Last month, Darpa (the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency) launched a program that aims to design something called
a TERN, or Tactically Exploitative Reconnaissance Node, a surveillance and
strike drone that can fly up to 900 miles from the deck of a destroyer. Darpa
released a full, formal solicitation for the drone in a statement, noting that:
"The TERN will be substantially beyond current state-of-the-art aviation
capabilities from smaller ships." The solicitation placed heavy emphasis
on the "node" component of TERN and highlighted the fact that Darpa
encouraged its potential research teams to explore the capabilities of
the new drones to exploit cooperation between aircraft and ship to
achieve enhanced performance. Such cooperation could potentially take the
form of data exchange, external energy addition, and/or manipulation of the
recovery environment.
The solicitation itself is interesting from a
technological perspective, but there are implications stemming from the TERN
program that extend beyond just enhanced drone warfare. Most significantly, the
collaborative effort points to fact that the Navy and the Air Force are working
on a master concept for future partnered operations called AirSea Battle.
However, the parameters of such a comprehensive model are still ill-defined,
even in the nascent stages. Its architects have yet to concretely
announce how exactly long-range bombers and stealth jets are supposed to
work alongside carrier strike groups, submarines or close-to-shore fighters.
Another core problem is the lack of a common communication structure between
the two branches of the military. This would likely cause serious tactical
problems and lead to failed coordinated efforts.
I personally have two primary hesitations for
funneling government money into the development of the TERN program.
Fundamentally, I think coordination is often a positive and constructive
effort. However, TERN would require the configuration and implementation of a
"bilingual" communication system that could communicate with both
Navy ships and Air Force planes. This would likely be an exorbitantly costly
endeavor that quite frankly seems implausible at the moment given sequestration and defense budget issues. What makes the proposal even less appealing is the fact that
ultimately, it may not even work. One of TERN’s major technical obstacles
is “devising a reliable launch and recovery technique,” according to Darpa
itself. LCSs and destroyers don’t have the deck space for a long takeoff run
which explains their reliance on the catapult-launched alternatives in the
past. It's a hard sell to inject billions of dollars into a comprehensive data
system overhaul when its success isn't even guaranteed.
More importantly, we must first define the
paramaters of the drone program itself before we work on expanding drone
capabilities. The program continues to be shrouded in secrecy and, as some
would argue, continues to lack a concrete legal basis. To expand drone capacity
into naval territory would be to get ahead of ourselves at a time when the very
foundations and competencies of the drone program are still up for debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment