From National Defense

 

September 2007

Navy still Years Away From Deploying Attack Drones Aboard Aircraft Carriers

By Grace Jean

 

Given the Navy’s checkered history of flying drones aboard ships, it’s not surprising that its first pursuit of an unmanned aircraft geared for carrier operations has progressed cautiously and even with a hint of trepidation. While the sea service remains tight-lipped about how such an autonomous system might be employed in the future, analysts say it has the potential to alter naval warfare and are calling for an accelerated demonstration of its capabilities.

 

“The sooner you can demonstrate this and convince the carrier aviation community that ‘hey, this will work,’ then we think the attractiveness of the system will be just too irresistible,” says Robert Work, naval analyst for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

 

About the size of a fighter jet, the unmanned combat air system, or UCAS, is envisioned as a stealthy, long-range fixed-wing aircraft similar in design to a B-2 bomber. Navy officials have hinted that the UCAS might serve as an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance system that could support manned aircraft aboard a carrier in the 2020s.

 

“But we believe it could be so much more,” Work says during a CSBA briefing on Capitol Hill.

 

The Navy sees the UCAS in the vein of the EA-18G Growler and the E-2B Hawkeye — as a specialized support plane flying intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions, says Work. Once naval aviators are convinced that UCAS can operate safely on a carrier, he believes the Navy will want to add long-range strike capabilities to its surveillance function.

 

For example, UCAS could be loaded with advanced medium range air-to-air missiles and fly in a persistent orbit to hit targets. It could suppress enemy defenses, hunt down moving targets, and conduct close air support and interdiction operations.

 

“This is more flexible than an ISR system,” says Work, who adds that he’s not suggesting the UCAS will replace manned aircraft, but rather complement them.

 

The Navy last month awarded Northrop Grumman a $635.8 million contract to study concepts for carrier-based unmanned aerial systems operations during the next six years. The Los Angeles-based company plans to demonstrate that its X-47B, a tailless autonomous air vehicle, can operate safely aboard a carrier in catapult launches and landings, and fly in operations in the ship’s airspace.

 

“The purpose of the UCAS contract is to demonstrate critical carrier suitability technologies of an air vehicle in a relevant environment,” says Lt. Cmdr. John Schofield, spokesman for the Navy.

 

Northrop, which has built other carrier-based aircraft such as the EA-6B Prowler and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, announced that it aims to conduct the first at-sea carrier landing demonstrations in late 2011. The company by 2013 will deliver studies, analyses, reports and flight test data, which will be used to verify that the technology is mature enough to enter into an acquisition program, says Schofield.

 

“We think the naval unmanned combat system offers huge opportunities to the Navy,” says Thomas Ehrhard, senior fellow at CSBA. UCAS has the ability to be as transformational in the air as the Navy Trident submarine conversions have been at sea, he says.

 

To explore elements of UCAS operations beyond the basic take-off, flying and landing capabilities, the Navy in a separately funded program is exploring concepts including autonomous aerial refueling and multi-ship combat operations.

 

“From our perspective, this is the time to make that a very robust program,” Work says. That will require more funding for UCAS, which has not fared well in the Defense Department’s budget.

 

The Bush administration has requested $1.8 billion in the next five years for both the UCAS demo program and the Navy’s technology advancement efforts. Of that total, $300 million is intended for studying operational UCAS capabilities. Work says that amount needs to be doubled over the future years defense plan to show that missions, such as air-to-air refueling, are feasible.

 

“The more money you put into the technology maturation program up front, the higher pay off you’ll get down the line because you’ll be able to demonstrate more, and perhaps get breakthroughs that you didn’t expect,” he tells National Defense.

 

Last year, Congress appropriated $100 million for the UCAS program, instead of the requested $239 million. The cut shifted the UCAS demonstration from fiscal 2011 to 2013, says Work. Reductions to the 2008 budget would delay the demonstration further.

 

“I think we would be well-advised to embrace this, understand it, make it work,” says Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D.

 

“This is a critical time, because the Navy is gearing up for its carrier Joint Strike Fighter,” says Work. The next-generation fighter jet is scheduled to hit the flight deck as early as 2013. If the UCAS demonstration takes place in 2011, then the Navy would be able to have a competition between the manned and unmanned aircraft and determine the right mix of squadrons for future carrier operations, Work says.

 

The Navy’s plan for future carrier air wings include one 12-plane squadron of F/A-18E fighters, one squadron of the two-seater F/A-18Fs, one 10-plane squadron of Joint Strike Fighters, a squadron of the Marine Corps’ JSF, five EA-18G Growlers, five E-2B Hawkeyes and five UCAS.

 

The Navy’s carrier air wing in the 2020s appears to be composed mostly of short-range fighters, which is maximizing sortie rates, says Ehrhard. But that model may not meet future demands.

 

In both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, fighters flew fewer, but longer, missions. Some missions lasted up to 10 hours, at the limit of human endurance. Flying UCAS instead of traditional fighters would allow for missions of even lengthier durations without worries of fatigue.

 

War games have suggested that U.S. forces and technologies will require range, stealth and persistence in the future, says Work. For a carrier air wing, those three elements are particularly important because they will operate far from their flattop bases and friendly shores.

 

Incorporating the UCAS system into the carrier air wing is going to transform the carrier from a mobile strike system with relatively limited tactical reach, to one with long-range and persistent reach, says Work.

 

In the future, if the Navy has a three-carrier strike force in which one of the carrier air wings is made up entirely of UCAS, then the unmanned bombers could provide days of non-stop strike and intelligence operations, says Ehrhard.

 

In war games, when officers were given the option to pick their strike force under future scenarios, an all-UCAS force is the one that they chose, he adds.

 

Today’s carrier air wing configuration resulted after the threat to carriers disappeared after the end of the Cold War. The air wing’s range isn’t much different than it was during World War II, with strike packages able to fly up to 250 nautical miles from the carrier, says Ehrhard.

 

Tactical aviation is a victim of its own success, says David Ochmanek, senior defense analyst at Rand Corp. The carrier air wings haven’t confronted a serious adversary since World War II. But that could soon change.

 

“We’re going to be facing large numbers of China’s fourth generation jets with small numbers of fifth generation systems,” he says. “That’s not a favorable ratio.”

 

China’s work on the DF-21C anti-ship ballistic missile and anti-access capabilities also could pose a threat to the Navy’s carriers.

 

“This is not Saddam Hussein’s scud, which only through luck actually hits anything,” says Ochmanek. China’s precise missiles can target specific buildings and “we don’t know how to cope with that right now,” he says.

 

In 1995 and 1996, during the Taiwan Strait crisis, the United States sailed carriers out to deter China, which had fired missiles toward the island during tests. The quick U.S. naval response was a significant blow to the People’s Republic of China, says Ehrhard. With its eye on retaking Taiwan, China has been working hard to deter the U.S. Navy from being in the Taiwan straits since then, says Ochmanek.

 

“They need a certain number of hours to execute their strategy. If they can keep a carrier out, they believe they can win,” says Ehrhard.

 

In such a scenario, the UCAS could be launched as carriers depart Pearl Harbor and arrive over the area of interest within eight hours. With current aircraft, it would take a carrier two to three days to get in range before they could launch.

 

“That’s a huge difference tactically,” says Ehrhard. UCAS could easily be made to fly for 50 hours and potentially up to 10 times longer than a manned system that is refueled, he adds.

 

UCAS configured for anti-submarine warfare also could counter the Chinese submarine fleet, says retired Rear Adm. Eric McVadon, a consultant on East Asian security affairs. It wouldn’t replace the Multimission Maritime Aircraft, but it would provide additional capabilities.

 

“If UCAS can reduce the number of Kilo submarines on station by anti-submarine warfare in the East China Sea, that would overcome a crucial shortcoming by the Navy,” he says.

 

Not only would UCAS be able to penetrate through an adversary’s periphery air defense system and loiter above enemy forces, but it also would create a great air defense nightmare for the adversary, says Jim Thomas, vice president at Applied Minds, Inc.

 

“It’s one that can help us complicate planning for our adversaries, and in particular, by driving up the costs of their air defense,” he says.

 

Given the service’s problematic history with flying unmanned systems off of ship decks, the Navy is rightfully skeptical of UCAS, says Work.

 

In the 1950s and 1960s, the Navy developed the Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter, (DASH), one of the first armed unmanned systems designed to deliver MK-44 homing torpedoes up to 30 miles away. It was brought on board the Arleigh Burke class destroyers and other frigates.

 

Though the Navy modified more than 100 vessels to operate the 746-fleet DASH system, it did not develop forces to properly operate or maintain the drone, says Ehrhard. That resulted in accidents and losses of more than half of the helos, and perhaps more devastatingly, it left Navy officers soured on the idea of unmanned aerial systems at sea, and especially aboard carriers, he says.

 

Carrier operations are not an insurmountable challenge for unmanned systems, says Thomas. “We’ve demonstrated the art of the possible,” he says during a panel discussion at the briefing.

 

Pilots are landing on aircraft carriers with their hands off the control systems because they’re using heads-up displays and other technologies to bring in their planes automatically, says Work.

 

Still, UCAS will have to earn its way to the deck, says Thomas.

 

Aircraft returning to a carrier fly in a stack formation at 1,000-foot intervals and circle the ship for landing. As the airplane at the lowest altitude peels off from formation and lands, the others drop down another 1,000 feet. All of this happens 30 seconds apart.

 

“You have to prove an unmanned airplane will do that, because a lot of pilots say that’s all done by sight,” says Work. That skepticism by Navy pilots could prove to be the biggest hurdle for UCAS to overcome.

Maybe I'm a cynic, but perhaps its the leadership of the carrier-pilot mafia that does not want to have written the manned "naval aviation" obituary while on their watch.

Holy bad news batman! I'm all for pilots but the unmanned world is going to pass the US Navy by, UCAS actually holds a small possibility of reduced costs when the Navy faces years of nowhere near enough money to build the ships that are needed, not wanted but needed. Pete is probably right about the reason, the 'pilot mafia', hehe, now that my favorite fighter mafia is gone...

 

Not to mention UCAS perhaps being able to be scaled in physical size more easily than manned planes to get us away from some of these $10 billion+ super carriers/planes that are going to be sunk for the cost of a few million dollars of torpedos from AIP subs. That's for those of you who forgot I think a super carrier is an indefensible target against a Russian/Chinese/anybody with a DE fleet, concerted attack