REDUCING RISK, NOT MANPOWER
The T-Hawk’s manned counterpart could arguably be manned helicopters, but in no sense do we see helicopter squadrons packing up and going home. That is because the T-Hawk cannot replace the helicopter’s many other capabilities. The T-Hawk may actually increase the man- power footprint, because its purpose is to increase capability and reduce risk, not to replace helicopter crews.
POTENTIAL TO SAVE While UMS currently appear to bring improved capabilities and reduce risk at the expense of increased manpower, there is definitely potential for UMS to reduce manpower.
Technology is advancing at an exponen- tial rate to improve upon our existing inventory. Also, UMS do not need all the ancillary equipment necessary to protect
A REPUTATION FOR SAVING LIVES
The RQ-16A T-Hawk, shown here at Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, in January 2011, is a reported lifesaver, although the events have not been quantified. Each is controlled by one operator, with the entire inventory maintained by five contract personnel. (Photo by SPC Jonathan W. Thomas.)
human bodies and provide for human comfort that manned systems do (e.g., latrines, air conditioning, oxygen, interior lights, ejection seats, and heavy armor). An aircraft or vehicle can patrol longer and work in more dangerous conditions than manned systems. Furthermore, battle-damaged systems can be repaired and reused fairly quickly by a proficient crew. The same cannot be said for battle- damaged human beings, who require a significant number of medical specialists and physical therapy to recover.
Finally, using UMS to reduce manpower outside of CONUS has the added ben- efit of reducing the logistical manpower needed to support large numbers of human beings in a combat zone.
To realize this vision, two conditions are necessary: UMS require a much higher
level of intelligent autonomy (IA) to allow them to operate with less human involvement, and UMS must be designed with lower manpower needs over their life cycles. These ideas are not new; DoD is working to bring about both of these conditions. The FY 2009-2034 Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap, online at
http://www.acq.osd.mil/psa/ docs/UMSIntegratedRoadmap2009. pdf, advocates improving IA and revers- ing the operator-to-platform ratio from many people to one platform, to many platforms per person. In addition, improvements to the acquisition process in recent years show much promise for reducing the manpower requirements for all acquisitions, not just UMS.
THE CHALLENGES While these initiatives are a good start, significant challenges remain.
Improved IA in UMS means, among other things, automated data collection and analysis; synchronized command and control among UMS operating in all domains (land, air, and maritime); and autonomous mission planning, tasking, and target identification among multiple UMS. While this presents an interest- ing vision, the reality is that such levels of IA introduce challenges pertaining to the laws of war, privacy, and ethics—mat- ters under discussion by military leaders, lawyers, engineers, and robot ethicists. Without a doubt, politics will play a role, and strong, decisive leadership will be necessary to prevent “analysis paralysis” with regard to increasing IA in UMS.
Similarly, improving the acquisition pro- cess with regard to designs that affect manpower is getting attention but raises challenges. A 2009 RAND Corp. study (Toward Affordable Systems: Portfolio Analysis and Management for Army Sci- ence and Technology Programs, online at
38 Army AL&T Magazine
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180
