In one form or another, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) have been employed for over 2,000 years. Lt Col Richard M. Clark's Uninhabited Combat Aerial Vehicles: Airpower by the People, For the People, But Not with the People, draws on that long history to gauge what the future may hold for uninhabited combat aerial vehicles (UCAV). The United States (US) Air Force's experience with UCAVs dates back to World War I and the US Army Air Service's order for 25 Kettering Bugs, explosive-laden unmanned minibiplanes. Over the next 60 years, the Air Force continued to experiment with-and periodically employ-UAVs/UCAVs in peace and war. Operational results were decidedly mixed. The Air Force abandoned UCAV development in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, but by the 1990s there was a marked resurgence of interest in UCAVs as a means of "doing more with less" while reducing combat risks to pilots. Given the problematic history of UAVs/UCAVs, knowledge of past experience could prove beneficial to the current generation of UCAV developers and planners. To that end, Colonel Clark examines technological obstacles that have handicapped UCAVs historically and which could continue to impede their future evolution. He then turns to more contemporary organizational and cultural issues that might hinder integration of UCAVs into the force. Clark concludes his study by proposing answers to two fundamental questions: (1) What are the major obstacles to UCAVs achieving meaningful operational status in the Air Force, and (2) Can those obstacles be overcome? Originally written as a master's thesis for Air University's School of Advanced Airpower Studies (SAAS), Uninhabited Combat Aerial Vehicles won the 1999 Air Force Armament Museum Foundation Prize as the best SAAS thesis on technology and aerospace power. The College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Education is pleased to make this timely study available to the Air Force and beyond. JAMES R. W. TITUS Dean of Research Air University

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) have been used in military operations for more than 60 years, with torpedoes, cruise missiles, satellites, and target drones being early examples.1 They have also been widely used in the civilian sector-for example, in the disposal of explosives, for work and measurement in radioactive environments, by various offshore industries for both creating and maintaining undersea facilities, for atmospheric and undersea research, and by industry in automated and robotic manufacturing. Recent military experiences with AVs have consistently demonstrated their value in a wide range of missions, and anticipated developments of AVs hold promise for increasingly significant roles in future naval operations. Advances in AV capabilities are enabled (and limited) by progress in the technologies of computing and robotics, navigation, communications and networking, power sources and propulsion, and materials. Autonomous Vehicles in Support of Naval Operations is a forward-looking discussion of the naval operational environment and vision for the Navy and Marine Corps and of naval mission needs and potential applications and limitations of AVs. This report considers the potential of AVs for naval operations, operational needs and technology issues, and opportunities for improved operations.

"To be sure, manned systems could accomplish many if not all of the same goals. But "unmanned systems reduce the risk to our warfighters by providing a sophisticated stand-off capability that supports intelligence, command and control, targeting, and weapons delivery. These systems also improve situational awareness and reduce many of the emotional hazards inherent in air and ground combat, thus decreasing the likelihood of causing civilian noncombatant casualties." "UAVs have gained favor as ways to reduce risk to combat troops, the cost of hardware and the reaction time in a surgical strike" and "to conduct missions in areas that are difficult to access or otherwise considered too high-risk for manned aircraft or personnel on the ground."--Page 3 (author).

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have been referred to in many ways, such as RPV (remotely piloted vehicle), drone, robot plane, and pilotless aircraft. Most often called UAVs, they are defined by the Dept. of Defense (DOD) as powered, aerial vehicles that do not carry a human operator, use aerodynamic forces to provide vehicle lift, can fly autonomously or be piloted remotely, can be expendable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or nonlethal payload. The war on terrorism has put a high premium on the primary mission of UAVs, intelligence gathering. The military effectiveness of UAVs in conflicts such as Iraq (2003), Afghanistan (2001), and Kosovo (1999) opened the eyes of many to both the advantages and disadvantages provided by unmanned aircraft. Long relegated to the sidelines in military operations, UAVs are now used in ways normally reserved for manned aircraft. This 2003 report includes background information on UAVs; considerations for Congress; and DOD UAV programs current in 2003, both operational and developmental. Figures and tables. This is a print on demand report.

The development of uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAVs) could potentially revolutionize how military force is used in the future. While the early operational experiences with UAVs show great promise, their full range of capabilities is largely unknown. However, it is clear that these technologies will enable military forces to use aerospace power more efficiently, which means at lower cost and with less risk to the humans who pilot aircraft. The broader question is the wisdom of using unmanned aerial vehicles for employing lethal force, and in particular which air power missions are best accomplished by uninhabited, piloted, and autonomous vehicles. The corollary is to examine the essential roles of human pilots or operators in aerospace operations in the twenty-first century. Since it is common to draw distinctions between vehicles with an on-board pilot, vehicles with off-board operators, and autonomous vehicles, this study explores the essential role of pilots and contrasts it with the roles of remotely piloted and autonomous vehicles. The assumption is that piloted, remotely piloted, and autonomous vehicles have advantages and disadvantages in military operations, and that these vary in strategic significance for different levels of conflict. Since it is essential for the U.S. defense establishment to consider the strategic and technological implications of these types of aerial vehicles, this study is devoted to addressing the issues raised by the new generation of aerial vehicles.

Lessons from recent combat experiences in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq have shown that UAVs can provide vastly improved acquisition and more rapid dissemination of Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) data. They are one of the principal contributors to successful outcomes for the United States, in these campaigns. The benefits and promise offered by UAVs in surveillance, targeting and attack have captured the attention of senior military and civilian officials in the Defense Department (DoD), members of Congress, and the public alike. Indeed, these recent combat operations appear to indicate that unmanned air systems have at last come of age. There is no longer any question of the technical viability and operational utility of UAVs. The success of UAVs in recent conflicts represents a historic opportunity to exploit the transformational capabilities inherent in UAVs/Uninhabited Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs). Transformation is not a term, it is a philosophy. Transformation is a predisposition to exploring adaptations of existing and new systems, doctrine and organizations. True transformation is not the result of a one-time improvement, but of sustained and determined effort. For example, the American forces used multiple Predator UAVs during Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) to provide a far more comprehensive operational perspective across the theater to the Combined Air Operations Center by integrating the Predator common operating picture with the Falcon View mission planning system. There is now another mission imperative and that is distance. During this review the new concept of Global Persistence Surveillance has specifically focused on the contributions of UAVs and UCAVs. During OIF Predator UAVs also enabled time-critical targeting via streaming video to strike platforms. Likewise one Global Hawk in the Iraqi theater from 8 March 03 to 23 April 03 accounted for 55% of the Time Sensitive Targets generated to kill air defense equipment. In 16 missions, Global Hawk located 13 Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) batteries, 50 SAM launchers, over 70 SAM transport vehicles and over 300 tanks. Notwithstanding the success of UAVs in OIF, UAVs have not been fully "embedded" in current Concepts of Operations (CONOPS) or valued with effects driven methodology. Future UAV programs must be conceived with this mix in mind, i.e. predefined operational concepts and effects driven methodology. UAVs are ideal systems to support the emerging joint character and the asymmetric nature of warfare. The Task Force feels it is time for DoD and the Services to move forward and make UAVs and UCAVs an integral part of the force structure, not an "additional asset." To do so requires appropriate planning, appropriate budgeting, and continued management attention of DoD and Service leadership. The DoD and the Services have already started to integrate UAVs into their force structure plans. Currently there are UAV plans and roadmaps within the DoD and Services and the FY 04 budget also shows substantial increases in funding of UAV programs. While progress has been made in planning and funding for UAVs, the Services need to move from deconfliction to integration to interdependence. UAV capabilities should be assessed in the larger context of the Global Persistent Surveillance. UAVs can ideally complement current architectures for Future Imagery Architecture, New Imagery System, and Space Based Radar. This study identifies steps the Department of Defense and Armed Services can take to field a robust UAV and UCAV capability. The recommendations in his executive summary indicate the Task Force's top level recommendations. Additional recommendations can be found in the body of the report. The Task Force's findings and recommendations fall into eight subject areas and are described in this executive summary in order of importance.