enable basic filtering opera-tions on their own or arbitrarily com-plex filter operations when connectedwithin a large array of Unit Cells. 2).Development of a program plan thatwill permit the fabrication, testing,and evaluation of the Unit Cell; De-scription of how the Unit Cell, whenarrayed within a high-density PIC,will scale and meet the PHASER fil-ter challenge problem, as well as howthe Unit Cells will be programmedand tested at the chip-level to ensurehigh yield. 3). Development of a filtersynthesis tool to demonstrate howUnit Cells will perform in the contextof generalized high-order filters.

DARPA seeks innovative propos-als in the following areas: I. Demon-strat ion of photonic f i l ter ingtechnology; II. Filter Algorithms;Additional information on these tech-nology areas is provided in the Areasof Interest section of the BAA 07-17Proposer Information Pamphlet re-ferred below. The PHASER programwill consist of a single phase whosefocus is on the development and dem-onstration of the PHASER Unit Cell.Supporting tasks will include the de-velopment and demonstration of a fil-ter synthesis software tool, and arelated transition plan. Proposersmust define a realistic schedule andbudget to meet the milestone and de-liverable schedule. It is recommendedthat the proposed program plan in-clude interim milestones at approxi-mately the halfway point of theprogram. Multiple awards are antici-pated. Collaborative efforts/teamingincluding different expertise such as,but not limited to: photonic and elec-tronic device design, fabrication, andpackaging; filter design and integra-tion; and military sensor processingsystem analysis are strongly encour-aged. Cost sharing is not required andis not an evaluation criterion, but isencouraged where there is areasonable probability of a potential

commercial application related to theproposed research and developmenteffort.

SOL is BAA07-17, POC is MikeHaney, Program Manager, MTO, tel:(571) 218-4813, fax: (703) 248-8053,email: [email protected] concerning this BAA maybe directed to the technical POC forthis effort, Dr. Michael Haney, tel:(571) 218-4813, fax: (703) 696-2206,email: [email protected].

Advanced Recognition CenterSCEPTIC

In May 2007, the Air Force Re-search Laboratory (AFRL), WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, issued a solicitation forSCEPTIC (System Concepts En-abling Persistent Tracking & Identifi-cation for Combat), to enhance thecapabilities of the Advanced Recog-nition Center (ARC) facility locatedat WPAFB, OH. The solution to theproblem of detecting targets and con-tinuously maintaining their identifi-cation and location requires amulti-faceted approach drawing froma variety of component technologies(eg., Automatic Target Recogni-tion/Cueing [ATR/ATC], target track-ing and registration, Sensor Fusion(SF), resource management, etc.).The ARC is a facility that emulatesoperational systems to permit the de-velopment, integration, demonstra-tion, and transition of advancedtechnologies including automatictarget recognition and multi-sensorfusion systems.

The AFRL anticipates a sixtymonth, $12 million program. POC isKathryn DeShano, AFRL/SNAR ,tel: (937) 656-9837, email: [email protected]. Technicalquestions may be directed to Mr. Ron-ald Dennis, AFRL/SNAR , tel: (937)255-5688 ext. 4147, email: [email protected].

Low Noise SWIR Camera So-licitation

In May 2007, the AFRL, DirectedEnergy Directorate, Kirtland AFB,NM, announced it is interested in re-

ceiving proposals in two separatetechnical areas: Topic Area 1 – devel-opment of a 20 kHZ Frame Rate, LowNoise Wavefront Sensing and Track-ing Short-wave Infrared Camera. Thetotal program budget for the technicaleffort is $500k to $1M per year forthree years. The project office forTopic Area 1 is Capt. Jetter DESE.Under Topic Area 2, development ofdesigns for advanced supersonicdiffusers for chemical oxygen-iodinelasers (COIL) is required. The totalprogram budget for the technical is$1M over two years, with initial fund-ing of $150,000. The project officefor Topic Area 2 is Tim MaddenDELC.

Open-Ended Sensor Technol-ogy BAA

In June 2007, the AFRL, WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, released a BAA solicita-tion covering sensor technologyRDT&E, open-ended BAA(STROEB). SOL is BAA-04-03-SNK, POC is Noelle Spalding, tel:(937) 656-9837, fax: (937) 255-8100.David Shellabarger is the ContractingOfficer, tel: (937) 255-4863, fax:(937) 656-9074. Email: [email protected] .mil , [email protected].

E-O & Special Mission SensorsProgram

In June 2007, NAWC-AD,Lakehurst, NJ, issued NAVMAR Ap-plied Sciences a $9.2 CPFF contractto fund the design, manufacture, in-stallation, and repair of Navy SpecialProjects Systems associated with E-Oand Special Mission Sensors pro-gram. The effort is to include ninedigital recording systems, spares fordigital recording systems, oneover-the-horizon (OTH) communica-tion system, and one light detectionand ranging review. The work is to beconducted in Warminster, PA, and isto be completed in July 2009. Con-tract funding is coming from NavyOther Procurement (OPN) and O&Maccounts (N68335-07-C-0395).



In July 2007, NAWC-AD,Lakehurst, NJ, awarded a $48.5 mil-lion CPFF contract to Coherent,Doylestown, PA, to fund services forNavy Special Projects Systems asso-ciated with Electro-Optics (E-O) andSpecial Mission Sensors Program.The contract was not competitivelyawarded. The work is being con-ducted in Windber, PA (40%); FortWalton Beach, FL (30%); and atPatuxent River, MD (30%), and is tobe completed in July 2010. Contractfunding will initially come from theNavy Common Picture Applied Re-search element (PE# 0602235N)(N68335-07-C-0150).

LADAR ResearchIn June 2007, the Air Force Re-

search Laboratory (AFRL), DirectedEnergy Directorate, Kirtland AFB,NM, announced it is interested in re-ceiving proposals for: 1). Develop-ment and test of fieldable long rangeLaser Direct ion and Ranging(LADAR) systems and, 2). AdvancedLADAR architecture, concepts, andapplication. SOL is BAA07-DE07,due July 2007. POP is 3550 AberdeenAvenue SE, Kirtland AFB, NM.

Transparent Urban StructuresSolicitation

In July 2007, the Office of NavalResearch (ONR), Arlington, VA, re-leased a solicitation notice for theTransparent Urban Structures (TUS)program, which is to develop measur-able advances for improving the col-lect ion, unders tanding, anddissemination of intelligence for theurban conflict. ONR seeks to developtechnology which assis ts thewarfighter in understanding the urbanterrain of interest by detecting andclassifying threats, both inside build-ings and underground, and by maxi-mizing situational awareness insidestructures. The key focus of this pro-gram is to develop advanced technol-ogies that make urban man-madestructures transparent, thereby elimi-nating the safe harbor that buildingsprovide to hostile forces and their ma-licious activities [sic]. This capability

will be provided through basicphenomenological research, hard-ware, and algorithm development ofsense-through-wall technology thatcan direct ly support tact icalexpeditionary urban operations in theGlobal War on Terrorism (GWOT).

Resultant technology developedthrough this program will be inte-grated into emerging net-centricNavy and Marine Corps Command &Control and Intelligence, Surveil-lance, and Reconnaissance (C2 andISR) acquisition programs through aService Oriented Architecture(SOA). This BAA opportunity is thesecond yearly advertisement for theTransparent Urban Structures pro-gram. Last year an initial group ofperformers were chosen to start work-ing towards the goals of the program.Respondents to this BAA should con-centrate on the capabilities describedin 6.4. In addition, intelligence gainedthrough use of TUS developed tech-nology will enable the warfighter tointroduce faci l i ty networkinformation into the analysis ofhostile human networks.

SOL is BAA07-035, due October2, 2007. It should be noted that thisprogram builds upon and is comple-mentary to the other Department ofDefense sense-through-walls pro-grams: DARPA VisiBuilding, andArmy CERDEC-I2WD Sense-Through-the-Wall (STTW).

LADAR Through Clouds & FogIn October 2007, DARPA an-

nounced interest in advancing E-O/IRcapabilities through the use of activeimaging and coherent techniques.The Synthetic Aperture LADAR forTactical Imaging (SALTI) program,for example, achieved the first-eversynthetic aperture LADAR imagingfrom aircraft. DARPA released anRFI in April 2007 with a similar, butbroader scope, requesting informa-tion on novel research ideas and ap-proaches for improving theperformance of coherent LADARthat would preserve the bandwidthand phase of signals propagatingthrough clouds, fog, and haze. POC is

Jennifer Ricklin, Program Manager,STO, tel: (703) 526-4751, fax: (703)741-0093.

No Dominant ProgramsUnlike what many foresaw a few

years ago, Global Hawk has not ma-tured into a dominant E-O/IR pro-gram, unl ike the increasingimportance of its MP-RTIP syntheticaperture radar (SAR), where GlobalHawk has taken over from themanned E-10 aircraft as the lead plat-form for the United States’ next gen-eration billion-dollar SAR program.Rather, Global Hawk E-O/IR willconsist of five or six Enhanced Inte-grated Sensor System (EISS) buildsper year, and periodic upgrades.

Even Predator, now being pro-cured in large numbers, will remainonly a moderate program in terms ofE-O/IR funding, and that includes thetotals of Predator, Predator B and theArmy’s Warrior ER/MP enduranceUAV. Tactical UAV sensors will re-main inexpensive systems, still pro-cured in fairly small numbers(hundreds, not thousands). Mini-/mi-cro-UAV sensor markets, on the otherhand, will grow substantially, withthe sensors increasing in capability(and expense), and procurements inthe thousands annually.

Follow-on programs such as theNavy’s BAMS and the US CoastGuard endurance UAV have all beendelayed, and are no longer plannedfor large numbers of sensors in a shortperiod. Endurance UAV programplans have returned to normalcy tosome extent, with moderate produc-tion numbers of moderately pricedE-O/IR system. They will not com-pare, for example, to programs tore-equip hundreds of manned fighterswith next generation targetingsystems.

Internationally, numerous tacticalUAV programs actually add up tofairly minor sensor funding in total.European endurance UAV programs,now in development stages, have ei-ther already selected non-US sensors(e .g . , Elbi t’s Compass forWatchkeeper), or will be a very tough



sell for US manufacturers. We haveincluded “available” spending for in-ternational markets (largely in Eu-rope), but much more funding willwind up buying European or Israelisensors.

But One Dominant Supplier?Raytheon has the majority of to-

day’s UAV E-O/IR market in its backpocket. With long-term contracts forGlobal Hawk, Predator and PredatorB, it is today earning by far the mostE-O/IR funding. FLIR Systems, Inc.has made great strides in the past cou-ple of years, especially for mini/mi-cro-UAV sensors, and is now in astrong second place, well ahead ofNorthrop Grumman. But they will notcome close to Raytheon.

On the other hand, as is evidencedfrom the majority black portion of ourMarket Share graph, tomorrow’s pro-grams are still largely available. Evensome UAVs nearing production stillhave not locked in an E-O/IR sup-plier. Thus, despite Raytheon’s cur-rent dominance, there are stillpossibilities, though mostly forsmaller, modular payloads for tactical

and mini-/micro-UAVs. Raytheonwill likely keep hold of the more valu-able endurance UAV programs.

For tactical UAVs, there have beensome changes in the market, eventhough they are reduced to mere sliv-ers on our graph. IAI-Tamam formany years had the largest share oftactical UAV E-O/IR (we have in-cluded their US programs in ourgraphs and forecasts), but contractedproduction for the US will end in afew years . Instead, NorthropGrumman has won some moderatenew production programs, basicallyout of nowhere, largely through col-laborat ion with IAI-Tamam.Northrop’s Raven Eye II sensor, con-tracted for the Navy’s Fire Scout andthe Army’s new, larger MQ-8BHunter, was developed from anIAI-Tamam system. With UAV pro-duction entering the mainstream, theUS DoD clearly prefers to remainprovincial and buy US (similar toNorthrop Grumman’s successfulLitening targeting pod production,born from a Rafael system).

Sensor Technology: UAV Sen-sors Need to be Smarter

Better resolution will continue tobe needed, but even more important isimproved software, networking, andsystems for discriminating smaller,camouflaged targets. As more UAVsgain laser designators, AutomaticTarget Recognition (ATR) willbecome more important.

UAV sensors do not have a humanoperator’s “sense” of what might beunusual or out of place. Going backfor a second look (or even doing adouble-take over your shoulder) isnot possible unless automated dis-crimination spots a target on the firstpass.

Along with the constant need forimproved data links, we see ATR and“smarter sensors” as the next UAVsensor breakthrough. Multi/hy-per-spectral cameras will also pro-vide better (better than human) targetdiscrimination, but will remain ex-pensive and limited in application.



UAV E-O/IR Market ShareRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US

FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY160%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Raytheon FLIR Systems

IAI-Tamam Northrop Grumman

Available

Sensor Modularity andInteroperability Crucial

With so many varieties of tacticalUAVs internationally, upgrades forsensor payloads will be much easier ifsensor packages are modular and eas-ily interchangeable. The new tacticalUAVs which succeed will be de-signed to accept several differenttypes of payload, from E-O/IR toSIGINT to SAR and others.

Endurance UAVs such as GlobalHawk, which approach manned air-craft in sophistication, will continueto mount sensor packages both moreexpensive and more custom-designedfor a single platform.

Conclusion: Everyone willneed UAV Sensors

With so many countries seeingUAVs as an entry-level reconnais-

sance technology, small procure-ments world-wide will become moreand more common over the next10-20 years, if not in the next 5. Likefighter tac recce 20 years ago, every-one will need UAV sensors. New in-ternational markets will remain opento new companies. Internationalteaming agreements wil l beimportant.

UAV E-O/IR Market Shares

RDT&E+Proc. (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

Raytheon 131 185 199 212 241 209 198 163 165 162 1,864FLIR Systems, Inc. 97 103 106 95 63 50 54 71 76 81 796IAI-Tamam 18 10 15 3 16 — — — — — 61Northrop Grumman 5 8 7 4 3 8 5 4 4 3 49Available U.S. & International 258 299 329 388 399 468 480 484 570 537 4,211

Total 510 604 655 701 722 735 736 722 814 782 6,980





Synthetic Aperture Radars

Market Overview

SAR Technology

Airborne Synthetic Aperture Ra-dars (SARs) process radar returns asif they were collected by an antennaas much as several hundred meterslong. This “synthetic” antenna aper-ture is created by the movement of theaircraft itself – which is why aerostatsdo not make good SAR platforms –and allows a “parallax view” of theground similar to a stereoscopic opti-cal image. Typically, two primarymodes are used by SARs. The first,

search or “spot” mode, provides veryhigh resolution 3D radar data forground mapping and target location,detection, and identification. The sec-ond, Ground Moving Target Indicator(GMTI) mode, does just that – indi-cates objects that have displaced evenslightly during the long radar scan.Subsequent scans indicate furthermovement details.

SARs were developed during theCold War for their ability to provide

ground reconnaissance throughclouds and weather – unlike visual,infrared, and even hyper-spectral sen-sors – and for GMTI. NorthropGrumman’s AN/APY-3 radar for theJoint Surveillance Target Attack Ra-dar System (JSTARS) aircraft was de-signed to detect and track masses ofSoviet tanks advancing across anovercast Europe.

Changing Applications

Despite the shift in geography andopponents, SARs continue to be acrucial airborne reconnaissance tech-nology. Pre-production versions ofJSTARS served with great success inthe 1990-1991 Gulf War over Iraq,and at least seven production aircraftserved in Operation Iraqi Freedom(OIF) in 2003. JSTARS continues tobe the world’s 800 pound reconnais-sance gorilla, both in capability and

funding, only now being supersededby the US Air Force’s follow-onMP-RTIP (Multi-Platform RadarTechnology Insertion Program) pro-gram and (maybe) NATO’s AllianceGround Surveillance (AGS) and Brit-ain’s ASTOR (Airborne Stand-OffRadar). MP-RTIP is now intended forthe Global Hawk UAV.

The need for SARs is perhaps be-coming even more important today.

Two-thirds of NATO air-to-surfacemissions over Kosovo in 1999 werenot completed because of badweather, with greater than 50% cloudcover encountered more than 70% ofthe time. Synthetic aperture radars(SARs) cut through clouds and smokeand can provide reconnaissance andtargeting data in any weather, unlikevisible light and infrared electro-opti-cal (E-O/IR) systems. In the context


UAV SAR Funding ForecastRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US


200

400

600

800

1,000(FY07 $ Millions)

of Homeland Defense and anti-terror-ism, any sensor which cannot provide24-hour surveillance is useless

against individuals who can simplywait to move or attack until weatheror darkness shields them.

The SAR Market

The few UAV SARs in service onthe first generation of enduranceUAVs are legacy programs from be-fore the UAV spending explosion.Primary among these are Raytheon’sGlobal Hawk HISAR and NorthropGrumman’s Predator A TESAR (Tac-tical Endurance SAR). HISAR willcontinue in production in upgradedform, while TESAR has already beenremoved from service, and is beingreplaced by the General AtomicsLynx SAR on the Predator B.

UAV SAR development fundinghas already increased drastically inthe past few years. Initially, most ofthis was due to the large MP-RTIP ra-dar for future Global Hawks, but to-

day many smaller SAR developmentprograms, including non-MP-RTIPradars for Global Hawk, are funding abroader and more robust increase.Programs entering production sooninclude a larger HISAR for the en-larged USAF RQ-4B Global Hawk,Lynx and Lynx II for Predator B, War-rior ER/MP and Fire Scout, and theTelephonics RDR 1700 maritime ra-dar for US Coast Guard Bell EagleEye UAVs. Programs in developmentinclude the US Navy’s Broad AreaMaritime Surveillance (BAMS) UAV(possibly with an ISAR).

The UAV SAR market will growmuch faster than the manned SARmarket. Most endurance UAVs will

remain relatively small platformswith light payloads (only 3,000 lbs.for the USAF’s enlarged GlobalHawk), and a growing percentage offunding will go towards UAV smallSARS, compared to the big707-mounted manned AN/APY-3.Improved technology will givesmaller UAV SARS equivalent capa-bilities to the large 1980s-designJSTARS system. The UAV SAR mar-ket will exceed the manned SAR mar-ket soon after the end of the decadeand never look back.

Persistence Pays

While big manned SARs will al-ways provide a capability not avail-able elsewhere – in-the-air commandand control – smaller SARs will in-creasingly be mounted on UAVs.Without a command and control func-tion, and with SARs providingall-weather, all-the-time surveillence,a persistent sensor will function justas well on an unmanned platform;better, in fact, when considering thelonger endurance of most UAVs.

Thus, while big SARs likeJSTARS will continue to garner hun-dreds of millions of dollars a year, theheyday of manned small SARs likeRaytheon’s U-2 ASARS-2 is over.Funding will remain, especially fornaval helicopter-mounted ISAR (In-verse SAR) systems such as theTelephonics AN/APS-147, but fund-ing will remain minimal, while smallUAV SARs take off as the next impor-tant SAR market.

The future for UAV SARs, at leastin terms of growth, is huge. Fundingwill ramp up especially for smallSARs for tactical UAVs, such asNorthrop Grumman’s Fire Scout Ver-tical takeoff and landing UAV(VUAV) and the Army’s Shadow 200TUAV. Ultimately, mini- and mi-cro-UAVs may get SARs also, to en-able all-weather extreme tacticalsurveillance.

Market Shares

In terms of market access, UAVSARs offer great opportunities, withseveral small developers already hav-ing earned big contracts – GeneralAtomics with its Lynx and Lynx II,Telephonics with the RDR 1700, Syr-acuse Research with the Army FutureCombat System A160 FORESTERSAR, and maybe Sandia NationalLaboratories with its MiniSAR. Al-ready, this is incredible. The BigThree defense electronics firms today

hold barely 50% of the market, withLockheed Martin not participating ata l l . Northrop Grumman andRaytheon are this big only due toMP-RTIP. In fact, General Atomicscould become the #1 UAV SARprovider by the beginning of nextdecade.

A full 50% of forecast marketfunding is still uncontracted andavailable for most of our forecast pe-riod. Obviously, Northrop and

Raytheon will earn some of this, butsmall UAV SARs are a very rare ex-ample of a field where anything ispossible, and a small technologycompany could suddenly find itself amajor player. Equally, the opportu-nity exists for nearly any establisheddefense electronics firm to become amajor player, either through acquisi-tion or internal development.


Page 182 Synthetic Aperture Radars

Endurance UAV SARs

Global Hawk MP-RTIP

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Northrop Grumman, Linthicum Heights, MD & Raytheon, El Segundo, CAUnit Cost: $40-50 million (speculative); Northrop Grumman cited $39 million in mid-2006

See Global Hawk program de-

scription in Electro-Optic/Infrared

(E-O/IR) Sensors chapter.

MP-RTIP DevelopmentIn late 1998, Northrop Grumman

was chosen for the $1.3 billion RadarTechnology Insertion Program(RTIP), which would add a 2D activeelectronically-scanned array (AESA)radar to JSTARS. Then, in early 2002,the USAF reformed the RTIP radarupgrade program, planning instead anall-new joint Northrop Grumman/Raytheon MP-RTIP (Multi-PlatformRadar Technology Insertion Pro-gram) radar. MP-RTIP will be anX-band radar with simultaneous SARand GMTI (JSTARS and other cur-rent SARs must shift betweenmodes), now planned for the JSTARSfollow-on MC2A (Multi-SensorCommand and Control Aircraft) aswell as Global Hawk, and possiblysatellites.

MP-RTIP will have a modularscaleable antenna, from 1.5’ x 5’ forGlobal Hawk, to 2’ x 18’ for me-dium-sized manned aircraft (businessjets), to 2’ x 24’ for MC2A. A majorgoal is improved resolution (one footor better) for detecting stealthy cruisemissiles. Some commonality isplanned with Joint Strike Fighter T/R(transmit/receive) module technol-ogy and software algori thms.MP-RTIP will stress modularity,commonality, and integration, ratherthan new technology.

MP-RTIP plans call for laboratorytesting to begin in FY05, with flighttesting possible in late FY05. GlobalHawk is now planned as the firstMP-RTIP platform, possibly receiv-ing the first radar around 2007-2008,as “Spiral 4”, with the first mannedplatform around 2010. Plans call for12 of the Air Force’s 51 planned

Global Hawks to get MP-RTIP, alongwith five 747-400ER-based mannedaircraft to be built by 2013. MP-RTIPdevelopment funding is planned as atleast $740 million, but if the programcontinues we expect this to increasesubstantially.

Initial systems design work wasspli t 50/50 between NorthropGrumman and Raytheon with Boeingadded as an equal partner for theWeapon Systems Integration (WSI)contract awarded in March 2003. InMay 2004, Northrop Grumman wonthe $900 million SDD contract. In late2004, Northrop Grumman wonBMC2 (Battle Management Com-mand and Control) development.

Planned Radar DeliveriesIn February 2004, planned

MP-RTIP system delivery scheduleswere (but we see these slipping con-siderably):

FY07—One Global HawkMP-RTIP radar for integration.

FY08—One Wide Area Surveil-lance (WAS) development unit radarfor System Integration Lab (SIL),concurrent mode development, test-bed/flight test.

FY09—Two WAS developmentunit radars for SIL, concurrent modedevelopment, testbed/flight test.

Before the FY06 funding cuts, theAir Force would have acquired thefirst MC2A Boeing 767 aircraft byDecember 2006, with a first systemflight in 2010, and initial operatingcapability in 2015.

$900 Million MP-RTIP SDDContract

In May 2004, the Air Force Elec-tronic Systems Center (ESC),Hanscom AFB, MA, issued NorthropGrumman an $888 million CPAFadd-on to fund system development

and demonstration (SDD) of theMP-RTIP radar. The contract in-cludes the design, development, pro-duction, test and certification, and thedelivery of two wide area surveil-lance full demonstration units (DUs),the delivery of one partial DU popu-lated with four radar frequency aper-ture units that are upgradeable to fullconfiguration baseline and include aradar frequency injection capability,and the delivery of three MP-RTIPGlobal Hawk radars. The contractalso includes the designing, buildingand support of one radar simulator.This also includes ECP-004 mode,platform integration and test (groundand flight), and NAOT GroundSurveillance Center support.

The work is to be performed byRaytheon in El Segundo, CA, and byNorthrop Grumman in LinthicumHeights, MD, with the work com-pleted by May 2010. Contract fund-ing will come from the Air ForceMulti-Sensor C2 Aircraft (PE#0207450F) and Airborne Reconnais-sance Systems (PE# 0305206F) pro-grams (F19628-00-C-0100/PO59).

Funding Add-OnsIn September 2004, the ESC is-

sued cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF)contract modifications of $50 million,$170.5 million, and $62 million to fi-nance certain period of performanceextensions to the pre-SDD phase ofthe MC2A RDT&E program. Thework is to be conducted in Mel-bourne, FL, and is to be completed by2010 for the first action, by October2005 for the second, and by Septem-ber 2004 for the third. Contract fund-ing will come from the Air ForceMulti-Sensor C2 Aircraft Program(PE# 0207450F) (F19628-03-C-0014/PO13/PO14/PO15).


Synthetic Aperture Radars Page 183

FY06 MC2A Budget CutsIn February 2005, the USAF FY06

budget request cut $600 million overtwo years from the MC2Asystem, ac-knowledging the program wouldhave to be restructured. Service offi-cials are still working out the details,but Jerry Madigan, NorthropGrumman’s vice president for theE-10A, said the cuts will primarilyeliminate many modifications to theBoeing 767 test aircraft. For example,the test aircraft will not have in-flightrefueling or de-icing capabilities, andcables will be run inside the cabinrather than fitted in the aircraft’sstructure. The Air Force now has just$397 million in the MC2A FY06budget request.

As of March 1, 2005, the Air Forcehad not yet gotten approval for the re-structured program, according toMadigan, but “we’re about 95 percentthere.” Under the new program, theAir Force can wait until as late as2008 to decide what aircraft will beused for production – it is looking in-creasingly likely that this will not bethe 767, which may end productionbefore then.

Last year, Congress cut $115 mil-lion from the Pentagon’s $538.9 mil-lion request for the MC2A in theFY05 budget.

MP-RTIP PlansIn July 2006, the USAF awarded

Northrop Grumman a $90 millioncontract to integrate the MP-RTIP ra-dar on Global Hawk, with work to becomplete by September 2009.Northrop and Raytheon are stilljointly developing the radar itself.

In October 2006, the MP-RTIP ra-dar will begin flight trials on amanned Scaled Composites Proteus

experimental aircraft. It will fly onGlobal Hawk AV-15 in late 2007.

Deliveries of production Block 40MP-RTIP Global Hawks are not dueuntil 2010, to be complete by 2013.Teal Group suspects 2010 is a veryoptimistic date for full production.

Larger Antenna SoughtIn mid-2006, the Air Force wanted

to increase the length of the GlobalHawk MP-RTIP antenna from thecurrent 5 feet to about 9 feet, but therewas not yet a formal requirement, norfunding, for the change.

MP-RTIP Replaces TCAR forGlobal Hawk AGS

In July 2006, NATO decided to re-duce the proposed number of GlobalHawk UAVs in the AGS fleet fromfive to four. NATO has also decided todevelop the TCAR radar only for thelarger Airbus A321 version, plannedfor four aircraft. Instead of TCAR,AGS Global Hawks will now get theMP-RTIP radar. AGS managing di-rector Larry Harrell says the changesto the fleet and sensor mix reflect ef-forts to “eliminate non-essential ca-pabilities” from the program to allowit to come in at a target price of 3.3 bil-lion Euros ($4.1 billion). Scrappingthe Global Hawk version of TCAR isexpected to result in cost savings tothe AGS project of around 500million Euros, according to Harrell.

Global Hawk MP-RTIP PrepIn December 2006, the Air Force

Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, issuedNorthrop Grumman Systems a $6.6million FPIU add-on to a FY05 con-tract to fund engineering changes toprepare the Global Hawk to receiveMP-RTIP capabilities. Additionally,

the award provides preliminary modi-fications to a second air vehicle inpreparation for MP-RTIP insertion, aswell as an option for aircraft ballast.The work is being conducted in SanDiego, CA, and is to be completed byFebruary 2009. Contract funding willcome from the Global Hawk Devel-opment/Fielding program (PE#0305220F) (FA8620-05-C-4692/PO9).

SARs for IED DetectionThough SARs can not actually de-

tect hidden or subsurface IEDs, SARdata has increasingly been used forcounter-asymmetric warfare by ana-lyzing histories of data after IED at-tacks to find patterns to look for todetect future IED placements. TheAir Force says post-mission analysisof persistent surveillance data is in-creasingly being used to determine“the scheme of maneuver of theasymmetric threat.”

MC2A Cancelled, JSTARSCould get MP-RTIP

In early 2007, the Air Force budgetcut funding for the E-10 MC2A fromits FY08 budget, and by March 2007Northrop Grumman had already be-gun closing down the program. Fund-ing will take the E-10 through initialdesign review in May 2007.

However, it is possible thatJSTARS may instead get theMP-RTIP radar, development ofwhich is continuing for Global Hawk.The E-10 planned antenna wouldhave to be narrowed by 15 inches(from 4 feet) to fit JSTARS, but otheraspects could potentially be addedwhole. Northrop Grumman’s BMC2(Battle Management Command andControl) system could also eventuallygo to JSTARS.

Teal Group Evaluation

The USAF E-10A program suf-fered a drastic program cut in theFY06 budget request, losing $600million over two years (following a$115 million cut in FY05), with thenew plan focusing on demonstrating

key performance parameters of theradar and cruise missile defense capa-bilities. Then, in early 2007 the E-10program was cancelled outright forthe FY08 budget.

MP-RTIP development for GlobalHawk will continue unabated, how-ever. 15 Block 40 Global Hawks withMP-RTIP are currently planned, withthe first production MP-RTIP radararound 2010 and fielding planned



from FY11 to FY15 (which we expectwill be slid right a couple of years).

Production Forecast


MP-RTIPUSAF (Block 40 RQ-4B) 1* — 1* 1* — — 1 2 3 3 3 15Undetermined (Blk 40 RQ-4B) — — — — — — — — — — 1 1

Total 1* — 1* 1* — — 1 2 3 3 4 16

*Development systems

Global Hawk AGS/MP-RTIP

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturers: Northrop Grumman, Linthicum Heights, MD; Raytheon, El Segundo, CA; Sostar GmbH,Friedrichshafen, Germany (a joint venture of EADS/Dornier (Germany), FIAR (Italy), and Thales Airborne Sys-tems (France) (each with 28%), and Indra (Spain) (11%) and Dutch Space (The Netherlands) (5%))Unit Cost: $40-50 million (speculative)

AGS DevelopmentAGS (Alliance Ground Surveil-

lance) is a NATO program for an air-borne SAR with ground movingtarget indication (GMTI), along thelines of JSTARS and MP-RTIP.

In Apri l 2002, NorthropGrumman, EADS, and GalileoAvionica submitted a white paper tosenior NATO officials proposingTIPS (the Transatlantic Proposed So-lution) for AGS, which would incor-porate MP-RTIP as well asSOSTAR-X radar technology into aTransatlantic Co-operative AGS Ra-dar (TCAR). In late 2002, as forecast,Britain’s ASTOR team joined thecompetition, led by Raytheon andBAE Systems, offering the Coopera-tive Transatlantic AGS System(CTAS) aboard a Global Expressbusiness jet.

In May 2003, a “mixed fleet”manned and unmanned option wasapproved by NATO, adding GlobalHawk UAVs to TIPS. The TCAR(TIPS radar) will be a “scalable-ar-ray” which can be fitted to a full-sizedAGS wide-body jet but also to smallerbusiness jets and endurance UAVs.

In April 2004, the TIPS team wonthe AGS design and developmentphase.

AGS plans then called for atwo-year, EUR 300 million, designand development contract in early

2005. Following this and a critical de-sign review, a full EMD contractaward is planned for 2007, whichwould involve two Airbus A321manned platforms and three GlobalHawk UAVs, plus ground systemsand support. At least two EMD radarswould be produced for testing. Initialoperational capability has beenplanned for 2010, with full opera-tional capability in 2013.

AGS has been put off many timesalready, and transatlantic cooperativeprograms have a long history of con-fusion and long delays. However, ul-t imately, AGS could be amulti-billion program (NATO allo-cated a budget of between EUR 3-4billion). EADS officials have quoted$4.8 billion total for TIPS. The pro-posed TIPS platform mix includesfive A321s and seven Global Hawks,and 49 fixed and mobile ground sta-tions, though this too will likelychange.

Germany to Buy AdditionalAGS Global Hawks

Germany had plans to acquire sixEuro Hawk UAVs from NorthropGrumman, to be equipped withEADS ELINT payloads (the sixthwould be a prototype based on thelarger RQ-4B platform).

But Germany also had plans to buysix more Global Hawks with SARs,

which would be similar to the GlobalHawk configuration planned forAGS. These Global Hawks wouldconduct ISR missions for German na-tional needs. The SAR UAVs were tobe acquired around 2008-2010, aboutthe same time as the AGS versions.

AGS Delayed, AgainIn January 2006, the AGS sched-

ule again slid right, with key eventsnow running almost a year later thananticipated. When NATO officialsgave the go-ahead to the latest phaseof the AGS in 2005 – a measly 23 mil-lion Euro ($28 million) effort – theywere planning to start a much moreambitious design and development(D&D) phase in late 2005 or early2006. But a contract award for the 500million Euro D&D phase, onceplanned to start as early as the begin-ning of 2005, is now not expected un-til the end of 2006, according to newAGS documents. D&D is slated torun about 2.5 years and lead to amid-2009 start of the engineering andmanufacturing development phase.

AGS was supposed to reach an ini-tial operational capability by 2010.However, now TIPS officials say theyare predicting the first orbit of aircraftwon’t be available until mid-2012.Morever, a mix of UAVs and mannedaircraft won’t emerge until at least a



year later. Formal production is nowplanned to start in early 2012.

AGS Industries GmbH FormedIn May 2006, the TIPS partici-

pants (EADS, Galileo Avionica, Gen-eral Dynamics Canada, Indra,Northrop Grumman, and Thales) cre-ated a joint venture company, AGSIndustries GmbH, to pursue AGS.The headquarters is in Brussels, andLarry Harrell of Northrop Grummanis first managing director and CEO.

MP-RTIP Replaces TCAR forGlobal Hawk AGS

In July 2006, NATO decided to re-duce the proposed number of Global

Hawk UAVs in the AGS fleet fromfive to four. NATO has also decided todevelop the TCAR radar only for thelarger Airbus A321 version, plannedfor four aircraft. Instead of TCAR,AGS Global Hawks will now get theMP-RTIP radar. AGS managing di-rector Larry Harrell says the changesto the fleet and sensor mix reflect ef-forts to “eliminate non-essential ca-pabilities” from the program to allowit to come in at a target price of 3.3 bil-lion Euros ($4.1 billion). Scrappingthe Global Hawk version of TCAR isexpected to result in cost savings tothe AGS project of around 500million Euros, according to Harrell.

Dutch Drop OutIn July 2007, the Netherlands was

no longer earmarking funds for AGS.According to defense minister Eimartvan Midelkoop, “we’ve stoppedfunding AGS as we’re awaiting theoutcome of international discussionsabout this program.” But it is believedthere is a very good chance the Dutchhave dropped out altogether. TheDutch are the smallest full partner inAGS, with a 5% work share.

Also in July 2007, the Dutchcancelled a program to acquire twoMALE UAV systems with eight airvehicles, expected to be Predator-Bs.

Teal Group Analysis

In the late 1990s, the US tried touse heavy-handed diplomacy and apolitically-motivated program cut toram JSTARS down the collectiveNATO throat. With a DoD-fundedcampaign, the US put pressure on thealliance to select JSTARS as a fasttrack solution to its Airborne GroundSurveillance (AGS) requirement.Britain, too, was offered a JSTARSsolution to its ASTOR requirement.

The idea failed badly. This wasn’tthe Cold War any longer, and the onlycomparable NATO program, the jointAWACS fleet, was a political and fi-nancial kidney stone even when peo-ple had the money to spend and thethreat to justify it. Today, everyone’slooking to save cash. Even worse, theUK ASTOR decision created alower-cost competitor. France alsothen created a competing program,the SOSTAR-X radar, with aid fromGermany, Italy, Spain, and theNetherlands.

After years of wrangling, and atleast a year of proposed joint coopera-tive solutions, in April 2002,Northrop Grumman, EADS, and Ga-lileo Avionica submitted a white pa-per to senior NATO off icialsproposing TIPS (Transatlantic Indus-trial Partnership for Surveillance, wasTransatlantic Proposed Solution) forAGS, which would incorporate

MP-RTIP as well as SOSTAR-X ra-dar technology into a TransatlanticCo-operative AGS Radar (TCAR). Inlate 2002, as forecast, Britain’sASTOR team joined the competition,led by Raytheon and BAE Systems,offering the Cooperative Transatlan-tic AGS System (CTAS) aboard aGlobal Express business jet. In April2004, TIPS was selected for thetwo-year AGS design and develop-ment phase, despite possibly validcomplaints from the losing CTASteam.

In April 2004, the TIPS team wonthe AGS design and developmentphase. In April 2005, the TIPS teamreceived a $30 million NATO con-tract for an AGS project defini-tion/risk reduction study. In early2006, plans seemed to be goingahead, albeit delayed, and a new jointventure company had been formed –AGS Industries GmbH.

But in July 2006, it was decided todrop the TCAR radar from AGSGlobal Hawks and buy MP-RTIP in-stead, to save money. In late 2006,France and Germany were reportedlyconsidering dropping out of AGS, orpushing for an all-European radar in-stead of the MP-RTIP-based TCAR.France especially was arguing for aEuropean radar, and many believetheir strategy is to suck up as much

MP-RTIP technology as possible,without spending any real money, andthen just drop out of AGS. In July2007, the Dutch cut AGS funding,while “awaiting the outcome of inter-national discussions about thisprogram.”

Think about it. Think of the addi-tional money NATO could save byeventually buying MP-RTIP for theA321 as well as Global Hawk. Con-sidering the paltry amount of fundinginvested in TCAR and AGS so far(except for large expenditures to buypaper for all the discussions about it),there is no way a Euro-based TCARwill approach MP-RTIP in capability.Europe seems to simply be unwillingto fund a major project like this ($30million peer year? Who are they kid-ding?), and though TCAR will likelycontinue as a face saving measure, wewould not be at all surprised to seeNATO buy MP-RTIPfor all of AGS atsome point – after picking up as muchfree MP-RTIP technology forSOSTAR-X as possible.

But now, there is another flaw inthe ever-troubled AGS plan. TheUSAF has cut i ts own E-10Awide-body aircraft, and will just buyMP-RTIP for Global Hawk. We haveJSTARS, essentially a new system,with the last of 19 platforms deliveredin March 2005. The US is in no real



hurry to field MP-RTIP (in fact, wecan’t afford it either), while NATO(aside from the UK with ASTOR) atleast has to pretend to wring its handsover having no long-range SAR capa-bility and letting us do all the surveil-lance for them. Embarrassing as itmay be, NATO may spend the nextdecade still relying on Britain and theUS for this capability.

Or, buying Raytheon/CTAS’s ear-lier offered ASTOR/DMR would be a

cheaper solution. An AGS re-com-pete would allow AGS to go Euro-pean (or British, on paper, anyway),and save money to boot. We are notsuggesting an off-the-shelf businessjet ASTOR buy would be the most de-sirable solution, and it is unlikely tobe chosen in its current form, but itwould be European, hugely cheaper,and would also give NATO a valuablebargaining position to get MP-RTIP(or MP-RTIP technology) cheaper.

We have changed our forecast con-siderably, and are now much less opti-mistic that AGS will go ahead withthe major funding still planned. Ourspeculative forecast is something of aholding pattern option, maintainingsimilar funding levels to what has ex-isted since the late 1990s. If a 3.3 bil-lion contract is actually awarded, wewill change our forecast, although theactual radar and C4I funding linesmay wind up in our MP-RTIPreport.

Production Forecast


MP-RTIP (AGS)NATO (Block 40 RQ-4B) — — — — — — — — — 1 1 2

Global Hawk HISAR

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Sensors and Electronic Systems, El Segundo, CAUnit Cost: $4 million (ISS); $5 million (EISS) (according to Northrop Grumman, 7/06)

OverviewRaytheon’s HISAR with GMTI,

developed from the U-2 ASARS ra-dar and the AN/APQ-181 on the B-2bomber, was planned for all GlobalHawk production before MP-RTIP. Itwill likely see moderate productionuntil MP-RTIP is ready, near the endof the decade. HISAR is a turnkeymulti-mission, real-time, multisensor,reconnaissance and surveillance sys-tem. It is already in service on severalother platforms, primarily for bordersurveillance and maritime patrol.

The HISAR radar weighs about250 kg, including an airborne workstation (ie., less than this on GlobalHawk). The radar has four modes ofoperation: wide area moving targetindicator (WAMTI), SAR strip, SARspot, and sea surveillance. WAMTIdetects moving targets in a10,000-square-km area in a 90-de-gree wedge ranging from 30 to 120km. The SAR strip mode has a 6-me-ter resolution that covers a 37 kmswath that can be positioned betweenthe ranges of 20 to 110 km. The SARspot mode has a 1.8-meter resolutioncovering 10 square km. The sea sur-veillance mode has a maximum rangeof 200 km.

The newest version, HISAR 2000,incorporates a new radar, with im-proved SAR resolution of 1-meter orbetter reported, and longer range, outto 200 km in SAR/GMTI modes. Italso allows wider coverage.

Raytheon claimed to have soldmore than 22 HISAR radars by theend of 2002, primarily for mannedplatforms including the Beech1900D, King Air 200, BombardierDash 7 and Dash 8, and Grob Egrett.

ASARS-2 Upgrades “Avail-able”

ASARS-2 (Advanced SyntheticAperture Radar System) is the SARcarried by the USAF’s U-2 aircraft. Itdeveloped out of the ASARS carriedby the SR-71 Blackbird as early as the1970s, and HISAR was a later deriva-tive of ASARS.

The first ASARS-2A ASARS Im-provement Program (AIP) radar wasdelivered in August 2001, and addi-tional upgrades are already planned,as the U-2 will remain in service untilat least 2020-2025. About $1.5 billionhas been spent on U-2 upgrades in thepast decade.

While HISAR may have alreadybenefited from ASARS-2 technology

for upgrades, this information hasremained classified. However, ac-cording to the Air Force andRaytheon, ASARS-2 upgrades all aretransferrable to Global Hawk, “if thisshould become a requirement.”

The ASARS-2A AIP adds a lim-ited Moving Target Indication (MTI)capability. AIP radar improvementsalso increase coverage by 4 times inthe search mode, 9 times in spotmode, and add a very-high-resolutionsearch mode. Resolution in searchmode is reportedly now 1 m over a 2.8nm wide swath, 2 m over an 11 nmswath, and 3 m over a 21 nm swath. Inspot mode, resolution is 30 cm over a1 x 1 nm area. Upgrades areCOTS-based.

Another major purpose of AIP is toincrease on-board data processingabilities. Before AIP, all data was sentto the ground station, which createdtransmission and bandwidth prob-lems. The datalink is also being up-graded for near-real t imetransmission, and the Air Force is re-searching an asynchronous datalink,which would spread data across thebandwidth and allow faster transmis-sion. The Air Force also claims itwould break video images down and



reassemble then more accurately andquickly. AIP is also improvingground station capabilties.

The next phase of ASARS-2A up-grades may include enhancements toimage quality such as the addition ofan Inverse SAR (ISAR) mode forthree-dimensional imaging and incor-poration of coherent change detec-tion. Future upgrades could includean active electronically-scannedarray antenna.

ASARS-2A Problems+Up-grades

The full scope of ASARS-2Aproblems was revealed in early 2004,when it was also revealed that only 3ASARS-2A radar conversions hadbeen completed (the USAF also stillhad 7 functional ASARS-2 radars),and that these don’t really work. TheAir Force also spent $15.3 millionfrom a FY03 supplemental appropria-tions act to ensure 14 U-2s can con-tinue to use the legacy ASARS-2sensor (as U-2s transition from Block0 to Block 10/20). The Block 10/20upgrade was to be complete by thesummer of 2004.

New algorithms needed to add pre-cision to the ASARS-2A sensor up-grade, and enlarge the swaths of landsurveyed, apparently also muddledthe imagery. This was discovered dur-ing field tests, and the ASARS-2Awas deemed “operationally unaccept-able” in late FY02. Conversion ofASARS-2 radars to 2A was sus-pended in early FY03, and U-2s inOperation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) usedlagacy ASARS-2 radars. A three

phase Image Quality ImprovementProgram was developed by Raytheonand the Air Force to correct problems.When complete, ASARS-2A shouldprovide all-weather precision suffi-cient for precision weapon targeting.ASARS-2 precision is only sufficientfor area weapon (eg. , ICBM)targeting.

Phase I, funded by Raytheon(about $5 million) and completed inOctober 2003, identified hardwareand software upgrades the Air Forceconsidered promising.

Phase II, which will implementPhase I upgrades to achieve a “base-line” ASARS-2A capability, was tobe contracted by mid-2004, run for 24months, and begin delivering im-provements in mid-2005. Phase IIwill cost $29.5 million, paid for inFY04 and FY05, and provide refur-bishment of 11 ASARS-2As.

Phase III wil l make an“end-to-end” upgrade of hardwareand software and achieve a “full capa-bility” ASARS-2A, will begin inFY06 and last for 36 months. Thisphase would cost $111.6 million, ifthe Air Force decides to go ahead withit.

As has often been stated, but rarelyelaborated upon, all these fixes forASARS-2A will be applicable to theGlobal Hawk production radar.

Sensor DetailsIn July 2006, much technical detail

regarding Global Hawks sensors wasreleased.

The Block 10 RQ-4AHISAR has apeak power output of 3.5kW and

weighs 290 kg, and requires 4.7 kWof 400Hz power and 1.3kW of 28VDC power. The Block 10 ISS weighs100 kg and requires just over 0.58 kWof 28V DC power.

The Block 20 RQ-4B has un-changed power requirements for theEISS, but the upgraded HISAR has apeak power output of more than3.5kW, with an increased powertransmitter.

The larger Block 20 X-bandHISAR antenna is housed in a bulgedfairing immediately aft of the nosegear, offering a field of regard of+/-45 degrees either side of the air-craft in azimuth and +/-20 degrees inroll. It can cover up to 138,000 sq km(53,000 sq mi) a day in search modefrom a range of more than 200km(110nm). It can search up to 15,000 sqkm/min, detecting targets with aground velocity of 4kt (seven km/hr)or more from a range of 100km (ie.,not walking humans). It has a 10mresolution in search mode, again notsufficient for human movement. In2km x 2km spot mode, however, reso-lution is 30 cm. SAR strip mode pro-vides 1 m resolution. Data throughputfor both Block 10 and Block 20HISAR is around 30Mb/s, and can becompressed to 8Mb/s at 2bits perpixel.

Final ASARS-2A Delivered forU-2

The ASARS-2A upgrade, with fi-nal delivery in 3QFY07, may be thelast major U-2 ASARS-2 funding,aside from maintenance & support.

Production Forecast


HISAR (ISS)USAF (Block 0 RQ-4A) 4 — — — — — — — — — — 4USAF (Block 10 RQ-4A) 5 2 — — — — — — — — — 7HISAR (EISS)USAF (Block 20 RQ-4B) — 1 3 2 — — — — — — — 6USAF (Block 30 RQ-4B) — — 2 4 5 5 4 3 2 2 2 29

Total 9 3 5 6 5 5 4 3 2 2 2 46



Navy BAMS ISAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: In competitionUnit Cost: $10 million (speculative)

OverviewThe US Navy’s Broad Area Mari-

time Surveillance (BAMS) programforesees the use of UAVs as an ad-junct to the manned Multi-missionMaritime Aircraft (MMA) program,to provide more persistent ISR in sup-port of missions such as time-criticaltargeting. But the program has seendelays since its beginnings in 2002.

Planned sensors are a maritime in-verse synthetic aperture radar(ISAR), capable of classifying tar-gets, an E-O/IR system, electronicsurveillance measures (ESM), and acommunications package. Essen-tially, for maritime UAVs, especiallyendurance UAVs, the radar is the pri-mary sensor, not the electro-opticalpayload. Maritime missions involvelonger slant ranges, with detectionand identification of ships the pri-mary goal, rather than picking smalltargets out of ground clutter for me-dium range reconnaissance and tar-geting. A long-range SAR, which canpierce cloud and moisture, is more ef-fective than an E-O/IR payload,which wil l be secondary onendurance maritime UAVs.

In August 2005, the Naval AirSystems Command (NAVAIR),Patuxent River, MD, awarded fourcontracts under the Persistent Un-manned Maritime Airborne Surveil-lance (PUMAS) capability broadagency announcement (BAA), in lieuof a request for information (RFI) forBAMS. Contracts went to The Boe-ing Co.; General Dynamics Ad-vanced Information Systems,Dayton, OH; Lockheed Martin, SaintPaul, MN; and Northrop GrummanSystems Corp., Bethpage, NY.

During an initial five-month pe-riod of performance, the selectedcompanies will establish perfor-mance metrics for unmanned ISR,and examine capabilities necessaryfor optimal performance of ISRwithin a family of systems. After this,

the Navy will down-select contrac-tors for another 7 month study.

According to the Navy, PUMASwill not change the acquisition strat-egy for BAMS, but , due to“affordability issues”, the Navy hasdeferred the initial operating capabil-ity of BAMS until 2013, “and so theRFI has been retracted”.

In April 2006, the US Navyplanned to issue draft RFPs forBAMS late in 2006, still aiming atIOC by 2013. BAMS has been essen-tially dormant since 2004.

Global Hawk First Offer forNavy BAMS

In 2002, Northrop Grummanelected not to bid for the Navy’sMulti-mission Maritime Aircraft(MMA) core program, but was origi-nally the only company to respond tothe solicitation for the complemen-tary Broad Area Maritime Surveil-lance (BAMS) programs. Thisforesees the use of UAVs as a poten-tial adjunct to the manned MMAs,providing more persistent ISR in sup-port of missions such as time-criticaltargeting. Northrop Grumman origi-nally proposed a force of 51 GlobalHawks to meet the BAMS require-ment, including eight equipped spe-cifically for signals intelligence(SIGINT) and communicationsintelligence (COMINT).

BAMS Reconnaissance vs.Surveillance

However, the Navy claimed inJuly 2002 that Global Hawk mightnot fulfill BAMS needs due to itsoriginal design for “reconnaissance”roles – collecting data on known tar-gets. The Navy argues its maritime“surveillence” mission requires scan-ning of larger surface areas for un-known possible targets. This mightrequire longer endurance sensorpasses.

While the Navy is not just splittinghairs, Global Hawk has been demon-strated with these surveillance capa-bilities in Australia, during OperationTandem Thrust. Modified softwareand sensors allowed surveillance of a100 km stretch of coastline with a 60km-wide swath aperture at 8 m reso-lution. This resolution was not as fineas the USAF’s 1 m quality data, butwas good enough to locate andtype-classify a tanker in waters off thecoast. Thus, we see this reconnais-sance vs. surveillance problem asresolvable.

Navy GHMD Purchases: NewSensors Planned

The Navy bought two GlobalHawks in its FY03 budget, for theGlobal Hawk Maritime Demonstra-tion (GHMD) program. The first airvehicle flew in October 2004. Bothwill now essentially be USAF LRIPRQ-4A versions, with added elec-tronic support measures (NorthropGrumman’s LR-100 and possiblyBAE Systems’ Hyperwide SIGINTreceiver).

Originally, the second GlobalHawk, to be delivered in mid-2005,was to mount an upgraded E-O/IRsensor with BAE Systems’DragonflyE-O target-recognition system (ratherthan the Integrated Sensor System),as well as a derivative of NorthropGrumman’s AN/APY-6 360-degreeAESA (Active Electronically-Scanned Array) ISAR/GMTI(Interferometric SAR/Ground Mov-ing Target Indicator) and TitanCorp.’s Copperfield SIGINT system.The APY-6 would have given moreemphasis to maritime-surveillancemodes and maritime MTI.

GHMD sensor development oc-curred from 2QFY03 to 3QFY04.Sensor hardware integration intoGlobal Hawk air vehicles wasplanned in February 2004 to occur



f rom3QFY04-1QFY05 and4QFY04-2QFY05.

These GHMD test UAVs areaimed at developing BAMS systemsand CONOPS (Concept of Opera-tions). While the Navy claims anyBAMS UAV purchase would only beas an adjunct to the manned MMAprogram, intended to replace the P-3COrion, the Navy may buy as many as50 UAVs (although about 25 nowlooks more likely). UAVs would addpersistent ISR (intelligence, surveil-lance, and reconnaissance) in supportof missions such as time-criticaltargeting.

BAMS PlansPhase 1 of BAMS will be a demon-

stration and experimentation phase,scheduled from FY05 to FY08. TheGlobal Hawk and the P-3C will testdata links for joint operations.

This is the Navy’s primary endur-ance UAV program, with BAMSRDT&E funding planned in February2004 at $224 million in FY05, withprocurement ramping up from $202million in FY07 to $440 million inFY09. The same sensor suite in devel-opment for the GHMD is planned forBAMS, including “robust SIGINT”development from FY05.

However, in the summer of 2004the Navy announced it would post-pone initial BAMS procurementfunding from FY07 to FY09 or FY10.

New BAMS Platform Competi-tion

By mid-2004, Navy air vehicleplans had also changed, and all BAMsUAVs are now planned to be procuredcompetitively. Northrop Grumman isstill offering Global Hawk; GeneralAtomics and Lockheed Martin Mari-time Systems & Sensors are offeringMariner, a derivative of the PredatorB; and General Dynam-ics/Gulfstream Aerospace may offeran unmanned version of its G-550business jet, dubbed the RQ-37.

Boeing wins $3.9 Billion MMAContract

In June 2004, NAVAIR issuedBoeing Integrated Defense Systemsin Long Beach, CA a $3.9 billioncost-plus-award-fee (CPAF) contractto finance the system developmentand demonstration (SDD) phase ofthe MMA aircraft program. Boeing’smilitarized version of the 737 air-frame won over Lockheed Martin’supdated P-3 Orion offer. Work is to beconducted in Long Beach, CA (91%);Baltimore, MD (4%); McKinney, TX(2.5%); Grand Rapids, MI (1.25%);and Cincinnati, OH (1/25%), and is tobe completed in June 2012. Contractfunding will come from the NavyMMA program (PE# 0605500N),where $71.4 million was pro-grammed for FY04 and $496 millionfor FY05 (N00019-04-C-3146). De-velopment of the electro-optic suitewill receive considerable funding.

BAMS Information AvailableIn June 2004, the Navy UAV Pro-

gram Office (PMA263) of the Pro-gram Executive Office for StrikeWeapons and Unmanned Aviation(PEO(W)) at NAVAIR, PatuxentRiver, MD, announced it is willing toconduct one on one discussions withpotential prime offerors for theBAMS UAV system. Draft documen-tation will continue to be posted onthe website for industry review; com-ments on the draft documentation willcontinue to be accepted and reviewedby the Government. All communica-tions regarding the BAMS UAV pro-gram shall be coordinated with Ms.Jessica Blackwell. This is not a re-quest for proposal . SOL isN00019-04-P7-TK113-02, POC isJessica Blackwell , te l : (301)757-5897, fax: (301) 757-5955; orMichael McLoughlin, tel: (301)757-5898, fax: (301) 757-5946.Email is [email protected] [email protected].

Persistent Maritime UAV ISRBAA

In May 2005, the Naval Air Sys-tems Command (NAVAIR), Patuxent

River, MD, hosted an Industry Dayfor the Persistent Unmanned Mari-time Airborne Surveillance Capabil-ity. It intends to release a BroadAgency Announcement (BAA) toseek proposals for research support indeveloping innovative solutions,which provide persistent unmannedmaritime airborne surveillance capa-bility. Concepts developed under theBAA may be considered in the devel-opment of future ISR mission systemimprovements.

The Navy’s desire is to developISR mission system enhancementsfor implementation in the 2012 timeframe, concurrent with other plannedISR improvements. The Navy is inthe process of recapitalizing itsland-based maritime ISR capabilities,currently provided by the aging P-3and EP-3 aircraft. The desired out-come of this study is a capabilitybased definition and overarching sys-tems architecture that will support thedevelopment of a family of systemsapproach to maritime ISR. The Indus-try Day was conducted at the JohnsHopkins University Applied PhysicsLaboratory Kossiakoff Center, 11100Johns Hopkins Road, Laurel MD20723-6099. SOL Reference- Num-ber is N00019-05-P-7TKBB2.

Navy GHMD TestingIn early 2006, the Navy tested the

GHMD Global Hawk, and locatedseaborne targets from 65,000 feetwith its ISAR.

Global Hawk vs. Mariner:Round 1

In June 2006, “Trident Warrior‘06” pitted Global Hawk vs. Marinerin their first head-to-head exercise.

USN/Australia BAMS FinalSDD RFP

In February 2007, NAVAIR re-leased the final BAMS System Devel-opment and Demonstration (SDD)RFP. Interested part ies canview/download the RFP(N00019-07-R-0001), exclusive ofthe Performance Based System Spec-ification (PBSS) and Technical Li-



brary (TL), posted on the NAVAIRwebsite. The RFP also includes op-tions addressing Australian uniqueobjectives. The anticipated contracttype is Cost-Plus-Award-Fee(CPAF); however, the option lineitems for TDPs/Data Rights areFirm-Fixed-Price (FFP). Contractaward is anticipated in 1QFY08.

BAMS full operational capabilitywill provide for up to five simulta-neous orbits worldwide. Initial Oper-ational Capability (IOC) for BAMS isdefined as one base unit with suffi-cient assets, technical data, trainingsystems, and enough spares and sup-port equipment to operationally sup-port one persistent ISR orbit. Thedesired IOC is FY14, however, theobjective is to achieve IOC in FY13or earlier. At IOC, the BAMS UASmissions will include, but are not lim-ited to, maritime surveillance, collec-tion of enemy order of battle

information, battle damage assess-ment, port surveillance, communica-tion relay, and support of thefollowing missions – maritime inter-diction, surface warfare, battlespacemanagement, and targeting formaritime and littoral strike missions.

SOL is N00019-07-R-0001, dueApril 2007. Questions may be ad-dressed to Ms. Stacy Bostjanick,PCO, tel: (301) 757-5931, email:[email protected]; and Ms.Clare Carmack, Contract Specialist,te l : (301) 757-5919, email :[email protected].

Sensor SuitesIn mid-2007, Lockheed Martin

plans provided Mariner with the 360degree Elta EL/M-2022 SeaWatchISAR, mounted on a ventral pylon,replacing the Telephonics side-look-ing radar used in the Mariner demon-strator. The radar will have SAR,

ISAR, and weather modes. It flew inthe June 2006 tests. It is likely thatLockheed Martin bought the Elta ra-dar for testing and the competition –because it was ready – but wouldre-compete any real production radar,looking for a US-sourced system.

Global Hawk will carry theNorthrop Grumman designedMulti-Function Active Sensor(MFAS) AESA SAR/ISAR radar,which will provide much commonal-ity with the AN/APG-81 radar on theF-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). TheMFAS allows simultaneous multipletarget tracking while also operatingthe ISAR surveillance mode. TheBAMS Global Hawk would alsocarry the Automatic IdentificationSystem (AIS).

Boeing’s BAMS 550 unmannedbusiness jet proposal will carry aRaytheon radar system.

Production Forecast


BAMS SAR (Undetermined)USN (BAMS) — — — — — — 2 2 4 4 3 15

Coast Guard Deepwater Endurance UAV ISAR


See Deepwater program descrip-

tion in Electro-Optic/Infrared


Predator TESAR

Status: Removed from ServiceManufacturer: Northrop Grumman, Electronic Sensors & Systems Sector (Baltimore, MD)Unit Cost: $1.1 million

See Predator program description

in Electro-Optic/Infrared (E-O/IR)

Sensors chapter.

TESAR DevelopmentThe General Atomics RQ-1 Preda-

tor A Medium Altitude EnduranceUAV program laid the groundworkfor future endurance UAVs likeGlobal Hawk, and Northrop

Grumman’s TESAR (Tact icalEndurance SAR) was the ground sur-veillance SAR carried by Predator –the first SAR produced as a standardfit for a major UAV program. A July1999 contract brought the total orderup to 60 radars, worth $72 million.

TUAVRThe TUAVR is a 63 lb. version of

the 168 lb. TESAR, tested by theArmy on a Hunter UAV in June 2003.

Israeli TESAR?The Elbit (Silver Arrow) (Haifa,

Israel) Hermes 450 has a 1,000 lb.gross weight, a 325



lb. payload, and an 18 hour endur-ance. It was in service with the IsraelDefense Force in West Bank fightingduring 2001/2002. Reports indicatesome Hermes 450s may havemounted TESAR.

Predator TacIFSAR ACTD toGeneral Atomics

In September 2004, the Air ForceAeronautical Systems Center, Recon-naissance System Program Office(ASC/RAK), Wright-Patterson AFB,OH, announced it intended to award acontract on a sole source basis to Gen-eral Atomics Aeronautical Systems toprovide TacIFSAR system integra-tion and an Interferometer SyntheticAperture Radar (IFSAR) Mapping

Advanced Concept TechnologyDemonstration. The all-weather,day/night TacIFSAR system providesa real-time High Resolution TerrainInformation (HRTI) capability devel-oped for the Rapid Terrain Visualiza-tion ACTD, and will be integratedwith and operated from the MQ-9Predator UAV.

The proposed contract action,F33657-02-G-4035 0037, has a pe-riod of performance of approximately36 months, and is anticipated to be anew contract awarded on asole-source basis. Interested partiesmay submit appropriate informationto Cynda Kemper at GeneralAtomics, at tel: (858) 455-2668, [email protected]. SOL is

F33657-02-G-4035/0037, dueOctober 2004.

TESAR Removed from USAFService

By late 2005, the USAF had re-moved TESAR from its Predators,with that payload capacity devoted toHellfire missiles. Operators no longertrain for TESAR, and the Air Forcestates the capability to return TESARto use has been lost. The TESAR dis-play has always been difficult to inter-pret, and TESAR had limited successin recent Iraq operations. The LynxSAR on the Predator B will replacethis capability for the Air Force.

Predator B Lynx SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: General AtomicsUnit Cost: $1.6 (Lynx); $1.5 million (Lynx II).

See Predator program description


Sensors chapter.

Lynx for TestingInitial Predator Bs mounted Gen-

eral Atomics’s own AN/APY-8 LynxKu-band SAR/MTI sensor for test-ing. General Atomics has been mar-keting its Lynx SAR since early thisdecade, especially for Predator (andnow Predator B).

AN/APY-8 Lynx SARThe 52 kg AN/APY-8 Lynx is a

compact Ku-band SAR/GMTI (Syn-thetic Aperture Radar/Ground Mov-ing Target Indication) sensor. InDecember 2003, CECOM reportedlyawarded General Atomics a24-month System Development andDemonstration (SDD) contract forthe Lynx II, a lighter weight (40 kg)version with improved reliability,maintainability, and diagnostics.

Lynx has reportedly been testedaboard the Predator UAV, Predator B,Fire Scout VTUAV, the Army’smanned Airborne ReconnaissanceLow (ARL) aircraft and possibly

UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters, andother platforms. But there are still nosignificant confirmed productioncontracts.

Fire Scout, JSTARS, FCS Inte-gration

Lynx was tested in June 2003aboard Northrop Grumman’s FireScout Vertical Takeoff and landingTactical UAV (VTUAV), for Brit-ain’s Watchkeeper program.

In mid-2003, General Atomicswas also developing a roll-on/roll-offLynx system for Army UH-60 BlackHawks. The self-contained systemwould provide a tactical adjunct toJSTARS. Development is also linkedto the FCS (Future Combat System)program, using the FCS tactical com-mon data link to control the radarfrom the ground.

ARL Lynx?The Army’s Airborne Reconnais-

sance Low (ARL) aircraft comes inboth a Communications Intelligence(COMINT) version (ARL-C) and aMulti-INT (ARL-M) verion, whichalso includes imagery intelligence.

The Army has seven ARL aircraft inservice in October 2004, with an eigthin production.

Unconfirmed reports have indi-cated the Lynx SAR may be mountedon the ARL-M.

“Cellular Radar”General Atomics has proposed a

“cellular radar” concept, which in-volves eight UAVs carrying Lynx ra-dars, six operating in SAR mode andtwo in MTI. This “cell” could coveran area of 2,500 square km from aheight of 40,000 ft.

Longer-Range LynxA longer-range Lynx SAR is being

developed for the Predator B. Rangewill double, to 75 km, and weight willincrease to 90 kg.

All-Weather Targeting Re-search

The Navy’s Power Projection Ap-plied Research program (PE#0602114N), funded by a Congressio-nal plus-up, provides for the NavalPrecis ion Str ike (SAR forAll-Weather Targeting) RDT&E re-



search. This effort will develop atime-critical targeting system usingGPS information to provideall-weather precision target locationand precision guidance capability thatwill significantly increase the accu-racy of precision weapons. It also de-veloped a prototype relative GPSsystem for guided weapons and inte-grated the Stereo SAR targetingpackage into the Lynx targetingsystem.

“Spectral Keying” UWB RadarNetworks

In February 2004, the Air ForceResearch Laboratory Sensors Tech-nology Directorate (AFRL/SNK),Wright Research Site ,Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, an-nounced it intends to solicit and nego-tiate with General Atomics forresearch and development pertainingto remote, battery powered sensornetworks under the authority of FAR6.302. These networks can be utilizedfor a variety of military purposes in-cluding hostile personnel detection.General Atomics makes innovativeuse of the “Spectral Keying (trade-marked)” UWB radar and communi-cations methods toward this end. Theresult is a sensor network that can pro-vide live, real time video of hostilepersonnel intrusions, is covert, activefor extended periods and resistant tofalse alarms.

General Atomics is the only ven-dor known to make use of the innova-tive “Spectral Keying (trademarked)”UWB radar method to develop sen-sors that would serve as the founda-t ion of a network with thecharacteristics described above. Thismethod provides a number of uniqueadvantages over current UWB radartechnology.

This notice is for informationalpurposes only. This is not a Requestfor Proposal (RFP). Contractors ca-pable of offering this technologymust respond within 15 days afterpublication of this notice by submit-ting a specific capability statement toprovide this technology. SOL isNOCA-04-04-SNK, POC is Cynthia

Stockelman-Anderson, tel: (937)255-0702, fax: (937) 255-8100,email: [email protected].

Predator B CONOPSUSAF Predator B units will be

designated attack, not reconnais-sance, squadrons, with the MQ-9 a“hunter-killer”. The sensor conceptof operations (CONOPS) calls forLynx to be used in brick-map mode tosearch for targets at slant ranges up to75 km (with a 2 m resolution). Poten-tial targets are then imaged withLynx’s SAR mode at ranges up to 35km. These targets are then handed offto the MTS-B E-O/IR sensor. Lynxcan also take three SAR images fromdifferent angles, flying a “hook” pat-tern, to provide target data for JDAM.

GMTI to be AddedThe full production standard Pred-

ator B, to undergo IOT&E in 2007,will add a MIL-STD-1760 weaponinterface, and a GMTI mode to Lynx.

DHS AwardIn September 2006, the Depart-

ment of Homeland Security (DHS)awarded $14.1 million to GeneralAtomics for one Predator B with anE-O/IR system and a Lynx SAR, aspart of the first Customs and BorderProtection (CBP) Unmanned AircraftSystem (UAS).

UK Orders Predator BIn September 2006, the UK or-

dered two Predator-Bs, expected to bedelivered and in service in Afghani-stan in 2007.

Italian Predator UpgradesIn 2006, the Italian MoD report-

edly upgraded its six Predator UAVswith two Lynx II SARs. It also up-graded the E-O/IR systems, to replaceL-3 WESCAM Model 14 Skyballs(presumably with Raytheon MTSsystems).

Lynx-ERIn late 2006, General Atomics was

also offering a new Lynx-ER version,

which weighs about 100 kg, and hasalmost twice the range and resolu-tion-at-range performance as Lynx.

Army I-Gnat Lynx ContractIn October 2006, the Army Com-

munications-Electronics Command(CECOM), Fort Monmouth, NJ, obli-gated $8.6 million to GeneralAtomics under a FFP, CPFF, T&Mcontract to fund the procurement ofLynx I systems for I-Gnat UAVs. Bidswere solicited in August 2006 to fi-nance the Lynx I effort and one pro-posal was received. The work is beingconducted in San Diego, CA (95%)and in Iraq (5%) and is to be com-pleted by March 2008. Contract fund-ing will come from the Army OtherProcurement (OPA) budget activity(W15P7T-06-C-9255).

Dual Beam LynxIn February 2007, the Dual Beam

Lynx program, funded in PE#0603767E, Sensor Technology, wasplanned to enhance the capabilities ofthe Lynx radar system to trackslow-moving vehicles more accu-rately. The program modifies a Lynx Iradar to create two beams with differ-ent phase centers and uses space timeadaptive processing to detect movingtargets in the main beam clutter. Thegoals include demonstrating im-provement in minimal detectable ve-locity, improving geolocationaccuracy, and achieving a low manu-facturing cost. The radar performancewill be demonstrated from flight datacollected from the radar flying on aUAV surrogate.

USAF Lynx OrdersIn March 2007, the ASC awarded

General Atomics a $9.4 million FFPcontract modification for the manu-facture and delivery of five LynxAPY-8 radars and associated spares.The work is being performed in SanDiego, CA, and the contract is to becompleted in April 2009. Contract fi-nancing is coming from the APF(FA8611-05-G-3028/0008).



SPI3D ContractIn May 2007, the Air Force Re-

search Laboratory (AFRL), WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, awarded General Atomicsa $7 million CPAF, CPFF contract tofund development of the StandoffPrecision Identification in 3 Dimen-sions (SPI3D) program to develophigh resolution three-dimensionalimaging systems. The work is beingperformed in San Diego, CA, and is tobe completed in April 2008. Contractfunding will come from the Air ForceAerospace Sensors element (PE#0602204F) (FA8659097-C-7715).Dawn M Ross is Contracting Officer,email: [email protected].

This effort includes but is not belimited to: developing advancedsub-component designs leading toturret integration, geo-location of thetargeting system, tracking capability

of the targeting system, developmentof Pockels cell hardware technologiesand other hardware technologies, lab-oratory testing to verify system devel-opment and algorithm development,design of a miniaturized laser for in-stallation in a gimbal, improvementsto the optics, turret component devel-opment, integration into a turret, soft-ware improvements for systemoperation, software improvementsfor a more user friendly operator in-terface, development and demonstra-t ions with ini t ia l laboratorydemonstrations within six months,and support of any flight-tests anddemonstrations.


nounced an interim requirement for aJoint Airborne ISR Capability(JAIC), which would procure an un-

determined number of MALE UAVsto serve on deployments in Afghani-stan and elsewhere. The RFP is to bereleased in early 2008, with IOCplanned for June 2009.

Mandatory JAIC sensor require-ments are a color E-O/IR/low lightlevel system, a laser target designator,and a SIGINT package. Additional“rated” requirements are for aSAR/GMTI and a weapon deliverycapability.

JAIC will essentially be anoff-the-shelf procurement, to be fol-lowed by a longer-term UAV programwith IOC in 2013-2016, the Joint Un-manned Surveillance and Target Ac-quisition System (JUSTAS). ThePredator-B with the MTS-B, ASIPvariant, and Lynx SAR are the mostobvious systems, though IAI will alsoreportedly offer a Heron/Heron TPsystem.

Teal Group Analysis

The AN/APY-8 Lynx is a compactKu-band SAR/GMTI (Synthetic Ap-erture Radar/Ground Moving TargetIndication) sensor, which GeneralAtomics has been marketing sinceearly this decade, especially for theGeneral Atomics Predator (and nowPredator B) UAV.

In December 2003, CECOMawarded General Atomics a24-month System Development andDemonstration (SDD) contract forthe Lynx II, a lighter weight (40 kg)version with improved reliability,maintainability, and diagnostics.

Lynx had been one of themost-tested and least-procured sys-tems around, tested aboard the Preda-tor, Predator B, Fire Scout VTUAV,the Army’s manned Airborne Recon-

naissance Low (ARL) aircraft andpossibly UH-60 Black Hawk helicop-ters, and other platforms. But therewere no significant confirmed pro-duction contracts.

Then, in August 2005, GeneralAtomics won a nine-unit productionorder for Predator B. This has provento be a watershed for Lynx and LynxII, followed by substantial wins forthe US Army’s Fire Scout UAV andWarrior ER/MP UAV (based on Pred-ator), as well as orders from the UKand the Department of HomelandSecurity (DHS).

Lynx has been one of the best (oneof the only) small SARs available forsome years, and production of a num-ber of other medium-sized UAVs willbe beginning later this decade. Lynx

II has already grabbed the Army’sWarr ior ER/MP (ExtendedRange/Multi-Purpose) UAV and theClass IV UAV for FCS (currentlyplanned as the Fire Scout). Other winsare likely, including the possibility ofa USAF Predator retrofit program.The US Navy could also order anavalized version of Lynx for its LCSFire Scout, but so far the Navy hasbeen looking for entirely different ra-dars for its UAVs – typically inverseSARs (ISARs). Future programs eas-ily could see our undetermined fore-cast double. General Atomics’ Lynxhas gone from nowhere to the indus-try leader in small UAV SARs in just acouple of years.

Production Forecast


USAF (Predator B) 12 2 3 2 9 11 9 10 7 8 8 81US Army (I-Gnat) 1 3 1 — — — — — — — — 5US DHS (Predator B) 1 — — — — — — — — — — 1UK RAF (Predator B) — 2 — — — — — — — — — 2Undetermined (various) 16 4 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 88

Total 30 11 10 8 17 19 17 18 15 16 16 177



Warrior ER/MP Lynx II SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: General AtomicsUnit Cost: $1.5 million

OverviewSee Warrior ER/MP program de-


(E-O/IR) Sensors chapter. The War-rior ER/MP will carry the 36 kg LynxII, simultaneously with an E-O/IRpayload.

Smaller Lynx II DevelopmentIn December 2003, CECOM re-

portedly awarded General Atomics a24-month System Development andDemonstration contract for the LynxII. The contract effort includes de-sign, fabrication, integration and test,

flight test, associated logistics and de-livery of six Lynx II SAR/GMTI sys-tems. The Lynx II will feature lighterweight (40 kg) and improved reliabil-ity, maintainability, and diagnostics.

Operating in SAR mode, Lynx IIwill provide 10 cm resolution, at arange of 30 km in fair weather and 25km through clouds and rain. The radarcan detect very small changes in ascene (including footprints) by usinga technique called coherent changedetection. In GMTI (Ground MovingTarget Indicator) mode, Lynx II will

detect moving targets with up to 10cm range resolution accuracy.

Sensor StatusIn mid-2007, the ER/MP UAV was

being developed with three inter-changeable threshold payloads (Mis-sion Equipment Packages (MEP)),including an E-O/IR sensor with laserrangefinder/designator, the Lynx IISAR with moving target indication(SAR/MTI), and a heavy communi-cations relay payload. The ER/MPwill simultaneously carry and controltwo different MEPs.

Production Forecast


Lynx IIUS Army (Warrior ER/MP) 4* 2* — 12 12 36 24 12 12 12 10 136


SeaVue SAR

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Systems Surveillance GroupUnit Cost: $2 million

The SeaVue is a new small ISARderived in part from Raytheon’sAN/APS-137, with wide area surveil-lance, moving target indication(MTI), and air target detection modes.It is in production for the US CustomsService aboard Dash-8 aircraft, andmay be bought for Customs P-3s. Itwas almost selected for the USCGDeepwater program MPA, and hasbeen tested along with theAN/AAS-52 MTS-A E-O/IR sensoron the General Atomics MarinerUAV. Mariner is derived from the tur-boprop Predator B, and is being of-fered for the US Navy BAMSprogram.

Components ContractIn April 2004, the Naval Surface

Warfare Center Crane Div.(NSWC-CD), Crane, IN, issuedRaytheon a $6.3 million firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract to provide for themanufacture and delivery of SeaVueRadar components. The work is to beconducted in McKinney, TX, andcompleted by August 2005. Contractfinancing will come from the NavyOther Procurement (OPN) account(N00164-04- C-8232).

SeaVue Tested for BAMSIn April 2004, Raytheon tested

SeaVue, mounted along with its

AN/AAS-52 MTS-A E-O/IR sensor,on the General Atomics MarinerUAV. Mariner is derived from the tur-boprop Predator B, and is being of-fered for the US Navy BAMSprogram.

MMA APS-137D(V)5 Develop-ment

In July 2005, Raytheon finalized a$60.8 million development contractto continue work on theAPS-137D(V)5, to include two SDDradars. The first is to be delivered byOctober 2008 and the second by July2009.



SensorCraft ISR UAV SAR


The SensorCraft idea has beenaround since at least 2000, planned asa new generation of multi-sensor highaltitude penetrating UAV. The con-cept developed out of the cancelledDark Star UAV program. One innova-t ion is the concept of a dia-mond-shaped or faceted aircraft(perhaps looking similar to a verywide and thin B-2 bomber), with sen-sors around all the the outside edgesof the wings. Operating altitude isplanned as at least 60,000 feet, withan endurance of at least two days.

The Air Force Research Lab(AFRL), Wright-Patterson AFB, OH,is currently sponsoring development,originally partnered with NASA andBoeing.

Sensors are to include radar andE-O/IR sensors, for ESM, electronicattack, and Airborne Early Warning& Control (AEW&C) as well as SARand GMTI reconnaissance.

Demonstrator FlownIn September 2004, researchers at

Wright-Patterson AFB flew a 7%scaled Joined-Wing TechnologyDemonstrator for the SensorCraftprogram.

Dual RadarsThe SensorCraft concept origi-

nally featured a dual radar: alow-band UHF system for wide-areasurveillance and a high-frequencyX-band system for more accuratetracking. The AFRL is developinglightweight, conformal antennas thatcan be embedded in the structure of awing.

In 2004, the AFRL launched theLow-Band Structural Array(LOBSTAR) initiative to develop anantenna panel about 3 m – 6 m long inlength, integrate it in a wing sectionand then test the mated pair in a windtunnel under stressful conditions, to

understand the antennas’ structuraland electronic performance. This ini-tiative runs until 2008.

On the high-band side, the AFRLis developing an X-band Thin RadarArray (XTRA) that it plans to demon-strate around 2007. XTRA will prob-ably be an array of about 3,700 cm sq.

New DesignsIn early 2007, SensorCraft was

still going strong. All the major play-ers have a platform design. NorthropGrumman and Lockheed Martin haveflying wings and Boeing has a“joined-wing”. All are planning“endfire array” antennas, a new kindof low-band antenna that emits en-ergy from its forward edge, not per-pendicular as with a regular antenna.The structure is a f la t-panelhoneycomb composite.

Teal Group Analysis

The idea of an all-singing,all-dancing reconnaissance aircraft isnot new (see the MC2A), although theUAV aspect and exotic appearancemake it interesting for science fictionfans. Adding electronic attack also is

a novel idea, although jamming from60,000 feet will require either a lot ofpower or some novel technologies.With a very theoretical in-service dateof 2015-2020, we are not breakingout funding in a separate forecast, but

the program is still going strong, andmay one day result in either a classi-fied or non-classified productionsystem.

Vulture SAR


In August 2007, DARPA releaseda solicitation notice for Vulture, an airvehicle exploratory development pro-gram that is to develop the capabilityto deliver and maintain a single air-borne payload on station for an unin-terrupted period of at least 5 yearsusing a heavier-than-air platform sys-tem. It is envisioned that this programwill, at a minimum, develop and dem-onstrate advanced reliability technol-ogies for air vehicle systems. Other

advanced technologies may also bedeveloped and demonstrated depend-ing upon the nature of thearchitectures proposed by offerors.

DARPA is not interested in ap-proaches that use either radioactiveenergy sources or employ any form ofbuoyant flight for this application.The Vulture program will researchand develop technologies and sys-tems which will enable the military todeliver and maintain a 1000 lb., 5 kW

airborne payload for an uninterruptedperiod of at least 5 years with anon-station probability of 99% andwith a high probability of missionsuccess, although major payload de-velopment is not yet funded underthis BAA.

The architectures selected and thespecific approaches taken by theofferors will determine the range oftechnical areas that are developed, in-cluding, but not limited to, environ-



mental energy collection, highspecific energy storage, extremely ef-ficient propulsion systems, precisionrobotic refueling, autonomous ma-teriel transfer, extremely efficient ve-hicle structural design, and mitigationof environmentally-induced loads.

The key technology developmentobjectives include: 1) identificationof robust system architectures thatmeet the program goals; 2) identifica-tion of efficient systems that allow the

program vision to be achieved; and 3)identification and reduction of bothmajor and minor system and subsys-tem technology risks. It is anticipatedthe program will be divided into threephases: 1) conceptual system defini-tion with a supporting formal reliabil-ity and mission success analysis,exiting with a System Readiness Re-view and an option for continuationtask; 2) risk reduction developmentand testing phase to include a Prelimi-

nary and Critical Design of a proto-type ending with the flight test of ascaled version of the system; and 3)fabrication, assembly, and flight testevaluat ion encompassing anoperational demonstration using thedesign payload.

SOL is BAA07-51, due September2007. POC is Stephen Davis, Con-tracting Officer, tel: (571) 218-4949,fax: (703) 807-4952.

Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHARE) UAV SAR


See PHARE program description


Sensors chapter.

UCAV Programs

US Navy UCAS-D Radars


See US Navy UCAS-D program

description in Electro-Optic/Infra-

red (E-O/IR) Sensors chapter.

APG Radar ProposedIn August 2007, due to its different

combat role versus US Air Force sur-veillance UAVs such as Global Hawkand Predator, Northrop Grumman’s

UCAS-D sensor suite included provi-s ion for ei ther Raytheon’sAN/APG-79 AESA fighter radar(from the Super Hornet) or NorthropGrumman’s AN/APG-81 AESAfromthe F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

Though it is much too early toknow what form a UCAV radar willreally take, with new abilities being

added to AESAfighter radars (includ-ing SAR mapping, electronic war-fare, data links, etc.), mounting anAPG- as the primary UCAV radarmakes a lot of sense.

Tactical UAV ProgramsSynthetic Aperture Radars (SARs)

are planned for several tactical UAVs(TUAVs), but so far, despi teever-smaller sensors, no major pro-duction contracts had been awarded.For example, after a four-year devel-opment contract, in October 2002

Northrop Grumman successfullytested its TUAVR (TUAV Radar)SAR, down-sized from the TESARon the Predator. But no US or interna-tional sales occurred.

Instead, some TUAV programshave dropped the SAR requirement or

transitioned the SAR to a UAV onesize bigger. The US Army haddropped plans for a Shadow 200TUAV SAR, in preference of thelarger ER/MP divisional UAV, but isnow again planning a Shadow 200SAR.



MQ-8B Fire Scout Lynx II

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: General AtomicsUnit Cost: $1.5 million

See US Navy MQ-8B Fire Scoutand US Army MQ-8B FCS Class 4A(Fire Scout) program descriptions in

Electro-Optic/Infrared (E-O/IR)

Sensors chapter.

Fire Scout Lynx Testing forWatchkeeper

In June 2003, General Atomics’sAN/APY-8 Lynx Ku-band SAR/MTIsensor was tested aboard Northrop

Grumman’s Fire Scout VTUAV, forBritain’s Watchkeeper program. Butso far, no Fire Scout-specific USNavy SAR funding has been pro-grammed. Nonetheless, a US NavyFire Scout SAR requirement is likelylater in the decade.

Lynx II for Army FCS FireScout

In December 2003, CECOMawarded General Atomics a24-month System Development andDemonstration (SDD) contract forthe Lynx II, a lighter weight (36 kg)version with improved reliability,maintainability, and diagnostics, in-tended for the FCS Fire Scout UAV.

Production Forecast


Lynx IIUS Army (MQ-8B Fire Scout) 4* 2* — — — — 15 15 15 15 15 81


Bell Eagle Eye RDR 1700 MMR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Telephonics Corp.Unit Cost: $1 million

See Bell Eagle Eye program de-



Eagle Eye RadarThe RDR 1700 Multi-Mode Radar

(MMR) is a maritime radar primarily

designed for search, surveillance, andweather avoidance, as well as terrainmapping, beacon navigation, and oilslick detection. The nose-mountedsystem in the Eagle Eye will includethree lightweight boxes: the an-tenna/pedestal uni t , the re-

ceiver/transmitter unit, and theinterface unit. The radar will operatein the X-band, and provide 120degree scanning.

Production Forecast


RDR 1700 MMRUSCG (Eagle Eye UAV) — — — — — — — 2 4 4 6 16

US Civil UAV SARs

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: UndeterminedUnit Cost: $2 million (speculative)

OverviewAt the moment, there are a number

of exploratory programs to examine

UAVs by various federal agenciesoutside the Department of Defenseand Coast Guard. See platforms chap-

ters for details. Payloads will vary byUAV size and application.



Production Forecast


US Civil UAV SARs (Undetermined)Undetermined (Undetermined) — 1 1 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 30

Army Shadow 200 TUAV SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: In CompetitionUnit Cost: $1.2 million (speculative)

See Shadow 200 TUAV program

description in Electro-Optic/Infra-

red (E-O/IR) Sensors chapter.

Northrop Grumman TUAVRSAR Development

In 1998, under the Multi-MissionCommon Modular Sensor PayloadAdvanced Technology Demonstra-tion (ATD), Northrop Grumman wasawarded a $7.3 million contract to de-velop a SAR/MTI for the TUAV.Northrop Grumman will build two ra-dars and one set of spares. Contractvalue could reach $12.4 million withall options.

TUAVR SAR ReadyIn October 2002, Northrop

Grumman announced it was nearlydone developing its TUAVR (TUAVRadar) synthetic aperture radar(SAR), and it is available for sale. TheTUAVR is a 63 lb. version of the 168lb. TESAR on the Predator, making itsuitable for the Hunter (on which ithas been flight tested) and other smallUAVs. But in 2002 the US Army had

decided not to procure a SAR for theTUAV yet.

Shadow 200 NDI SAR RFIIn March 2004, the Army Commu-

nications-Electronics Command(CECOM), Fort Monmouth, NJ, re-leased a pre-solicitation request forinformation (RFI) synopsis. The Pro-gram Manager, Robotic & UnmannedSensors (PM-RUS) is currently con-ducting market research only and isinterested in the availability ofnon-developmental miniature syn-thetic aperture radars to provide allweather sensing capability that will fitinto the existing payload bay of aShadow 200 UAV. The system mustdemonstrate true SAR capabilities.

To be considered as non-develop-mental item, the miniature syntheticaperture radar must be capable of be-ing demonstrated on board an operat-ing UAV. The requirements for aminiature SAR include, but are notlimited to, the following: a) mustweigh less than 16 lbs to meet the pay-load restrictions of the Shadow 200

UAV, b) must demonstrate half meter(or better) resolution to at least 3.5 kmslant range, c) must have an onboardpower consumption of less than 150Watts, d) must have demonstrateddata link functionality from an air-borne platform, e) must be able toprovide a swath width of 1 km, f)must have near real time SAR imagesprocessing and display (need not beon board).

If the test is successful, it is the in-tent of PM-RUS to procure a numberof systems for use on Shadow 200UAVs. SOL is W15P7T-04-I2WD004, POC is Jane Calicari, tel:(732) 427-7077, email : jane.c a l i c a r i @ m a i l 1 . m o n m o u t h .army.mil.

New Sensor PlannedIn 2004, under the Army’s new

FCS plans, an interim Class II tacticalUAV will be deployed by 2010.Likely to be an upgraded RQ-7BShadow 200, this could include aSAR.

MiniSAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Sandia National LaboratoriesUnit Cost: Undetermined

Anti-IED MOUT MiniSARIn April 2006, the Air Force 99th

Contracting Squadron, Nellis AFBNV, announced it is conducting mar-ket research for a contractor to exe-cute the USAF UAV Battlab (UAVB)Miniaturized Synthetic Aperture Ra-dar (MiniSAR) Initiative. TheMiniSAR Initiative is a USAF War-fare Center Commander approved,

and UAVB led, initiative to integrateSandia National Laboratory’sMiniSAR onto an Unmanned AircraftSystem (UAS). The purpose of thisinitiative is two-fold. First, demon-strate the abil i ty to integrateMiniSAR onto a tactical UAS. Sec-ond, demonstrate the military worthof MiniSAR in Improvised Explosive

Device (IED) detection and in urbanoperations.

The Sandia MiniSAR is a govern-ment off-the-shelf (GOTS) system. Itis designed for short range imaging(8-10 km), and reportedly has a finerresolution and is less expensive thanexisting radars.

The MiniSAR initiative is plannedas a four-phase project with a total du-



ration of one-year. Phase one definesthe integration and interface require-ments between the UAS and theMiniSAR sensor. Phase two coversboth the fabrication of the UAS andthe integration of the sensor into theUAS. Phase three consists of theground testing and flight demonstra-tion. Phase four is a concept demon-stration in a tactical scenario. Thefollowing general services are re-quired in order to execute thisinitiative:

1). Production of a UAS: Mini-mum technical requirements are: 100pound payload capacity, 12 hoursflight duration at cruise, 300 Wattssustained power production, operatein 30 knot winds, auto takeoff andland capability, austere field opera-tions capable, remotely piloted andautonomous operations, on-boardprocessing, real- t imereprogrammable mission computer,line-of-sight and beyond line-of-sight

communications and control, 18 cu-bic feet internal payload volume, 10inch external ball capable, landinggear capable of protecting sensor ball,proven platform design, and platformreadily available for modification tosupport the MiniSAR. The UAS shallalso have a ground control station ca-pable of mission planning, flighttraining, mission execution, multipleaircraft command and control, and si-multaneous connectivity betweenaircraft and multiple ground stationsfor data download.

2). Production of a lightweight,high performance synthetic apertureradar. The radar chosen is a GOTSsystem developed by Sandia NationalLaboratories. Performance specifica-tions are classified. The contractorwill work with Sandia National Labo-ratories to execute design, integra-tion, installation, and operation oftheir GOTS SAR on the UAS.

Based upon the success of the ini-tial demonstration, a planned transi-tion option exists. Additionally, therecould be subsequent efforts to dem-onstrate the MiniSAR sensor in con-junction with other sensor systems.At that time, the UAVB will analyzethe current state-of-the-art UASavai lable . SOL isFA4861-06-LGCC012, due April2006. POP is Nellis AFB, NV andCreech AFB NV, 89191. POC is 1LtCassandra Proctor, email: [email protected], and 1LtMicah O’Neal , email :[email protected].

Rockwell Teams with SandiaIn June 2006, Rockwell Collins

Government Systems announced ithad formed a strategic alliance withSandia to develop, manufacture, andoffer service and support for theMiniSAR.

Army Future Combat System (FCS) A160 FORESTER FOPEN SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Syracuse Research Corp., North Syracuse, NYUnit Cost: Undetermined

The A160 Hummingbird was in-tended to act as the airborne commu-nications/data link/relay betweenFCS vehicles and various deployedsensors and robotic vehicles. TheA160 would also mount E-O/IR andsynthetic aperture radar/ground mov-ing target indicator (SAR/GMTI)sensors.

The A160 was developed by Fron-tier Systems (Irvine, CA), has a3-blade variable speed rigid rotor, andis being designed for a 2,500 nmrange, 300 lb payload, and up to 40hour endurance. The rigid rotor is de-signed to increase endurance to threetimes that of any other helicopter. TheA160 is 35 feet long with a rotor di-ameter of about 30 feet, weighs 4,000lb, and is expected to reach 130-140knots.

The A160 first flight occurred inJanuary 2002. In August 2002, the USSpecial Operat ions Command

(SOCOM) also expressed interest inthe A160. In May 2004, Boeing’sPhantom Works bought Frontier Sys-tems, and is now responsible for de-velopment of the A160.

A160 FOPEN ContractIn May 2004, CECOM awarded a

$35 million, three year cost-plus-in-centive-fee (CPIF) contract to Syra-cuse Research in North Syracuse, NY,for efforts associated with the ultrahigh frequency (UHF) foliage pene-trating (FOPEN) real-time movingtarget indicator MTI/SAR radar foruse in the A160 Hummingbird UAV.There were two proposals solicited inDecember 2003, and two proposalswere received. The radar is also des-ignated the FORESTER (FOPEN Re-connaissance, Survei l lance,Tracking, and Engagement Radar.

Work on the first 18-month phaseis to be conducted in North Syracuse,

NY, and is to be completed by No-vember 2005, followed by a second18-month phase. Contract funding isexpected to come from the Army Ad-vanced Tactical Computer Scienceand Sensor Technology element (PE#0603772A) (W15P7T-04-C-K216),under DARPA sponsorship.

Raytheon AACER AntennasAlso in May 2004, DARPA

awarded two $6 million contracts toRaytheon Space and Airborne Sys-tems and Northrop Grumman Elec-tronic Systems, to conduct phase Idevelopment of the AffordableAdaptable Conformal ElectronicScanning Antenna (AACER)SAR/GMTI antenna for FORESTER,consisting of Ka-band electronicallyscanning arrays.

In November 2005, DARPA se-lected Raytheon Space and AirborneSystems over Northrop Grumman



Electronic Systems to continue phaseII AACER development. The secondphase will see system design com-pleted and key subassemblies built.

Plans also include a one-year thirdphase of development, for flight tests.

Congress Suggests CuttingFOPEN

In September 2006, defense ap-propriations conferees decided to cut$12 million or more from Army re-search on its UAV FOPEN. In re-sponse, a Pentagon appeal stated theability to sense through foliage is“desperately needed” for surveillancemissions in U.S. Southern and U.S.

Central commands’areas of responsi-bility. “The [Defense Department’s]current capability is one aging testbed system on manned aircraft thatcontains soon-to-be-outdated equip-ment with a limited anticipatedlifetime.”

The foliage penetrating radar sys-tem is in the second year of athree-year advanced concept technol-ogy demonstration cycle. The systemdeployed for the SOUTHCOM areaof responsibility in June 2005 for amilestone test to determine its utility,according to Pentagon officials. “Af-ter just two test flights, its ability tosupport real-world operations was

immediately recognized by U.S. andcoalition forces” because the systemprovided previously unavailable in-telligence information to fieldcommanders,” the appeal states.

The system is slated to finish theACTD process in February 2007 withthe completion of a joint military util-ity assessment.

Testing Contract PlannedIn May 2007, DARPA announced

it will award a contract to Boeing totest-fly the FORESTER radar on itsA160 UAV. Tests will last 6-9months, in the US.

USMC Dragon Warrior MiniSAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Imaging MicrosensorsUnit Cost: Undetermined

Imaging Microsensors’s 6.8 kgMiniSAR is thought to have been as-

sociated with the Dragon Warriorprogram, but little is known.

MicroSAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Imaging MicrosensorsUnit Cost: Undetermined

Imaging Microsensors’s has de-veloped the 0.45 kg MicroSAR.

International UAV SAR Programs

EuroHawk SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: EADSUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewGermany has a requirement for an

endurance UAV for strategic recon-naissance and maritime patrol, andhas examined the RQ-4A GlobalHawk as a possible candidate. TheEuroHawk is envisioned as a navalsurveillance version of the GlobalHawk which substitutes an EADSELINT package for the current ISS.EuroHawk will also mount a SAR. A

Global Hawk flew with an EADSSAR from Edwards AFB in 2002.

Further plans to conduct trials of aGlobal Hawk fitted with an EADSsensor package were delayed due tothe commitment of the aircraft tocombat operations in 2003, but aGlobal Hawk was finally deployed toGermany in October 2003 for a seriesof six test flights.

The short term objective is to ac-quire four to six Global Hawks to re-

place four 40-year-old BreguetAtlantique ELINT aircraft, althoughthe EuroHawk could also be used fora broader range of surveillance re-quirements. The German partner forNorthrop Grumman is EADS-Dornier. The program plans havebeen for the delivery of the firstEuroHawk in 2007, the second in2008-09 and eventually 3-4 more, at atotal cost of about $600 million. Ger-many is also considering a follow-on



buy of up to six more EuroHawkswhich would be fitted with a syntheticaperture radar.

In 2004, the German Navy an-nounced plans to retire its fleet of

Atlantique maritime patrol aircraftsooner than expected, and as an in-terim solution to purchase surplusDutch P-3C Orion aircraft . Anavalized EuroHawk would presum-

ably replace these, although the radarhas not yet been developed.

I-Master

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: ThalesUnit Cost: Undetermined

I-Master for WatchkeeperIn December 2005, the Thales

I-Master SAR/GMTI radar was se-lected for Britain’s WatchkeeperWK450 UAVs. I-Master was re-vealed at the Farnborough Air Showin 2004, and will provide sub-metricresolution from a range of 20 km instrip mode or 15 km in spot mode, anddetect slow-moving vehicles or peo-ple from 20 km.

I-Master was developed out ofRacal’s Pod SAR, with additionaltechnology input from Thales’Searchwater radars. I-Master isplanned to weigh 32 kg.

I-Master is lighter than GeneralAtomics’ Lynx SAR, with a slightlylesser range, but this will allowWatchkeeper UAVs to also carry anE-O/IR payload simultaneously.I-Master also provides ground mov-

ing target identification (GMTI), un-like most other similar size SARs.

Watchkeeper Dual SensorsOne of Britain’s Watchkeeper pro-

gram’s biggest selling points is itsdual payload system, allowing a com-bination of E-O/IR, SAR, andSIGINT sensors. The WatchkeeperWK450 UAV is based on Elbit’s Her-mes 450.

PicoSAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Selex Sensors &Airborne Systems, UKUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn May 2006, Selex Sensors and

Airborne Systems’ (Selex S&AS)PicoSAR made its maiden flight on anASS-355 Twin Squirrel helicopterflying out of Cumbernauld in Scot-land. The radar scanned various ur-ban and rural areas at altitudes of3,000 ft to 9,500 ft.

PicoSAR is a lightweight, com-pact active electronically scanned ar-

ray (AESA) SAR, specificallydeveloped for use on small airborneplatforms, typically UAVs and heli-copters . The system provideshigh-resolution ground mapping andGMTI. It currently weighs only 9.1kg, although Selex is looking to re-duce this further for productionsystems.

Building on existing technologyemployed in the company’s Seaspray

radars, PicoSAR was transformedfrom a basic idea to an actual radar in13 months, according to Selex.

One key application planned forPicoSAR is to combine it with a burstillumination radar to provide a com-bat identification (CID) system thatcan penetrate smoke and other formsof clutter.

SWORD

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: Thales, EADS-DornierUnit Cost: Undetermined

The Thales/EADS-DornierSWORD (Standoff all-Weather Ob-servation and ReconnaissanceDrone) SAR weighs 30 kg, and wasdesigned to replace the E-O payload

of the CL-289 UAV. Sword is aJ-band SAR/MTI sensor covering aswath width of approximately 2000metres, generating high-resolutionSAR imagery in real time and me-

dium-resolution MTI imagery innear-real-time. SWORD is an oldersystem, status unknown in mid-2007.



AWARDS (All-Weather Airborne Reconnaissance Drone Sensor)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Thales, EADS-DornierUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewAWARDS (All-Weather Airborne

Reconnaissance Drone Sensor) is a49 kg version of SWORD, using

much of the same hardware, but add-ing an onboard real-time processor,plus antennas which are mechani-

cally-steered in elevation and elec-tronically-steered in azimuth. It alsowas an older system in mid-2007.

QuaSAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: EADS AstriumUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn 2005, EADS Astrium was mar-

keting the QuaSAR scalable modularSAR for UAV applications. Based ontechnology originally developed by

Matra Marconi Space, the radar is of-fered in 4-8 GHz, 8-12 GHz, and12-18 GHz variants, all of which haveSAR strip-map, spotlight imaging,

and MTI modes. QuaSAR is scalable,but can be fielded in a form thatweighs as little as 30 kg, making itsuitable for small UAVs.

MiSAR

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: EADS Defense ElectronicsUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewEADS’s 4 kg, Ku-band MiSAR

has been test flown aboard the LUNA

UAV, probably in 2006. In April2007, contract negotiations began tobuy an upgraded system for Luna

UAVs in Afghanistan. The new con-figuration gives a GMTI capability,with a revised side-looking antenna.

Mini-SAR

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)Unit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThe 50 kg, 10 GHz center fre-

quency Mini-SAR GMTI/SAR wasbeing promoted in mid-2007.

CARABAS (Coherent All Radio Band Sensing)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Saab Microwave Systems (was Ericsson), SwedenUnit Cost: Undetermined

Ericsson developed the smallCARABAS (Coherent All RadioBand Sensing) VHF band radar, suit-

able for a UAV. The system will oper-ate at 20-90 MHz in SAR mode, andat 60-90 MHz in MTI mode. The ba-

sic system has been extensivelyflight-tested on a manned aircraft, andwas available for sale in mid-2007.

EL/M-2055

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Elta (IAI), IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined



OverviewElta’s (IAI) 33-66 kg EL/M-2055

SAR has a strip map mode for areasearch and detection, a high-resolu-tion spot mode, and an MTI mode

with wide-area Doppler beam sharp-ening surveillance for tracking mov-ing targets. The EL/M-2055 has beendemonstrated on the Searcher II UAV,may have been installed in the Hunter,

and has been fitted to the Indian De-fence Research and Development Or-ganisation (DRDO) Nishant UAV. Itwas available in mid-2007.

EL/M-2022U

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Elta (IAI), IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewElta’s (IAI) 114 kg EL/M-2022U

maritime radar has been test flown on

the Heron UAV (payload capacity250 kg). In mid-2007, it was thoughtto be in service aboard Herons of the

Indian and Israeli navies. It has arange of 200 km.

Recent SAR Solicitations and RDT&E Programs

MOUT: Urban ReconSeveral Program Elements fund

projects looking to improve capabili-ties for MOUT, including, for exam-ple the Urban Recon (UR) ACTD,begun in FY03. This area will see in-creasing funding over the next fewyears, and SAR developments to im-prove capabilities for ISR over citieswill likely receive funding.

PE# 0603750D8ZThe Advanced Concept Technol-

ogy Demonstration (ACTD) Programfunds several related programs, in-cluding:

• Coalition Aerial Surveillance andReconnaissance (CAESAR),which is developing a concept ofoperations and tactics, techniques,and procedures for NATO em-ployment of moving target indica-tors and SAR operations.

• Foliage Penetrating Synthetic Ap-erture Radar, to provide real-timedetection and cueing of stationarytargets obscured by foliage andunder camouflage using tacticaland national sensors.

• Tactical Interferometric SyntheticAperture Radar (IFSAR) Map-ping, to provide theater-widethree-dimensional, fine resolutionterrain data and SAR imagery formission planning and rehearsal

data acquisi t ion in jointoperations.

Combating Terrorism Technol-ogy Solicitation

In February 2004, the Army Rob-ert Morris Acquisition Center(RMAC), Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD, announced it is soliciting con-cepts for innovative research and de-velopment projects for combatingterrorism. The mission areas includeChemical, Biological, Radiologicaland Nuclear Countermeasures (CB);Investigative Support and Forensics(ISF); and Surveillance, Collectionand Operations Support (SCOS).

RMAC is the procuring office forthis Broad Agency Announcement(BAA) for the Combating TerrorismTechnology Support Office (CTTSO)Technical Support Working Group(TSWG). The BAA package itselfwill be available only from the fol-lowing website, www.bids.tswg.gov.The BAA process constitutes a solici-tation of concepts from those offerorscapable of sat isfying thegovernment’s needs.

SOL is W91CRB-04-T-0065, dueApril 1, 2004. POC is Renee Hodge,tel: (410) 278-0881, email: [email protected]. POPis Robert Morris Acquisition Center,Aberdeen Branch, ATTN:AMSSB-ACC-A, 4118 Susquehanna

Avenue, Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD 21005-3013.

USAF Conformal Phased ArrayAntenna Research

In March 2004, the Air Force Re-search Laboratory (AFRL),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, awardedNorthrop Grumman a $9.4 millioncost-reimbursement type contract tofinance demonstrations of a high fre-quency (HF), low-band, load bearingphased array antenna concept that isconformal or structurally integrated.The work is to be conducted in ElSegundo, CA, and is to be completedby June 2009. Contract funding willcome from the Air Force AerospaceSensors program (PE# 0602204F)(FA8650-04-C-3423).

NGS Interferometric SARIn June 2004, the National

Geospatial-Intelligence Agency(NGA), Arnold, MO, awarded a de-livery order (DO) amount of $4.2 mil-l ion as part of a $47 mil l ionfirm-fixed-price (FFP) contract toIntermap Federal Services inEnglewood, CO, to finance the pro-duct ion and delivery of aninterferometric SAR (IFSAR) air-borne commercial imager, to providehigh-resolution radar images, digitalsurface models, and radar based mapproducts. The place of performance isEnglewood, CO, and the contract



completion date is January 2005.Contract financing will come fromthe Defense Agencies Procurement(PDA) account (HM1574-04-D-0003).

Army Affordable ConformalRadar Contracts to Raytheonand Northrop

In July 2004, the Army RobertMorris Acquisi t ion Center(ARMAC), Adelphi, MD, awardedRaytheon in El Segundo, CA, a $2.7million increment as part of a $36.8million cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF)action to finance research and devel-opment in support of the AffordableAdaptive Conformal ESA Radar.Bids were originally solicited in No-vember 2002, and three proposalswere received. The work is to be con-ducted in El Segundo, CA (90.3%);Tucson, AZ (7%); and San Diego, CA(2.7%), and completed by June 2008.Contract funding will initially comefrom the Army Electronics and Elec-tronic Devices program (PE#0602705A) (W911QX-04-C-0108).

In July 2004, the ARMAC alsoawarded Northrop Grumman Sys-tems in Linthicum, MD a $2.6 millionincrement as part of a $32.2 millioncost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) action insupport of the Affordable AdaptiveConformal ESA Radar Program. Thework is to be conducted in Linthicum,MD, and is to be completed by June2008. Contract financing will alsocome initially from Army PE#0602705A (W911QX-04-C-0107).

Dynamic Tactical Targeting(DTT) Follow-On

In October 2004, the InformationExploi tat ion Off ice (IXO) atDARPA, Arlington, VA, announced itwas soliciting proposals for the Dy-namic Tactical Targeting: TacticalExercises and System Test(DTT:TEST) program under thisBroad Agency Announcement(BAA). The DTT program currentlyis developing technology to continu-ously cross-cue a large set of hetero-geneous, partially controllable sensorplatforms to maintain track on known

targets, while maintaining search ef-forts to find new candidate targets, sothat known targets can be held at riskuntil a commander authorizes en-gagement. Abstractly, the sensors canbe viewed as a pool of resources, andmission needs (search an area,maintain track on a designatedvehicle) as prioritized demands.

DTT is the process that continu-ously, and proactively, assigns re-sources to demands as the situationchanges: new missions are defined,known vehicles move, new vehiclesare found, existing tracks degrade,etc. The DTT program began in 1999,and is ending this year. It developedan initial set of software components,in tegrated into a complete ,closed-loop system, that clearly vali-dated the above premise, but vali-dated the premise only on simulateddata. Simulated data simply cannotcontain all of the artifacts and errorsources present in the real world.

The Tactical Exercises and SystemTesting (DTT:TEST) program hasbeen created to validate the DTTpremise in live exercises, leveragingcompanion efforts in the Army (affili-ated with the Future Combat System)and Air Force (affiliated with the Dis-tributed Common Ground Station).The DTT:TEST program will vali-date the premise that automated toolscan be employed to, 1). align thetransformed sensor data to a commongeospatial reference system, 2). cor-relate data across sources into consis-tent target tracks, 3). predict futuretarget motion, 4). create sensor-spe-cific tasking that develops the mosteffective way to employ sensors in thecontext of anticipated target motion(for targets in track) and remainingsearch tasks (for targets yet to be dis-covered), and 5). allow a commanderand staff to maintain situationawareness and supervise theoperation of the automation.

The DTT:TEST program willbuild and integrate technologies forthese five areas, and exercise them onreal-world sensor data, both recordedand live. Some of these technologiesmay be drawn from those funded by

the original DTT program, but IXO isaware of, and interested in, other,equally mature technologies that mayoutperform those employed by DTTto date. Validation will be accom-plished in live exercises, leveragingcompanion efforts in the Army andAir Force. SOL is BAA05-04, dueJanuary 29, 2005.

Maritime Search withSmall-Antenna SAR StudyContract

In March 2006, the Naval Air War-fare Center Weapons Div.(NAWC-WD), China Lake, CA, an-nounced it intends to contract withUser Systems, Inc., Crofton, MD, toprocure a Maritime Search withSmall-Antenna SAR study. Respondto Faith La Gore, Commander Code220000D, NAWCWD, 429 E BowenAve, MS 4015, China Lake, CA93555-6108; fax: (760) 939-3095;email: [email protected]. SOLIS N68936-06-T-0065.

ARTEMIS MTI SolicitationIn November 2006, Army

CECOM, acting in concert with theRDECOM, CERDEC, Intelligenceand Information Warfare Directorate(I2WD), solicited proposals for a42-month design and developmenteffort for ARTEMIS (All-Terrain Ra-dar for Tactical Exploitation of MTI& Imaging Surveillance), a light-weight multi-function airborne coun-ter CC&D radar. SOL isW15P7T-07-R-P005, POP is USArmy C-E LCMC Acquisition Center- DAAB07, ATTN: AMSEL-AC,Building 1208, Fort Monmouth, NJ07703-5008.

Next Generation Radar Con-cepts Solicitation

In January 2007, the Information& Sensors Directorate, Air Force Re-search Laboratory (AFRL), RomeResearch Site, Rome, NY, solicitedwhite papers for innovative ap-proaches in the area of advanced ra-dar technology to overcomedeficiencies in existing and plannedradar systems to detect, track, and



identify aircraft, missiles, spacecraft,space debris, ground vehicles, andsubsurface complexes in clutter andcountermeasure environments. Thesurvivability of new and existing sys-tems must also be improved withoutthe use of decoys. Upgrades to exist-ing ISR platforms, demonstrations tosupport transition to the next level oftechnology development, and evolu-tions to new sensors and concepts(UAVs, space-based platforms, etc.)need to be addressed.

Sensor concepts should includemultiple configurations with charac-ter is t ics support ing diversemulti-mission requirements includ-ing Airborne Moving Target Indica-tor (AMTI), Ground Moving TargetIndicator (GMTI) and Synthetic Ap-erture Radar (SAR), MultibandSAR/Tomographic Imaging features,and Foliage Penetrating (FOPEN)Radar. These concepts include bothmonostatic and multistatic solutions.Lookdown bistatic concepts shouldinclude bistatic receivers using radia-tors of opportunity (TV, FM, etc.)with large wideband receiveantennas.

Areas of interest include new andinnovative advances in system archi-tectures, hardware, software and/orsignal processing algorithm improve-ments, diverse transmit waveforms,survivability, positional estimationimprovements, unique concepts in ra-dar system design, Multi-BasingLook Down Surveillance (Air andSpace), Augmentation of Reconnais-sance Capabilities (development ofnew surveillance capabilities in re-connaissance sensors), Ground Pene-trating Radar, Bistatic/MultistaticRadar (non-cooperative emitter standalone sensors and cooperative aug-mentation of existing ISR platformsthrough UAVs), the architecture andsignal processing for expendableUAV radar probes, and theater missiledefense.

Additional technology areas in-clude the measurement, test, analysisand modeling efforts that are requiredto support the development of ad-vanced radar systems. The primary

emphasis is to identify and demon-strate promising technologies forboth monostatic and multistatic radarsensors in the areas of Space TimeAdaptive Processing, both Adaptiveand Knowledge Based (KB),Multi-Channel Signal ProcessingTechniques , Innovative andWideband Processing Techniques,Multi-Dimensional Processing Tech-niques, improved radar system per-formance developments in spreadDoppler clutter environment for atheater application and, in general,technologies that may significantlyimprove the performance of ad-vanced radar systems. The successfulapplication of these approaches willrequire a broad spectrum of expertise,covering hardware, software, andsystems technology.

Total funding for this BAA is ap-proximately $49.9 million. The antic-ipated funding to be obligated underthis BAA is broken out by fiscal yearas follows: FY06, $16.6 million;FY07, $16.7 million; FY08, $16.6million. Individual awards for theNext Generation Sensor Conceptstopic area will not normally exceed 36months, with dollar amounts rangingbetween $100,000 to $1 million peryear. Awards of efforts as a result ofthis announcement will be in the formof contracts, grants, cooperativeagreements, or other transactions de-pending upon the nature of the workproposed. SOLis BAA-06-06-IFKA.

VADER: GMTI Radar Exploita-tion Solicitation

In January 2007, the Intelligenceand Information Warfare Directorate(I2WD), Army Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM),Fort Monmouth, NJ, issued an RFI ontechniques for the exploitation ofMoving Target Indicating Radar data.The purpose of the announcement isto request white papers for the Vehi-cle and Dismount Exploitation Radar(VADER) program. Responses to thisRFI will be reviewed by the Govern-ment and may result in an invitation tosubmit proposals against the BAA fora 3QFY07 award.

The goal of the VADER programis to provide tactical persistent sur-veillance and tracking of dismountsand vehicles over wide areas of thebattle space. VADER is a side look-ing, ku-Band, electronic scanning(azimuth), medium range radar withboth very high resolution GMTI andSAR modes. The radar system willhave four GMTI modes and two SARmodes. The GMTI modes include awide-area MTI (WAMTI) mode forvehicles, a small-area MTI (SAMTI)mode for dismounts, a High RangeResolution (HRR) sub mode of theWA MTI, and High Range-DopplerVideo modes for dismounts. The SARmodes include a spotlight and stripmap mode to resolutions as fine assix-inches in spot and twelve-inchesin strip.

VADER is composed of threephases. The purpose of this RFI is tosupport phases II and III, which willbegin in 3QFY07 and 3QFY08 re-spectively. The objective duringphase II (12-months) is to integrate alltechnologies into an existing MTIworkstation. Real data will be pro-vided at month 3 to support develop-ment. Lab prototype of the integratedworkstation will occur at month 9 andfull integration and test with live datawill occur at month 12. Phase III(6-months) will provide for technol-ogy upgrades and insertion of tech-nologies not fully integrated duringphase II.

Technologies are sought across anumber of specified application areasas listed in detail below. MTI exploi-tation technologies beyond thoselisted below will also be consideredand are encouraged. 1). AutomatedTracking - Algorithms capable oftracking dismounts are sought. Track-ers capable of tracking both dis-mounts and vehicles without aid of apriori classification (dismount vs. ve-hicle) are desired. 2). Feature AidedTracking - Tracking algorithms,which use signature data derivedfrom high resolution dwells of a targetarea, to enhance track length and pu-rity are sought. Such algorithmsshould work, at a minimum, in con-



junction with High-Range Resolutionvehicle signatures.

SOL is W15P7T-07-R-P014, dueJanuary 2007. POP is US Army C-ELCMC Acquisi t ion Center -DAAB07, ATTN: AMSEL-AC,Building 1208, Fort Monmouth, NJ07703-5008. Email :[email protected].

All Terrain Radar ContractIn August 2007, Army CECOM

obligated a $6.1 million increment aspart of a $6.7 million CPFF contractto Northrop Grumman Systems in

Linthicum Heights, MD, for procure-ment of the All Terrain Radar for Tac-tical Exploitation of Moving TargetIndicator and Imaging Surveillanceprogram. The contract was competi-tively awarded as a result of bids so-licited via the World Wide Web.There were two proposals received.The work is being conducted inLinthicum Heights, MD, and is to becompleted by November 2010. Con-tract funding is coming from ArmyOther Procurement (OPA)(W15P7T-07-C-P044).

Revolutionary Urban RadarSolicitation

In August 2007, DARPA solicitedinnovative research proposals in thearea of urban radar, in BAA Number07-58, entitled “Multipath Exploita-tion Radar”. Proposed researchshould investigate innovative ap-proaches that enable revolutionaryadvances in science, devices, or sys-tems. Specifically excluded is re-search that primarily results inevolutionary improvements to theexisting state of practice. SOL isBAA07-58.





SIGINT & Electronic Warfare Systems

Market Overview

Definitions

SIGINT (Signals Intelligence) is ageneral term that includes radio band(COMINT – Communications Intelli-gence), radar band (ELINT – Elec-tronic Intelligence), and MASINT(Measurement and Signature Intelli-gence) systems. US Department ofDefense definitions are: COMINT –technical information and intelli-gence derived from foreign commu-

nications by other than the intendedrecipients, ELINT – technical andgeolocation intelligence derived fromforeign non-communications electro-magnetic radiations emanating fromother than nuclear detonations or ra-dioactive sources, and MASINT –scientific and technical intelligenceobtained by quantitative and qualita-tive analysis of data (metric, angle,

spatial, wavelength, time depend-ence, modulation, plasma, andhydromagnetic) derived from spe-cific technical sensors for the purposeof identifying any distinctive featuresassociated with the target, source,emitter, or sender measurement of thesame (the detected feature may be ei-ther reflected or emitted).

SIGINT: The New EW

These long-winded definitionsmight serve to explain the relativelylow profile SIGINT has had in thepast among electronic warfare pro-grams, while jammers and radar andmissile warning systems have gottenall the attention. But that has beenchanging since the conflicts began inAfghanistan and Iraq. Suddenly,monitoring communications has be-come vital – more vital than fightingsophisticated surface-to-air missile

radar networks – in part becausemany of the improvised explosive de-vices (IEDs) that have resulted in alarge proportion of US casualties aredetonated by detectable RF commu-nications devices. And, those that arenot can often be detected by monitor-ing communications of those whoemplace them. Infrared-guidedMANPADS (man-portable air de-fense systems) have become the num-ber one threat to aircraft, and small

units of irregular troops, often indense urban environments, havetaken over from much-easier-to-trackmassed armies. These new opponentsdemand new methods for locationand tracking, and signals intelligenceoffers one of the best opportunities.Much new funding is being pro-grammed to develop SIGINT sys-tems.


UAV SIGINT/EW Funding ForecastRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US


200

400

600

800

1,000


GH/Pred ASIP Other Endurance UCAV

Tactical Available Int'l

US Markets

Communications Intelligence(COMINT) has long been a vital mili-tary requirement at the grassrootslevel, and many COMINT systems to-day have been in service for sometime. COMINT is equally valuablefor air, ground, and naval forces, withlarge numbers of simple systems be-ing procured to provide situationalawareness for soldiers, ships, andsubmarines. This contrasts with ra-dar-band ELINT, where aircraft haveused more expensive and sophisti-cated radar warning receivers aswarning and self-defense against thelaunch of radar-guided sur-face-to-air-missiles.

Unlike for ELINT, the value ofshort-range COMINT receivers onUAVs – in support of ground troops –will ra ise airborne unmannedCOMINT to become the most impor-tant COMINT market segment at theend of the decade, with many inex-pensive systems to be procured. Thiswill cover all scales of UAV, from the

Global Hawk Airborne Signals Intel-ligence Program (ASIP) Low BandSystem (LBS) to (eventually) mi-cro-scale COMINT receivers onmini- and micro-UAVs. We are fore-casting steady RDT&E and procure-ment funding.

As an example, the US Air Forcein Iraq has equipped Predator UAVswith communications jamming pay-loads. These are used as acloser-range supplement to EA-6BProwlers and EC-130 Compass Callaircraf t , to counter relat ivelylow-power VHF and UHF transmis-sions (receivers rather than transmit-ters).

Larger-scale and more expensivesystems are planned, with NorthropGrumman’s ASIP nearing produc-tion. On Global Hawks, Predators,and Reapers, ASIP will be the firstmajor manned-aircraft-equivalentUAV SIGINT program, to be fundedat more than a quarter of a billion dol-

lars per year beginning in a couple ofyears.

Tactical UAV programs will re-main smaller, with the Army’s Tacti-cal SIGINT Payload (TSP) to be onlya moderate program in terms of fund-ing. On the other hand, UAV ELINTRDT&E will remain high throughoutour forecast period, and this shouldprovide knock-on technology bene-fits for other ELINT programs.

With its 20 EA-6B Prowlers aging,and no EF-18G Growlers to be pur-chased, the USMC is dedicated toproviding Electronic Attack (EA)from UAVs. With systems flying atlow altitudes on tactical UAVs, muchless power is needed for jamming,and a much smaller area will be af-fected, meaning less disruption offriendly communications.

The Marines are also likely to bestrong supporters of the new NavyUCAS-D program, as a full-sizedUCAV might be able to supplant theGrowler for Marine Corps mission.

International Markets

There are many European SIGINTsuppliers, especially EADS andThales Communicat ions . Forground-based ELINT and COMINTsystems, the US has had few interna-tional sales and for a long time had abad reputation even in the US. Thebest opportunities for US SIGINTsales abroad will be for airborne sys-tems. If US investment in UAV sys-tems grows at the rates forecast, USUAV ELINT and COMINT capabili-

ties should result in a very good mar-ket climate internationally.

However, a real barrier to US entryinto international SIGINT markets isthe large number of small programs.The US excels at expensive, inte-grated, and high-powered systems –like JSTARS, top-line FLIR pods,and Global Hawk. SIGINT systemshave traditionally been small, rela-tively inexpensive systems that can bedeveloped by niche companies. There

is less need to “go US” when manymore politically-acceptable (or justplain better) alternatives exist. Thismay change with the renewed interestin SIGINT generated by the War onTerror. If it does, expect some marketbarriers to fall. Until then, interna-tional markets will not offer the sameopportunities as DoD programs, andthis will be continue to be a weak areafor FMS sales.

Funding Forecast

US RDT&E (FY07 $Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

Global Hawk/PredatorASIP (USAF) 69 78 81 84 95 101 106 106 113 110 943

Other Endurance UAVSIGINT & EW (speculative) 32 34 52 66 72 70 74 70 78 84 632

UCAV EW & SIGINT (speculative) 6 6 18 42 44 51 54 54 66 54 395Tactical UAV

SIGINT & EW (speculative) 46 54 50 56 58 72 68 68 88 86 646

Total 153 172 201 248 269 294 302 298 345 334 2,616


Page 210 SIGINT & Electronic Warfare Systems

US Procurement (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 Total

Global Hawk/Predator ASIP (USAF) — 26 200 194 196 196 168 164 178 200 1,522Other Endurance UAV SIGINT & EW 22 24 74 128 138 144 126 172 170 160 1,158UCAV EW & SIGINT — — — — — — — — 100 125 225Tactical UAV

SIGINT & EW (speculative) 55 55 140 110 100 120 130 130 152 140 1,132

Total 77 105 414 432 434 460 424 466 600 625 4,037

Total Available International RDT&E+Procurement (speculative)

($ Millions) 22 42 52 52 60 62 70 75 72 76 583

Endurance UAV EW & SIGINT Programs

Global Hawk Hyperwide COMINT

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: BAE SystemsUnit Cost: $1 million (speculative)

OverviewThe US Navy bought two Global

Hawks in its FY03 budget, for theGlobal Hawk Maritime Demonstra-tion (GHMD) program. The first airvehicle was to essentially be a USAFLRIP version, with added electronicsupport measures (BAE Systems’Hyperwide receiver and NorthropGrumman’s LR-100). The secondGlobal Hawk, to be delivered inmid-2005, was to mount an undeter-mined turreted E-O/IR sensor (ratherthan the Integrated Sensor System),and instead give more emphasis to anew 360 degree scanning InverseSAR (ISAR), adding maritime-sur-veillance modes and maritime MTI.

Little information has been madepublic about Hyperwide, but ordersfor the “Enhanced Integrated SensorSystem and Clip- in Sensor(Hyperwide)” continue.

Lot 3 LRIPIn April 2004, the Air Force Aero-

nautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, issuedNorthrop Grumman a $202 millionfixed-price-incentive (FPI) contractadd-on to provide for an undefinitizedcontract action for LRIP Lot 3, in-cluding one Global Hawk productionair vehicle with one basic Integrated

Sensor Suite; two Global Hawk pro-duction air vehicles; one Global

Hawk production air vehicle with one

Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite

and Clip-in Sensor (Hyperwide); onemission control element (MCE); onelaunch recovery element; one basic

Integrated Sensor Suite; and supportequipment and spares. The work is tobe performed in San Diego, CA, andis to be completed by October 2005.Contract funding will come from theAir Force Aircraft Procurement(APF) account (F33657-03-C-4310/POO1).

Lot 4 LRIP Advance Procure-ment

In March 2004, the ASC issuedNorthrop Grumman a $50.7 millioncontract to provide for long leadparts/advance procurement for LRIPLot 4 items, including RQ-4B GlobalHawk air vehicles with Enhanced In-

tegrated Sensor Suites and Clip-in

Sensor (Hyperwide); one missioncontrol element (MCE); one launchrecovery element; and support equip-ment and spares. Contract financingwill come from the Air Force AircraftProcurement (APF) account(FA8620-04-C-3410).

USAF COMINT Research WhitePapers

In April 2005, the Air Force Re-search Laboratory, Rome ResearchSite, Rome, NY, announced it was so-

liciting white papers for various sci-entific studies and experiments to in-crease the lab’s knowledge andunderstanding of the broad range ofcapabilities required in support of au-tomated COMINT collection andprocessing. Solutions to basic re-search and engineering problemsusing innovative approaches aresought.

The overall technical objectives ofthe BAA are to develop techniquesand algorithms for the detection, rec-ognition, exploitation, and location ofanalog and digital communicationsignals in a moderate to denseco-channel environment. AFRL is in-terested in techniques and algorithmsfor: (1) automated detection, identifi-cat ion, character izat ion, andgeolocation; (2) enhanced collectionsystem efficiency; and (3) improveddigital signal processing hardwareand software.

The scope of this effort concernsseveral areas and covers a broadrange of issues, which include, but arenot limited to the following: (1) signaldetection; (2) signal recognition andclassification in low Signal to Inter-ference Noise Ratio (SINR) environ-ments; (3) improved methods toaccomplish geolocat ion (4);multi-User Detection (MUD) algo-rithms; (5) interference cancellation;(6) TDOA/FDOA techniques; (7)


SIGINT & Electronic Warfare Systems Page 211

emerging technologies and radiocommunication devices; (8) wirelesscommunications (RF and Net-worked); (9) miniaturization of sys-

tems to allow embedding aboardUAV platforms. SOL is BAA-05-05-IFKA.

LR-100 RWR/ESM/ELINT

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Northrop GrummanUnit Cost: $500,000-$1 million

OverviewThe LR-100 is a lightweight (27

kg) 2-18 GHz (baseline) radar signalreceiver designed in-house byNorthrop Grumman (was Litton) us-ing COTS components. It can serve asa radar warning receiver (RWR), andalso provides precision emitter loca-t ion and ident if icat ion (ful lESM/ELINT). In its most accuratephase-comparison mode, the LR-100reportedly allows emitter rangingwith about a 1% accuracy.

The LR-100 was bought for theUS Navy GHMD air vehicles, alongwith BAE Systems’ HyperwideSIGINT receiver, and it seems thishas also become a standard fit on cur-rent USAF Global Hawks. However,

Northrop Grumman’s new ASIPSIGINT system will soon supersedethe LR-100, with IOC planned for2012. A significant UAV market forthe small and light LR-100 could fol-low, but no international orders havebeen announced, and our forecast willremain fairly conservative until moreorders are confirmed.

Global Hawk TestingIn March 2001, Global Hawk Air

Vehicle No. 5 was fitted with theLR-100, as well as a RaytheonE-O/IR sensor and, reportedly, aSAR, for its deployment to Australia.The USAF claimed this was aone-time sensor fit. This Global

Hawk crashed in January 2002, re-turning from a mission overAfghanistan.

Two LR-100s were also procuredfor the Navy’s two Global HawksMaritime Demonstration (GHMD)aircraft, originally intended as test ve-hicles for the BAMS (Broad AreaMaritime Surveillance) program.

Limited Production for GlobalHawk

It seems that current Global hawksare receiving the LR-100 as standardequipment, and this should continueuntil it is replaced by the new ASIPSIGINT system.

Airborne Signals Intelligence Program (ASIP) & High Band System(HBS) & Low Band System (LBS)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Northrop Grumman (HBS & LBS); Raytheon (LBS)Unit Cost: $15.4 million (for Global Hawk Block 30, NG quote in 2006)

ASIP DevelopmentThe High Band System (HBS) be-

ing developed by Northrop GrummanMission Systems (San Jose, CA) (wasTRW), is part of the Airborne SignalsIntelligence Payload (ASIP) pod, de-velopment of which began in FY03for use on the U-2 and Global Hawk.HBS flight tests were conducted in2006.

The ASIP will also include a newLow Band System (LBS), also beingdeveloped by Northrop Grumman(and Raytheon). The Joint SIGINTAvionics Family (JSAF) low bandsystem was cancelled in 2002, aftercontinuing technical problems withthe BAE Systems development pro-gram. Due to these delays, the HBS

was ready earlier, so Northrop con-ducted bench testing of the system forabout a month, then took it to Ed-wards AFB in 2006 for test flights au-thor ized by Congress as arisk-reduction measure to make surethat the SIGINT package would workon Global Hawk. “We have to wait forthe Low Band System to catch up,which should be in 2007,” accordingGeorge Guerra, Northrop GrummanUSAF Global Hawk programmanager.

Development of an all-new ASIPfor the Global Hawk represents an ex-tension of earlier USAF plans for theUAV, which called for equipping theGlobal Hawk with the LR-100 re-ceiver as a high-band SIGINT sys-

tem, along with an undeterminedlow-band system and the Hyperwidereceiver for communications intelli-gence (COMINT). Despite limitedHyperwide system and LR-100 pro-duction, the Air Force decided to goahead with the development and pro-duction of the ASIP – a completelynew system.

Northrop Grumman has also beenasked to look into the possibility of in-tegrating a COMINT system onboardthe Global Hawk, but the studies inthis area are only in the very earlystages.

ASIP IntegrationIn June 2004, the Air Force Elec-

tronic Systems Center (ESC),



Hanscom AFB, MA, issuedRaytheon’s Strategic Systems Div. inFalls Church, VA a $16.2 millioncost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) modifica-tion to integrate ASIP tasking, pro-cess ing, exploi ta t ion, anddissemination capabilities into theDeployable Ground Intercept Facility(DGIF) element. The work will beconducted in Falls Church, VA, and isto be completed by March 2007. Con-tract funding will come from the AirForce Other Procurement (OPF)appropriation.

The ASIP program is to build uponthe HBSS production configurationunit by adding specific low-bandfunctions developed for the currentAir Force Special SIGINT System.ASIP will interface with the USAFDistributed Common Ground System(DCGS) for tasking, processing, ex-ploitation, and dissemination of intel-l igence, survei l lance, andreconnaissance information(F19628-97-D-0009).

ASIP Integration into DCGSIn March 2005, the Air Force Elec-

tronic Systems Center (ESC),Hanscom AFB, MA, announced aproposed contract action for the pur-pose of extending the ordering andperformance periods for the Recon-naissance, Intelligence Ground Sys-tems (RIGS) Products and Services(RPS) contracts with Lockheed Mar-t in (F19628-97-D-0008) andRaytheon (F196280-97-D-0009).The contracts’ ordering periods willbe increased by three years by chang-ing the current ending date from De-cember 2003 to December 2006. Thecontracts’ periods of performancewill also be increased by three yearsby changing the current ending datefrom December 2004 to December2007. This change will not increasethe ceiling price of the two contracts.

The extension is a contract actionrequired to provide for the acquisitionof upgrades to existing subsystems,the Ground Control Processor (GCP)and Deployable Ground Intercept Fa-cility (DGIF), which were developedand fielded by the aforementioned

contractors, as parts of the DistributedCommon Ground Station (DCGS).The anticipated upgrade candidateplanned for functional integrationinto the two subsystems is the ASIP.ASIP development will proceed thru2007. SOL FA8707-05-R-3500, POCis Diane O’Neil, tel: (781) 377-2388,email: [email protected].

Program CostsIn 2006, the Air Force was budget-

ing about $400 million for the ASIPproduction program, which wouldbuy about 25 systems for GlobalHawk at $15.4 million per system,with full rate production from 2009through 2015.

Full System Flight Testing Be-gins

In January 2007, ASIP flight test-ing began aboard a USAF U-2, sched-uled to run through late 2007.Northrop Grumman is under contractto provide five developmental ASIPsystems, with two more planned forthe U-2. The fourth system will begintesting on a Global Hawk in late 2007,and the fifth is designed for ASIP sus-tainment activities.

The three U-2s have been ex-pected to be available for operationalmissions from late 2008, but in Au-gust 2007 the Air Force claimed thatthey had no plans for operational de-ployment of U-2 with ASIP. CurrentU-2s carry Raytheon’s RAS-1RSIGINT system.

ASIP for Army ACS?In January 2007, Northrop

Grumman officials stated they areseeking other applications for ASIP,and one of the most obvious would beas an interim solution for the Army’scancelled Aerial Common Sensor(ACS) program.

Merlin SIGINT Tested forBAMS

In mid-2007, the Navy tested a Si-erra Nevada Merlin SIGINT systemon one or both of its RQ-4A GlobalHawks. The Navy currently has noSIGINT requirement for BAMS, but

it could include ASIP or another sys-tem eventually.

U-2 ASIP Spares ContractIn May 2007, The Air Force Aero-

nautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, issuedNorthrop Grumman’s Mission Sys-tems a $26.1 million FFP contract topurchase U-2 ASIP support equip-ment, including depot level spares,test equipment, High band System(HBS) refurbished equipment, andback shop support equipment, in sup-port of ASIP U-2 fielding. The workis being performed in San Jose, CA.Contract funding is to come from theAir Force Aircraft Procurement(APF) account (FA8620-07-C-4018).

ASIP 1C/2C Development Con-tract

In May 2007, the ASC announcedit intends to award a contract toNorthrop Grumman Space and Mis-sion Systems for the rapid develop-ment, integration, and testing of afieldable, scaled, communication in-telligence system based on the ASIParchitecture, for the MQ-1, MQ-1X,MQ-9 and RQ-4B (Block 30 I) Un-manned Aerial Systems. The AirForce Distributed Common GroundSystem (DCGS) will command andcontrol the ASIP 1C/2C sensors usinginterface standards established on thebaseline ASIP program. SOL isFA8620-07-C-4020, due June 2007.Direct all routine non-technical issuesto Mr. Brad Penn, tel : (937)904-7149, e-mail: [email protected], and for technical issuescontact Mr. John Frey, tel: (937)255-5999, e-mail: [email protected].

ASIP/1C/2C Production PlansIn August 2007, the USAF

planned to equip all Predator andPredator-B UAVs with the wiringnecessary to receive the ASIP 1C(MQ-1 Predator – one electronics“box”) or ASIP2C (MQ-9 Predator-B– two “boxes”), beginning with airvehicles leaving the production linein 2010. The full-up ASIP system for



U-2 and Global Hawk requires sevenor eight electronics “boxes”.

In August 2007, the Air Force wasalso considering whether to re-com-

pete the integration/installation con-tract, or award the contract to GeneralAtomics as planned. A decision is ex-pected by the end of 2007.

In August 2007, plans called forGlobal Hawk ASIP deployment andIOC in 2012.

Teal Group Analysis

SIGINT has become not only theprimary focus of electronic warfaretoday (along with infrared counter-measures systems), but it now garnersgenuine “A-list” funding for UAVs aswell as manned airborne platforms.

Because threats are constantly evolv-ing, and because detecting the IEDthreat is so dependent on SIGINT,continuing RDT&E and upgradefunding is needed. For example,$66.2 million is scheduled for ASIP

RDT&E in FY09 in PE# 0304260F,Proj. #5183, for “upgrades to meet theevolving threat.” Our forecasts beloware speculative.

Production Forecast


ASIPUSAF (Block 30 RQ-4B) — — — — — 1 2 4 4 4 4 19

Global Hawk Electronic Warfare Systems

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Not yet in competitionUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThere has been consideration of

equipping the Global Hawk with anelectronic warfare (EW) self-protec-tion system. Global Hawk is builtwith the interfaces necessary for such

a system, and test flights of the GlobalHawk with a Raytheon AN/ALE-50towed radio-frequency decoy wereconducted in the late 1990s.

There are currently no contracts tooutfit Global Hawk with a self-pro-

tection system, but enhancing surviv-ability has long been recognized.However, the US currently has no op-ponents who operate missile systemsthat could possibly reach a Globalhawk at 60,000 feet altitude.

Predator SIGINT (USAF)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Not yet in competitionUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewPEDS PE# 0304260F (Airborne

SIGINT Enterprise), Project #5182(Predator) supports design studies,engineering analysis, non-recurringengineering, and other efforts associ-ated with the integration and modifi-cation of Predator and Predator BSIGINT sensors and their associatedair and ground components.

Funding will begin efforts on an-tennas, receivers, processors, soft-ware development , a i rcraf tintegration and ground station up-grades to allow a persistent recon-naissance, surveillance, targeting,and acquisition capability againstmission specific threats. Develop-

ment of a networked capability toother SIGINT platforms will also beinitiated.

This project will provide thewarfighter with increased combat ca-pability as soon as technology andrisk achieve satisfactory levels.

Batfish TestesIn 2006, Raytheon’s experimental

Batfish ESM/SIGINT was testedaboard an early Predator B. The largesystem included two underwing podsand wingtip spiral antenna arrays.


nounced an interim requirement for a

Joint Airborne ISR Capability(JAIC), which would procure an un-determined number of MALE UAVsto serve on deployments in Afghani-stan and elsewhere. The RFP is to bereleased in early 2008, with IOCplanned for June 2009.

Mandatory JAIC sensor require-ments are a color E-O/IR/low lightlevel system, a laser target designator,and a SIGINT package. Additional“rated” requirements are for aSAR/GMTI and a weapon deliverycapability.

JAIC will essentially be anoff-the-shelf procurement, to be fol-lowed by a longer-term UAV programwith IOC in 2013-2016, the Joint Un-



manned Surveillance and Target Ac-quisition System (JUSTAS). ThePredator-B with the MTS-B, ASIPvariant, and Lynx SAR are the most

obvious systems, though IAI will alsoreportedly offer a Heron/Heron TPsystem.

UCAV EW & SIGINT Programs

US Air Force/Navy UCAV Electronic Warfare Systems

Status: Program CancelledManufacturer: N/AUnit Cost: N/A

See UCAV program description in

Electro-Optic/Infrared (E-O/IR)

Sensors chapter.

UCAV EW PlansThe US Air Force had envisioned

one of the first missions of the Block10 A-45 UCAV as a lethal Suppres-sion of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD)

platform, but by 2003 planned anon-lethal electronic attack role in-stead (lethal SEAD is already carriedout by the F-16CJ).

The Block 20/30 A-45 could havebeen developed for a “pre-emptive”or “reactive” SEAD role, or carry out“full electronic attack” missions,which would include information

warfare (computer and network at-tack) missions as well as tactical jam-ming. Some even see a directedenergy (microwave) attack capability.

In April 2004, Pentagon officialschose to prioritize electronics devel-opment for J-UCAS, choosing elec-tronic attack, sidelining Navypriorities for ISR.

US Navy UCAS-D SIGINT


Raytheon ALR-69 ESMPlanned

In August 2007, NorthropGrumman’s UCAS-D was to incorpo-rate a derivative of Raytheon’sAN/ALR-69U ESM system, as had

been planned for the J-UCAS, withfour upper and four lower antenna lo-cations to satisfy the Navy’s coveragerequirements.

Tactical UAV EW & SIGINT Programs

Tactical SIGINT Payload (TSP) (US Army)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: BAE Systems, Nashua, NHUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThe airborne element of the

Army’s bill ion dollar ProphetSIGINT program was designated theTactical SIGINT Payload (TSP) [wasDivision TUAV SIGINT Program(DTSP)], with three component ad-vanced development contractsawarded to Applied Signals Technol-ogy (AST), BAE Systems, andRaytheon in July 2001. A down-se-lect left BAE Systems and AST com-

peting in late 2003, with BAE Sys-tems winning the $27 million, 36month SDD contract in June 2004.Today, TSP development has shiftedaway from Prophet, and is insteadplanned for the Army’s Fire ScoutFCS Class IV UAV.

The Tactical SIGINT Payload(TSP) is an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV) mounted SIGINT sensor thatdetects radio frequency (RF) emitters.TSP initially developed sensors to de-

tect low-power COMINT radio emit-ters and provide directed ElectronicAttack (EA). TSP, a key FCS compo-nent, is capable of providing the Bri-gade Combat Team (BCT) LandCommander with an overwatch and apenetrating SIGINT system capableof detecting, identifying, locating,and providing geolocation informa-tion on RF emitters throughout theArea of Operations (AO).



The BCT commander will deployTSP to provide sensor coveragewhere FCS ground vehicles cannotperform the SIGINT mission due toradio line of sight blockage. TSP isdeveloping sensors for BCTapplications to detect low-powerradio emitters.

The SIGINT payload is scalableand designed to provide maximumflexibility for the BCT mission pro-file. TSP will provide near real time(NRT) actionable intelligence thatcan immediately be used in the com-manders’ decision cycle. The TSPelectronic emitter information will becorrelated with data from other sys-tems, e.g. Prophet and Aerial Com-mon Sensor (ACS), to provideprecise targeting information for im-mediate engagement. The TSP sen-sors are critical to providing fullcoverage Intelligence, Surveillanceand Reconnaissance (ISR) informa-

tion for Future Force capabilities forFCS and contributing to the Joint ISRnet.

TSP to BAEIn June 2004, BAE Systems,

Nashua, NH won the $27 million, 36month TSP SDD contract. BAE Sys-tems’ TSP is based on its AJCN sys-tem.

Army Adds EW Core Compe-tency

In early 2007, the US Army addedEW as a core competency for its sol-diers, reflecting the increasinglyubiquitous nature of electronic war-fare, from SIGINT to counteringIEDs.

TSP for Fire ScoutThe platform initially planned to

carry TSP was the Shadow 200TUAV, as the airborne element of the

Army’s Prophet EW system. But TSPis not currently small or light enoughfor the Shadpw, and the initial plat-form is planned as the FCS Class IVUAV – Fire Scout. Production couldbegin in FY08.

TSP UpgradesFuture versions of TSP will pro-

vide more COMINT and ELINT ca-pabilities. BAE Systems is workingon Sapphire, which may add a focalplane gate array (FPGA) to TSP.Communications jamming and weap-ons cueing are also likely upgrades.

TSP for Warrior? Shadow?As a scalable system, TSPcould be

enlarged for the Army’s Sky WarriorER/MP UAV. BAE Systems will alsocontinue working to shrink TSPenough for the Shadow TUAV.

Lightweight Modular Support Jammer (LMSJ) (USAF)

Status: Program CompleteManufacturer: BAE SystemsUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn late 2002, the Air Force Re-

search Laboratory (AFRL) began afour-year experimental phase of theLightweight Modular SupportJammer (LMSJ) program. LMSJ isintended to counter both communica-tions and radar threats at frequenciesfrom 20 MHz to 4 GHz.

But it seems development endedafter FY05 testing, when a special ca-pability high band antenna array aper-ture with wide bandwidth solid statepower amplifiers was demonstrated,along with a wide bandwidth jam-ming techniques generator. Hardwaremodifications and upgrades to thesystem also provided high band ex-citer coverage, and software modifi-cations to the software system neededfor demonstration of the high bandelectronic attack (EA) jamming sub-system were implemented. An ECbatt le management study for

distributed and networked EA wasalso performed.

LMSJ SolicitationIn May 2002, the Sensors Direc-

torate, Sensor Applications and Dem-onstrations Div., Electronic WarfareBranch at the Air Force ResearchLaboratory (AFRL/SNZW), WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, released the solicitation forresearch proposals for the LMSJ Crit-ical Experiment (CE) program. Theobjective of the LMSJ effort is to do arequirements analysis, design, de-velop, fabricate, ground (field) test,and demonstrate a f lyablebrass-board model of a flexible andmodular support jammer system.Maximum emphasis shall be placedon a scalable architecture hardwareconfiguration which has applicationto a wide range of host platform airvehicles from small expendable un-manned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to

fighter aircraft size external pods.One, or a few transmitter/aperturemodules may form the basic levelsupport jammer system in a smallexpendable or recoverable UAV.

The “front end” receiver subsys-tem for the LMSJ shall be, as a mini-mum, al l , or elements of theAFRL/SNZW Advanced ThreatAlert and Response (ATAR) digi-tal-based receiver flyable brass-boardnow undergoing development in alaboratory CE program. ATAR in-cludes an Electronic Attack (EA)jammer techniques generator, whichshall perform the jamming signal se-lection and generation functions forthe LMSJ brass-board.

The required ATAR receiver hard-ware will be furnished by the govern-ment to the LMSJ contractor. ATARdata and interface documentation willalso be provided by means of an asso-ciate contractor agreement in theLMSJ contract. The LMSJ system



shall be designed to effectively coun-ter both communications and radarthreats in the 20.0 Megahertz through4.0 Gigahertz frequency band, in oneor multiple sub-bands. Sophisticatedtechnologies and EA techniques shallbe developed to adequately nullifymodern threat radar andcommunications advancements.

Major technology and techniquesadvancements shall be also addressedin the areas of high power transmit ar-ray apertures, transmitter RF poweramplifier device applications, bothsolid state and vacuum electronics,and support jamming techniques andalgorithms. The brass-boarded hard-ware shall be fabricated and tested towithstand the rigors of a full flight testin a separate, future program, shouldsuch a program be eventually funded.Tasks to be completed in this effort in-clude a thorough analysis of the tech-nical and operational requirementsfor a support jammer to defeat the ra-dar and communications classes ofthreats in the above frequency bandand a definition of those threat driv-ers, which affect the overall system

architecture. SOL is PRDA-02-11-SNK, due 7/01/02. POC is StevenWillis (937) 656-9837, Fax (937)255-9074; David Shellabarger is theContracting Officer (937) 255-4863,Fax (937) 656-9074, email: [email protected], [email protected].

Plus Up for TestingIn April 2005, the Air Force Re-

search Laboratory (AFRL), WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, awarded BAE Systems a$5.1 million CPFF modification toprovide for additional work for theLMSJ 2005 Congressional Plus UpProgram. The program will accom-plish hardware and software modifi-cations and upgrades to the basicLMSJ system, to include totalend-to-end integration with the Ad-vanced Threat Alert and Response(ATAR) digital receiver, develop-ment and fabrication of a high bandtransmitter and active phased arrayantenna, and improvements to theElectronic Attack (EA) jammingmanager and techniques generator.

The work is to be performed byBAE Systems in Lansdale, PA, and byBAE Systems Information and Tech-nology in North Merrimack, NH, andis to be completed by October 2006.Ground testing and flight test demon-strations of the full system will beconcluded on a Small UAV at an EWtest range in Nevada, to further theevaluation of jammer performanceagainst realistic radar threats. Also in-cluded in the Plus Up effort is a thor-ough study of the feasibility andarchitecture for a Network CentricEW Battle Management concept,which would control an EAsystem-of-systems (F33615-02-C-1183).

LMSJ FutureThe LMSJ program was com-

pleted in late 2006, but future effortscould develop the Common SupportJammer, proposed to fabricate“stackable” amplifiers and antennamodules that could be integrated intofuture electronic attack systems.

Adaptive Joint C4ISR Node (AJCN) (USAF & US Army)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: BAE Systems, Nashua, NHUnit Cost: Undetermined

AJCN DevelopmentBAE Systems’ Adaptive Joint

Command, Control, Communica-tions, and Computer Intelligence andReconnaissance (C4ISR) Node(AJCN) was developed to providecommunications, COMINT, elec-tronic attack, and information opera-tions simultaneously, covering 30MHz to 3 GHz. AJCN was a $60 mil-lion, five-year Army, Air Force, andDARPA ACTD.

For the ACTD, BAE Systems builtfour systems, two 200-lb systems forUAVs, and two 850 lb. systems testedon Army KC-135 Big Crow test beds.The systems are modular, with re-duced power and frequency coveragefor the smaller systems, but the same

hardware building blocks and soft-ware. BAE Systems’ WolfPack min-iaturized EW unattended groundsensors, and the Tactical SIGINTPayload (TSP), will both either use orbe interoperable with AJCN.

Initial systems were planned forCOMINT only, but operational sys-tems could include full high- andlow-band coverage.

Program PlansIn FY05, the AJCN program ma-

tured payload functionalities, com-pleted payload integration, andinstalled payloads and antennas onthe Air Force’s Paul Revere and twoArmy Hunter aircraft. AJCN flighttests were conducted to verify opera-

tion of the payload and AJCN net-work, at the first Joint Military UserAssessment exercise.

In FY06, plans were to conductExtended User Evaluation (EUE)flights and provide sustainment sup-port for leave-behind equipment andsupport transition initiatives.

In FY07, the AJCN program willcomplete EUE and sustainment forleave-behind equipment.

The Army currently has no pro-duction plans for AJCN, but AJCNtechnology and modular systemshave seen application to otherSIGINT Army and Air Forceprograms.



US Marine Corps Electronic Attack


OverviewWith its 20 EA-6B Prowlers aging,

and no EF-18G Growlers to be pur-chased, the USMC is dedicated toproviding Electronic Attack (EA)from UAVs. With systems flying atlow altitudes on tactical UAVs, muchless power is needed for jamming,and a much smaller area will be af-fected, meaning less disruption offriendly communications.

PEAPLIn mid-2007, the Pioneer EA Pay-

Load (PEAPL) was tested aboard aPioneer UAV in Iraq and Afghani-stan. Two air vehicles carry a variety

of payloads, and have been flying realworld operations as a proof of con-cept demonstration. The system wasdeveloped by the AFRL and BAESystems, Nashua, NH. With Pioneerdue to be retired, the Marines arestudying transitioning PEAPL to itsnew Shadow TUAV.

Jam CubeAnother EA payload being devel-

oped is the BAE Systems Jam Cube,which looks like a small metal brickand weighs only 2.2 lbs. With an am-plifier and electronically steeredconformal antenna, total weight ishoped for at less than 11.3 lbs, which

would allow it to be carried on theShadow along with its other sensors.Jam Cube has evolved from BAE’sAdaptive Joint C4ISR Node (AJCN)project.

It is hoped that two Jam Cubes willbe ready for proof of concept testingaboard Shadow UAVs by 2009.

Another possible future use iscombining Jam Cube with the Army’sTactical SIGINT Payload (TSP)aboard a Shadow UAV, and linkingthe two so Jam Cube can rapidly ex-ploit SIGINT data gathered by TSP,without encrypting and transmittingdata to a ground processing facility.

FCS Class III & IV ESM Warning Systems (Army)


OverviewIn August 2006, Northrop

Grumman Electronic Systems, theFCS aerial sensor integrator, issuedan RFI for a survivability sensor suiteto warn FCS Class III and IV UAVsthat they have been acquired or tar-geted by surface-to-air or air-to-air

threat systems. Warnings should beissued before the host vehicle has ap-proached within the lethal radius sur-rounding the threat, so the UAV maytry to avoid the threat. When warn-ings are not issued in real time, the na-ture and approximate location of the

detected threat should be reported tothe host platform as soon as possible,so the information may be relayed tothe UAV’s ground controllers beforethe vehicle is exposed to hostile ac-tion. These sensors could be installedby the Army as soon as 2010.

Battlefield Helicopter Emulator (BHE) (DARPA)


OverviewIn February 2007, the Tactical

Technology Office (TTO) of the De-fense Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (DARPA), Arlington, VA,solicited innovative proposals for theBattlefield Helicopter Emulator(BHE) program. The goal of the BHEprogram is to develop small-scaletechnologies that can effectively em-ulate the acoustic and infrared signa-tures of a wide variety of helicopters,

from small scout to large utility heli-copters. The technologies developedin the program will be integrated ontoa surrogate, small unmanned aerialvehicle (UAV) to produce a low cost,expendable battlefield decoy. This ca-pability would aid in special opera-tions, provide anti-helicopter minelocation and engagement, and drawfire from enemy ground locations.This BAA shall remain open for one(1) year from the date of publication

on www.fedbizopps.gov andwww.fedgrants.gov. Although theGovernment may select proposals foraward at any time during this period,it is anticipated that the majority offunding for this program will be com-mitted during the first round of selec-tions. In order to be considered duringthe initial round, full proposals mustbe received by March 2007. SOL isBAA07-05.



Dragonfly COMINT (USN)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Northrop Grumman, San Diego, CAUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn May 2005, the Naval Air Sys-

tems Command (NAVAIR), PatuxentRiver, MD, released a notice of intentto issue a CPFF order with NorthropGrumman Corp., San Diego CA, onan other than full and open competi-

tion basis, under an existing Basic Or-dering Agreement (N000190-05-G-0009), to provide engineering andintegration services to demonstratethe Dragonfly COMINT payload on aNorthrop Grumman Fire Scout

VTUAV. The effort will determinethe non-recurring engineering re-quired to mount, integrate and operatethe payload while a part of the Navy’sVTUAV configuration. SOL isN00019-05-P-2TKBB7.

International UAV EW & SIGINT Programs

EuroHawk ISIS SIGINT System

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: EADSUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewThe EuroHawk’s primary mission

is to be SIGINT for European AirForces, with an EADS payload, nowbased on the larger RQ-4B GlobalHawk. Integration of the initialSIGINT payload on the RQ-4A wascompleted in July 2002. The first re-quirement for EuroHawk is to replaceGermany’s four 40-year-old standoffSIGINT Breguet Atlantique aircraft.

In mid-2006, Northrop Grummanand EADS had signed memoranda ofunderstanding between the US andGerman governments to establish aframework for the interoperability ofthe Global Hawk systems.

Initial RequirementsThe EuroHawk was envisioned as

a naval reconnaissance version of theGlobal Hawk which substituted anELINT package for the ISS. Germanywas also considering a follow-on buyof up to six more EuroHawks whichwould be fitted with a syntheticaperture radar.

Plans to conduct trials of a GlobalHawk fitted with an EADS sensorpackage were delayed due to the com-mitment of the aircraft to combat op-

erations in 2003, but a Global Hawkwas finally deployed to Germany inOctober 2003 for a series of six testflights.

Initial Testing CompleteIn November 2003, the sixth and

final test flight of the EADS-devel-oped SIGINT demonstrator payloadtook place aboard a Global HawkUAV over Germany. More than 30hours of flight tests from October toNovember 2003 proved safe opera-tion at 45,000 feet, above Europe’scongested airspace.

However, a decision to proceedwith the program would be taken only“within three years”, according tosources. This indicates both the lackof immediate funding for SIGINTprograms, and the likelihood of lim-ited sensor buys going to Europeanmanufacturers. EADS is almost guar-anteed any German procurements.

Atlantiques Retired Early?In 2004, the German navy an-

nounced plans to retire its fleet ofAtlantique maritime patrol aircraftsooner than expected, and as an in-

terim solution to purchase surplusDutch P-3C Orion aircraft . Anavalized EuroHawk would presum-ably replace these, although the radarhas not yet been developed.

Updated ISIS ELINT/COMINTPayload

For the new, larger RQ-4B (Block20), EADS is developing a new, 30kHz-30 GHz Integrated Signals Intel-ligence System (ISIS) payload for theLuftwaffe, designed to performELINT and COMINT functions. Thecompany will also provide groundstations to receive and analyze thecollected intelligence.

EuroHawk ContractIn February 2007, EuroHawk

GmbH (a 50/50 team of NorthropGrumman and EADS) signed a 430million Euro contract for the develop-ment, test, and support of fiveEuroHawks, including sensors andground stations. The first air vehicle(a “demonstrator) is scheduled for de-livery in 2010, with the other fourplatforms by 2014.



UK Watchkeeper SIGINT: Soothsayer

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Lockheed Martin UK, London, EnglandUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn August 2003, the UK Ministry

of Defense (MoD) awarded a contractvalued at more than $220 million toLockheed Martin UK (London, UK)(Neale Prescott is director of businessdevelopment) for the provision ofnext-generation EW systems for Brit-ish land forces, under the Soothsayerprogram. Soothsayer will provide in-tegrated ELINT, COMINT, and elec-tronic-countermeasures (ECM)capabilities, similar to the US Prophetprogram, for the British Army andRoyal Marines. The new system, ini-tially with both mobile and vehi-cle-mounted variants, will interceptand monitor a variety of enemy sig-nals , with an emphasis oncommunications, and will providegeo-location data.

Soothsayer is also planned forUAV platforms, probablyWatchkeeper, as soon as feasible.

Soothsayer will rely heavily oncommercial, off-the-shelf (COTS)

products and technology, with a keeneye toward interoperability betweenSoothsayer; other related intelli-gence, surveillance, target-acquisi-tion, and reconnaissance (ISTAR)programs; and coalition forces. Par-ticular attention is being paid to mak-ing Soothsayer compliant withISTAR programs such as the Cooper-ative Engagement Capability (CEC),Watchkeeper, and the Fire ControlBattlefield Information System Ap-plication, in order to enable datafusion across the battlespace andacross services.

Soothsayer systems will cover abroad SIGINT spectrum range, fromHF communications to 40 GHz. ECMcapabilities, however, will addressonly communications frequencies.

Soothsayer systems are to beginentering service in 2006, replacingthe existing Thales Sensors (Crawley,UK) Meerkat-S Interim Non-Com-munications ESM (INCE) and Odette

systems. The new systems will even-tually be fitted onboard the UK’splanned Future Rapid Effects Systemvehicles, but the first units will be car-ried by 6x6 trucks. Current plans callfor the acquisition of more than 50Soothsayer systems.

Lockheed Martin (UK) is under-stood to be relying heavily on its unitsin the US – especially for ELINT –thus providing a possible “point ofentry” for other US companies. Thefirst Soothsayer vehicles will not beequipped with the final version of thesystem. Future upgrades are planned,such as the integration with airborneplatforms noted above.

One of Watchkeeper program’sbiggest selling points is its dual pay-load system, allowing a combinationof E-O/IR, SAR, and SIGINT sen-sors. The UAV is based on Elbit’sHermes 450.

TRC 274 & TRC 6200

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Thales Land and Joint Systems, FranceUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn mid-2007, Thales was promot-

ing i ts 20 MHz-3,000 MHzmulti-mode TRC 274 communica-

tions jammer and 2 MHz-3,000 MHzTRC 6200 intercept and direc-tion-finding equipment for UAVs.

Top Scan

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Rafael, Haifa, IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewRafael (Haifa, Israel) has devel-

oped a new 0.5-18 GHz podded air-borne electronic support measures(ESM) direction-finding and local-ization system, especially for UAVsand helicopters. Top Scan is alow-weight ESM system designed to

detect , ident ify and locateground-based emitters with highaccuracy.

Rafael will not disclose the sys-tem’s accuracy, apart form saying it is“better than 2 degrees”. Top Scanweighs 15kg (33lb), and a smallerversion for UAVs has also been de-

veloped. Rafael says Top Scan’s algo-rithms allow the system to avoidambiguity and multipath interference,and to handle dense electromagneticenvironments. The system wasavailable in mid-2007.



Skyfix SIGINT Suite

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Elbit Systems, Israel; Elisra, Israel; Tadiran Electronic Systems, IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined

OverviewIn July 2006, at the Farnborough

Air Show, Elbit Systems unveiled theSkyfix integrated UAV electronic in-telligence-gathering suite, being de-veloped for an unnamed Israeligovernment agency.

The system incorporates thesub-22 kg, 1-18 GHz ElisraAES-210/V combined electronic sup-port measures (ESM)/ELINT direc-

tion-finding system and a newTadiran Electronic SystemsCOMINT suite. The Elisra system is abroadband, targeting-quality ESMsystem that can fit into a larger TUAVlike an IAI Searcher or Elbit’s Hermes450. Unlike earlier systems, which re-lied on ground-based computers to lo-cate targets based on raw signal datafrom the UAV, it can resolve the tar-get’s location on board the UAV and

compare the signal to an onboardthreat library.

The suite comprises two spiral an-tennas mounted in wingtip pods andtwo interferometer arrays mounted inpods attached to inboard winghard-points. The COMINT suite in-cludes eight antennas mounted on awing suspended beneath the ElbitHermes 450 UAV’s fuselage.

Skyfix was available in mid-2007.

EL/K-7071 COMINT/DF & EL/L-8385 ESM/ELINT

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Elta Systems, IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined

Elta Systems offered these sys-tems in mid-2007 for use aboardMALE UAVs such as the Heron.

Skyfix COMINT/DF

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Tadiran, IsraelUnit Cost: Undetermined

In mid-2007, Tadiran was offeringits 25 kg, 30 MHz-3 GHz Skyfix sys-

tem, which has been tested aboard aHermes 450 UAV.

Recent EW Solicitations and RDT&E Programs

Sensor System R&D ContractsIn May 2007, NAVAIR announced

it was awarding contracts to five com-panies to continue research on sensordevelopment. Receiving follow-oncontracts were L-3 Communications’Titan Corp. in Mount Laurel, NJ;RBC in Alexandria, VA; Sabre Sys-tems in Warminster, PA; Navmar Ap-plied Sciences in Warminster, PA; andBAE Systems’ Applied Technologiesin Rockville, MD. NAWC-AD-Patuxent River issued modificationsthat increase the ceiling for each ofthe holders of ID/IQ CPFF contractsfor the development of sensor sys-tems and equipment. The add-ons in-crease the ceiling for present ID/IQcontract holders to $200 million: Ti-

tan ($96.1 million); RBC ($111 mil-lion); Sabre Systems ($117.2 mil-lion); Navmar Applied Sciences($113.2 million); and BAE Systems($117.9 million). It is estimated that80 percent of the work will be con-ducted at contractor facilities (asshown above), with the remaining 20percent at NAWC-AD-PatuxentRiver, MD. There is a five-year order-ing period, which is to expire in April2009. Contract funding will comefrom the Navy Force Protection Ap-plied Technology program (PE#0603123N), under contractN 0 0 4 2 1 - 0 4 - D - 0 0 8 0 — Ti t a n ;N 0 0 4 2 1 - 0 4 - D - 0 0 8 1 — R B C ;N 0 0 4 2 1 - 0 4 - D - 0 0 8 2 — S a b r eSystems; N00140-04-D-0083—

Navmar Applied Sciences;N00421-04-D-0084—BAE Systems.

Open-Ended Sensor Technol-ogy BAA

In June 2007, the AFRL, WrightResearch Site, Wright-PattersonAFB, OH, released a BAA solicita-tion covering sensor technologyRDT&E, open-ended BAA(STROEB). SOL is BAA-04-03-SNK, POC is Noelle Spalding, tel:(937) 656-9837, fax: (937) 255-8100.David Shellabarger is the ContractingOfficer, tel: (937) 255-4863, fax:(937) 656-9074. Email: [email protected] .mil , [email protected].





C4I Systems

Market Overview

Definitions

Data links are crucial for UAV op-erations, and development is acceler-ating as sensors provide orders ofmagnitude more data. This sectionprovides analysis and forecasts of allimportant radio frequency (RF) datalink programs for US services (manyof which also sell well internation-ally), even if they are only in part re-lated to UAVs. Teal Group forecaststotal funding for US-developedand/or produced data links of at least$1.5 billion annually throughout ourforecast period, rising from $1.5 bil-lion in FY08 to $2 billion in FY16.There is much RDT&E and procure-

ment funding for small programs anddevelopment programs, which in-clude much UAV-applicable funding.Minor programs alone (apart fromJTIDS and MIDS, CEC, the Im-proved Data Modem [IDM], andEPLRS/SADL) will be worth morethan $1 billion in FY07 and FY08.This primarily includes Link-16funding, but also several importantresearch Program Elements.

Programs covered in this sectioninclude Tact ical Data Links(TDL)/Link-16, Smart Tanker/ROBE(Link-16/Satellite), Common DataLink (CDL), Tactical Common Data

Link (TCDL) [especially importantfor UAVs], TCDL-Network(TCDL-N), Communications DataLink System (CDLS) (was CommonData Link-Navy [CDL-N]), TacticalControl System (TCS) and other UAVoperating systems, and selected newtechnology development programs,including RF/Optical data links, theWeapons Data Link NetworksACTD, and other new technologies.We also cover the “big name” pro-grams — JTIDS and MIDS, CEC, theImproved Data Modem (IDM), andEPLRS/SADL.

System Type Overview

There are fundamental differencesin the designed purpose of different

data links. In US service, Tactical

Data Links (TDL)/Link-16/ATDLS/

JTIDS/MIDS/EPLRS/SADL/IDM

(EPLRS/SADL/IDM are notLink-16) serve as situation awarenessaids and communications/intelli-

gence data links. These data links arefairly small and limited in capabili-ties, and will be procured in the thou-sands, for all platforms down toone-man fighter aircraft. Reconnais-sance data can be received (or trans-mitted) by an equipped platform, but

only for limited applications – usuallyto aid real-time decision-making.

Amuch more sophisticated type of

data link, the Cooperative Engage-

ment Capability (CEC) (see report)was developed to improve the USNavy’s anti-air warfare capability, bycoordinating information from all air


UAV C4I Funding ForecastRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US

*TDL/L-16/ATDLS/JTIDS/MIDS/EPLRS/SADL/IDM; **CDL/TCDL/TCDL-N/CDL-N


500

1,000

1,500

2,000


Tactical Links* CEC Recce Links**

TCS/UAV Op Sys Other US Other Int'l

and ship sensors into a single, realtime, composite track picture that hasfire control quality. CEC is more ca-pable than JTIDS/MIDS, with higherdata throughput rates and fundamen-tal qualitative differences. Primaryamong these is that all units in theCEC system share sensor measure-ment data, forming a composite radartrack. In the Link-16/JTIDS/MIDSsystem, data provides situationawareness, but each unit develops itsown target track from its own sensors.Thus, targeting is conducted by eachplatform, and is much more suscepti-

ble to jamming and other forms oftrack degradation. If CEC type datalinks continue to shrink and getcheaper, and bandwidth limits areovercome, they could eventuallyreplace the Link-16 type.

Other developments are workingto improve data links for transferring

reconnaissance data. The Common

Data Link (CDL), Tactical Common

Data Link (TCDL), and the earlier

TCDL-N and CDL-N, are designed tosend vast quantities of signals or im-age intelligence data (SIGINT orIMINT), typically from aircraft such

as U-2s, JSTARS, and UAVs. As withall data links, interoperability is key,at least within the “type” of link. CDLtype ISR data is not combined intocomposite target tracks, but withtechnological advances, this couldalso be in the future.

One other major type of data link

in development today is the Tactical

Control System (TCS) and other UAV

operating systems, command andcontrol systems for UAVs and theirsensors.

Teal Group Analysis

Analysts predict at least a 250%growth in Defense Department band-width needs over the next decade, forhigher capacity and more complexdata devices. Commercial wirelessusers have also pushed the govern-ment to give up additional bandwidthof the DoD-assigned spectrum to usefor third-generation cellular technol-ogy. These needs will continue toincrease.

The USAF estimates Defense De-partment emitters use only about 1%of the available spectrum, due to inef-ficient legacy systems and allocationprocedures. With a fixed total band-width, the DoD needs to more effi-ciently use the spectrum available.

In Afghanistan, for the first time incombat, live reconnaissance imagerywas transmitted from Predator UAVsto US F-16 and F/A-18 fighters andAC-130 gunships, allowing attackson Taliban and al-Qaeda targets al-most immediately. In OperationDesert Storm, it took hours or days toget imagery from Pioneer UAVs toaircraft and troops.

Data linking has continued togrow, and reaction times have contin-ued to shrink, in Iraq since 2003. Theincreased need for time-critical tar-geting of mobile assets will drive thedevelopment of more and better datalinks.

In the US, Link-16 systems willearn the majority of funding over thenext decade, dominating any othersingle type of data link system.Through FY07, much of this is USAir Force Link-16 RDT&E funding,which will not only develop hardwaresystems for platforms such as theF/A-22 and B-1B, but will researchcontinuing improvements in integra-tion and interoperability, and curingor minimizing the bandwidth prob-lems discussed above. See especiallyPE# 0207434F, Link-16 Support andSustainment, worth about $200 mil-lion annually from FY05 onwards.There will be much basic research,funded by more than $600 million inRDT&E spending per year in FY07and FY08. Much of this funding isstill uncontracted and available, al-

though exactly what portions of whatProgram Elements is difficult todetermine.

We forecast a steady increase inundetermined data link RDT&Efunding through the decade, to keeppace with increasing bandwidth anddata transfer demands. This line cov-ers programs that will be announcedor expanded in the next ten years. Ourundetermined lines are in fact quiteconservative when compared to thePentagon’s plans for near-termLink-16 funding. If the DoD in-creases planned data link funding af-ter FY07 or FY08, there could be ahuge increase to our speculative fore-cast – just to maintain FY07/FY08levels.

Our undetermined procurementforecast also increases as UAV pro-duction ramps up and production ofCDL, TCS, and other data links be-gins in earnest. Many of these fundinglines are classified or not broken out;thus our undetermined line is bothlarge, and highly speculative.

Funding ForecastRDT&E (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16

JTIDS/MIDS 144 98 62 98 74 62 56 58 92 90TDL/Link-16 539 363 307 332 320 344 341 359 381 405ROBE 1 — — — — — — — — —EPLRS/SADL 18 15 8 6 4 2 — — — —IDM 13 10 8 2 4 8 2 — 2 —CEC 64 40 46 54 52 56 54 52 50 58


Page 224 C4I Systems

CDL/TCDL/TCDL-N 37 36 38 39 39 38 38 38 38 40TCS & UAV Operating Systems 70 80 90 90 100 100 100 90 90 100Undetermined Data Link FundingUS RDT&E 80 100 120 140 160 180 180 180 180 200

Total 966 742 679 761 753 790 771 777 833 893

Procurement (FY07 $ Millions)FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16

JTIDS/MIDS 144 141 152 150 148 166 164 158 144 162TDL/Link-16 135 99 113 125 127 152 158 176 181 202ATDLS 12 24 26 15 — — — — — —ROBE 20 20 — — — — — — — —EPLRS/SADL 42 48 42 28 18 12 10 6 4 —IDM 16 26 32 26 22 18 20 14 12 8CEC Data Link Component 9 13 15 17 16 16 15 16 16 14CDL/TCDL/TCDL-N 62 64 73 73 74 74 74 74 74 76TCS & UAV Operating Systems 86 91 120 138 160 160 160 160 160 160Undetermined Data Link FundingUS Procurement 100 100 110 110 120 120 140 160 180 200

Total 626 626 683 682 685 718 741 764 771 822

Other Available International RDT&E+Procurement (speculative)80 100 120 140 180 200 210 240 250 280

Data Link Programs

JTIDS and MIDS

Status: In ProductionManufacturers: Data Link Solutions L.L.C., Cedar Rapids, IA; ViaSat, Carlsbad, CA; EuroMIDSUnit Cost: $200,000 (MIDS-LVT, MIDS-FDL terminal)

OverviewThe Multifunctional Information

Distribution System (MIDS) is ajam-resistant, secure, voice and datacommunications system, based on theLink 16/TADIL-J data link. It is es-sentially a third generation JTIDS(Joint Tactical Information Distribu-tion System) system, smaller and lessexpensive but with equivalent capa-bilities. MIDS includes a secure voicechannel, but more importantly it auto-matically creates a common naviga-tional grid for its subscribers,providing situation awareness andcommand and control capabilities.

MIDS was being developed by aninternational consortium, MIDSCO,led by the United States, but also in-cluding France, Germany, Italy, andSpain. In 1994, the US DoD awardeda $342 million EMD contract toMIDSCO for the MIDS-LVT (-LowVolume Terminal). The F-15, F-16,F/A-18, Rafale, Eurofighter EF2000,

and many other platforms will receiveMIDS terminals.

After a program stoppage in 1999,and due to the need for absolute con-nectivity, an international agreementcompleted in early 2001 arranged forthree recognized MIDS producers.Data Link Solutions (Rockwell Col-lins and BAE Systems) and ViaSat(partnered with Harris and Xetron)produce MIDS in the US. EuroMIDSproduces MIDS in Europe, includingThales (France), EADS (Germany),MID (Italy), and Enosa (Spain). Thethree companies compete for con-tracts, but use exactly the same soft-ware (the fact that all procurementsmust go through SPAWAR in the UShas hurt EuroMIDS’ competitive-ness). This agreement will last for 9years.

A new development, with $140million in RDT&E contracts awardedto Data Link Solutions and ViaSat inDecember 2004, is the MIDS-JTRS(Joint Tactical Radio System).

MIDS-JTRS is designed to beplug-and-play interchangeable forUS Navy and US Air Force platformsthat use MIDS-LVT, while accommo-dating future technologies andcapabilities.

We estimate more than 4,000 addi-tional MIDS terminals will be builtover Teal Group’s ten year forecastperiod, with a total program value ofalmost $2 billion.

MIDS-JTRSProj. #P773, MIDS, in PE#

0604771D8Z previously supportedthe RDT&E of MIDS-LVT. The lastyear of funding, FY05, supported theclose out of MIDS-LVT developmentas the DoD began the migration to theJoint Tactical Radio System (JTRS).

The technical objective of theMIDS-JTRS program is to transformthe current MIDS-LVT into afour-channel, Software Communica-tions Architecture (SCA) compliantJTRS, while maintaining current


C4I Systems Page 225

Link-16 and tactical air navigationsystem (TACAN) functionality.MIDS gathers data from multiplesources which provide the platformwith a digital view of the battlefield.The MIDS-JTRS is designed to beplug-and-play interchangeable forUS Navy and US Air Force platformsthat use MIDS-LVT, while accommo-dating future technologies and capa-bilities. Improvements such asLink-16 enhanced throughput,Link-16 frequency remapping, andprogrammable crypto will also be re-alized in the MIDS-JTRS design. Inaddition to Link-16 and TACANfunctionality, the MIDS-JTRS Coreterminal includes three 2 MHz to 2GHz programmable channels that al-low the warfighter to use multiplewaveforms currently in developmentwith the JTRS Network EnterpriseDomain (JNED).

Total Core terminal program re-quirements include: Terminal devel-opment, F/A-18 Level 0 integration,software hosting (Operating Environ-ment/Waveforms), and productiontransition. The Tactical TargetingNetwork Technology JTRS PlatformCapability Package (TTNT JPCP) in-volves integration of an advanced lowlatency, high bandwidth, internet pro-tocol-capable waveform that meetsTime Sensitive Targeting NetworkingTechnology requirements. TTNTJPCP program requirements includehardware and software changes, ter-minal development, qualification,and production transition. The TTNTJPCP is the integration of the TTNTwaveform as the specif icimplementation of the Joint AirborneNetworking - Tact ical Edge(JAN-TE) waveform.

MIDS-JTRS development will beinitiated as a major modification toMIDS-LVT using an EngineeringChange Proposal to the existing pro-duction contracts. Development ef-forts include the Phase 2B Coreterminal and the Phase 2C/2D TTNTJPCP. The US prime contractors fromthe MIDS-LVT program (Data LinkSolutions and ViaSat) will coopera-tively design and develop the Coreterminal and TTNT JPCP. Each primecontactor will build and qualify Pro-duction Verification Terminals. TheUS will implement a continuous com-petition strategy between DLS andViaSat, which will be maintainedthroughout the MIDS-JTRS produc-tion phase. This strategy wassuccessfully used on MIDS-LVTproduction.

USAF Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16

Status: In ProductionManufacturers: Various

OverviewTactical Data Links (TDL) inte-

gration employs the Joint Tactical In-formation Distribution System(JTIDS) and the Multifunction Infor-mation Distribution System (MIDS)terminals on multi-service platformsto broadcast Link-16 information toall participants operating within thenetwork. TDLs include but are notlimited to: Link-16, Link-11, Situa-tional Awareness Data Link (SADL),and Variable Message Format(VMF). Multiple contractors work ondifferent hardware systems.

Tactical Data Links are used in acombat environment to exchange in-formation such as messages, data, ra-dar tracks, target information,platform status, imagery, and com-mand assignments. TDLs provideinteroperability, local and global con-nectivity, and situational awareness tothe user when operating under rapidlychanging operational conditions.TDL terminals are used by the AirForce, Army, Navy, and MarineCorps Theater Command and Control

(C2) elements, weapons platforms,and sensors.

TDL Special Program OfficeThe Chief of Staff of the Air Force

(CSAF) on April 17, 2001 approvedthe management of TDL as a MajorSystem Acquisition Program. In or-der to effectively manage the pro-gram, the Tactical Data Links SystemProgram Office (SPO) was stood upat Electronic Systems Center (ESC),Hanscom AFB, MAon 29 May, 2001.Funding for Tactical Data Links wascontained in PE 0604754F, TacticalData Link Integration; PE 0604779F,Tactical Data Link Interoperability;and PE 0207434, Link-16 Supportand Sustainment. This funding wasconsolidated into PE 0207434F, forthe purpose of supporting the TacticalData Link Infrastructure.

Utilization of Link-16 in a joint en-vironment requires the integration ofterminals (eg., JTIDS or MIDS) intohost platforms, and interoperabilityof Link-16 nets across all deployed

joint and allied platforms. TheTactical Data Links (TDL) SystemProgram Office (SPO) performs sev-eral cross-platform activities to helpensure proper integration of Link-16capabilities and interoperability ofLink-16 nets. In addition, the SPO hasmanagement responsibility for theAir Force’s Air Defense System Inte-grator (ADSI) systems. The SingleIntegrated Air Picture (SIAP) effortswill lead to the joint development ofimprovements to TDLs to better sup-port the warfighter by ensuring the airpicture is composed of common,continual, unambiguous tracks of allairborne objects.

JINTACCSThe Joint Interoperability of Tacti-

cal Command and Control Systems(JINTACCS) Program ensures plat-form/system interoperability throughthe development and management ofthe joint/combined architecture, tacti-cal information exchange require-ments (IERs), interface definitions



and protocols, platform/system im-plementations, employment con-cepts, and operating procedures. Thisincludes the coordination of all TDLand United States Message Text for-mat (USMTF) message standardsconfiguration management, plat-form/system interoperabi l i tyassessments and interoperabilitycertification testing.

Platforms GrowingThe number of Air Force plat-

forms hosting TDLs are expandingfrom C2 aircraft (E-3, E-8, etc.) intothe fighter, bomber, sensor, tanker,airlift and other tactical fleets (F-15,F-16, F/A-22, Rivet Joint, B-1, B-2,B-52, etc.). Utilization of TDLs in ajoint environment requires the inte-

gration of terminals into these hostplatforms and interoperability of TDLnetworks across all deployed jointand allied platforms.

JSS Multi-TADIL ArchitectureContract

In January 2007, the 653rd

Elec-tronic Systems Wing (ESW), AirForce Electronic Systems Center(ESC), Hanscom AFB, MA, an-nounced it was awarding a $9.8 mil-lion contract to Northrop Grumman’sDefense Mission Systems in Reston,VA, to fund tasks for the Joint Inter-face Control Office (JICO) SupportSystem (JSS). The action was re-leased as a follow-on to an FY04CPAF, FFP, and T&M contract. TheJSS is an automated tool that inter-

faces with existing tactical systems toprovide the means to dynamicallyplan and manage all aspects of aMulti-TADIL Architecture (MTA).The JSS enables the JICO, taskedwith the management of the Joint andCoalition tactical data links pipesthrough which it flows. There arethree major components of the JSS,including the Common Core Capabil-ity (COC), Full Expeditionary Capa-bility (FEC), and Local/Remote DataRepository (JDR). The action exer-cised 13 options and provided incre-mental funding for five contract lineitems. The work is to be performed inReston, VA, and is to be completed inSeptember 2009. Contract fundingwill come from OPA (FA8725-04-C-0007/PO35).

US Navy Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16

Status: In ProductionManufacturers: Various

OverviewThe US Navy’s Link-16 Improve-

ment project (PE# 0205604N TacticalData Links; Project #X1743) extendsLink-16 technological improvementsto existing and developing Navy datalink systems, including Link-11 andLink-22. Near term Link-11 improve-ments include: Mobile UniversalLink Translator System (MULTS)upgrade, Common Shipboard DataTerminal Set (CSDTS), Link-11Baseline Freeze message standardwork, and the NATO ImprovedLink-11 (NILE) Project. Link-22 willpass TADIL-J data elements beyondthe line of sight (HF) using a Time Di-vision Multiple Access (TDMA) pro-tocol and the improved Link-11waveform. The Common Data LinkMonitoring System(CDLMS) will beupgraded to Next Generation Com-mand and Control Processor (C2P) toaccommodate the higher CPU speeds,update rate and memory capacity re-quired for multi-TADIL processingfunctions. The Multi-TADIL Capa-bility (MTC) is the initial phase of theNext Generation C2P architecture.Next Generation C2Pwill be based on

open system hardware and softwarearchitecture, providing a system ca-pable of supporting critical data linkfunctions, including Link-22,Link-16 Joint Range Extension(JRE), and high throughput Link-16.These projects will allow moreeffective employment of fleet units byincreasing timeliness, accuracy, andcontent of tactical data transfer.

ATDLSThe Advanced Tactical Data Link

Systems (ATDLS) integration pro-gram develops new and improved ca-pabilities for Navy Link-16 users.Development of new capabilities inATDLS includes the Joint InterfaceControl Officer Support System(JSS), Common Link Integration Pro-cessing (CLIP), and DynamicNetwork Management (DNM).

The Joint Interface Control Officer(JICO) Support System (JSS) will bethe standard joint service toolset tomonitor and control Multi-TDL net-work architectures.

The Common Link IntegrationProcessing (CLIP) concept will intro-duce open system software required

to reduce life cycle support costs andcommercial off-the-shelf (COTS)technology refresh objectives andhigh throughput Link-16. The CLIPdevelopment concept addresses fun-damental interoperabil i ty andaffordability of tactical data link ca-pabilities through cooperative devel-opment program under both US Navyand Air Force sponsorship. The prin-cipal goal of CLIP is to develop amulti-TDL software capability thatcan be utilized by multiple platforms(aircraft, ships, and ground) for allservices.

Dynamic Network Management(DNM) will provide automatic recon-figuration of Link-16 networks thatrespond instantly to emergentwarfighter requirements in the field.DNM consists of different capabili-ties including network control tech-nologies (NCT), new terminalprotocols (time slot reallocation re-ceipt compliance (TSR RC) and Sto-chastic Unified Multiple Access(SHUMA)) and has been signifi-cantly expanded to include a more ro-bust TSR and adaptive multi-netting.The DNM capability will be inte-



grated into the JSS host system andalso JTIDS, MIDS, and Joint TacticalRadio System (JTRS) terminals.

This project also funds: (1) the de-velopment required to accommodateexpanded Link-16 operational capa-bilities for additional warfare areas,(2) development of automated net-work management aids, and (3) re-lated systems engineering andcontractor support efforts.

Other FundingThe Navy Tactical Data Links pro-

gram element (PE# 0205604N) alsofunds: (1) the development requiredto accommodate expanded Link-16operational capabilities for additionalwarfare areas, (2) development of au-tomated network management aids,and (3) related systems engineeringand contractor support efforts.

Multi-TADILIn March 2006, the Space and Na-

val Warfare Command’s (SPAWAR)Systems Center (SYSCEN),Charleston SC, issued Ultra Electron-ics a $6.4 million indefinite-deliv-ery/indefinite-quantity (ID/IQ)firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract tosupport the Multi-TADIL processor

and the Air Defense Systems Integra-tor programs. The contract is to pro-vide technical services and suppliesfor appointed systems being imple-mented with Navy Data Link Sys-tems, Communication Systems, and aCryptographic System. The work is tobe performed in Austin, TX (60%);San Diego, CA 915%); OCONUS(5%); Mayport , FL (2.5%);Bremerton, WA (2.5%); and is to becompleted by August 2009. Contractfinancing will come from the NavyOther Procurement (OPN) account.Included in the instrument are twoone-year options, which if exercised,would bring the cumulative value ofthe contract to $19.7 mil l ion(N65236-06-D-5180).

LINK-16 TDLIn March 2006, NAVAIR awarded

Sikorsky Aircraft a $16.3 millioncost-plus-incentive-fee (CPIF) deliv-ery order against the ongoing BOA tofund development efforts to completethe Link-16 TDL Full Scale Integra-tion (FSI) of the MH-60R andMH-60S aircraft. The work is beingperformed in Stratford, CT, and is tobe completed in September 2007(N00019-03-G-0003).

TDN DDS ContractIn November 2006, the Marine

Corps Systems Command(MARCORSYSCOM), Quantico,VA, issued General Dynamics C4Systems in Taunton, MA a $45.6 mil-lion FFP contract to provide for Tacti-cal Data Network (TDN) DataDistribution Systems (DDS) – Re-placements (TDN DDS-R). The con-tract was competitively awarded,with two proposals solicited and twooffers received. The work is to be per-formed in Taunton, MA, and is to becompleted in March 2007. Contractfunding will come from the MarineCorps Procurement (PMC) budget.The TDN DDS is a standardized suiteof high reliability Automated DataProcessing Equipment (ADPE) andcommunication systems designed foruse in a tactical environment. It con-sists of a network of gateways andservers interconnected with one an-other and their subscribers via a com-bination of common-user, long-haultransmission systems along with aLocal Area Networks (LANS) andswitched telephone systems(M67854-07-C-7010).

US Army Tactical Data Links (TDL)/Link-16

Status: UndeterminedManufacturers: Undetermined

Link 16 for Apache Block IIIIn July 2006, the US Army autho-

rized SDD for a link 16 capacity for

the Apache Block III upgrade, mak-ing it the first rotary-wing aircraft toget Link 16 (even the V-22 does not

have Link 16). Block III production isscheduled to begin in 2010.

Smart Tanker/ROBE (Link-16/Satellite)

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: MTC Technologies, Dayton, OH

OverviewThe first “Smart Tankers” flew in

2003, consisting of a KC-135Stratotanker with a MTC Technolo-gies, Inc. (Dayton, OH) Roll-On Be-yond Line-of-Sight Enhancement(ROBE) communications pallet. TheROBE pallet combines satellite andLink-16 links. Typically, the tanker

receives data from reconnaissanceplatforms like JSTARS and AWACS,via satellite, and uses a Link-16 inter-face to relay data to forward fighterand ground attack aircraft. Normally,Link-16 is restricted to line-of-sight,which is no more than 300 miles. Inother words, the tankers will extend

the line-of-sight MIDS/JTIDS andother Link-16 terminals.

ROBE consists of four cases ofequipment, each weighing less than140 lbs. It can be rolled on a tanker bytwo maintainers. Once set up (whichis very simple), it can be operated re-motely from the cockpit. Operation



consists of turning it on when the air-craft reaches cruising altitude.

The Air Force has alloted $39 mil-lion for 20 ROBE units and wiringmodifications to 40 KC-135Rs. It isuncertain if the Air Force will eventu-al ly equip more of their 545Stratotankers, but we are providing aspeculative continuing forecast. TheROBE contract was awarded in the

summer of 2002, with an operationaltest flight in October and final designreview in December.

ROBE Spiral 2As of November 2005, the Air

Force had equipped 40 KC-135s withROBE Group A (GPS/satcom an-tenna, permanent cabling, etc.), andprocured 20 Group B transferrable

electronics pallets, including theGateway Manager.

The planned Spiral 2 upgrade willinclude enhancements in data for-warding and satellite communica-tions, as well as more antennas.Current systems sometimes lose thesatellite link when banking in a turn.The Air Force plans to upgrade allsystems with Spiral 2.

EPLRS & SADL

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Command, Control, Communication and Information Systems, Fullerton, CA

OverviewThe EPLRS (Enhanced Position

Location Reporting System) is a digi-tal data communications systemwhich supports US Army tactical op-erations on the battlefield. The systemprovides the posi t ion of al lEPLRS-equipped tactical elements toauthorized users, and provides forpassing targeting data, combat orders,SITREPS, intelligence data, mes-sages, and other Command and Con-trol information. Productioncontinues, along with further devel-opment of the EPLRS waveform,which (among others) will be used forthe Joint Tactical Radio System(JTRS).

The SADL (Situational AwarenessData Link) is an Air Force programthat provides situational awareness,providing status reporting on allfriendly SADL platforms (altitude,fuel, airspeed, etc.) and informationon targets each plane sees, as well asinformation from ground EPLRS net-works ( including SINCGARS/GPS-equipped friendly forces with-out EPLRS). SADL capabilities areless than those of JTIDS, MIDS, orLink-16 data links, but have beenwell-received by Close Air Support(CAS) pilots, especially as a combatidentification source: the CAS pilotknows where all friendly vehicles andSINCGARS-equipped ground unitsare. The radio/data link backbone ofSADL is the EPLRS. SADL is cur-rently carried aboard USAF, USAFReserve, and Air National Guard

CAS F-16 Block 25/30 aircraft, andproduction is beginning for A-10s asthe second increment of the PrecisionEngagement (PE) upgrade.

EPLRS and the airborne SADL(Situational Awareness Data Link)have placed an increased emphasis onsituation awareness (SA), whichpartly responds to criticisms of theArmy’s limited combat identificationcapabilities. However, eventually anext generation system should beavailable (probably still JTRS), andwe don’t see significant productioncontinuing for more than another fewyears, at most.

Network Architecture Re-search

In May 2005, the Army Aviationand Missile Command (AMCOM),Redstone Arsenal, AL, announced aneed for the development of JointRange Extension Application Proto-col (JREAP), Link-16, and EnhancedPosition Location Radio System(EPLRS) models. These models willbe used in the simulation for specificMedium Extended Air Defense Sys-tem (MEADS) and Lower Tiernetwork architectures.

The work will be performed usingthe OPNET modeler simulation envi-ronment to model the network archi-tecture. This effort will procureconsulting services for the develop-ment of these models and their inte-gration into the OPNET modelerenvironment. This is a Sole Source re-quirement and wil l be

Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP). Theanticipated award will be to OPNETTechnologies, 7255 WoodmontAvenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.

SOL is W31P4Q-05-R-R020,POPis US Army Aviation and MissileCommand (Missi le) , ATTN:AMSAM-AC, Building 5303, MartinRoad, Redstone Arsenal , AL35898-5280.

EPLRS Goes to JailIn July 2005, CECOM awarded a

$97.4 million FFP contract to FederalPrison Industries in Washington, DCto fund the procurement ofSINCGARS, EPLRS, and theFHMUX Ik. Bids were solicited viathe World Wide Web in June 2005,and one proposal was received. Thework is to be performed in Danbury,CT (42%); Edgefield, SC (1%);Fairton, NJ (1%); Lexington, KY(3%); Lompoc, CA (1%); Loretta, PA(1%); Memphis, TN (42%); andPhoenix, AZ (8%), and is to be com-pleted by February 2007. Contractfunding will come from the ArmyOther Procurement (OPA) account(W15P7T-05-F-0073).

Production ContinuesCECOM obligated $19.5 million

under an FY97 firm-fixed-price(FFP) contract to Raytheon, to fundEPLRS production. The work is be-ing performed in Fullerton, CA(39.9%); Tempe, AZ (16.4%); LosAngeles, CA (16.2%); Forest, MS(13%); Lewisburg, TN (7%); Mel-



ville, NY (4.1%); Brenham, TX(3.3%); and Marlborough, MA(0.1%), and is to be completed by De-cember 2007. Contract funding willcome from the Army Other Procure-ment (OPA) account (DAAB07-97-C- 0775).

A-10s Get SADLAs part of the second increment of

the Precision Engagement (PE) up-grade, USAF A-10s will get a limitednumber of SADL systems (includingtwo 5” x 5” displays per aircraft) bythe end of 2006, to be used for testing

in 2007. If testing is successful, theAir Force would like to equip all 356A-10s with the system. Funding is al-ready in place for 216 A-10s. Originalplans called for only 40 systems, as aninterim measure until the Joint Tacti-cal Radio System (JTRS) was avail-able, but JTRS delays mean it couldbe years before they are available forA-10s.

A-10 SADL/IDM ContractIn April 2007, the Air Force Aero-

nautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, awarded

Lockheed Martin, Owego, NY a $70million ID/IQ FFGP, CPFF and T&Mdelivery order contract to finance thecontinuing development, integration,and production of the SADL and IDMefforts in support of ongoingA/OA-10C Precision Engagement(PE) Fleet Modernization and up-grade efforts. Contract financing willcome from the Air Force A-10 Air-craf t Procurement (APF) andRDT&E A-10 Squadrons element(PE# 0207131F) programs(FA8635-07-D-6015).

Improved Data Modem (IDM)

Status: In ProductionManufacturers: Innovative Concepts, Inc., McLean, VA; Symetrics Industries, Inc., Melbourne, FL

The IDM (Improved Data Mo-dem) is a lightweight six-channel tac-tical data modem providing digitalconnectivity between airborne andground platforms, including transfer-ring images, using existing radios andcrypto. It is the US Army’s standardhelicopter data link. More than 2,000systems have been produced.

IDM ContractsIn April 2005, AMCOM obligated

a delivery order amount of $2.8 mil-lion to Rockwell Collins in CedarRapids, IA as part of a $5.6 millioncost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contractfor IDM integration. This action con-tinues an effort begun in FY03 undera delivery order contract. The work isbeing conducted in Cedar Rapids, IA,and is to be completed by June 2005.Contract funding will come from the

Army Other Procurement (OPA)account (DAAH23-03-D-00150).

Also in April 2005, AMCOM obli-gated $8.5 million to Innovative Con-cepts in McLean, VA, as a follow-onto a FY04 CPFF contract, to providefor a software upgrade for the IDM.The work is being performed inMcLean, VA, and is to be completedApril 2006. Contract funding willcome from the OPA account(W58RGZ-04-C-0171).

IDM RDT&ERDT&E funding in PE#

0604201A provides for continuingdevelopment and integration effortsfor an Open Systems ArchitectureIDM solution compatible with theCommon Avionics Architecture Sys-tem (CAAS) cockpit for the CH-47Fand HH/UH-60M helicopters. FY06

and following year funding will pro-vide the foundation for future openarchitecture solutions which will re-duce space, weight, and power de-mands not only for the CAAS aircraft,but also mature technology for theAH-64D Block III. Funds also begindevelopment and integration of theFuture Combat Systems (FCS)database-to database exchangeinteroperability standard.

IDM for A-10In April 2007, the Air Force

awarded Lockheed Martin a $70 mil-lion contract for development andproduction of SADL and IDM effortsin support of the A/OA-10C PrecisionEngagement (PE) upgrade (seeEPLRS/SADL section or details).

CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability)

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: Raytheon Network Centric Systems Group, St. Petersburg, FLUnit Cost: $6 million (estimated $1 million for data link component)

OverviewThe Cooperative Engagement Ca-

pability (CEC) has been developed toimprove the US Navy’s anti-air war-fare capability, by coordinating infor-mation from all air and ship sensors

into a single, real time, compositetrack picture that has fire control

quality. CEC is more capable than theUS’s other multi-billion dollar datalink program, JTIDS/MIDS, with

higher data throughput rates and fun-damental qualitative differences.

The Navy plans to procure morethan 300 systems over the next tenyears (including the follow P3I miniCEC), for all Aegis ships, carriers,



E-2C Hawkeyes, and many otherplatforms.

An LRIP award was made toRaytheon in September 1999,OPEVAL was passed in September2001, and Milestone III was awardedin April 2002.

In April 2002, the USN announcedit would open a competition in FY03for CEC Block II, but in February2003, Raytheon and Lockheed Mar-tin announced they would team forthe program. Then, in August 2004,the Navy instead decided to imple-ment a Pre-Planned Product Improve-ment program (P3I) for CEC, in lieuof a new CEC Block II. The P3I miniCEC terminal, at half the price but fullcapabilities, was being tested in 2005and will likely see production soon.

It is very likely that continuingtechnology advances in the decadewill allow a system even smaller thanthe P3I mini CEC to see applicationon fighter-sized platforms, and poten-tially UAVs. This system could super-sede MIDS on thousands of fighters.We will not forecast it here, but tech-nology advances will probably resultin a very different, even unrecogniz-able, CEC system well before the endof our forecast period.

P3I CECIn August 2004, the Navy decided

to implement a Pre-Planned ProductImprovement program (P3I) forCEC, in lieu of a new CEC Block II.The P3I approach will modify currentequipment to meet reduced size,weight, cost, power and cooling ob-jectives. The P3I approach also sup-ports continuity for interoperabilityimprovements and program protec-tion, as well as supporting open archi-tecture initiatives, communicationsindependence, Joint Tactical RadioSystem (JTRS) compliancy, andGlobal Information Grid (GIG) hori-zontal fusion initiatives. P3I will pro-vide hardware which complies withCategory 3 Open Architecture Com-puting Environment (OACE) stan-dards with rehosted exist ingsoftware, which will be fieldedfleet-wide to allow affordable re-

placement of obsolete computing sys-tem components and eliminatedependencies on “closed” equipment,operating systems, and middleware.

Joint Track Manager UpgradeIn March 2005, General Dynam-

ics, Fairfax, VA, was competitivelyawarded the Systems Integrator/De-sign Agent (SI/DA) contract for thedevelopment, integration, and testingof the Joint Track Management(JTM) upgrade across applicableNavy Programs (e.g. DD(X), E-2,LCS). CEC will work with Joint Sin-gle Integrated Air Picture System En-gineering Organization (JSSEO) tojointly engineer a sensor measure-ment fusion and track managementalgorithm set of solutions which is vi-able for all services to implement, to-ward achieving optimuminteroperabi l i ty across thebattlespace. This effort supportsre-architecting of battleforce func-tionality in order to support theNavy’s Open Architecture functionalarchitecture which establishes a com-mon functional framework acrossNavy programs and platforms to re-duce development cost by promotingsoftware reuse. This architecture pro-motes interoperability by allowingfunctionality to be consistently engi-neered across the battlespace. TheOpen Architecture Track Manager(OATM) is derived from an Inte-grated Architecture BehavioralModel (IABM) through a series ofconfiguration deliveries which willinclude JTM functionality.

Initial Production EndingAs of June 2005, Raytheon had

105 CEC systems delivered or in pro-duction. Fifty-three (53) were lim-ited-rate production units (26shipboard, 27 airborne) and another28 were shipboard full-rate produc-tion units.

Seventy-three (73) systems werefielded on four aircraft carriers, 21Aegis destroyers and cruisers, andseven LPD/LHD transport ships. An-other 27 were fielded on E-2Cs, withone P-3 test unit. Raytheon also has a

mobile demonstration unit in aHumvee.

Also in mid-2005, Raytheon re-ceived a $49 million FY05 produc-tion contract from the Navy for itsfinal buy of the current CEC system.

UK Delays Procurement Deci-sion

In Mid-2005, the UK Royal Navydecided to delay introduction of theCEC, with the UK Main Gate invest-ment decision now postponed untilthe end of the decade. Plans hadcalled for CEC introduction aboardType 23 frigates from 2008 and Type45 destroyers from 2012.

Mini CEC TestingBy July 2005, Raytheon had in-

vested $10 million in developing miniCEC terminals. These are compact,lightweight versions that cost half asmuch as the current CEC system, butwhich have no operational differ-ences. They have an open architecturefor both hardware and software, al-lowing for easy upgrades, and useCOTS technologies. Current ship-board and airborne CEC systemsweigh upwards of 3,614 lbs. (ships)and 688 lbs. (aircraft), and cost asmuch as $6 million per system, de-pending on the quantity. The miniCECs weigh 1,770 lbs. and 420 lbs.,and cost about $3 million each.

The Navy was to test five miniCEC terminal prototypes, bothshipborne and airborne, later in thesummer of 2005, including systemsdeveloped by Space Applications In-ternational Corp. (SAIC). Phase I ofthe planned P3I development wasconducted in FY04 and is complete. Aproduction decision culminating in aproduction unit award was plannedfor FY06. The Navy intends to buyabout 200 mini CEC systems between2006 and 2010. Final production con-figuration will be available for FY06procurement.

Program PlansFuture AN/USG-2 and

AN/USG-3 systems will incorporatePre-Planned Product Improvements



(P3I) to take advantage of hardwaretechnology advances to provide a sys-tem with reduced cost, size, andweight. Additionally, alignment ofthe Joint Track Manager (JTM) archi-tecture is on track with a report out atthe Joint Single Integrated Air PictureSystems Engineering Organization’s(JSSEO) Integrated Architecture Be-havior Model (IABM) System Func-tional Requirements (SFR) reviewscheduled for August 2006. The En-gineering Assessment (EA) 5 Test

and Analysis Plan for Time Box (TB)30 was signed and delivered in May2006. The Navy Engineering Assess-ment Working Group (EAWG) Engi-neering Assessment ReadinessReview was held in June 2006. EA 5is on track with the final report antici-pated in September 2006. Future CECsystems will use the Sierra II chip forsecure data transmission. The SierraII replaces the CDH chip used in leg-acy AN/USG-2/3 systems. The Sierra

II chip is planned to be introducedinto the FY08 production line.

A revised Acquisition Strategywas approved August 2004 to reflectthe realignment of track managementfunctions with JSSEO. JSSEO’sIABM will ultimately replace theCEC Data Distribution System(DDS) which will be backward com-patible with the IABM. The IABMwill first be integrated with AEGIS aspart of their Spiral 4 upgrade and de-livered to the fleet by FY12.

Common Data Link (CDL) & Tactical Common Data Link (TCDL)

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturers: L-3 Communications, Salt Lake City, UT (CDL, Mini-CDL); Harris Corp., Palm Bay, FL (CDL);Cubic Defense Applications, San Diego, CA (TCDL, Mini-CDL); Rockwell Collins, Cedar Rapids, IA (Mini-CDL)

OverviewThe objective of the US Air

Force’s Common Data Link (CDL)effort is to define an interoperablecommand, control and communica-tions capability for intelligence andreconnaissance assets, to include bothmanned and unmanned platforms.CDL will achieve interoperable com-munications paths by employing anarchitecture based on developedhardware, software, and waveforms,to promote commonality among theServices. As the CDL ExecutiveAgent the Air Force is responsible forensuring design configurationcommonality and interoperability.

The CDL design will permit exist-ing and future reconnaissance assetsto operate worldwide, providing sen-sor data directly via point-to-point orvia point-to-multipoint broadcasts toground sites and airborne platforms,or via satellite or air-to-air relay whenthe asset and ground site are notwithin line-of-sight. This effort willintegrate commercial and other satel-lite communications into the avail-able satellite relay options, to ensuresufficient wideband data relay capa-bility. The system will have sufficientbandwidth to accommodate numer-ous sensors collecting Signals Intelli-gence (SIGINT), ImageryIntelligence (IMINT) (includingvideo), multi-spectral, and other data.

CDL concept and technology de-velopment and system developmentand demonstration efforts will sup-port continuous improvements andimplementation of line-of-sight andnetwork Command and Control, In-telligence, Surveillance and Recon-naissance (C2ISR) capabilities, toenable a joint global strike task force.Modular design allows for futuretechnology insertion. The commonal-ity of modular components reducesnon-recurring engineering and lifecycle costs to the DoD user.Interoperability provides for theexchange of data across service oragency boundaries.

TCDLNote: the term “A-series” refers to

full rate/capability CDL systems, and“T-Series” refers to TCDL (TacticalCommon Data Link) systems. CDLsatisfies NATO STANAG 7085 forpoint-to-point data links.

ScanEagle Data LinkIn December 2004, Boeing dem-

onstrated high-speed wireless com-munications technology developedby Harris aboard the ScanEagle UAVit is producing with The Insitu Group.The ScanEagle, enabled by HarrisType 1 classified SecNet-11 Plustechnology in the UAV’s avionicsbay, sent streaming video and

voice-over IP communications from aground control station over a securehigh-bandwidth network to the UAV18 miles away. The data was then in-stantaneously relayed to groundpersonnel six miles from the UAV.

TCDL Fire Scout ContractIn December 2005, Northrop

Grumman awarded Cubic Corp. an$11 million contract for 10.71 MbpsTCDL systems for the US NavyMQ-8B Fire Scout UAV.

TCDL for PredatorIn 2006, Predators began to be

fielded with the TCDL, and a systemwhich allows one pilot (with abackup) to control up to four aircraft.

TCDL & HIDL for WatchkeeperIn 2006, Thales subcontractor

UAV Tactical Systems awarded a $52million contract to Cubic DefenseApplications to supply Watchkeeperwith an advanced data link technol-ogy program. Cubic’s developedtechnology will include a TacticalCommon Data Link (TCDL) andHigh Integrity Data Link (HIDL).

Cubic has also subcontracted out aGB10 million ($19 million) deal withUltra Electronics to assist in develop-ment, which will allow the system totransfer time-critical information toground controllers from multiple



UAVs without mutual interference.HIDL, developed for com-mand-and-control of UAVs, will pro-vide a programmable backup link forthe TCDL.

SAR Data Transfer with CDL?In October 2006, the AFRL issued

Raytheon a $9.7 million ID/IF, CPFFcontract to determine the technicalfeasibility of using radar aper-tures/systems as a data link to trans-mit synthetic aperture radar (SAR)data (and other data types) using amodified CDL waveform (or equiva-lent) in near real time. The demon-stration will occur in three phases.The work is being performed in ElSegundo, CA, under a phased ap-proach to reduce technical, cost andschedule risk by determining techni-cal feasibility prior to awarding anyother task orders. The projected con-tract completion date is October2006. Contract financing will comefrom the Air Force AerospaceSensors R&D program (PE 0602204)FA8650-07-D-4502).

MH-60R CDL TestingIn November 2006, NAVAIR is-

sued Harris’ Government Communi-cations Systems in Melbourne, FL an$82 million CPAF/CPFF modifica-tion to an ongoing FFP contract tofund testing services for the MH-60RCommon Data Link Hawklink sys-tems. The award also includes inte-grated logistics support and analysis,sustaining engineering, training,non-recurring and recurring engi-neering changes, and technical, ad-ministrative, and financial data. Inaddition, the modification providesfor an option to cover the procure-ment of three AN/ARQ-58 and threeAN/SRQ-4(ku) systems. The work isbeing conducted in Melbourne, FL(50%), and in Wayne, NJ (50%), andis to be completed in January 2009.Contract financing is coming fromAPN (N00019-04-C-0130).

UAV Mini-CDL Terminal Devel-opment Contracts

In November 2006, the AFRLawarded ID/IQ, CPFF contracts total-ing $23 million to L-3 Communica-tions’ Communications Systems-West in Salt Lake City, UT, andRockwell Collins (teamed with CubicDefense Applications) in Cedar Rap-ids, IA, to finance the development ofthe preliminary design for the Minia-turized CDL. The effort is to includetrade studies and trade space analysis.Furthermore, the orders shall includeidentification of high-risk areas, andplans for mitigating these risks in fu-ture task orders. Task order 1 shallalso include, but not be limited to,modeling and simulation of the sys-tem, its components or subsystem,laboratory demonstrations displayingthe proposed technologies for achiev-ing the size, weight, and power re-quirements, and bread boarding ofhigh risk components. The work is tobe conducted in Salt Lake City, UTand in Cedar Rapids, IA, and is to becompleted in November 2012. Con-tract funding will come from the AirForce Command ControlCommunications (C3) program(FA8650-07-D-4500—L-3; FA8650-07-D-4501—Rockwell Collins).

The Mini-CDLterminal will be foruse in Small Unmanned Aircraft Sys-tems (SUAS). Due to the payload re-strictions of these systems, usingpresent CDL equipment is prohibi-tive, and has contributed to the prolif-eration of platform specific data linksystems. This effort shall examine thesize, weight, and power requirementsfor SUAS platforms, and develop aCDL terminal capable of providingthese platforms with CDL capability,with the intent of reducing the needfor further unique systems. In addi-tion, the Mini-CDL terminal shall becapable of communicating withexisting ground systems whichemploy CDL terminals.

These objectives shall be accom-plished by, first, developing a prelim-inary design, including an evaluationof trade space, identification of highrisk areas, and a plan for mitigating

these risks in the design. Upon suc-cessful completion of a preliminarydesign, the system shall be imple-mented and demonstrated in a labora-tory environment with hardwarein-the-loop systems. Finally, the ter-minal shall be flight tested to deter-mine its ability to provide SUAS withthe required CDL communications.Interested offerors may view and/ordownload the full BAA solicitationby accessing the Federal BusinessOpportunit ies (FEDBIZOPPS)homepage at http://www.fbo.gov/.SOL is BAA-06-3-PKS, due October2006.

F-22/F-35 NT-ISR Radar-CDLDevelopment Contract

In January 2007, the AFRL issuedLockheed Martin a $9.7 millionID/IQ, CFF contract to fund supportfor Non-Traditional Intelligence,Survei l lance, Reconnaissance(NT-ISR) capability and concepts ontactical platforms, such as fifth gener-ation aircraft (F-22 and F-35), and theneed to transmit NT-ISR products in atimely manner. The current Link 16fighter data link is far too slow totransmit next generation radar andtargeting data. The proposed RadarCommon Data Link (R-CDL) pro-gram will accomplish this via devel-opment , laboratory tes t anddemonstration, followed by flight testand demonstration. The work is beingconducted in Fort Worth, TX, and isto be completed in January 2012.Contract funding will come from theAir RDT&E programs of AdvancedAerospace Sensors (PE# 0603203F)and C2 Constel la t ion (PE#0207449F).

Upon successful completion oflaboratory and demonstration efforts,followed by flight demonstration, it isanticipated that the developed capa-bility will participate in a Govern-ment-sponsored joint exercise such asthe Joint Expeditionary Force experi-ment (JEFX). In addition, LockheedMartin Aeronautics will evaluateR-CDL system specification devel-oped by Raytheon. This evaluationwill ensure that the specification will



be usable by any contractor that theGovernment Tasks to build opera-tional systems. In addition to theR-CDL specif icat ion effor t ,Lockheed Martin will also provideconcept of operations (CONOPS),concept of employment (CONEMP),and system of system studies that spe-cifically focus on the intricacies of afifth generation fighter aircraft, to

include stealthiness and integratedavionics system design (FA81650-07-D-4506).

ARGUS-IS CDL Airborne Ter-minal

In August 2007, the AFRL an-nounced it intends to award a solesource contract to L-3 Communica-tions Systems-West for one 274 Mbps

Common Data Link (CDL) airborneterminal for use with the AutonomousReal-time Ground Ubiquitous Sur-vei l lance - Imaging System(ARGUS-IS). Delivery will be re-quired not later than 15 months afterreceipt of order. POC is Dawn MRoss, Contracting Officer, email:[email protected]. SOL isARGUS-IS_CDL, due August 2007.

Tactical Common Data Link-Network (TCDL-N)

Status: In ProductionManufacturer: L-3 Communications, Salt Lake City, UT

OverviewThe Tactical Common Data

Link-Network (TCDL-N) was de-rived from an earlier version of theTCDL, an effort to define an opensystem architecture interoperablecommand, control and communica-tions capability for both manned and

UAV ISR platforms, including theUSAF Global Hawk and Navy SH-60helicopters and ships. TCDL-N wasalso developed to be interoperableamong all services, and employscommon hardware modules based ona Ku-band data link.

The first TCDL-N (-Network) sys-tems were delivered by L-3 in April1999, with air-to-air capabilities stillin development in 2003. We are in-cluding TCDL-N funding in our CDLfunding lines.

Communications Data Link System (CDLS)

Status: Upgrade & SupportManufacturer: L-3 Communications, Salt Lake City, UT

OverviewThe (was Common Data

Link-Navy [CDL-N], was CommonHigh Bandwidth Data Link-SurfaceTerminal [CHBDL-ST]) is the legacysystem that provides the data commu-nications link between shipboard sig-nal and image processing equipment

and remote reconnaissance aircraftequipped with a Common Data LinkAirborne (CDL A/B) System. Pri-mary data transferred is un-processedSIGINT/COMINT and imagery datafrom BGPHES (Battle Group PassiveHorizon Extension System) andATARS (Advanced Tactical Airborne

Reconnaissance System) (seereports).

CDL-N has been produced for 14aircraf t carr iers , large-deckLHA/LHD class amphibious assaultships, and fleet flagships. Acceleratedproduction took place between 1997and 1999.

Tactical Control System (TCS) & UAV Operating Systems

Status: New DevelopmentManufacturer: Raytheon Systems, Falls Church, VA & Various

OverviewThe Tactical Control System

(TCS) provides interoperability forcommand and control (from bothafloat and ashore) of present and fu-ture Tactical and Medium AltitudeEndurance (MALE) Unmanned Ae-rial Vehicles (UAVs) and their pay-loads utilized for RSTA and combatassessment. This includes the ArmyShadow 200 Tactical UAV and theNavy/Marine Corps Fire Scout Verti-

cal Takeoff and Landing (VTOL)Tactical UAV (VTUAV). TCS pro-vides connectivity to designated C4Isystems and will also interface withthe Navy Global Hawk MaritimeDemonstration (GHMD) system (atLevel Five capability), the BroadArea Maritime Surveillance (BAMS)High Altitude Endurance (HALE)UAV system, the Marine Corps Pio-neer, and the Navy MALE Predator.TCS is being developed in concert

with the development of the UAVconcept of operations (CONOPS), soas to ensure system functionalitywithin operational requirements.

TCS provides a full range ofscaleable UAV capabilities, from pas-sive receipt of air vehicle and payloaddata to full air vehicle and payloadcommand and control. TCS offers thewar fighter a common core operatingenvironment to simultaneously re-ceive, process, and disseminate UAV



data from two or more different UAVtypes for reconnaissance, surveil-lance, and combat assessment. TCSprovides UAV command, control andprocessing from ground vehicles,ships, and fixed locations.

Beginning in FY04, TCS will fo-cus development on a command andcontrol capability for HALE Air Ve-hicles aboard CVN/LHA/LHD shipsand Tactical Support Centers (TSCs).In addition, this effort will investigatesharing processing assets with theJoint Service Imagery ProcessingSystem-Navy (JSIPS-N) TacticalInput Segment (TIS) component.

TCS supports seamless integrationinto existing Service C4I architec-tures and interfaces with othermanned and unmanned reconnais-sance platforms and intelligence sys-tems to provide informationsuperiority through cross-cueing.TCS maximizes the use of commer-cial and government off-the shelfhardware and software wheneverpossible . TCS software isinteroperable and is compliant withthe OASD(C3I) Joint Technical Ar-chitecture (JTA) and DistributedCommon Ground System (DCGS)standards.

Award for Fire ScoutIn April 2004, the Navy awarded

Raytheon a $36.8 million contract tomodify TCS to support the Fire ScoutVTUAV, and to implement furtheropen architecture solutions. TCS willlikely be the first system to meet thenew NATO Standardization Agree-ment (STANAG) 4586 requirements

for commonality and interoperabilityfor multiple UAV types with a groundcontrol system. Raytheon is also com-pany-funding the transition from thepresent Unix operating system toLinux, and wil l invest igateinteroperability with Raytheon’swork on the Distributed CommonGround System (DCGS).

Raytheon expects an operationalassessment on TCS modifications inSeptember 2007, with DT&E startinga few months after that.

J-UCAS Common OperatingSystem

In February 2005, the Defense Ad-vanced Research Projects Agency(DARPA) announced the formationof a consortium for developing acommon operating system for theJoint Unmanned Combat Air Systems(J-UCAS). The consortium agree-ment strengthens collaboration in theeffort to develop a family of vehiclesthat share a common operating sys-tem. It also outlines a managementstructure and processes for handlingintellectual property and protectingproprietary information. The com-mon operating system creates a mech-anism for integrating the system’smajor components, including sen-sors, weapons and aerial vehicles.The consortium brings together JohnsHopkins University Applied PhysicsLaboratory, Boeing, and NorthropGrumman.

Warrior OneSystem GCSIn February 2005, the General

Atomics Warrior UAV flew, con-

trolled by an AAI Corp. OneSystemground control station (GCS). TheOneSystem can control the Warriorand also AAI’s Shadow UAVs. Thesystem software implemented theNATO Standard STANAG 4586 Pro-tocol, and communication betweenthe aircraft and ground was con-ducted via both line-of-sight andKu-band satellite communications.

Predator Ground Control StationContracts

In September 2006, the Air ForceAeronautical Systems Center (ASC),Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, awardedGeneral Atomics a $27.6 millionCPFF delivery order (0022) add-on toprocure four field compatible aircraftmaintenance test stations, twoMD-1A mobile ground control sta-tions, two MD-1A fixed ground con-trol stations, five MD-1B dual controlmobile ground control stations, andnon-engineering support per FY06Predator MQ-1 and Reaper MQ-9 re-quirements.In September 2006, theASC also issued General Atomics a$15.8 million FFP delivery order(0010) contract modification to pro-cure 18 ground data terminals, oneground support equipment (GSE),two remote split operation kits, onereplenishment spares kit, one initialspares package, and two predatorSITCOM link modem assemblies, perFY06 Predator MQ-1 and ReaperMQ-9 requirements. The work underthese awards is to be conducted in SanDiego, CA, and completed in Sep-tember 2008 and June 2010. Contractfunding will come from the APFappropriation (FA8620-05-G-3028).

New Technology Developments

MMW Radar Data Link MarketStudy

In March 2004, the Naval Air Sys-tems Command (NAVAIR), NavalAir Warfare Center Weapons Div.(NAWC-WD), China Lake, CA, an-nounced it is conducting market re-search to identify companies whomay have experience and capabilitiesin the development and production of

miniature coherent radar andpoint-to-point millimeter wave(MMW) high rate data links. The ra-dar/data link is expected to be en-closed in a small volume,approximately 250 cu. in., and oper-ate in a marine environment. The an-tenna must have high gain and becapable of beam steering to compen-sate for minor platform motion and,

for the data link, remain aligned witha slow-moving data link partner. Theaverage transmit power will beapproximately 5 watts or less.

NAWD-WD is interested in usingsoftware radio techniques in the de-sign of this radar and data link. It hasdone preliminary design work in thisarea and is interested in a companythat would work closely with the



Navy to complete the developmentfor production. Production quantitiesare anticipated to be approximately100 units. The company should beable to manufacture, maintain, andupgrade systems over time. SOL isN68936-04-N-0001, due April 16,2004. POC is Deborah Winfield, tel:(760) 939-9661, fax: (760) 939-9651.Diane Foucher is the Procuring Con-tracting Officer, tel: (760) 939-8160,fax: (760) 939-965.

Optical & RF Combined DataLink Solicitation

In November 2003, DARPA an-nounced that its Advanced Technol-ogy Office (ATO) is solicitingproposals to investigate, prototypeand demonstrate an Air-to-Air-to-Surface hybrid combined-and-simul-taneous Free Space Optical (FSO) &Radio Frequency (RF) data link andnetworking concept. The link willhave a compact form factor, highavailability, and high average datarate under all weather conditions.

Proposals may be submitted in anycombination of the following techni-cal topic areas: (1) Range and FlightDemonstration Systems Integration,and (2) Technology Maturation, to in-clude the following: (a) OpticalChannel Obscuration Mitigation (ie.,transmission through clouds), (b)Common/Combined FSO/RF aper-ture, (c) Compact Optical BeamSteering, (d) Hybrid (FSO & RF)Router Technology.

Although the principal focus ofthis BAA will be on the Optical & RFCombined Link Experiment(ORCLE), identified as technicaltopic area (1) above, proposers are en-

couraged to respond to any combina-tion of technical topic areas. SOL isBAA04-03, POC is Anthony Cicala,Contracting Officer, tel: (571)218-4639, email : [email protected]..

Fire Scout Serves as Be-yond-LOS Relay

In March 2006, for a programcalled Beyond Line-of-Sight TacticalUAV Communicat ions Relay(BTCR), Fire Scout successfully per-formed as an over-the-horizon com-munications relay, allowing groundtroops on the move and battlefieldcommanders to share uninterruptedvoice, data and real-time video.

New RF Adaptive PersistentISR Data (Rapid) Link Solicita-tion

In March 2007, the AFRL an-nounced that its Information Direc-torate (IFGD) is soliciting researchproposals which shall consist of thedesign of a complete (both groundand airborne terminals), high capac-ity, Radio Frequency (RF) AdaptivePersistent ISR Data (Rapid) Link.With advances in sensor technology,the need for increased throughputover platform data links has grown.This effort shall examine cutting edgetechnologies to provide maximum ca-pacity to platforms carrying thesesensors. In particular, this effortsupports pers is tent dominantsurveillance concepts.

With this mission in mind, the datalink system shall provide an allweather capability, as well as variablebit rates to support low-resolutionsensors/basic video applications to

full download of ‘raw’, unprocessedIn-phase and Quadrature (I&Q) sen-sor data. System concepts for this ap-plication are currently immature.Therefore, this effort shall also in-clude an examination and analysis ofsystem concepts to further define theuse of the system in this mission. Thecontracted effort shall include allphases of the design. During prelimi-nary design the contractor shall per-form trade studies, modeling andsimulation, system concepts analysis,and requirements definition leadingto a Preliminary Design Review(PDR).

Following the PDR, the contractorshall advance the design with furthermodeling and simulat ion,bread-boarding/brass-boarding ofsystem components, laboratory test oftechnologies and subsystems, and re-finement of the design resulting in aCritical Design Review (CDR). Uponsuccessful completion of CDR, theeffort shall include hardware con-struction of both air and ground ter-minals, system integration and test,and ground demonstration of the sys-tem. The effort shall conclude with aflight test, demonstrating the func-tionality of the system in an opera-tionally representative environment.SOL is 07-01-PKS, due April 2007.

MAV Data LinksIn mid-2007, the common

RQ-11A Raven UAV carr iedAeroVironment’s Micro Air VehicleDatalink, based on a DARPA pro-gram of the late 1990s.

The data link on board the Wasp IIand new Wasp III MAVs has a rangeof 5 km.

Networking and Data Fusion

C4I (Networking)

Army Future Force NetworkedSensors

In February 2004, plans forPE#0603710A, Project #K86, NightVision, Airborne Systems includedthe Networked Sensors for the Future

Force Advanced Technology Demon-stration (ATD) project, which willmature multi-mission (RSTA, coun-termine) day/night targeting sensorsand software for small unmanned ae-

rial vehicles (UAV) for the FutureForce.

Technologies to be addressed in-clude automated flight control and ul-tra-light payloads for UAVs. Themission equipment package for the



Class II UAV will demonstrate small,lightweight, interchangeable pay-loads (electro-optical/infrared, laserradar) to support target detection,identification, and location of diffi-cult targets for the Unit of Action. Themission equipment package for ClassI UAVs will demonstrate very small,very lightweight, interchangeablepayloads (electro-optic, thermal,acoustic, chemical) to support intelli-gence, survei l lance, andreconnaissance requirements for theUnit of Action.

FCS Multi-Cell and Dis-mounted C2

In February 2004, DARPA,Arlington, VA, released a BAA tosupport the Future Combat SystemCommand and Control (FCS C2) pro-gram. This effort will expand the re-search effort of the FCS C2 programto determine the next level of require-ments, C2 functions and informationprofiles/flows for FCS Unit HigherHeadquarters, Multiple FCS Unit’sCommand and Control, and Dis-mounted Soldier and DismountedCommander Operations.

The research to date has built aprototype C2 system that integratespreviously stove-piped Battle Com-mand operating systems/functionsinto a single tailorable display for de-cision-making. The supporting Com-mand and Control ExperimentalDemonstration System developed inthe FCS C2 Program will be extendedto support this expanded research indetermining the technical challengesin Battle Command for Multiple FCSUnit interactions, Higher Headquar-ters’ Command and Control, and Dis-mounted soldiers as a subsystem tothe FCS Family of Systems design.

The current command and controlsystem experimental demonstrator(prototype) for the FCS Unit alreadyillustrates the potential for a signifi-cantly reduced staff to control andemploy its organic assets within the

unit. In addition to minimizing sup-porting staff, an important part in ex-panding this research effort will be toassess whether the system under testis scaleable to other FCS echelons andjoint task force elements, to facilitatefuture C2 with multiple Battle Com-mand functions integrated into a sin-gle Battle Command System. Thiswill empower the decision-makerwith information to understand cur-rent and future states while reducinguncertainty. SOL is BAA03-33, POCis Gary Sauer, DARPAProgram Man-ager, fax: 703-696-9781. MichaelBlackstone is the Contracting Officer,tel: (571) 218-4804, fax: (703)696-2208.

UAV Reduced Operator Work-load RFI

In May 2006, NAVAIR issued anRFI seeking innovative technologyconcepts to reduce Unmanned AirSystem (UAS) operator workload.This technology will help operators tobetter manage and control multipledissimilar Navy unmanned aerial ve-hicles and their associated payloads.Various studies and assessments ofUAS operator activities have deter-mined that effective control of multi-ple unmanned vehicles taxes anindividual’s visual, audio, and cogni-tive skills. The technology shouldhave the capacity to provide a moreagile, flexible, responsive, and robustcapability to simplify control and im-prove an operator’s situational aware-ness during UAS and multiplesimultaneous UAS missions withdissimilar air vehicles.

The objectives of this RFI are to:identify technologies that are soundand can be seamlessly integrated withexisting and developing UASs; refineidentified technologies so that theybetter support Navy UASs and theirintended missions; demonstrate thatthe technologies will reduce operatorworkload during execution of UAVmission planning and re-tasking,

UAV and payload Command, Con-trol, and Situational Awareness tasks,and data processing tasks includingdata retrieval, storage, manipulation,interpretation, and dissemination;provide methods and technologies toincrease the quantity of UAVs undersimultaneous control from two to asmany as eight.

NAVAIR is issuing this RFI to al-low industry an opportunity to submitits best technology concepts for re-view and consideration. SOL isN00019-263-RW-5876, due June2006.

Collision Avoidance TestingIn mid-2007, the Dutch National

Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) usedRafael’s Toplite II sensor, combinedwith a transponder-based TCAS (traf-fic-alert and collision avoidance sys-tem), to test a non-cooperativecollision avoidance system intendedfor UAVs. Tests showed that TCAScan effectively cue an existing UAVE-O/IR sensor to precisely determineother aircraft location, and avoid col-lision. Tests were carried from amanned Cessna Citation platform.Continued development could resultin integrating medium to large UAVsinto unsegregated airspace by 2010.

ScanEagle CooperationIn July 2007 flight tests, three

ScanEagle mini-UAVs automaticallycoordinated their ISR searches, in-cluding location, tracking, and inter-ception of a moving target. Thesesearches were monitored but not ma-nipulated by a single human pilot. Ef-forts are seeking to provide truecooperative action, rather than justde-conflicting navigation. Trackingmoving targets is one of the highestworkload events in UAV operationstoday, and independent cooperativeoperation is essential to handlingincreased sensor and data densities,according to Hal.



Data Fusion

Manufacturers: Various

NATO CAESAR Data FusionIn mid-2001, NATO’s Consulta-

tion, Command, and Control Agency,with a deputy from Canada, France,Germany, Italy, Norway, the UK andUS, announced the CAESAR (Coali-tion Aerial Surveillance and Recon-naissance) advanced concepttechnology demonstration (ACTD).The US Army’s Training and Doc-trine Command (TRADOC) SystemManager for JSTARS and the Com-mon Ground Station (CGS) is actingas operational manager and usersponsor.

CAESAR will integrate opera-tions by various airborne ground sur-

veillance systems operated orplanned by NATO members. Theseinclude the French army’s Horizonhelicopter, the US Navy’s AN/APY-6TacRadar, JSTARS, ASTOR, GlobalHawk, Canada’s Radarsat II satellite,the Italian Army’s CRESO, the USArmy’s Airborne ReconnaissanceLow (ARL) and Tactical UAV(TUAV), and the USAF’s U2 andPredator.

CAESAR, during “Clean Hunter”exercises, overlaid Link-16 air pic-tures on GMTI/SAR ground pictures.GMTI data was also used to updateenemy orders of battle, and multipleGMTI hits from different assets were

combined to form a single targettrack. These abilities will eventuallybe added to a large number of NATOsurveillance systems.

EADS Eagle Vision Data Fu-sion

In late 2003, EADS was marketingits C-130-deployable Eagle Visiondata fusion ground station built forthe US. Eagle Vision combines bothoptical and electronic intelligencefrom commercial and military satel-lites with that from UAVs. EADS isalso working on data compressionand onboard data processing systems.



CBRN Sensors

Market OverviewA fairly new mission for UAVs is

the detection of chemical, biological,radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)agents, spanning RF, electro-optic,acoustic and other sensing tech-niques, as well as data sharing tech-nology (was termed nuclear,biological, and chemical (NBC)).This can include everything from de-tecting battlefield gas clouds to nu-clear material storage installations to

chemical weapon manufacturing sitesto hand-carried CBRN materials.

Much of this sensor developmentwill take the form of basic scientificresearch, as the detection of theseagents, especially if an opponent is at-tempting concealment, is often verydifficult. The US is already spendingmore than $1 billion per year onRDT&E alone (not just for UAVs),with funding rising steadily.

Hyperspectral sensors have beensuggested as having good possibili-ties, due to their ability to discern spe-cific chemical elements. Groundpenetrating (GPEN) and foliage pen-etrating (FOPEN) airborne sensorsmay also have applications, in addi-tion to ground-based and naval sen-sors.

Executives

• AFRL: Air Force Research Labo-ratory, Wright Research Site,Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

• CECOM: Army Communica-tions-Electronics Command, FortMonmouth, NJ

• DTRA: Defense Threat ReductionAgency, Fort Belvoir, VA

• MARCORSYSCOM: MarineCorps Systems Command,Quantico, VA

• RDECOM: Army Research, De-velopment, and Engineering Com-mand, Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD

• RMAC: Army Robert Morris Ac-quisition Center, Aberdeen Prov-ing Ground, MD

• SMDC: Army Space and MissileDefense Command, Frederick,MD and Huntsville, AL

• SPAWAR SYSCEN: Space andNaval Warfare Systems Center,San Diego, CA

• SPO: DARPA Special ProjectsOffice

• TACOM: Army Tank-automotiveand Armaments Command, War-ren, MI


UAV CBRN Funding ForecastRDT&E+Procurement Available to the US


100

200

300

400

500(FY07 $ Millions)

Funding ForecastR&D+Proc. (FY07$ Millions) FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16

Available World UAV CBRN Sensors & SystemsUndetermined (speculative) 150 200 230 280 300 320 320 350 380 400

Chemical & Biological ProgramsTACTIC: Aerosol/Vapor Cloud Detection and Countermeasures

In February 2004, the DARPASPO announced that a new researchand development program, ThreatAgent Cloud Tactical Intercept andCountermeasures (TACTIC), is to beconducted under the auspices of theArmy Robert Morris AcquisitionCenter (RMAC). In support of theTACTIC Program, DARPA plans torelease two Broad Agency An-nouncements (BAAs) simulta-neously: BAA04-TDT (TACTIC-DT[-Detection Technologies]) andBAA04-TCM (TACTIC-CM[-Countermeasures]). These effortswill represent the first phase of theTACTIC Program.

The TACTIC Program will focuson the interception and defeat ofchemical and biological threat agent

aerosol/vapor clouds on the battle-field that can be produced during mil-itary operations either by defensivemeasures against an adversary or byintentional agent dissemination/re-lease by an adversary. Release of suchagents could cause widespread dis-ruption of military operations. TheTACTIC Program seeks to activelyprotect troops and military assetsfrom such events and to provide ameans to maintain critical militaryoperations at the required tempo bypursuing two paths in parallel: 1) de-velopment of technologies that canrapidly detect, discriminate and iden-tify chemical and biological airborneclouds with low false-alarm rates, and2) development of technologies thatcan defeat (precipitate and/or neutral-

ize) the clouds before they can reachthe troops on the battlefield.

The actions outlined in this noticeare intended solely to enable potentialsources to gain an understanding ofthe TACTIC Program prior to the re-lease of the associated BAAs. SOL isW911SR-04-R-0014, due March 26,2004. Program Manager is Dr. WayneBryden, email: [email protected] is Marjorie Roberts, tel: (410)436-6797, email: [email protected]. POP is US ArmyResearch, Development, Robert Mor-ris Acquisition Center (RMAC),APG Contracting Div., EdgewoodDiv., ATTN: AMSRD-ACC-E, 5179Hoadley Road, Aberdeen ProvingGround, MD 21010-5401.

Joint Biological Point Detection System Contract to GD

In August 2004, the ArmyRDECOM reported the awarding of adelivery order contract to GeneralDynamics in Deland, FL, to financetasks for the Joint Biological PointDetection System (JBPDS). Therewere 55 bids solicited in January2004, with only one proposal re-

ceived. RDECOM-Aberdeen obli-gated a delivery order amount of$25.5 million to General Dynamicsunder a firm-fixed-price (FFP) con-tract to provide for JBPDS InterimSystem Production. The work is be-ing performed in Charlotte, NC(40%), and in Columbus, OH (60%),

and is to be completed by Aug. 31,2009. Financing will come fromArmy Other Procurement (OPA)(W911SR-04-D-0017).

IPDS Systems for Navy Ships

As of late 2004, the TechnologyService Corporation (TSC) had pro-vided engineering changes and instal-

lation support for more than 50Integrated Point Detection Systems(IPDS) on numerous classes of US

Navy and Coast Guard surface ships.The IPDS is used for early point de-tection of chemical warfare agents.

ACTD Selections

In January 2005, the Departmentof Defense (DoD) reported the selec-tion of 15 Advanced Concept Tech-nology Demonstration (ACTD)programs for inclusion in the FY2005DoD RDT&E effort. The ACTD pro-jects are expected to aid in rapidlytransitioning advanced technology

into the hands of the warfighters.Marrying new operational concepts(ACTD) with maturing technologiesin a joint environment reduce the timerequired to field new systems and in-crease user involvement in system de-sign and integration. Included weretwo CBRN projects:

• Chemical Unmanned Ground Re-connaissance: Detection at ma-neuver speeds, while protectingpersonnel

• Epidemic Outbreak Surveillance:Near real-time, pre-symptomaticdiagnostic detection of pathogens


Page 240 CBRN Sensors

Biological Assessment Mobile Laboratory

In January 2005, the DTRA issueda sources sought notice to seek infor-mation from government and indus-try parties possessing existingbiological laboratory technology thatcould be used to develop and con-struct an affordable, self-contained,mobile laboratory for performingidentification and viability determi-nation of biological agents while lo-cated onboard a host vessel (ship) atsea. The Biological Assessment Mo-bile Laboratory (BAML) is one com-ponent of the Biological CombatAssessment System (BCAS)Advanced Technology Demon-stration (ATD).

The BCAS ATD will culminate intechnology demonstrations to locateand track, collect, detect, selectivelyidentify, and characterize biologicalaerosol agents released during Weap-ons of Mass Destruction (WMD)counterforce strikes against WMD-related research and development,production, and storage targets. TheBAML’s role in this ATD includesidentification and viability assess-ment of potential biological warfare(BW) material collected by the com-bat assessment-unmanned aerial ve-hicle (CA-UAV) from the WMDcounterforce strike detonation and re-sultant plume; as well as performing

viability assessment on BCASdemonstration range samples.

The BAML will conduct this diag-nostic and viability assessment whilelocated onboard a host vessel at sea.This Sources Sought Notice is re-questing information on BAML tech-nology only. A separate pre-solicitation notice, HDTRA1-04-R-0009, ‘Weapons of Mass Destruc-tion Counterforce Combat Assess-ment Program’ has been issued andcontains additional information onthe BCAS ATD, which can be used asa reference. SOLis BAML59977596.

JBAIDS Toxin Sensors

In March 2005, the Army SMDCannounced it is seeking suppliers todevelop and produce toxin identifica-tion equipment for the Department ofDefense to support the DoD Joint Bi-ological Agent Identification and Di-agnostic System (JBAIDS) programBlock II effort. POP is the US ArmySpace and Missile Defense Com-mand, 64 Thomas Johnson Drive,Frederick, MD 21702.

The JBAIDS team, Medical Iden-tification and Treatment Systems

(MITS) Product Management Office,under the Chemical Biological Medi-cal Systems Project Management Of-fice in Frederick MD, is conducting amarket survey of potential suppliersto develop and manufacture toxinidentification equipment for the USDepartment of Defense. This an-nouncement covers only the JBAIDSBlock II, Phase 1, Market Surveyeffort to identify potential candidatesystems.

Interested contractors are re-quested to forward potential candi-date product information to identifytoxins to the following address: USArmy Space and Missile DefenseCommand, Attn: Susan Dell, Con-tract Specialist, 64 Thomas JohnsonDrive, Frederick MD 21702. Re-sponses are requested by March2005. SOL is W9113M-05-S-0002.

FLIR GasFindIR Camera

In June 2005, FLIR Systems, Inc.demonstrated its GasFindIR infrared(IR) camera as the first commercialcamera capable of detecting volatile

organic compound (VOC) gas emis-sions. “We are in the process of writ-ing new regulations to take advantageof this new infrared camera,” accord-

ing to David Markwordt of the Envi-ronmental Protection Agency’sEmissions Standards Division. “It’s aremarkable new technology.”

Chemical Alarm/Detector Contract

In Apri l 2006, the ArmyRDECOM obligated a delivery orderamount of $27.3 million to SmithsDetection in Edgewood, MD, to man-

ufacture and deliver M22 automaticchemical agent alarm systems andM88 chemical agent detectors. Thework is to be conducted in

Edgewood, MD, and is to be com-pleted by March 2007. Contract fi-nancing will come from the ArmyOPA (W911SR-06-D-0001).

JBPDS Biological Detection Contracts

In Apri l 2006, the ArmyRDECOM obligated $45.3 million toGeneral Dynamics’ Armament andTechnical Products, Charlotte, NC,under an FFP add-on to provide forthe continuing procurement of theJoint Biological Point Detection Sys-

tem (JBPDS). The JPBDS is the firstfully automated biological threatagent detection, collection, and iden-tification suite that was designed forall four services. It is modular andprovides both continuous andreal-time aerosol detection with pre-

sumptive identification for up to tenagents simultaneously within tenminutes. Work is being conducted inCharlotte, NC (40%) and Columbus,OH (60%), and is to be completed byDecember 2007. Contract funding


CBRN Sensors Page 241

will come from the Army OPA(W911SR-04-C-0017).

In May 2006, the Army RDECOMobligated a delivery order amount of$7.8 million as part of a $32 million

firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract toHarris Radio in Rochester, NY, tomanufacture and deliver the M31E2JBPDS/Biological Integrated Detec-tion Systems High Frequency Radio

(JBPDS/BIDSHF). The work is beingconducted in Rochester, NY, and is tobe completed by September 2010.Contract funding will come fromArmy OPA (W911SR-05-D-0002).

Biological Agent ID Contract

In May 2006, the Army SMDC ob-ligated $14.7 million to Idaho Tech-nology, Salt Lake City, UT, under aFFP add-on contract to continue theproduction of the Joint Biological

Agent ID Diagnostic System. Thework is being conducted in Salt LakeCity, UT, and is to be completed byJuly 2007. Contract financing will

come from Army OPA (DASG60-03-C-0094).

Bright Onyx UAV Chemical Sensor Contract

In June 2006, the Air Force AFRLawarded Akamai Physics, Las Cru-ces, NM, a $10.3 million CPFFadd-on to a FY04 contract to providefunding for Bright Onyx, a compact,active multi-spectral chemical sensoroperating in the 5-um region for re-mote detection of chemicals associ-

a ted with weapons of massdestruction that may be transportedon ships inbound to the US. BrightOnyx is to be capable of operating atunattended aerial vehicle (UAV)speeds and ranges, with detectionsensitivities of 10ppm*m, and meetUAV, power, weight, and size require-

ments. The work is being conductedin Las Cruces, NM. Contract financ-ing will come from the Air ForceAerospace Sensors element (PE#0602204F) (FS8650-04-C-1714/PO4).

FY06 Chemical/Biological Initiative Solicitation

In July 2006, the DTRA solicitedproposals from degree-granting uni-versities, nonprofit organizations,and commercial concerns includingsmall businesses, in support of theChemical and Biological DefenseProgram (CBDP) to fund chemicaland biological defense science andtechnology projects across awide-range of military operations. Insupport of the CBDP mission, theFY06 Chemical and Biological De-fense Initiative Fund (CBDIF) havebeen established.

The CBDIF spans both the Physi-cal Science & Technology (S&T) ca-

pability areas and the Medical S&Tcapability areas. Physical S&T capa-bility areas include chemical and bio-logical detection, individual andcollective protection, decontamina-tion, and modeling and simula-t ion/bat t lespace management .Medical S&T capability areas includepre-treatments, therapeutics, and di-agnostics. The goal of this initiative isto explore new and innovative ideasto fill identified technology gaps. TheGovernment is seeking either BasicResearch or Applied/Advanced Tech-nology Development projects that ad-dresses one or more of the specific

topics that are presented in Section 9and 10, respectively of the BAA.

Technical point of contact for thisBAA is Mr. Larry Pollack, Joint Sci-ence and Technology Office forChemical and Biological Defense,DTRA-CB, e-mail: [email protected]. Questions regarding admin-istrative content may be addressed tothe DTRA Contracts Office (ATTN:BCR) at the same e-mail address.SOL is HDTRA1-06-CBDIFBAA,due August 25, 2006.

ScanEagle UAV Biological Agent Detection Program

In June 2006, the DTRA signed an$8.2 million contract with Boeing tomodify a ScanEagle mini-UAV to ac-commodate sensors that detect, trackand collect biological warfare agents.

Boeing will conduct the first flighttest of the modified UAV in Floridaover the next 18 months. Both DTRAand Boeing off icials said theScanEagle test will be the first timethat a biological agent detection sys-tem has been deployed on a UAV. Af-ter initial testing is complete, the

DTRA will have an option topurchase four ScanEagle biologicaldetection systems, which will includea total of eight aircraft, for as much as$20 million, according to Boeing.Under the contract, each system willconsist of one ScanEagle aircraft,modified to accommodate a biologi-cal detection system, a secondScanEagle used in the more conven-tional role of surveillance and meteo-rological data collection, and a

system of ground-based assets for thelaunch and landing of the aircraft.

Boeing expects US defense offi-cials to use the system to collect sam-ples and conduct surveillance atlocations where they suspect biologi-cal weapons and germ warfare mate-rials are being produced. Beforeconducting a military strike on a sus-pected biological agent site, USforces would send a ScanEagle –which looks much like those now be-ing deployed in Iraq – to collect mete-



orological data. Lab technicians onthe ground would then use the data topredict the path of the potentiallydeadly plumes that could be releasedduring a military strike. AnotherScanEagle would be deployed after

the military strike, the nose of whichwould house a system that can collectbiological agent particles. Militaryscientists on the ground would ana-lyze the particles to confirm that germ

warfare agents had been destroyed inthe strike.

$1 Billion for Chemical Agent Disposal Facility Closure

In September 2006, the Army Sus-tainment Command, Rock island, IL,obligated a $154.3 million incrementas part of a $1 billion FY99 CPAF in-strument to Parsons Infrastructure &Technology Group in Pasadena, CA,for continued chemical agency neu-

tralization operations, leading to theclosure of the Newport ChemicalAgent Disposal facility. In May 2007,the Army Sustainment Command ob-ligated an additional $69.7 million.The work is being conducted in New-port, IN, and is to be completed by

May 2009. Contract funding willcome from Army O&M (DAAA09-99-C-0016).

Handheld Bio Aerosol Detection Solicitation

In August 2006, the USMCMARCORSYSCOM announced it isseeking market research, potentialsources, and best practice informa-tion for hand held and one man porta-ble biological aerosol detection,identification and sampling technolo-gies in preparation for the Expedi-tionary Biological Detection (EBD)Advanced Technology Demonstra-tion (ATD) program. Technologies at

Technology Readiness Level 5 andhigher are of interest. Light weight,autonomous, battery operable sys-tems requiring minimal training andconsumables are also of interest. Re-spondents to this market surveyshould contact Adam Becker, tel:(703) 432-3210, email: [email protected] ; or TomJohnston, tel: (703) 784-6686, email:[email protected], for a login

and password. Respondents are en-couraged to submit a separate entryfor each different system configura-t ion. Quant i ty and fundingavailability are unknown at this time.SOL is M67854-06-I-3060, dueAugust 2006.

Battelle Gets $500 Million for DHS Biodefense Center

In December 2006, the DHSawarded an initial $250 million of apotential $500 million contract toBattelle Memorial Institute, to bemanagement contractor for the Na-tional Biodefense Analysis and

Countermeasures Center (NBACC).Construction of the 160,000 squarefoot facility began earlier in 2006 atFort Dietrich, MD. This will becomea “national lab” for life sciencesresearch for biodefense.

The facility is planned to open inJune 2008, with a day-to-day staff of120 people. The contract provides$250 million for the first five years,with five option years of $50 millioneach.

TACTIC Solicitation

In January 2007, the ArmyRDECOM solicited proposals in sup-port of the Threat Agent Cloud Tacti-cal Intercept and Countermeasure(TACTIC) Program under BAA06-TSDD. The purpose of this BAA is todevelop a revolutionary capability forthe US military to defend againstChemical and Biological Warfare

Agent (CWA/BWA) attacks againstmobile U.S. troops on the battlefieldas well as fixed sites. A Proposer In-formation Pamphlet (PIP) and BAA06-TSDD are available on the De-fense Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (DARPA) TACTIC Programwebsi te at ht tps: / /d tsn .darpa.mil/TACTIC. The PIP and BAA06-

TSDD can also be obtained by con-tact ing Kane Leedy, email :[email protected]. SOL isW911SR-AA06-TSDD, POP isREDCOM Acquisition Center –Edgewood, ATTN: AMSSB-ACC-E,5183 Blackhawk Road, AberdeenProving Ground, MD 21010-5424.

Joint Material Decontamination System Solicitation

In February 2007, the RDECOMannounced it intends to award a con-tract for a Joint Material Decontami-nation System (JMDS) for usethroughout the Army, Marine Corps,

Air Force, and Navy to provide theability to decontaminate chemical andbiological warfare agents from sensi-tive equipment and platform interiorswithout degradation of the equipment

in an immediate, operational, andthorough environment. Sensitiveequipment is high value or low-den-sity electronic or optic equipment thatcannot be decontaminated using ex-



isting means without degradation oftheir functions. Examples of criticalsensitive equipment are laptops, nightvision goggles, and the Joint HelmetMounted Cueing System. Platforminteriors refers to the interior decon-tamination of tactical platforms suchas personnel carriers and small air-craft such as a single seat fighterplane, as well as large platform inte-rior decontamination such as interiorsof buildings, ships and large aircraft,e.g., cargo aircraft.

The acquisition will be awarded asa single contract for JMDS SystemDevelopment and Demonstration(SDD) on a CPIF basis with options

for Low Rate Initial Production(LRIP) and Full Rate Production(FRP) on a Fixed-Price Incentive(Successive Target) basis. The antici-pated period of performance will be24 months for the base contract, 12months for the first option (LR IP),and 40 months for the second option(FRP). The solicitation will be issuedon a full and open competitive basis.All responsible sources may submit aproposal, which will be considered bythe agency. The anticipated releasedate of the Request for Proposal(RFP) is on or about February 2007.Solicitation number W911SR-07-R-

0007 is the number assigned for thiseffort.

SOL is W911SR-07-R-0007, dueMarch 2007. POP is RDECOM Ac-quisition Center – Edgewood, ATTN:AMSRD-ACC-E, E4455 LeitzanRoad, Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD 21010-5424. Please submit inwriting, all questions pertaining tothis RFP to Mary Ann Mitchell, Con-tract Special is t , a t email :[email protected] or bymail to US Army RDECOM Acquisi-tion Center, Edgewood ContractingDiv. , E4455 Leitzan Road,AMSRD-ACC-E, Aberdeen ProvingGround, MD 21010-5401.

Chem/Bio Solicitation

In February 2007, the DTRA is-sued a BAA to solicit proposals in2007 for Chemical and BiologicalDefense Program, Defense ThreatReduction Agency requirements thatin previous years were broadcast intwo separate BAA documents: Theannual Chemical Biological DefenseInitiative Fund (CBDIF) BAAand theannual DTRA Chemical and Biologi-cal Technologies, Physical Scienceand Technology (S&T) Div. New Ini-

tiatives BAA. The CBDIF goal is tofund new and innovative chemicaland biological science and technol-ogy projects across a wide range ofmilitary operations. Established inFY03, it is congressionally directedwith the intent to provide funds via acompeti t ive acquisi t ion tonon-Government entities.

This BAA is soliciting basic re-search, applied research and ad-vanced technology development for

the topics referenced in Section 7 ofthe BAA. Proposals may each addressBasic Research, or Applied Researchand/or Advanced Technology Devel-opment. Proposals will not be ac-cepted or considered that combineBasic Research with Applied Re-search and/or Advanced TechnologyDevelopment. SOL is HDTRA1-07-CBDIF07-CBT08-BAA, dueMarch 2007.

JBPDS Contracts

In December 2006, the ArmyRDECOM obligated a FFP modifica-tion of $32.1 million to an FY05 con-tract to General Dynamics, to provideadditional funding for JBPDS and re-lated fielding support packages, forsystem testing, and for user training.The work is being conducted in Co-lumbus, OH (60%), and in Charlotte,

SC (40%), and is to be completed byDecember 2008. Contract financingwill come from OPA (W911SR-04-C-0017).

In March 2007, RDECOM obli-gated a delivery order amount of $5.7million as part of a $32 million FY05FFP contract to Harris Radio in Roch-ester, NY, for the M31E2 Joint Bio-

logical Point Detection System(JBPDS)/Biological Integrated De-tection System (BIDS) high fre-quency (HF) radio. The work is beingconducted in Rochester, NY, and is tobe completed by September 2010.Contract funding will come fromOPA (W911SR-05-D-0002).

Chemical Agent Alarm Systems

In May 2007, RDECOM obligated$5.9 million to Smiths Detection inEdgewood, MD, as part of a $60.1million FFP contract for the M22 au-

tomatic chemical agent alarm sys-tems. The work is being conducted inEdgewood, MD, and is to be com-pleted by September 2007. Contract

funding wil l come from OPA(W911SR-06-D-0001).

ScanEagle Chem-Bio Testing

In August 2007, initial ScanEagleChem-Bio testing began, with devel-opmental testing occurring in Sep-tember. An operat ional

demonstration is scheduled forFebruary 2008.

Spiral 1 is referred to as the Bio-logical Combat Assessment System

(BCAS). Boeing received $8 millionfor the 24-month ATD.

Spiral 2 contains options for chem-ical and radiological sensors, as well



as a biological weapon identificationsystem. Spiral 2 would also be a

24-month ATD, but it is not yetfunded.

Radiological & Nuclear ProgramsAlternative Nuclear Detection Technologies Sought

In August 2004, the DTRA issueda Sources Sought notice and is cur-rently preparing research and devel-opment program plans for thedetection and identification of nu-clear and radioactive materials in sup-port of DoD efforts in counteringterrorism, counter-proliferation, andnonproliferation. The goal of theseprogram plans is to improve detectionand identification capabilities for ura-nium, plutonium and other nuclearand radioactive materials of interestthat do not rely on ionizing radiationsignatures.

DTRA is interested in technolo-gies that will provide signatures rela-tively unique to radioactive materialor radiation fields. Passive and activeradiation detection systems are notthe subject of this request for infor-

mation because the US Governmenthas extensive efforts in that area. Inparticular, DTRA is interested in pos-sible methods to detect such materialsat a distance of over a kilometer inboth shielded and unshielded config-urations in kilogram-scale quantities.Methods that might be of interest in-clude, but are not limited to, optical,laser, radar, mass, or acoustic tech-niques either alone or in combinationwith each other or with someinformation systems technology.

All technologies that are not pri-marily based on passive or active nu-clear radiation detection signaturesfor detection and identification maybe submitted in response. Neithernear term deployment or extensivetesting is a prerequisite for consider-ation under this request for informa-

t ion, al though both would bedesirable. Techniques can be ground,air, sea, or satellite based. Each con-cept should provide some analysis orexperimental results indicating somepossibility of standoff detection ofnuclear materials at least by refer-ence. An operational deploymentconcept indicating how the conceptwould be realized, including distanceand quantity would greatly assistevaluation.

SOL is TDNDSS0727. POC isDebra Maschino, tel: (703) 325-1168,fax: (703) 325-9294. CatherineBenavides is the Contracting Officer,tel: (703) 325-1091, fax: (703)325-9294. Email: [email protected], [email protected].

Nuclear Radiation Detectors

In February 2005, the DTRA an-nounced it is seeking potentialsources for the development of nu-clear radiation detectors that princi-pally use a solid material as thedetection medium for both gammaand neutron radiation. It is essentialthat the detection medium be scalablein size from man-portable sizes totens of square meters and that it beformable into configurations otherthan those offered by conventionalcrystalline and gaseous media. Themost desirable detection medium

shall also be flexible with a minimumdegradation in performance whenbent or twisted.

Systems from this detector familymust provide data through standardnetwork and communications proto-cols in a format that is usable by anon-technical but trained operator.Systems must also be usable in a widevariety of operating environments.Large system size configurationsmust not be susceptible to single pointdestruction (i.e., destruction of asmall portion of a panel must not ren-

der the entire panel or system inopera-tive). This synopsis is for informationplanning purposes and the Govern-ment will not pay or otherwise reim-burse respondents for informationsubmitted. Electronic responses arerecommended and encouraged, andshall be submitted to Ms. ElizabethBraxton at email: [email protected] responses, though notpreferred, may be submitted via fac-simile to tel: 703-325-9294, to theattention of Ms. Elizabeth Braxton.SOL is 049976757.

Radiological & Nuclear Countermeasure System Architectures

In April 2005, the SPAWARSYSCEN announced it intends toaward two sole-source contract ac-tions, one to Science Applications In-ternational Corp. of San Diego, CA,and one to the Boeing Service Co. ofHuntsville, AL (teaming with Ap-plied Research Associates of Albu-

querque, NM). The contracts willprocure research and developmentservices for the implementation of acomplete information technology en-abled radiological and nuclear coun-termeasures system architecture, thedesign and fabrication of prototypesystems to utilize and interface with

existing detection systems, and thedevelopment of plans for deploy-ment , t ra ining, operat ion,maintenance and sustainment of thesystems.

These two actions are follow-on toprocurement contracts N66001-05-C-6005 (Science Applications Inter-



national Corp.), N66001-05-C-6006(Applied Research Associates), andother transact ion agreementHSHQPA-05-9-0010 (made betweenHomeland Security Advanced Re-search Projects Agency and the Boe-ing Service Co.). The contract actionsrepresent a continuation of work initi-ated by the contractors under the com-petitive broad agency announcementBAA 04-01 “BAA for Radiological

and Nuclear Countermeasure SystemArchitectures Analysis” issued by theHomeland Security Advanced Re-search Projects Agency. Through theinitial contract efforts, the contractorshave begun the research anddevelopment required to perform theinitial architectures analysis.

The follow-on actions will imple-ment the system architecture that iscritically needed for homeland secu-

rity. The use of any other contractorswould result in substantial duplica-tion of cost to the Government thatcould not be recovered through com-petition as well as unacceptable de-lays in fulfilling vital securityrequirements. Government POC isTerry Metz, tel: (619) 553-4467;email: [email protected]. SOL is001-05-C-6005.

Radioactive Liquid ID System Contract

In June 2006, the Army CECOMannounced it intends to issue, basedupon an unsolicited proposal, a solesource award to Apantec, LLC for theLiquid Identification Detection Sys-tem (LIDS). The LIDS measures ra-dioactivity in liquids, providing aninnovative solution for measuringlow energy alpha/beta emitting iso-topes entrained within water.

The LIDS instrument is a completestand-alone unit and can be used for

both fixed and portable applications.Delivery will be 120 days after con-tract award. This will be a firm fixedprice type contract. Packaging shallbe commercial in accordance withPackaging Reference ASTM D3951-98 (04 Edition).

The point of contact for this pro-curement is Erica Balesterri, ContractSpecialist, tel: 732-427-1329, email:[email protected] . SOL is W15P7T-06-

R-P228, due August 12, 2006. POP isUS Army C-E LCMC AcquisitionCenter - DAAB07, ATTN: AMSEL-AC, Building 1208, Fort Monmouth,NJ 07703-5008.

Radiological Collection UGV

In March 2007, the DTRA wasseeking potential sources for the de-velopment of an Unmanned GroundVehicle (UGV) for radiological sam-ple collection following a nuclear/ra-diological event. The UGV needs tobe an unmanned semi-autonomousall-weather all-terrain sample collec-tion vehicle. The system will aid inthe observation of tactical/technicalobjectives and danger areas beyondthe user’s Line of Sight (LOS). TheUGV will perform collection and re-connaissance tasks while permittingthe operator to remain at a safe dis-tance away (up to 10 miles) at a

Ground Control Station (GCS). Theplatform should be able to conductextended missions with durations upto 24 hours (including periods of lim-ited visibility), traversing improvedsurfaces with a top speed of at least 30kph. If using an engine, it should usediesel fuel. The platform must be ableto negotiate uneven rough terrain(such as rubble containing largeblocks up to 2m x 2m x 2m) up to a45-degree slope 16 in (41 cm) highstep, and be able to ford one foot ofwater.

The UGV must have the capabilityof transporting 7-10 chunk debris

samples weighing up to two kilo-grams (two kg) each with a volume ofapproximately 25 cubic inches, beable to collect 7-10 fine particulatedebris samples weighing 20 gramsvia vacuum samplers, and collect7-10 smear samples. The systemshould be inherently simple to use,survivable, durable, multi-functionaland easily transportable by air andtruck. As part of its survivability, theUGV needs to be able to operate in aradiologically contaminated areawith reasonable protection, and beable to be decontaminated. SOL isNTD070005729, due April 2007.

General ProgramsCombating Terrorism Technology

In February 2004, the ArmyRMAC announced it is soliciting con-cepts for innovative research and de-velopment projects for combatingterrorism. The mission areas includeChemical, Biological, Radiological

and Nuclear Countermeasures (CB);Investigative Support and Forensics(ISF); and Surveillance, Collectionand Operations Support (SCOS).

RMAC is the procuring office forthis Broad Agency Announcement

(BAA) for the Combating TerrorismTechnology Support Office (CTTSO)Technical Support Working Group(TSWG). The BAA package itselfwill be available only from the fol-lowing website, www.bids.tswg.gov.



The BAA process constitutes a solici-tation of concepts from those offerorscapable of sat isfying thegovernment’s needs.

SOL is W91CRB-04-T-0065, dueApril 1, 2004. POC is Renee Hodge,

tel: (410) 278-0881, email: [email protected]. POPis Robert Morris Acquisition Center,Aberdeen Branch, ATTN:AMSSB-ACC-A, 4118 Susquehanna

Avenue, Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD 21005-3013.

J-UCAS Revolutionary Technologies Solicitation

In June 2004, the Joint UnmannedCombat Air Systems (J-UCAS) Of-fice at DARPA, Arlington, VA, an-nounced it is soliciting ideas that willhelp achieve its objectives to developand demonstrate unmanned air com-bat capabilities for high-threat com-bat missions and environments,including the Suppression of EnemyAir Defenses (SEAD), surveil-lance/reconnaissance, precisionstrike and other related missions, be-ing conducted within the emergingglobal command and control archi-tecture. Such ideas can range frommodest hardware and or softwarecomponent projects to majorsubsystems developments.

Enabling system level technologyareas of interest encompass advancedsensors; digital wireless communica-tions, including networks; informa-tion processing and integration;

intelligent algorithms and relatedsoftware for mission management,data fusion, image registration, tar-geting and other system level func-tions; digital avionics; and other areasthat can improve or enhance systemcapabilities. Unmanned air vehicleplatform technologies, includingthose that impact vehicle manage-ment, survivability, and platform per-formance, including enhancedpropulsion, also fall within the scopeof this solicitation.

Additional ideas of specific inter-est to the J-UCAS Office for nearterm application include automatedair refueling; avionics performanceand reliability enhancement technol-ogies (eg., spray cooling); advancedflight stability and control; and othertechnologies to reduce weight andcost. Proposals should fall within thegeneral scope of the topics described

herein and extend the state of the art inorder to be considered acceptable.

The J-UCAS Office’s goal for thisBroad Agency Announcement(BAA) is to solicit revolutionary re-search and development that will sup-port its Office mission. Such effortsmay involve high technical risks,which if enabled would provide com-mensurate high payoffs. Offerorsshould initially be prepared to supportthe technical feasibility of their con-cept or idea, and then be prepared todemonstrate and discuss successivephases leading toward technology de-velopment and integration withJ-UCAS system elements. SOL isBAA04-24, POC is MarkBennington, Contracting Officer, tel:(703) 696-2411, fax: (703) 696-2208,email: [email protected].

CBRNE Non-Intrusive Detection Technologies

In June 2004, the DTRA an-nounced that Research and Develop-ment is being sought in the area ofCBRNE non-intrusive detection tech-nologies. Multiple awards are antici-pated. The objective is to research anddevelop non-intrusive detectors capa-ble of providing real-time, non-intru-sive interrogation of ordnance,munitions, and Improvised ExplosiveDevices (IEDs) to detect and identifyinternal CBRNE components andfiller agents. Desired systems shouldalso have the capability to accuratelyinterrogate container contents for the

presence of CBRNE materials re-gardless of packaging and/or con-tainer types, to include items such aspipes and equipment associated withagent production.

The systems being sought will per-form CBRNE detection and identifi-cation in a complete “non-intrusive”manner, i.e., not requiring physicalcontact with or exposure to the agentoutside of the containment vessel.The non-intrusive detection systemsshould be man-portable with a totalweight not to exceed 80 lbs (thresh-old), 30 lbs (objective), and not re-

quire or depend upon extensivelogistics support for operation. Thesystems being sought should be easilyupgraded to incorporate technologi-cal advances in hardware or softwareincluding the ability to detect newanalyses; and should be capable ofoperating within all anticipated envi-ronments and should perform with aspecificity of 99% (objective) 95%(threshold) with sensitivity compara-ble to direct detection technologies(objective), 2 logs more than directdetection technologies (threshold).

CBRN Unmanned Ground Reconnaissance (CUGR)

In January 2005, the ArmyRDECOM announced it is seeking toidentify existing sensors or systemswhich will provide detection, identi-fication, and collection capabilities of

CBRN agents. These sensors need tobe small, rugged, and use minimalpower in order to facilitate integrationon a small Unmanned Ground Vehi-cle (UGV). Detectors must be able to

relay status and control to/from anexternal controller by means such asserial, infrared (IRDA) or Ethernet.Detection capabilities sought includedetection and identification of chemi-



cal warfare agents, toxic industrialchemicals and radiological materials.

Environmental sensors that pro-vide O2, LEL/UEL, VOC, CO, andH2S detection are also required. Useof multiple sensors to provide this ca-pability is acceptable. Detectors mustuse a proven detection technologyand have independent test data and

user data to verify their performance.In addition to detection and identifi-cation, ECBC seeks to identify prod-ucts capable of collecting liquid andsolid samples that are suitable for de-ployment on a UGV. Products mustbe suitably mature and available tosupport system integration and tech-nical testing in mid FY 2006, fol-

lowed by operational demonstrationin late FY 2006. SOL isW911SR-05-ECBC-0000. POP isRDECOM Acquisition Center –Edgewood, ATTN: AMSSB-ACC-E,5183 Black Hawk Road, AberdeenProving Ground, MD 21010-5424.

CUGR MARS

In January 2005, the ArmyRDECOM released a solicitation forits Military Applications in Surveil-lance and Reconnaissance (MARS)program, that supports the CBRN Un-manned Ground Reconnaissance(CUGR) Advanced Concept Tech-nology Demonstration (ACT D) pro-gram, to seek to identify candidatetechnologies that with short-term de-velopment can provide sample col-lection devices for air, aerosols,vapor, liquids, and solids. Similarly,sensors that can trigger, detect, oridentify CBRN agents, Toxic Indus-tr ia l Chemicals or Mater ials(TICS/TIMS), O2, LEL/UEL, VOC,

CO, and H2S detection are alsosought.

New and novel systems that canprovide an integration platform formulti-variate sensors will also be en-tertained. These sensors need to besmall, rugged, and use minimalpowerin order to facilitate integration on asmall Unmanned Ground Vehicle(UGV) and must be interface-ablewith systems that can relay status andcontrol to/from an external controllerby means such as serial, infrared(IRDA) or Ethernet. Use of multiplesensors to provide this capability isacceptable.

Technologies must be maturable toa TRL-6 level within 2 years. Ideally,

these technologies should be avail-able to support system integration andtechnical testing in mid FY 2007, fol-lowed by operational demonstrationin late FY 2007. SOL isW911SR-R-05-A002. POP isRDECOM Acquisition Center –Edgewood, ATTN: AMSSB-ACC-E,5183 Blackhawk Road, AberdeenProving Ground, MD 21010-5424.POC is Stephen Skolnik, tel: (410)436-3955. Email questions to [email protected], atRDECOM Acquisition Center -Edgewood.

Fox NBC Vehicle Contract

In February 2005, the ArmyTank-automotive and ArmamentsCommand (TACOM), Rock Island,IL, announced it was awarding a con-tract to General Dynamics Land Sys-tems in Sterling Heights, MI, tofinance services for the M93A1 FoxNuclear, Biological, Chemical (NBC)Reconnaissance vehicle. The contractwas sole source and was issued as part

of an FY 2002 basic orderingagreement (BOA).

TACOM-Rock Island obligated adelivery order amount of $11.5 mil-lion as part of a $39.3 millioncost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) contractfor contractor logistic support (CLS)services for the M93A1 NBC Recon-naissance Vehicle. The work is to beperformed in Sterling Heights, MI,and is to be completed by January,

2006. Contract funding will comefrom Army O&M.

The M93A1 is an Army-improvedversion of the German TPZ1 Fuchswheeled armored vehicle. It isequipped with a fully integrated nu-clear and chemical detection, warningand communications capability, and ithas the added capacity to sampleNBC contamination for future analy-sis (DAAE20-02-G-0008).

CBRN Detection & Remediation Contract

In May 2005, the Army TACOMproposed to award on a sole sourcebasis a new cost-plus-fixed-fee(CPFF) RDT&E contract to Ad-vanced Concepts and TechnologiesInternational (ACTI) of Waco, TX,for solutions of detection andremediation of nuclear biologicalchemical (NBC); chemical, biologic,radiologic and nuclear (CBRN); toxic

industrial chemical (TIC) and toxicindustr ia l mater ials (TIM)contaminants in potable water.

The contractor shall advance theresearch and engineering develop-ment of breadboard/demonstrator de-vices for NBC/CBRN and TIC/TIMcontaminant sample concentration,detection, and removal, currently be-ing conducted under a previous con-

tract with ACTI. This new require-ment shall update the previous litera-ture study and development ofbreadboard/demonstrator devices forCBRN/TIC contaminant sample con-centration, detection, and removal. Inaddition, the contractor shall developa reverse osmosis water recovery unit(ROWPU) computer hydraulicmodel, a flat element test system, a



ROWPU scale model for laboratorytesting, ROWPU instrumentation,and a ROWPU contaminant removaldatabase.

The computer hydraulic modelsupports the development and optimi-

zation of the ROWPU benchtop scalemodel, as well as instrumentation ofthe ROWPU. The contractor shallconduct laboratory testing to includephotocatalytic oxidation (PCO) anddevelop missing fate, transformation

and toxicity data identified during ini-tial AOA under the previous contract.The period of performance will beeighteen (18) months. SOL isW56HZV-05-R-0753, due July 20,2005. POP is TACOM Warren.

CBRN Services Contract

In March 2006, SPAWARawarded Cubic Applications, SanDiego, CA, a $7 million CPIF con-tract to fund the development of theJoint Operational Effects Federationprototype, including code-basedmodels, analysis and decision supporttools used as part of the CBRN plan-ning process, and the development of

new software tools to help prepare forCBRN weapon attacks. The work isto be conducted in Alexandria, VA(80%), and in San Diego, CA (20%),and is to be completed by February2007. The award includes optionsthat if exercised, would increase thevalue of the procurement to $124 mil-lion and extend the period of perfor-

mance to February 2011. Contractfunding is expected to come from theNavy Force Protection AdvancedTechnology element (PE#0603123N) (N00039-06-C-0019).

CBRN Medical Science Solicitation

In January 2006, the DTRA re-leased a BAA to solicit proposals forthe Department of Defense (DoD)Chemical and Biological DefenseMedical Science and Technology

(S&T) Extramural Program. The ex-press focus of this BAA is on the de-velopment of medical pretreatmentand therapeutic countermeasures tochemical, biological, and radiological

threats and associated medical diag-nostics systems. SOL is HDTRA1-06-CMB-BAA, due February 2006.

Fox NBC Recon Vehicle Upgrades

In August 2007, the ArmyRDECOM obligated $56.5 million toGeneral Dynamics’ Land Systems inSterling Heights, MI, under an FFPmodification to a FY96 contract, forthe upgrade of the Fox NBC Recon-naissance Vehicle System (NBCRS)for the M93 configuration to theM93A1, and then to the MP31A1P1.The Fox NBCRS is an Army-im-proved version of the German TPZ1Fuchs wheeled armored vehicle. The

work is being conducted in SterlingHeights, MI, and is to be completedby September 2009. Contract fundingwill come from the Army Weaponsand Tracked Combat Vehicle(WTCV) account.

The M93A1 enhancement allowsfor the detection, identification, andmarking of areas of nuclear andchemical contamination, as well asthe reporting of accurate informationto supported commanders in real

time. A Block I version also permitssoldiers to detect chemical contami-nation at a distance through the use ofa standoff detector (M21 RSCAAL).There is also a Block II modificationto NBCRS that incorporates en-hanced chemical and biological de-tectors that will allow on-the-movestandoff chemical agent detection(DAAM01-96-C-0028).

Counter Terrorism CBRN BAA

In August 2007, the ArmyRDECOM solicited concepts for in-novative research and developmentprojects for combating terrorism.Mission areas include Blast Effectsand Mitigation; Chemical, Biologi-cal, Radiological and Nuclear Coun-termeasures; Improvised ExplosiveDevice Defeat; Investigative Supportand Forensics; Surveillance Collec-tion and Operations Support; Very

Important Person Protection; andConcept Development.

The Army RDECOM AcquisitionCenter is the procuring office for thisBAA for the Combating TerrorismTechnology Support Office, Techni-cal Support Working Group(CTTSO/TSWG). The BAA selec-tion process will be conducted inthree phases. The BAA package de-scribes the full process for the con-

cept submission and evaluation aswell as specific requirements for themission areas listed above. SOL isW91CRB-07-T-0155, due September2007. POP is RDECOM AcquisitionCenter – Aberdeen, ATTN:AMSSB-ACC-A, 4118 SusquehannaAvenue, Aberdeen Proving Ground,MD 21005-3013.





UAV Manufacturers Overview

AAI Corp.P.O Box 126

Hunt Valley, MD 21030

Tel: 410-666-1400.

Internet: www.aaicorp.com

Textron moves to purchase

United Industrial. Textron an-nounced in October that it would pur-chase United Industrial Corp. parentof AAI Corp. The company an-nounced that AAI would fit well andoffer revenue synergies with bothTextron Systems and Bell Helicopter.

The decision by United Industrialto sell the company was no surprise. Anumber of companies have looked atit in recent years including DRS Tech-nologies, Northrop Grumman Corp.,L-3 Communications and EADS.They all decided not to make an offerdue to worries about asbestos liabil-ity.

Despite United Industrial’s strongposition in UAVs, potential acquirerswere deterred by concerns about as-bestos liability. Detroit Stoker Co., anenergy business owned by United In-dustrial, faces a number of asbestoslawsuits that raised the concernsabout potential liability. In addition,potential acquirers asked for condi-tions such as a breakup fee or unani-mous board approval, which UnitedIndustrial was unable to satisfy.

The divestiture of the United In-dustrial’s energy unit appears to havealleviated concerns about the com-pany’s asbestos liability and clearedthe way for a sale of the highly cov-eted UAV business.

Attractiveness to Textron. AAIwas attractive to Textron primarilybecause of its extremely strong posi-tion in tactical UAVs. It is currentlythe leading tactical UAV supplierwith an extremely strong positionwith the US Army and the US Marine

Corps.The company also has leveraged

its position with the Shadow to offerrelated products in a sign of its inno-vative nature. The company used its

own research and developmentmoney to develop video terminals forsoldiers to provide streaming videofrom the Shadow. The Army has nowcontracted to buy the system.

AAI also is attractive because theOne System ground control stationhas become the standard commandand control system for Army tacticalUAVs. In addition to being used onthe Shadow it is also being used forthe Army’s new Warrior UAV.

In addition, AAI has a built astrong position in performance-basedlogistics. The Army has been pleasedwith its work on the Shadow. Textronalso sees the Services and Logisticsbusiness as an attractive growth areaof defense.

AAI outlook. AAI is projected toreport $689 million of sales in 2007 ofwhich $386 million will come fromits unmanned systems unit. Textron’sprojection of AAI’s sales reflect a 22percent sales growth over the past

year.Earnings are also projected to be

strong. Earnings before interest andtaxes are projected to reach $68 mil-lion, up from $52.6 million in 2006.The profit margin reaches 9.9 percentin 2007, up from 9.3 percent the pre-vious year.

That growth is projected to con-tinue with 8.5 percent compound rev-enue growth that could reach 12percent with synergies over the pe-riod from 2007 to 2012. By 2012 syn-ergy revenues are projected to reach$175 million.

Positioning in tactical UAVs.

AAI has clear competitive advan-tages in the US tactical UAV marketwith its continuing deliveries ofShadow 200 for use in Iraq.

AAI this year opened a secondproduction line of Shadow 200 UAVs

to satisfy US Army needs in Iraq.Currently the US Army plans to pur-chase 83 to 109 Shadow 200 systemsfor use by the active Army, the ArmyReserve and the National Guard. TheMarine Corps plans to purchase 12systems to replace its Pioneer withfunding going through the US Army.

As of August 2007 a total of 74systems had been ordered including296 aircraft and 148 ground controlstations. A total of 58 delivered. Thatcompares with 65 Shadows orderedand 49 delivered as of August 2006.In addition, international customerspurchased two Shadow 600 systemsand one Shadow 400.

AAI estimates that deliveries withcurrent orders will extend productionthrough January 2008. Lead time forproduction is between nine monthsand one year.

To boost its production, AAI hasstreamlined its production, movingall work into a single, refurbishedbuilding.

Improving the Shadow. AAI isintroducing a series of upgrades thatare making the Shadow increasinglycapable. A tactical common data linkwill improve interoperability andhelp with spectrum problems. An im-proved electro-optical/infrared sen-sor has been added. Reduced TargetLocation Error is being added to im-prove target ing accuracy andlengthen the distance at which attackscan be mounted.

An improved tactical commondata link will be added to increase thebandwidth. One ground control sys-tem operates one UAV currently butwith an improved data link it will beable to control multiple UAVs. L-3and Cubic are competing to provideto the improved data link which is ex-pected to be available in 2008.


Additional spiral upgrades areplanned including a laser designator,an engine improvements to reducemaintenance and a heavy fuel engine.These improvements are beingworked on now and are expected to beavailable in 2008.

The Marine Corps’ decision toprocure the Shadow 200 was a bigboost for AAI. Originally the MarineCorps’ anticipated replacing the Pio-neer in about 2015 with the winner ofthe Marine Corps’ Tier III competi-tion—either Northrop Grumman’sFire Scout or Bell Helicopters EagleEye tilt-rotor UAV. Ultimately theMarine Corps decided in favor ofcommonality with the Army. TheArmy has already transferred one sys-tem to the Marine Corps for trainingpurposes.

Although the Pioneer UAV is be-ing replaced by the Shadow 200, it isstill expected to be maintained in Ma-rine inventories for occasional use.Pioneer’s continued maintenancegenerates about $7 million annuallyfor AAI although this will decline asthe operations tempo of the Pioneerdeclines. With the Pioneer’s replace-ment by the Shadow all upgrades ofthe Pioneer will also end.

Future Combat System Class III

UAV cancellation a mixed bag. Thecancellation of the competition for anew Class III UAV for the FutureCombat System offers both good andbad news for AAI.

On the positive side, the cancella-tion of the new UAV eliminates thethreat of US government funding todevelop a successor to the Shadow. Inthe Class III competition,

an advanced version of theShadow was competing withPiasecki’s Air Guard rotocopter andTeledyne’s version of Rheinmetall’sKZO UAV. The winner of that compe-tition would have faced a DARPA ro-torcraft—the DP-5X from DragonflyPictures or the Boeing X-50A Drag-onfly canard rotor/wing—to decidewhich aircraft would be procured forthe Future Combat Systems Class IIIUAV, a potentially lucrative opportu-nity for the winner.

On the negative side, the decisionto add additional payloads to theClass I and Class IV Future CombatSystem UAVs directly threatensShadow. It could mean that NorthropGrumman’s Fire Scout, the Class IVUAV, would ultimately replace theShadow. Still, they will take a consid-erable amount of time.

Background on the Shadow. TheShadow was selected by the US Armyfor its Tactical Unmanned Aerial Ve-hicle (TUAV) requirement in Decem-ber 1999. That was followed by a fullproduction contract in December2002.

United Industrial’s AAI managedto beat larger companies favored towin the US Army competition to pro-vide the new TUAV system. At thetime of the contract win in 1999,Alliant Techsystems Inc., the incum-bent on the program was beaten, aswell as TRW Inc.

To win, AAI took on a unit ofRaytheon Co. in Falls Church, Va. asa subcontractor to help boost its pros-pects on the program.

Export prospects. United Indus-trial plans to build on its US Armysuccess to export the Shadow. As yet,there has been little to show forShadow export efforts.

Poland will be purchasing two ofthe Shadow systems as the latest in-ternational customer. Polish troops’involvement in Iraq has created con-siderable interest in Poland in thecountry purchasing its own UAVs.Poland is now seeking to develop aposition as a leader within NATO inreconnaissance and surveillance. TheShadow would be the first stage ofthat process which Polish officialshope will broader to include either thePredator or even the Global Hawk, as-suming US aid is available for suchacquisitions.

AAI has already made several ex-ports of the Shadow UAV family. Ro-mania purchased the Shadow 600, alarger version of the Shadow UAV,while an undisclosed Asian countrypurchased the Shadow 400, a mari-time version of the Shadow.

The limited success of the Shadowin export markets appears to stemfrom intense international competi-tion. Israel’s Elbit Systems and IsraelAircraft Industries are extremely ac-tive in international UAV markets. InAustralia, a team composed of Boe-ing Australia and Israel Aircraft In-dustries (IAI) beat a BAE SystemsAustralia-AAI team to win a contractto provide tactical UAVs to the Aus-tralian Defence Force. Since the Boe-ing Australia /IAI team offered theI-View 250 UAV, a new UAV underdevelopment, the loss was all themore bitter for AAI, which alreadyhas the Shadow in production. IAI’scommitment to build part of the airvehicle in Australia was a factor in thevictory.

Growth in logistics, One Station.

AAI has been successful in gettingthe US Army and the US MarineCorps to adopt its One Station groundcontrol station as the standard.

The new US Army Warrior pro-gram will use the One Station for itsground control. Obviously theShadow already uses the One Station.

In the Marine Corps, the Pioneerhas now been modified to use the OneStation and the expectation is that fu-ture Marine Corps UAVs will also usethe One Station.

The Coast Guard’s Eagle EyeUAV, if it moves ahead, will also usethe One Station.

As an increasing number of USmilitary UAVs adopt the One Station,AAI’s management believes that theOne Station will adopted by othercountries as well to ensure they canwork easily in coalition operationswith US troops.

In addition to its success in gettinggreater adoption of the One Station,AAI is benefitting from a growth inUAV-related logistics. As the in-stalled base of Shadows increases,each system requires spares, engi-neering upgrades and training. Withits success in performance based lo-gistics associated with the Shadow,AAI is able to look at broadening itslogistics work for other manufactur-ers’ products, such as the Warrior


Page 252 UAV Manufacturers Overview

UAV and the Predator UAV. It previ-ously had a contract to providetraining for the Raven UAV.

Aerosonde acquisition offers sci-

entific, Marine Corps and interna-

tional prospects. As AAI seeks tobroaden its position in UAVs, it hasacquired several UAV companies tobroaden its product offering.

AAI’s purchase of Aerosonde Pty.Ltd. and Aerosonde North AmericaInc. for $6.5 million is an importantstep. Aerosonde Pty is a Victoria,Australia-based manufacturer and de-veloper of UAVs which has the poten-tial to broaden AAI through the use ofits Aerosonde UAV for weather fore-casting needs of the National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration,NASA and the US Air Force.Aerosonde offers UAVs on a lease ba-sis for weather forecasting.

AAI also was able to enter theAerosonde UAV in the Marine Corps’Tier II UAV competition, pitting itagainst five other UAVs, includingthe competitive favorite, the BoeingScanEagle already operated by theMarine Corps. With the United Statesrepresenting most of the world mar-ket for UAVs, access to the US marketalso is a key advantage for Aerosondewith its acquisition. AAI officials saythey continue to evaluate whether tomake the Aerosonde their final offerin the competition or whether theywill offer another vehicle.

Aerosonde may also help AAIpenetrate foreign markets. Its UAVscan be marketed to customers whocannot currently afford the Shadow.Since Aerosonde’s UAVs would usethe One System ground control sys-tem offered by AAI, eventually theAerosonde UAVs could be substi-tuted by Shadow air vehicles.

Allied Aerospace builds MAV

positioning. AAI also acquired theUAV business of Allied Aerospace

last year. While it was a small acquisi-tion, it was also very important strate-gically. Allied Aerospace has theintellectual property rights for the airvehicles for Honeywell’s Organic AirVehicle family.

As a result, AAI has a strong posi-t ion with small UAVs on theHoneywell team. In March 2006, itreceived a $1.7 million order fromHoneywell Aerospace for 55 MicroAir Vehicle (MAV) airframes for usein the Advanced Concept TechnologyDemonstration program of the De-fense Advanced Research ProjectsAgency. The contact, which involvesdesign modifications and manufac-ture of the MAVs, extends AAI’swork with Honeywell on MAV sup-port until November 2006. The MAV,which flies like a helicopter using aducted fan to provide thrust, is de-signed to scout urban and mountain-ous areas using its hover and starecapability. It is small enough to becarried in a backpack.

The involvement of Honeywell inthe project is important due to itsworldwide marketing clout. It willhave the ability to market the MAV tonot just military customers but also topolice departments around the coun-try and around the world. The MAV isalso expected to have civil applica-tions such as bridge inspections.

Despite its interest in making UAVacquisitions, there is no guarantee thecompany will be able to do any addi-tional acquisitions soon. Currentlythe obstacle to making acquisitions isthe high valuations for UAV manu-facturers. As yet, the company hasbalked at paying such premiums.

In terms of its interest in UAVs,AAI remains committed to purchas-ing air frame manufacturers. Whilethe company considered possiblypurchasing a small payload manufac-turer in the past, it now believes such

as acquisition would expose the com-pany to unnecessary risks of trying tounderstand the sensor market.

Threats to the company’s UAV

position. Despite its strong currentposition in the UAV business, UnitedIndustrial would have found it hard tomaintain a strong position in an at-tractive growth market such as UAVs,which is attracting an increasingnumber of large and small companiesinto the market. This is part of the ex-planation of the decision to sell thecompany to Textron.

Northrop Grumman has emergedas a major competitor since the pur-chase of Ryan Aeronautical in 1999.With its strong positioning in the stra-tegic UAV market due to the strategicGlobal Hawk UAV and the tacticalFirescout, Northrop Grumman hasestablished itself as the broadest UAVmanufacturer in the United States.

The competition for the UAV mar-ket includes not only NorthropGrumman, but a number of otherlarger companies offering UAVs, in-cluding General Atomics, Textron,Lockheed Martin Corp., the BoeingCo., Israel Aircraft Industries, Israel’sElbit, France’s Thales and France’sSafran.

Moreover, the potentially more lu-crative unmanned combat aerial vehi-cle market (UCAV) is the domain ofonly the larger companies, includingNorthrop Grumman, Boeing,Lockheed Martin and Dassault Avia-tion. United Industrial is making noeffort to enter the UCAV market,which would be far too technicallydemanding for a small company.

In addition to the size of its com-petitors, United Industrial also faceschallenges from a trend toward theprovision of complete systems, suchas a larger company like NorthropGrumman could provide, rather thanjust platforms.


UAV Manufacturers Overview Page 253

AeroVironment Inc.181 W. Huntington Drive, Suite 202

Monrovia, CA 91016

Tel: 626-357-9983

Fax: 626-359-9628

Internet: www.avinc.com

Focusing on growth in small

UAVs. AeroVironment may be a rela-tively small defense company, but it isa giant in small UAVs. It is seeking tobroaden its position with a focus onnew markets such a homeland secu-rity, new products and an initial pub-lic offering that will raise money forpossible acquisitions.

AeroVironment already is the larg-est player in small unmanned aerialvehicles (SUAV), experiencing ex-plosive growth over the past threeyears. Its revenue over the past fouryears has almost quadrupled, drivenlargely by its UAV programs.

In January 2007 AeroVironmentsuccessfully completed the initialpublic offering of its stock raising$80.5 million. The stock offeringgives the company greater flexibilitygoing forward in expanding its opera-tions or making acquisitions.

The company has prepared thefoundations for further growth. ItsSUAV facility in Simi Valley, Calif.has been expanded and can produceup to 1,000 SUAV aircraft per month.Currently it is producing 200monthly.

AeroVironment’s SUAVs arelaunched by one person and operatedwith a hand-held control unit. Carry-ing electro-optical or infrared sen-sors, they can travel as much as 20miles at speeds as high as 50 miles perhour. Each system consists of aground-control station and three airvehicles.

Competitive strength in SUAVs.

In open competitions for US SUAVs,AeroVironment has been the victor ineach of the last three competitions. In2001 AeroVironment and BAIAerosystems defeated up to 10 otherUAV manufacturers to the final de-velopment of the Navy-Marine

Corps’ Dragon Eye portable UAV.Subsequently, The Marine Corps’chose the AeroVironment to build theDragon Eye in November 2003.

In October 2005, the US Armycompetition for a small unmanned ae-rial vehicle that could be carried in abackpack ended with the victory ofAeroVironment’s Raven B over L-3BAI Aerosystems’ Evolution Ex-tended Time (XTS) SUAV. ThisSUAV will be dedicated for use bybrigade and company commanders.The Army plans to purchase as manyas 1,328 of the systems, which in-clude a ground-control station andthree air vehicles.

In December 2006,AeroVironment won an Air Forcecontract worth up to $45 million overfive years to buy as many as 1,000Battlefield Air Targeting Micro AirVehicles (BATMAV), a smaller UAVthan the Raven.

Small UAV product range.

AeroVironment produces five differ-ent SUAV systems. With their porta-bility, limited cost and minimalinfrastructure needs, they are de-signed for small units. They allowlow altitude intelligence, reconnais-sance survei l lance andcommunications relay.

AeroVironment’s SUAVs include:

• Raven. Used by the US Army andSpecial Operations Command theRaven has a range of six miles anda flight time of 90 minutes. It islighter and greater range and flighttime than predecessors such as theDragon Eye and Swift. Under afive year IDIQ contract won in2004, AeroVironment became thesole provider of Raven to the USArmy. As of July 29, 2006, ordersof $58.8 million had been placed

of planned purchases of $282.6million.

• Dragon Eye. Used by the US Ma-rine Corps with the ability to makehorizontal autonomous landings,the Dragon Eye has a range of 3.0miles and a flight time of 60 min-utes. The Marine Corps has an-nounced that i t would betransitioning from the Dragon Eyeto the Raven.

• Swift. Used by US Special Opera-tions Command, Swift was de-rived from the Dragon Eye to meetspecial operations needs. It has arange of 3.0 miles and a flight timeof 60 minutes.

• Wasp. Used by the US Army, Ma-rine Corps, Navy and Special Op-erations Command, the Wasp isthe smallest of AeroVironment’sproducts. It is designed for rapidassembly and launch with a rangeof 2.4 miles and a flight time of 30minutes.

• Puma. Used by the US Navy andSpecial Operations Command, thePuma has the longest flight dura-tion of any of AeroVironment’sUAVs. It has a range of 6 miles anda flight time of four hours.

Research on new projects.

AeroVironment is working on at leastthree new projects related to UAVs.They include:

• Global Observer. This high-alti-tude, long-endurance UAV wouldbe intended to provide year roundpersistent intelligence, surveil-lance, reconnaissance and com-munications. The aircraft isintended to be equivalent to a12-mile high, low cost satellite. Itwould provide coverage of asmuch as 600 miles diameter. The



Global Observer would fly at65,000 feet for five to seven daysbefore needing refueling. In addi-tion to intelligence and communi-cations applications for defenseand homeland security, the GlobalObserver could be used for disas-ter recovery, storm tracking andwildfire detection and tracking. Itis under development for the USArmy’s Special Operations Com-mand.

• Switchblade. This hand-heldSUAV would be able to destroy atarget using detonation of anonboard explosive. An operatorwould be able to launch Switch-blade and guide it to its target us-ing a ground control unit. In urbanwarfare this would be useful in at-tacking snipers, mortar launchersand machine guns.

• Digital Data Link. This digital net-work module would enable aswitch from the current analogtechnology used onAeroVironment’s SUAV. Itwould allow transmission betweenSUAVs and their operators as wellas reduce bandwidth needs,thereby increasing the number ofSUAVs that can work in close dis-tances.

Building an international pres-

ence. With allied troops in Afghani-stan and Iraq able to see benefits ofAeroVironment’s SUAVs in action,the company is focusing on increas-ing its international sales.

So far international sales are quitelimited. AeroVironment has made in-ternational sales to customers in Aus-tralia, France, Italy and Denmark butinternational sales have been less than7 percent for each of the past fouryears. In 2007 they amounted to fivepercent of total sales, which was quitean improvement. Prior to that, inter-national sales as a portion of totalsales have been in decline, fallingfrom 93.6 percent in fiscal 2004 to97.6 percent in 2005 and 99.7 percentin 2006.

Obviously a number of factors areinvolved in the limited internationalsales. The UAVs are still extremelynew and foreign militaries will taketime to include them in their own pro-curement plans. Clearly there hasbeen a focus so far on meeting the rap-idly growing needs of the US military.In addition, gaining government ap-proval for export of UAVs to a num-ber of countries can be slow anddifficult.

Homeland security prospects.

AeroVironment also sees strong po-tential in homeland security with thepotential for offering a family ofUAVs in coming years .AeroVironment would like to trans-late its position as the leading supplierof small UAVs for the US militaryinto a leadership role in homelandsecurity.

The Department of Homeland Se-curity is still evaluating how it woulduse UAVs. It has experimented withmuch larger UAVs, such as leasingElbit’s Hermes 450 for trials earlierand has been deploying several Pred-ator UAVs.

Mostly recently, the Departmentof Homeland Security awarded a con-tract for SBI Net to The Boeing Co.whose team includes Israel’s ElbitSystems. Elbit will be offering theSkylark-man packed UAV.

In other homeland security roles,SUAVs could be used in natural disas-ters to assess damage and aid in res-cue efforts.

AeroVironment executives alsosee potential to use their UAVs in ar-eas such as petrochemical industry in-frastructure monitoring, utilityinfrastructure inspection and aerialimaging.

AeroVironment see specific appli-cations for a number of their existingUAVs. Small UAVs such as thefour-pound, hand-launched Raven,offering less than 90 minutes of flight,can be stored at a border outpost or inthe truck of a car for launching asneeded. The BATMAV could be usedin situations in which a UAV need tobe carried in a backpack and can havea shorter duration.

The Navy’s Puma UAV could beused for maritime surveillance, offer-ing 150 minutes of flight. The AquaPuma, another variant, could be usedwhen landings must be made in saltwater.

Even the Global Observer mighthave some homeland security appli-cations. Its long-endurance would en-able it to fly for five to seven daysbefore refueling, allowing it to beused for border security or maritimesurveillance.

A change in Federal Aviation Ad-ministration (FAA) regulations onSUAVs is critical if AeroVironment isto be able to boost its non-defensesales of SUAVs. Currently FAA regu-lations require that SUAVs remainwithin 400 feet of the ground and thatoperations be able to see the aircraftthroughout its flight. Those regula-tions are currently being reviewed bythe FAA.

Acquisition interest. In additionto its rapid growth organically,AeroVironment is interested in mak-ing acquisitions.

The company has said little otherthan any acquisition would need toadd to its product offerings, customerbase or technological capabilities.

That may not prove easy for thecompany to do in UAVs. United In-dustrial’s AAI has been looking foracquisition candidates in UAVs andhas tended to find that properties arevery highly priced and frequentlyhave poor business prospects. Themere fact that they have a limited po-sition in UAVs has tended to drive uptheir price. United Industrial recentlyannounced that it would be acquireditself by Textron.

Challenges ahead with larger

competitors. Clearly there are loom-ing challenges for AeroVironment inthe competitive environment.

Despite its dominance in theSUAV market, it will face increas-ingly serious challenges from largercompanies. Companies such asLockheed Martin and Honeywellmay have seen the market as a relativebackwater with limited sales, but asthe market grows their interest is



growing. The economies of scalesuch companies can bring to bear inthe market will be increasingly im-portant as production of SUAVs tran-sitions from boutique production intomass production.

As larger companies becoming in-creasingly interested inAeroVironment’s market niche, theyare able to bring tremendous techni-cal, financial, research and marketingcapabilities to bear in the market.They may be able hire key employeesby offering strong compensationpackages. Larger companies may alsooffer services that lessen the role ofAeroVironment in future contracts.For example, AAI performed trainingon AeroVironment’s Raven SUAVfor the US Army earlier.

With their large procurementclout, big companies may also be ableto get more ready access to materialsin shor t supply. In 2005AeroVironment have difficulties get-ting needed supplies particular nyloncomposites used for SUAVs due toworldwide shortages.

Honeywell, winner of the Class IFuture Combat Systems competition,will be making a strong push intoAeroVironment’s market niche as itsUAV continues its development.

AeroVironment is clearly aware ofthe need to retain its technological

edge in such an environment. It hasbeen increasing its company-fundedresearch and development spendingover the past several years. Researchin the 2007 fiscal year totaled $13.9million or 8 percent of revenue, an ex-tremely high proportion of sales forany defense company but still belowthe 12 percent spent the previous year.

Yet AeroVironment also faces achallenge in competing with largecompanies’ research and develop-ment budgets. Customer funded re-search and development has fallen inthe past several years, making com-pany funded research all the more im-portant. In fiscal 2004, customer-funded research and development to-taled $17.3 million, falling to $10.6million in 2005. By 2006, it slightlyrebounded to $11.6 million, but re-mained well below the levelsachieved in 2004.

In fiscal 2007 AeroVironmentposted a strong gain in cus-tomer-funded research and develop-ment that reversed the declines ofrecent years. Customer-funded re-search and development amounted toapproximately $19.1 or 11 percent ofsales.

US government contracts may alsoadd to the r isks posed toAeroVironment by competition.Some contracts allow the federal gov-

ernment to release technical datawithout any constraint on a potentialrecipient. They may also allow theroyalty-free use of inventions devel-oped under US government contracts.Obviously such provisions lower thebarriers to entry for competitors.

Strong financial performance.

AeroVironment is a rarity in the UAVindustry because it offers transpar-ency into its financial performance inUAVs that is lacking with largercompanies.

That financial performance hasbeen extremely good. Overall reve-nue increased from $47.7 million inthe year ended April 30, 2004 to$173.7 million in 2007.

Net income soared even faster,growing from $2.2 million in 2004 to$11.4 million in 2006.

Unmanned Aerial Systems con-tributed $146.5 million of the com-pany’s $173.7 million in revenues forthe 2006 fiscal year, 84 percent of thecompany’s sales. That compared to$30.4 million of the total $47.7 mil-lion in fiscal 2004, approximately 64percent of sales.

In 2007 Unmanned Aerial Sys-tems revenues increased to $146.5million from $111.1 million, the pre-vious year, a 32 percent increase.

Aurora Flight Sciences Corp.9950 Wakeman Drive

Manassas, VA 20110

Tel: (703) 369-3633

Fax: (703) 369-4514

Internet: www.aurora.aero

Building its position through

collaboration. While Aurora FlightSciences has not hesitated to go italone on UAV programs, generallythe company has built up its positionby working a subcontractor to primecontractors.

Aurora has a key strategic relation-ship with Northrop Grumman. Au-rora provides about a third of the

exterior structure of the Global Hawkincluding the V-tail assembly. Aurorareceived a $16 million contract tobuild Northrop Grumman’s Hunter IIUAV, which was offered unsuccess-fully in the Army’s ExtendedRange/Multi-Purpose (ER/MP) UAVcompetition. Northrop Grumman iseven a member of the Golden Eyeteam.

Aurora is working with Boeing onthe Orion High Altitude, Long Loiter(HALL) hydrogen-powered UAV in-tended to loiter as much as 4 days. Itsprimary role would be as a communi-cations relay. In July the US Army’sSpace and Missile Defense Com-mand/Army Forces Strategic Com-mand awarded a $6.1 million contractto continue development of the OrionHall system that could be worth as



much as $27.7 million if all optionsare exercised. Boeing is providing thehydrogen engine which is intended tocarry payloads of as much as 400pounds to altitudes of up to 65,000feet. The UAV would then remainthere for more than 100 hours.

Aurora is studying another versionof the Orion HALL that would beconventionally powered. It wouldhave endurances of as much as twoweeks at 20,000 feet altitude.

The Orion HALL could be usedfor persistent surveillance and targettracking by the military or for envi-ronmental research to track hurri-canes and severe storms.

Aurora’s research programs.

Through its position as a small busi-ness, Aurora has been able to win keyresearch programs. In April 2007 Au-rora was selected by the US Navy todevelop technologies to enable un-manned aerial, surface and underwa-ter vehicles to work together. In May2007 Aurora was selected by the USAir Force to develop technology toenable micro air vehicles to movethrough complex, cluttered environ-ments. This includes both stationaryobjects such as buildings and movingobjects such as vehicles.

Aurora opens a new facility. Au-rora is expanding, opening a new

manufacturing plant at the GoldenTriangle Regional Airport in Colum-bus, Mississippi in May 2007.

The plan manufactures compositeaerostructures. Its UAV work in-cludes design, assembly and integra-t ion of the Orion HALL, theGoldenEye 50 and the GoldenEye 80.In addition the plant will work onmanned aircraft including the Ad-vanced Composite Cargo Aircraftand parts of the Sikorsky AircraftCH-53K heavy lift helicopter.

The Boeing Co.100 N. Riverside

Chicago, IL 60606-1596

Tel: (312) 544-2000

Internet: www.boeing.com

Pursuing the Broad Area Mari-

time (BAMS) unmanned systems

contract. Boeing is the latest entryinto the BAMS contest, building onexpertise developed in its unsuccess-ful bid for the Navy Unmanned Com-bat Air Vehicle (UCAV) contest.

Boeing is offering an unmannedversion of the G550 business jet. Itwill use some of the same softwareused in the ScanEagle. It will alsobring technology and people from itsUCAV team.

Boeing, which will be responsiblefor the unmanned of the aircraft andthe overall system, put together ateam that included: General Dynam-ics’ Gulfstream (manufacturer of theG550 jet); Raytheon Co. (advanceddigital radar, electronic support mea-sures, electro-optical and infraredsystems); Honeywell (vehicle man-agement) and Rolls-Royce plc(aircraft engine).

The contract, which is expected tobe decided in the last quarter of 2007,involves initial operational capabilityby 2014 for one orbit. Ultimately theentire system will include five orbits.

Boeing’s concept for each orbit in-cludes: three G550 aircraft, one mainoperating base and one forward oper-ating base.

Boeing faces a tough competitiveenvironment. Northrop GrummanCorp. is offering its Global HawkUAV. ALockheed Martin Corp.-Gen-eral Atomics team is offering theMariner, a naval version of thePredator UAV.

Boeing bases its appeal in part onits ability to bring common systems tothe BAMS from its work as primecontractor on the P-8 maritime patrolaircraft program. Creating systemsthat have the same mission systemsoftware, communications suite andcontractor logistics support shouldcut training costs, according toBoeing executives.

Boeing also sees the reliability ofthe aircraft in government service as abig advantage. The aircraft hasachieved 99.8 percent reliability. Thatreliability reduces the number of air-craft needed and also reduces theneed for attrition aircraft.

As a commercial aircraft, the G550also has the advantage of a worldwidelogistics network to support existingbusiness jet customers.

Boeing executives suggest thatthere is more room for growth in theG550 than in their competitors’ offer-ings. With continuing weight prob-lems in many programs and thepossibility of adding additional pay-loads in the future, they suggest thiscould be another key advantage.

The G550 also has speed advan-tage with the ability to cruise at 440knots and to dash at 480 knots. Thisshould help limit the number of air-craft needed.

Despite these key advantages,there are also some hurdles in the costof the individual aircraft and theG550’s need to still obtain certifica-tion. Both of its competitors, theGlobal Hawk UAV and the PredatorUAV already have passed certifica-tion and are in operation with themilitary.

Picking up the pieces after its

UCAV failure. The loss of the Navy’s



UCAV program was not unexpectedbut was still a setback for Boeing.

Northrop Grumman beat Boeingto win the $635.8 million demonstra-tor contract in July 2007 in a resultthat was widely anticipated.

Boeing achieved some technicalsuccess with 64 successful flights ofits X-45. Boeing was forced to try toplay catch up with NorthropGrumman

Following the cancellation of theJ-UCAS program. The decision toterminate the joint Air Force-NavyJ-UCAS program in the 2007 defensebudget was a bitter blow for Boeing.Boeing had been working on theX-45C demonstrator which was opti-mized for Air Force missions.Northrop Grumman was working onthe X-47B that was intended to oper-ate from aircraft carriers.

With the differing orientation oftheir work, the transfer of the programto the Navy put Boeing at a distinctdisadvantage versus NorthropGrumman. Boeing received fundsfrom the Navy to even the playingfield with its competitor NorthropGrumman, but it was difficult to catchup to a competitor that had alreadyoriented its work to the Navy.

Boeing developing innovative al-

liances, acquisitions to build UAV

presence. Boeing has adopted an in-novative approach of building itsUAV business that ranges from out-right acquisitions of UAV businessesto strategic alliances.

Boeing is working with the InsituGroup to develop the ScanEagle, alow-cost, long-endurance autono-mous unmanned vehicle. Rather thanpurchasing Insitu, Boeing preferredto maintain the company’s independ-ence and its ability to remain innova-tive. In February 2002, the twocompanies signed an initial agree-ment to develop and building theScanEagle. They followed that agree-ment with a long-term contract tomove into production.

The approach has worked well.The team was able to quickly intro-duce the ScanEagle into Iraq where itestablished a strong reputation as the

only UAV that flew 100 percent of thetime in the support of the battle ofFallujah in 2004.

ScanEagle, a long-endurance,fully autonomous unmanned aircraft,has been used by the Marines sinceJuly 2004, the US Navy since Sep-tember 2005 and the Australian De-fense Forces since November 2006.During that time, ScanEagles haveflown more than 4,600 sorties and50,000 flight hours.

Team ScanEagle, composed ofBoeing and Insitu, have achievedconsiderable success in gaining ac-ceptance of their system. The Marineshave used the system since July 2004.The US Navy began using it in Sept.2005. The Australian Defense Forceshave used it since November 2006.

The ScanEagle, which has beenused by the Marine Corps, is now incompetition for the Marine Corps’Tier II requirement.

Boeing is working with AuroraFlight Sciences and Ford Motor Com-pany on the development of Orion, itsHigh Altitude Long Endurance UAV.The key to success will be the hydro-gen propulsion system based onFord’s proprietary technology whichis being tested in a controlled cham-ber at Aurora Flight Sciences’Manassas, Va. facility.

The goal is to develop an un-manned system that could providepersistent intelligence, surveillanceand reconnaissance over an area. Thiswould have applications rangingfrom battlefield intelligence to borderobservation and port security.

The system could be used for tele-communications relay after a crisissuch as Hurricane Katrina or after anattack on US communicationssatellites.

The system would stay aloft formore than a week at a height of morethan 50,000 feet carrying payloadsweighing as much as 2,000 pounds.

Boeing also has chosen to build itsposition through an outright acquisi-tion of a UAV company. In May 2004,Boeing purchased Frontier SystemsInc., developer of the A-160 Hum-mingbird and Maverick UAVs.

Frontier Systems, privately-heldcompany, had about 70 employeesand was formed in 1991. Frontier isbased in Irvine, Calif., and also hasoperations in Victorville, Calif., forflight-test operations.

The A-160 Hummingbird is a ver-tical take-off-and-landing UAV. Itwas designed to fly up to 2,500 nauti-cal miles with 30 to 40 hour endur-ance carrying as much as a 1,000pound payload. The Hummingbird isintended to provide reconnaissance,surveillance, target acquisition, com-munication relay, precision re-supplyand sensor delivery. Eventually it isintended to provide precision attackcapabilities.

The Maverick UAV is a retrofittedcommercially available helicoptersold to the US Special OperationsCommand. The Maverick UAV hasbeen used as a test bed for A-160technologies.

ScanEagle achieves success with

Marine Corps. ScanEagle hasproved very successful with the USMarine Corps and the US Navy. Morerecently in July 2007 the MarineCorps awarded Boeing an $18 mil-lion, three and a half year contract toprovide intelligence, surveillance andreconnaissance support for theScanEagle. With options the valuecould increase to $351 million.

Although ScanEagle was alreadyin service with the Marine Corps, ithad to compete against two to threeother companies to win the finalaward.

The services contract is a stop gapmeasure until the Navy/Marine Corpsawards the Small Tactical UnmannedAerial Vehicle System (STUAS) in2011. The draft request for proposalswas expected in January 2008 at presstime.

In April 2005, the Navy awardedBoeing a $14.5 million contract forsupport of operations in Iraq. Thatwas followed by a Sept. 2005 contractto provide the system for Navyhigh-speed vessels and an afloat for-ward staging base.

Although ScanEagle as the incum-bent is seen as having a strong advan-



tage, other companies are alsopreparing to compete for the require-ment . The Swif t Engineer-ing/Raytheon team is expected tooffer the Killer Bee. NorthropGrumman, which withdrew from co-operating on the Killer Bee, is evalu-

ating the UAV it will offer. DRSTechnologies may offer its NeptuneMaritime UAV. Lockheed Martin isanother likely candidate to offer aUAV although it may team with an-other company such as DRSTechnologies.

Elbit Systems Ltd.Advanced Technology Center

P.O. Box 539

Haifa 31053

Israel

Tel: (972) 4 8 315 315

Fax: (972) 4 8 550 002

Internet: www.elbit.co.il

New opportunities emerging.

Elbit has become a major player inUAVs thanks to its victory in theUnited Kingdom’s Watchkeeper pro-gram. That victory showed that theThales-Elbit team could beat majorplayers in UAVs such as NorthropGrumman.

Thales and Elbit set up a joint ven-ture known as UAV Tactical Systems(U-TacS) to develop the UAV basedon Elbit’s Hermes 450. Elbit owns 51percent of the joint venture with theremainder held by Thales.

Elbit’s strong position in theUnited Kingdom in the Watchkeeperprogram meant that the UK turned toit when it urgently needed UAVs foroperational deployments. In June2007, U-TacS won a $110 millioncontract to provide Hermes 450UAVs and needed support for severalyears.

Elbit has followed that up its suc-cess on Watchkeeper with an agree-ment to team with Dassault Aviationand Thales to offer the UAV forFrench tactical surveillance require-ments for the Système de DroneTactique Terrestre (SDTT). The WK450 UAVs being developed under theWatchkeeper program will be offeredfor the French program.

At time when EADS is having em-barrassing problems with the UAVs itis providing for the French army, theThales team is in a strong position.

Thales, as prime contractor for theFrench defense procurement agency,is also using the WK 450 in a study ofmunitions release and firing fromUAVs.

Elbit’s cooperation with Thalesalso paid off in Canada. Thales Can-ada was selected in September 2006to deliver a mini-UAV based onElbit’s Skylark. Elbit is to deliver fiveSkylark UAVs with an option for anadditional five. The goal was to pro-vide an immediate capability for Ca-nadian Forces in Afghanistan.

This puts Elbit in a good positionfor the competition for CanadianArmy plans to acquire a family ofUAVs. The competition is expected topit Elbit’s Skylark 2 against the Boe-ing/Insitu ScanEagle and Israel Air-craft Industries-Malat I-View 50.

Beyond its willingness to teamwith other companies, Elbit hasshown a willingness to consider localproduction to bolster its prospects.The Watchkeeper UAV will be pro-duced in the UK and exported to othercountries. Elbit agreement with twoPolish companies—Bumar andRADWAR—that it would produceUAVs there for the Polish army, po-lice and border police.

Introducing new products.

Elbit’s management is planning tobuild a slightly larger version of theSkylark. The Skylark 1 and 2 have es-tablished a strong position in the mar-

ket with 15 customers including Can-ada and Australia.

The company will follow-up itssuccess with the Hermes 450B thathas been chosen for the Watchkeeperprogram by introducing the Hermes900. It will have the same mission avi-onics and control systems but will belarger. It will have an endurance of 40hours, twice the 20 hours of the Her-mes 450. It will also carry a payloadof 300 kilograms, twice the payloadof the Hermes 450.

Still, the company is staying out ofthe high-altitude long-endurancemarket. In Israel, Israel Aircraft In-dustries is focused on that segmentwhich is dominated worldwide by theNorthrop Grumman Global Hawk.

Elbit is proving to be extremelyagile in its marketing and product de-velopment efforts, in part a legacy ofthe company’s position as a non-stateowned company. Elbit controls ap-proximately 85 percent of Israel’snon-state owned defense industry.

UAV victories. Elbit’s agility hasbeen reflected a series of recent UAVwins. The Boeing Co.’s Sept. 2006victory in the $2 billion US SecureBorder Initiative, with Elbit’s partici-pation on the Boeing team could pavethe way for the use of its UAVs for UShomeland security.

That followed the Nov. 2005 se-lection of Elbit’s Skylark mini-UAVfor use by the Australian army, poten-



tially a much smaller contract of sixsystems.

In a critical victory, the UnitedKingdom’s Watchkeeper program ismoving ahead with the Hermes 450 asits basis. In August 2005, the UKMinistry of Defence (MoD) andThales UK, and Elbit Systems Ltd.signed a contract worth £700 millionfor the development and initial sup-port of the program. At the time, ElbitSystems Group estimated that itwould receive a significant part of thecontract, valued at around £300 mil-lion, the majority being executed byas Leicester based joint venture ofThales and Elbit Systems. This pro-gram will establish a capability toprovide day and night-time recon-naissance by 2010 with UAVs able tostay airborne for more than 16 hourseach.

These contracts have been key inbroadening Elbit’s base beyond Is-rael. This was a major step for Elbit inincreasing its international presencein the UAV market. The Watchkeepervictory against competitors who ini-t ial ly included BAE Systems,Lockheed Martin Corp. and Northrop

Grumman Corp. gives theThales-Elbit team tremendous credi-bility in international market.

In addition to beating other lead-ing UAV manufacturers, Elbit broad-ened its possible export targets. TheWatchkeeper program involves theThales-Elbit team using the UnitedKingdom as an export base for un-manned aerial vehicles.

Position in Israel. While Elbit ex-ecutives like to point out that theyhave won all competitive UAV bidswithin Israel, Israel Aircraft Indus-tries remains a potential competitoron the domestic market. The Israeligovernment remains committed toIAI as a strategic and technologicalasset that must be preserved. IAI wasawarded a $50 million contract tosupply the Heron UAV to the IsraelAircraft Force in Sept. 2005.

The Heron TP is particularly im-portant to Israel since it was originallydeveloped as a UAV that could per-form boost-phase intercept. TheHeron would be able to loiter and thenlaunch a weapon to destroy a missilein its boost phase.

The next test of Elbit against Is-raeli competitors will come as the Is-raeli Defense Force ground forcescommand selects its main mini-UAV.Elbit is offering the SkyLark againstIAI’s I-View and Rafael’s SkyLite.

Business units engaged in UAV

work. Elbit’s UAV work is done pri-marily by Silver Arrow LP, with workin both Rishon Le-Zion and Haifa, Is-rael. Silver Arrow developed andmanufactures the Hermes 450S forthe Israel Defense Forces and theHermes 1500, a medium altitudeUAV for the Israeli Ministry of De-fense. It is also working on develop-ment of the Hermes variant for theUK Watchkeeper program.

UAV Tactical Systems, a Britishsubsidiary owned 51 percent by Elbitand 49 percent by Thales UK Ltd. isresponsible for a major portion ofwork on the Watchkeeper program.

In addition, UAV Engines Ltd., awholly-owned UK subsidiary of Sil-ver Arrow, manufactures engines forUAVs. The UK Watchkeeper will bepowered by the company’s engines.

EMT IngenieurgesellschaftGrube 29

D-82377 Penzberg

Germany

Tel: (49) (0) 8856 / 9225-0

Fax: (49) (0) 8856 / 2055

Internet: www.emt-penzberg.de

EMT proving successful in in-

ternational markets. In the intenselycompetitive international market forUAVs, EMT is proving that it canmake a market impact well beyond itssize.

Early in 2006 the Pakistan militarypurchased the Luna, a tactical recon-naissance UAV with a range of 80 ki-lometers, to patrol its borders. TheNetherlands purchased five Aladinmini-UAVs to support its troops inAfghanistan.

The Pakistani and Dutch exportsfollowed extensive use of EMT’s

UAVs in the Balkans and Afghanistanby the German military. EMT pro-vided the Luna, a UAV with a range of80 kilometers, to the German militaryfor use in Kosovo in 2000. Since thenEMT also has delivered the Aladin, asmall UAV with a range of 5 kilome-ters. Both UAVs have been used byGerman forces in Afghanistan.

EMT faces growing competition

from Rheinmetall. EMT facinggrowing competition in Germanyfrom Rheinmetall, which is workingto establish a strong position in UAVsdespite EMT’s early lead.

Rheinmetal l developed theKleinfluggeraet Zielortung (KZO)UAV, which has been adopted by theGerman Armed Forces for artilleryspotting. The initial pilot system wasdelivered in 2006 with six systems(consisting of ten air vehicles and twoground stations) to be delivered to theBundeswehr by 2007. The companyteamed with Teledyne to attempt tosell a derivative of the KZO to the USmilitary as part of the Future CombatSystem (see Teledyne report).

Rheinmetall is also offering theOptional Piloted Surveillance and



Reconnaissance System (Opale) andaerial sensor aircraft which can fly ei-ther piloted or unmanned.

Rheinmetall’s ambitions in UAVsgo well beyond the KZO so it hasbeen teaming with a number of inter-national companies to develop prod-ucts.

Rheinmetall announced in June2007 that it was teaming with IsraelAerospace Industries to cooperate inthe development of a reconnaissanceand strike system using loitering mu-nitions.

Rheinmetall also is working withBell Helicopter Textron and France’sSagem to offer a European version ofthe Eagle Eye til t-rotor UAV.Rheinmetall would provide theground control and sensor payload.

In addition, Rheinmetall is work-ing with Diehl to offer the General

Atomics Predator in Germany.Rheinmetall would provide groundstations and sensors.

Holding out hope for civil appli-

cations. EMT is developing theFancopter for the urban market. Thesmall UAV will have a diameter of 50centimeters and a height of 60 centi-meters to enable it to fly into build-ings. It could be used for crisesranging from a repetition of the WorldTrade Center attacks to a fire in ahigh-rise.

If the German Federal AviationAuthority and the European Unionmove ahead on allowing the civil useof UAVs, EMT sees a number of ap-plications for its existing systems aswell. These applications include:

• Installation security, includingpower plants, factories and mili-tary bases.

• National border and waterwaymonitoring.

• Oil and gas pipeline monitoring.

• Measuring radioactivity after re-actor accidents.

EMT background. Based inPenzberg, Bavaria , EMT wasfounded in 1978 by a small group ofengineers. Specializing in UAVs,EMT has grown since then to employmore than 140. The company is pri-vately owned by Hartmut Euer, an en-gineer.

European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. (EADS)Drentestraat 24

1083 HK Amsterdam

Netherlands

Vision of a key growth market.

EADS’ management sees UAVs as akey growth market in defense. In a2005 presentation management sug-gested that the market potential until2014 could total 10 billion euros.

EADS could have a 10 to 15 per-cent share in that market although theUS market is not currently accessible,according to Tom Enders, then chiefexecutive officer of EADS Defenseand Security Systems.

EADS’vision was clearly to domi-nate systems for France, Spain andGermany, which are projected to rep-resent 13 percent of the world market.

The vision faces the harsh real-

ity. Although EADS seeks to becomethe leading continental Europeanprime on UAV programs, but the real-ity has been quite different.

EADS has been plagued by thecrash of its Barracuda demonstrator,the demise of the EuroMALE pro-gram and performance problems inthe SIDM program.

These problems come at a timewhen the company’s capabilities arestretched by performance problemsand delays in the A380 commercialairliner program and difficulties inlaunching the next generation A350program. They also come at a timewhen EADS management is engagedin bitter infighting between its Ger-man and French units and manage-ment. In addition, management’sattention is focus on revitalizing thecompetitiveness of Airbus through anaggressive cost-cut t ing andoutsourcing program.

The so-cal l EADS-ledEuroMALE program, languished,while the Dassault Aviation-led Neu-ron program has moved ahead. Do-mestic competitors in the Germanmarket—Rheinmetall and EMT—arebecoming more formidable.

Charges, delays, technical prob-

lems. EADS reflected the difficultiesin 2005 with a 100 million euro

charge to earnings to reflect problemsin UAV programs.

The SIDM or Eagle 1, which isbased on the IAI Heron modified tomeet French requirements, has facedseveral years of delays. New technol-ogy restrictions imposed by theUnited States following the WorldTrade Center terrorist attacks led to adecision to create a UAV free of USexport control regulations. The instal-lation of a new data link to allow con-trol of two air vehicles by a groundstation and modifications in theavionics also added delays.

As a result, the planned delivery ofthe system slipped increased from a21 month development cycle to 57months, according to a French Senatereport prepared in February 2006.The report cites Francois Lureau,chief executive of the DGA Frenchprocurement agency, as saying that“the performance of the industrialist(EADS) was not satisfactory.”



The EADS-led EuroMALE pro-gram failed to win the European sup-port it needed to be viable. OriginallyEuro-MALE was intended to be aFrench-led effort that would enlistparticipation from other Europeancountries. Yet European participationhas been limited to Spain so far.

The EuroMALE or Eagle 2 wouldbe based on Israel Aircraft Industries’Heron TP program. It will have amulti-mission capability in surveil-lance, tracking and targeting; mari-time surveillance; signal intelligence;and data relay.

Yet the problems in the EADSEuroMALE program are now so seri-ous that little work is now going on.Dassault Aviation, which is leadingthe Neuron unmanned combat air ve-hicle program, is proposing that italso take the lead in the EuroMALEprogram.

EADS’ revised vision of the fu-

ture. EADS is now focused on a mod-ular UAV approach that wouldreplace its earlier work on the Eagle 2under the EuroMALE program. Thismodular approach, called the Ad-vanced UAV, involves the creation ofa UAV that would be able to exchangewings and payloads to enable it to op-erate for missions requiring long en-durance and high speed. The UAV isan outgrowth of the GermanBarracuda program.

It would be intended to replace theTornado and the CN-289 for recon-naissance. The German Air Forcepossesses the Tornado while both theGerman and French militaries havethe CN-289.

Current plans call for developmentof a full prototype by 2011.

France, Germany and Spain an-nounced in July 2007 that they wouldcooperate in the effort. It will be in-tended to develop a UAV that wouldmeet the needs of all three countriesand might be managed by the Euro-pean Defense Agency.

The new effort does reflect theproblems EADS has faced with theearlier EuroMale effort. EADS willcontinue to lead the effort but it willnow include Thales and Indra.

EADS and Northrop moving

ahead on EuroHawk. EADS’ in-volvement at the strategic UAV levelis getting a push with the signing of amemorandum of understanding be-tween the Germany Ministry of De-fense and the US Department ofDefense to establish conditions forGlobal Hawk cooperation in May2006. It paves the way for a final con-tract for the UAV, which Germanywill use as a replacement signalsintelligence platform.

EADS will be responsible for pro-viding the signals intelligence pack-age that will detect communicationsand radar emitters.

EADS and Northrop Grummanhave established a 50-50 joint venturecompany in order to pursue this pro-gram. EuroHawk GmbH is based inFriedrichshafen, Germany. The jointventure will serve as the nationalprime contractor for the German Min-istry of Defence.

Progress on the contract has beenextremely slow. EADS and NorthropGrumman started cooperating on theprogram in August 2000, but it facedrepeated delays due to funding prob-lems in the German budget and USexport control concerns.

Working to develop a broad

product offering. In addition to itswork on theater UAVs such as the Ea-gle 1 and Eagle 2, EADS is workingon a number of tactical and smallUAVs.

The Orka-1200, is an unmannedvariant of a light helicopter manufac-tured by France’s HelicopterGuimbal, for use on naval vessels. Itis expected to carry a 180 kilogrampayload with an endurance of morethan 8 hours. Its anticipated missionsinclude maritime surveillance, fleetprotection, intelligence, communica-tion relay and targeting.

The Scorpio, a multi-purpose lightUAV, is a much smaller helicopter in-tended primarily for special opera-tions. With an endurance of 1 hour, itwould travel at speeds up to 35 kilo-meters per hour. It would be used forurban warfare; special forces; armyreconnaissance, intelligence, surveil-

lance and targeting; homelandsecuri ty and commercialapplications.

The Surveyor 2500 would be a fasttactical UAV to replace the CL-289. Itis intended to be stealthy UAV with anendurance of three hours that cancarry an advanced signals intelli-gence sensor package.

German UCAV work under way.

The EADS Military Systems demon-strator known as the Barracuda is pre-paring the basis for design of a UCAVfor possible German requirements.The program which has already beenin existence for four years may in-volve linkages with the EurofighterTranche 3, providing sensor capabili-ties in high threat environments. Theoutlook for the effort is still uncertainpending a German decision to estab-lish a requirement and with Germanyinterested in finding Europeanpartners who could help fund theprogram.

Fostering UAV cooperation

within the company. EADS’strategyis to build up its UAV company bybringing together the capabilitiesacross the company.

EADS has combined the units ofthe former Aérospatiale, Matra andDornier into a single intelligence, sur-veillance and reconnaissance unit.These businesses have been involvedin the CL-289 UAV in service withthe French and German armies; thegeneric ground segment for theKZO/Brevel; the Dragon JammingUAV; the SEAMOS VTOL demon-strator and the C-22 Reconnaissanceand Target UAV.

It has broader capabi l i t iesthroughout the company that it is alsoworking to bring together. Eurocopterhas capabilities in vertical take-offUAVs. Military Aircraft is workingon Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles,such as the Barracuda, and theEuroHawk High Altitude, Long En-durance UAV. Defense Electronics isdoing work on flight controllers, sen-sors and data links. Space is workingon ground stations and data reception.EADS Corporate has done researchon micro helicopters.



General Atomics3550 General Atomics Court

San Diego, CA 92121-1122

Tel: (858) 455-3000

Fax: (858) 455-3621

Internet: www.ga.com

Broadening customer base,

product offerings. General AtomicsAeronautical Systems is working tobroaden its market appeal followingthe success of the Predator, expand-ing its customer base and increasingits product offering.

General Atomics’ victory on the$1 billion US Army Warrior contractin August 2005 paved the way forGeneral Atomics to increase its pres-ence in the US Army. The initial con-tract provided for delivery and testingof 17 Warrior aircraft by mid-2009with associated ground stations andlogistics support.

It is also competing for the NavyBroad Area Maritime SurveillanceProgram, working with LockheedMartin Corp. The program would useUAVs to do surveillance currentlydone by P-3 patrol aircraft. TheLockheed Martin-General Atomicsteam, which is offering a variant ofthe Predator B, is competing againstNorthrop Grumman offering theGlobal Hawk and Boeing offering anunmanned version of the G550business jet.

In homeland security, the acquisi-tion of its first unmanned aerial vehi-cle by Customs and Border Protection, a Predator B, offered strong potentialfor General Atomics AeronauticalSystems to make further inroads intothe homeland security unmanned ae-rial vehicle market. The contractaward followed a test mission in No-vember 2003 along the southwestborder of the US, near Gila Bend, AZ,utilizing Predator B. At that time, thePredator showed that it could locateand track illegal immigrants. Its sur-veillance video was used as evidencein court prosecutions. In other poten-tial homeland security applications,the Predator can also be equipped

with a maritime radar to meet theneeds of the Coast Guard.

Unfortunately General Atomicsfaced a setback for efforts to gainbroader UAV acceptance by the De-partment of Homeland Security whenthe Predator crashed in April 2006.

General Atomics recovered fromthe setback and has delivered twoPredators to the Department ofHomeland Security. Another two areon order. The Department of Home-land Security appears likely to ordermore.

Still, General Atomics is also see-ing growing interest overseas forPredators that could be used forhomeland security applications al-though exports so far have been ori-ented to mil i tary needs. TheAustralian Coast Watch, which is in-terested in possible use of the Preda-tor for resource protection, and Japan,which is interested in maritime secu-rity and missile defense applications,are possible international customers.

To date, General Atomics has soldunmanned aerial vehicles to militariesin Turkey and Italy, the UK militaryhas plans to buy Predators. The $500million Canadian Joint UninhabitedAerial Vehicle Surveillance TargetAcquisition System (JUSTAS) pro-gram, on which General Atomics isteamed with General Dynamics Can-ada, is another major potential pro-gram that is intended to provide theCanadian Air Force with UAVs by2010.

In new products, the Predator Cnow under development will build onthe success of the Predator B, but willoperate at higher altitudes and will flyfaster. The Predator C is intended tomake competitive inroads into thestrategic UAV market now dominated

by Northrop Grumman Corp.’sGlobal Hawk.

This broadening of its market ap-peal is critical for a company that hasin the past focused heavily on US in-telligence services and the US AirForce. General Atomics’ reputationwas firmly established after the WorldTrade Tower terrorist attacks when aPredator unmanned aerial vehiclewas used to track and then fire mis-siles to kill terrorists in Afghanistan,Yemen and Pakistan.

Ironically at the time of the WorldTrade Center attacks, GeneralAtomics was on the verge of cuttingits unmanned aerial vehicle produc-tion due to a lack of orders. Now Gen-eral Atomics Aeronautical Systems isincreasing its capacity to be able tomeet demand for its UAVs and hassucceeded in garnering support froma broader range of customers.

Market posit ion. GeneralAtomics has achieved its leading po-sition in MALE UAVs despite itscompetition in large, publicly-ownedcompanies.

General Atomics, which was cre-ated in 1995 by General Dynamics,was bought by two brothers—Nealand Linden Blue—in 1986. Neal Blueserves as chairman and chief execu-tive officer of the company, which isalso involved in solid-state lasers andelectromagnetic systems.

General Atomics’ managementbelieves that its ability to invest overthe long-term in new technologieswithout worrying about support fromshareholders has given it an edge.Moreover, General Atomics lacks thehigh overhead costs of major compet-itors, giving it a cost advantage.

As yet, General Atomics hasproven that it can continue to wincompetitions against larger rivals de-



spite their growing interest in displac-ing General Atomics. In the Warriorcompetition, General Atomics beat ateam led by Northrop Grumman that

included Israel Aircraft Industries,both major players in the UAVmarket.

Honeywell International Inc.101 Columbia Road

Morristown, NJ 07962-2245

Tel: (973) 455-2000

Fax: (973) 455-4807

Internet: www.honeywell.com

Iraq assessment may mean

rapid move into production. TheMAV was sent to Iraq in the summerof 2007 to help identify improvisedexplosive devises from the air. TheUS Navy awarded Honeywell con-tracts worth $7.5 million to buildmore than a dozen MAV systems andprovide training and deployment sup-port for Iraqi operations.

Honeywell is making plans to be-gin producing as many as 100 MAVsmonthly as early as the end of 2007assuming the evaluation proves suc-cessful.

The MAV’s attraction stems fromits ability to use its ducted fan to hoverclose to the ground and evaluate po-tential improvised explosive devices.

Future Combat System UAVs.

Honeywell’s UAV efforts are focusedon development of a family of duct-ed-fan vehicles, including the Class Ivehicle for the US Army’s FutureCombat System, which the companybelieves may have applications wellbeyond defense.

Honeywell won a $61 millionaward in May 2006 to develop the Mi-cro Air Vehicle (MAV) ducted-fanvehicle, which will be the smallestUAV in the Future Combat Systemprogram. While the air vehicles arebeing built by AAI Corp., the MAV iscontrolled by Honeywell’s flightmanagement subsystem and uses aHoneywell electronic sensorpackage.

The MAV will be used at the pla-toon level. Its strength comes from its

ability to hover and stare and individ-ual targets, a capability that smallUAVs such as the Raven do notpossess.

The 16-pound MAV can be carriedin a backpack. It flies between 10 feetand 500 feet off of the ground and cantake off and land without a need forrunways. It relays video back to sol-diers equipped with a portablehandheld terminal.

Several upgrades are already be-ing planned for the MAV. A heavyfuel engine is being developed to re-place the current gasoline engine. Agimbaled sensor will replace fixedcameras.

Cancellation of Class II Future

Combat System competit ion

strengthens MAV. The MAV prom-ises to have a market beyond its ini-tially intended Class I niche. Thedecision to cancel the Class II compe-tition with plans to add addition pay-loads to the Class I vehicle bodes wellfor Honeywell.

In the Class II competitionHoneywell was offering a slightlylarger version of its MAV. The planwas that ducted-fan vehicles beingbuilt by Honeywell and Aurora FlightSciences will compete againstPiasecki Aircraft’s Air Scout, whichwould fly like a helicopter.

The cancellation prevents govern-ment funding of a competitor such asAurora Flight Sciences GoldenEye.That makes Honeywell’s position inproducing a ducted-fan vehicle much

more secure although there are alsoforeign competitors including

Chem-bio and homeland secu-

rity applications. Honeywell’s man-agement believes that its family ofOrganic Air Vehicles may have appli-cations in homeland security as wellas on the battlefield. In particular, theUAVs could be carried on a vehicleand provide over the hill reconnais-sance. The Coast Guard could use theUAVs on small vessels to be able toexamine ships.

Honeywell also sees the potentialto take advantage of the hover andstare capability to provide remotesensing of chemical and biologicalagents. Honeywell’s UAVs have theability to collect chemical and biolog-ical samples over a long period oftime from a specific area.

Honeywell has shown a corporateinterest in putting the weight of the$26 billion company behind its Or-ganic Air Vehicle family. Last year’sacquisition of Switzerland-basedZellweger Analytics, a manufacturerof toxic and flammable gas detectionsensors, was in part intended to addnew missions and capabilities for theOrganic Air Vehicle UAVs.

Honeywell is also looking at inter-national markets. Honeywell’s MAVmade its first successful internationaltest flight in Bourges, France onMarch 28, 2007. Another test wasplanned for the United Kingdom.



Insitu, Inc.118 East Columbia River Way

Bingen, Washington USA 98605

Tel: 509-493-8600

Fax 509-493-8601

Internet: www.insitu.com

Insitu broadens its product of-

fering, customer base. Followingthe success of the ScanEagle, Insitu isworking to build on that success bydeveloping the Integrator.

The Integrator takes many of thestrengths of the ScanEagle such as itsmodularity and combines it with asignificantly larger UAV. The Inte-grator will carry a payload of 11 kilo-grams with an endurance up to 24hours. By comparison the ScanEaglecarries a 1 kilogram payload with anendurance up to 20 hours.

The Air Force, which has not beena customer of the ScanEagle, will doflight testing on the Integrator to dothe initial military assessment of po-tential battlefield use of the UAV.

The new product may also havecommercial applications. Those ap-plications will be examine in the con-text of the new all iance withOregon-based EvergreenHelicopters.

Insitu allies with Evergreen for

commercial services. Insitu an-nounced in July 2007 that it wouldwork with Evergreen Helicopters toprovide commercial UAV services.Insitu and Boeing already pioneeredthe development of military UAV ser-vices in the ScanEagle so commercialservices was a natural next step.

The Insitu-Evergreen strategic al-liance will focus on the Insight civilversion of the ScanEagle. The compa-nies will be targeting forest fire man-agement, maritime monitoring,petrochemical industry monitoringand environmental clean-up.

Insitu establishes an unrivaled

growth track record. Even in thefast-growing UAV industry, Institu’sgrowth rate has been explosive. The

company has grown from three em-ployees in 2002 to 230 currently.

The company, which was foundedin 1992, languished in relative obscu-rity for a decade after its founding. Itdid develop the Aerosonde UAV,which was subsequently licensed tothe company of that name (now partof AAI Corp.).

In 2001 it developed its SeaScanprototype for the commercial fishingindustry. The SeaScan was intendedto be launched and recovered fromtuna fishing boats. Once Insitu estab-lished itself in the fishing industry, itplanned to explore the militarymarket.

Partnership with Boeing estab-

lishes Insitu's credibility. In 2002Boeing and Insitu reached an agree-ment that gave the company the boostit needed to successfully market to theUS military.

Boeing took responsibility formarketing ScanEagle to military cus-tomers. It also undertook to do anysystems integration, communicationsand payloads needed for the military.Insitu was responsible for providingthe ScanEagle UAV vehicle, whichhad been developed from theSeaScan.

After the 911 terrorist attacks andthe subsequent need for new UAVs,the US military was receptive to theScanEagle.

ScanEagle achieves success with

Marine Corps. ScanEagle hasproved very successful with the USMarine Corps and the US Navy. Morerecently in July 2007 the MarineCorps awarded Boeing an $18 mil-lion, three and a half year contract toprovide intelligence, surveillance andreconnaissance support for the

ScanEagle. With options the valuecould increase to $351 million.

Although ScanEagle was alreadyin service with the Marine Corps, ithad to compete against two to threeother companies to win the finalaward.

The services contract is a stop gapmeasure until the Navy/Marine Corpsawards the Small Tactical UnmannedAerial Vehicle System (STUAS) in2011. The draft request for proposalswas expected in January 2008 at presstime.

In April 2005, the Navy awardedBoeing a $14.5 million contract forsupport of operations in Iraq. Thatwas followed by a Sept. 2005 contractto provide the system for Navyhigh-speed vessels and an afloat for-ward staging base.

Although ScanEagle as the incum-bent is seen as having a strong advan-tage, other companies are alsopreparing to compete for the require-ment . The Swif t Engineer-ing/Raytheon team is expected to of-fer the Kil ler Bee. NorthropGrumman, which withdrew from co-operating on the Killer Bee, is evalu-ating the UAV it will offer. DRSTechnologies may offer its NeptuneMaritime UAV. Lockheed Martin isanother likely candidate to offer aUAV although it may team with an-other company such as DRSTechnologies.

ScanEagle is making its mark

among US allies. Boeing AustraliaLtd. was awarded a AUD$20 millioncontract to provide ScanEagle UAV-based services to the AustralianArmy in Afghanistan. Boeing Austra-lia Limited has been under contract tothe Australian Army since lateNovember 2006.



Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd.70100 Ben Gurion International Airport

Tel Aviv

Israel

Tel: (972 3) 935 3111

Fax: (972 3) 935 8278

Internet: www.iai.co.il

Successful UAV use in Lebanon

may boost sales. Israel Air Force’ssuccessful use of its newly purchasedHeron UAV in operations in Lebanonin 2006 may help spur additional salesof the IAI UAV.

The Heron is the most capableUAV deployed by the Israel AirForce. It is capable of flying at 30,000feet. It is able to carry up to a 550pound payload with an endurance ofmore than 40 hours.

The Heron UAV was just on theverge of coming into service at thet ime the war broke out withHezbollah. The UAV was being de-livered under a $50 million contractoriginally awarded in September2005.

IAI has followed up on theHeron’s success by unveiling theHeron TP Medium Altitude Long En-durance MALE UAV at the Paris AirShow in June 2007.

The latest version of the Heron canfly at 45,000 feet with a full payloadof approximately 2200 pounds. It canloiter for 36 hours.

Developed in the framework of anIsraeli Ministry Of Defense program,several UAV’s were already manu-factured and tested . It is ready for se-rial production.

The Heron TP promises to be atough competitor for the Predator ifthe manufacturers claims about pay-load and loiter time are accurate. Thenew UAV would carry about the samepayload as a Predator, but would havegreater linger time, 36 hours versusthe Predators’ 24 hours.

Boosting UAV exports. IsraelAircraft Industries has scored keyvictories in its drive to boost its UAVexports.

In Australia, a team composed ofBoeing Australia and Israel AircraftIndustries (IAI) won a $109 millioncontract to provide TUAVs to theAustralian Defence Force for air-borne surveillance in land operations.The Boeing Australia /IAI team of-fered the I-View 250 UAV, a new IAIUAV under development. BoeingAustralia will provide supportservices in Australia.

In winning the competition, IsraelAircraft Industries beat three otherteams. Australia’s ADI was teamedwith Elbit to offer a variant of theWatchkeeper UAV. BAE SystemsAustralia was working with UnitedIndustrial’s AAI to offer the USShadow 200. SAGEM was offeringits Sperwer UAV.

In addition, IAI has strong poten-tial to make sales of UAVs to India.India is planning to purchase a num-ber of additional Heron to supplementits IAI-provided force of six Heronsystems and 10 Searcher II systems.

Work with foreign companies.

The victory in Australia was indica-tive of a strategy adopted by IsraelAircraft Industries to penetrate for-eign markets involving workingclosely with foreign partners to boostits worldwide presence.

In the United States, IAI hasworked closely with NorthropGrumman building on its cooperationin the Hunter program. IAI workedwith Northrop Grumman and AuroraFlight Systems to try to win the Ex-tended Range Multi Purpose (ERMP)Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System.The team was beaten by GeneralAtomics Aeronautical Systems Inc.,which won a $214.4 mil l ioncost-plus-incentive-fee contract forresearch, development test and evalu-

ation on the ERMP UAV, also calledthe Warrior. The development anddemonstration is expected to last fouryears with ini t ia l operat ionalcapability achieved in fiscal 2009.

Glitches in EADS cooperation.

In France, IAI has been workingclosely with EADS, providing its me-dium-altitude long-range Heron sur-veillance system as the baseline airvehicle for the MALE programs. Theprogram includes two air vehi-cles—the Eagle 1 based on the IAIHeron modified to meet French re-quirements and the Eagle 2, which isbased on IAI’s Heron TP program, amedium-altitude, long-enduranceUAV. The vehicles operate autono-mously and can carry intelligence,surveillance, reconnaissance andcommunications relay payloads.

Both programs ran into problems.Development of the Eagle 1 has takenconsiderably longer to develop thanoriginally expected. The planned de-livery of the system slipped increasedfrom a 21 month development cycleto 57 months, according to a FrenchSenate report prepared in February2006. Part of the problem appears tohave stemmed from difficulties byIAI in fulfilling its technologicalpromises.

IAI also proposed a joint develop-ment program to EADS of a high-alti-tude long-endurance UAV that wouldcompete with Northrop Grumman’sGlobal Hawk. That proposal does notseem to have attracted much interestin EADS.

Competition from Elbit. IAI andElbit have engaged in a bruising bat-tle around the world as Israel’s twochampions in UAVs. With a limiteddomestic market it is inevitable thatthey clash in export competitions, al-



lowing customers to play one offagainst the other.

In Australia, it was IAI that pre-vailed as noted earlier. A team com-posed of Boeing Australia and IsraelAircraft Industries (IAI) team won acontract in December 2005 to providethe I-View 250 UAV, a new UAV un-der development. Elbit was one of thelosing teams offering a variant of theWatchkeeper UAV.

In the United Kingdom, it wasElbit teamed with Thales that won the

Watchkeeper competition. Israel Air-craft Industries lost as part of theNorthrop Grumman team.

Still, there are occasions in whichthe two companies cooperate. In Sep-tember 2005, the Turkish Armyawarded IUP, an equally-owned part-nership between Elbit Systems andIsrael Aircraft Industries a UAV con-tract to supply Unmanned Air Vehicle(“UAV”) systems. The $150 millioncontract will be divided equally be-tween Elbit Systems and IAI.

New management may clear

way to greater IAI-Elbit coopera-

tion on UAV exports. IAI’s newpresident, Itzhak Nissan, is approach-ing the company strategy with a freshapproach that could include greatercooperation with Elbit to limit thebruising competition of the past. TheIsraeli Ministry of Trade and Industryis looking into its policy on coopera-tion, critical when both companieshave such a small domestic market.

Kaman Corp.Blue Hills Avenue

Bloomfield, CT 06002

Tel: (860) 243-7100

Internet: www.kaman.com

Promoting the K-MAX. Kamanis working with Lockheed MartinCorp. to develop and promote an un-manned version of the K-MAX, avery heavy lift helicopter.

Under the partnership announcedin March 2007, Kaman and LockheedMartin will develop an unmannedversion of the K-MAX. LockheedMartin Systems Integration will be re-sponsible for advanced flight controlsfor autonomous operations. It willalso provide some avionics, weaponsand sensors.

Kaman is working with LockheedMartin Systems Integration. It hasbeen involved in helicopter integra-

t ion work on the US Navy’sMH-60R/S helicopters and the RoyalNavy Merlin Mk 1. It now acts as inte-grated on the VH-71A Presidentialhelicopter program. The unit ledLockheed Martin’s work on the nowcancelled Unmanned Combat ArmedRotorcraft (UCAR) program

The K-MAX’s competitive advan-tage comes from its ability to carrylarge payloads of 6,000 pounds at sealevel. It has also demonstrated that itcan operate at very high altitudes andin hot environments.

Earlier work on an unmanned

K-MAX. Kaman was already work-ing on developing the unmanned ca-

pabilities of the K-MAX. In July 2006the US Army Material Research De-velopment and Engineering Com-mand awarded a $3.1 million contractmodification to Kaman to continuework on the Broad-area UnmannedResponsive Resupply OperationsUAV, the unmanned version of theK-MAX. The contract was intendedto pay for additional Army demon-strations and to work on the automaticflight control system.

That contract award followed anApril 2006 Army demonstration thatshowed the BURRO could remainaloft on a mission for 12 hours and 17minutes.

Lockheed Martin Corp.6801 Rockledge Drive

Bethesda, MD 20817

Tel: (301) 897-6000

Fax: (301) 897-6083

Internet: www.lockheedmartin.com

A strategy of technology leaps.

Lockheed Martin is seeking to com-pensate for its relative dearth of UAVprograms by pursuing technologiesthat will give it an advantage in thenext generation of UAVs.

Much of Lockheed Martin’s workis being done by the Advanced Devel-opment Programs, better known asthe Skunk Works. The Skunk Worksis responsible for development ofnew and innovative technologies

which has made it a leader in technol-ogies such as stealth to make planesinvisible to radar and lift fan for verti-cal takeoff and hover. These technol-ogies promise to be important infuture UAVs.



The Skunk Works was heavily in-volved in winning the F-35 JointStrike Fighter, but that focus meantthat it chose not to compete in keyUAV programs such as the UCAV.

Lockheed Martin’s position as theworld’s leading military aircraft man-ufacturer makes it more difficult forthe company to pursue a market thatmight cannibalize its own market incoming years.

Yet Lockheed Martin executivesmaintain that the company has notbeen slow in working to developUAVs, but rather is preparing thefoundations for the time when there isenough money spent on UAVs to pavethe way for Lockheed Martin’s activeinvolvement.

Lockheed Martin sees its strengthin advanced technology and systemsintegration so its approach is to de-velop sophisticated UAVs. LockheedMartin is focusing on developinghigh value unmanned, next genera-tion systems ranging from unmannedF-35 Joint Strike Fighters to UAVsbased on cruise missiles.

With its range of company-fundedand government-funded initiatives,Lockheed Martin’s leadership insiststhat when sufficient money is beingspent on UAVs, the company will bein a leading role.

Investing company research and

development in UAVs. WhileLockheed Martin may have been am-bivalent about UAVs in the past, thereis a new commitment to makingLockheed Martin a major player inthe technology now. Lockheed Mar-tin is committed to reversing the earlygains it allowed to rivals such asNorthrop Grumman Corp. and theBoeing Co.

Company-funded research showsthe level of commitment. LockheedMartin is spending heavily on fixedwing vertical takeoff and landingtechnology. This would rely heavilyon lift fan technology developed forthe F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It wouldallow operation for any of the USNavy ships that now carry aircraft.

This technology has the potentialto be the next generation technologythat would replace the Fire Scout.

From Lockheed Martin’s perspec-tive, the technology is a criticaldiscriminator that could allowLockheed Martin to reenter the com-petition for the Unmanned CombatAircraft System (UCAS) afterNorthrop Grumman finishes its dem-onstrator for the Navy.

Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Worksunveiled a high-altitude UAV demon-strator the P-175 Polecat, at the 2006Farnborough Air Show. The demon-strator, which was company-fundedat a cost of $27 million, has anall-composite flying-wing. It couldbe use to develop a stealthy high-alti-tude intelligence, surveillance and re-connaissance UAV or a long-rangestrike vehicle.

The vehicle, which crashed in test-ing, was important because it demon-strated the company’s ability to docarbon composite manufacturing ataffordable costs. By using manufac-turing techniques that cut touch laborand used rapid prototyping, theSkunk Works was able to produce theaircraft for half of the cost usingtraditional techniques.

Lockheed Martin executives seethis as another competi t ivediscriminator for the company in anyfuture competition to build high-endUCAS systems.

Using its own funds LockheedMartin also developed its newStalker, a 14 pound UAV that can flyfor two to three hours carrying a threepound payload. The size of the pay-load and its quiet operations make theUAV an extremely strong competitorin the market.

The Stalker, whose existence waspublicly revealed in August 2007,was developed based on special oper-ations needs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Focusing on high-value UAVs.

With its focus on technological leaps,Lockheed Martin is also examining avariety of new approaches to the UAVmission.

One project being pursued byLockheed Martin would involve the

creation of armed UAVs calledminions as an alternative to more ex-pensive UCAV concepts. TheseUAVs, which would be based oncruise missiles rather than aircraft toensure affordability, would work withmanned aircraft such as the F-22 orthe F-35 to increase striking rangeand reduce risk to the manned air-craft. These minions could be used ei-ther for reconnaissance or to strikewell-defended targets with precisionmunitions.

The Skunk Works has a demon-strator of a morphing UAV that couldchange its shape for use for intelli-gence and attack missions. Amorphing UAV would fold its wingsinwards during flight to boost itsspeed.

One version , known as the Cor-morant, being financed by DARPAwould be launched from submarines.Although it has demonstrated consid-erable promise in testing, the Navyand DARPA have not yet identifiedbudgets to move ahead with deploy-ment of the UAV.

With its leading position in stealthtechnology, Lockheed Martin is alsolooking at ways to apply stealth toUAVs.

Lockheed Martin has been study-ing optionally piloted and dedicatedunmanned versions of the F-35 JointStrike Fighter. While Lockheed Mar-tin is waiting to actively pursue theidea until the three planned, mannedversion of the F-35 are developed, itcontinues to promote the idea as an al-ternative to the now cancelled JointUnmanned Combat Air Systemsprogram.

Lockheed Martin has even beeninvolved in providing small UAVs tothe Air Force. It supplied theSentryOwl UAV to the US Air Forcefor air base perimeter surveillance.The Desert Hawk III, which devel-oped from the original Sentry OwlUAVs, has been used in Iraq and Af-ghanistan by the United Kingdom andthe United States.

Building a position in decoys. Aspart of its work in unmanned systems,Lockheed Martin is working to win



the 375 plane QF-16 program, a $500million to $1 billion to convert F-16sinto decoys.

Currently the US military relies onF-4 decoys built by BAE Systems, butby 2011 those targets will run out.

As a result in the summer of 2008,the military will issue a request forproposals to begin converting F-16sinto decoys. Lockheed Martin’s Ad-vanced Development Programs be-lieves that it has the expertise aboutthe Lockheed Martin-built aircraft towin the competition. Targets are a rel-atively simple version of an un-manned vehicle since they arepreprogrammed to fly a route.

BAE Systems Electronics and In-tegrated Solutions will be the majorcompetitor. It has been taking F-4 air-craft from the bone yard at Da-vis-Monthan Air Force Base inArizona and repairing them so theycan fly. BAE then adds electroniccomponents to allow the plane to flyunpiloted.

Israel Aircraft Industries also maybe a formidable competitor in thedrone contest. IAI competed in theoriginal 1992 QF-4 competition in

which BAE Systems ultimately pre-vailed. IAI’s extensive UAV workadds to its expertise.

Pursuing the BAMS program.

Lockheed Martin teamed with Gen-eral Atomics to pursue the $3 billionBroad Area Maritime Surveillance(BAMS) program. Lockheed Martinwould combine its systems integra-tion with General Atomics’ MarinerUAV.

The competition pits LockheedMartin-General Atomics against twoother teams. Northrop Grumman isoffering its Global Hawk and broadexperience in UAVs. Boeing is tyingits experience in its unsuccessful bidon the Unmanned Combat Air Systemto development of an unmanned ver-sion of the Gulfstream G550 businessaircraft.

Promoting the K-MAX. Kamanis working with Lockheed MartinCorp. to develop and promote an un-manned version of the K-MAX, avery heavy lift helicopter.

Under the partnership announcedin March 2007, Kaman and LockheedMartin will develop an unmannedversion of the K-MAX. Lockheed

Martin Systems Integration will be re-sponsible for advanced flight controlsfor autonomous operations. It willalso provide some avionics, weaponsand sensors.

Kaman is working with LockheedMartin Systems Integration inOwego, New York. The LockheedMartin unit has been involved in heli-copter integration work on the USNavy’s MH-60R/S helicopters andthe Royal Navy Merlin Mk 1. It nowacts as integrated on the VH-71APresidential helicopter program. Theunit led Lockheed Martin’s work onthe now cancelled Unmanned Com-bat Armed Rotorcraft (UCAR) pro-gram and is applying that expertise toan unmanned K-MAX.

The K-MAX’s competitive advan-tage comes from its ability to carrylarge payloads of 6,000 pounds at sealevel. It has also demonstrated that itcan operate at very high altitudes andin hot environments.

The US military is the market be-ing targeted for the unmannedK-MAX, which is generally seen astoo large for other militaries.

Northrop Grumman Corp.1840 Century Park East

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Tel: (310) 553-6262

Fax: (310) 201-3023

Internet: www.northropgrumman.com

Positioning to dominate UAV

market. Northrop Grumman madeUAVs a top corporate priority yearsbefore other US prime contractors.

For Northrop Grumman UAVs area key element of the company’s claimto be a leader in network centric war-fare.

As a result, Northrop Grummanhas assembled an unrivaled range ofcapabilities. Northrop Grumman’smost recent victory came with the USNavy’s award of the X-47B UCAS-Dcarrier demonstrator program toNorthrop Grumman. Northrop

Grumman beat Boeing to demon-strate that a low observable, taillessUAV can operate from a carrier at sea.

Global Hawk, the gold standard ofUAVs, has proven its ability to pro-vide high altitude, long endurance in-tel l igence, survei l lance andreconnaissance capability in conflictsin Iraq and Afghanistan. GlobalHawk provides all-weather high reso-lution imagery during day or night.The Euro Hawk, the first internationalversion of the Global Hawk, is beingpurchased by the German Ministry of

Defense under a contract signed inJanuary 2007.

Fire Scout is emerging as NorthropGrumman’s next breakout product.The Fire Scout was selected as the USArmy’s Class IV UAV. Its missionswill include reconnaissance, surveil-lance and target acquisition, mine de-tection, chemical detection andlogistics resupply.

Fire Scout has added appeal be-cause the US Navy selected it as itsvertical take-off tactical UAV.

Top pursuits. Northrop is activelyworking to win a number of new con-



tracts. The US Navy BAMS program,which is expected to be decided inearly 2008, pits Northrop offering amaritime version of the Global Hawkagainst a Lockheed Martin/GeneralAtomics team offering Mariner, a ver-sion of the Predator, and Boeing of-fering an unmanned version of theGulfstream business jet.

Northrop Grumman also sees amarket for Global Hawk in the NATOAlliance Ground Surveillance Sys-tem. A Northrop Grumman/EADSteam won an initial 20 million euro($28 million contract) in 2005 beatinga competitive team led by Raytheon.The system would include RQ-4BGlobal Hawk UAVs equipped withMulti-Platform Radar Technology In-sertion Program (MP-RTIP) radars.

Global Hawk has potential beyondGermany and the NATO AGS pro-gram. Australia, Japan and South Ko-rea have all expressed an interest inthe program.

While potential exports of GlobalHawk are likely to be restricted onlyto NATO countries and other majorallies due to arms control treaties, FireScout offers considerable potentialfor Northrop Grumman to make ex-ports. A lengthy number of countriesexpressed an interest in Fire Scout, in-cluding Spain, France, Denmark,Germany, Italy, South Korea, Japan,Brunei, Singapore, United ArabEmirates and Saudi Arabia. The mari-time version of the Fire Scout is ofparticular appeal with all countriesexpressing an interest in it and SouthKorea also expressing an interest inthe land version of the Fire Scout.

In addition to its contracts with theUS Army and the Navy, Fire Scoutmay also have some potential with theUS Marine Corps. The Marine Corpsoriginally appeared to be favoringTextron Bell Helicopter’s Eagle Eyefor its Vertical Unmanned Aerial Sys-tem requirement. That requirementhas been reopened for examining fol-lowing problems in Eagle Eye testing.

Northrop Grumman also sees po-tential to compete for the TierII/Small Tactical Unmanned AerialSystem program. Original ly

Northrop Grumman planned to offerSwift Engineering’s Killer Bee, butNorthrop Grumman and Swift Engi-neering ended their partnership in theprogram. Now Northrop Grumman isevaluating another UAV that it couldoffer for the program. The request forproposals is expected in 2008.

Northrop also sees the potential tosell targets to selected countries, in-cluding Japan, Taiwan, Singapore,Canada, Greece, Egypt and SaudiArabia. Northrop Grumman is stillproducing the BQM-74E/Chukarwith 80 being produced in fiscal 2007and 8,600 delivered since 1965. TheBQM-74E supports more than 80 per-cent of the US Navy’s research, de-velopment, test and evaluationmissions.

The Egyptian Air Force also islooking at upgrading its M324 RecceUAV, which was produced byNorthrop Grumman.

Fire Scout’s growing missions in

the US Navy and Army. Fire Scout’sfull capabilities remain to be devel-oped, adding to its potential appeal.

Northrop Grumman is building onits successful test of the Fire ScoutRQ-8A to develop a more capableRQ-8B. Payload capability is beingincreased from 400 pounds to 600pounds. Time on station is beingboosted to 5 hours and 110 nauticalmiles with a 200 pound payload.Supportability is being increased andsoftware is being improved.

Northrop Grumman originallywas awarded a competitive contractunder the Navy’s Vertical TacticalUAV program for development of theMQ-8 version of the Fire Scout inFebruary 2000.

The program is scheduled to estab-lish an initial MQ-8B operational ca-pability by late 2008 with full scaleproduction following.

For the Navy’s Littoral CombatShip a number of potential future mis-sions are being planned.

• Anti-Submarine Warfare: In addi-tion to the existing high altitudecommunications capability of theFire Scout, other capabilities are

envisaged, including: periscopedetection radar, the compact verylightweight torpedo, shallow wa-ter and surface submarine detec-tion, deployable bottom acousticarrays and the insertion andmonitoring of sonobouys.

• Anti-Surface Warfare: Fire Scoutalready has a number of capabili-ties in this area, including organichigh altitude surveillance, high al-titude communications relay andlink, detection and identificationof small surface craft swarms, andtargeting for joint fires. In addi-tion, capability will be added to en-gage mult ip le targets . Inparticular, the Low Cost GuidedImage Rocket and Viper Strikewill be carried by the Fire Scout.

• Mine Interdiction Warfare: FireScout has capabilities with thecoastal battlefield mine and recon-naissance system and long endur-ance communications rely forunmanned minesweeping vessels.In addition, capability is plannedto add airborne laser mine detec-tion system and to reseed surveil-lance assets.

The US Army program is plannedto trail the naval program. The Army,which has chosen the Fire Scout as itsFuture Combat System class IV UAV,plans to have the first flight of the ve-hicle in Nov. 2010. Initial operationalcapability is planned for 2014.

Northrop Grumman will be actingas a major subcontract to the Boe-ing/SAIC Lead System Integrator.

The Future Combat System’sbaseline payloads are: Airborne Sur-veillance, Target Acquisition andMinefield Detect ion System(ASTAMIDS); Synthetic ApertureRadar/Ground Moving Target Indica-tor’ and remote chemical detector.There are plans to add a communica-tions relay (Joint Tactical Radio Sys-tem AMF). Future growth couldinclude a tactical SIGINT payloadand air survivability equipment.

Capabilities also are being addedapplicable to homeland security, in-



cluding payloads to detect chemical,biological and nuclear threats.

Northrop Grumman’s UAV op-

erations. Northrop Grumman’s workon UAVs is heavily concentrated inCalifornia, Maryland, and Missis-sippi.

In Moss Point, Mississippi,Northrop Grumman produces the FireScout and Global Hawk.

In Pas River, Maryland, NorthropGrumman does its VTUAV andGlobal Hawk Maritime Demonstratorflight testing. At Hollywood, MD, ithas an unmanned systems supportcenter.

In California, there are numerousfacilities working on UAVs, includ-ing:

• Rancho Bernardo: Global Hawkengineering, N-UCAS engineer-ing, Fire Scout engineering, tar-gets development , rapidprototyping.

• El Segundo: N-UCAS Engineer-ing.

• Palmdale: Global Hawk produc-tion, targets production andN-UCAS production.

• Beale Air Force Base: GlobalHawk continental United Statesflight operations.

• Pt. Mugu: targets operations.

• Edwards Air Force Base: GlobalHawk flight testing.

A lengthy string of setbacks to

ambitions to plans to dominate the

US UAV market . NorthropGrumman continues to have thegreatest breadth of any US UAV man-ufacturer, but the development of itscapability has faced repeated set-

backs over the past several years thathave slowed its growth. Still, thecompany continues to focus on UAVsas a high priority.

Most recent ly, NorthropGrumman lost the $2 billion Depart-ment of Homeland Security SecureBorder Initiative to a Boeing Co-ledteam that will use Elbit Systems’UAVs. Northrop Grumman was ex-pected to use its own UAVs if it hadwon the contract.

Northrop Grumman also lost the$1 billion US Army Warrior programto build a hunter-killer UAV to Gen-eral Atomics in Sept. 2005. NorthropGrumman was working with IsraelAircraft Industries offering theHunter II, which incorporated aspectsof IAI’s E-Hunter and Heron UAVdesigns.

With the loss of in the Warrior pro-gram, Northrop Grumman will be fo-cusing on improving the currentHunter UAVs by improving its avion-ics, mission computer and other capa-bilities. Ultimately the GeneralAtomics Warrior will replace the 35Hunter UAVs still in service.

Northrop Grumman’s involve-ment as one of two competitors for theUnmanned Combat Armed Rotor-craft program ended with the termina-tion of the program. NorthropGrumman and Lockheed Martin werecompeting for a $160 million contractto begin building prototypes underthe third phase of the program, whenthe US Army withdrawal forced theprograms cancellation by DARPA inDec. 2004.

Northrop Grumman was one oftwo companies down-selected for theUK Watchkeeper program, but ulti-mately it lost to a Thales-Elbit Sys-tems team.

The US Air Force decided not tomove into production with theNorthrop Grumman’s MiniatureAir-Launched Decoy, a small UAVthat would appear as a full size air-plane to enemy radar. Instead itawarded a contract to Raytheon Co.

Efforts to export the Global Hawkhave proved to be difficult because ofrestrictions under the Missile Tech-nology Control Regime. Although itis now moving ahead, a planned pur-chased by Germany was slowed bythe problems for years despite its po-sition as a close NATO ally. Althoughthe German export will move aheadsoon, South Korea will not be allowedto buy the system due to US exportregulations.

The US Navy’s $2 billion BroadArea Maritime Surveillance System,for which Global Hawk would be aprime candidate, has been slowed dueto budgetary problems and uncer-tainty about the Navy’s exact needs.In the competi t ion, NorthropGrumman is competing against aLockheed Martin Corp.-GeneralAtomics team offering the PredatorB-Extended Range and a Boeingteam offering the G550.

The J-UCAS unmanned combataerial vehicle program, in whichNorthrop Grumman is competingagainst Boeing, has been restructureddue to Pentagon budgetary cutbacks.Although Northrop Grumman wonthe Navy-led N-UCAS, it has beentransformed into a demonstrationprogram rather than a full-scale de-velopment program. That was a dis-appointment for Northrop Grummanin light of the company’s heavy in-vestment in i ts Pegasusdemonstration vehicle.

Proxy Aviation Systems, Inc.Germantown, MD

Tel: 301-515-2799

Challenging a winner. Proxy Avi-ation Systems has its sights set onchallenging the General Atomics

Predator, an extremely establishedproduct thanks to its successful use inIraq and Afghanistan.

Proxy Aviation, a companybacked by private established in 2003by private investors, is still a small



company with only 28 employees.The company’s entire focus is onUAVs.

Proxy Aviation still believes it cantake on the General Atomics Predatorby offering a UAV that is cheaper andscan be controlled by a personal com-puter-based command station.

Testing successes. Proxy Aviationhas completed demonstrations of thecooperative flight of its SkyWatcherand SkyRaider UAVs, controlled byits SkyForce Distributed Manage-ment System.

The US Air Force contractedProxy to do the tests under the control

of the US Air Force UAV Battle Labat Creech Air Force Base, IndianSprings, Nevada from July 1 to July11, 2007.

SkyForce’s software, which is de-signed to operate as many as 12UAVs, successfully controlled fourSkyWatcher and SkyRaider UAVs.The mission demonstrated the utilityof having different sensors operatingin their optimal flight pattern and thencombining the information.

SkyWatcher is an optionally pi-loted, UAV designed for intelligence,surveillance and reconnaissance mis-sions. SkyRaider, which can carry a

payload of up to 1,000 pounds, is de-signed to be able to carry and fireweapons.

SkyForce, which controls bothUAVs, is able to make missionchanges during flight based on chang-ing conditions.

Facing an uphill climb. Despiteits success, Proxy Aviation faces awell entrenched competitor. GeneralAtomics has won tremendous supportwithin the services and within Con-gress during its successful employ-ment in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Safran Group2, Boulevard du General Martial Valin

75724 Paris Cedex 15

France

Tel: (1) 40 60 80 80

Fax: (1) 40 60 81 02

Internet: www.sagem-ds.com

Early European leader. SagemDefense Sécurité, the unit of Safranthat builds UAVs, established an earlyposition in UAVs.

The Sperwer system is now de-ployed by the armed forces of Can-ada, the Netherlands, Sweden, Franceand Greece.

The system has been used exten-sively by Canadian and Dutch forcesin Afghanistan. Over the 12 monthsending in June 2007 there were 500flights by the Sperwer.

Safran, the third largest aerospacecompany in Europe, became involvedin UAVs through its acquisition ofSagem in May 2005.

Sagem is now working on devel-oping the Sperwer B, a more capableUAV than the basic Sperwer series.

UAV leadership has faltered. De-spite its early leadership in UAVs,Sagem Defense Sécurité has rapidlylost its lead.

Part of the problem came fromcustomer dissatisfaction with thequality of its UAVs. Denmark sold itsUAVs to Canada after experiencing

serious problems with crashes andwith high operating costs.

Politically there have been prob-lems maintaining French governmentinterest in Safran’s continued work inUAVs. Rather support has shifted toEADS and to a lesser extent to Thalesfor UAVs. For UCAVs, Dassault Avi-ation is the favored choice with itswork on Neuron.

There also has been an element ofbad luck. In December 2004, Sagem,Rheinmetall Defence Electronics(RDE) of Germany, and Bell Helicop-ter agreed to work together to offer anext generation tactical VTOL UAVbased on the Eagle Eye to Europeanexpeditionary forces. Sagem andRDE would have furnished theground and ship borne control sta-tions, digital data links, electro-opti-cal and infrared payloads, simulatorsand command, control and computingintegration.

The problem with that strategyproved to be the uncertainty about thefuture of the Eagle Eye. Following thecrash of its prototype, the US Coast

Guard eliminated all future fundingfor the Eagle Eye from the Deepwaterprogram.

Acquiring a UAV subcontractor.

Sagem Defense Sécurité purchasedthe Finnish company Robonic LtdOy, a specialist in pneumatic UAVcatapults. The acquisition strengthensSagem’s UAV work by adding a keyelement of next-generation UAVs be-ing developed by Sagem and improv-ing modernization of the Sperwer.The catapults promise faster deploy-ment and a reduced logisticalfootprint.

In addition, the Robonic acquisi-tion gives Sagem the company’s Arc-tic Test UAV Flight Center. Sagemalready used the center in June 2006for long-endurance tests of tacticalUAVs.

Evaluating sense and avoid tech-

nology. Despite its problems withUAVs, Safran is also working on re-lated studies.

Sagem Defense Sécurité is leadinga project for the European DefenseAgency to study how long endurance



UAV systems can comply with Senseand Avoid Air Traffic Managementregulations. The study involves de-fining and simulating technical solu-tions that would satisfy European

regulations. France’s ONERA, Neth-erlands TNO and Spain’s ESPELSAare also involved in the study.

Swift Engineering Inc.1141-A Via Callejon

San Clemente, CA 92673

Tel: 949-492-6608

Fax: 949-366-8249

Swift replacing its Northrop

Grumman alliance with Raytheon.

Swift Engineering Inc. announced inJuly that it would team with RaytheonCo. to pursue the Navy/MarineCorps’ Small Tactical Unmanned Ae-rial Systems/Tier 2 competition.

The planned Tier 2 UAV wouldtake over work now being done by theBoeing Insitu ScanEagle through aservices contract.

After working together on SwiftEngineering’s Killer Bee to pursuethe Marine Corps’ STUAS/Tier IIcompetition, Northrop Grumman andSwift Engineering ended their part-nership several months earlier. No in-dication was provided as to thereasons for the decision to endcooperation.

Northrop Grumman in March2006 demonstrated a version of theKiller Bee to the US Air Force.

The Killer Bee, which is based on ablended wing, would be a family ofscalable UAVs that could be used formissions ranging from surveillanceand protection of military bases, con-voys and shipping lanes.

First flight of KB4. In April 2007,the latest version of the Killer Bee, theKB4, flew for the first time in YumaArizona beginning a series of flightsdesigned to demonstrate the systemscapabilities. The KB4, which has a 10foot wingspan, is intended to carry 30a standard communications/ISR pay-load for as much as 15 hours. TheKiller Bee has an optical grenadelauncher and laser illuminators.

Although the Killer Bee was de-signed specifically to meet the MarineCorps’Tier 2 requirement, the MarineCorps competition is shaping up asintensely competitive. Boeing/Insitualso has established a strong position

through its existing work with theNavy/Marine Corps through aservices contract.

Expertise in composites. SwiftEngineering originally developed itsaerospace capabilities through its 24years of work designing race cars.The aerodynamic wind tunnels andautoclaves for composite materialsused for that design work are directlyapplicable to aeronautics.

The company also designed anddeveloped the Eclipse Concept Jet toallow Eclipse to evaluate the marketfor personal jets.

Ownership. Swift Engineering ina private company owned by HiroMatsushita, a grandson of the founderof Panasonic. Matsushita, who pur-chased the company in 1991, washimself a race car driver.

Teledyne Technologies Inc.12333 West Olympic Blvd.

Los Angeles, Calif. 90064

Tel: (310)-893-1600

Internet: www.teledyne.com

Focusing on selling a heavy fuel

engine. Teledyne Technologies’ im-mediate strategy for getting into theUAV market is heavily focused on itsS-1204 Heavy Fuel Engine.

The S-1204 was developed byTeledyne Brown Engineering for theProspector UAV, a version of theKZO UAV deployed with the GermanArmy. It engine upgrade for the Pros-

pector was financed as part of theFuture Combat System program.

Although prospects for the Pros-pector have disappeared within theFuture Combat System (FCS) pro-gram, there may still be a market forthe engine itself outside of FCS.

In particular, Teledyne Brown En-gineering is discussing the use of thenew engine on versions of the pros-

pector sold by its par tnerRheinmetall. The current engine isprovided by Dr. Schrick GmbH, aGerman engine manufacturer.

There may also be the possibilityof getting the engine added to theShadow UAV, which needs such anupgrade to allow it to use regularArmy fuel.



Setbacks in UAV entry strategy.

The cancellation of planned procure-ment of a new Class III UAV underthe Future Combat System leavesTeledyne Technologies with no po-tential US program for the ProspectorUAV, a version of a UAV deployedwith the Germany Army.

Teledyne has been working withGermany’s Rheinmetall to build up itsposition in the booming market forunmanned aerial vehicles. It agreedwith Rheinmetall that it would begiven exclusive marketing for theProspector in the US market.

The Teledyne-Rheinmetall teamwon one of three positions to competefor the next generation Class III un-manned aerial vehicle (UAV) for theFuture Combat System. Teledyne wascompeting against United Industrialoffering an updated version of itsShadow UAV, which is currently theArmy’s main tactical UAV, andPiasecki Aircraft, a company teamedwith Lockheed Martin Systems Inte-gration, to offer its Air GuardGyrocopter.

The winner of that competitionwould then face DARPA’s alternative

rotorcraft technology. The winningUAV will be the Future Combat Sys-tems Class III system.

Over two years, those remainingtwo candidates would be evaluated ina process that includes a flight assess-ment to determine the final winner.

Teaming with Rheinmetall.

Teledyne Ryan’s approach of formingan alliance to adapt a foreign productto US requirements is not new to thecompany. It tried a similar approachearlier to try to win the $7 billion In-terim Armored Vehicle in 2001. Theunsuccessful effort involved teamingwith Singapore Technologies Kinet-ics to offer the Bionix, a Singaporeanarmed vehicle, to the US military.Manufacturing would have beendone in the United States.

In the current teaming arrangedwith Rheinmetall, Teledyne BrownEngineering would adapt severalGerman UAVs for US military recon-naissance and armed reconnaissancerequirements. The Prospector, themain system based on the GermanKZO, would require no runway forlaunch and whose payload can bechanged in the field. The Thunder, an-

other UAV, would be able to locateand attack targets.

Any UAVs sold to the UnitedStates would be produced at TeledyneBrown’s manufacturing facilities inHuntsville, Ala.

Regretting the sale of Teledyne

Ryan. Ironically Teledyne’s efforts toreenter the UAV market are a reflec-tion of its former strength in themarket.

In 1999 a previous owner of thecompany sold the Teledyne Ryanbusiness, a loss regretted by the com-pany’s current management .Teledyne Ryan, acquired by NorthropGrumman Corp. and now incorpo-rated within its Integrated Systemssector, has been a leader in UAVs. TheGlobal Hawk, high-altitude, long-en-durance, aerial vehicle system hasbeen tremendously successful.

Teledyne Ryan is a cornerstonenow of Northrop Grumman’s strongposition in UAVs. At this point,Teledyne Technologies will face a se-rious challenge in trying to revive aUAV capability.

Textron Inc.40 Westminster Street

Providence, RI 02903

Tel: (401) 421-2800

Fax: (401) 421-2878

Internet: www.textron.com

Textron builds a strong UAV po-

sition through the planned United

Industrial acquisition. Textron an-nounced in October that it would pur-chase United Industrial Corp. parentof AAI Corp. The company an-nounced that AAI would fit well andoffer revenue synergies with bothTextron Systems and Bell Helicopter.

AAI is projected to report $689million of sales in 2007 of which $386million will come from its unmannedsystems unit. Textron’s projection ofAAI’s sales reflect a 22 percent salesgrowth over the past year.

Earnings are also projected to bestrong. Earnings before interest andtaxes are projected to reach $68 mil-lion, up from $52.6 million in 2006.The profit margin reaches 9.9 percentin 2007, up from 9.3 percent the pre-vious year.

That growth is projected to con-tinue with 8.5 percent compound rev-enue growth that could reach 12percent with synergies over the pe-riod from 2007 to 2012. By 2012 syn-ergy revenues are projected to reach$175 million.

AAI was attractive to Textron pri-marily because of its extremely strongposition in tactical UAVs. It is cur-rently the leading tactical UAV sup-plier with an extremely strongposition with the US Army and theUS Marine Corps.

AAI also is attractive because theOne System ground control stationhas become the standard commandand control system for Army tacticalUAVs. In addition to being used onthe Shadow it is also being used forthe Army’s new Warrior UAV.



In addition, AAI has a built an at-t ract ive posi t ion in perfor-mance-based logistics. The Army hasbeen pleased with its work on theShadow. Textron also sees the Ser-vices and Logistics business as an at-tractive growth area of defense.

The acquisition likely has an at-traction to Textron as a hedge of itsposition through its own Eagle Eyetilt-rotor UAV. It ensures that even ifEagle Eye does not move ahead,Textron will have a strong position inUAVs.

Eagle Eye UAV faltering. A deci-sion by the Coast Guard Deepwaterprogram to eliminate future fundingfor the Eagle Eye UAV puts the pro-gram in serious jeopardy from the lossof its launch customer.

Coast Guard plans, worth $1 bil-lion, called for the procurement of 45air vehicles and 33 ground stations. .

The UAV was to be used for searchand rescue, drug interdiction andanti-terrorism patrols when it reachedits initial operating capability in 2009,a two year delay compared to earlierplans. The Bell Eagle Eye’s tilt rotortechnology would allow the aircraftto take off and land like a helicopterand fly like an airplane.

Bell also hoped that the MarineCorps might be interested in orderingthe system since it would work wellwith the V-22’s tilt-rotor technology.Now the Marine Corps appears to bemoving in other directions, recentlydeciding to purchase some ShadowUAVs.

The loss of the Coast Guard as alaunch customer undercuts plans toexport the technology. It is alwayseasier to sell a system overseas whenit is being used by US forces. In De-cember 2004, SAGEM of France,

Rheinmetall Defence Electronics(RDE) of Germany, and Bell agreedto work together to offer a next gener-ation tactical VTOL UAV based onthe Eagle Eye to European expedi-tionary forces. SAGEM and RDE willfurnish the ground and ship bornecontrol stations, digital data links,electro-optical and infrared payloads,simulators and command, control andcomputing integration. Other coun-tries that have expressed an interest tothe Coast Guard about the Eagle Eyeinclude Canada, India and Sri Lanka.There might also be interest from theUnited Kingdom.

Bell Helicopter is also looking atbroadening its product mix in UAVsby turning existing helicopters intounmanned systems. Data link systemswould be installed that would able tooperate without a pilot.

Thales45, rue de Villiers

Paris, France

Tel: (33 1) 57 77 80 00

Fax: (33 1) 57 77 83 00

Internet: www.thalesgroup.com

Close cooperation with Elbit.

The success of the Thales-Elbit bid onthe $1.4 billion (700 billion pound)Watchkeeper program positions thepartnership to become a major playerin UAVs.

Thales and Elbit set up a joint ven-ture known as UAV Tactical Systems(U-TacS) to develop the UAV basedon Elbit’s Hermes 450. Elbit owns 51percent of the joint venture with theremainder held by Thales.

The joint venture will pursue ex-port opportunities from the UnitedKingdom as well as meet the UK re-quirement under Watchkeeper.

The Thales-Elbit joint venture’sstrong position in the United King-dom in the Watchkeeper programmeant that the UK turned to it when iturgently needed UAVs for opera-tional deployments. In June 2007,

U-TacS won a $110 million contractto provide Hermes 450 UAVs andneeded support for several years.

Elbit and Thales combined withDassault Aviation to offer the WK450 UAV developed for theWatchkeeper program (based onElbit’s Hermes 450) for French tacti-cal surveillance requirements for theSystème de Drone Tactique Terrestre(SDTT).

At time when EADS is having em-barrassing problems with the UAVs itis providing for the French army, theThales team is in a strong position.

Thales, as prime contractor for theFrench defense procurement agency,is also using the WK 450 in a study ofmunitions release and firing fromUAVs.

Elbit’s cooperation with Thalesalso paid off in Canada. Thales Can-

ada was selected in September 2006to deliver a mini-UAV based onElbit’s Skylark. Elbit is to deliver fiveSkylark UAVs with an option for anadditional five. The goal was to pro-vide an immediate capability for Ca-nadian Forces in Afghanistan.

Developing an independent po-

sition on UAVs. Thales is not relyingon its relationship with Elbit for itsentire UAV effort. It has other pro-grams active in both France and theUnited Kingdom.

Thales has been working withBoeing and QinetiQ to offer the Boe-ing/Insitu ScanEagle in the UnitedKingdom. The team conducted testsunder the UK Joint UAV Experimen-tation program to show the possiblebenefits of a low-cost UAV in persis-tent maritime surveillance.



The revamping of the Euromaleprogram has also benefitted Thales.The cooperative program betweenFrance, Germany and Spain an-nounced in July 2007 will still be ledby EADS, but will be expanded to in-volve Thales and Spain’s Indra.

Thales role will be negotiated withEADS after the risk study contracthas been finalized. The risk reductioneffort will examine technical finan-cial and schedule issues that will sat-isfy the needs of all three participatingnations. Ultimately the goal is to at-

tract other European participants inthe program.



Appendix

US DoD UAV Prime ContractsBelow is a listing of prime contract actions announced by the Pentagon since the beginning of FY1988 that involve un-

manned aerial vehicle systems. These actions include the award of, or modification to, all unclassified DoD prime con-

tracts with a base value of $5 million or more that deal with these subjects. The following is a listing of abbreviations

used in describing the contract types.

Contract Type Codes

BOA—basic ordering agreementCPAF—cost-plus-award-feeCPFF—cost-plus-fixed-feeCPIFc—ost-plus-incentive-feeFFPf—irm-fixed-priceFFPEPA—firm-fixed-price with economic price adjustmentsFPIFf—ixed-price incentive (firm target)FPAF—fixed-price award-feeFPEPA—fixed-price with economic price adjustmentsFVI—face-value increaseLH—labor-hourNTE—not-to-exceedTM-time and materials

AAIDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details11/10/1988 N00019-86-C-0077 NAVAIR $6,646,789 Modification to exercise an option to a previously awarded FP con-

tract for contractor maintenance and maintenance support, train-ing requirements, and added support needs to maintain PioneerRemotely Piloted Vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/1989. Program involvement: Pioneer.

1/19/1989 N00019-89-C-0090 NAVAIR $5,151,138 CPFF contract to modify and improve the operational suitability,effectiveness and safety of the Pioneer Unmanned Air Vehicle,plus shipboard integration of the system. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 1/31/1990. Program involvement: Pioneer.

5/12/1989 N00019-88-C-0343 NAVAIR $6,422,734 FFP contract for subsystems and components of the Pioneer re-motely piloted vehicle system. Work is scheduled to be completedby 11/30/1990. Program involvement: Pioneer.

1/2/1990 N00019-88-G-0351 NAVAIR $10,500,000 FFP contract for logistics support for Pioneer remotely piloted ve-hicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1990. Programinvolvement: Pioneer.

2/28/1990 N00019-89-C-0309 NAVAIR $9,226,495 FFP contract for Pioneer remotely piloted vehicle system spareparts and depot spares, battleship net and installation parts, andassistance and modifications. Work is scheduled to be completedby 7/31/1991. Program involvement: Pioneer.

6/28/1990 N00019-90-C-0121 UAVJPO $5,166,000 FFP contract for Pioneer remotely piloted vehicle system uit sup-port kits/depot spares. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/1991. Program involvement: Pioneer.

2/14/1991 N00019-90-C-0241 NAVAIR $6,390,799 FFP contract with options for technical, material, maintenance,and logistics support of Pioneer Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in con-tinental US, shipboard, and land-based. The work will be per-formed in Hunt Valley, MD (20%) and Operational Sites (80%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1991. Program in-volvement: Pioneer.

12/27/1999 DAAH01-99-C-0142 AMCOM $17,800,000 Increment as part of a $41,802,927 modification to FPI/CPFF con-tract for low rate initial production of Tactical Unmanned Aerial Ve-hicle Systems. Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2001.PE involvement: 0305204A. Program involvement: RQ-7Shadow.


12/15/2003 DAAH01-03-C-0024 AMCOM $15,973,000 Modification to a FFP contract for the SHADOW unmanned aerialvehicle schoolhouse system upgrade. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 11/15/2004. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

12/24/2003 DAAH01-03-C-0024 AMCOM $35,029,107 Modification to a FFP contract for the Shadow unmanned aerialvehicle. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2007. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

1/9/2004 DAAH01-03-C-0042 AMCOM $17,187,722 Modification to a CPFF contract for the SHADOW unmanned ae-rial vehicle system contractor logistics support. Work is scheduledto be completed by 9/30/2004. Program involvement: RQ-7Shadow.

3/2/2004 DAAH01-03-G-0004 AMCOM $18,540,889 Increment as part of a $28,189,204 CPFF contract for contractorengineering support for research and development tasks for theShadow unmanned aerial vehicle system. The work will be per-formed in Hunt Valley, MD (80%) and Fort Huachuca, AZ (20%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2005. PE involve-ment: 0305204A. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

3/12/2004 DAAH01-03-C-0074 AMCOM $11,861,841 CPFF contract for contractor engineering services for the Shadowunmanned aerial vehicle system. The work will be performed inHunt Valley, MD (90%) and Fort Huachuca, AZ (10%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 4/30/2008. Program involvement:RQ-7 Shadow.

8/12/2004 DAAH01-03-C-0042 AMCOM $15,999,038 Increment as part of a $78,649,743 CPFF contract for contractorlogistics support for SHADOW unmanned aerial vehicle system tosupport wartime operational readiness. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 7/31/2005. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

9/28/2004 DAAH01-03-C-0042 AMCOM $23,394,390 Modification to a FFP contract for Contractor Logistics Support forthe SHADOW Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/2005. Program involvement: RQ-7Shadow.

11/1/2004 W31P4Q-05-C-0014 AMCOM $7,000,000 Increment as part of a $43,941,930 CPIF contract for perfor-mance-based contractor logistical support of the SHADOW Un-manned Aerial Vehicle System. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 10/31/2005. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

1/13/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0024 AMCOM $14,421,828 Modification to a FFP contract for one SHADOW Unmanned AerialVehicle System and Associated Support Equipment. Work isscheduled to be completed by 1/31/2007. PE involvement:0305204A. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

2/9/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0042 AMCOM $10,774,161 Modification to a FFP contract for Contractor Logistics Support forthe SHADOW Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/2005. Program involvement: RQ-7Shadow.

4/27/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0074 AMCOM $9,857,624 Modification to a CPFF contract for engineering services for theSHADOW unmanned aerial vehicle System. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 4/30/2008. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

9/28/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0024 AMCOM $7,153,965 Modification to a FFP contract to lead the fleet Shadow tactical un-manned aerial vehicle system hardware. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 7/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

5/3/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $65,556,046 FFP and CPIF contract for performance based contractor logisticssupport for the SHADOW Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System. Workis scheduled to be completed by 10/31/2007. Program involve-ment: RQ-7 Shadow.

5/4/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0292 AMCOM $87,154,533 FFP contract for full rate production of the SHADOW UnmannedAerial Vehicle System and associated support equipment. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2009. Program involvement:RQ-7 Shadow.

6/28/2006 W31P4Q-05-G-0004 AMCOM $11,900,000 Increment as part of a $15,193,138 CPIF contract for the TacticalCommon Data Link System Dual Demonstration for the ShadowTactical Unmanned Aerial System. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 10/31/2007. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program in-volvement: Shadow Tactical UAV.


Page 278 Appendix

9/30/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0292 AMCOM $32,630,010 Modification to a CPFF and FFP contract for production of theSHADOW unmanned aerial vehicle systems and associated sup-port equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2009. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

9/30/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0292 AMCOM $13,216,384 Modification to a FFP contract for engine modification kits and as-sociated spares for the Shadow 200 unmanned aircraft system.Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2008. Program in-volvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

9/30/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $11,449,800 Modification to a CPFF contract for special unit training supportpreparations for the SHADOW unmanned aerial vehicle system.Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. Program in-volvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

11/21/2006 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $40,722,746 Increment as part of a $164,736,153 CPFF contract for Perfor-mance Based Logistics for the SHADOW Unmanned Aerial Vehi-cle System. Work is scheduled to be completed by 10/31/2007.Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

3/2/2007 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $16,187,864 Modification to a CPFF and FFP contract to reset/refurbish theequipment associated with the Shadow System. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 3/1/2008. Program involvement: RQ-7Shadow.

5/4/2007 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $27,272,390 Modification to a CPFF contract for support services for theShadow 200 system. Work is scheduled to be completed by5/4/2008. Program involvement: RQ-7 Shadow.

AeroVironmentDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details1/2/2004 W58RGZ-04-C-0025 AMCOM $20,700,000 FFP/CPFF contract for procurement of 170 small unmanned aerial

vehicles - RAVEN. The work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA.Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2004. Program in-volvement: RQ-11 Raven.

2/5/2004 W911QY-04-C-0046 RMAC $9,916,398 FFP contract for 59 Raven unmanned air vehicle systems withconsumable and intermediate spares. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 11/27/2004. Program involvement: RQ-11 Raven.

2/8/2005 W58RGZ-04-C-0025 AMCOM $7,900,000 Modification to a FFP and CPFF contract for Contractor LogisticsSupport to RESET 170 RAVEN Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.The work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA. Work is scheduledto be completed by 10/5/2005. Program involvement: RQ-11 Ra-ven.

9/27/2005 N68335-05-C-0356 NAWC $9,612,838 Phase III Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Programcontract for Topic N87-190 entitled “Unmanned Aerial Vehicle De-velopment, Demonstration, and Production”. The work will be per-formed in Simi Valley, CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by2/28/2011. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement:UAV.

6/21/2006 W58RGZ-05-C-0338 AMCOM $9,612,000 Modification to a FFP, CPFF, and CPIF contract for depot levelmaintenance and repair for the RQ-11A Small Unmanned AircraftSystem. The work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA. Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/30/2007. Program involvement:RQ-11 Raven.

2/14/2007 W58RGZ-05-C-0338 AMCOM $46,797,769 Modification to a CPFF, FFP, and CPIF contract for procurementof RQ-11 Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Known as Raven),and associated initial spare packages. The work will be performedin Simi Valley, CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by1/11/2008. Program involvement: RQ-11 Raven.

2/14/2007 W58RGZ-05-C-0338 AMCOM $6,661,985 Modification to a CPFF, FFP, and CPIF contract for procurementof RQ-11 small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Known as Raven),and associated Initial spare packages to meet emergent MarineCorps needs. The work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA. Workis scheduled to be completed by 1/11/2008. Program involvement:RQ-11 Raven.


Appendix Page 279

8/30/2007 W58RGZ-05-0338). AMCOM $16,385,429 FFP contract for logistical support to RQ-11 unmanned aerial sys-tems (Raven). The work will be performed in Simi Valley, CA. Workis scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2008. Program involvement:RQ-11.

9/27/2007 H92222-07-C-0072 SOCOM $108,400,000 CPFF contract for the design, fabrication, integration, and groundtesting of a hydrogen powered Global Observer Unmanned Air-craft System. Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2011.Program involvement: Global Observer Unmanned Aircraft Sys-tem.

Alion Science and TechnologyDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details5/9/2005 N00421-05-D-0016 NAWC $20,023,288 CPFF, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to develop

an intelligent control system for swarming UAVs to demonstrateautonomous operations and cooperative behavior for persistentsurveillance. The work will be performed in Morgantown, WV.Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2009. PE involvement:0602114N. Program involvement: UAV.

Allegheny TeledyneDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical

5/5/1989 N00019-89-C-0186 NAVAIR $200,000 Engineering development contract for an engineering analysis re-lated to the Medium Range Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System.Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/5/1990. PE involvement:0305141D. Program involvement: UAV-MR, BQM-145.

6/30/1989 N00019-89-C-0173 NAVAIR $69,600,931 FPI contract for full-scale engineering development of the Me-dium-Range Unmammed Aerial Vehicle System. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 2/28/1994. PE involvement: 0305141D.Program involvement: UAV-MR, BQM-145.

9/21/1990 F09603-90-C-1837 WRALC $53,137,853 FFP contract for BQM-34A/S serial target drones, installation kits,support equipment, and related data. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 6/30/1992. Program involvement: BQM-34.

6/10/1991 N00019-89-C-0173 NAVAIR $11,000,000 Increment as part of a $31,337,194 unpriced change order con-tract to provide material composition upgrades, vehicle redesign,increased test requirements and schedule adjustments of theATARS suite. Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/1996.PE involvement: 0305141D. Program involvement: UAV-MR,BQM-145.

9/30/1991 F09603-90-C-1837 WRALC $44,067,772 FVI to a FFP contract for 53 BQM-34A (USAF) serial targetdrones, 34 BQM-34S (USN) serial target drones, and variousitems of associated support equipment, modification kits an. Workis scheduled to be completed by 10/30/1994. Program involve-ment: BQM-34.

8/6/1992 F09603-90-C-1837 WRALC $67,753,927 FVI to a FFP contract for 32 BQM-34A aerial target drones for theUSAF, 100 BQM-34S aerial target drones for the USN, and asso-ciated installation kits, warranties, and data. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/1995. Program involvement: BQM-34.

12/10/1993 N00019-93-C-0115 NAVAIR $54,600,000 FFP contract for 120 BQM-34S aerial targets, associated kits andtechnical data. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA (75%)and Santa Monica, CA (25%). Work is scheduled to be completedby 10/31/1996. Program involvement: BQM-34.

6/6/1995 N00019-94-C-0087 NAVAIR $28,145,004 FFP contract for the BQM-34S aerial targets for the Navy AerialTargets Program Management Office. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/1997. Program involvement: BQM-34.

7/7/1995 N00019-89-C-0173 NAVAIR $11,489,299 Modification to a previously awarded contract for partial reinstate-ment of the Medium Range Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (MR UAV)program. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/1997. PE in-volvement: 0305141D. Program involvement: BQM-145.


Page 280 Appendix

3/19/1999 MDA972-94-3-0013 DARPA $45,000,000 FVI to a CPFF contract to provide for Phase III demonstration,evaluation and non-recurring engineering in support of AdvancedConcept Technical Development of the Global Hawk H. Work isscheduled to be completed by 1/31/2000. PE involvement:0305205D and 0603760E. Program involvement: Global Hawk,HAE-UAV.

3/31/1999 F08626-99-C-0140 AAC $14,999,950 FFP contract to provide for up to 100 BQM-34 subscale aerial tar-gets, initial spares, and support equipment. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 3/31/2004. Program involvement: BQM-34.

11/22/1999 F08626-99-C-0140 AAC $13,600,000 Modification to a FFP contract to provide for 32 BQM-34 sub-scaleaerial targets. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2002.Program involvement: BQM-34.

Alliant TechsystemsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Defense Systems Group

5/2/1996 N00019-96-C-0152 NAVAIR $52,583,651 CPIF/AF contract for six tactical unmanned aerial vehicle sys-tems; two mobile maintenance facilities; eight attrition air vehicles;and training and contractor logistics s. The work will be performedin Hopkins, MN (20%) and Hondo, TX (80%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 5/31/1998. Program involvement: TUAV, Out-rider.

5/1/1998 N00019-96-G-0196 NAVAIR $12,124,005 CPFF, delivery order against a basic ordering agreement contractfor the design, engineering development, fabrication, and test ofan improved Outrider System. Work is scheduled to be completedby 3/31/1999. PE involvement: 0305205D. Program involvement:Outrider, TUAV.

Army ArmamentsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details9/27/2007 W31P4Q-06-C-0256 AMCOM $29,895,552 Modification to a CPFF contract for Support Services for the

Shadow 200 System. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/27/2008. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program involvement:RQ-7 Shadow.

Aurora Flight SciencesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details3/24/2005 W911W6-05-D-0003 AATD $5,011,524 Increment as part of a $20,000,000 CPFF contract for Excalibur

Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Development. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 4/24/2010. PE involvement: 0305204A.Program involvement: Excalibur Tactical UAV.

6/30/2005 HR0011-05-C-0035 DARPA $4,400,000 Increment to a $12,143,970 CPFF contract for Phase II of the Or-ganic Air Vehicle II Program. Work is scheduled to be completedby 4/30/2006. PE involvement: 0603764E. Program involvement:OAV, Raven.

6/8/2006 HR0011-05-C-0035 DARPA $5,700,000 Increment as part of a $38,323,151 CPFF contract for the contin-ued development and demonstration of the Organic Air Vehicle-IItoward the Army future combat systems Class II Unmanned AerialVehicle need. Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/19/2009.PE involvement: 0603764E. Program involvement: OAV-II.


Appendix Page 281

BAE SystemsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Advanced Information Technologies

6/28/2005 F33615-02-C-1149 AFRL $3,258,025 Increment as part of a $5,425,036 CPFF contract to provide amulti-sensor, multi-look exploitation system designed to providepersistent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance for thePredator UAV. Work is scheduled to be completed by 6/30/2006.PE involvement: 0305219F. Program involvement: RQ-1 Preda-tor.

Integrated Defense Solutions

4/12/2004 FA8675-04-C-0214 AAC $17,175,962 FFP contract to provide for 13 QF-4 Full-Scale Aerial Targets, andassociated technical support. The work will be performed inMojave, CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2006.Program involvement: QF-4, FSAT.

12/9/2004 FA8675-04-C-0214 AAC $21,310,741 FFP contract to provide for QF-4 Full-Scale Aerial Targets (FSAT),Production Contract for Lot 11 (17 FSATs) and associated techni-cal support. The work will be performed in Mojave, CA. Work isscheduled to be completed by 8/31/2007. Program involvement:QF-4 FSAT.

12/21/2005 FA8675-04-C-0214 SASG $5,653,000 FFP with T&M and cost contract to provide for Full Scale AerialTargets (FSAT), engineering change proposal to re-introduce theRF-4C configuration model back into QF-4 FSAT fleet. Work isscheduled to be completed by 11/30/2007. Program involvement:RF-4, QF-4.

2/27/2006 FA8675-04-C-0214 SASG $25,115,004 FFP with T&M cost contract to provide for QF-4 Full-Scale AerialTargets Production Contract for Lot 12 and associated technicalsupport. The work will be performed in Mojave, CA. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 7/31/2008. Program involvement: QF-4.

3/7/2007 FA8675-04-C-0214 SASG $26,462,593 FFP with T&M and cost contract for QF-4 Full-Scale Aerial Targets(FSAT), Production Contract for Lot 13 (20 FSATs) and associ-ated technical support. Work is scheduled to be completed by7/31/2009. Program involvement: QF-4.

BoeingDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Frontier Systems

8/10/2005 N00421-05-D-0046 NAWC $49,950,000 Ceiling-priced indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract foran Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) of theA-160 Hummingbird Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) Un-manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). Work is scheduled to be completedby 8/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement:A-160 Hummingbird VTOL UAV.

Integrated Defense Systems - Air Force Systems

10/12/2004 MDA972-99-9-0003 DARPA $766,696,178 Modification to a previously awarded other transaction contract forprototypes agreement to design, develop and fabricate threefull-scale X-45C Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems air vehiclesand two mission control el. The work will be performed in St. Louis,MO (80%); El Segundo, CA (4%); Cincinnati, OH (2%); and multi-ple other sites (14%). Work is scheduled to be completed by3/31/2010. PE involvement: 0603285E. Program involvement:J-UCAS, UCAV, X-45.

7/8/2005 MDA972-99-9-0003 DARPA $2,650,000 Increment of a $174,993,367 modification to a previously awardedcontract to conduct a robust autonomous aerial refueling demon-stration with the X-45C and extend the current flight test effort by18 months. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2012. PEinvolvement: 0603286E. Program involvement: X-45.


Page 282 Appendix

9/26/2007 N00019-05-C-0045 NAVAIR $16,000,000 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract to provide fol-low-on persistent Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance(ISR) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) services. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/2008. Program involvement: ISRUAV.

9/28/2007 HR0011-07-C-0100 DARPA $1,145,000 Increment as part of a $6,344,438 CPFFR contract to deliver anA160T aircraft and modified pod for the Autonomous Real-timeGround Ubiquitous Surveillance-Imaging System (ARGUS-IS)program. Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2009. PE in-volvement: 0602702E. Program involvement: ARGUS-IS.

Integrated Defense Systems - Naval Systems

6/22/2004 N00019-99-C-0003 NAVAIR $16,364,000 NTE modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for theprocurement of 14 MA-31 live boosters, 14 MA-31 aerial targets,and three AKY-58 launchers with tool sets. The work will be per-formed in St. Charles, MO. Work is scheduled to be completed by11/30/2006. Program involvement: MA-31, SSST.

4/18/2005 N00019-05-C-0045 NAVAIR $14,500,000 FFP contract to provide persistent Intelligence, Surveillance, Re-connaissance UAV services for a Naval Expeditionary StrikeGroup deployment and Gulf Oil Platform security. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 2/28/2006.

Phantom Works

3/24/1999 MDA972-99-9-0003 DARPA $14,848,000 Increment under a $131,000,000 other-transaction-for-prototypescontract to design and fabricate the UCAV demonstrator systemand conduct a series of demonstrations to validate the technicalfeasibility of the operational syste. The work will be performed inSeattle, WA (38%); St. Louis, MO (53%); Huntington Beach, CA(3%); and 2 other locations (6%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 9/30/2000. PE involvement: 0602702E. Program in-volvement: UCAV.

4/29/2002 MDA972-00-9-0005 DARPA $3,000,000 Increment on a $9,999,868 modification contract for prototypes tofurther advance technology and risk reduction activities in PhaseIIA of the Naval Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle program. The workwill be performed in St. Louis, MO (94%); Seattle, WA (2%); Mesa,AZ (1%); and 3 other locations (3%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 9/30/2004. PE involvement: 0603285E. Program in-volvement: UCAV.

7/6/2002 MDA972-02-9-0005 DARPA $1,562,000 Incrementa s part of a $460,056,330 contract to fund the Spiral 1objectives that are being incorporated into the existing UnmannedCombat Air Vehicle (UCAV) Other Transaction Agreement. Thework will be performed in St. Louis, MO (62%); Seattle, WA (34%);Palmdale, CA (3%); and 2 other locations (2%). Work is scheduledto be completed by 12/30/2005. PE involvement: 0603285E and0603333F. Program involvement: UCAV, X-45.

BrunswickDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Defense Div.

11/8/1988 N00019-88-C-0340 NAVAIR $6,988,764 FFP contract to manufacture and deliver 10 AQM-37C missile tar-gets, various mission kits, and technical data in order to qualify asa second source for the AGM-37C. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 7/31/1990. Program involvement: AQM-37.

7/27/1989 N00019-89-C-0260 NAVAIR $30,848,893 FFP contract for the Tactical Air-Launched Decoy (TALD) and as-sociated integrated logistics support, technical manuals and sup-port equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/1991. Program involvement: ADM-141.

4/23/1991 N00019-91-C-0163 NAVAIR $5,684,280 FFP contract for missile targets, passive flight kits, provisioningitems, manuals and associated technical data for AQM-37C AerialTargets System. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/1993.Program involvement: AQM-37.


Appendix Page 283

10/18/1991 N00019-89-C-0260 NAVAIR $7,500,000 Increment as part of a $23,732,801 ceiling priced modification to aFFP contract for an engineering change proposal to provide apowered Tactical Air Launched Decoy (TALD) configuration to 25TALD units. The work will be performed in Costa Mesa, CA (70%)and Jerusalem, Israel (30%). Work is scheduled to be completedby 7/31/1994. Program involvement: ADM-141.

6/2/1992 N00019-92-C-0155 NAVAIR $13,190,706 FFP contract for 95 AQM-37C aerial targets. The work will be per-formed in Costa Mesa, CA (95%) and Hawthorne, NV (5%). Workis scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1994. Program involvement:AQM-37.

Canadian CommercialDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Bombardier, Canadair Div.

5/23/1990 N00019-90-C-0137 NAVAIR $5,000,000 FFP contract for supplies and services required for the develop-ment, demonstration, test, and evaluation of a Vertical Takeoffand Landing (VTOL) Unmanned Aerial Vehic. The work will beperformed in Montreal, Canada. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 12/31/1991. Program involvement: CL-289, VTUAV.

5/17/1994 N00019-94-C-0074 NAVAIR $6,799,794 CPFF contract to integrate an enhanced turboshaft engine into theCL-227 system and demonstrate at least a three hour enduranceflight. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/1996. Programinvolvement: CL-227, VTUAV.

Composite EngineeringDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details7/12/2002 F08635-02-C-0005 AAC $6,603,770 Modification contract to provide for two pre-production Air Force

subscale aerial targets (AFSAT), flight demonstration and sup-port, a target test set and associated data. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 7/31/2003. Program involvement: AFSAT, Skeeter.

8/11/2004 F08635-02-C-0005 AAC $0 Increment as part of an $8,703,409 FFP with T&M contract to pro-vide for Air Force Subscale Aerial Target (AFSAT), Exercises ofLRIP Option for Lot 1 (10 AFSATs), First Article Acceptance Test-ing, and Target Test. Work is scheduled to be completed by1/31/2006. The contract involves FMS. Program involvement:AFSAT.

5/6/2005 F08635-02-C-0005 AAC $0 Increment as part of a $20,380,569 FFP contract to provide for AirForce Subscale Aerial Target (AFSAT), exercise of Low Rate ofInitial Production Option for Lot 2 and the procurement of ExhibitB-Data. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2007. Thecontract involves FMS. Program involvement: AFSAT.

3/17/2006 F08635-02-C-0005 AAC $0 Increment as part of a $15,000,785 FFP contract for Air ForceSubscale Aerial Target (AFSAT), exercise of LRIP option for Lot 3(quantity of 38 AFSATs) and the procurement of Exhibit B-Data.Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/2008. Program in-volvement: AFSAT.

3/2/2007 F08635-02-C-0005 308 ASW $5,505,841 FFP contract to procure contractor peculiar recoverable sparesand peculiar consumables for use in USAF Subscale Aerial Targetduring operations at Tyndall AFB, FL. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2008. Program involvement: FSAT.

3/27/2007 F08635-02-C-0005 308 ASW $23,858,299 FFP modification to an existing contract awarded contract to pro-cure Air Force Subscale Aerial Target (AFSAT), exercise of fullrate production option of Lot 4 (quantity of 42 AFSATs). Work isscheduled to be completed by 3/31/2008. Program involvement:AFSAT, BQM-167.


Page 284 Appendix

Frontier SystemsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details9/11/2003 MDA972-03-9-0004 DARPA $2,500,000 Increment of a $75,000,000 other transaction for prototypes

agreement contract to design, develop and test four A160 un-manned aerial vehicles. The work will be performed in Victorville,CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2007. PE involve-ment: 0603764E. Program involvement: A160 UAV.

General AtomicsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Aeronautical Systems

1/7/1994 N00019-93-C-0137 NAVAIR $31,721,695 CPFF contract for tactical endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV) advanced concept technology demonstration. The work willbe performed in Adelanto, CA. Work is scheduled to be completedby 6/30/1996. PE involvement: 0305141D. Program involvement:UAV-E, Gnat 750, Tier 1.

7/26/1996 N00019-96-C-0121 NAVAIR $36,219,673 CPIF contract for Predator Medium Altitude Endurance (MAE) Un-manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) system hardware. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 3/31/1998. PE involvement: 0305154D.Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

5/13/1997 N00019-97-C-0070 NAVAIR $16,968,183 FPI contract for six Medium Altitude Endurance Unmanned AerialVehicles (UAVs), spare parts, ground support equipment, anddata. Work is scheduled to be completed by 8/31/1998. PE in-volvement: 0305154D. Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier1, RQ-1.

8/19/1997 N00019-97-C-0106 NAVAIR $25,492,200 Undefinitized contract for eight Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehi-cles, two ground control stations, spare parts, ground supportequipment, program management, and data. The work will be per-formed in Rancho Bernado, CA. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 9/30/1999. Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1,RQ-1.

3/13/1998 N00019-98-C-0072 NAVAIR $71,557,399 FPIF contract for the procurement of 2 Predator Unmanned AerialVehicle (UAV) systems (eight air vehicles and 2 ground controlstations), 10 air vehicles, and spare parts. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (80%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%) and SaltLake City, WA (3%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2000. PE involvement: 0305205D. Program involvement:Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

5/1/1998 N00019-98-C-0045 NAVAIR $15,641,532 Ceiling amount, CPIF, FFP contract for interim contractor supportand spare parts for the Predator Unmanned Air Vehicle system.Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1999. PE involvement:0305205D. Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

5/27/1998 N00019-95-G-0197 NAVAIR $8,875,295 CPFF delivery order against a basic ordering agreement contractfor Predator UAV Block I upgrade improvements which include se-cure voice radio, relief on station, Ku-Band tuning, reliability andmaintainability. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/1999.PE involvement: 0305205D. Program involvement: Predator,UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

8/16/1999 F33657-99-C-3045 ASC $47,066,928 FPIF contract to provide for one Predator unmanned aerial recon-naissance vehicle system. Work is scheduled to be completed by4/30/2001. Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

12/16/1999 F33657-99-C-3045 ASC $49,353,203 Modification to a FPIF contract to provide for 12 Predator un-manned aerial reconnaissance vehicles, six ice protection kits,ground control equipment, and associated spares. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 6/30/2002. PE involvement: 0305205D.Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.


Appendix Page 285

6/30/2000 F33657-00-C-4010 ASC $5,337,583 CPFF contract to provide for contractor logistics support from Julythrough September 2000 for the Predator unmanned aerial recon-naissance vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2000. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement:Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

2/22/2001 F33657-00-C-4010 ASC $6,107,916 Modification to a CPAF contract to provide for contractor logisticssupport from March through June 2001 for the Predator un-manned aerial reconnaissance vehicles. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 6/30/2001. Program involvement: Predator, UAV,Tier 1, RQ-1.

3/20/2001 F33657-00-C-4040 ASC $19,837,034 Increment as part of a $30,100,096 FFP contract for seven Preda-tor unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehicles. Work is scheduledto be completed by 3/31/2002. Program involvement: Predator,UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

6/27/2001 F33657-00-C-4010 ASC $2,250,769 Increment as part of a $16,016,421 modification to a CPFF con-tract to provide for 12 Predator unmanned aerial reconnaissancevehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by 6/30/2002. Pro-gram involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

9/6/2001 F33657-98-G-3110 ASC $11,178,404 CPFF contract to provide for retrofit of five ground control stationssupporting the Predator unmanned aerial reconnaissance vehi-cle. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2002. Program in-volvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1.

12/28/2001 F33657-01-C-5063 ASC $8,151,708 CPFF contract for contractor logistics support from Jan. 1, 2002,through March 30, 2002, for the Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehi-cle System. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2002. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-1 Predator.

12/4/2002 F33657-00-C-4040 ASC $21,614,280 Increment as part of a $28,819,040 FFP contract to provide 12MQ-1 Block 10 Predator Aircraft. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 4/30/2004. Program involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1,RQ-1, MQ-1.

7/22/2003 F33657-03-C-3003 ASC $5,113,819 Modification contract to provide CONUS field support, depot sup-ply support, program management, configuration management,Nellis Flight Operations support, and reach back suppo. Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/30/2003. Program involvement:Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1, MQ-1.

8/20/2003 F33657-03-C-3018 ASC $41,345,710 FFP contract to provide for 19 MQ-1L Predator unmanned aerialvehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by 8/31/2005. Pro-gram involvement: Predator, UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1, MQ-1.

3/29/2004 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $5,555,125 Increment as part of a $17,011,750 CPFF contract to provide forthe development of specifications to produce and weaponize theMQ-9A Predator unmanned air vehicle. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 1/31/2005. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program in-volvement: Predator, RQ-1, MQ-9.

4/9/2004 F33657-03-C-3018 ASC $9,124,893 FFP contract for readiness spares, consisting of consumables,support equipment, and line replaceable units, in support of theMQ-1L Predator unmanned aerial vehicle. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/2005. Program involvement: Predator,UAV, Tier 1, RQ-1, MQ-1.

7/1/2004 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $26,427,245 FFP contract to provide for seven each MQ-IL Predator Un-manned Air Vehicles, six Ground Data Terminals, and twelveRuggedized Air Maintenance Test Stations. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 6/30/2006. Program involvement: MQ-1, Preda-tor.

7/6/2004 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $27,705,374 Increment as part of a $36,940,499 FPIF contract to provide forfour MQ-9A Air Vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2006. Program involvement: MQ-9.

10/1/2004 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $5,558,748 FFP contract to provide for three MQ-9A Air Vehicles. Work isscheduled to be completed by 6/30/2006. Program involvement:MQ-9, RQ-1, Predator.


Page 286 Appendix

11/15/2004 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $22,001,140 FFP contract to provide for 7 each MQ-1L Predator Remotely Pi-loted Aircraft and 14 each Ruggedized Aircraft Maintenance TestStations. Work is scheduled to be completed by 1/31/2007. Pro-gram involvement: MQ-1, RQ-1.

11/19/2004 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $7,206,740 Increment as part of a $14,413,480 CPFF contract to providePredator MQ-IL Block 10+ Retrofit Phase 1-Non-recurring engi-neering to define all necessary kit hardware. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 11/30/2005. Program involvement: RQ-1.

2/1/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $4,218,338 Modification to a CPFF contract for 2 additional Improved-GNATUAVs, three modification kits for legacy, hardware and the devel-opment and integration of the Tactical Automatic Landing System.The work will be performed in San Diego, CA (80%) and Adelanto,CA (20%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/22/2006. PEinvolvement: 0305205A. Program involvement: Gnat UAV.

2/10/2005 FA4890-05-C-0001 ACC $8,285,431 CPFF contract to provide services necessary to perform PredatorOrganizational Maintenance for aircraft, Ground Control Stations,and Predator Primary Satellite Links. The work will be performed inSan Diego, CA and Indian Springs, NV. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2006. Program involvement: Predator, UAV,Tier 1, RQ-1.

2/11/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $4,990,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for on-site technical, logistical,and operational support of the I-GNAT unmanned aerial vehicle.The work will be performed in Adelanto, CA (65%) and San Diego,CA (35%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2005. Pro-gram involvement: I-GNAT UAV.

3/30/2005 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $15,610,000 Increment as part of a $68,205,573 CPIF contract provide for theSystem Development and Demonstration (SDD) of the MQ-9Hunter-Killer Aircraft. Work is scheduled to be completed by3/31/2006. PE involvement: 0305219F. Program involvement:MQ-9, RQ-1, Predator.

3/31/2005 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $20,082,837 FFP contract to provide for additional Readiness Spares PackageKits for the Predator Program. Work is scheduled to be completedby 1/31/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1, Predator UAV.

3/31/2005 FA8620-05-C-3000 ASC $9,992,967 CPFF contract to provide for Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)Predator Spares and Quick Reaction Repair and Return Supportfor Two Additional OEF Predator Orbits. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-1, PredatorUAV.

6/1/2005 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $5,322,582 Increment as part of a $7,096,776 modification contract to providefor Predator Initial Spares for seven MQ-1 Aircraft. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 8/31/2008. Program involvement: MQ-1,Predator, RQ-1.

6/3/2005 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $14,636,236 Increment as part of a $19,514,981 modification contract to pro-vide for the Development and Production efforts for the Predatordual control mobile ground control station and enhancement modkits. Work is scheduled to be completed by 10/31/2008. PE in-volvement: 0305219F. Program involvement: Predator, RQ-1.

6/21/2005 FA8620-04-C-4005 ASC $54,551,742 Increment as part of a $72,735,659 FFP contract to exercise anoption of Predator requirements including acceleration of the de-livery of 17 aircraft, produce 15 MQ-1L Block 10 aircraft, and Sup-port Equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2008.Program involvement: RQ-1, Predator.

6/22/2005 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $23,121,898 Increment as part of a $30,829,202 CPFF contract to providePredator Ground Control Stations including two fixed facilityGCSs; one Dual Control; 19 Enhancement Mod Kits; and twoMulti-Aircraft Controls. Work is scheduled to be completed by4/30/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1, Predator.

7/15/2005 FA8620-05-C-3000 ASC $20,769,160 CPFF contract to exercise an option of Contractor Logistics Sup-port for the Predator System for five months. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2005. Program involvement: RQ-1, Preda-tor UAV.


Appendix Page 287

7/29/2005 FA8620-05-C-3013 ASC $10,467 Increment as part of a $13,867,301 FFP/CPFF contract to providefor 9 Lynx Synthetic Aperture Radars for the Predator, GroundSupport Equipment and Spares, and a option for training manuals.Work is scheduled to be completed by 11/30/2007. Program in-volvement: RQ-1, Predator, LYNX SAR.

8/8/2005 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $214,409,789 For research, developmenCPIF contract for research, develop-ment, test and evaluation of the Extended Range Multi PurposeUnmanned Aerial Vehicle system. The work will be performed inSan Diego, CA; Adelanto, CA; Palmdale, CA; and 3 other loca-tions. Work is scheduled to be completed by 8/31/2009. PE in-volvement: 0305204A. Program involvement: RQ-1, Predator.

9/29/2005 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $12,235,013 Modification to a CPFF contract for Technical, Logistical, and Op-erational Support of the I-GNAT Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Thework will be performed in Adelanto, CA (60%) and San Diego, CA(40%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2006. Programinvolvement: I-GNAT UAV.

1/25/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $41,403,571 FPIF contract for the manufacture, test, and delivery of five Preda-tor B MQ-9 UAVs and associated equipment to include InitialSpares, and Ground Support Equipment. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2008. Program involvement: BMQ-9, Predator.

3/3/2006 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $67,000,000 Increment as part of a $214,321,143 CPIF contract for System De-velopment and Demonstration for the Extended Range/ Multi-Pur-pose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (43%); Adelanto, CA (14%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%);and 3 other locations (25%). Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program involvement:ER/MP-UAV.

3/13/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $27,127,089 CPFF contract for periodic depot maintenance for the PredatorMQ-1 and MQ-9 unmanned aircraft system program. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. Program involvement:Predator, RQ-4.

3/15/2006 FA4890-05-C-0001 ACC $30,136,635 CPFF contract to provide services necessary to perform Predatororganizational maintenance of aircraft, Ground Control Stations,and Predator Primary Satellite Links. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2007. Program involvement: Predator, RQ-4.

6/15/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $25,151,451 CPFF term contract to support the Predator MQ-1 and MQ-9 un-manned aircraft system program. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 12/31/2006. Program involvement: Predator, RQ-1.

6/21/2006 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $21,094,500 Modification to a CPFF contract for the improved unmanned aerialvehicles and associated support equipment and initial spares. Thework will be performed in San Diego, CA (65%); Salt Lake City, UT(25%); Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. Program involvement:RQ-1.

6/29/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $14,881,292 CPFF contract to exercise an option which includes the PredatorMQ-1 Unmanned Aircraft System Outside Continental UnitedStates program. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2006. Program involvement: Predator, RQ-1.

6/30/2006 F33657-02-G-4035 ASC $5,210,170 CPFF contract for the retrofit of five MQ-9 Predator aircraft, withupgraded landing gear for increased landing capacity, and Hell-fire/EGBU-12/Special Project A Payloads. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 6/30/2006. Program involvement: RQ-1.

8/4/2006 N00421-06-C-0024 NAWC $8,294,000 CPFF contract for the procurement of one Predator B aircraft foruse in demonstration and operations, including ground supportequipment, spares kit and system integration. Work is scheduledto be completed by 4/30/2007. PE involvement: 0305204N. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-1.

8/22/2006 W58RGZ-06-C-0208 AMCOM $11,466,000 As part of an estimated $23,400,000 CPFF contract to acquire fourextended range multi-purpose unmanned aerial vehicles, the as-sociated support equipment and initial spare parts. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 8/31/2007. PE involvement: 0305204A.Program involvement: UAV.


Page 288 Appendix

9/22/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $11,846,649 Increment as part of a $15,795,532 FFP contract for 1 ground sup-port equipment, 1 initial spares package and 2 primary predatorsitcom link modem assembly per FY06 Predator MQ-1 andReaper MQ-9 requirements. Work is scheduled to be completedby 6/30/2010. Program involvement: RQ-1, MQ-9.

9/22/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $38,363,450 Increment as part of a $49,587,121 FFP contract for 7 MQ-1 Block15 aircraft and the necessary non-recurring engineering toproductionize the block 15 configuration. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 1/31/2010. Program involvement: RQ-1.

9/29/2006 W15P7T-06-C-P255 CECOM $8,550,308 FFP, CPFF and T&M contract for Lynx I Systems. The work will beperformed in San Diego, CA (95%) and Iraq (5%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 3/30/2008. Program involvement: Lynx.

9/29/2006 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $14,536,421 Modification to a CPFF contract for contractor logistics support forIGNAT unmanned aerial vehicle operations. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (75%); Salt Lake City, UT (15%);Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 11/30/2007. Program involvement: IGNAT UAV.

11/7/2006 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $20,000,000 Increment as part of a $215,373,106 CPIF contract for system de-velopment and demonstration for the extended range / multi-pur-pose unmanned aerial vehicle. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (43%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%); Adelanto, CA (14%);and 3 other locations (27%). Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program involvement:ER/MP UAV.

12/18/2006 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $13,807,439 Modification to a CPFF contract for contractor logistics support insupport of IGNAT Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Operations. The workwill be performed in San Diego, CA (65%); Salt Lake City, UT(25%); Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 8/31/2009. Program involvement:RQ-1, IGNAT UAV.

12/18/2006 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $63,168,556 Increment as part of a $215,373,106 CPIF contract for system de-velopment and demonstration for the Extended Range / Multi-Pur-pose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (43%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%); Adelanto, CA (14%);and 3 other locations (25%). Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program involvement:RQ-1, ER/MP UAV.

12/29/2006 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $38,099,885 Increment as part of a $42,666,206 CPFF term contract forCAMS/REMIS/CEMS data collection/entry and numbered Peri-odic Depot Maintenance (PDM) for the Predator MQ-1 and MQ-9Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) program. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-1 Preda-tor.

1/30/2007 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $20,748,347 Modification to a CPFF contract for contractor logistics support forIGNAT Unmanned Aerial Vehicle operations. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (75%); Salt Lake City, UT (15%);Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2007. Program involvement: IGNAT UAV,RQ-1.

2/9/2007 W58RGZ-06-C-0208 AMCOM $11,679,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for acquisition of four ExtendedRange Multi-Purpose Block 0, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, associ-ated support equipment, and initial spares. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (65%); Salt Lake City, UT (25%);Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/18/2007. PE involvement: 0305204A. Pro-gram involvement: ERMP UAV, RQ-1.

3/13/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $32,747,250 Increment as part of a $43,663,000 FFP contract for the manufac-ture, test and delivery of two Predator B MQ-9 unmanned aerialvehicles, two mobile ground control stations, and associatedequipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2008.Program involvement: RQ-1.


Appendix Page 289

4/5/2007 W58RGZ-06-C-0208 AMCOM $5,264,342 Modification to a CPFF contract for Extended Range Multi-Pur-pose Block 0, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (65%); Salt Lake City, UT (25%);Adelanto, CA (5%); and Palmdale, CA (5%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/2007. PE involvement: 0305204A. Programinvolvement: RQ-1.

5/7/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $58,976,370 FFP contract for the manufacture, test and delivery of four Preda-tor B Reaper MQ-9 UAVs and associated equipment to include ini-tial spares and ground support equipment. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2009. Program involvement: RQ-1, MQ-9Predator.

5/7/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $10,135,251 CPFF contract to provide a series of required tasks to design, fab-ricate, integrate, and test the Predator MQ-1B Block X aircraftwhich will utilize a Heavy Full Engine (HFE). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 5/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305219F. Programinvolvement: RQ-1 Predator.

6/22/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $69,407,519 CPFF contract for Predator/Reaper contractor logistics support toinclude all program management, urgent repairs and services, lo-gistics support and configuration management. Work is scheduledto be completed by 12/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-1,MQ-9.

6/22/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $43,983,622 FFP contract for the manufacture, test and delivery of four Preda-tor B Reaper MQ-9 UAVs and associated equipment to include Ini-tial Spares and Ground Support Equipment. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2009. Program involvement: RQ-1, MQ-9.

6/28/2007 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $14,665,000 Increment as part of a $215,373,106 CPIF contract for system de-velopment and demonstration for the Extended Range / Multi-Pur-pose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (43%); Salt Lake City, UT (18%); Hunt Valley, MD(14%); and 3 other locations (25%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 8/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204A. Program in-volvement: ER/MPUAV.

8/6/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $7,307,964 CPFF contract to provide two Pre-Production YMQ-1C Block X air-craft. Work is scheduled to be completed by 1/31/2009. PE in-volvement: 0305219F. Program involvement: YMQ-1.

8/31/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $40,592,440 Increment as part of a $54,123,254 FFP contract for the manufac-ture, test, and delivery of six (6) Predator B MQ-9 Reaper Un-manned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 8/31/2008. Program involvement: MQ-9 Predator.

8/31/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $64,955,733 FFP contract for various MQ-9 Reaper equipment and items in-cluding Aircraft Initial Spares, 30 Day Pack-up Kits, and GroundSupport Equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1, MQ-9.

9/7/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $94,341,404 FFP contract for 36 Predator MQ-1B Aircraft, Aircraft Spares, RSPkits, Hellfire Missile Kit Installation, IM’s and core tasks. Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/30/2008. Program involvement:RQ-1 Predator, AGM-114 Hellfire.

9/14/2007 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $11,306,274 Modification to a CPIF contract for contractor logistics support forthe IGNAT Warrior Alpha unmanned aerial system. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/13/2008. Program involvement: IGNATWarrior Alpha, RQ-1.

9/19/2007 W58RGZ-07-C-0107 AMCOM $5,181,995 CPIF contract for low rate initial production effort for the extendedrange/multi-purpose unmanned aerial system. The work will beperformed in San Diego, CA (75%) and Salt Lake City, UT (25%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/11/2008. Program in-volvement: ER/MP UAV, RQ-1.

9/19/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $6,089,382 CPFF contract for Target Location Accuracy (TLA) Phase I, MQ-1Predator Predator/MQ-9. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2007. PE involvement: 0305219F. Program involvement:MQ-1, MQ-9.


Page 290 Appendix

9/25/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $33,672,337 Increment as part of a $45,503,158 modification contract for 10Predator MQ-1B Aircraft, Aircraft Spares, RSP kits, Hellfire MissileKit Installation, IMA’s and core tasks. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/2008. Program involvement: Predator MQ-1B,RQ-1.

9/28/2007 DAAH01-03-C-0124 AMCOM $27,530,591 Modification to a CPFF contract for contractor logistics support forthe Sky Warrior Block 0 Unmanned Aircraft System. The work willbe performed in San Diego, CA (80%); Hunt Valley, MD (10%) andSalt Lake City, UT (10%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/27/2008. Program involvement: Sky Warrior.

10/1/2007 FA8620-05-G-3028 ASC $15,180,780 contract for retrofit 20 Predator block 5 to block 15; retrofit 1 block10 to 15. Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2008. Pro-gram involvement: Predator, RQ-1.

10/1/2007 FA4890-07-C-0009 ACC $21,914,173 Modification contract for organizational maintenance support forthe Predator MQ-9 remotely piloted aircraft systems at CreechAFB, NV, and deployed sites worldwide. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1, MQ-9Predator.

10/18/2007 W58RGZ-05-C-0069 AMCOM $20,828,590 Increment as part of a $231,154,861 CPIF contract for system de-velopment and demonstration for the Extended Range / Multi-Pur-pose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Including Integration of the HellfireMissile. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA (43%); SaltLake City, UT (18%); Hunt Valley, MD (14%); and 3 other locations(25%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 8/31/2009. Programinvolvement: ER/MP UAV, AGM-114.

Geneva AerospaceDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details7/13/2005 N68335-05-D-0013 NAWC $25,000,000 Indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for a Phase III SBIR

Project under Topic N03-058 entitled “Advanced Ship/Fixed-wingUnmanned Aerial Vehicle Recovery Interface”. Work is scheduledto be completed by 6/30/2010. PE involvement: 0602114N and0603286E. Program involvement: UAV.

Honeywell InternationalDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Defense and Space Electronics Systems

10/15/2003 MDA972-01-9-0018 DARPA $1,000,000 Increment as part of a NTE $39,346,264 modification to a previ-ously award contract to add the Micro Air Vehicle Advanced Con-cept Technology Demonstration effort to the on-going Organic AirVehicle program. The work will be performed in Albuquerque, NM(54%); San Diego, CA (32%); Minneapolis, MN (10%); andBlacksburg, VA (4%). Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2006. PE involvement: 0603764E. Program involvement: Mi-cro UAV.

6/30/2005 HR0011-05-C-0043 DARPA $4,714,331 Increment to a $17,450,199 CPFF contract for Phase II of the Or-ganic Air Vehicle II Program. Work is scheduled to be completedby 4/30/2006. PE involvement: 0603764E. Program involvement:OAV.

Israel Aircraft IndustriesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

LTD-MALAT

9/15/1989 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $18,521,657 FFP pre-production contract for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles-ShortRange (UAV-SR) systems. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/31/1991. Program involvement: BQM-155.


Appendix Page 291

12/15/1989 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $11,822,185 FFP supply contract for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle - Short Range.Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/1991. Program in-volvement: BQM-155.

12/26/1990 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $7,152,786 FY91 option to the FFP preproduction contract for Unmanned Ae-rial Vehicle-Short Range (UAV-SR) system supplies. The work willbe performed in Tel Aviv, Isreal. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/1991. PE involvement: 0305141D. Program in-volvement: BQM-155.

Israel Military IndustriesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details9/24/1996 N00019-96-C-0144 NAVAIR $21,221,026 FFP contract for 98 Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoys

(ITALDS) for use on F/A-18 aircraft. The work will be performed inIsrael (70%) and Toledo, OH (30%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/1999. Program involvement: ITALDS, F/A-18.

3/3/1998 N00019-97-C-0097 NAVAIR $14,434,581 FFP contract for the procurement of 110 improved tactical airlaunched decoys for the USN, including the associated technicaland administrative data and the integrate. The work will be per-formed in Israel (60%) and Toledo, OH (40%). Work is scheduledto be completed by 10/31/1999. Program involvement: ADM-141,ITALD.

9/28/2000 N00019-00-C-0424 NAVAIR $6,350,842 Ffp contract for upgrade of the ITALD navigation system throughintegration of a GPS receiver and the retrofitting of productionbaseline ITALD air vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completedby 9/30/2001. Program involvement: ITALD, GPS, ADM-141.

12/18/2002 N00019-03-C-6518 NAVAIR $21,551,081 FFP contract for the procurement of 140 improved tactical airlaunched decoys, 10 improved decoy tester and mission program-mers; 10 IDTP kits, and supply support equip. The work will be per-formed in Israel (63%); Toledo, OH (28%) and Wayne, NJ (9%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2004. Program in-volvement: ITALD, ADM-141.

3/30/2006 N00019-03-C-6518 NAVAIR $13,367,585 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract to incorporate aClass I engineering change proposal into 19 ADM-141C ITALD, toconvert them to 18 advanced ITALD flight test vehicles and oneadvanced ITALD E3. The work will be performed in Israel (84.2%);Eatontown, NJ (4.1%); United Kingdom (3.7%); and 4 other loca-tions (8%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 11/30/2007. PEinvolvement: 0604270N. Program involvement: ADM-141, ITALD.

IMI Services USA

3/19/2003 N00019-03-C-6518 NAVAIR $12,496,275 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for the procure-ment of 85 Improved Tactical Air Launched Decoys (ITALDs). Thework will be performed in Israel (63%); Toledo, OH (28%) andWayne, NJ (9%). Work is scheduled to be completed by1/31/2005. Program involvement: ITALDS, ADM-141.

9/23/2004 N00019-03-C-6518 NAVAIR $12,770,947 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for the procure-ment of 70 improved tactical air launched decoys (ITALDs), 17ITALD training vehicles, and 1 lot of supply support equipment.The work will be performed in Israel (63%); Toledo, OH (28%) andWayne, NJ (9%). Work is scheduled to be completed by8/31/2006. Program involvement: ITALD.


Page 292 Appendix

Johns Hopkins UniversityDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Applied Physics Laboratory

9/28/2004 HR0011-04-9-0018 DARPA $2,000,000 Increment of a $26,941,808 other transaction contract to financetasks associated with Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems. Thework will be performed in Laurel, MA (82%); Chesterfield, MO(11%) and Hampton, VA (7%). Work is scheduled to be completedby 9/30/2009. PE involvement: 0603285E. Program involvement:UCAV.

KOO ConstructionDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details2/8/2005 W91238-05-C-0008 COE $7,376,569 FFP contract for the Global Hawk System. The work will be per-

formed in Beale AFB, CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by5/25/2006. Program involvement: RQ-4, Global Hawk.

L-3 CommunicationsDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Communications Systems-West

4/16/1997 N00019-97-C-0071 NAVAIR $10,358,893 FFP contract for Predator Medium Altitude Endurance UAV Satel-lite Air Data Terminals, Ground Support Equipment, Spares, andTechnical Data. Work is scheduled to be completed by 6/30/1998.PE involvement: 0305154D. Program involvement: Predator,UAV-MR.

8/15/1997 N00019-97-C-0071 NAVAIR $9,437,891 Undefinitized contract for Ku-Band satellite air and ground dataterminals, spare parts, ground support equipment, and data foruse in the Predator Unmanned Air Vehicle system. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 1/31/1999. Program involvement: Preda-tor, UAV-MR.

9/13/2007 FA8620-05-G-3027 ASC $8,737,924 FFP contract for the build, installation, and test of fixed SATCOMterminals for the Predator/Reaper Program. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 9/30/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1 Preda-tor.

Lockheed MartinDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Aeronautics

5/10/2005 HR0011-05-9-0007 DARPA $4,222,852 Increment of a $7,087,376 other transaction for prototypes agree-ment contract to conduct risk reduction demonstrations and ma-ture the Multi-Purpose Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and relatedservicing and support system concepts. The work will be per-formed in Ft. Worth, TX (52%); Groton, CT (33%); Toledo, OH(8%); and Riviera Beach, FL (7%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/2007. PE involvement: 0602702E. Program in-volvement: Multi-Purpose UAV.

Missiles and Space

11/21/1988 DAAH01-88-C-0844 MICOM $833,330 Increment as part of a $3,303,329 modification to a CPAF contractfor contractor support for the Aquila remotely piloted vehicle sys-tem. The work will be performed in Austin, TX (79%) and Ft. Sill,OK (21%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1989. Pro-gram involvement: Aquila.


Appendix Page 293

Systems Integration

7/24/2003 MDA972-02-9-0011 DARPA $7,000,000 Increment as part of a $9,430 modification to a previously awardedcontract for the phase II (preliminary design phase) of the un-manned combat armed rotorcraft program. The work will be per-formed in Owego, NY (39%); Hurst, TX (29%); Orlando, FL (14%);and 3 other locations (18%). Work is scheduled to be completed by4/30/2004. PE involvement: 0602702E. Program involvement:UCAR.

Locust USADate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details3/30/2004 DAAH10-02-C-0058 AATD $2,100,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for conversion of a L50/60 turbojet

engine into a turboshaft engine for the unmanned aerial vehicleapplications. The work will be performed in Miami, FL (60%); JunoBeach, FL (30%); Lebanon, OH (8%); and Cedar Park, TX (2%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 6/30/2005. PE involvement:0602211A. Program involvement: L50/60 turbojet.

BoeingDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Boeing Aerospace

5/12/1995 N00019-95-C-0162 NAVAIR $4,760,290 FFP (base-year) contract for FY95/96 foreign comparative testingof Russian M-31 Aerial Targetrs to fulfill the mission requirementsof the Supersonic Sea Skimming Target (SSST). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/1996. PE involvement: 0605117D.Program involvement: SSST, M-31.

1/10/1997 N00019-95-C-0162 NAVAIR $7,528,580 Modification to previously awarded contract to exercise an Ex-panded Demonstration Test option of the Russian MA-31 AerialTarget Foreign Comparative Test. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 6/30/1998. PE involvement: 0605103D. Program in-volvement: MA-31, SSST.

Boeing Missile Systems

9/15/1989 N00019-89-C-0347 NAVAIR $43,138,481 FFP pre-production contract for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles - ShortRange (UAV-SR) systems. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/31/1991. Program involvement: UAV-SR.

12/15/1989 N00019-89-C-0347 NAVAIR $6,763,399 Modification to an FFP supply contract for Unmanned Aerial Vehi-cle - Short Range supplies. The work will be performed in St. Louis,MO (80%) and Ontario, CA (20%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/1991. Program involvement: UAV-SR.

Mission TechnologiesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details8/4/2003 DAAB07-03-C-P021 CECOM $5,046,345 FFP contract for three generation II mini-unmanned air vehicles.

The work will be performed in Hondo, TX. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 7/31/2004. Program involvement: Mini-UAV.

NeanyDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details6/14/2004 N00421-04-C-0042 NAVAIR $9,253,693 Ceiling priced modification to a previously awarded CPFF contract

for the design and trade studies for mid-range and long-UAV’s insupport of the expendable and low cost autonomous airborne sur-veillance platform. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2006. PE involvement: 0305205N. Program involvement:UAV.


Page 294 Appendix

Northrop GrummanDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Integrated Systems - Unmanned Systems

12/22/1994 N00019-94-C-0175 NAVAIR $28,866,788 FFP contract for BQM-74E target systems and subkits for navalcombat simulations. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/1997. Program involvement: BQM-74.

4/19/1996 N00019-96-C-0132 NAVAIR $26,507,456 FFP contract for 120 BQM-74E aerial targets, 36 mission essentiallaunch kits and associated technical data. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 12/31/1900. Program involvement: BQM-74.

11/1/1996 F08626-96-C-0168 ASC $2,700,000 Increment as part of a $24,381,746 CPAF contract to provide for32 Miniature Air Launched Decoys (MALDs) and associated dataand software in support of the MALD Advanced Concept Technol-ogy Demonstration. Work is scheduled to be completed by4/30/1999. PE involvement: 0602702E, 0603270F and 0604270F.Program involvement: MALD, ADM-160.

3/20/1997 N00019-96-C-0132 NAVAIR $23,457,917 Modification to previously awarded contract to exercise an optionfor Subsonic Subscale Aerial Target (BQM-74E), Mission Essen-tial Air Launch Kits, and technical data. The work will be performedin El Segundo, CA (20%) and Hawthorne, CA (80%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 4/30/1999. Program involvement:BQM-74.

4/15/1997 N00019-96-C-0179 NAVAIR $6,498,048 FFP contract for BQM-74E Aerial Target Mission Essential Kits.The work will be performed in El Segundo, CA (50%) and Haw-thorne, CA (50%). Work is scheduled to be completed by2/28/1999. PE involvement: 0604258N. Program involvement:BQM-74.

12/3/1997 N00019-96-C-0132 NAVAIR $28,819,797 Modification to a previously awarded contract for the procurementof 119 subsonic subscale aerial targets (BQM-74E), 54 missionessential launch kits and associated technical data. The work willbe performed in El Segundo, CA (50%) and Hawthorne, CA (50%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2000. Program in-volvement: BQM-74.

7/9/1999 MDA972-99-9-0006 DARPA $3,011,497 Increment as part of a $14,100,000 other-transaction-for-proto-type agreem contract to prototype and demonstrate a miniatureair-launched cruise missile interceptor with supersonic capability.Work is scheduled to be completed by 1/31/2002. PE involvement:0603762E and 0602702E. Program involvement: MALI.

10/1/1999 F33615-99-C-3613 AFRL $5,239,776 CPFF contract to provide for the Software Enabled Control for theAutonomous Multivehicle Control System program. Work isscheduled to be completed by 2/4/2004. PE involvement:0601102F and 0603203F.

2/9/2000 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $93,721,957 CPIF/AF contract for the engineering and manufacturing develop-ment (EMD) phase of the vertical takeoff and landing tactical un-manned aerial vehicle (VTUAV) program. The work will beperformed in San Diego, CA (78%); Owego, NY (6%); Salt LakeCity, UT (5%); and 3 other locations (11%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2003. PE involvement: 0305204N. Pro-gram involvement: VTUAV, UAV-MAR.

2/16/2000 MDA972-95-3-0013 ASC $71,999,635 Modification to a CPAF contract to provide for two prototypeGlobal Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles, associated system modi-fication, and engineering support. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/2002. PE involvement: 0305205F. Programinvolvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

11/30/2000 F33615-00-D-3054 AFRL $95,000,000 Indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the first of threeparticipating in the Air Vehicles Technology Integration Program(AVTIP). Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/27/2009. PE in-volvement: 0602201F and 0602203F. Program involvement:AVTIP.


Appendix Page 295

2/13/2001 MDA972-95-3-0013 ASC $84,000,000 Modification to a CPAF contract to definitize pre-engineering andmanufacturing development (EMD) support for the Global Hawkunmanned aerial vehicle program. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 2/28/2002. PE involvement: 0603762E and 0305206D.Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

3/15/2001 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $5,500,000 Increment as part of a $ 45,000,000 CPAF contract to provide forengineering and manufacturing activities in support of the GlobalHawk unmanned aerial vehicle program. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2002. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program in-volvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

4/5/2001 N00019-01-C-0041 NAVAIR $23,594,712 FFP contract for the procurement of 78 BQM-74E targets and vari-ous mission essential kits. The work will be performed inPalmdale, CA. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2007.Program involvement: BQM-74.

4/6/2001 MDA972-95-3-0013 DARPA $2,248,110 Increment as part of a $6,248,110 CPAF contract for performanceof demonstration missions by the Global Hawk unmanned aerialvehicle as part of a joint United States-Australia program. Work isscheduled to be completed by 4/30/2002. PE involvement:0305205F and 0305205D. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

5/1/2001 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $14,167,276 Modification to a previously awarded CPIF contract for one FireScout Vertical Take-Off and Landing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(VTUAV) System, its associated support equipment, data, and ini-tial training. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA (29%);Elmira, NY (20%); Salt Lake City, UT (20%); and 2 other locations(31%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2002. Programinvolvement: VTUAV, Firescout, RQ-8, UAV-MAR.

6/12/2001 F33657-01-C-4601 ASC $20,524,297 NTE FPIF contract to provide for long lead parts/advanced pro-curement in support of LRIP of two Global Hawk unmanned aerialvehicles and one Mission Control Element. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 3/31/2003. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

1/25/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $7,000,000 Increment as part of a $41,500,000 modified ‘Other Transaction’contract to definitizes engineering and manufacturing develop-ment efforts in support of the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehi-cle. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2003. PEinvolvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

1/30/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $7,000,000 Increment as part of a $41,500,000 CPAF contract to definitizesengineering and manufacturing development efforts in support ofthe Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2003. PE involvement: 0305205F. Pro-gram involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

1/31/2002 F33657-01-C-4601 ASC $30,000,000 Increment as part of a $101,300,000 NTE FPIF Modification con-tract to provide for low rate initial production (Lot 1) for two GlobalHawk air vehicles and one mission control element. Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/30/2003. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

2/26/2002 NAVAIR $29,712,456 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for procure-ment of 109 BQM-74E Aerial Targets and 234 BQM-74 MissionEquipment Installation kits. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (51%); Walled Lake, MI (20%); Palmdale, CA (13%);and 2 other locations (16%). Work is scheduled to be completed by1/31/2004. Program involvement: BQM-74.

2/28/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $8,900,000 Increment as part of a $52, 840,000 CPAF modification contract toprovide for Global Hawk engineering and manufacturing develop-ment Stage IIA. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2004. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.


Page 296 Appendix

2/28/2002 N00019-02-C-3116 NAVAIR $24,955,142 CPIF contract for the design, development and test of theBQM-74F aerial target. The work will be performed in San Diego,CA (85%); Walled Lake, MI (11%); Elmira, NY (2%); and 2 other lo-cations (2%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/2005.PE involvement: 0604258N. Program involvement: BQM-74.

3/25/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $34,579,000 Increment as part of a $247,000,000 NTE CPAF contract to pro-vide for engineering and manufacturing development stage IIB ac-tivities for the Global Hawk program including communicationsand sensor suite upgrad. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2006. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

5/1/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $6,642,000 Increment as part of a $23,250,000 CPAF contract to provide forGlobal Hawk Engineering Manufacturing and Development Logis-tical Support Plus-Up. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2004. PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

5/2/2002 MDA972-00-9-0006 DARPA $3,000,000 Increment of a $10,000,000 modification contract transaction forprototypes to further advance technology and risk reduction activi-ties in Phase IIA of the Naval Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle pro-gram. The work will be performed in El Segundo, CA (81%) andmultiple locations (19%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2004. PE involvement: 0603285E. Program involvement:UCAV.

5/16/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $18,900,000 CPAF contract to provide for Engineering and Manufacturing De-velopment Stage IIB activities for the Global Hawk Program in-cluding ground segment improvements and SIGINT. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. PE involvement:0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

6/3/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $6,568,400 Increment as part of a modification contract for engineering andmanufacturing development Stage IIB activities for the GlobalHawk Program including ground segment improvements and ca-pability develo. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006.PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

7/26/2002 F33657-02-C-5422 ASC $30,290,000 FPIF contract to provide for long lead parts and advance procure-ment for low-rate initial production Lot 2. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 7/31/2003. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

9/24/2002 MDA972-95-3-0013 ASC $15,751,776 CPFF contract to provide for demonstration of the Global Hawk.Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/2003. PE involvement:0603285E. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

9/30/2002 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $9,000,000 Increment as part of a $21,700,000 CPAF contract to provide forengineering and manufacturing development stage IIB SIGINTexpansion activities for the Global Hawk program. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 12/31/2006. PE involvement: 0305205F.Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

9/30/2002 F19628-00-C-0100 ESC $0 Increment as part of a $153,900,000 CPAF contract for contractordesign support of the government’s selection of Boeing 767 -400ER as WAS platform of choice, and “Balance Plus” configura-tion for Global H. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2004.PE involvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

11/26/2002 N00019-01-C-0041 NAVAIR $24,494,691 Modification to previously awarded FFP contract to exercise anoption for procurement of 77 BQM-74E Aerial Targets and 220BQM-74 Mission Equipment Installation kits. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (35%); Walled Lake, MI (17%);Palmdale, CA (15%); and 4 other locations (33%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 11/30/2004. Program involvement:BQM-74.


Appendix Page 297

1/15/2003 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $29,000,000 CPFF contract to provide for special test equipment for the GlobalHawk Unmanned Aircraft. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2004. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

1/31/2003 F33657-02-C-5422 ASC $205,330,000 Increment as part of a $300,000,000 FPIF contract for LRIP Lot 2as follows: for the USAF, 4 Global Hawk air vehicles, 3 integratedsensor suites, and 2 electro-optical infrared. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/2005. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

2/5/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $20,000,000 Increment as part of a $185,200,000 CPAF using anundefinitized-contract- contract to provide for engineering andmanufacturing development activities in support of the GlobalHawk Maritime Demonstration. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 9/30/2006. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program in-volvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

2/20/2003 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $9,200,000 Increment as part of a $74,500,000 CPFF contract for contingencyoperations to include pre-deployment, deployment and operationsof a ground segment, two air vehicles, and associated supportsegment. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2003. Pro-gram involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

3/3/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $34,625,000 Increment as part of a $147,300,000 CPAF contract for engineer-ing and manufacturing development (EMD) activities in support ofEMD Spiral 3 for the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle pro-gram. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2004. PE in-volvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

3/24/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $26,423,763 CPAF contract to provide Engineering and Manufacturing Devel-opment activities in support of the Global Hawk Program. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. PE involvement:0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

4/8/2003 F33657-02-C-5424 ASC $6,920,000 CPAF contract to provide nine months of interim contractor sup-port for the Global Hawk Program. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 12/31/2003. PE involvement: 0305205F. Programinvolvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

6/27/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $11,762,820 Modification contract to provide for payment of award fees earnedduring evaluation period 2 from Aug 15, 2002, to May 15, 2003.Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. PE involve-ment: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

6/27/2003 F33657-03-C-4310 ASC $30,100,000 FPIF contract to provide for long lead parts/advance procurementfor Global Hawk low rate initial production Lot 3 items. Work isscheduled to be completed by 2/28/2004. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

7/16/2003 MDA972-02-9-0013 DARPA $7,000,000 Increment as part of an $8,700,000 modification to a previouslyawarded contract for the first of two planned efforts for Phase II(preliminary design phase) of the Unmanned Combat Armed Ro-torcraft (UCAR) Program. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (62%); Bloomfield, CT (12%); Baltimore, MD (9%); andother locations (17%). Work is scheduled to be completed by4/30/2004. PE involvement: 0602702E. Program involvement:UCAR.

8/27/2003 N00019-01-C-0041 NAVAIR $19,790,044 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract to exercise anoption for 16 BQM-74E aerial targets and 50 extended rangeBQM-74E aerial targets. The work will be performed in San Diego,CA (38%); Walled Lake, MI (16%); Palmdale, CA (14%); and 4other locations (32%). Work is scheduled to be completed by1/31/2006. Program involvement: BQM-74.

9/16/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $6,681,121 CPAF contract to provide for an interim payment of award fee forevaluation period 3 from May 15, 2003 to Feb 14, 2003, for theperformance of integrated logistic sup. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 12/31/2006. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.


Page 298 Appendix

9/29/2003 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $5,400,000 Increment as part of a $27,150,000 CPFF contract to provide forspecial test equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2004. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

10/22/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $2,750,000 Increment as part of a $6,300,000 modification contract to providefor System Design and Development activities for the Global HawkProgram. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/31/2004. PE in-volvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

11/25/2003 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $30,500,000 Increment as part of a $61,000,000 modification contract to pro-vide engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) activi-ties in support of EMD Spiral 4A for the Global Hawk program.Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2005. PE involvement:0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

1/5/2004 N00019-01-C-0041 NAVAIR $10,171,872 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for 27BQM-74E aerial targets, 13 extended range BQM-74E aerial tar-gets, and 150 radar altimeters. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (38%); Walled Lake, MI (16%); Palmdale, CA (14%);and 4 other locations (32%). Work is scheduled to be completed by7/31/2006. Program involvement: BQM-74.

3/2/2004 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $0 Increment as part of a $49,000,000 ceiling-priced undefinitizedmodificat contract for the continued development and testing ofthe Fire Scout UAV System, including the procurement of 2 engi-neering and manufacturing, development RQ-8B UA. The workwill be performed in San Diego, CA (85%) and Elmira, NY (15%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 10/31/2005. PE involve-ment: 0305204A. Program involvement: RQ-8 FIRE SCOUT.

3/31/2004 FA8620-04-C-3430 ASC $50,662,000 Unspecified type contract to provide for four Global Hawk (RQ-4B)production air vehicles with enhanced-integrated sensor suitesand clip-in sensor; support equipment and spares. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 1/31/2005. Program involvement: RQ-4,Global Hawk.

4/1/2004 F33657-03-C-4310 ASC $128,925,000 Increment as part of a $202,000,000 FPI contract for a action LRIPLot 3: one Global Hawk production air vehicle with basic integratedsensor suite and Two Global Hawk production air vehicle. Work isscheduled to be completed by 10/31/2005. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

4/23/2004 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $9,661,000 Increment as part of a $16,836,191 CPFF contract for the opera-tion of the Global Hawk System in a forward theater of operationsfor a classified length of time, including personnel, equipment andlogisti. Work is scheduled to be completed by 6/30/2004. Programinvolvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

4/30/2004 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $7,400,000 CPAF contract for incremental funding action for the engineeringmanufacturing and development contract. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2006. PE involvement: 0305205F. Pro-gram involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

4/30/2004 F19628-00-C-0100 ESC $66,923,000 Increment as part of an $887,965,579 CPAF contract for theMulti-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (MP-RTIP)system development and demonstration. The work will be per-formed in El Segundo, CA and Linthicum Heights, MD. Work isscheduled to be completed by 5/31/2010. PE involvement:0305206F and 0207450F. Program involvement: MP-RTIP,Global Hawk, RQ-4A.

8/18/2004 HR0011-04-9-0009 DARPA $30,000,000 Increment of a $1,037,274,437 other transaction for prototypesagreement contract to design and develop 3 X-47B air vehicles, 3mission control systems and an common operating system tomeet Air Force and Navy mission capability objecti. The work willbe performed in San Diego, CA (70%); Palmdale, CA (10%); EastHartford, CT (3%); and 10 other locations (17%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/2009. PE involvement: 0603285E.Program involvement: X-47.


Appendix Page 299

10/15/2004 F33657-03-C-4310 ASC $48,675,000 Increment as part of a $207,700,000 FFP contract for 1 GlobalHawk (RQ-4A) Production Air Vehicle with Basic Integrated Sen-sor Suite; 2 Global Hawk (RQ-4B) Production Air Vehicle; andSupport Equipment. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/31/2005. Program involvement: RQ-4, Global Hawk.

2/2/2005 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $6,334,279 Modification contract for the operation of the Global Hawk systemin a forward theater of operations for a classified length of time,which includes communications support. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 4/30/2005. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4A.

3/28/2005 N00019-05-C-0040 NAVAIR $24,329,279 FFP contract contract for the procurement of 12 BQM-74E AerialTargets and 48 Extended Range BQM-74E Aerial Targets. Thework will be performed in San Diego, CA (37%); Walled Lake, MI(22%); Elmira, NY (13%); and 2 other locations (15%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2006. Program involvement:BQM-74.

4/5/2005 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $11,748,783 Modification to a previously awarded CPIF/AF contract for the pro-curement of Fire Scout Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV) hardware forthe Army in support of the Future Combat System. The work will beperformed in Elmira, NY (85%) and San Diego, CA (15%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 11/30/2006. PE involvement:0305204N. Program involvement: Fire Scout, RQ-8.

4/22/2005 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $8,851,651 Increment as part of a $143,000,000 contract to provide for con-tract price increases and funding to account for Global Hawk EMDOverrun. Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2006. PE in-volvement: 0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

6/13/2005 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $5,923,000 Increment as part of a $42,500,000 modification contract to pro-vide for the completion of development on the Global Hawk RQ-4B(AF-8), including developmental and operational testing. Work isscheduled to be completed by 6/30/2006. PE involvement:0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4.

6/30/2005 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $15,241,828 Modification to a previously awarded CPFF contract for the pro-curement of two RQ-8B Fire Scout Unmanned Air Vehicles includ-ing two associated payloads and non-recurring engineeringservices. The work will be performed in Elmira, NY (48%); SanDiego, CA (44%) and Mosspoint, MS (8%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/2008. Program involvement: RQ-8, FireScout UAV.

7/12/2005 FA8620-04-C-3430 ASC $41,174,144 Increment as part of a $272,700,000 FPIF contract to provide 4Global Hawk RQ-4B Production Air Vehicle with Enhanced-Inte-grated Sensor Suites; 1 Mission Control Element; 1 Launch Re-covery Element, and Spares. Work is scheduled to be completedby 7/31/2008. Program involvement: RQ-4.

8/25/2005 FA8620-05-C-4692 ASC $60,210,000 FPI contract to provide for Low Rate Initial Production Lot 5 items.Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2006. Program in-volvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

9/20/2005 N00019-05-G-0009 NAVAIR $27,078,898 NTE delivery order against a previously issued basic orderingagreement contract for the procurement of initial spares in supportof the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration Program. The workwill be performed in San Diego, CA (46%); El Segundo, CA (28%);Salt Lake City, UT (19%); and 2 other locations (7%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/20/2007. PE involvement:0305205N. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

9/30/2005 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $3,874,000 Increment as part of a $20,454,000 CPAF contract to complete thedevelopment of the Global Hawk RQ-4B to meet the start of InitialOperation Test and Evaluation Office in November 2008. Work isscheduled to be completed by 9/30/2007. PE involvement:0305205F. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.


Page 300 Appendix

10/7/2005 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $5,789,220 Modification to a previously awarded CPFF contract for the de-sign, manufacture and test of a shipboard compatible control sta-tion for the Fire Scout UAV so it can operate from a littoral combatship. The work will be performed in Oswego, NY (65%) and SanDiego, CA (35%). Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2006. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement:FIRE SCOUT UAV.

10/17/2005 HR0011-06-9-0001 DARPA $419,520 Increment of a $56,485,853 other transaction for prototypesagreement contract to continue work on the X-47B Joint Un-manned Combat Air Systems program. The work will be per-formed in San Diego, CA (73%); Palmdale, CA (10%); EastHartford, CT (7%); and other locations (10%). Work is scheduledto be completed by 9/30/2006. PE involvement: 0603286E. Pro-gram involvement: X-47, J-UCAS.

11/30/2005 N00019-05-C-0057 NAVAIR $10,513,230 Ceiling-priced modification to a previously awarded CPFF con-tract to exercise an option for operations and maintenance supportfor the Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD). The workwill be performed in San Diego, CA (79%) and Patuxent River, MA(21%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 11/30/2006. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

12/9/2005 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $5,751,275 Increment as part of a $990,027,153 CPAF contract to provide foran award fee, for period 5 of Engineering and manufacturing de-veloping activities in support of the Global Hawk Program. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2007. PE involvement:0305205F. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

12/15/2005 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $8,345,263 Modification to a previously awarded CPFF contract for shipboardtesting of Fire Scout Vertical Takeoff and Landing Tactical Un-manned Aerial Vehicle. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2006. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement:RQ-8 Fire Scout.

12/19/2005 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $11,335,846 CPFF contract for operation of the Global Hawk System in a for-ward theater of operations for a classified length of time. Work isscheduled to be completed by 6/30/2006. PE involvement:0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

12/19/2005 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $5,751,275 Award fee contract for period 5 of Engineering and manufacturingdeveloping activities in support of the Global Hawk Program. Workis scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2007. PE involvement:0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

12/27/2005 F19628-00-C-0100 ESC $0 Increment as part of a $17,064,878 cost reimbursement withaward fee contract for Global Hawk radar development activities.Work is scheduled to be completed by 10/31/2008. PE involve-ment: 0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

2/1/2006 N00019-05-C-0040 NAVAIR $23,375,521 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for the procure-ment of 60 BQM-74E Aerial Targets, 60 Radar Altimeters, 15 LowRadar Cross Section Nose Cones, and 40 Integrated AvionicUnits. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA (38%); WalledLake, MI (16%); Palmdale, CA (14%); and 4 other locatins (32%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 1/31/2008. Program in-volvement: BQM-74E.

3/7/2006 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $6,000,000 CPFF contract for the operation of the Global Hawk system in aforward theater of operations for a classified length of time, whichincludes personnel and equipment. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 4/30/2006. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

3/20/2006 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $29,286,714 Modification to a previously awarded cost -share, CPFF contractfor the continued development and testing of the RQ-8 Fire Scoutvertical takeoff unmanned air vehicle. The work will be performedin San Diego, CA (85%) and Elmira, NY (15%). Work is scheduledto be completed by 6/30/2006. PE involvement: 0305204N. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-8 Fire Scout.


Appendix Page 301

4/10/2006 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $7,134,757 CPFF contract for the operation of the Global Hawk system in aforward theater of operations for a classified length of time. Work isscheduled to be completed by 7/31/2006. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4.

5/8/2006 FA8620-06-C-3002 ASC $60,621,200 FPI firm target contract for six RQ-4B air vehicles; three missioncontrol elements; three launch recovery elements; support seg-ment-support equipment and initial spares. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 3/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-4.

5/24/2006 FA8620-06-C-3002 ASC $60,621,200 FPI, firm target contract for five RQ-4B Air Vehicles; three missioncontrol elements; three launch recovery elements, support seg-ment-support equipment and initial spares. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 3/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-4.

6/19/2006 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $11,250,000 Increment as part of a $22,500,000 CPAF contract provide criticaloperational interoperability capabilities required for the start of theInitial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) in November2008. Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2008. PE in-volvement: 0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

6/29/2006 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $11,250,000 Increment as part of a $22,500,000 CPAF contract forinteroperability implementation for Global Hawk. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 3/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305220F.Program involvement: RQ-4.

7/10/2006 F33657-03-G-4306 ASC $16,500,000 CPFF contract for the support of a critical high priority mission sup-port kit for production assets. Work is scheduled to be completedby 6/30/2008. Program involvement: RQ-4 Global Hawk.

7/28/2006 NAVAIR $135,821,763 Modification to a previously awarded CPI/AF contract for contin-ued development and test of the RQ-8B Fire Scout vertical takeoffunmanned vehicle. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA(81%); Moss Point, MS (7%); Horsehead, NY (6%); and two otherlocations (6%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 8/31/2008.PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement: RQ-8 FireScout.

9/1/2006 FA8620-01-C-4600 ASC $5,877,875 FFP contract for the delay and disruption cost impacts to theGlobal Hawk EMD contract for incorporation of the Fielding Strat-egy Acceleration. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305220F. Program involvement:RQ-4.

9/25/2006 F33657-03-C-4310 303 ASG $20,554,834 FFP contract for initial spares for RQ-4A and RQ-4B Global HawkAir Vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/2008.Program involvement: RQ-4, Global Hawk.

9/25/2006 F33657-03-G-4306 303 ASG $22,163,441 CPFF contract for the operation of the Global Hawk System in aforward theater of operation for a classified length of time, whichincludes personnel, equipment and logistics. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 1/31/2007. Program involvement: RQ-4, GlobalHawk.

11/13/2006 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $7,000,000 Increment as part of a $29,440,938 CPAF contract for various pro-jects to support IOT&E schedule for November 2008. Work isscheduled to be completed by 11/30/2008. PE involvement:0305220F. Program involvement: RQ-4.

11/17/2006 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $12,542,589 CPAF contract for engineering, manufacturing and developmentactivities in support of the Global Hawk program. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 12/31/2007. PE involvement: 0305220F.Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

12/14/2006 N00019-00-C-0277 NAVAIR $16,242,493 Modification to a previously awarded CPIF/AF contract for 2RQ-8B Fire Scout Vertical Takeoff Unmanned Vehicle (VTUAV)including Concept of Operations support. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 10/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305204N. Programinvolvement: RQ-8, Fire Scout.


Page 302 Appendix

2/14/2007 FA8620-06-C-3002 ASC $5,000,000 FPI, firm-target contract for two (2) RQ-4 Block 30-ASIP enabledair vehicles each containing an Enhanced Integrated SensorSuite. Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2008. Programinvolvement: RQ-4.

2/22/2007 (FA8620-06-C-300 ASC $5,000,000 FPIF target contract for Long Lead Parts/Advance Procurementfor support of the RQ-4 including MP-RTIP, MCE, LRE and initialspares. Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2008. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-4.

3/14/2007 N00019-05-C-0040 NAVAIR $25,625,000 Modification to a previously awarded FFP contract for the procure-ment of 80 BQM-74E Aerial Targets for the Navy (78) and the gov-ernment of the Netherlands (2). The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (36%); Walled Lake, MI (24%); Elmira, NY (14%); and 3other locations (26%). Work is scheduled to be completed by1/31/2009. The contract involves FMS. Program involvement:BQM-74.

3/28/2007 F33657-02-C-5424 ASC $15,000,000 Increment as part of a $35,000,000 modification to anundefinitized CPAF contract to provide logistics for Global Hawksystem from April 1 thru 30 September 2007. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 9/30/2007. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4.

4/30/2007 N00019-05-C-0057 NAVAIR $7,675,484 Modification to a previously awarded CPFF contract for operationsand maintenance support for the Global Hawk Maritime Demon-stration. The work will be performed in Patuxent River, MD (90%)and San Diego, CA (10%). Work is scheduled to be completed by12/31/2007. PE involvement: 0305205N. Program involvement:Global Hawk.

5/17/2007 FA8620-07-C-4015 ASC $11,450,000 FPI, firm-target contract for two RQ-4 Block 30 Airborne Signal In-telligence Processor enabled air vehicles, Support Segment sup-port equipment and initial spares. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2008. Program involvement: RQ-4.

5/18/2007 FA8620-06-C-3002 ASC $185,688,167 Increment as part of a $371,376,333 FPI/FT contract to provide for5 Global Hawk Air Vehicles, 3 Mission Control Elements, 3 Launchand Recovery Elements, along with associated equipment. Workis scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2010. Program involvement:RQ-4 Global Hawk.

5/31/2007 N00019-07-C-0041 NAVAIR $13,600,000 Undefinitized contract for the procurement of long lead items insupport of the production of Vertical Takeoff and Landing TacticalUAV Low-Rate-Initial-Production units. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program in-volvement: VTUAV.

8/1/2007 N00019-07-C-0055 NAVAIR $635,860,599 CPIF contract for the Unmanned Combat Air System CV Demon-stration Program (UCAS-D). The work will be performed inRancho Bernardo, CA (38%); El Segundo, CA (29%); Palmdale,CA (13%); and various locations (20%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/2013. PE involvement: 0604402N. Program in-volvement: UCAS.

8/7/2007 W31P4Q-04-C-0082 AMCOM $30,000,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for the rehabilitation, reconstitu-tion, repair, modification, and integration of damaged and obso-lete Flight Team Hunter unique equipment. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/6/2008. Program involvement: Hunter.

8/28/2007 N00019-07-C-0041 NAVAIR $5,842,760 Modification to a previously awarded undefinitized contract for theprocurement of initial fleet spares to support fielding of VerticalTakeoff and Landing Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VTUAV)LRIP air vehicles. Work is scheduled to be completed by5/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement:VTUAV.

9/14/2007 N00019-07-C-0041 NAVAIR $7,067,000 Modification to a previously awarded undefinitized contract for theprocurement of additional long-lead items in support of the pro-duction of VTUAV LRIP air vehicle units. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2009. PE involvement: 0305204N. Program in-volvement: VTUAV.


Appendix Page 303

9/19/2007 F33657-05-G-4306 ASC $23,808,284 Modification contract for the operation of the Global Hawk Systemin a forward theater of operation for a classified length of time. PEinvolvement: 0305220F. Program involvement: Global Hawk,RQ-4.

9/24/2007 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $1,500,000 Increment as part of an $8,200,000 modification contract for engi-neering, manufacturing and development activities in support ofthe Global Hawk Program. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2008. PE involvement: 0305220F. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4.

10/1/2007 FA8528-08-C-0001 560 ASSS $44,461,740 contract to provide materials and support services to include plan-ning, operations support and maintenance in support of GlobalHawk fielded systems. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2008. Program involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

Mission Systems

10/30/2001 DAAH01-02-C-0009 AMCOM $1,800,000 Increment of a $22,281,048 CPFF contract for fiscal year 2002and fiscal year 2003 contractor logistics support for sustainment ofthe Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Hunter System. The workwill be performed in San Diego, CA (18%) and Sierra Vista, AZ(82%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 10/29/2003. Pro-gram involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

3/14/2003 DAAH01-02-C-0009 AMCOM $10,360,000 Increment as part of a $63,455,137 CPFF contract for engineer-ing, technical and operational support for the 1-system sheltersand Tactical Automated Landing System to support deployedunits for the UAV H. The work will be performed in Sierra Vista, AZ(75%) and San Diego, CA (25%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 5/17/2005. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

9/25/2003 DAAH01-02-C-0009 AMCOM $10,500,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for contractor logistical support toinclude depot maintenance/supply support, labor and materials.The work will be performed in Sierra Vista, AZ (70%) and SanDiego, CA (30%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/26/2004. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

9/26/2003 DAAH01-02-C-0009 AMCOM $33,000,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for maintenance of Hunter uniqueequipment. The work will be performed in Sierra Vista, AZ (70%)and San Diego, CA (30%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/29/2004. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

10/30/2003 DAAH01-04-C-0001 AMCOM $6,000,000 Increment as part of a $100,491,236 CPFF contract for contractorlogistics support for the sustainment of the Hunter unmanned ae-rial vehicle system. The work will be performed in Sierra Vista, AZ(82%) and San Diego, CA (18%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 10/30/2008. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

1/28/2005 W31P4Q-04-C-0082 AMCOM $10,200,000 Modification to a CPFF contract for rehabilitation, reconstitution,and repair of damaged V Corps Hunter UAVS in support of the un-manned aerial vehicle System. The work will be performed in Si-erra Vista, AZ (82%) and San Diego, CA (18%). Work is scheduledto be completed by 1/28/2006. Program involvement: RQ-5,Hunter.

11/28/2006 F33657-01-C-4600 ASC $12,000,000 Increment as part of a $24,983,025 CPAF contract for engineer-ing, manufacturing and development activities in support of theGlobal Hawk Program. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/31/2008. PE involvement: 0305220F. Program involvement:Global Hawk, RQ-4.

Okland ConstructionDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details12/22/2006 W912PL-07-C-0007 COE $40,269,000 FFP contract for the Predator Beddown. The work will be per-

formed in Creech AFB, NV. Work is scheduled to be completed by12/11/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1 Predator.


Page 304 Appendix

Orbital SciencesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Launch Systems Group

6/29/2000 N00019-00-C-0255 NAVAIR $34,193,862 CPIF contract for six supersonic sea skimming target engineeringdevelopment models, ground and flight testing and testing sup-port. The work will be performed in Chandler, AZ (41%);Gainesville, VA (30%); Wichita, KS (28%); and Tucson, AZ (1%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2003. PE involvement:0604366N. Program involvement: GQM-163.

11/2/2001 N00019-00-C-0255 NAVAIR $8,039,150 Modification to exercise an option to a previously awarded CPIFcontract for the procurement of 10 GQM-163 supersonic sea skim-ming targets, ancillary equipment, ground and flight testing andtesting support and associated data. The work will be performed inGainesville, VA (34%); Chandler, AZ (33%) and Wichita, KS(33%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2003. Programinvolvement: GQM-163.

4/13/2005 N00019-00-C-0255 NAVAIR $12,544,169 Modification to a previously awarded CPIF contract to exercise anoption for 10 GQM-163A Supersonic Sea Skimming Targets(SSST). Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2007. Pro-gram involvement: GQM-163 SSST.

3/19/2007 N00019-07-C-0031 NAVAIR $9,222,023 CPFF contract for the procurement of one GQM-163A SupersonicSea Skimming Target Vehicle, support equipment, spare parts,technical data, and technical assistance. The work will be per-formed in Chandler, AZ (27%); France (18%); Orlando, FL (15%);and 4 other locations (40%). Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/2009. The contract involves FMS. Program involvement:GQM-163.

9/25/2007 N00019-07-C-0031 NAVAIR $37,370,248 Modification to a previously awarded FPIF contract for the pro-curement of 13 GQM-163A supersonic sea skimming vehicles, in-cluding support equipment, spare parts, technical data, andtechnical assist. The work will be performed in Chandler, AZ(25%); Camden, AR (25%); Sacramento, CA (20%); and 7 otherlocations (30%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2010.Program involvement: GQM-163.

Pioneer UAVDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

(joint venture)

8/5/1992 N00019-92-C-0094 NAVAIR $5,700,000 FFP contract for unit support kit/attrition spares for the Pioneer Re-motely Piloted Vehicle System. The work will be performed in HuntValley, MD (40%) and Israel (60%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 1/31/1994. Program involvement: Pioneer.

12/22/1993 N00019-93-C-0050 NAVAIR $6,550,000 FFP contract for Pioneer remotely piloted vehicle unit support kitsand attrition spares. The work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD(50%) and Tel Aviv, Israel (50%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 11/30/1995. Program involvement: Pioneer.

8/4/1994 N00019-94-C-0249 NAVAIR $20,200,000 FFP contract for 20 Pioneer Unmanned Aerial Vehicles with pay-loads, nine fuselages, and applicable data. The work will be per-formed in Hunt Valley, MD (48%) and Israel (52%). Work isscheduled to be completed by 5/31/1996. Program involvement:Pioneer.

10/17/1994 N00019-94-C-0249 NAVAIR $6,724,820 Modification to a previously awarded contract to exercise an op-tion for 10 Pioneer Unmanned Aerial Vehicles with payloads. Thework will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD (53%); Tel Aviv, Israel(45%) and various US locations (2%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 8/31/1996. Program involvement: Pioneer.


Appendix Page 305

6/26/1995 N00019-94-C-0249 NAVAIR $10,750,000 FFP contract for FY95 spare parts for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.The work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD (30%) and Tel Aviv,Israel (70%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/1997.Program involvement: Pioneer.

2/13/1996 N00019-95-C-0219 NAVSEA $7,548,825 FFP contract for logistics support for the Pioneer Remotely PilotedVehicle. The work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD (60%);Patuxent River, MD (25%); Camp Lejeune, NC (5%); and 2 otherlocations (10%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/1998.Program involvement: Pioneer.

3/14/1996 N00019-95-C-0157 NAVAIR $17,745,620 FFP contract for FY96 requirements for spare parts for the PioneerUnmanned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in Hunt Val-ley, MD (48%) and Israel (52%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 3/31/1998. Program involvement: Pioneer.

5/12/1997 N00019-95-G-0203 NAVAIR $5,041,903 FFP contract for 20 payloads and modification kits in support of un-manned aerial vehicles. The work will be performed in Hunt Valley,MD (15%) and Healdsburg, CA (85%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/1999. PE involvement: 0305154D. Program in-volvement: Pioneer.

5/29/1998 N00019-97-C-0010 NAVAIR $10,134,175 FFP ceiling amount contract to procure FY 98 spare parts for thePioneer unmanned aerial vehicle system. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 1/31/2000. Program involvement: Pioneer.

7/7/1998 N00019-97-C-0010 NAVAIR $10,635,360 360 modification to previously awarded contract for the procure-ment of 15 Pioneer unmanned air vehicles spares. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 2/28/2000. Program involvement:Pioneer.

2/19/2004 N00019-01-G-0128 NAVAIR $8,500,000 FFP delivery order against a previously issued basic orderingagreement contract for the procurement of components consistingof payloads, receiver systems, engines, IFF transponders, groundcontrol stations and aircraft components. The work will be per-formed in Ben Gurion, Israel (55%); Hunt Valley, MD (25%) andJohnson City, NY (20%). Work is scheduled to be completed by3/31/2005. Program involvement: Pioneer.

2/19/2004 N00019-01-G-0128 NAVAIR $11,200,000 Cost-reimbursement delivery order against a previously issuedbasic agree contract for the procurement of two replacementground control stations for the Pioneer unmanned air vehicle sys-tem. The work will be performed in Hunt Valley, MD (65%); Holon,Israel (20%) and Patuxent River, MD (15%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 8/31/2005. Program involvement: Pioneer.

8/29/2005 N00019-04-G-0011 NAVAIR $6,877,234 FFP delivery order against a previously issued Basic OrderingAgreement contract for the production and delivery of 2 Replace-ment Ground Control Stations, 12 Modular Avionics IntegratedSystems, and 8 Airborne Data Terminals for the Pioneer. The workwill be performed in Hunt Valley, MD (45%); Holon, Israel (40%)and Patuxent River, MD (15%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 7/31/2007. Program involvement: Pioneer, RQ-2.

RaytheonDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Electronic Systems

8/6/2003 N00164-00-G-0007 48 $69,999,995 FFP job order under previously awarded basic ordering agree-ment contract for multi-spectral targeting systems, including 52turret units and 40 electronics units in support of the USAF’s Pred-ator Program and the USN’s SH-60. The work will be performed inMcKinney, TX (99%); Goleta, CA (1%) and Marboro, MA. Work isscheduled to be completed by 12/31/2005. Program involvement:RQ-1, SH-60, MTS.


Page 306 Appendix

4/16/2004 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $17,375,000 FFP job order under previously awarded basic ordering agree-ment contract for eight Multi-spectral Targeting System (MTS) “B”infrared systems for the Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV). Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2005. Pro-gram involvement: RQ-1, MTS.

7/1/2004 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $26,552,810 FFP purchase order under previously awarded Basic OrderingAgreement contract for Multi-spectral Targeting Systems (MTS),including 17 turret units and associated line items supporting thePredator and Navy H-60 programs. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 6/30/2006. Program involvement: RQ-1, MTS, SH-60.

9/1/2004 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $11,692,127 CPFF task order under previously awarded basic ordering agree-ment contract for Multi-spectral Targeting Systems (MTS) “B” pro-duction in support of the Predator “B” program. Work is scheduledto be completed by 6/30/2006. Program involvement: Predator,RQ-1.

1/3/2005 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $22,756,226 FFP order under Basic Ordering Agreement contract forMulti-spectral Targeting Systems (MTS) “B” configuration includ-ing 11 turret units and associated line items in support of the Pred-ator program. Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/2007.Program involvement: RQ-1, MTS.

1/26/2005 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $12,670,563 FFP task order under previously awarded Basic Ordering Agree-ment contract for Multi-spectral Targeting System “A” configura-tion, which includes seven Turret Units and associated line itemsin support of the Predator UAV program. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 6/30/2007. Program involvement: RQ-1, MTS.

3/30/2005 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $25,942,745 FFP modification under previously awarded Basic OrderingAgreement contract for Multi-spectral Targeting Systems (MTS)“A” configuration, including 22 Turret Units and associated lineitems in support of the Predator UAV program. Work is scheduledto be completed by 6/30/2007. Program involvement: RQ-1, Pred-ator UAV.

9/8/2005 N00164-00-G-0007 NSWC $31,402,406 FFP task order under previously awarded basic ordering agree-ment contract for Multi-Spectral Targeting System “A” configura-tion, including 51 turret units and associated line items in supportof Predator UAV and MH-60 helicopter. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/2007. Program involvement: PREDATOR,MH-60, RQ-1.

9/26/2006 N00164-06-G-8555 NSWC $27,100,290 FFP order under previously awarded Basic Ordering Agreementcontract for Multi-spectral Targeting System configuration, includ-ing 27 Turret Units and associated line items In support of thePredator UAV program. Work is scheduled to be completed by2/28/2008. Program involvement: RQ-1, Predator, MTS.

Electronics Systems

5/2/2003 N00019-02-G-0350 NAVAIR $5,000,000 NTE order against a previously awarded basic ordering agree-ment contract for requirements development and initial design ofthe Block 3 Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD) datacontrol processor, and data link controls. The work will be per-formed in Falls Church, VA (80%) and Rancho Bernardo, CA(20%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2003. PE in-volvement: 0305205N. Program involvement: RQ-4, GlobalHawk.

3/26/2004 N00019-00-C-0190 NAVAIR $36,800,000 NTE CPAF/IF modification to a previously awarded contract fortactical control system (TCS) software to support the Navy FireScout unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) integration onto the littoralcombat ship. The work will be performed in Falls Church, VA(56%); Dahlgren, VA (30%); San Pedro, CA (10%); and State Col-lege, PA (4%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/2008.PE involvement: 0305204N. Program involvement: Fire ScoutUAV.


Appendix Page 307

12/29/2006 FA8620-06-G-4041 ASC $8,651,775 Increment as part of an $11,535,700 CPFF contract for ContractorLogistics Support for the Predator A and B Multi-spectral Target-ing Systems including program management, repairs and ser-vices. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2007. Programinvolvement: RQ-1 Predator, MTS.

Missile Systems

5/20/2003 F08635-03-C-0002 AAC $3,600,000 Increment as part of an $88,000,000 CPAF contract to provide forsystem development and demonstration of the Miniature AirLaunched Decoy. Work is scheduled to be completed by6/30/2008. PE involvement: 0603270F. Program involvement:MALD.

5/8/2007 F08635-03-C-0002 328 ASW $9,641,946 Increment as part of a $14,636,654 CPIF contract to provide forrisk reduction for miniature air-launched decoy jammer system toinclude ground and captive flight testing. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 3/31/2008. PE involvement: 0603270F. Program in-volvement: MALD.

Raytheon Aircraft

9/22/1995 DAAH01-95-C-0167 MICOM $9,776,643 Modification to a FFP with cost reimbursement contract for 22MQM-107D Aerial Targets. Work is scheduled to be completed by10/30/1996. Program involvement: MQM-107.

9/29/1995 DAAH01-95-C-0167 MICOM $30,102,547 Modification to a FFP contract for 81 MQM-107D Aerial Targets.Work is scheduled to be completed by 11/20/1997. Program in-volvement: MQM-107.

12/15/1997 N00019-95-C-0165 NAVAIR $8,634,827 Modification to previously awarded contract to exercise an optionto procure 55 AQM-37C targets, 10 extended performance kits, 30E-F band augmentation kits, and 20 transponder G-Band installa-tion k. Work is scheduled to be completed by 5/31/2000. Programinvolvement: AQM-37C.

Science Applications InternationalDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details3/1/2002 DASG60-02-D-0006 SMDC $10,223,872 Modification to a CPFF, LoE contract for support of the Global

Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in the areas of analyses,requirements definitions, systems engineering, payloads and sen-sors. Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/15/2004. Programinvolvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

9/23/2004 FA8650-04-D-1722 AFRL $240,000 Increment as part of an $8,660,000 indefinite-delivery/indefi-nite-quantit contract to provide for the Active Unmanned VehiclePhenomenology (AUP) Program. The work will be performed inSan Diego, CA and McLean, VA. Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 9/30/2009. PE involvement: 0601102F and 0602204F.Program involvement: AUP.

Structural AssociatesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details7/9/2004 W912DS-04-C-0014 COE $5,373,000 FFP contract to construct launch and recovery airstrips, a taxi

apron, and specialized airstrip lighting for training in the use of theTactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicl. The work will be performed inFort Drum, NY. Work is scheduled to be completed by 7/30/2005.Program involvement: TUAV.


Page 308 Appendix

Syracuse ResearchDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details5/7/2004 W15P7T-04-C-K216 CECOM $10,300,000 Increment as part of a $13,316,088 CPIF contract for the ultra high

frequency, foliage penetrating, real-time moving target indica-tor/synthetic aperture radar for use in the A160 Hummingbird heli-copter. Work is scheduled to be completed by 11/2/2005. PEinvolvement: 0603772A. Program involvement: A160 Humming-bird helicopter.

TAAS-Israel IndustriesDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details8/31/1989 N00019-89-C-0328 NAVAIR $6,679,120 FFP contract for Tactical Air-Launched Decoys (TALD). The work

will be performed in Jerusalem, Israel (50%) and US sites (50%).Work is scheduled to be completed by 3/31/1991. The contract in-volves FMS. Program involvement: ADM-141.

9/25/1992 N00019-92-C-0218 NAVAIR $21,933,385 FFP contract for 1,480 Tactical Air Launched Decoys (TALDS).The work will be performed in Jerusalem, Israel. Work is sched-uled to be completed by 2/28/1995. Program involvement:ADM-141.

TitanDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details9/15/2003 N65236-03-D-7849 SPAWAR $8,840,575 Indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, CPFF contract for engineer-

ing and technical services to support Space and Naval WarfareSystems Command Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Operations.The work will be performed in Norfolk, VA (75%) and Charleston,SC (25%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 9/30/2004. Pro-gram involvement: UAV.

TracorDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Tracor Aerospace

2/4/1992 F08626-92-C-0032 ASC $3,500,000 Increment as part of a $91,883,760 FPIF contract for the develop-ment of 8 QF-4 Full Scale Aerial Targets (FSATs), peculiar supportequipment, test support, ground control system integration sup-port and d. Work is scheduled to be completed by 1/31/1994. PEinvolvement: 0604211F. Program involvement: QF-4.

TRWDate Contract Number Agency Obligation Details

Avionics Systems Div.

12/28/1992 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $9,907,095 NTE ceiling priced modification contract for short range un-manned aerial vehicle system personnel training, systems logis-tics and technical manuals. The work will be performed inDominguez Hills, CA (50%) and Lod, Israel (50%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 12/31/1993. Program involvement:BQM-155.

2/12/1993 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $171,111,895 Modification to a fixed price NTE contract to exercise Option Item0301, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-Short Range (quantity: 7), andOption Item 0327, Life Cycle Software Support Environment. Thework will be performed in San Diego, CA (50%) and Lod, Israel(50%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 4/30/1995. PE in-volvement: 0305141D. Program involvement: BQM-155.


Appendix Page 309

8/18/1993 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $21,383,542 FFP FY92 contract for contingency support packages, test pro-gram sets, field spares and training equipment for the Short RangeUnmanned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in Tel Aviv,Israel (50%) and Sierra Vista, AZ (50%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 10/31/1995. PE involvement: 0305141D. Programinvolvement: BQM-155.

2/9/1994 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $52,795,398 FFP contract for the procurement of some of the FY92 and FY93option items for the Joint Tactical UAV-Short Range Program. Thework will be performed in San Diego, CA and Sierra Vista, AZ.Work is scheduled to be completed by 2/28/1997. PE involvement:0305144D. Program involvement: BQM-155.

3/28/1994 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $56,363,898 CPIF contract for Ada computer software conversion AutomaticLaunch and Recovery System (ALRS) and Block II upgrade for theJoint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle-Short. The work will beperformed in Rancho Carmel, CA (17%); Sierra Vista, AZ (20%);Huntsville, AL (15%); and Israel (48%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 4/30/1996. Program involvement: BQM-155.

6/23/1994 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $5,166,208 Increase to FFP contract for attrition air vehicles and day/night im-agery intelligence payloads for the Joint Tactical-Short Range Un-manned Aerial Vehicle. The work will be performed in Tel Aviv,Israel (50%) and Sierra Vista, AZ (50%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 10/31/1995. PE involvement: 0305141D. Programinvolvement: BQM-155.

9/14/1994 N00019-94-C-0156 NAVAIR $25,714,835 CPIF contract for 12 downsized ground control stations, 12 down-sized ground data terminals, and associated data in support of theJoint Tactical UAV Program. The work will be performed in SanDiego, CA (31%) and Tel Aviv, Israel (70%). Work is scheduled tobe completed by 2/28/1996. PE involvement: 0305154D. Programinvolvement: BQM-155.

10/17/1994 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $37,994,986 CPIF contract for the development and integration of a Heavy FuelEngine for the Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (JT-UAV). The workwill be performed in Burlington, VT (34%); Sierra Vista, AZ (33%)and Tel Aviv, Israel (33%). Work is scheduled to be completed by3/31/1997. Program involvement: BQM-155.

12/29/1994 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $43,825,623 FFP option exercise contract for the procurement of logistics sup-port and associated data for the joint tactical unmanned aerial ve-hicle (JT UAV) program. The work will be performed in SierraVista, AZ (55%); Rancho Carmel, CA (30%) and Huntsville, AL(15%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/1995. PE in-volvement: 0305154D. Program involvement: BQM-155.

11/9/1995 N00019-89-C-0346 NAVAIR $8,905,552 Modification to a previously awarded contract for Joint Tactical Un-manned Aerial Vehicle - Hunter (JT UAV-Hunter) 1995 contractorlogistics support. The work will be performed in Fort Huachuca, AZ(75%) and San Diego, CA (25%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 12/31/1995. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

5/24/1996 N00019-96-C-0056 NAVAIR $6,100,946 Modification to a previously awarded contract for FY 96 contractlogistics support. The work will be performed in San Diego, CA(25%) and Fort Huachuca, AZ (75%). Work is scheduled to becompleted by 9/30/1996. Program involvement: JT-UAV,BQM-155, Hunter.

2/20/1997 N00019-96-C-0056 NAVAIR $7,500,000 CPFF contract for third and fourth quarter increments of fiscal year1997 contractor logistics support for the Joint Tactical UnmannedAerial Vehicle (JT-UAV) Hunter sy. The work will be performed inSierra Vista, AZ (95%) and San Diego, CA (5%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 9/30/1997. PE involvement: 0305154D.Program involvement: JT-UAV, BQM-155, Hunter.

9/25/1997 F30602-97-C-0340 RL $5,748,222 CPFF contract to provide for a prototype Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV), and associated documentation. Work is scheduled to becompleted by 4/30/1999. PE involvement: 0305154D. Program in-volvement: JT-UAV, BQM-155, Hunter.


Page 310 Appendix

11/21/1997 N00019-98-C-0010 NAVAIR $15,000,380 CPFF contract for contractor logistics support for the “Hunter”Joint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle program. The work will beperformed in Sierra Vista, AZ. Work is scheduled to be completedby 9/30/1998. PE involvement: 0305154D. Program involvement:Hunter, JT-UAV, BQM-155.

Data Technologies Div.

10/2/1998 N00019-99-C-0005 NAVAIR $17,499,994 CPFF contract for contractor logistics support services, such asdepot support, inventory, storage of the inactive Hunter subsys-tems, training, and software maintenance. The work will be per-formed in Sierra Vista, AZ. Work is scheduled to be completed by9/30/1999. Program involvement: BQM-155, Hunter.

TRW Systems and Information

12/13/2002 F33657-97-C-4505 ASC $15,000,000 Increment as part of a $29,167,320 CPAF contract to provide fordesign, development and test on the high band system productionconfiguration unit, in support of Global Hawk. Work is scheduled tobe completed by 12/31/2005. PE involvement: 0305206F. Pro-gram involvement: Global Hawk, RQ-4.

TRW Tactical Systems

9/16/1999 DAAH01-99-C-0003 AMCOM $9,002,087 Modification contract for deployed Hunter Unmanned Aerial Vehi-cle repairs and spare parts, in support of the mission in Kosovo.The work will be performed in Sierra Vista, AZ (60%) and Macedo-nia (40%). Work is scheduled to be completed by 12/31/2000. Pro-gram involvement: Hunter, BQM-155.

10/29/1999 DAAH01-99-C-0003 AMCOM $900,000 Increment as part of a $17,768,503 modification to a CPFF con-tract for continuation of the contractor logistics support effort, in-cluding engineering support, flight operations support, and depotmaintenance activity. The work will be performed in Sierra Vista,AZ (60%) and San Diego, CA (40%). Work is scheduled to be com-pleted by 10/29/2000. Program involvement: Hunter, BQM-155.

5/31/2000 DAAH01-00-C-0003 AMCOM $6,928,987 CPFF contract for Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle payload hard-ware and software modification kits. The work will be performed inSierra Vista, AZ (80%) and San Diego, CA (20%). Work is sched-uled to be completed by 10/31/2001. Program involvement:BQM-155, Hunter.


Appendix Page 311


Page 312 Appendix

Date post:	20-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	2 times

World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems · World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems Market Profile and...

Documents