Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

Drone Swarm for Maximum Harm

(There's a section on the impact of cheap, numerous unmanned aircraft in my book Weapons Grade, now in paperback. Here's one man's vision of what they could mean.)

The awesome future of air power is just around the corner – but the Air Force doesn't want it. That’s the word from Gregory Jenkins of the USAF’s Air Armament Center, self-styled 'heretic' and architect of a concept he calls Just In Time Strike Augmentation (JITSA).

Dominator.jpgThere are many fleeting targets on the modern battlefield that appear briefly and are gone. Think Saddam Hussein’s entourage slipping from one hideout to the next, or a Transporter-Erector-Launcher moving into firing position, or a pickup full of insurgents fleeing after staging a mortar attack. An air strike that takes five minutes to arrive is useless in these situations.

Jenkins’ vision is a networked battlespace with unmanned aircraft maintaining continuous surveillance over a wide area. At the cutting edge is Boeing’s Air Dominator, a 100 lb drone with a 12-foot span which looks like a model aircraft. I interviewed the people involved in the Dominator program two years ago here. Although Boeing say they have nothing new to report, there have been enhancements since then. A special lightweight fuel cell could bring its endurance to over 40 hours, and there’s a sophisticated new vision system for mid-air refueling to increase endurance even further. Each Dominator will carry out up to three attacks using munitions similar to but more versatile than the BLU-108 Skeet . (Some sources claim this has been increased to eight submunitions; Boeing say it’s still three).

Above all it will be cheap, so unlike the solitary MQ-1 Predator drones, Dominator will be used in packs, with a large number of hunter-killers accompanied by a few 'gateway' vehicles providing networked communications and refuelling. Each craft folds away into a pod just eight inches square and four feet long for transport and launch. The plan calls for two dozen or so were to be delivered by an F/A-22 Raptor jet at high speed, but Jenkins is thinking much bigger.

Dominate3.jpg

You don’t need a stealthy, high-performance aircraft to deliver something that can travel hundreds of miles on its own. In the JITSA scheme Dominators would be packed in pallets of twenty on a C-17 transport plane, with thirty pallets in all – that’s a total of six hundred drones. A loadmaster would handle the individual release of as many as needed. It’s something akin to a British FOAS concept of replacing bombers with a transport plane packed with palletized cruise missiles.

Once in position, the swarm would maintain air dominance over a wide area, providing both of continuous surveillance and instant reaction. Jenkins estimates that any target in the kill zone could be hit within 2-4 minutes maximum. None of those fleeting targets would escape.

Against a conventional force, Jenkins calls the JITSA system a ‘back breaker’, destroying armor, artillery and air defences on a massive scale, not to mention taking out air forces on the ground.

Dominators can also tackle targets that would normally take much larger munitions by being smarter. You might need a 2000 lb laser guided bomb to destroy a bridge, but a few Dominators can simply destroy vehicles attempting to use it. The bridge is denied to the enemy just as well, and you don’t have to rebuild afterwards.

The system can also neutralize deep bunkers which are invulnerable to the heaviest bombs. Missiles or stores of WMD are not going to harm anyone if they are stuck underground with a swarm of Dominators overhead 24/7, ready to attack anything the minute it emerges. Underground command centres become prisons.

The kill decision will always be delegated to a human operator using a mobile control set, so in the example above the bridge could be selectively closed to military vehicles.

Dominate2.jpgJITSA is much bigger than I’ve described here – Jenkins has detailed a true net-centric concept, with additional tiers and other aircraft types providing extra capabilities. It doesn’t even have to be based on Dominators, any networked loitering UAV would do.

The Air Force is going head with Dominator, but not in the swarms Jenkins would like to see. So why is JITSA “not a USAF-endorsed concept at this time,” with no funds allocated? In a world of multi-billion dollar programs, it offers outstanding capability for a modest outlay and minimal development. Perhaps a system based on something that looks like a toy and has no requirement for manned combat aircraft is not too popular with the blue suits. Or perhaps the idea of pilots demoted to delivery-truck drivers does not fit their vision.

So JITSA is still on the shelf. But even if the US does not buy into the concept, that doesn’t mean nobody else will. And what might happen then would be anybody’s guess.

Thanks to SSgt. Ryan Hansen, AAC Public Affairs and Marguerite Ozburn at Boeing for their help.

-- David Hambling

Latest Comments

Good ideas that pull money from those that have money are bad ideas to those that have money

Posted by: no money at September 13, 2006 8:43 PM


Droping several dozen or more of these for a one shot search/destroy or self destruct seems very costly. There should be a recovery scheme.

Posted by: DR LEN GILMAN at August 25, 2006 12:10 AM


The USA doesn't really want the capability this weapon offers. The Dominator seems awfully good at going after that image we all have of the terrorist. The Bush gang knows darn well that terrorism isn't the problem that it has made it out to be. Just the same, the Bushies have built up the terrorism threat, not because it is real, but because it's a good way to get the country to agree to its real designs, that is, getting Congress to approve appropriations to companies like Halliburton. The real Bush plan is to invade countries, such as Iraq, then build a them back up again. Either way, Bush cronies get filthy, filthy rich.

Posted by: iseethroughitall at August 24, 2006 10:38 PM


if the air force wont accept it then why not do some research on what there looking for right now in drone asociated technology...

*do the research

*make improvements (btw the carbonfiber vac spheres thing is a good ideah)

*try to present it again

if that dosn't work then like moose said the army likes this stuff, as do I

Posted by: n/a at August 22, 2006 8:09 PM


if the air force wont accept it then why not do some research on what there looking for right now in drone asociated technology...

*do the research

*make improvements (btw the carbonfiber vac spheres thing is a good ideah)

*try to present it again

if that dosn't work then like moose said the army likes this stuff, as do I

Posted by: n/a at August 22, 2006 6:59 PM


» View All 27 Comments

» Post a Comment