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
3.1 HISTORICALLY VALIDATED UAS ROLES
How the Services have employed UAS over the past 40 years is not a sure indicator of how UA will be used in the next 25 years, but most of the current UAS programs show a strong correlation with a line of past UAS programs built to fulfill similar requirements. The Services have repeatedly sought to fill five variations of the reconnaissance role with UAS, implying the underlying requirements are of a long-term, enduring validity and therefore can be expected to continue throughout the period of this Roadmap. These five roles, and the succession of UAS, procured or attempted, to fill them, see Table 3.1-1.
TABLE 3.1-1. HISTORICALLY VALIDATED UAS ROLES.
UAS Role: Brigade/division asset for RSTA
Proponent: Army, Marine Corps
Heritage: Falconer (1950-60s) – Aquila (1970-80s) – Pioneer (1980-2000s)-Dragon Drone (1990s) – Outrider (1990s) – Shadow 200 (2000s)
UAS Role: Shipborne asset for reconnaissance and weapon support
Proponent: Navy
Heritage: DASH (1960s) – Project Blackfly (1970s) – Pioneer (1980-2000s) – Fire Scout (2000s)
UAS Role: Small unit asset for over-the-hill reconnaissance
Proponent: Marine Corps
Heritage: Bikini (1960s) – Pointer (1980-90s) – Dragon Eye (2000s)
UAS Role: Survivable asset for strategic penetrating reconnaissance
Proponent: Army/Air Force/Navy
Heritage: Osprey (1960s) – D-21 (1960s) – Classified Program (1980s) – DarkStar (1990s) – JUCAS (2000s)
UAS Role: High altitude endurance asset for standoff reconnaissance
Proponent: Air Force
Heritage: Compass Arrow (1960s) – Compass Dwell (1970s) – Compass Cope (1970s) – Condor (1980s) – Global Hawk (1990-2000s)
3.2 COMBATANT COMMANDER REQUIREMENTS FOR UAS
Each COCOM annually submits a prioritized IPL of shortfalls in that theater’s warfighting capabilities. IPLs are the seminal source of joint requirements from our nation’s warfighters and possess three essential attributes as requirements sources. They are (1) “direct from the field” in pedigree , (2) joint in perspective, and (3) reexamined annually, so their requirements remain both current and auditable over the years. At SECDEF direction, the latest IPLs (for FY06-11) changed their focus from identifying programmatic challenges to capability gaps and tied these gaps to the five QDR-defined “operational risk” categories (battlespace awareness (BA), command and control (C2), focused logistics (FL), force application (FA), and force protection (FP)).
Of the 50 capability gaps specified in the FY06-11 IPLs, 27 (54 percent) are capabilities that are currently, or could potentially be, addressed by UAS. Four of the 27 shortfalls specifically identified unmanned platforms as a desired solution. Table 3.2-1 depicts where the COCOMs place their priorities (1-8) on these 27 capability gaps that UA, current and potential, could fill. Red are functions UA do
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：无人机系统路线图 Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap(44)
