Department of Defense Report to Congress on Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training, Operations, and Sustainability


Page 1


Department of Defense
Report to Congress on
Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Training, Operations, and
Sustainability



Under Secretary ofDefense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics



April 2012



Preparation ofthis report/study cost the Department ofDefense a total of approximately
$17,000 in Fiscal Years 2011 - 2012.
ReflD: 7-3C47E5F




REPORTING REQUIREMENT:



This report is being provided to the congressional defense committees as requested in House
Armed Services Committee Report 111-491, accompanying the Ike Skelton National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.



TASK: Report on Future Unmanned Aerial Systems Training, Operations, and
Sustainability.
The rapidgrowth ofUAS inventories to meet operational demands raises a number of
questions concerning the military services' ability to support these inventories in the near-
and long-term. In particular, to support their UAS inventories, the military services must
train sufficient numbers ofpersonnel to operate and maintain the aircraft, provide adequate
facilities and other infrastructure to sustain them, andprovide sufficient access to airspace
and training ranges to train militarypersonnel within the United States and at military bases
overseas.
The committee directs the Secretary ofDefense to provide a report to the congressional
defense committees with itsfiscal year 2012 budget request that describes the military
services'plans to support their current andplanned UAS inventories. The report should, at a
minimum, discuss:
(1) Current UAS inventory levels andplanned UAS inventory levelsfor eachfiscal year
through 2017;
(2) Plans to supply the number ofpersonnel neededto operate the aircraft andsensor
payloads and to perform UAS maintenance;
(3) Current andplanned UAS basing andother operating locations;
(4) Progress made in providing the number offacilities neededfor UAS inventories to
support operations and training and thefunding requiredfor any additionalfacilities; and
(5) The availability ofairspace, ranges, and other infrastructure at each planned UAS
location, and a description ofthe steps that the servicesplan to take to overcome any
limitations that adversely impact UAS training.




Executive Summary



The Department ofDefense (DoD) continues to increase its investment in unmanned
aircraft systems



(VAS)



to meet battlefield commanders' demand for their unique capabilities.
The emphasis on long-endurance, unmanned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
(lSR) assets - many with strike capabilities - is a direct reflection ofrecent operational
experience and further Combatant Commander demands. This increase in demand has
resulted in a large number ofUAS capable ofa wide range ofmissions. This large number
offielded UAS has also driven a strong demand for access within the National Airspace
System (NAS). This need for airspace access to test new systems, train operators, and
conduct continental United States (CONVS)-based missions has quickly exceeded the current
airspace available for military operations. The situation will only be exacerbated as units
return from overseas contingencies.
Currently, DoD



VAS



operations conducted outside ofRestricted, Warning, and
Prohibited areas are authorized under a temporary Certificate ofWaiver or Authorization
(COA) or waiver from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or under limited
conditions outlined in the 2007 DoD-FAA Memorandum ofAgreement (MoA). DoD is
actively engaged in coordinating efforts on behalfofthe Military Departments and
Combatant Commands to shorten and simplify the FAA COA process to allow greater
unmanned access to the NAS, with direct engagement through the interagency



VAS



Executive Committee (ExCom). The



VAS



ExCom is a joint committee composed ofsenior
executives from four member organizations: DoD, FAA, the Department ofHomeland
Security (DHS), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The
mission ofthe



VAS



ExCom is to enable increased and ultimately routine access ofFederal



VAS



engaged in public aircraft operations into the NAS to support operational, training,
development, and research requirements ofFAA, DoD, DHS, and NASA. DoD is also
pursuing ground-based and airborne sense-and-avoid efforts to eventually supplant or
significantly reduce the need for COAs. In the future, DoD will continue to utilize
Restricted, Warning, and Prohibited areas but will also continue to develop the necessary
technologies to access other airspace safely and in accordance with applicable federal
aviation regulations.
This document outlines planned force capability growth and forecasted attrition of



VAS



aircraft through FY 2017; Military Department personnel required for training and
operations; personnel and aircraft basing intentions; and required military construction
(MILCON) and airspace requirements for bases hosting



VAS.



Within the report, the Military
Departments provide current and planned inventories, personnel requirements to operate and
maintain the systems, planned bases and operating locations, and progress with facilities to
support inventories. Also, the report addresses the airspace integration challenge through
implementation ofthe DoD Airspace Integration Plan, mUlti-agency collaboration, and
ongoing negotiations with FAA. The Military Departments have a cohesive plan to address
basing, funding, and manning in support offorecasted training and operations.



11




Report
INTRODUCTION
Effective employment of



VAS



worldwide is an integral part ofDoD military
operations.



VAS



operations in the NAS are required to ensure direct mission support to
Combatant Commanders to both train and maintain ready forces and pursue operational test
activities for



VAS.



Additionally,



VAS



are utilized to conduct Homeland Defense/Homeland
Security and, when approved by the Secretary ofDefense, Defense Support ofCivil
Authorities (DSCA) missions (e.g., disaster relief, search and rescue). Accomplishing these
missions requires airspace to efficiently train, develop, and support



VAS



operations. This
report describes the Military Departments'



VAS



inventories, personnel, sustainment, and site
plans to support and execute



V



AS missions from now through FY 2,017.




SECTION 1 - Current VAS inventory levels and pial/ned VAS inventory levels/or each
jiscalyear through FY 2017:



The following table describes the current



UAS



program of record inventory levels
planned through FY 2017, net of attrition.



S},stem Designation/Name



t



FY12 FY13 FY
FY15 F'l 16 FY



Air Force
MQ-1B
Predator



163
152
141
130
121
115
110



MQ-9A
Reaper



70
96
135
167
199
229
256



RQ-4B



*



Global Hawk



23
23
15
15
15
15
15



Army
RQ-11B
Raven



5394
6294
6528
6717 6921 7074
7074



RQ-7B
Shadow



408
408
408
408
408
408
408



MQ-SB
Hunter



45
45
45
45
45
45
45



MQ-1C
Gray Eagle



19
45
74
110
138
152
152



Navy
RQ-4A
Global Hawk



5
5
0
0
0
0
0



MQ-4C
BAMS



0
0
2
2
5
9
13



MQ-SB
FirescouWTUAV



5
9
14
18
25
32
37



RQ-21A
STUAS



0
1
2
3
4
4
4



Scan Eagle



122
122
122
122
122
122
122



X-47B
UCAS-O



2
2
2
2
0
0
0



UCLASS



0
0
0
0
2
2
4



Marine Corps
RQ-7B
Shadow



52
52
52
52
52
52
52



RQ-21A
STUAS



8
8
8
23
48
73
100



Table I: UAS Inventory Levels (FYI2 budgeted inventory with noted exception)



*



Reflects RQ-4B Block 20140



illventOlY



remaining after FY



2012



(Block 30 cancelled in President 's



2013



Budget
submission).



2




SECTION 2 - Plalls to supply the lIumber ofpersollllel lleeded to operate the aircraft amI
sensor payloads alld to perform VAS mailltellallce:
This section provides manpower planning by the Military Departments for the
necessary personnel to operate the aircraft and mission sensor. UAS pilots/operators
initial, continuation, upgrade, and proficiency/currency training sorties in the NAS. SllTIllar
requirements apply to sensor operators in their respective mission areas.
Air Force
As ofDecember 16, 20II, the manpower requirements for Remote Piloted Aircraft
(RPA) pilots and Sensor Operators (SO) to support 57 MQ-I/9 and 4 RQ-4 Combat Air
Patrols (CAPS)I, including operational, test, and training requirements, as well as appropriate
overhead and staffrequirements, were:



-------



MQ-l
MQ-9
RQ-4



Total
Pilots
1012
529
155
1696
SO
730
401
63
1194



1 able 2: RPA Crew Manpower Requirements



As ofDecember 16, 2011 , the number of trained RPA pilots and SOs available and
the resulting personnel shortfall to provide 57



MQ-1I9



and 4 RQ-4 CAPs, including
operational, test, and training requirements, as well as appropriate overhead and staff
requirements, was:



MQ-l
MQ-9 RQ-4



Total
Current
Shortfall
Pilots
726
455
177
1358



-338



SO
610
291
48
949
-245



..



I able 3: Current RPA Crew Mannlllg



AV;.lilnbility



The temporary shortfalls in aircrew manning were overcome by using a minimum of
seven aircrews vice the programmed ten aircrews per CAP and by prioritizing operational,
test, and training requirements above overhead and staff requirements.
Beginning on March 30, 201 1, the Air Force was tasked to provide additional CAPs
to support new contingency operations in Libya and a summer surge in Afghanistan. During
the fall and winter of2011 , the Air Force provided 60



MQ-1I9



CAPs and 4 RQ-4 CAPs. The
Air Force took the following actions in order to support this additional temporary surge:



I



MQ-I /9: 4 aircraft per combat air patrol (CAP) and 10 mission control element (MCE) crews per CAP; RQ-4:
3 aircraft per CAP, 15 pilots for MCE, 5 pilots for launch and recovery element (LRE) and 15 sensor operators
(SO) per orbit.



3




(a) Stood down a portion ofthe formal training to provide three CAPs;
(b) Mobilized Air Force Reserve (AFR) and Air National Guard (ANG) units to provide
two CAPs for 7 months;
(c) Resourced ANG CAP with volunteers; and
(d) Accelerated the early stand up oftwo planned CAPs.
These actions impacted the production of trained aircrews, requiring the Air Force to
reconstitute the force during FY 2012. On December 16,2011, the Air Force reduced
sourcing to 57



MQ-1/9



CAPs, allowing experienced aircrews to be reassigned to the formal
training units at Holloman AFB as instructors. Additionally, the Air Force will increase
hiring ofcontract instructors to augment uniformed instructors. These actions will enable the
Air Force to increase RPA aircrew manning to full strength at a sustainable rate.
The FY 2015 manpower requirements for RPA pilots and SOs to provide 65



MQ-1 /9



and 8 RQ-4 CAPs, including operational, test, and training requirements, as well as all
overhead and staff requirements, are:



-------



MQ-I
MQ-9
RQ-4
Total
Pilots
902
858
300
2060
SO
657
647
150
1454



-



rable 4: I-Y 201 5 RPA Crew ReqUirements



[n order to meet this RPA aircrew manpower requirement, the Air Force has
implemented two key initiatives. The first initiative created Undergraduate RPA Training
(URT) for RPA pilots with the 18X Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) as well as a distinct
training pipeline for RPA SOs with the I U AFSC. These programs solve the problem of
insufficient capacity in existing pipelines (Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) and IN
AFSC training) to meet RPA aircrew operational requirements. URT production is planned
at 60 for FY 2011 , 146 for FY 2012, and 168 in FY 2013-201 5, while the 1U training
pipeline is planned for 353 in FY 2011 , 327 in FY 2012, 255 in FY 2013, and 202 in
FY 2014-2016. The l8X and 1U career fields will comprise the majority ofthe RPA aircrew
force structure in the future. Until that time, the Air Force will continue to use traditional
pilots with the IIX AFSC and SOs with the IN and IA AFSCs to augment the RPA aircrew
requirement.
The second initiative increased the capacity of the



MQ-1 /9



Formal Training Units
(FTUs) in order to meet operational RPA requirements. There is currently one active duty
MQ-I FTU and one active duty MQ-9 FTU as well as a launch and recovery training
squadron. Additionally, there is an Air National Guard MQ-I FTU and an Air National
Guard MQ-9 FTU producing pilots in FY 2012. As the Air Force evolves toward an MQ-9
4




fleet, aircrew production focus will shift from MQ-1 to MQ-9, which will require standing up
an additional active duty MQ-9 FTU. The expected capacity ofthe MQ-1/9 FTUs will be
310 initial qualification MQ-1/9 aircrew and 30 MQ-1 to MQ-9 aircrew conversions in
FY 2012 and 360 initial qualification MQ-l/9 aircrew and 40 MQ-l to MQ-9 aircrew
conversions in FY 2013. These training slots support ActivelReserve Component and
foreign training requirements. For the RQ-4, there is one active duty FTU that has a capacity
of 72 pilots and 36 SOs per year. This RPA pilot training infrastructure and the associated
capacity will enable the Air Force to meet the operational RPA aircrew requirement and
continue to sustain the enterprise in the future.
Air Force RPA organizational level maintenance utilizes a combination ofmilitary
and Contracted Logistics Support (CLS) personnel in support ofoperations. Organizational-
level maintenance contractors primarily reside within the MQ-l community, performing both
home station and deployed maintenance actions alongside military maintenance technicians.
Military maintenance personnel currently perform the majority oforganizational level
maintenance within the MQ-9 community. MQ-l/9s require up to 30 military maintenance
personnel to stand-up an initial CAP. This number increases up to 65 military maintenance
personnel supporting up to five CAPs. MQ-l contractors gain efficiencies by conducting
Cross Utilization Training (CUT) with their personnel enabling the contractor to conduct
home station and deployed maintenance operations with a significantly smaller footprint.
The RQ-4 also utilizes a combination ofmilitary maintenance and CLS personnel to perform
the majority oforganizational-level maintenance actions. RQ-4s require up to 60 military
maintenance personnel per detachment to support operations. As with the MQ-l/9s,
contractors gain efficiencies by conducting CUT training with their personnel to reduce
footprint.
Original equipment manufacturers currently conduct all Air Force RPA depot-level
maintenance actions. A Business Case Analysis (BCA) to determirie a course ofaction for
switching to a more organic depot structure is underway within the MQ-l/9 community.
Preliminary findings will be concluded by June 2012. The Life Cycle Sustainment plan for
the RQ-4 is complete and awaiting final signatures. A BCA to determine a course ofaction
for switching to a more organic depot structure will follow in the near future.
Air Force Maintenance Career Field Managers conducted Utilization and Training
Workshops in April and May of2011 to determine training requirements for all aircraft
maintenance AFSCs with the exception ofWeapons. An interim mechanical RPA course
(Crew Chief, Engines and Hydraulics technicians) began in August 2011. For the long term,
robust mechanical and technical courses are currently under development with
implementation ofa mechanical course scheduled for August 2012.



Army



The Army uses three Military Occupation Specialties (MOS) to support UAS. Two
ofthese MOS, 15W Operator and 15E Repairer, are for enlisted Soldiers and one, 150U
Technician, is for a Warrant Officer. The exception to this is the small RQ-11B Raven
systems which are operated by any Soldier qualified through a IO-day flight training course.
5




The 15W Operator is qualified to fly the aircraft, operate the sensors, and
emplace/displace the system. Individual aircraft qualifications are tracked by an additional
skill identifier. The 15W is the feeder MOS for the 150U Technician MOS.
The 15E Repairer is responsible for the maintenance ofall parts ofthe UAS, to
include the aircraft, ground control stations, data links, and supporting equipment. The 15E,
like the 15W, has an additional skill identifier to denote specific system qualifications.
The 150U Warrant Officer provides leadership and expertise in the UAS unit. These
individuals interface with their higher headquarters and provide oversight ofaviation safety,
standardization, and maintenance programs.
Manning numbers are based on Unit Modified Table of Organizational Equipment
(MTOE) requirements. The exception to this is the RQ-II B Raven where the number of
trained personnel is at the discretion ofthe owning Commander. The numbers included in
this document for Raven are the minimum required.
MQ-IC MQ-5B RQ-7B RQ-llB Total
15E Operator



92



57
1307
N/A
1456
15W Mechanic
52
33
733
N/A
818
150U Warrant
20
12
168
N/A
200
Totlll
164
94
2208
3596



Table 5: Current Manpo\\'cr Requirements



MQ-IC MQ-5B RQ-7B RQ-llB Total
15E Operator
552
57
1448
N/A
2057
15W Mechanic
312



""



828
N/A
1173



.J.J



150U Warrant
120
12
184
N/A
316
Total
984
94
2460
4614



Table 6: FY 2015 Manpower ReqUirements



Due to the rapid growth ofthe Army UAS fleet, all th.ree ofthese MOS have been
stTessed to maintain pace with demand. To ensure wartime requirements are met, the Army
has prioritized the distribution ofUAS personnel to units preparing to deploy, followed by
new unit fielding and then other units. This prioritization has allowed the Army to meet
wartime requirements with well-trained and integrated units.
The Navy is currently conducting strategic plarming for the long term marlpower
required to operate and maintain its UAS.
Vertical Take Off and Landing Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VTUAV)-Littoral
Combat Ship (LCS): Detachments that operate from the LCS are known as composite
Aviation Detachments (AvDets). These composite AvDets operate and maintain both the
MH-60R or MH-60S and one or two MQ-8B Fire Scout aircraft. This minimally manned (4
6




officers, 19 enlisted) detachment structure cannot be split to operate the different
.
platforms independently. Therefore, the UAS portion ofLCS composite AvDet manrung



IS



not separate from traditional helicopter manning.
The MH-60NTUAV composite AvDets will support all LCS seaframes with a 3:3:1
rotation. Under the 3:3:1 plan, three aviation detachments ofpersonnel will use three AvDets
to support one LCS deployment. One A vDet will be deployed, one A vDet will be
completing training requirements as it prepares to deploy, and one AvDet will be conducting
turnover and upkeep training to maintain aviation proficiency having recently returned from
a deployment.
At the completion ofthe fleet response training plan (FRTP) cycle, personnel will
return to their squadrons for further assignment, in accordance with the squadron's
detachment loading, while MQ-8B airframes will be returned to the Contract Logistics Site
(CLS) base. Personnel will be managed within squadrons to ensure operational exposure and
experience is gained



in



both manned and unmanned assignments to enable a quality spread of
personnel, and to attain personal career progression milestones. This will promote VTUAV
community integration and ensure the community has a flexible manpower base to draw
upon when supporting various detachment configurations.



VTUAV-Special Operations Forces (SOF) ISR:



Navy is evaluating the manning structure
needed to provide a VTUAV -only aviation detachment. The leading proposal is to develop
unmanned detachments, or "UDets" from HQU-I0, the VTUAV fleet replacement
Nine detachments would be needed to support three constantly deployed UDets, totaling
approximately 336 additional personnel. Alternately, a separate expeditionary VTUAV
squadron could be organized to perform the same function but at higher personnel cost due to
the lack ofsynergy with an existing unit.



DAMS:



Personnel that will operate and maintain the.MQ-4C BAMS will transition from the
existing Maritime Patrol (P-3C Orion) community. The existing community will transition
from the P-3C to the P-8A Poseidon and the MQ-4C. At full operational capability in
FY 2020, it is estimated that 866 personnel will be needed for five worldwide BAMS orbits.



Marine Corps
U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) Shadow and STUAS:



Three active-duty and one reserve-duty
Marine Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (VMU) squadrons are manned at or near the required
Table ofOrganization (T/O) manning level of 193 Marines and Sailors. Each VMU is
comprised ofa headquarters element (40 personnel) and three individual RQ-7B
detachments, each comprised of51 Marines. Each RQ-7B detachment is capable of
independent operations, and contains all necessary intelligence, communications, flight
operations, and maintenance personnel. In 2012, an additional 81 Marines to support nine
RQ-21A STUAS systems will begin arriving at each active-duty VMU squadron. Each
RQ-21A STUAS detachment will contain nine Marines and be capable ofindependent UAS
flight operations with required host unit support.



7




SECTION 3 - Current amIplanned VAS basing and otlter operating locations:
The rapid increase in fielded UAS has created a strong demand for access within the
NAS and international airspace. The demand for airspace to test new systems and train UAS
operators has quickly exceeded the current airspace available for these activities.
I
below shows the projected number ofDoD UAS locations



in



the next 6 years, many Without
access to airspace compatible for military operations under the current regulatory
environment.



Figure I: Representative DoD



VAS



Locations



by



20 17



NAS access for UAS is currently limited primarily due to regulatory compliance
issues and interim policies. DoD UAS operations conducted outside of restricted, warning,
and prohibited areas are authorized only under a (temporary) eOA from the FAA. The eOA
process is adequate for enabling a small number offlights but does not provide the level of
airspace access necessary to accomplish the wide range of DoD UAS missions at current and
projected operational tempos (OPTEMPOs). This constraint will only be exacerbated as
combat operations shift from abroad and systems return to U.S. locations.
If DoD UAS do not have direct access to Restricted and Warning Areas (e.g., airfield
located within a restricted area), a eOA is required. Obtaining a eOA requires a significant
amount oftime and resources - both to complete an application and to work through the
FAA approval process. The Military Departments currently have 88 active eOAs at various
locations around the country, most of which provide access to a restricted or warning area.
Many restricted areas are small in size and will only accommodate a smaller sized UAS.
8




Table 7 lists the Departments' 110 potential UAS basing locations and the UAS likely to fly
at that location.
9




Ii



MQ4CBAMS



10




II




12



.



,,,..,.,. ',i:



USMC
RQ21A
NALF Fentress
USSOCOM
PUMAAE
USSOCOM
RQllB



USSOCOM



Wasp



USSOCOM
5100
WASHINGTON



Fort lewis



USA
RQllB
USA
RQ7B



McChord AFB



USSOCOM



PUMAAE



USSOCOM
ROllB



USSOCOM



Wasp



Yakima Training



ARNG
RQ7B
USSOCOM
MQlB



USSOCOM



MQ9A



WISCONSIN



Fort McCoy



ARNG
RQllB
ARNG
RQ7B



Camp Douglas



ANG
RQ7B



WYOMING



Camp Guernsey



ARNG
RQllB



GUAM



Anderson AFB



USAF



RQ4
USMC
RQ7B



USMC



RQ21A
PUERTO RICO



Salinas



ARNG
RQllB
OCEANIC
Worldwide Oceanic
USN
MQB



..



I able 7: Planned DoD VAS LocatIOns by



Stater rcrritory



*



Dilly block 20140 RQ-48 aircraft remain at Beale AFlJ after
FY 201



3



hudget



is



Gllthori=ed (Block 30s cancelled).




SECTION 4 - Progress made in providillg tfle IIlImber ojjacilities lIeededjor VAS
illvelltories to Sllpport operations alld trainillg alld tflejlllldillg requiredjor allY additiollal
jacilities:
Past, current, and future MILCON projects necessary to support UAS operations and
training are presented by each ofthe Military Departments below:
Air Force
The Air Force UAS MILCON chart (Table 8: Air Force UAS MILCON Projects)
shows past, current, and future MILCON projects supporting MQ-I , MQ-9, and RQ-4 UAS
funded by the FY 2012 President's Budget.
Additional Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) MILCON includes: a
$30.4-million SOF RPA Hangar/ AMU Facility at Cannon Air Force Base to replace Hangar
119 and $1.95 million to beddown the 2"'1 Special Operations Squadron (SOS) once a final
location is determined.
Program
Amount



FY



MAJCOM LOCATION
TITLE



($1<)



STATUS



GLOBAL HAWK SQUADRON



2003



ACC
BEALE
OPERAT10NS/MAINTENANCE FACILITY



$3,670



HIS'
GLOBAL HAWK UPGRADE MAINTENANCE



2003



ACC
BEALE
DOCK



$4,600



HIS'



2003



ACC
BEALE
GLOBAL HAWK DINING FACILITY



$3,470



HIS'
PREDATOR SQUADRON



2004



ACC
CREECH
OPERATIONS/AM U/HANGAR



$25,731



HIS'



2004



ACC
BEALE
GLOBAL HAWK UPGRADE DOCKS



$8,958



HIS'



2004



ACC
BEALE
GLOBAL HAWK DORMITORY



(144



RM)



$14,609



HIS'



2005



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR MAINTENANCE COMPLEX



$27,



I



08



CMP'



2005



ACC
BEALE
GLOBAL HAWK UPGRADE DOCK



2
$8,320



HIS'



2005



ACC
BEALE
GLOBAL HAWK ADDITION TO AGE FACILITY



$1,866



HIS'



2006



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR OPERATIONS FACrLlTIES



$23,081



CMP'
PREDATOR MAINTENANCE AND LOGISTICS



2006



ACC
CREECH
COM PLEX



$19,067



CMP'



2006



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR MUNITIONS COMPLEX



$9,237



CMP'



2006



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR TRAINING FACILITLES



$8,732



CM P'
GLOBAL HAWK TWO BAY MAINTENANCE



2006



ACC
BEALE
HANGAR



$14,058



HIS'



2007



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR VARIOUS FACILITIES



$26,000



CNS'



2007



ACC
CREECH
PREDATOR VARIOUS FACILITIES



$23,923



CMP'
GLOBAL HAWK AIRCRAF MAINTENANCE AND



2007



PACAF
ANDERSEN
OPERATIONS COMPLEX



$52,800



CMP'
13




2007 ANG
MARCH,CA
PREDATOR OPERATIONS



&



TRAINING
COMPLEX
$6,000 CMP'
2007 ANG
HECTOR, ND
PREDATOR OPERATIONS COMPLEX
$5,500 CMP'
2007 ANG
ELLINGTON,
TX
PREDATOR OPERATIONS COMPLEX
$6,000 CMP'
GRAND
BRAC - CONVERT HANGAR FOR UAV
2008 ACC
FORKS
CORROSION CONTROL
$1 ,280
HIS'
2009 ACC
CREECH
UAS OPS FACILITY
$16,145 CNS'
2009 ACC
CREECH
UAS DIl'.JING HALL
$7,579 CMP'
2009 ACC
CREECH
UAS FLIGHT SIM



&



ACADEMICS FACILITY
$9,127 CNS'
2009 ACC
CREECH
UAS 432 WING HQ MISSION SPT FACILITY
$7,000 CMP'
UAS MAIN GATE/SEWER TRANSFER STATION
2009 ACC
CREECH
INFRASTRUCTURE
$6,500 CNS'
2009 ANG
HANCOCK, NY TFI-REAPER IOC/FOC
$5,000 CMP'
NAS
GLOBAL HAWK AIRCRAFT MALNT AND OPS
2010 ACC
SIGONELLA
COMPLEX
$31,300 CNS'
2010 ACC
HOLLOMAN
UAS FTU COMPLEX
$37,500 CNS'
2010 ANG
DAVIS-
TFI-PREDATOR BEDDOWN - FOC
$5,600 CNS'
MONTHAN,AZ
2010 ANG
S. CALIF LOG
TFI-PREDATOR LRE BEDDOWN
$8,400 CNS'
APT,CA
2010 ANG
FTDRUM, NY TFI-REAPER LRE BEDDOWN
$2,700 DSG



4



2011 AFSOC
CANNON
UAS SQUADRON OPS FACILITY
$20,000 DSG'
2011 ACC
HOLLOMAN
UAS ADD/ALTER MAINTENANCE HANGAR
$15,470 DSG



4



2011 ACC
HOLLOMAN
UAS MAINTENANCE HANGAR
$22,500 DSG'
2011 ACC
CREECH
UAS AIRFIELD FIRE/CRASH RESCUE STATION
$11 ,710 RTA'
2011 USAFE
RAMSTEIN
UAS SATCOM RELAY PADS AND FACILITY
$10,800 DSG'
2011 ANG
DAVIS-
TFI - PREDATOR FOC - INCREASED ORBITS
$4,650 DSG'
MONTHAN, AZ
FORT
2011 ANG
HUACHUCA, TFI-PREDATOR LRE BEDDOWN
$11 ,000 DSG'
AZ
2011 ANG
FT DRUM, NY TFI - REAPER INFRASTRUCTURE
$2,500 DSG'
2011 ANG
ELLINGTON,
TFI-ALTER UAV HANGAR
$7,000 DSG'
TX
SIGONELLA
$15,000
2012 ACC
NAVAL AS
UAS SATCOM RELAY PADS AND FACILITY
DSG'
2012 ANG
SPRINGFIELD,
ALTER PREDATOR OPERATIONS CENTER
$6,700 DSG'
OH
2013 ACC
UNSPECIFIED MQ-9 PLANNING AND DESIGN
$3 14
2013 ACC
UNSPECIFIED MQ-9 REAPER FACILITIES
$47,750
2014 ANG
TBD
PREDATOR OPERATIONS CENTER
$10,200



Table 8: Air force UAS MILCON Projects



Table NOles:
l.
Historical (H[S)
4.
Design (DSG)



2.
COllllllete



(eMP)
3.
Construction (eNS)



14




5.
Ready To Advertise (RTA)
(Contracting Package is Ready
for Bidding/Solicitation)



The Army VAS MILCON listed below shows current and future MILCON projects
supporting MQ-I C, MQ-5B, RQ-7B and RQ- II B that are funded through the FY 201 2
President's Budget.
MQ-IC Gray Eagle: The Gray Eagle system will be stationed at existing Army Airfields.
Table 9: MQ-I C Gray Eagle MI LCON) describes the budget for 14 ofthe 17 Companies
(last three Companies are outside the current MILCON funding window). Each of the
identified hangars will house up to three Companies of Gray Eagles.



LOCATION



Fort Huachuca (Schoolhouse)
Fort Hood
F0l1 Riley
Fort Stewart
Fort Bragg
Fort Campbell



BUILDING BUDGET



I Hangar
2 Hangars
I Hangar
I Hangar
I Hangar
I Hangar
FY 20I: $10 million
FY 2011: $55 million; FY 2012: $45 million
FY 2012: $68 million
FY 2011: $47 million; FY 2013: $20 million
FY 2012: $72 million
FY 2012: $68 million



Tobie 9: MQ-IC Gray Eogle MILCON



MQ-5B Hunter: No new facilities are planned as all three Companies and the training units
are already fielded.
RQ-7B Shadow: There are no unit-specific facilities planned for the Shadow Platoon as the
system is a subordinate unit whose maintenance and storage facilities are part oftheir parent
company's Tactical Equipment Maintenance Facility. To improve training and reduce
maintenance, the Army will prepare field sites in local training areas that are dedicated for
the Shadow VAS . The field site facility includes a I 000-foot-by-50-foot paved landing strip
and adjacent support building. The building is a rudimentary structure (3200 square feet) to
support Shadow sustainment, provide shelter from adverse weather, and secure the platforms.
The concept is for units to occupy the facility on a temporary basis and schedule it as they
would a range or training area. It enables launch and recovery under the veil ofthe
installation's restricted airspace and greatly reduces system damage risks during training.
Landing strips are funded in FY 2012 for Fort Bragg, Fort Drum, Fort Bliss, Fort Carson,
Fort Lewis, Yakima Training Center, Fort Riley; and, in FY 201 3, for AP Hill, Atterbury,
Fort Chaffee, Fort Dix, Fort Indian Gap, Knox, Korea, Fort McCoy, Orchard Training Area,
Fort Richard, Fort Pickett, Camp Ripley, Camp Roberts, and Camp Shelby.
RQ-llB Raven: Due to its small size, dedicated UAS facilities are not required for this
system.
15




FY



2011
2012
2013
2013
2013
2014
2015



RQ-4A Broad Area Maritime Surveillance Demonstrator (BAMS D): BAMS D aircraft
are launched and recovered from a Forward Operating Base (FOB) in the U.S. Central
Command (USCENTCOM) and return to NAS Patuxent River, MD, for periodic
maintenance. Facilities for BAMS D are temporary in nature (occupying available hangar
space at Patuxent River). Following the declaration of initial operating capability of BAMS,
the BAMS D UAS are planned to be returned to the tenant command (NAS Patuxent River)
for retirement.
MQ-4C BAMS: Table 10: Navy UAS MILCON Projects) shows current and future
MILCON projects that are funded by the FY 2012 President's Budget. Additional Navy
MILCON is planned outside the FYDP to support continued establishment ofUAS
capability.
When production commences in FY 2013, BAMS aircraft will initially be located at
NAS Patuxent River, MD, for testing. The first two orbits in USCENTCOM and
U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM)will be established with aircraft located OCONUS in
FY 2016 and FY 2017. BAMS training and maintenance facilities are currently planned at
Beale AFB, CA, and at Main Operating Bases (MOB) NAS Jacksonville, FL, and NAS
Whidbey Island, W A. Additionally, FOBs are planned for Andersen AFB, Guam, and NAS
Sigonella, Sicily, and at a location in USCENTCOM.
A BAMS UAS test facility is currently under construction at NAS Patuxent River
with a completion date of October 2012. Designs are complete for the BAMS Mission
Systems Operator training facility at NAS Jacksonville, and construction will begin upon
receipt ofFY 2012 funding. Three additional projects - USCENTCOM FOB site, BAMS
Mission Control Systems Facility at NAS Jacksonville MOB, and BAMS Maintenance
Training Facility at Beale AFB - are in the contracting and development process for FY 2013
funding. BAMS' initial USCENTCOM FOB site location is pending host nation notification.
Program
Amount
MAJCOM
LOCATION
TITLE



($K)



STATUS
NAVAIR
PATUXENT
BAMS TEST HANGAR FACILITY



$33,304



CNS'
RfYER
FFC
JACKSONVILLE
BAMS MISSION SYSTEMS OPERATOR



$4,482



DSG



1



TRAINING FACILITY
FFC
JACKSONVILLE
BAMS MAIN OPERATING BASE MISSION



$24,660



CONTROL SYSTEMS F ACrLlTY
USCENTCOM
VARLOC
BAMS FORWARD OPERATING BASE



$35,900



MIDDLE EAST FACILITIES
FFC
BEALE
BAMS MAINTENANCE TRAINING FACILITY



$17,370



USPACOM
GUAM
BAMS FORWARD OPERATING BASE



$76,139



FFC
WHIDBEY
BAMS MAIN OPERATING BASE MISSION



$28,130



ISLAND
CONTROL SYSTEMS FACILITY
16




FY
2015
2015
2016
Program
Amount
MAJCOM
LOCATION
TITLE



($J()



STATUS



USEUCOM
SICILY
BAMS FORWARD OPERATING BASE



$29,730



FACILITIES
FFC
BEALE
BAMS MAINTENANCE HUB HANGAR



$50,983



FACILITIES
FFC
BEALE
BAMS FORWARD OPERATING BASE



$35,224



FACILITIES



,



Table 10: Navy UAS MILCON ProJccts
Tllblc



Notes:



I. Construction



(eNS)
2.
Design (DSG)



MQ-8B VTUAV-LCS: VTUAV will leverage existing MH-60 support infrastructure as it
will also be supporting LCS requirements. Since LCS composite AvDets will normally have
the UA only when supporting an LCS, squadrons will not require ramp or hangar space in
support ofthe MQ-8B.
MQ-8B VTUAV - SOF ISR: HQU-IO, located onboard NAS North Island, CA, has been
identified as the fleet replacement squadron for VTUAV training. No new construction is
envisioned to meet VTUAV training requirements.
Unmanned Carrier-Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS): UCLASS air vehicle
basing and testing locations have not been selected at this time since the system is
pre-milestone



A.



USMC
RQ-7B Shadow and RQ-21A STUAS: VMU-l and VMU-3 are currently based at Marine
Corps Base Twenty-Nine Palms, CA. All active-duty VMU squadrons are currently housed
in existing facilities that have been modified to support VMU squadron activity. MILCON
construction contracts to support the VMU-3 move to Hawaii and the planned VMU-4 move
to Camp Pendleton are either in place or pending.



17




SECTION 5 -



The availability ofairspace, ranges, and other infrastructure at each
planned UAS location, and a description ofthe steps that the services plan to take to
overcome any limitations that adversely impact UAS training:



Over the past several years, UAS have become a transformational force multiplier for
DoD. The numbers and roles ofUAS have expanded dramatically to meet mission demands,
and operational commanders have come to rely upon robust and persistent ISR support from
unmanned platforms executing their core missions against hostile forces. DoD UAS require
routine NAS access in order to execute operational, training, and support missions and to
support broader military and civil demands. UAS will not achieve their full potential
military utility unless they can go where manned aircraft go with the same freedom of
navigation, responsiveness, and flexibility.
As theater forces return and the Military Departments' UAS fleets expand, DoD will
require comprehensive continuation and Joint force training in the peacetime environment.
Failure to prepare for this eventuality will result in a loss ofcombat gained experience. As
UAS have matured and acquisition programs ofrecord have emerged in all Military
Departments, a concerted effort has been made to ensure, wherever practical and possible,
that the Departments share logistics costs and burdens to include training and training
systems. Below, each Military Department describes planned UAS basing locations and any
mitigation plans for adversely impacted UAS training.



u.S. Air Force (USAF)



Each CONUS location that has plans to base MQ-l, MQ-9, or RQ-4 aircraft is listed
below with an associated assessment ofrange and airspace availability.



Beale AFB (RQ-4):



Beale AFB currently operates the CONUS-based AF fleet ofRQ-4s.
Operation from Beale is conducted under a COA issued by the FAA allowing the aircraft to
climb into Class A airspace above Flight Level (FL) 180 and transit to operational locations.



Creech AFB (MQ-l



&



MQ-9):



Creech AFB is located under the restricted airspace ofthe
Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), one ofthe Air Force's largest and most capable
range complexes. Other operations from Creech are conducted under FAA-issued COAs,
primarily for MQ-l/9 flights within the Creech AFB traffic pattern in Class D airspace, and
for transits to restricted airspace in CA (R-2508) and the Utah Test and Training Range.



Holloman AFB (MQ-l & MQ-9):



An FAA COA is required to utilize runways at
Holloman AFB that are not within restricted airspace. A COA is also required to allow
MQ-l/9 access to Restricted Area R-5103 B/C southeast ofHolloman AFB in order to transit
airspace that is not restricted.



Cannon AFB (MQ-l & MQ-9): RP



As transiting from Cannon AFB to their training
location at the Melrose Range operate under an FAA COA requiring ground observers to
follow the aircraft when not in restricted airspace.



18




March ARBISoCal Logistics Airport (MQ-l



&



MQ-9):



An FAA COA requires chase
aircraft to escort RPAs from Southern California Logistics Airport (formerly George AFB) to
the R-2S08 Complex associated with Edwards AFB, NAS China Lake, and Fort Irwin.



Fort Drum (MQ-9):



The MQ-9 RPAs associated with the Syracuse Air National Guard
(ANG) will be based at Fort Drum, NY. Fort Drum is located under the restricted airspace of
the Adirondack Range Complex. An FAA COA is required to allow MQ-9 Reaper launch
and recovery at Wheeler Sack Army Airfield in order to transit from military Class D
airspace to and from the Misty Airspace Complex and the Adirondack Air Traffic Control
Assigned Airspace (ATCAA).



Grand Forks (RQ-4, MQ-l & MQ-9):



Chase aircraft or visual observers are required by
FAA to mitigate the RPAlUAS lack ofa see/sense and avoid capability. In the case of
Southern California Logistics Airport (formerly George AFB), no restricted airspace is
available for RPAs to operate or transit to R-2S08; while at Grand Forks, an airspace
proposal has been submitted to establish restricted airspace to support UAS operations west
ofGrand Forks AFB. RPA. operations beyond the Grand Forks AFB traffic pattern are
limited until the airspace proposal is approved and charted by the FAA and a supporting
COA is developed.



Remote Split Operations (RSO) only:



MQ-1 & MQ-9 operations at Ellsworth AFB, SD,
and Whiteman AFB, MO, will not have aircraft assigned to their location.
The USAF will require additional airspace access for U AS operations. The current
NAS access does not support developmental Sense and Avoid objectives, nor will it support
projected training requirements. Without improved NAS access and improved access to
special use airspace (SUA), the capabilities ofthe USAF UAS force will stagnate or degrade,
reducing the USAF overall mission effectiveness.
As the U AS force expands and resets from overseas deployments, the demand for
airspace or airspace access will increase. Defense Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
Commission actions and force restructuring have presented an immediate need for suitable
testing and training airspace. While the USAF maintains that exclusionary SUA must remain
an interim solution, it is not the preferred option due to the lengthy rulemaking process.
Consequently, the USAF adamantly supports exploration ofall less exclusionary alternatives
(e.g., special security instruction airspace, alert areas, terminal radar service areas, Mode C
veil over a military operations areas, Federal Aviation Regulation Part 93: Special Air Traffic
Rules and Airport Traffic Patterns) that alone or combined with current technology, provide a
means to support near-term AF test and training airspace requirements. These interim
airspace measures provide immediate improved NAS access, while USAF and FAA work
together towards viable long-term and routine sense-and-avoid solutions without undue
burden on other N AS stakeholders.
The USAF will limit requests for additional SUA to that required to support combat
readiness and only when less exclusionary airspace options are not available or practical.
19




The USAF is committed to maintaining the safety ofthe NAS and minimizing impact on
civil users while working towards full UAS NAS integration.
The Army has more than 1,800 UAS that are embedded in maneuver units from
Platoon through Corps echelons. Army UAS are found at nearly all Army installations. The
larger systems, Hunter and Gray Eagle, operate from Army airfields. Shadow UAS launch
and recover predominately from field sites located in the local training areas. The hand-
launched Raven requires no prepared location from which to conduct operations. For
peacetime training, all ofthese systems operate primarily inside the confines ofa military
restricted airspace in support ofground maneuver units.
Army U AS have similar operational challenges as other manned aviation platforms
such as adequate airspace to maneuver, realistic range targets and sufficient bed down
locations. U AS also have the additional limitation ofspectrum availability. Ofthese
challenges, spectrum is the most limiting and requires close coordination between all
spectrum users to ensure sufficient numbers offrequency sets are available to conduct
training. The Army has continued to modernize existing UAS data links in an effort to
become more bandwidth efficient; two examples ofthis are the Digital Data Link (DDL) for
the small UAS and the Tactical Common Data Link (TCDL) for Shadow and larger systems.
With both data links, modernization allows for more aircraft to operate in the same amount of
bandwidth.
While the Army has significant numbers ofUAS deployed to combat operations, their
return at the end ofhostilities will not have a significant negative impact on training. Similar
to other Army assets (manned aviation, artillery, ground maneuver units), these units must
prioritize and deconflict their requirements for range resources.
Table 11 Locations Requiring COAs) lists the locations where the Army currently
conducts operations outside ofRestricted Areas that require a COA from the FAA. In the
majority ofthese locations, the purpose ofthe COA is to transition from the launch site to
adjacent Restricted Areas. Additionally, the Raven can be operated using DoD-FAA
agreed-to Class G airspace notification procedures for flights flown over Government-owned
or -leased land.
20




MQ-IC
RQ-7B SHADOW
Fort Huachuca
AZ
Fort Greeley (Allen AAF)
AK
El Mirage/Grey Butte
CA
Fort Richardson (Bryant AAF)
AK
r-:-MQ-S HUNTER
Fort Wainwright (Husky DZ)
AK
Cochise College
AZ
Redstone Arsenal
AL
Fort Stewart
GA
Whetstone
AZ
Fort Hood
TX
Camp Roberts
CA
RQ-llB Raven (Class G
Fort Stewart
GA
Notification)
Fort Wainwright
AK
Wheeler AAF



HI



Simi Valley
CA
Havana
IL
Pinon Canyon
CO
FOit Knox
KY
Ipava



IL



Fort Polk
LA
RQ-llB Raven (Continued)
RQ-7B Shadow (Continued)
Ft Polk
LA
Camp Grayling
MI
Seneca
NY
Camp Ripley
MN
Camp Gruber
OK
Camp Shelby
MS
Salem
OR
Fort Drum
NY
Brownsville
TX
Ft Sill
OK
Camp Bowie
TX
Fort Indiantown Gap
PA
Camp Swift
TX
Ft Bliss
TX
Yakima Training Center
WA
Ft Hood
TX
Fort A.P. Hill
VA



..



Table 11 LocatIOns ReqUIring COAs



Additional efforts to accommodate home station UAS training beyond the Shadow
down-range facilities include the following:



1.



Targetry. Conventional training range targetry cannot adequately SUpp0l1 UAS
acquisition and engagement tasks as it is one-dimensional. To provide requisite targetry, the
Army has provided targets that are either physical or digital, full-scale representations ofthe
threat to installations. These targets also come with Digital Aviation Gunnery Ranges and
Aviation Add-On Packages for existing digital ranges (Riley, Yakima, and Carson Digital
Multipurpose Range Complexes). Three-dimensional targets are necessary to support target
acquisition, designation, and engagement with captive training missiles.
2. Scoring. Crew tasks must be scored to ensure the laser is on the target and
accurate in order to ensure effective Hellfire engagements. While live missiles will not be



21




fired from U AS platforms at home station, laser accuracy must be assessed to ensure
precision targeting capabilities.
3. Urban Terrain. Mission challenges in the contemporary environment dictate the
availability ofurban terrain on home station ranges. To provide these venues, the Army has
initiated and successfully enabled fielding ofAir-Ground Integration (A-OI) villages. These
villages provide 13 modular buildings and urban ballast on live fire ranges. A-OI villages are
on the ground at Fort Drum, Fort Bragg, Fort Stewart, Fort Riley, Fort Hood, Fort Bliss,
Pohakulua Training Area (HI) and Donnelly Training Area (AK). Further, villages will be
fielded to the Yakima and Carson Digital Multi Purpose Range Complex (DMPRC). The
Digital Air Oround Integration Range (DAOIR) includes A-OI villages. Units are currently
using these villages for manned aerial platform crew qualification and collective A-OI
training.
4. Airspace. Thorough analysis has been conducted to evaluate available restricted
airspace at installations that support UAS platforms. The challenges can be broken down
into two basic areas.
a. Adequate area to maneuver/train for each installation. This is the length,
width, altitudes, and availability ofrestricted area airspace at the installation.
b. Adequate/established corridors from the installation's Army Airfield to its
restricted airspace. While Raven and Shadow can be supported down range, Oray
Eagle requirements dictate launch and recovery from Army Airfields with sufficient
runways.
Navy UAS operator training for Fire Scout, BAMS and UCLASS is planned to be
100-percent simulation based. Fire Scout and BAMS aircraft will generally not be used to
meet or maintain training and readiness except in early development before simulators are
delivered. Between FY 2012 and FY 2014, Fire Scout training will involve flights at
Webster Field. During underway training periods on board Navy ships, Fire Scout will
operate in overland and overwater airspace appropriately cleared for UAS operations.
Additionally, ship and Strike Group pre-deployment training will require



VAS



flights in
Fleet training areas. Navy is working within the construct ofthe DoD UAS Airspace
Integration Plan to ensure adequate airspace is available for this integrated training.
BAMS: Training for BAMS operators will be done via simulation, utilizing the same
computer-based ground stations used to control BAMS. Use ofhigh-fidelity simulation will
limit the need to operate the aircraft to only ship and Strike Oroup integration training.
Regardless ofoperating location, CONUS or OCONUS, the MQ-4C Mission Control
Station (MCS), along with its embedded Mission System Trainer (MST) only requires
electrical power and basic infrastructure to provide full functionality for operations and
training. Due to its integrated design, the MST does not require an aircraft (or any related
22




airspace, ranges, or flight-related logistic support) in order to provide fully representative
operator training.
The Navy is actively engaged with the FAA to obtain COAs for future CONUS sites
for BAMS. The current East Coast COA utilized for BAMS-D based from NAS Patuxent
River will serve as a model for obtaining authorizations for other CONUS basing locations.
With the final approval of CONUS basing sites by Fleet Forces Command, the program
office will work with regional commanders and the FAA to obtain COAs to transit through
theNAS.
UCLASS: The Navy is actively developing plans for UCLASS training and basing. Due to
the immaturity ofthe program, final decisions have not yet been made.



Marine Corps



All USMC RQ-7B UAS operators (AVOs), maintainers, and unmanned aircraft
commanders (UACs) are trained at the U.S. Army's Fort Huachuca, AZ, UAS Training
Center under an Interservice Training Agreement in place since 2007.
Marine Corps RQ-7B initial AVO training is nearly identical to the U.S. Army's
AVO curriculum and utilizes a combination ofclassroom instruction and RQ-7B simulator
activities at Ft Huachuca. This initial instruction qualifies AVOs to the Joint Basic
Unmanned Qualification (BUQ) Level 22.
USMC is reviewing a plan to send students for initial UAC training (for non-winged
aviators) through the U.S. Air Force's RPA Pilot's flight and instrument qualification courses
at Randolph Air Force Base in San Antonio, TX and Pueblo, CO. The USAF RPA Pilot's
curriculum uses a combination ofclassroom instruction, flight simulation, and actual manned
aircraft flight to train future UACs. This training will qualify the UACs up to BUQ Level 4.
Almost halfofthe USMC's RQ-7B Shadow's upper level training syllabus and most
refresher training can be accomplished using RQ-7B simulators located at the VMU
squadrons. The remainder of the training is conducted using the actual systems operating in
support of USMC training events held within the FAA restricted areas that make up the
MCB 29 Palms, CA, range complex, MCB Pendleton, the Yuma, AZ range complex, the
NAS Fallon, NV range complex, and the MCB Camp Lejeune range complex.
The RQ-21A training syllabus and pipeline are currently under development by NAV AIR
PMA



263/205



and the USMC's Training and Education Command (TECOM). It is expected
that initially, RQ-21A AVOs and UACs will be drawn from the ranks ofqualified RQ-7B
operators.
Active FAA COAs allow the transit ofVMU-2 aircraft through uncontrolled airspace
from the MCAS Cherry Point class "D" surface area to the Restricted Area



R5306CID,



and
from the NAS Fallon class "D" surface area to the surrounding restricted areas. A ground
based sense and avoid (GBSAA) solution is currently being evaluated by the FAA to support



2



CJCS 3255.01, "Joint Unmanned Aircraft Systems Minimum Training Standards, July 17,2009."



23




the 6 nm transit at Cherry Point. However, a network of 14 ground-based observers is still
required to comply with the COA while the evaluation is ongoing.
USMC is actively engaged in its support to the overall DoD-coordinated efforts to
shorten and simplify the FAA COA process in order to allow greater unmanned access to the
NAS. To support this goal, USMC is pursuing a combination oftechnical solutions, such as
a reliable GBSAA capability, and increased unmanned operator instrument flight training.
24




SUMMARY
DoD UAS have become a critical component ofmilitary operations. Many DoD
UAS now require rapidly expanded access to the NAS and international civil airspace to
support operations, training, testing, and broader governmental functions. In order for
military aircraft to fly routinely in domestic and international airspace, the aircraft must be
certified as airworthy, operated by a qualified pilot/operator in the appropriate class(es) of
airspace, and comply with applicable regulatory guidance. DoD exercises sole certification
authority for its aircraft and pilots/operators, consistent with authority provided in title 10,
U.S. Code.
DoD's UAS NAS access methodology uses an incremental approach to provide DoD
UAS critical access via given operations profiles prior to implementing a full dynamic
operations solution. DoD's immediate focus is gaining near-term mission-critical access
while simultaneously working toward far-term routine NAS access. DoD's airspace
integration efforts will have positive affordability effects, such as eliminating the cost to
study, analyze and complete a COA. Progress will be accomplished through policy and
procedural changes, as well as technology and standards developments described in DoD's
UAS Airspace Integration Plan. The end state will be routine NAS access comparable to
manned aircraft for all DoD UAS operational, training, and support missions.
Additionally, the Office ofthe Deputy Assistant Secretary ofDefense for Readiness,
Directorate for Training Readiness and Strategy, is developing a comprehensive DoD UAS
training strategy. The strategy will leverage the skills and expertise ofeach organization and
build on foundational efforts already completed or being studied within the Military
Departments. The study will investigate and assess the adequacy ofexisting and forecast
joint, Military Department, and Combatant Commander UAS plans and programs that
identify and describe qualification, continuation, and joint training requirements and
CONOPS. The strategy will identify and describe individual, unit, and large force training
requirements ofall groups ofUAS. The result will be a UAS Training Roadmap that guides
UAS training shortfall and mitigation analyses, provides UAS training recommendations, and
proposes investment considerations for the U AS community. The UAS Training Roadmap
will serve as a companion piece to the "Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap" to provide
guidance for efforts related to delivering UAS capabilities to the Warfighter. Phase one of
the study will be complete in early 2012 and will serve to identify critical gaps in policy,
guidance, and training concepts ofoperation.



25




ACRONYM LIST



AAF - ARMY AIRFIELD
ACC - AIR COMBAT COMMAND
AFB - AIR FORCE BASE
AFR - AIR FORCE RESERVE
AFRC - AIR FORCE RESERVE COMPONENT
AFSC - AIR FORCE SPECIALTY CODE
AFSOC - AIR FORCE SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND
ANG - AIR NATIONAL GUARD
ARNG - ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
ATCAA - ADIRONDACK AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ASSIGNED AIRSPACE
AVDET- A VIATION DETACHMENT
AVO - AIR VEHICLE OPERATOR
B-BASIC
BAMS - BROAD AREA MARITIME SURVEILLANCE
BAMS-D - BROAD AREA MARITIME SURVEILLANCE - DEMONSTRATOR
BRAC -



DEFENSE



BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
BUQ - JOINT BASIC UNMANNED QUALIFICATION
CAP-COMBAT AIR PATROL
CCDR - COMBATANT COMMANDER
CENTCOM - CENTRAL AREA COMMAND
CLS - CONTRACT LOGISTICS SUPPORT
CMP - COMPLETE
CNS - CONSTRUCTION
COA - CERTIFICATE OF WAIVER OR AUTHORIZATION
COE - CENTER OF EXCELLENCE
CONOPS - CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
CONUS - CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES
DAGIR- DIGITAL AIR GROUND INTEGRATION RANGE
DDL - DIGITAL DATA LINK
DMPRC - DIGITAL MULTI- PURPOSE RANGE COMPLEX
DOD - DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DSG-DESIGN
FAA - FEDERAL A VIATION ADMINISTRATION
FLO-FIELD
FMS -FOREIGN MILITARY SALES
FOB - FOREIGN OPERATING BASE
FOC - FULL OPERATIONS CAPABILITY
FRTP - FLEET RESPONSE TRAINING PROGRAM
FT-FORT
FTU - FLIGHT TRAINING UNIT
FY - FISCAL YEAR
GBSAA - GROUND BASED SENSE AND AVOID
HIS - HISTORICAL
HQ - HEADQUARTERS
ISR - INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE
LCS - LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP
LRE - LAUNCH AND RECOVERY ELEMENT
MCAGCC - MARINE CORPS AIR GROUND COMBAT CENTER
MCALF - MARINE CORPS AUXILLIARY LANDING FIELD



26




MCAS - MARINE CORPS AIR STATION
MCB - MARINE CORPS BASE
MILCON - MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
MOB - MAIN OPERATING BASE
MOS - MILITARY OCCUPATION SPECIALTIES
MRMUAS - MEDIUM- RANGE MARITIME UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM
MST - MISSION SYSTEM TRAINER
MTOE - UNIT MODIFIED TABLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL EQUIPMENT
NALF - NAVY AUXILLIARY LANDING FIELD
NAS - IN GEOGRAPHICAL REFERENCE: NAVAL AIR STATION
NAS - IN AIRSPACE REFERENCE: NATIONAL AIRSPACE
NAWS - NAV AL AIR WEAPONS STATION
NOLF - NAVAL OUTLYING FIELD
NS - NAVAL STATION
NTTR - NEVADA TEST AND TRAINING RANGE
PACAF - PACIFIC AIR FORCE
PACOM - PACIFIC COMMAND
POM - PROGRAM OBECTIVE MEMORANDUM
PT-POINT
RPA - REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT
SATCOM - SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
SCLA - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LOGISTICS AIRFIELD
SO - SENSOR OPERATOR
SOF - SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES
SOS - SPECIAL OPERAIONTS SQUADRON
SPT - SUPPORT
SQFT - SQUARE FOOT
SSTC - SILVER STRAND TRAINING COMPLEX
STUAS - SMALL TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEM
SUA - SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE



T/O -



TABLE OF ORGANIZATION
TCDL - TACTICAL COMMON DATA LINK
TECOM - TRAINING AND EDUCATION COMMAND
TSRA - TRAINING SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS
UAC - UNMANNED AIRCRAFT COMMANDER
UAS - UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
UCAS - UNMANNED COMBAT AIR SYSTEM
UCLASS - UNMANNED CARRIER LAUNCHED AIRBORNE
SURVEILLANCE AND STRIKE
USAF - UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
UDET - UNMANNED DETACHMENT
URT - UNMANNED RPA TRAINING
USA - UNITED STATES ARMY
USAF - UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
USAFE - UNITED STATES AIR FORCE EUROPE
USMC - UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
USN - UNITED STATES NAVY
USSOCOM - UNITED STATES SPECIAL OPS COMMAND
VMU - VEHICLE MAINTENANCE UNIT
VTUAV - VERTICAL TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE
WSMR - WHITE SAND MISSILE RANGE COMPLEX



27

No comments:

Post a Comment