DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Drones » UAV Takeover Shot Down

UAV Takeover Shot Down

The Air Force’s bid to take over all of the U.S. military’s fly­ing drones has been shot down, Inside Defense says.
shadow_launch.jpgOver the years, the var­i­ous branches of the mil­i­tary have all pur­sued their own inde­pen­dent, often over­lap­ping, unmanned aer­ial (UAV) vehi­cle pro­grams. The result is a giant, jum­bled robot menagerie, with over a dozen species of mil­i­tary drones fly­ing in Iraq. Few of them speak the same lan­guage, or work together well. Soldiers often have to wait weeks for a slice of the radio spec­trum that they can use to talk to their UAVs.
That’s why panel after expert panel has rec­om­mended that some­one take con­trol of this unmanned zoo, and start get­ting the crea­tures to play together nicely. Last year, Air Force gen­er­als nom­i­nated them­selves to be the zookeep­ers. They offered the Air Force up as the “Executive Agent” for UAVs — the finan­cial and oper­a­tional gate­keeper for all robots in the air.
In many ways, it was a log­i­cal choice. The fly­boys already under­stand the skies, man­ag­ing the “Air Tasking Orders” that tell American planes when and where to fly over a war­zone. And they’ve long been the military’s gad­get freaks. That’s why, back in the day, they got the bulk of the Pentagon’s space pro­gram, too.
But there was also a heap­ing scoop of self-​​interest in the Air Force move. The service’s fighter jocks have had a whole lot of free time on their hands, ever since the Cold War ended and all those Soviet MiGs stopped fly­ing. And which ser­vice has been the most threat­ened by the rise of robo-​​pilots?
Plus, UAVs — espe­cially the lit­tle, hand-​​thrown mod­els — aren’t exactly planes. As I noted in last month’s Wired, “they have wings and fly, but they’re more like guns (or cam­eras) with wings than planes with guns.” And the last thing any Army or Marine gen­eral wants to do is give up his guns. Or kiss some fighter jock’s ass every time he needed to buy a few more fly­ing cam­eras for his men.
So, in the end, it wasn’t a sur­prise that the Joint Requirements Oversight Council — the vice chair­man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the vice chiefs from each of the ser­vices — nixed the Executive Agent idea in a June 1 meet­ing.
Instead, Inside Defense reports, they endorsed the idea of turn­ing the Air Force’s new UAV Center of Excellence near Las Vegas into an estab­lish­ment for all four ser­vices. “That cen­ter will be led by a rota­tional flag offi­cer, with the first leader being an Army one-​​star [gen­eral],” accord­ing to the newslet­ter. “The deputy, also a rota­tional posi­tion, will ini­tially be filled by an Air Force colonel.”

Share |

June 30th, 2005 | Drones | 26539 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2005/06/30/uav-takeover-shot-down/UAV+Takeover+Shot+Down2005-06-30+12%3A27%3A16noahmax You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

« « Rapid Fire 6/​29/​05 | Wonder Weapons, $20 a Pop » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. anthony bauwens says:
    July 1, 2005 at 5:53 am

    All 4 ser­vices should use thes live sav­ing expen­sive drones! Without a argu­ment that is a bad thing for the tax­pay­ers in these times. Show the Tax pay­ers what for pos­i­tive life threat­en­ing sit­u­a­tions the drones has done out there for our men out there in the war zone! A.Bauwens

    Reply
  2. Stu says:
    July 1, 2005 at 9:56 am

    GOOD! I’m glad to see that the pretty AF boys didn’t get their way and put a whole lot of MOSQ UAV pilots in the Army and Marines out of a job. THey need to work TOGETHER not fight for a piece of the pie and rule over it all like the AF jocks love to do. GO ARMY!!!

    Reply
  3. Gerald A. Reason says:
    July 1, 2005 at 4:46 pm

    To give this type of weapon to the Air Force is like a com­bat sol­dier giv­ing his rifle to a logis­ti­tion. NO WAY! These are the type of weapon one needs in min­utes, not hours. The AF can send in fight­ers it has on sta­tion, as can the Navy. You cann’t have a drone on sta­tion. It needs to be there, at BN level and up.
    LTC® U.S. Army Reserve, ORD

    Reply
  4. Anonymous Troll says:
    July 3, 2005 at 5:41 am

    I attended a lec­ture at the AASM in the 1980s where Gen. Chuck Yeager said that this day was com­ming… He could say that because he was “retired”.
    I think the divid­ing line for Air Force con­trol is going to be the data link. If the datalink needs to go above the arm­strong line or needs to be bounced off of an Air Force asset, then it’s going to be an Air Force UAV.

    Reply
  5. F. Lovejoy, USAFR says:
    July 3, 2005 at 6:10 pm

    It seems to me that this is just one indi­ca­tor of big changes on the hori­zon. With our cur­rent com­bat envi­ron­ment it isn’t easy to make clear dis­tinc­tions between the respon­si­bil­ity of the branches. Air Force mem­bers have been liv­ing in many more “real” com­bat envi­ron­ments, Army and Marine infantry are get­ting loaded up with high tech gear and old bat­tle struc­tures just don’t apply. I see an even­tual merg­ing of forces on the way. What it will look like and when it will hap­pen, I wouldn’t begin to guess. But joint force bases are becom­ing the norm and stag­gered branch com­mand struc­tures like the one slat­ted for the UAV Center of Excellence seem to be point­ing in that direc­tion. I have heard the pat­tern coined as “The Purpling of the Military”. We’ll see how long it takes.

    Reply
  6. James R. Cooke says:
    July 4, 2005 at 3:23 pm

    The deci­sion to employ rotat­ing com­mand fits the ongo­ing attempt to use more joint command/​joint ops. Maybe it’ll lead to the dif­fer­ent branches play­ing together bet­ter. Let’s see how long this lasts.

    Reply
  7. John Penta says:
    July 5, 2005 at 8:28 am

    Exactly until they claw each other to shreds in the next bud­get cycle.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "And no, the Koran does not say anything about killing...
      bdwilcox
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Fascism? Last time I heard, the fascists promoted christianity. Or,...
      DualityOfMan
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I see an M16 firing, and I see a 40 mm grenade launcher...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare...
      Sam
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      No. I am not saying a grenade launcher on a rifle is a hoax. I...
      Zandor
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      So are you saying the grenade launcher is a hoax or the M-16?...
      WJS
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Dear Cannon Fodder; Only politically correct patriots should be accepted...
      Zandor
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage