USAF Remotely Piloted Aircraft Future:
2013-2047
Lt Gen Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret)
Former Deputy Chief of Staff Intelligence,
Surveillance and Reconnaissance
(some updates Sep 2015)
1
Agenda
 Remotely
 Demand
 AF
Piloted Aircraft
and Challenges
RPA Future
 Domains
& Environments…
 Implications
& Perceptions
2
MQ-1/MQ-9 CAP
~168 Total Personnel
Leadership
Admin &
Overhead
GCS
PPSL
GDT
MX
Pilots
Sensors
Msn
Coord
Processing, Exploitation,
Dissemination (PED)
Mission Control
Aircraft
Personnel
Pilots
Sensors
Maintenance
Msn Coordinator
Leadership
Admin/Overhead
Other Equip
Ground Station
MX
FMV
Unclassified
SIGINT
Pilots
GCS
Launch & Recovery
0 Aircraft
43 Personnel
7†
Pilots
7†
Sensors
8
Maintenance
5
2
14
1 Other Equip
1
Ground Station
Satellite Link
Data Terminal
4
59
3
3
53
Processing
Exploitation
Dissemination (PED)
Personnel
FMV Crew
SIGINT
Maintenance
Sensors
66
24‡
20
22
MX
3
1
1
1
* Additional CAPs co-located require ~80% less MX, ops/PED personnel remain the same
† Surge numbers, steady state = 10 each
‡ Does not include backshop Personnel
3
Growth in Remotely
Piloted Aircraft (RPA)
Growth in RPA Combat Air Patrols

2004 = 5
70

2005 = 8
60

2006 = 11

2007 = 18
50

2008 = 33
40

2009 = 39

2011 = 60
30

2012 = 57
20

2013 = 62

2014 = 65
10
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Insatiable demand with no defined end state
4
MQ-1/MQ-9 History of Surges
• RPA Normalization Delayed
• Extended Assignment Freeze thru FY11
• 7 CAPs pulled 18 months Forward
• 17RS Increased CAPs
• Increased FTU training #s
• Stand up MQ-9 FTU in NM,
UAS WIC and CA ANG FTU
• Assignment Freeze Cont’d
• Reduced aircrew CAP ratios
• Delay RPA Weapons School
• Recall Qualified Supervisors
• Ops Support Contractors
• 2d yr ARC Mobilization
• Cont. assignment freeze
• 179 to 365 day TDYs
• Assignment Freeze
• Additional Mobilization
• Extended Tours
• Crew Recall
• Mobilized ANG
• Curtailed Test
10 Surge Actions since 2007
5
• Reconstitution
Attributes of Remotely Piloted
Aircraft (RPA)

Persistence - ability to loiter over a target for long time periods
for ISR and/or opportunity to strike enemy target

Undetected penetration / operation

Operations in dangerous environments

Can be operated remotely, so fewer personnel in combat zones ―
projects power without projecting vulnerability

Integrates “find, fix, finish” sensor and shooter capabilities on one
platform
6
21st Century Challenges:
Dealing With Data Growth

Sensor technology rapidly expanding ISR capacity

Analysis and exploitation tools need to keep pace with
sensor development and deployment
Swimming in Sensors…
Need to Avoid Drowning in Data…
Integrity - Service - Excellence
7
Wide Area Airborne Surveillance (WAAS)
Increment 2
Gorgon Stare
Increment 1
Gorgon Stare
FMV
MQ-1
Observe single target
Single ROVER / OSRVT
MQ-9
MQ-9
Wide area coverage area
10-12 independent ROVER queries
and potentially 50-60 chip outs through
the GORGON STARE ground station
Better area overage and resolution
10-12 independent ROVER queries
and potentially 50-60 chip outs through
the GORGON STARE ground station
8
Motion Imagery Spots
Why “CAPs” Should Not be Used as a
Measure of ISR Sufficiency
Increment 2
GORGON STARE
Increment 1
GORGON STARE
34 CAPs
39 CAPs
49 CAPs
50 CAPs
62 CAPs
65 CAPs
9
How to Get the Most ISR Soonest:
Focus on “Output” Instead of “Input”
Motion Imagery Spots
WAAS
Program
Of record
WAAS
QRC 2
WAAS
QRC 1
36 CAPs
44 CAPs
59 CAPs
WAAS
Program
Of record
50/62 CAPs 50/65 CAPs 50/65 CAPs 50/65 CAPs 50/65 CAPs
10
Air Force RPA Vision:
Tenets of RPA Evolution

RPA compelling where the human is a
limitation to mission success

Seamless manned and unmanned
systems integration

Automation is key

“Integrated Systems” approach

Modularity = Flexibility

Robust, agile, redundant C2 enables
supervisory control (“man on the loop”)

Solutions are linked and must be
synchronized

Survivable in contested airspace
11
Perspectives on RPA Pilots

RPA are not ubiquitous—the Army RPA force is
significantly different from the AF: don’t fall into the
trap of equating the two...

The AF already has enlisted operators flying UAS’s —
the same category that makes up over 99% of what
the Army operates—small UAVs



AF needs to fully explore alternatives to operate RPA
to meet: increased RPA demand; rated management
challenges; and appropriate levels of responsibility—
however, this must be accomplished with a view to
the future not the past
FAA, ICAO, and DOD, regulatory and safety
requirements same for RPA as manned aircraft
Level of responsibility should dictate level of
qualification in combat
USAF Med/Lg RPA: 312
Army Med UAS: 92
1
23%
USA 23%
2
77%
USAF 77%
Army
Small UAS: 7910
Medium UAS: 92
SUAS
1%
MUAS
99%
RPA operation should be commensurate with the capabilities
of the particular system; the level of responsibility involved;
and the implications of that particular systems’ employment.
Service Distinctions
Air Force: blue/left Army: green/right
Weapons Used in Combat to Date
*30 Hellfire shot in test
4 Viper Strike, 13 Hellfire
922 Hellfire, 213 GBU-12
(105 lb)
(500 lb)
(55 lb)
(105 lb)
* UAS strike capable – not primary msn
Composition of Inventory
Small RPA: 244
Med/Large RPA: 312
AF Med/Lg RPA: 312
Army Med/Lg RPA: 92
Med/Large
UAS
56%
Army
23%
Small UAS
44%
Predator: 134
Reaper: 178
Global Hawk: 23
Wasp/Raven/Puma: 244
AF
77%
Most Large/Medium RPA in AF
CAO: 28 Jul 10
Small RPA: 7910
Medium RPA: 92
Hunter:
42
PUMA: 969
Warrior A: 9
Grey Eagle 83
Raven: 6525
Shadow: 416
AF RPA Enterprise:
Remote Split Operations Global Operations
Anderson AFB
• RQ-4
Grand Forks AFB
• RQ-4
Osan AB
• DGS 3
ND ANG
Hector IAP
• MQ-1
Ellsworth AFB
Whiteman AFB
• MQ-9
• MQ-1
Beale AFB
• RQ-4
• DGS 2
Creech AFB
• MQ-1
• MQ-9
OH ANG
Springfield
• MQ-1
TN ANG
Nashville IAP
• MQ-9
AFSOC
Cannon AFB
• MQ-1
• MQ-9
CA ANG
March ARB
AZ ANG
• MQ-9
Davis-Monthan AFB
• MQ-1
Holloman AFB (FTU)
• MQ-1
Hickam AFB
• MQ-9
• DGS 5
NY ANG
Syracuse
• MQ-9
PA ANG
Horsham
• MQ-9
Langley AFB
• DGS 1
Ramstein AB
• DGS 4
TX ANG
AFSOC (AFR)
Ellington Field
• MQ-9
• MQ-1
•Hurlburt Field
RQ-4 Global Hawk
Feeds to DGS
MQ-9 Reaper
United States C2 distribution
MQ-1 Predator
Global C2 distribution
Optimizing Combat Capability with Reduced Footprint in Harm’s Way
NAS Sigonella
• RQ-4
14
Power of the Network
DGS-4
Ramstein AB
DGS-3
Osan AB
MA
DGS-2
Beale AFB
NV UT
IN
KS
AL
12 AF
DGS-5
Hickam AFB
DGS-1
Langley AFB
AR
AFSOC
DGS
Active Duty DCGS Sites
Partner NAFs
ARC/ANG Partners
Distributed Sites
Active Duty DCGS:US/Combined Ops
DGS LNOs
RC-N
RC-C
RC-E
RC-W/S/SW
Combined Air
EXPED
Ops Center
Inherent flexibility to rapidly focus local & global ISR capabilities
to meet theater and national priority requirements
15
AF RPA Flight Plan:
Vision for an unmanned future
An Air Force with…

Remotely piloted aircraft fully
integrated across the full range of
operations

Automated control and modular
“plug-and-play” payloads

Joint RPA solutions and teaming

An informed industry and
academia – knowing where we are
going and what technologies to
invest in….
Capabilities-based Air Force RPA vision thru 2047:
Doctrine, Organization, Training, Material, Leadership,
Personnel, Facilities
16
AF RPA Flight Plan:
Mission sets for RPA
FY09
Today
FY47
Current
Capability
Shortfalls
NANO/MICRO
EA
GAP
Indoor recon, indoor lethal/non-lethal, indoor comm, cyber attack, Swarming
Nano
WASP III
Personal ISR, Lethal, SIGINT, Cyber/EW, Counter RPA, Auto-sentry
Family of Transformers
Small
Raven
Scan Eagle
NextGen – Multi-Mission
Tier II STUAS
ISR, Comm Relay, Lethal/Non-lethal, Cyber/EW, SEAD, SIGINT, Low Altitude Pseudo-Sats
ISR, Comm Relay, Lethal, SIGINT
Air-Launched SUAS
Close-in ISR, Lethal, SIGINT/DF
Fighter
Recap
MQ-1B
Medium
“fighter size”
MQ-9
EA/ISR/CAS
MQ-Ma
MQ-Mb
MQ-Mc
Large
Aircraft
Recap
EO/IR/SAR
RQ-4 Blk 10/20
SEAD/AAR-T Counterair, Missile Defense
MP-RTIP
RQ-4 Blk 40
Large
“tanker size”
RQ-4 Blk 30
RJ/E-X C/KC-X
MQ-La
+ASIP
MQ-Lb
NGLRS
MQ-Lc
Interoperable RPA C2
High Altitude Long Endurance
Special RPA
ISR/EA
Low Observable
Hypersonic
17
AF RPA Flight Plan:
Small “Family of Systems”
Nano
Bio-Mechanicals
- Indoor Reconnaissance
- Indoor
- Indoor
Lethal/Non-lethal
Lethal
- Indoor Comm
- Cyber attack
- Swarming
Nano
Navigate / communicate
inside buildings
Micro
Close-in reconnaissance
& situational awareness
Wasp III
“SUAS Family of Transformers”
- Personal ISR
- Lethal
- SIGINT
- Cyber/EW
- Counter-UAV
Lite Machine’s
- AutoSentries Conceptual SUAS
Irregular Warfare
Man-portable
- ISR
- Time-Sensitive
- Lethal
Family of Expendables
Raven B
Increasing across all mission sets
Switchblade SUAS
Technical Demonstration
Air-Launched
- Close-in ISR
- Lethal
- SIGINT/DF
Multi-Mission
- ISR
- Force protection
- FID
Now
18
Anti-Access Support
Voyeur SUAS
Finder
SUAS
Scan Eagle
Technical Demonstration
Tier II Joint
- ISR
- Comm Relay
GT Aero
- Lethal Conceptual Bandit SUAS
- SIGINT
Artist
- Close-In ISR
Conception
- Expendable JammersFuture AL-SUAS
- Lethal
- Counter Air
- Precision Clandestine Resupply
- Cyber attack
Next Gen Multi-Mission
- ISR
- Communications Relay
- Lethal / Non-lethal
- Electronic/Cyber Attack/SEAD
- SIGINT/Low Altitude Pseudo-Sats
- New Mission areas
Future
18
AF RPA Flight Plan:
- Collection – SIGINT/FMV
- CAS
MQ-Xa
EW
ISR
CAS
Comm Relay
Modular Payloads
MQ-1
Modular Payloads
Medium Systems
Collection
Dissemination
Specialized ISR
AAR-R
MQ-Xb
EW/ISR
CAS
Comm Relay
Collection
Dissemination
Specialized ISR
AAR-R&T
SEAD
Air Interdiction
Counter Air
CSAR
Missile Defense
Strategic Attack
MQ-9
MQ-9
- Collection
- SIGINT/FMV
- Wide Area Airborne ISR
- SAR/GMTI
- CAS
MQ-Xc
Modular Payloads
- Collection – SIGINT/FMV
- CAS
EW
ISR
CAS
Comm Relay
Collection
Dissemination
Specialized ISR
AAR-T
SEAD
Air Interdiction
Aeromedical Evacuation
Personnel Recovery
Now
Future
19
AF RPA Flight Plan:
MQ-Lc
RQ-4 (Blk 20/30/40)
- Collection – ISR
- Basic SAR
- Basic EO/IR
Modular Payloads
MQ-La
Now
EW
ISR
Command and Control
Airborne Moving Target Indicator
Ground Moving Target Indicator
Information Integration
AAR-R & T
Airlift
Humanitarian Assistance
Strategic Attack
Global Strike
CAS
Air Mobility
Airlift
MQ-Lb
EW
ISR
Command and Control
Airborne Moving Target Indicator
Ground Moving Target Indicator
Information Integration
Modular Payloads
RQ-4 (Blk10)
- Collection:
- Block 20
- Enh SAR
- Enh EO/IR
-BACN
- Block 30
- Adv SIGINT
- Block 40
- MP-RTIP Radar
- GMTI and concurrent SAR
- High Range Resolution
- No EO/IR or SIGINT
Modular Payloads
Large Systems
EW
ISR
Command and Control
Airborne Moving Target Indicator
Ground Moving Target Indicator
Information Integration
AAR-R & T
Airlift
Humanitarian Assistance
AAR-R
Future
20
Next Generation RPA Key Concepts

Fully modular and
upgradable


Maximize sensor &
weapons flexibility
High subsonic dash

21
Sensor Truck
Size, Weight and Power


Support future roles and
mission needs
Tanker
Force packaging and
responsiveness

Target area persistence

Survivable in denied or
contested environments
Missile Truck
Advanced ISR Capabilities
Open Sensor Bus
Open architecture allowing modular sensors to
be integrated quickly and inexpensively
WAAS
LADAR
Hyperspectral
Hyperspectral
SIGINT
Situational Awareness
SAR
DAS
Multi-stream
Wide Area Sensor
22
Common Airframe with
Modular Mission Bays
Pallets
Tanker
Tactical Transport
Cost effective, multi-mission
solution
- Transformable to optimize force mix
per phase of conflict
- Simpler common/modular design
- One aircraft design effort
- Lower average production cost
- Lower life cycle costs
Potentially
streamlines
acquisition &
sustainment
ISR
Weapons platform
Potential Savings - 25% in total aircraft inventory
23
AF RPA
Modular Payloads
MQ-9
MQ-9
- Collection – SIGINT/FMV
- CAS
- Collection
- SIGINT/FMV
- Wide Area Airborne ISR
- SAR/GMTI
- CAS

Increasing multi-mission capability
enabled by:
 Automation, modularity, and
interoperability
MQ-Xc
MQ-Xb
MQ-Xa
MQ-1
AAR-T
Airlift
Air Interdiction
Aeromedical Evacuation
Personnel Recovery
Modular Payloads
EWSEAD
ISR
CAS
Comm Relay
Collection
Dissemination
Specialized ISR
AAR-R
Modular Payloads
Modular Payloads
- Collection – SIGINT/FMV
- CAS
Counter Air
CSAR
Missile Defense
Strategic Attack
24
AF RPA Modularity and Flexibility
Day 1, Phase 0
Day 5, Phase II
Day 7, Phase III
Day 12, Phase IV
Day 30, Phase V
Deploys with cargo
Electronic Attack
Refueling and
Electronic Attack
Armed ISR CAPS
Theater comm relay
ISR support of
Irregular Warfare
26.352”
13.931”
14.908”
26.352”
13.931”
14.908”
Reconfigures with
SIGINT / IMINT
Suppression of
Enemy Air
Defense and ISR
“Loyal Wingman”
 CAS
 Interdiction
Palletized Cargo
Movements
Modularity enables optimized RPA mission reconfiguration
in the field
25
Autonomy
Airpower focused on killing targets
WWII
Vietnam
Gulf War
1,000 planes
(B-17)
30 planes
(F-4)
1 plane
(F-117)
Focus now on finding enemy
2011
2012
(Current system)
(MAC)
1 plane
(F-16)
2022
(MAC + 50% auto)
Distant
Future
4 planes
(Semi-autonomous)
Swarm
(Autonomous
RPA)
Mission
Director
Loyal Wingman
10,000 crew
60 crew
1 crew
1 crew
1 crew
Mission
Commander
1 Target
1 Target
2 Targets
6 Targets
32 Targets
More Targets
??? Targets
Mass Aircraft
Tactical
Laser
GPS
Linked
Collaboration
In-the-Loop
In-the-Loop
In-the-Loop
In-the-Loop
MAC
On-theLoop
Collaborative
Directing
Modularity, automation, and interoperability will multiply the effectiveness
and efficiency
operations,
26
I n t e gof
r iacquisition,
ty - Servic
e - E x c e l land
e n cmaintenance
e
Autonomy – Multi-Aircraft Control
Potential Manpower Savings
2011


50 CAPs
 50 MQ-9 CAPs
 + 7 a/c in constant transit
10 pilots per CAP
 500 pilots required
 + 70 pilots to transit a/c
570 Total Pilots


2014
TBD
(MAC)
(MAC + 50% auto)
50 CAPs
 50 MQ-9 CAPs
 2 CAPs per MAC GCS
 1 transit per MAC GCS
5 pilots per CAP
 250 Pilots required
 + 0 to transit aircraft
250 Total Pilots

50 CAPs
 50 MQ-9 CAPs on orbit

25 CAPs automated

25 CAPs in MAC (5 pilots/CAP)
 125 pilots required
 + 25 auto-msn monitor pilots
 + 0 to transit aircraft
150 Total Pilots
56% Manpower Savings
64% Manpower Savings
Auto
Transit
Surge Capacity
Transit
Surge Capacity
Surge Capacity
MAC = 1 pilot can fly up to 4 a/c
Surge Capacity
27
Enabling Affordable
Multi-mission Flexibility
Teams of People
+ Teams of Aircraft
+ Any Payloads
Fractionated, Composable
Capability
28
RPAs: Automated Partners/Loyal Wingman
One-to-Many Platforms
Loyal Wingman
29
Teams: One-to-Many Operators
Loyal Wingman
“App Store”
Multilateration
Multi-Aircraft Control
Immersive
Multimodal Fusion
&
Cross-Cueing
EO/IR
SAR
Payloads
30
Technology
Challenge Areas
Advanced Control Segment
and Mission Management
Operations
 Sense and Avoid
 Air Refueling
 Terminal Operations
 Multi-ship Cooperative Teaming
 Distributed Operations
 Manned-unmanned Teaming
Flexible, Interoperable, Growth-Capable
C2 & Information Architectures
Standard & Open
Payload Interfaces
Mission & CONOPS Dependent
Displays & C2
Payloads as Services
Multifunctional Apertures
Integrity - Service - Excellence
31
Next Steps: Technology Maturation
Demonstrations

Sense and Avoid, File and Fly

Terminal Area and Ground Operations

Reliable, Certifiable System Software

Predictive Displays/Dynamic Maneuvering
REC
OVE
R
D
i
v
e
Tur
n
LT
Har
d
LT
B
R
K
L
T
Har
d
Har
LT
d
RT
RT
Tur
n
RT
Ho
ok
RT
Tur
n
Tur
LT
n
C
L
E
A
R
Har
d
RT
Ho
ok
LT
Ho
ok
Ho
LT
ok
C
li
m
b
B
R
K
R
T
C
li
m
b
RT
D
i
v
e
Integrity - Service - Excellence
32
Sense and Avoid Vision
Adaptive Flight Procedures

Safety, Responsiveness

Air Traffic Control/Mgmt

Operational Transparency
Adaptive Mission Operations

Catapult &
Arrestment Tests
Sequenced
with Manned
Aircraft
Ordnance
Loading
Selecting
Runway
Turnoff
SAA Enables:

Increased info collection

Coordinated missions

Cooperative target engagement

International Operations
Sense & Avoid
Ground Hazards
Vertical UAS
Operations
Integrity - Service - Excellence
Next Steps: Technology Maturation
Demonstrations


Cooperative Engagement
Cooperative ISR
 Comm Relay
 Distributed Search
 Combined Sensor functions
 IP Based Flight and Sensor Control
Integrity - Service - Excellence
34
Communicating Across Threat Environments
JFACC/CAOC
BLOS C2 / Data between
RPAs / CAOC via Wideband SATCOM;
Bandwidth / Transmissions restricted in AOR
Global Hawk/
Bams
USAF deep
attack forces
Carrier
Strike
Group
AWACS / E-2
Relayed SATCOM and LOS to
Forward platforms via RPAs,
E-3, Airborne Gateway, etc
F-35
Mission Control
Element
Aerial Refueling
Tanker / RPA Local
Network
LOS C2 / Data via Directional LPI
Links to Anti-Access Platforms
Integrity - Service - Excellence
Ground Forces/SOF
Communicating Across Threat Environments
JFACC/CAOC
BLOS C2 / Data between
RPAs / CAOC via Wideband SATCOM;
Bandwidth / Transmissions restricted in AOR
Global Hawk/
Bams
USAF deep
attack forces
Carrier
Strike
Group
AWACS / E-2
Relayed SATCOM and LOS to
Forward platforms via RPAs,
E-3, Airborne Gateway, etc
F-35
Mission Control
Element
Aerial Refueling
Tanker / RPA Local
Network
LOS C2 / Data via Directional LPI
Links to Anti-Access Platforms
Integrity - Service - Excellence
Ground Forces/SOF
THE FUTURE OF UNMANNED AIR POWER:
IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY & STRATEGY

Ethical implications of RPA use
Today counterintuitive…more ‘ethical oversight’ than manned aircraft
 In future will become a significant issue with greater autonomy…


Cultural implications



Accuracy/collateral damage



Common perceptions out of sync with reality…
RPA technology enthusiastically embraced inside the Air Force…
Air delivered weapons most accurate means of force application
Taliban number one cause of civilian casualties in AF/PAK
Are RPAs subject to excessive exuberance?

While introducing enormous capability and concept advantages, RPAs
are not a panacea for air warfare nor replacement for manned aviation
 Vulnerability of RPAs in contested/denied airspace is significant
37
Syrian Territory Photos by RPA
Refugees, Syrian-Turkish border
Integrity - Service - Excellence
Syrian Territory Photos by RPA
Khirbet Ghazaleh, Syria, Aug-Sep 2015
Integrity - Service - Excellence
USAF Remotely Piloted Aircraft Future:
2013-2047
Lt Gen Dave Deptula, USAF (Ret)
Former Deputy Chief of Staff Intelligence,
Surveillance and Reconnaissance
(some updates Sep 2015)
40