Just before Christmas I was in China for my 44^th visit since helping to launch RNP operations in China beginning with the Air China Boeing 757 in Lhasa in November of 2004.  Click here to see a photo. The occasion for this visit was to kick off our brand new training course, “PBN 201: Integrating PBN into Air Traffic Management”.  PBN technology is endorsed by international organizations and regulatory agencies globally and is recognized as the enabler of more consistent and efficient operations at remote and busy terminal environments.  In consideration of these benefits, the global expansion of Performance-based Navigation (PBN) is continuing to increase.  A number of countries have done a remarkable job preparing PBN deployment plans and with trial deployments to gain experience and validate results for stakeholders.  These same countries are then moving rapidly toward broad deployment with the idea of multiplying the benefits at an exponential rate through a network deployment of PBN infrastructure across the country.  With expansion of PBN procedures at mid to high traffic airports, transformations in air traffic management concepts and techniques are needed to address a mixture of PBN and traditional operations.

China is an excellent example of a country that is remarkable in their PBN plans and progress with deployment, particularly with RNP.  The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) and Air China had their first introduction to PBN during a visit to Boeing in the early part of the last decade.  During that visit, they had a briefing on the aircraft capability and a simulator demonstration of the RNP operation in Juneau that had been pioneered by Alaska Airlines in the mid-1990’s.  That introduction to RNP led to the launch of their first RNP deployment in Lhasa, Tibet which went into service with an Air China 757 in May 2006.  Success led to success and today there are over a dozen airports equipped with RNP procedures flown by all four of the major airlines in China and an increasing number of regional operators.

There is one common theme for all of the RNP deployments at China airports to date, and that is to reduce the risk of operations at some of the most challenges airports in the world.  The majority of the work has been in the Tibet Autonomous Region, Yunnan Province, and Sichuan Province.  In most of this region, the average terrain elevations are 15,000’ and current RNP operations ensure predictable, reliable airline operations to airports in Tibet like Bangda with an elevation of 14,200’ and Ali, with an elevation just over 14,000’.  With these extreme airport environments, the China RNP deployment strategy is understandable.  Other countries that are actively deploying RNP have also focused on high-risk airports as a first step in deployment.  What we have seen in other countries however, is a transition very quickly to an RNP deployment schedule that focuses on air traffic operational efficiency. 

Being at the forefront of the global PBN transformation, GE is focused on developing and delivering air traffic management solutions that improve aircraft operations and the air traffic control workload.  The PBN 201 course was created to address the need for ATM transformation associated with wide implementations and to help participants understand what’s required for successful PBN integration in a wide-variety of environments, including busy terminal areas.

The PBN 201 course builds on the real-world example of the pioneering work of the Brisbane Green RNP Project and highlights the results of this trial in an environment of medium density traffic with various levels of aircraft capability.  Details on practical integration of PBN into the ATM system, including technical training requirements, project management and existing regulatory and guidance material was covered in the course. 

We had a lot of positive feedback from the participants in the course and we expect to offer the course again in the future as part of our effort to support the deployment of PBN infrastructure in the various world regions.

In a stunning turn of events, the USAF announced it is seriously considering terminating the Global Hawk program in favor of extending the service life of manned U-2 spy planes through the mid-2020s. Service officials and analysts cite operational cost issues associated with Global Hawk (click here to see a photo of the RQ-4B Global Hawk) that have been exacerbated given the upcoming budget requests in February. Although Global Hawks have performed extraordinarily well in their relatively short service life, cost overruns and reliability issues have dogged the program in recent years.

As somewhat of a silver lining for the Department of Defense, it appears that the US Navy’s BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance) UAV, a modified version of the Global Hawk, will continue to be funded and will remain a foundation for high-altitude long-endurance ISR. The USAF certainly won’t take any comfort in this, but we’ll see how this decision plays out once PY13 is released. No word yet on how this might affect international procurement of Global Hawks, in particular with Germany, South Korea, and NATO.

The potential decision to terminate Global Hawk goes against what we’ve heard recently from President Obama and SecDef Panetta. Both have emphasized the strategic US military shift towards Asia-Pacific and both have reinforced the critical need for long distance, persistent, intelligence-gathering platforms. In other words, UAVs such as Global Hawk were thought to be at the leading edge of the new doctrine.

A colleague of mine just shared an interesting perspective. Since Global Hawk was originally developed only as a demo program and was never meant to be operationalized in its current state, perhaps the USAF and the DoD are finally coming to terms with this fact and are instead shifting resources to classified programs that exceed the capabilities of both Global Hawk and the U-2 (click here to see a photo of the U-2S Dragon Lady). Keep in mind that the U-2 still has some superior reconnaissance capabilities, but it’s a 1950s-era airframe with a cost per flight hour just slightly less than that of Global Hawk ($31,000 versus $35,000, according to the USAF Total Ownership Cost database)[1]. 

As I’ve discussed before, this is only the beginning of what we should expect to be difficult and substantial cuts to DoD programs. I think this decision in particular is a bit of a shocker, but perhaps that’s the “new norm” going forward. Fair winds and following seas, Global Hawk.

Fly safe,

Marc

[1] DefenseNews, August 10, 2011; http://www.defensenews.com/article/20110810/DEFSECT01/108100302/Global-Hawk-to-Replace-U-2-in-2015

Over the next couple of months, those of us steeped in all things defense will be very busy developing insights and implications once PB13 comes out in early February. The best we can do until then is speculate on the long-term US defense strategy based on what we hear and read from key government and military leaders.

What we do know, and what has been stated by President Obama himself, is that there will be a large and substantial drawdown of US military forces across the board. Historically, each of the four services has shared the burden of reduced budgets. This time around, however, we should expect to see the Army bear the lion’s share. Since 2001 funding for the Army rose much more than that of the other services, due primarily to OCO (Overseas Contingency Operations) funding that supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. With the end of the Iraq war and with operations winding down in Afghanistan, OCO funding will continue to decrease. So, too, will the Army’s budget in a rather disproportionate rate vis-à-vis the Air Force or the Navy.

What does this mean for UAVs, you might ask? With a strategic shift from Europe to threats in Asia-Pacific and the Middle East, the Air Force and the Navy become much more critical over the next 10-20 years. One program in particular, LRS (Long Range Strike), has been singled out as a “must have” for the Air Force in order to conduct campaigns in anti-access environments such as China, Iran and North Korea.

LRS is still very much on the drawing boards, but even now the defense industry is working with Air Force leadership to help develop program definition and ensure technology roadmaps are consistent with military needs (see this Boeing concept of LRS). More than likely, LRS will be a “family” of platforms that operate together and have integrated sensors, communications, etc. UAVs will be a key part of this family. In fact, many believe the actual LRS platform (or a derivative of one) will be optionally-manned. It makes perfect sense when one considers the vast ranges and loiter times necessary for future conflicts in the Asia-Pacific region.

Much more speculation to come, but one thing is for sure – UAVs will continue to be an essential part of any military budget conversation.  

Fly safe,

Marc

In my earlier blog on the 787, I talked about the dramatic increase (5X) in electrical power on board the aircraft versus its predecessor due to increased demand. With all that power, the weight of the electrical power system is sure to go up and at some point, the electrical power system weight will drive decisions and compromises in aircraft design. A step change in technology is needed to overcome the weight challenge.

Current power electronic components are silicon (Si) based and as power devices are forced to achieve higher efficiency, the silicon core is operating closer to its temperature limit. Extra cooling packaging is required to maintain reliability, which becomes a key driver of the weight increase. A breakthrough in reduced cooling requirements is anticipated with the introduction of silicon carbide (SiC) based devices. Key advantages of SiC are that they can operate at higher temperatures (more than 50% higher than Si-based devices) and at faster switching speeds, especially at high voltage (> 600V). However, fundamental challenges associated with reliability and yield of the SiC devices are preventing mass adoption in many markets.

Many leading power electronics manufacturers are focusing on the SiC device area. Cree has launched the first commercial SiC-based MOSFET.  The product’s performance is slightly better than Si-based devices, and more companies will join suit in the next two to three years with more capable devices. Why the focus? The industry is anticipating the next generation hybrid-electric and pure-electric vehicles to adopt SiC technology, making the vehicles more efficient than current generations. Companies are jockeying for a piece of this huge market.

GE is certainly not standing still on the sideline in SiC development. GE Aviation Systems, in collaboration with GE’s Global Research Center (GRC), has a an industry leading  cooperative project with AFRL at Wright Patterson AFB to develop an advanced solid-state primary power distribution technology using Silicon Carbide (SiC) high power switches. GE also announced introduction of a new line of SiC-based power conversion devices at the 2011 Paris Air Show. GE anticipates that its proprietary SiC technology will be world class, addressing fundamental challenges of gate oxidation and switch reliability. Once the technology matures, we can imagine that the next generation of aircraft will have electrical power equipment that enables aircraft manufacturers to continue up the power curve without lumbering heavy electrical power systems.

Click here to see GE’s SiC MOSFET.

 Click here to see lower switching loss of GE’s all SiC module vs. hybrid Si-SiC module.