By David Crane
defrev (at) gmail (dot) com
The following article is property of DefenseReview.com (DR) and is copyrighted material. If you are reading this article on another website other than DefenseReview.com, please email us the website address/URL (where the unauthorized DR article reprint is located) at defrev (at) gmail (dot) com. Thank you.
July 19, 2012
Last updated on 7/20/12.
While we're on the subject of killer drones, i.e., armed/weaponized UAS/UAVs (Unmanned Aircraft Systems/Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), it's appropriate to mention a pair of articles that The Drudge Report linked-to today. The first is a CBS Los Angeles News (KNX1070 Newsradio) article that discusses a joint development project between LaserMotive and Lockheed Martin Skunk Works to develop laser-powered/laser-charged UAS/UAV/drone aircraft, where the UAS/UAV's on-board batteries get re-charged wirelessly by a "power-beaming" ground-based laser while the unmanned aircraft is in flight. So far the Lockheed Martin/LaserMotive team has been able to keep a Lockheed Martin Skunkworks Stalker "Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)"/drone aloft in a wind tunnel in Palmdale, California for 48+ hours via this wireless power-beaming battery-recharging tech, thus achieving a 2400-percent flight-duration increase/improvement. Next step is field testing a simulated desert warfare environment.
DefenseReview (DR) finds the concept of laser-re-charged "eternal" UAS/UAVs to be very interesting, and will try to obtain more detailed information on it from either LaserMotive, Lockheed Martin, or both. We actually just spoke briefly with LaserMotive executive Tom Nugent (no relation to Ted Nugent) by phone to schedule a quick phone interview with him tomorrow to glean more detailed information on the technology.
1) Line-of-Sight Requirement: The laser-powering ground station will need to maintain line of sight with the target unmanned aircraft system (UAS). It would therefore seem logical that mobile laser-powering platforms like Laser Motive laser-equipped ground vehicles, manned aircraft, and other UAS/UAVs be utilized to power the target UAS.
2) Interference from adverse weather (storms, clouds, fog, etc.) and combat conditions (smoke) could interfere with the laser beam.
3) If a UAS/UAV can be hit by a LaserMotive Power Link re-charging laser, it can also be hit by a high-powered enemy laser weapon to either blind or destroy it. That said, ALL aircraft are vulnerable to high-powered laser weapons.
4) Drone aircraft, including the most expensive, advanced, and secret ones, have demonstrated an Achilles heel, specifically a hacking/cracking-vulnerability. Ironically, this vulnerability could hamper laser comms (communications) with future unmanned aircraft, a potential line-of-sight communications method, and a potential future additional/alternative comms method to radio comms.
DR will discuss its concerns with Mr. Nugent if/when we talk with him again.
In the meantime, here are a couple of LaserMotive videos on this intriguing technology, including one on a laser-powered quadcopter UAS/UAV:
And, here's a LaserMotive white paper on the power-beaming tech:
Laser Power for UAVs (PDF Format)
The second article linked-to by Drudge is a Fox Nation piece that provided the transcript of Chairman Michael McCaul's (R-TX) opening statement at a House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations and Management hearing today warning that "in 2 1/2yrs, drones will begin to 'dominate skies' in the U.S., which is obviously relevant to the the LaserMotive tech.
Here's the transcript of Mr. McCaul's statement:
"Unmanned aerial systems, commonly known as “drones”, have been a game changer for our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. These systems have provided our troops with much needed “eyes in the sky” and have taken the fight to the enemy, eliminating some of the most dangerous Al-Qaeda terrorists. Drones have also increased our capabilities to secure our borders and aid first responders.
US Customs and Border Protection began first looking at using drones back in 2004. Now, CBP owns ten UAS aircraft. These systems have been used to surveil drug smuggling tunnels; video dams, bridges, levees, and riverbeds at risk of flooding; and assist with the deployment of National Guard resources responding to local flooding. CBP has flown missions in support of the Border Patrol, Texas Rangers, US Forest Service, FBI, and others. These systems have become a force multiplier for military operations and border security.
However, we are now on the edge of a new horizon: using unmanned aerial systems within the homeland. Currently, there are about 200 active Certificates of Authorization issued by the Federal Aviation Administration to over 100 different entities, such as law enforcement departments and academic institutions, to fly drones domestically. This map shows the location of COA recipients as of April 2012. The number of recipients since that time has increased.
The FAA plans to select six test sites around the country for the use of nongovernment drones this year and plans to allow the deployment of nongovernment drones nationwide by 2015.
While the FAA is responsible for ensuring these systems fly safely in US airspace, with only two and a half short years until drones begin to dominate the skies in the US homeland, no federal agency is taking the lead to deal with the full implications of using unmanned aerial systems and developing the relevant policies and guidelines for their use. This is despite the fact that four years ago the Government Accountability Office recommended the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the TSA Administrator to examine the security implications of future, non-military UAS operations in the national airspace system and take any actions deemed appropriate.
GAO’s recommendation was well founded because in 2004 TSA issued an advisory that described possible terrorist interest in using UASs as weapons.
The advisory noted the potential for UASs to carry explosives or disperse chemical or biological weapons. It discussed how the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia, or FARC, and Hezbollah were interested in acquiring UASs. While the advisory acknowledged there was no credible evidence to suggest that terrorist organizations planned to use these systems in the United States, it did state that the US government was concerned that these aerial vehicles could be modified and used to attack key assets and critical infrastructure in the United States.
These concerns were validated just last week when a Massachusetts man agreed to plead guilty to attempting to damage and destroy federal buildings. The individual was arrested in September 2011 after an undercover FBI investigation revealed his plot to use multiple remote controlled aircraft laden with explosives to collapse the dome of the US Capitol and attack the Pentagon.
As if this plot wasn’t frightening enough, cutting edge research out of the University of Texas at Austin has revealed yet more security vulnerabilities. Specifically, researchers from the Cockrell School of Engineering led by Dr. Todd Humphreys proved that civilian unmanned aerial systems can be hacked into and hijacked with a relatively small investment of money and time. These findings are alarming and have revealed a gaping hole in the security of using unmanned aerial systems domestically. Now is the time to ensure these vulnerabilities are mitigated to protect our aviation system as the use of unmanned aerial systems continues to grow.
The Department of Homeland Security mission is to protect the homeland. Unfortunately, DHS seems either disinterested or unprepared to step up to the plate to address the proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Systems in US air space, the potential threats they pose to our national security, and the concerns of our citizens of how drones flying over our cities will be used including protecting civil liberties of individuals under the Constitution. For example, indiscussions with my Subcommittee staff prior to this hearing, Department officials repeatedly stated the Department does not see this function (domestic use of drones) as part of their mission and has no role in domestic unmanned aerial systems. I strongly disagree.
DHS’s lack of attention about this issue is incomprehensible. It should not take a 9/11 style attack by a terrorist organization such as Hezbollah or a lone wolf inspired event to cause DHS to develop guidance addressing the security implications of domestic drones. It should not take a hearing to force DHS to develop policy when it comes to the security of our homeland.
What it should take is responsible leadership willing to recognize a potential threat and take the initiative. DHS lacks that initiative. I am concerned DHS is reverting back to a pre-9/11 mindset, which the 9/11 Commission described as a lack of imagination in identifying threats and protecting the homeland.
We are disappointed DHS declined to testify today. This is simply another example of how DHS leadership is failing to get ahead of the curve on an issue which directly impacts the security of the United States. I hope that our witnesses’ testimony will be a call to action for the Department. During today’s testimony, we look forward to learning more about the security issues related to the domestic use of drones and what DHS needs to do to prepare for their widespread use."
Image Credit: LaserMotive
Company Contact Info:
Lockheed Martin Skunk Works Contacts:
Raytheon Small Tactical Munition (STM) Laser-Guided Mini-Gluide Bomb/Precision-Guided Munition with Semi-Active Laser-Seeker and GPS/INS Guidance for Close Air Support (CAS) and Ground-Attack Missions
BCB/AAI SQ-4 RECON Nano UAS/UAV (NUAS/NUAV) Bat-Like Unmanned Spy-Copter Stealth Drone Aircraft for “Over the Hill” Observation and Reconnaissance: Special Operations Forces (SOF) Get a New (Small) Backpackable/Manpackable Quadcopter VTOL Eye in the Sky…Maybe (SOFIC 2012 Video!)
SpotterRF Radar Backpack Kit (or “Backpack Radar Kit”): Compact, Lightweight Backpackable/Manpackable Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) Motion-Tracking Perimeter Surveillance Radar (PSR) System for Military Special Operations Forces (SOF) Perimeter Security and Force Protection Applications (SOFIC 2012 Demo Video!)
MBDA TiGER (Tactical Grenade Extended Range) Small UAS/UAV (SUAS/SUAV)/Mini-Flying Bomb/”Kamikaze Drone” for Tactical Reconnaissance and Precision-Kill Missions is Low-Observable, Seriously Lethal: Kitty’s got a temper!
AeroVironment (AV) Switchblade Backpackable/Manpackable “Kamikaze Drone” SUAV/Mini-UAS (Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle/Mini-Unmanned Aircraft System) “Over-the-Ridge” Precision-Kill Weapon: Tactical Reconnaissance Meets Low-Order-Detonation Lethality
Prioria Robotics Maveric Flexible-Wing Mini-UAS (Mini-Unmanned Aircraft System) at SOFIC 2011: Manpackable, Throwable SUAV (Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) with Flexible/Bendable Wing! (Photos and Video!)
Heat-Seeking Missile Killer: Northrop Grumman Guardian Anti-Missile Laser System/Missile Defense System (MDS)/Counter-MANPADS Aircraft Pod (Military and Commercial Aircraft) vs. Russian KBM Igla-S (SA-24) “9M342″ Man-Portable/Packable Fire-and-Forget Surface-to-Air Missile System/MANPADS.