LETTERS to the EDITOR


Small Units Need Unmanned Aircraft Would you like to comment on an article that has appeared in Army AL&T Magazine?


I’m not normally associated with Army aviation. I’ve only had brief correspon- dence with respective leaders and DOD civilians within the unmanned aircraft systems sector. I have no input as to the acquisition of UAS or contracts.


I serve as an Infantryman, and I can express my frustration when we did not have the assets that we needed with regard to UAS platforms. I have 15 years in active-duty Army service. I have been deployed to Iraq twice. While con- ducting combat patrols, I very much appreciated the use of helicopter and UAS air support. The Army has attempted to field platoon-level UAS aircraft, yet most platoons still operate without internal UAS.


We have the Raven, but when I was deployed, I could not sign for one. Com- manders do not want to be responsible for loss of any platform even though it was designed to be a “throwaway” system.


Change will need to happen on two fronts: First, the military needs to loosen up a bit with regard to losing an unmanned aerial vehicle. If we are given a tactical advan- tage over the enemy, loss of a UAV should be acceptable.


There are concerns about sensitive elec- tronic hardware falling into enemy hands.


124 Army AL&T Magazine


This is one of the biggest concerns for most in the military, so to that end, some sort of self-destruct device needs to be incorporated.


UAS systems for the platoon and squad need to be simple. Full collective heli- copters, radio-controlled and otherwise, require flight control manipulation to correct the angular difference between retreating and advancing blades when maneuvering from a hover into lateral flight, i.e., cyclic left, increase collective pitch, increase throttle, and, finally, increase tail rotor pitch to maintain yaw and head- ing. That’s a lot for just “moving left.”


Controls need to be simplified. I need to take the least knowledgeable pri- vate with the least experience and put a UAS system in his hands, teach him the operation, and stand back to watch him successfully employ the system to the advantage of his platoon.


Second, respective industries need to fab- ricate systems in a less expensive manner: durable, simple, but cost-effective to pro- duce. It can be done. Sadly, a number of those in the industry are looking for the big slice of “government pie,” which results in platforms that commanders end up not wanting to issue out because they’re expensive.


Do you have information you would like to add on a published topic? Is there a trend or other development that you’d like to bring to our attention? Send us a Letter to the Editor.


I know for a fact that I can go into a hobby shop that carries a large inven- tory of radio-controlled helicopter parts, and I can build a cheaper, yet reliable, UAS system. The UAS industry needs to band together, just as the helicopter industry did in 2010 with the Vertical Lift Consortium.


We are a Nation that has been involved in continuous conflict and operations since 2001. Enough time has passed for UAS platforms to be designed, tested, fielded, and implemented down to the lowest level. Fear of losing a UAS should never outweigh the tactical advantage over any insurgency or the preservation of life. Cost should never be a consideration when those lives include our Soldiers.


SSG DAVID A. HICKMAN C Company, 2nd Battalion, 11th Infantry Regiment Fort Benning, GA


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