Would a Logistically designed UAS
dangerously increase the Logistical Footprint Army?
With the use of unmanned systems on the rise designed to go above and beyond the call of duty and keep as many of America's precious resources out of harm’s way, several arguments have been made discouraging the use of unmanned systems. Although there are many articles that praise the performance of surveillance UASs like the RQ-11 Raven and the Wasp that are used primarily in Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance missions. A couple of problems that are currently plaguing researches & developers are how to reduce the logistical footprint, cost and still make it can effective asset on the battlefield. The military is now considering fielding a UAS designed for supply missions like the Kaman K-MAX largely developed by Lockheed Martin. Now I'm fully aware that such logistical design could very well enable the military to complete dangerous resupply missions, however the question should posed if this unmanned system will increase our logistical footprint in regards to more support equipment that will be needed in conjunction with this unmanned system. I ask this question to really ask the question of how we can effectively transport and deploy this unmanned system without creating more problems for our military logistically.
If we take time to compare the lift capacities of the aircraft system the UH-60 Blackhawk against newly designed unmanned K-Max, the UH-60 Blackhawk has 4.5 tons to 2 tons advantage over the K-Max. Researches and developers are saying that although there may be a disparity in the lift capacity against the UH-60 Blackhawk this unmanned system will still keep soldiers out of hostile territory. However in reality many of these unmanned systems do not have weapons installed to deter enemy fire resulting in many of them being shot down. I had a chance to interview some junior level officers to conduct a stakeholder analysis about the unmanned systems they had to chance to work with in theater. From those interviews, I gathered that these unmanned systems are very expensive due to their sophisticated designs and the sensitive technology they use. In addition to using these company level assets, most of the junior officers experienced frustration with having to go on a separate mission just to recover the UAS after it was shot down in enemy territory. The problem that we need to answer in the future is how we can effectively design and use the Unmanned Aircraft Systems is such a capacity that if unfortunate circumstances take place we do not risk the lives of our soldiers to recover these systems.
This summer I went on a AIAD out to San Diego with the company General Atomics (http://www.ga.com/). This was a great experience for me and I learned a lot about UAS. One the main problems that the company has seen with leasing these powerful systems out to the military is that some of the solder's that are operating the systems do not know how to adequately use them. This may in fact could possibly tie right to your results for the interviews. The UAS is a very powerful and useful system. I feel that the benefit from them far out weighs its cost. I do however feel that something needs to be put in place to possibly have soldiers be better trained on the system before using them in theater (b/c they are rather expensive :) )
ReplyDelete