The last day here at AUVSI in Las Vegas. All in all, a great venue and a fantastic opportunity to connect with the various segments of the UAV community.

Before the event started on Monday, I have to admit I was a bit concerned that industry presence would be down this year given the continuing economic uncertainty. I’m happy to report, however, that the exhibit floor has been buzzing with activity all week and the GE Aviation Systems booth has seen a tremendous amount of foot traffic.

As I mentioned in my blog yesterday, the one big difference between this year’s show and last year’s in Washington, DC, is the lack of uniformed military personnel. The DoD has obvious budget constraints and travel amongst our service men and women has been severely limited. It’s absolutely critical to get their insight with regards to what works, what doesn’t, and how the platforms and systems can be improved.

As I’ve walked through the exhibitor floor, I’ve seen an emphasis placed on sensor payloads, digital processing, data links. To me, this makes perfect sense given the DoD’s continued challenge to industry to help solve the issue with PED (Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination). As retired General Dave Deptula famously said several years ago, “We’re swimming in sensors and drowning in data.”

Another interesting aspect of the show has been the involvement from the academic part of the industry (e.g., Oklahoma State University, Embry-Riddle, etc.) and various state economic development groups (e.g., Ohio, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Florida, etc.). More and more universities are conducting UAV research and at some point next year the FAA will announce which states will be named as UAV test sites. They are planning for six across the US.

If I had to pick a couple parts of our booth that have truly stood out and resulted in excellent conversation pieces, I’d choose our EOGRS (Electro-Optical Grid Reference System) drogue and our large-screen display covering the platforms to which we provide systems. The display has also been running a continuous loop of a short UAV video that highlights GE Aviation’s continued presence in this growing part of the military market.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

We also gave one final presentation to the public at the “Beyond the Booth” forum. Peter DeBock from the GRC discussed thermal management solutions for UAV applications. Click on the following link for a more in-depth look at Peter’s presentation.

AUVSI Thermal Management

To wrap, it’s been an outstanding four days to connect with the key stakeholders of the UAV industry, gain insights into the current challenges, and discuss our perspective on how GE Aviation Systems is committed to providing new and innovative solutions for UAV operators, manufacturers, and suppliers.

Fly safe,

Marc

Another great day at AUVSI here in Las Vegas. One major difference I’ve seen at this show versus last year in Washington, DC, is that there are far less members of the US military present (wondering if other attendees have felt that too?). The DoD placed restrictions on government travel this year and, unfortunately, many of the operators who would have attended in the past were unable to make it. My suggestions for AUVSI – keep it in DC!

Shortly after lunch, I sat in on a panel discussion about current UAV challenges and what industry is doing to develop tomorrow’s solutions.

Maj. Gen. James Poss mentioned how important UAVs and ISR have been to the DoD. He stated that the USAF budget for ISR has increased from 3% in 2001 to 11% in 2012. In addition, he said there has been a 4,300% increase in ISR flight hours since 2001. Much of that is due to the exponential growth the total number of UAVs in the DoD inventory – from 167 in 2007 to over 7,500 today.

Duke Dufrense, sector VP and GM of UAS at Northrop Grumman, stressed the need to increase the amount of foreign military sales (FMS) of UAVs so that overall costs could be reduced. He said that the weaponization of UAVs is one of the primary barriers to increasing FMS. In addition, Duke stated that FMS restrictions are allowing foreign competitors to fill gaps that US UAV OEMs could fill today.

Among all the discussions I’ve had and the presentations I’ve attended, I keep hearing about the many opportunities for civil UAV applications. Although I don’t doubt there is opportunity in this industry, I’m perhaps not as optimistic as others in terms of how quickly and how large the market segment will be in the near-term.

One huge barrier is integrating UAVs into the national airspace. The current timeline is still set for September of 2015, but I’m certainly not alone in thinking that this date is incredibly aggressive. I don’t expect integration until the latter part of this decade.

The second barrier to growing the civil UAV industry is the market itself! In other words, I don’t see a strong demand from industry for civil UAVs. There are certainly a variety of applications — everything from police surveillance to agricultural analysis to oil pipeline monitoring — but, to my knowledge, I have yet to see pull from any one sector that would make a valid business case for civil UAVs.

The day was capped off with Craig Hoover giving a presentation on UAS flight in the national airspace. For a more in-depth look at his content, click on the following link to his white paper.

UAS in the NAS

More to follow as things wrap up.

For real-time information on presentations and discussions, make sure to follow me on Twitter at @MarcLuley.

Fly safe,

Marc

 

 

It may have been only the first day of the AUVSI exhibit and conference here in Las Vegas, but with all the activity already taking place it sure hasn’t felt that way. I’ll cover some of the highlights below, but for up-to-date information on AUVSI and the military market in general, follow me on Twitter @MarcLuley.

I started off the week on Monday afternoon attending a presentation about the importance of UAS lifecycle management. The panel emphasized a few points: 1) more focus will be placed on UAV defensive systems going forward in order to adjust to non-permissive environments, 2) the civil market for UAVs will remain relatively small until lifecycle costs can be decreased, and 3) as budgets decrease and flight hours follow, UAV simulation will become more prevalent for both operators and maintainers.

On Tuesday, I sat in on a panel discussion about UAS industry growth and the changing climate. The speakers were Ron Steans from G2 Solutions, Derrick Maple from IHS Janes, and Phil Finnegan from the Teal Group.

Ron brought up an interesting point around DoD funding for UAVs. In terms of procurement, the DoD budget for program of record UAVs will go down substantially through 2017. However, the R&D budget will go up through the same time period to prepare for the next generation of platforms.

Derrick mentioned that although US operators currently account for 2/3 of the market place, that will decrease going forward as emerging market leaders (e.g., China, Russia, South Korea, and India) gain more of a presence. Moreover, these countries are also building their own indigenous capabilities to manufacture and market UAVs.

Phil talked about forecasted trends in terms of type of UAVs (e.g., HALES, MALES, etc.), how much different countries would spend, and what some of the barriers to entry will continue to be. In the near term with budget constraints domestically and abroad, established OEMs will have a much better chance of maintaining their market share versus new entrants.

Also on Tuesday, GE Aviation Systems presented two of our leading technologies to the open forum on the exhibition floor.

Sam Lassini, Chief Application Engineering for Mission Systems, discussed our innovative SPC (Store Payload Controller) solution for micro-munitions implementation on tactical UAVs. Click on the following link to read more about this SPC.

SPC AUVSI

Mike Feldmann, Chief Engineer for Refueling Technologies, talked about our approach to UAV air-to-air refueling, a technology we call EOGRS (Electro-Optical Grid Reference System). Click on the following link to read more about EOGRS.

EOGRS AUVSI

Tomorrow, I’ll make sure to cover the highlights from some of the other panel sessions and GE Aviation Systems presentations.

Fly safe,

Marc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The looming US budget crisis has been well documented. Sequestration seems to be just around the corner and the defense industry is already bracing for the catastrophic impact of an additional $500 billion cut to the DoD’s budget over the next 10 years. Other countries, especially those in Europe, are also feeling the effects and anticipating drastic austerity measures. What’s lost on some, perhaps, is that there are growth opportunities elsewhere. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, India, and Brazil, are beefing up their defense purchases and capabilities. In fact, the latest projections from SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) indicate that many of these countries will have healthy defense growth rates for the next several years (see Figure 1).

So what’s driving this growth? Well, a number of weapons systems and R&D projects. But certainly UAVs are one of the more important areas. Several well-respected organizations project a tremendous amount of money spent on UAVs over the next 10 years, and this will almost definitely change the landscape of aircraft inventories.  When we consider just the US inventory alone, we see 45 times more UAVs today than we had only 10 years ago (see Figure 2).

When we compare that to the US manned aircraft inventory, the trend becomes quite apparent – we’re steadily moving towards a 50/50 convergence between manned and unmanned assets (see Figure 3). Other countries and regions will follow (some quicker than others) as the US leads the trend.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Much of the growth, both domestically and internationally, can be attributed to the large UAVs. To that point, many countries around the world lack the capabilities and funding to either procure or manufacturer these larger, more complex systems. However, countries such as India and Brazil are forming partnerships today to help build those capabilities now so that, in the not-too- distant future, they can manufacture more expensive systems indigenously. Thus, the larger UAVs will continue to dominate total sales while representing only a small portion of the total volume (see Figure 4).

In terms of UAV growth, it should come as no surprise that the US has been the clear leader for some time now. However, other regions around the world have taken notice and will continue to enhance their defense arsenals by increasing budgets allocated for UAVs. Asia-Pacific and Europe are projected to be the leaders behind the US, with the Middle East, Americas, and Africa rounding out the rest (see Figure 5). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, I think we can safely reference Malcolm Gladwell and say that we’ve reached the tipping point with respect to UAVs and their manned alternatives. Although we shouldn’t expect to see UAVs performing the more intricate, complex and dynamic missions such as air-to-air combat anytime soon, we should expect to them to take over the dull, dirty, and dangerous ones, thus leading to a strategic shift in aircraft inventories around the world.

Fly safe,

Marc

During the recent Aero Friedrichshafen, Diamond CEO Christian Dries announced that his company was in the process of developing a robotic helicopter, the “Hero”, capable of conducting autonomous missions.

I had to let that news sink in… Sure, we had already witnessed optionally manned DA-42 variants. However, the reader will forgive me if I didn’t see this one coming. It’s one thing to develop a fixed wing aircraft with some sensing capability; it’s a completely different one to develop a rotorcraft (with no prior experience to speak of) that has sufficient processing power to make its own decisions. What’s more, Mr. Dries indicated that the “Hero” has already flown.

So far, not much has been revealed, but for the sake of initiating a discussion we can speculate the following:

• The two engines and associated rotors will likely be placed side by side to improve lateral stability.
• With 250 lbs of sensor equipment and a total weight of just over 1,300 lbs, it’s safe to assume that there won’t be much room for payload. If we compare these basic specs to, say, the “Firescout”, the size of the “Hero” should be substantially smaller. I also suspect that some of the weight savings will come in the form of reduced metal in the fuselage and added composites (as is the case in other Diamond-made fixed-wing products).
• The lack of payload and the stated ability for the “Hero” to hover for 6.5 hours point towards an aircraft that will be only used for reconnaissance and surveillance operations. In that respect, its missions will be more focused than those of Boeing’s Hummingbird, as an example. This assumption seems to be further reinforced by Mr. Dries’ comments that the aircraft can hover for “nearly four hours” over one spot with no mention about range. One has to believe that specific applications removed from the battlefield likely also include border patrol.

At this point my primary thought is whether Diamond has sufficient financial wherewithal to bring the project to completion: we are aware of the delays in the D-Jet program (which, by the way, is a beautiful aircraft), but then again the recent trend towards UAVs appears to give credence to Diamond’s new strategy. And once we find out who is their yet-to-be-named partner, we may be able to put all doubts to rest.

What’s certain is that with the number of players in the UAV market, Diamond will be in good company.

Cheers,

Raf.

In my last post, I talked about the effect of PB13 on several of the Department of Defense’s top UAV platforms. One program that remains a key DoD priority (and thus will continue to receive ample funding) is the Navy’s UCLASS (Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike) program. The current competition includes a potential clean-sheet offering from Boeing, a carrier-based variant of the General Atomics Avenger, a possible derivative of the Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel, and the Northrop Grumman X-47B UCAS-D (i.e., the Navy’s UCLASS demonstration platform).

On August 11^th, 2011, the Pentagon’s acquisition executive, Sean Stackley, approved the Navy’s request to admit the UCLASS program into the preliminary phase of the procurement system, granting the program a material development decision to proceed with an analysis of alternatives and related studies. More recently, Naval Air Systems Command formally advised industry that within a month it may release a competitive broad agency announcement “for additional studies” of the UCLASS concept. All extremely positive signs for continue progress.

This fiscal year, the Navy plans to “complete milestone preparation activities” and “initiate design and development of the UCLASS system,” according to the budget documents. The Navy’s five-year, $2.3 billion development funding plan for the UCLASS program, according to service budget documents, includes $122.4 million in FY13, $144.1 million in FY14, $674.1 million in FY15, $777.6 million in FY16, and $611.2 million in FY17. In other words, the money is there for UCLASS.

It seems that UCLASS is even finding its way into somewhat “adjacent” conversations, including those that involve F/A-XX, the Navy’s future replacement for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. Yes, even those discussions are beginning to occur.

In written testimony submitted prior to the House Appropriations defense subcommittee’s March 1^st hearing on the Navy budget, Ray Mabus, Secretary of the Navy, acknowledged that the Navy will need to replace its Super Hornet fleet in the far term, and initial activities “are underway to define the follow-on F/A-XX aircraft”. The Navy won’t necessarily design a new aircraft to fill that role, and the service won’t be limited to considering just one platform, Mabus said. “Options include additional F-35s, a variant of UCLASS, a new manned/unmanned platform, or some combination of these.” Mabus said the Navy has no plans of abandoning development of the UCLASS platform despite the austere fiscal environment.

Now, to be fair we are WAY early on F/A-XX speculation. What’s important to note, however, is the repeated emphasis the Navy and DoD leadership are placing on UCLASS. Programs such as this will continue to be critical enablers for the military’s strategic shift towards Asia-Pacific. This is just the start.

Fly safe,

Marc

Now that the dust has settled from last week’s release of PB13, it’s time to stake stock of the impact on the DoD’s plans for UAVs. As I mentioned in my previous blog, even before PB13 was released we knew the Air Force had made the decision to terminate procurement of block 30 Global Hawks in favor of the manned U-2 Dragon Lady and subsequent procurement of block 40 Global Hawks. Nothing new to report there, although we can certainly expect Northrop Grumman to continue to press the DoD for an alternative solution. So, here is the UAV breakdown for each of the services. Bean counters of the world, enjoy…

By and large the Air Force took the biggest hit last week. In addition to the aforementioned block 30 Global Hawk termination, the Reaper fleet will see substantial reductions, as the DoD decided to extend the service life of MQ-1B Predators. Also, the Air Force just announced that it has no intention of moving forward in the near term with MQ-X, the Reaper replacement program that was set to come online in FY17. Check out this article to read more and this photo to see an MQ-9A Reaper.

The Navy also did not escape completely unscathed. MRMUAS (Medium-Range Maritime Unmanned Aerial System) was canceled in lieu of the successful RQ-8B Fire Scout and its larger, more capable brother, the MQ-8C Fire Scout – click here to read more. Overall procurement for Fire Scout through FY16 is down compared to PB12 plans, but the Navy seems fully committed to long-term utilization of the platform. Similarly, BAMS will also see less procurement through FY16. See a photo of an MQ-8C Fire Scout here.

The story for the Army is slightly different. Although procurement is down overall for FY13, the numbers are well ahead of PB12 plans through FY16. The vast majority of that difference stems from increased purchases of the RQ-11B Raven. No Army UAV programs have been outwardly canceled as of yet, though it will be interesting to see what happens now that MRMUAS is no longer. The Army was essentially leveraging it as an AoA for a VTOL UAV. Check out this article to read more and this photo to see a RQ-11B Raven.

All in all, some winners and losers in terms of PB13 plans for UAVs. One program of note, UCLASS, remains a key focal point not only for the Navy, but also for the Air Force – click here to read more. Essentially, the Air Force will watch how UCLASS unfolds and then decide upon a follow strategy for UCAVs. Of course, this assumes only non-proprietary programs. Any programs and platforms in the classified world are…well… classified. See a photo of an X-47B UCAS-D Fire Scout here.

Fly safe,

Marc

 

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