Issues and Challenges

Last year, our major challenges were in the areas of acquisition, technology, architecture, management approach, and operations. We have made significant progress in each of these areas, but new aspects emerge. As FY 1997 phases into FY 1998, they are as follows:

Acquisition Oversight

Our family of UAVs continues to be the best approach to meeting the JROC’s multiple requirements. Sustaining Pioneer and using Hunter until new systems are available reflects a DoD-wide appreciation for UAVs’ value. Predator is now firmly in production, the result of a solid post-ACTD transition process. The Outrider program has incurred a number of schedule delays, but increased oversight by the USD(A&T) and recent flight testing indicate that progress is being made. The HAE UAVs’ flights are now taking place in FY 1998, after prudent delays to resolve technical issues. Both TCS and HAE CGS are being brought along to support their tactical and HAE UAVs and integrate their products with the C4I infrastructure.
The challenges that remain are those of all acquisition programs: how to “manage uncertainty” while bringing newly integrated systems to operational status and meeting program objectives in the standard areas of performance, cost, and schedule.

Technology

A combination of changing national roles and force structure in the face of stringent budgets enhances the role of technology as enabler of future capabilities. Many of the high-leverage technologies we have been maturing are now parts of subsystems and payloads that are being procured for fielded use (e.g., UCARS and MIAG). In turn, others are emerging for near-term focus and application in their turn (e.g., Tactical CDL). We will approach payload development in light of the JROC’s emerging guidance, and in turn project new and varied military uses for our basic UAV platforms (e.g., Boost Phase Intercept, Communications UAV, and Uninhabited Combat Air Vehicle). Finally, integration of technologies is, in effect, another technology and offers as much challenge as any other aspect of system development.

Architecture

The DADT’s interim report provides a first view of DARO’s Objective Architecture and force structure projection for the 2010 time frame, as envisioned in DARO’s Integrated Airborne Reconnaissance Strategy of 1994. Force mix and inventories sized for two MTWs should also suffice for routine and contingency operations. The report’s roadmap projects eventual replacement of manned platforms by HAE UAVs for high-altitude missions and broad augmentation of manned platforms by Predator and tactical UAVs for medium- and low-altitude missions. The challenge architecturally will be to ensure (1) that Service UAV acquisition programs continue to meet joint requirements, and (2) that system interfaces and product interoperability factors continue to meet the needs of warfighters for comprehensive, accurate and timely information. The challenge analytically will be for DARO to develop and validate even more capable MS&A tools and techniques to support complex architectural and system-level trades as airborne reconnaissance migrates to the 2010 time frame.

Management Approach

Both DARO and the Department are accommodating to the recent changes in DoD organizational structure and oversight roles. What remains well proven, however, is the need for continuing, unified oversight of the many resource and functional aspects of airborne reconnaissance. The central roles played by DARO, the Joint Staff and many current DoD-wide processes have done much to rationalize airborne reconnaissance services and products for the warfighter, but the real payoff for UAVs will be in the projected fielding of those UAVs currently in ACTD status.

Operations

The continued presence of Predator over Bosnia and the series of FY 1997 exercises and demonstrations, in which UAVs proved their worth many times, are changing the way commanders view their battlefield. Ground commanders want responsive collection systems that provide critical information to enhance battlefield situational awareness, and UAVs must also show that they are sustainable logistically and can interoperate functionally with existing forces and C4ISR environments. Four operational subareas are noteworthy: multiple-UAV operations, airspace management, marinization, and imagery archival and retrieval. They are addressed in the following table.

Summary

The several challenge areas outlined above have all shown progress during the past year. At the same time, each issue resolved contains the seeds of a new challenge to be met. DARO’s role has been to identify these cross-cutting, system- and architectural-level issues and provide guidance and oversight for their resolution, and we look forward to meeting the challenges of FY 1998 and beyond.