曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
an emerging capability that deserves increased emphasis. Next, trade studies need to be conducted to
determine if multi-mission, versus dedicated mission, platform designs are the most cost effective
approach for every application. Lastly, opportunities must be sought to take advantage of the growing
commercial market to solve DoD problems.
Strike/Suppression of Enemy Air Defense
Actions in Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) and Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) have
shown the value of arming UA. Lightweight weapons on long endurance platforms like the MQ-1
Predator make possible rapid reaction to fleeting targets, a mission that is more accurately termed “armed
reconnaissance” and can be considered a sub-set of the Strike mission, possibly the first example of
“persistent strike.” This capability plays more on the endurance and surveillance capability of the UA
than on its weapons prowess. However, UA are being developed to carry greater payload load-outs, with
greater variety to offer greater strike flexibility to warfighters. The Air Force’s MQ-9 Predator
development is an example of a movement in a direction of greater weapons capability while retaining its
reconnaissance and endurance capabilities. This kind of armed reconnaissance or persistent strike
capability is crucial in executing GWOT missions. Strategic Planning Guidance has made reducing risk
in GWOT its top priority.
The joint Air Force-Navy development of J-UCAS is the first example of a net-centric UA system where
significant weapons employment flexibility is a design requirement. Besides the strike mission, the JUCAS
program will provide a UA capable of operating in the SEAD role. The SEAD role will also
emphasize survivability as a key design requirement. As opposed to the armed reconnaissance or strike
against lightly defended targets, the SEAD mission makes significantly greater survivability demands on
UA developers because of its intended use in denied airspace. Understanding the design trades required
to develop an effective capability is critical to holding down acquisition costs. A robust system
engineering effort is paramount.
UA have two attributes that are attractive for the SEAD, strike, and armed reconnaissance missions when
compared to manned assets:
Eliminate risk of the loss of an aircrew
Potential for greater survivability by reducing signatures through optimal shaping not possible with
traditional manned aircraft design and through greater maneuverability (beyond human tolerance)
These attributes can be used to improve operational effect, or reduce cost while maintaining the same
level of operational effect. The Strategic Planning Guidance specifically directs acceptance of
“…increased risk and/or undertake initiatives to achieve substantial savings…” However, before UA can
be used to improve effect or lower cost in the strike/SEAD mission area, there are several challenges that
must be met:
1. Rules of engagement (ROE) considerations that may require the intervention of a human operator.
2. The prosecution of advanced integrated air defense systems (IADS) targets and time critical targets
through an as yet unperfected automatic targeting and engagement process or by a human operator
outside the vehicle.
UAS ROADMAP 2005
APPENDIX A – MISSIONS
Page A-5
3. The integration, interoperability, and information assurance required to support mixed
manned/unmanned force operations.
4. Secure, robust communications capability, advanced cognitive decision aids, and mission planning.
5. Adaptive autonomous operations and coordinated multi-vehicle flight.
Strike, persistent strike and armed reconnaissance missions may be against heavily or a lightly defended
targets. The level of threat determines which UA attribute is most influential in the design. If the
requirement is to engage and defeat lightly defended targets, then a conventionally designed UA would
stress payload and aero performance to achieve the most efficient “kill” capability. The ability to provide
a persistent threat against adversaries will stress endurance as a design feature in the lower threat
environments. If prosecution of highly defended targets is required, then a design stressing survivability
is paramount, and often will trade away payload and aerodynamic performance to achieve greater
certainty of success against highly defended targets. This trade is required to ensure “anti-access” targets
(targets that deny use of conventional joint force assets) are eliminated early in a campaign so the Joint
Force Commander can use the full range of forces at his disposal and achieve desired effects as swiftly as
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
unmanned aircraft systems roadmap(50)
