DARPA Unmanned History

48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition
4 - 7 January 2010, Orlando, Florida
AIAA 2010-158
To Boldly Go Where No Unmanned Aircraft Has Gone Before:

A Half-Century of DARPAs Contributions to Unmanned Aircraft
Michael J. Hirschberg*
CENTRA Technology, Inc., Arlington, VA 22203
Through 45 years of development efforts, the Defense Advanced Research Projects

Agency (DARPA) has helped foment the revolution in unmanned aircraft. Over this time,
DARPA has engendered research in autonomy, structures, propulsion, guidance, payload
sensors, communications and operations, as well as weaponization and novel configurations
possible only by obviating the need for an onboard pilot. Although the military services have
not always been successful at fielding unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), DARPA programs
eventually led to the introduction of the Pioneer, Gnat, Predator, Global Hawk and T-Hawk
into operational military service. Numerous other programs explored other approaches,
with many technologies eventually implemented on manned and unmanned aircraft. The
explosion in fielded UAVs over the past 15 years is due in large part to DARPAs legacy in
unmanned systems technology investments.
I. Introduction
In February 1958, as a response to the shock of the launch of the Soviet Sputnik satellite the preceding October,
the U.S. Department of Defense founded the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) as it was known until
1972. According to an article published at DARPAs 50th anniversary: Sputnik evidenced that a fundamental
change was needed in Americas defense science and technology programs. Out of this ferment in fact one of the
first actions to emerge from it came a bold new concept for organizing defense advanced research the Advanced
Research Projects Agency. This agency refocused and rejuvenated Americas defense technological capabilities.1
The Agency was to address three key areas: space, missile defense, and nuclear-test detection. Toward the end of the
1960s, however, with the race to the moon all but certain, and missile defense transferred to the Army, ARPA began
to focus on providing quick reaction support to actions in southeast Asia. 2
One area that had become of interest was developing the sensors and controls necessary for unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs), then generally referred to as Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs). Some early work in this area was
classified,3 but experiments on advanced sensors and payloads were flown on an existing Navy UAV, beginning in
1965.
With the military drawdown after Vietnam, the services curtailed much of their UAV developments, and would
experience one failed UAV development program after another. The Air Force even eliminated their UAV
organizations in 1976 in favor of cruise missiles. As a result of these actions and the tendency to demand too much
for too little, as well as constant resistance from the pilot community it wasnt until the mid-1990s that the military
succeeded in fielding the first U.S.-designed post-Vietnam UAVs.4
II. Early DASH Successes

During World War II, remotely piloted aircraft had been flown in the Pacific with some modicum of success. By
the late 1960s, the Ryan Lightning Bug family of unmanned aircraft were busy over the skies of Vietnam, taking
photographs along pre-programmed tracks and being picked up at the end of their mission to have their film
developed. Meanwhile, remotely piloted helicopters were flying from Navy destroyers to search for submarines, but
with no onboard sensors. 4 Recognizing the limitations of prior efforts, ARPA began looking at how to advance the
state-of-the-art of unmanned aircraft.
Principal Aerospace Engineer, 4121 Wilson Blvd Suite 800, Lifetime Associate Fellow.
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright 2010 by Michael J. Hirschberg. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
In 1962, the U.S. Navy began operating unmanned

QH-50 Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter (DASH) UAVs,
capable of carrying antisubmarine torpedoes, giving
destroyers the ability to attack enemy submarines far beyond
the range of their antisubmarine rockets. As such, it was the
first time that a reusable UAV had been developed and
operated for attack missions. A Navy/ARPA program
dubbed Snoopy, which had begun in January 1965, had
equipped a DASH with a real-time TV camera for destroyer
artillery spotting over the coast of Vietnam (particularly
since there were no enemy submarines to combat).*
Since the 30 nm range of the QH-50 far exceeded the 6
nm range of the sonar available on the older destroyers and
the sonar upgrade had dragged on for 8 years the Chief of
Naval Operations directed in December 1967 that the DASH
Figure 1. Gyrodyne DESJEZ QH-50D launches
be removed from these older, now obsolete ships. With a
from the destroyer, USS MOALE (DD-693) on
surplus
of
an ASW mission at sea on July 2, 1969 (courtesy
QH-50s, the
Gyrodyne Helicopter Historical Foundation).*
Navy, with
technical expertise from ARPA, conducted a number of experiments
with the DASH drones to examine the possibility of expanding its
role beyond anti-submarine warfare (ASW) operating from
destroyers. Under the Navy/ARPA DESJEZ program, QH-50D
aircraft were modified with three long-range fuel tanks and eight
Jezebel sonobuoy sensors, so as to obviate the need for the ships
sonar. The DESJEZ DASH (Figure 1) would cruise to a point up to
50 miles from the ship at an altitude of 4700 ft and then drop to sea
level and launch its sonobuoy(s). If it detected a submarine, it could
then drop its MK-44 torpedo. With the extra tanks, the DESJEZ
(Destroyer Jezebel) DASH had an overall endurance of up to four
hours, becoming, in essence, an independent hunter-killer platform.*
Figure 2. Gyrodyne Nite Gazelle with
Beginning in January 1968, ARPA conducted a number of
XM-18 bomblet dispensers (each with
experiments on weaponizing the DASH for other applications,
six tubes holding 19 bomblets each for a
largely under
total of 228 bomblets per aircraft), a TV
the
Nite
camera and an XM129 grenade
Gazelle effort.
launcher (courtesy Gyrodyne Helicopter
These
were
Historical Foundation).*
initiated
to
eliminate high value targets in North Vietnam. Figure 2 shows
an anti-personnel platform, fitted with two bomblet dispensers
and two M5 turrets one with a grenade launcher and the other
with a high resolution TV camera that were slaved together
for targeting. *,5,39
Two other efforts under Nite Gazelle, Attack Drone and
Gunship, were hunter-killer pairs, with the two aircraft
operating as a team. The Gunship would lead to clear a low
level flight path to the target area, whereupon the Attack Drone
would release two 250 lb bombs. Gunship had a daylight TV
camera (developed by Cohu Electronics, Inc.) that was bore
sighted to the tilt-mounted minigun (Figure 3). The camera was
Figure 3. General Electric GAU-2B-A minigun
used for target acquisition, aiming and damage assessment.
mounted on a QH-50D (courtesy Gyrodyne
Helicopter Historical Foundation).*
Attack Drone had an ordnance load of two MK-81 bombs, plus
a telemetry package and a Cohu real-time downlinked TV
http://www.gyrodynehelicopters.com
2
camera mounted on a calibrated tilting mount. The Attack DroneGunship system was studied for possible deployment to Vietnam. *
Another effort tested a hypervelocity gun on a DASH (see Figure 4).
ARPAs Nite Panther built on the Snoopy efforts in response to a
Marine Corps urgent operational need. ARPA contacted Gyrodyne on
March 7, 1968 and received a proposal less than two weeks later; by
April 1, Gyrodyne received a Naval Air Systems Command letter
contract for delivery of three Nite Panther drones and two mobile
ground control systems mounted on military Jeeps which were all
delivered within the week. The Jeeps, QH-50Ds, support equipment,
trained Marine Corp personnel and Gyrodyne technicians were
deployed from San Clemente Island (55 nm south of Long Beach,
California) on April 18, 1968. *
The two Jeeps (shown in Figure 5) were Model M38A1 quarterton 4x4 trucks, each built with a modified version of the AN/SRW4B
Target
Control System
Figure 4. Nite Gazelle with a
used on
the
hypervelocity gun (courtesy Gyrodyne
destroyers,
as
*
Helicopter Historical Foundation).
well
as
the
necessary equipment for receiving, monitoring, recording and
playback of the video downlink and a Special Support
Telemetry System to monitor 38 data parameters, plus two
synchronizing channels processed by the airborne telemetry
system. One truck also was modified as the Command-Start
Jeep with the necessary engine start umbilicals and the
Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS).*
Each Nite Panther drone was equipped with:
Two 40 gallon self-sealing extended range fuel tanks
Armor protection of the engine and avionics
Cohu daylight TV camera
ITT low light level TV camera
Dynasciences Dynalens System for each TV camera
Covert IR illuminator
Laser rangefinder
Telemetry with distance-azimuth measuring equipment
capability and capability for in-flight monitoring of
QH-50D systems
X- and C- band radar transponders and antennas
Revised altitude references including a visual readout by
means of TV and a pressure transducer input through
the telemetry*
The three aircraft were configured to fulfill different
missions; for example, either a daylight high resolution
monochrome or a low light level monochrome TV camera could
be mounted on the DASH. Testing of the three aircraft prior to
deployment accounted for a total of 12.2 flight hours and 31
flights. Unfortunately, all three aircraft had been lost off
Figure 5. Nite Panther Command-Start Jeep
Vietnam by April 28; it is not known if they were successful
(top) and Jeep Control Station (bottom)
*
during operational testing.
(courtesy Gyrodyne Helicopter Historical
Foundation). *
3
Figure 6. Nite Panther with three

extended range fuel tanks and a lowlevel light TV camera (courtesy
Gyrodyne
Helicopter
Historical
Foundation). *
ARPA later added a 3-hour loiter (using three auxiliary fuel tanks)
that provided a 50 nm operating range (limited by the ships tracking
radars). Figure 6 shows the installation with a low-level light television
camera. Another Nite Gazelle QH-50D (Figure 7) sported a moving
target indication radar system, mounted on a two-axis tracking mount.
The DASH could then transmit the surveillance radar to the destroyer
for real-time over-the-horizon radar coverage.*
An extension of the
Nite Gazelle program
added
a
Korad
Corporation
laser
designator to provide
targeting points for Air
Force and Navy jets.
The DASH would use
its day or night TV
camera to locate a
target,
and
then
illuminate it for laserguided bombs.
A
LARS (Laser-Aided
Rocket System) air-toground rocket system
was
later
added
Figure 7. Nite Gazelle with an AN/PPS-5
(Figure 9) so the
MTI radar system (courtesy Gyrodyne
DASH could destroy
Helicopter Historical Foundation). *
targets that it found. *
ARPA
also
experimented with QH-50s for base perimeter surveillance (Seek
Launcher) with the Air Force, a classified day/night sensor for the
Defense Intelligence Agency and the Navy (Blow Low), and extending
the command, control and communications range through a data link
relay (Grandview).
Other
ARPA
experiments with the
Nite Gazelle laser
designator used a
rocket with a laser
seeker (Figure 9); this
Figure 8. Low Blow created a high-end
eventually resulted in
ISR platform (courtesy Gyrodyne
the Army M712
Helicopter Historical Foundation). 39
Copperhead
laserguided munition that
was used so successfully in Desert Storm. Finally, ARPA used the
DASH with the Army to validate the concept and sensors for its
unmanned surveillance aircraft, discussed below.
However, with the operational use of the DASH drones over in
1970, and with the war in Vietnam drawing to a close, ARPA
Figure 9. Nite Gazelle with a day/night TV
concluded its experiments in 1974. With over 650 DASH aircraft
camera, laser designator and a single
built, however, the QH-50D lived on as a target drone for the Navy
Martin Marietta LARS rocket in the
*
until 1995 and the Army until May 2006!
center (courtesy Gyrodyne Helicopter
Historical Foundation). *
*
4
All known ARPA-related projects are summarized in Table 1. Note that the Navy (without ARPA) considered
using the DASH for evacuation / rescue of personnel (called Project Midget) and electronic countermeasures
(Project DAMPS); numerous other missions and payloads were also examined over its nearly 50 years in service.
Table 1. Summary of ARPA experiments with the QH-50D DASH.*
Program
Sponsor(s)
DESJEZ
Navy/ARPA
Snoopy
Navy/ARPA
Purpose
Hunter-Killer ASW DASH, with extended fuel tanks and sonobouys; also showed
defense of aircraft carriers from ship-to-ship missiles by acting as a decoy
Surveillance with real-time TV for gun spotting for U.S. surface ships off Vietnam
Seek Launcher
ARPA/Air Force
Surveillance: base perimeter defense using MTI radar and low-light TV
Blow Low
Army Armed
Drone
DIA/ARPA/Navy
Nite Panther
ARPA
Nite Gazelle
ARPA
Grandview
ARPA
MASSTER
Army/Navy/ARPA
Surveillance (day or night) sensor payload-classified

TV surveillance and ordnance delivery using XM-129 grenade launcher and XM-25
bomblet dispensers
Surveillance and artillery spotting by the use of radar, day and night TV, and other
sensors with tracking capability for moving targets.
Nite Panther with ordnance delivery (precision bombing, SAWS ammo, rockets and
missiles) capability on stationary and moving targets
Nite Gazelle operating through a relay data link to extended ranges; TV-bandwidth
communications
Validation testing for unmanned aerial surveillance system concept at Ft. Hood,
Texas; MTI radar and day/low level light TV as sensors
ARPA/Army
III. The Long Road before the Pioneer

Although the DASH sensor tests were successful, the systems were very expensive. In 1971, Dr. John Foster, the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), recommended that ARPA begin considering lightweight,
rugged, inexpensive, model-airplane technology as the basis of small unmanned aircraft then called remotely
piloted vehicles (RPVs). This was also the recommendation of the Defense Science Board (DSB) in 1972; as a
result, (the now renamed) DARPA also began work on a lightweight, compact, low-cost sensor/laser designator.3
Three levels of RPVs were then being considered by DoD: High Altitude/Long Endurance (HALE) to replace
manned reconnaissance aircraft like the U-2; the Medium-Scale RPV, between 500 lb and 5,000 lb weight class, to
be used for low-altitude reconnaissance, electronic warfare and strike; and the Mini-RPV which were scaled
upward from model airplane technology and as such will be characterized by low-speed, limited endurance, small
payloads and operating at relatively low altitudes, day or night under adverse weather conditions. They are designed
to be cheap and easily maintained, thus making it possible to procure large numbers. 6
Praeire and Calere
The DARPA Mini-RPV program was begun in March 1972
with Ford Motor Companys aerospace subsidiary, Philco-Ford
Corporation (renamed Ford Aerospace in 1976, it eventually
became part of Lockheed Martin). Philco-Ford developed a series
of low-cost mini-RPVs with two interchangeable modular sensor
payloads: both aircraft used a wide-angle, non-stabilized camera
with a zoom lens for basic navigation and gross sensor pointing,
plus Praeire (Latin, meaning to precede) had a narrow-angle
stabilized daylight television and TWL-50 laser designator, while
Calere (to glow) used a lightweight, Texas Instruments
forward-looking infrared (FLIR) sensor for night operations and a
larger TWL-100 designator. Each RPV was radio controlled and
operated by a crew of two: the pilot/navigator and the sensor
operator. 7,8,10
Figure 10. Philco-Ford Praeire I Mini-RPV.

The sensor was between the main wheels. 38
5
Two of each aircraft were built. The aircraft (Figure 10) was built of wood and fabric, and was powered by a
two-cylinder engine mounted in the nose and driving a two-blade propeller; it had a wingspan of 10 ft. Praeire
weighed 75 lb with a 25 lb payload and had a maximum endurance of about 2 hours; Calere was slightly heavier at
85 lb gross weight, due to the FLIR and a larger laser designator. Cruise speed was about 52 kt; range was over 10
nm. It made its first flight in 1973 under joint DARPA-Army-Air Force partnership. It was intended to have a
production cost of about $10,000 per vehicle. In flight tests at Eglin Air Force Base during the summer of 1973,
Praeire successfully designated targets for laser-homing bombs delivered by tactical aircraft. 9,10
Nonetheless, there were some difficulties with the IR payload that needed additional development.9 Survivability
aspects were taken into consideration, leading to reduced radar and IR signature. In addition, the sensors were
located in a round turret on top of the forward fuselage (see Figure 12); in flight, this nose section rotated so that the
sensors were on the bottom of the aircraft this protected the sensors during take-off and landing and facilitated
larger viewing coverage by the sensors. The resulting Philco-Ford
(then renamed Aeronutronic) Praeire/Calere II was powered by a
modified 5 hp lawnmower engine, which was mounted above and
behind the wing driving a two-blade pusher propeller. The aircraft
weighed 90 lb, had a 9.5 ft fuselage and a 12 ft wingspan; it also
had an endurance of almost 6 hours. By this time, the payloads
had much improved in capability and reduced in size. The
TV/laser package weighed 19 lb and the FLIR about 6.5 lb. The
aircraft demonstrated their TV, FLIR and laser payloads to
representatives from the Army, Air Force and Navy. An electronic
warfare payload capable of interception and/or jamming were
also developed and tested by the Army Electronics Command at
Fort Huachuca, Arizona, carrying an electronic warfare payload.
Figure 11. Philco Ford Praeire II. The
3,7,10
camera, shown above the nose, rotated to
38
Several examples of an extended range version with a high
the bottom of the fuselage in flight.
performance data link, the Praeire IIB (see Figure 12), were also
built. It had a 13 ft wingspan and an 11 ft length, an empty weight of 89 lb and a maximum take-off weight of 136
lb. It used an 8 hp Kolbo engine and could reach 75 kt, but cruised at 48 kt; the maximum altitude was about 10,000
ft. Significantly, a number of Praeire IIB RPVs were sold to Israel
in 1977. 10
Finally, Calere III featured a new, lighter FLIR/laser target
designator combination, developed under the DARPA Lightweight
Advanced Night/Day Surveillance System (LANDSS). The aircraft
was somewhat smaller, with a wingspan of 9 ft and a gross take-off
weight of 60 lb. First flight was in 1976. 10
Based in part on the results of the Mini-RPV program, the Army
initiated an operational system development program in late 1974;
Lockheeds Aquila, however, was never fielded, as the
requirements, weight and costs eventually spiraled out of control,
with the program finally terminated in 1987. Unbelievably, after the
Figure 12. Philco Ford Praeire IIB. This
impressive results of operational UAVs used in Vietnam, the U.S.
ungainly-looking aircraft was an ancestor
military failed to develop any new operational UAVs until the midof the Pioneer UAV. 10
1990s.4,41
STAR, Aequare and Axillary
Several other mini-RPV efforts were also underway in the early 1970s. In 1973, DARPA began an effort for a
low-observable mini-RPV for the Navy Shipborne Tactical Airborne RPV (STAR) program, with the mission
objective of locating, indentifying and targeting surface vessels. Teledyne Ryan built three examples of their Model
262, dubbed the Manta Ray. This 7 ft span delta flying wing was constructed of fiberglass and used a propulsive
ducted fan (with the inlet and exit covered by a screen) that was mounted between two inclined vertical tails. It had
inherently low acoustic, radar and infrared signatures. 10
The Manta Ray weighed about 165 lb and had an endurance of around 8 hours. It was powered by a 25 hp
McCulloch MC-101 two-cylinder, two-stroke, air-cooled engine. 11 In flight, the STAR was controlled by radio
commands. Launch was via a compressed-air rail launcher, while recovery was by an automatic flight into a large
6
vertically-mounted net, as shown in Figure 13. The STAR proved the feasibility of a RPV operation from small
ships; in fact, similar approaches were used by the Pioneer operations from battleships (rocket assist) and on the
ground (pneumatic launcher assist). The operational version was expected to carry electro-optical sensors, a radar,
electronic equipment or other payloads. But, although flight tests were successfully concluded in 1976, a production
contract did not result.10 In 1977, the Navy was developing an RPV to provide target acquisition for its guided
projectile and the Harpoon anti-ship missile, building on the STAR program and prior DARPA sensor and
communications developments. Unfortunately, these efforts eventually came to naught.
Figure 13. Teledyne Ryan ship-launched mini-RPV. Net recovery tests were conducted in 1976-77. 10
In parallel, DARPA also initiated development of the Aequare (Latin for to equalize) mini-RPV with the Air
Force, which was intended to be launched from a manned aircraft for target designation in heavily defended territory
and/or in adverse weather. An award was made to Lockheed Missiles and Space Company (LMSC) in 1973 (the
fiberglass airframe was manufactured by Windecker Industries) and first flight was in mid-1975. 3,10
The 7.4 ft long Aequare (Figure 15) was to be carried
by a McDonnell F-4 Phantom inside a pod that was built
from an SUU-42/A flare dispenser. The pod was dropped
at 25,000 ft; when it reached 14,000 ft, a drogue chute
would deploy and pull the pod off of the RPV. The
wings then pivoted and extended to 7.5 ft and the 12.5 hp
McCullough MC-101 engine was started. (The threebladed wooden pusher propeller was shrouded to protect
the blades during extraction.) The F-4 would then serve
as a relay for command and control, and well as sensor
imagery and data between the RPV and the ground
Figure 15. Lockheed Aequare air-launched ministation. The RPV carried a laser designator to illuminate
10
RPV with the wings folded.
targets that could then be attacked by the F-4 or other
aircraft. The 140 lb Aequare flew at 100 kt and had a range of
about 175 nm or an endurance of about two hours. The vehicle
itself was not recovered, but the sensors could be ejected with a
small parachute and reused. As many as 20 of the RPVs were
built. Several demonstrations were conducted and as many as 20
aircraft plus a ground control system were delivered to the Air
Force, before the Air Force completed the follow-on program in
March 1976.10
Aequare grew out of a joint DARPA/Air Force/Army study
during the early 1970s called the Remotely Piloted Aerial
Observation Designation System (RPAODS). Another RPV
program under this effort was Axillary (Latin, relating to the
feathers under a birds shoulders), which developed the EFigure 14. E-Systems E-45, developed in
Systems E-45 expendable mini-RPV (Figure 14), capable of
the DARPA/Air Force Axillary program. 38
7
loitering and attack. The E-45 was intended to be a multi-purpose testbed with a gross weight of 45 lb. It was a highwing monoplane with twin tailbooms and was powered by a rear-mounted 2 hp single-cylinder two-stroke engine
powering a pusher propeller. The wingspan was 7.9 ft and overall length was 7.8 ft; the cruise speed was 43 kt and
endurance was 5 hours. The main sensor was a gimbal-mounted miniature TV camera.3
A total of twelve E-45s were built and first flew in June 1974. Radar homing tests were also conducted; with a
small explosive charge, they could have been used for suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD). Some aircraft
were upgraded to the E-55 standard, with a 3.7 hp Toper single-cylinder engine. This increased the maximum gross
weight to 55 lb and speed to 52 kt, but reduced the endurance to 4 hours. This also doubled the payload from 15 lb
to 30 lb. 10
From the results of these programs, the Air Force initiated the Harassment Drone program, intended for air
defense saturation and destruction; five E-55s were modified for demonstrations for the Air Force in 1976. This
program led to the AGM-136 Tacit Rainbow, which, in 1991, was unfortunately also cancelled, just prior to
production, for cost reasons.
Technology Transitions
Despite the repetitive cycle of promising technologies that failed to reach operational service, a strange series of
events eventually transitioned DARPA technology to the U.S. military. As mentioned above, several Praeire IIB
systems were acquired by Israel in 19773 and the Praeire sensor technologies were combined with existing Israeli
UAV platforms the Tadiran Mastiff and the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) Scout, both of which were used
extensively in the 1973 Arab-Israeli War (and, interestingly, grew from the radio controlled model aircraft
brainchild of a former Ryan Lightning Bug engineer). These upgraded systems were used in the 1982 Lebanon War,
and when the US Navy was drawn into the conflict in 1983, it was impressed by their capabilities, particularly for
artillery spotting. As a result, the Marines began experiments with the Mastiff in the U.S. In 1984, Tadiran and IAI
formed a joint subsidiary (IAI Mazlat Ltd later renamed IAI Malat) and joined with the American company AAI
Corporation (which had originally stood for Aircraft Armaments, Inc.) to propose a modified Mastiff with a larger
engine to the U.S. Navy, named the Pioneer.12,42 (Note that in 1991, the companies founded Pioneer UAV, Inc. to be
the prime contractor for the aircraft.)
Consequently, the first post-Vietnam UAV that was fielded with the U.S. military was the Israeli-developed
Pioneer in 1986, which leveraged U.S. technology investments by DARPA in the 1970s. During Operation Desert
Storm, the Pioneer (Figure 16) flew nearly 300 reconnaissance sorties and was so effective in directing battleship
artillery fire that Iraqi soldiers famously surrendered to the UAV upon hearing it fly overhead. 13 The Pioneer
subsequently expanded to the Navy and Army, and led to the development of the AAI Corporation Shadow, now
operated by the Army. (AAI is now part of Textron.)
Figure 16. An AAI RQ-2A Pioneer uses a small rocket motor to launch from the USS Iowa in 1986;
recovery was by a net (courtesy U.S. Navy).
Several other technologies took a less circuitous route to service introduction. DARPA developed sensor
packages to provide real-time (or near real-time) data links that were capable of target acquisition and recognition at
high speed. This target acquisition data system, developed under RPAODS, was transferred to the Army in 1974.
8
A compact, high performance MTI radar was also developed. It had a range of 15 km (8 nm) and could
recognize various types of ground and (low flying) air vehicles. A miniature emitter locator was developed to
complement the MTI radar; a combined system was also explored.
Perhaps most important, however, was DARPAs development of a stabilization system suitable for Mini-RPVs
with only intermittent control inputs. An anti-jam data link, the Integrated Communications-Navigation System
(ICNS) capable of automatic acquisition, aircraft location and transmitting both digital data and video was
transferred to the Army in 1978 for testing on both manned and unmanned aircraft.
Between 1972 and 1977, DARPAs investment in Mini-RPV developments was close to $15M (about $60M
today). 14 As noted in the IDA study:
The efforts conducted through the 1970s laid the foundation for many of the later US RPV/UAV
developments. But, with the transfer of programs to the Services in the late 1970s, DARPA was left
temporarily out of direct involvement with the Services in RPV/UAVs. However, work continued on
enabling technologies (especially sensor and command and control research) along with highly classified
work with non-DoD Agencies (e.g., CIA) and the Air Force. 14
IV. Longer and Higher

Following the Sunrise with the Broomstick
Astro Flight, Inc. was founded in 1969 by Robert and Roland Boucher, who wanted to develop highperformance radio controlled competitive sailplanes. They set a world distance record in 1970; the following year,
Astro Flight demonstrated the worlds first practical electric powered model airplane, setting a record of over an
hour on a single battery charge. 15
Also that year, Astro Flight began discussions with ARPA and in 1972 demonstrated a drone prototype that set
another world record: a flight of 19 miles in less than 30 minutes, exceeding 55 miles/hour. ARPA was skeptical that
battery power would ever provide sufficient endurance. John Foster (DDR&E) suggested that if Astro Flight could
extend the endurance beyond 12 hours, the military might be interested. Using a new Heliotek high-efficiency solar
cell expected to have a power density of 100 W/lb and a conversion efficiency of 14%, they knew they could fly an
aircraft, but needed a sufficient energy storage system. The solution, therefore, was to climb high during the day and
glide during the night. Astro Flight was awarded a (now) DARPA contract, through Lockheed Missiles & Space
Company, in April 1974. 15
Figure 17. Astro Flight Sunrise I the worlds first successful solar powered aircraft
(courtesy of Astro Flight).
9
The Heliotek solar cells were almost 50% heavier than expected, raising the overall vehicle weight to 27.5 lb
including the telemetry and radar beacon. A battery-powered shakedown flight was made on September 17, 1974,
and, on November 4, 1974, Astro Flight flew the worlds first solar-powered aircraft, the Model 7404 Sunrise, at
Bicycle Lake, California (see Figure 17). The RPV had a 32 ft wingspan with 4,096 solar cells, which were activated
after a catapult launch using a 165 ft bungee cord. Bob Boucher recalls, Scores of flights for three to four hours
were made that wet and windy winter. Some flights were made in winds of 20 to 25 mph!! The aircraft was
eventually damaged during a sandstorm. 15,16
DARPA was satisfied enough with the results to fund a
second demonstrator, dubbed Sunrise II, in June 1975.
Heliotek reduced the weight of their cells and significantly
increased efficiency, resulting in a wing panel with 4,480
photovoltaic cells (as seen in Figure 18) that weighed less
than 4.5 lb and could generated 600 W. First flight of the
22.5 lb second aircraft, referred to as 7404-02, was made at
Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on September 12, 1975
(Figure 19). After weeks of flight testing, a high altitude
flight reached 17,200 ft on a flight lasting 3 hours and 25
minutes. Unfortunately, a command and control failure led
to a structure failure that resulted in the loss of the aircraft.
Astro Flight calculated that Sunrise II could have reached
75,000 ft at 30 north latitude in June (or 25,000 ft in
Figure 18. Sunrise II wing center section with
winter), and could exceed 24 hour endurance during May,
4,480 solar cells (courtesy Astro Flight). 15
15
June and July.
Beginning in 1979, Astro Flight continued its work on solar power and eventually collaborated with AeroVironment to build the Solar Challenger, the first solar-powered aircraft to carry a human across the English
Channel, in 1981. AeroVironments HighAltitude Solar-Powered (HALSOL) flying
wing UAV first flew in June 1983.
Although flown on battery power, it
evaluated the effect of wing flexure on
solar-cell performance. It reached 8,000 ft
and flew for more than an hour, but the
conclusion was that the solar-cell
efficiency of the time was still insufficient
for practical long-endurance flight. It
wasnt until nearly two decades later that
AeroVironment solar-powered UAVs
approached 100,000 ft, with a predicted
endurance of days. 12
Although only the two Sunrise UAVs
were DARPA-funded, Ray Morgan,
AeroVironment chief engineer and
program manager of the Solar Challenger
program (and many others) recalls that
Bob Boucher, owner of Astroflight, was
absolutely critical
to the Solar
Challengers success. He was a consultant
on HALSOL as well, and built the motors,
gear boxes, and the mechanical side of the
propeller pitch control systems. Without
Bob, these two aircraft would not have
Figure 19. Astro Flight Sunrise II first flight on September 12,
been successful, and without ARPAs
1975 (courtesy of Astro Flight).
funding his solar aircraft development in
the 70s, we probably would never have
heard of Bob, let alone leveraged his experience and knowledge gained from the Sunrise project.17
10
Another DARPA/AeroVironment demonstration

program, Broomstick, was developed in 1986 to
explore the limits of airfoil design and straight-wing,
high-lift, high aspect ratio aerodynamics. This
demonstrator employed 50% thick airfoil sections
with circulation control, using differential blowing to
provide lift and control while also efficiently
achieving a very lightweight, high aspect ratio wing
structure.18 It used suction and blowing for boundary
layer control, propulsion, and flight control, with no
visible propulsion elements (inlets, exhausts,
propellers). Broomstick, seen in Figure 20, had a
span of 25 ft and a 20 inch chord; its flight weight
Figure 20. AeroVironment Broomstick demonstrator.
was 45 lbs. The airfoil was designed at David Taylor
It is flying in the direction of the small wheels. The
Model Basin (now part of the Naval Surface Warfare
stick on the rear held the angle of attack sensor
Center, Carderock Division), with modifications to
(courtesy of AeroVironment).
the suction section by heuristic development at
17
AeroVironment to keep the flow attached.
The first flight of the electric-powered demonstrator was in 1987, proving the feasibility of extremely thick
airfoils and the ability to control a straight (0 degree sweep), all-wing planform. Initially, Broomstick used
horizontal and vertical tails for stability mounted on a circular boom, approximately 4 ft long. First flight without the
tailboom was in 1992, after standing down for a couple of years waiting for funding to develop the digital autopilot
that stabilized the pitch axis. The angle-of- attack sensor was mounted on a stick at the rear of the aircraft; this fed
into the autopilot. Putting it behind the wing kept the pitch rate from causing dynamic instabilities with a positive
feedback loop into the autopilot, creating natural damping. Broomstick flew nominally around 15-20 mph. 40
From Albatross to Predator
In 1978, Abe Karem who was then
developing UAVs at Developmental Sciences,
Inc., after working in Israel on aircraft
developments designed a 90,000 ft altitude 5day surveillance aircraft using a piston engine that
produced 65 hp at sea level as well as at its
highest altitude, through the use of three-stage
turbo-charging, as well as three-stage aftercooling. This was conducted under DARPAs
Teal Rain program.
Karem left Developmental Sciences in
February 1980 to form Leading Systems, Inc.; and
(using private funds) built two prototypes of a
high aspect ratio, low empty weight, longendurance UAV called Albatross as well as
an advanced piston engine, avionics and a ground
station. DARPA funded a series of flight tests of
the UAV system and the engine from 1980-1982
to demonstrate the technical feasibility of long
endurance, with flights up to 56 hours. The
Albatross airframe was intentionally built with the
lowest technology materials to prove that its
advanced performance was not a result of using
advanced composites.
Based upon the success of the Albatross, a
scaled-up advanced technology configuration, the
Amber UAV, was started in December 1984
under a joint program with the Navy (with Army
Figure 21. Leading Systems Albatross (top), Amber

(middle) and Gnat 750 (bottom) (Leading Systems photos,
bottom two by Stephen Waide).
11
and Marine participation). Both aircraft are shown in Figure 21. Amber was originally to be launched by rocket from
a box launcher and be self-deploying, and thus had provisions for pivoting wings, and folding tails and propeller
blades, as well as the capability for a deep stall controlled recovery for precision landings on small unprepared
fields. The canister-launch capability for Amber was never tested, however the canister-launch aerodynamics were
wind tunnel tested with a 70% scale model at NASA Langley. 12,19
Before the Amber contract was consummated with Leading Systems, a Letter of Agreement (LoA) was signed
between the Director of DARPA and the Secretary of the Navy (with the support of the Marines) to have Amber if
successfully developed replace all low speed Naval UAVs (the Navy was then operating the Mastiff, which soon
came the Pioneer, as discussed below). By mid-1985, the Army joined the LoA, with the Navy assigned as the lead
Service for Amber transition to operations and production. In a meeting with the assistant secretary of the Navy in
late 1985, it was decided that Leading Systems would take their design to production, with as many as 200 aircraft
per year. As a result, Karem acquired a 200,000 square foot facility with the required shops for composites,
electronics, integration, ground testing, machine shops, etc. Karem leased, and later purchased, El-Mirage airport to
provide a fully-dedicated site for Amber flight test, training and operations. DARPA assembled a team of 25 experts
from the Army, Navy, Marines, NASA and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) as the DARPA Senior
Technical Advisory Group to provide streamlined guidance to Karem in order to achieve a major increase over
typical the UAV flight tempo, reduction in the operating team size, reduction in total man-hours per flight hour and
a drastic reduction in UAV loss rates.
In addition to using state-of-the-art advanced composites for light weight, Leading Systems designed Amber as
an integrated design, where every component and subsystem was an integral part of the overall performance
optimization. The tails were all-moving and the propeller had variable/reversible pitch; Amber (and later the Gnat
750) featured a purpose-built tall retractable landing gear for efficient loiter flight and carrying large payloads
under the wing and the fuselage this is probably a first for a UAV of this size. Nearly everything on Amber was
custom-designed because existing components
were just not considered to be adequate in terms
of performance, affordability and reliability:
digital ground control system, engine, propeller
and gearbox, computers, digital flight control
system, control actuators, wheels, brakes and even
tires!20 The purpose-built flight control computer,
for example was about four times as powerful as
the control system for the F-16 at the time, and is
essentially the same as is still flying in some of
the Predators today, a quarter century later.
The design maximum endurance was 48
hours. The aircraft first flew in November 1986
and soon set an endurance record of 30 hours and
reached an altitude of 27,800 ft. The basic version
(referred to as B45) was intended to perform a
Figure 22. Leading Systems Amber A45. The outboard
variety of missions, including surveillance,
wing dihedral and the pointed nose distinguishes this as
communications or video relay, radar, signals
an one of the original attack demonstrators (Leading
intelligence, electronic warfare, electronic support
Systems photo by Stephen Waide).
measures, jamming, reconnaissance etc. An attack
version (A45) was also developed shown in Figure 22 it would have jettisoned its wing to dive into a target.
Other variants included the canister-launched version (A40) and a high altitude version (H55), neither of which were
flown, however. The R52 integrated an MTI radar for ground surveillance; two were captive flown by MIT Lincoln
Labs on a De Havilland Twin-Otter.21
Three prototypes each of the A45 and B45 were built, and by 1988 LSI had demonstrated 30 hours at 17,000 ft
and 35 hr at 5,000 ft; maximum altitude reached was 27,800 ft. The three Amber A45s had accrued 38 flights (140
hours) and Amber B45s made 22 flights (128 hours) by this time. These aircraft were also flown at night and in bad
weather to demonstrate their ruggedness; Amber prototype No. 03 (an A45) was lost in an accident in September
1987. The structures were designed for 6.6 g and 12 ft/s landings.22
Karem identified the abysmal crash rate of other UAVs such as the Armys Aquila to be due, at least in part,
to the low number of flight hours that were being accumulated on those systems. The lack of a critical mass of flying
hours reduced pilot familiarity, leading to accidents. This in turn made the aircraft more expensive to keep flying,
which further reduced the flying rate and increased the accident rate. As a result, Karem built a trainer, called the
12
Gnat 400 (discussed below) had his four company pilots flying
constantly, during the day, at night, in bad weather; each pilot
had to accumulate 300 take-offs and landings prior to flying the
Amber. This all also contributed to one of the most important
contributions of the Amber program: increased reliability
Amber demonstrated 650 flight hours with only one accident
due to an engine failure a tenfold increase over other UAVs
of the time. In addition, the 10 aircraft built for the Navy
accumulated over 500 flight hours without a loss. 12
Leading Systems also developed two very low cost trainers
the Gnat 400BT (Basic Trainer) and the Gnat 400AT
(Advanced Trainer). The 400BT was purely company funded;
13 were built and flown extensively accruing over 400 flights
Figure 23. Leading Systems Gnat 400BT
and 350 hours by July 1989. More telling, however, is the
Basic Trainer (Leading Systems photo by
number of landings 1172 (including 40 night landings and 22
Stephen Waide).
hours of night flying). The Gnat 400BT shown in Figure 23
operation from the ground control station was identical to that of Amber. The Gnat 400BT was constructed with top
and bottom carbon-epoxy composite skins of the wing and fuselage in two integrated shells as a means to provide
low cost, medium endurance, and extremely low maintenance UAV operator training. It weighed 55 lb empty and
up to 121 lb gross. Maximum level speed was 100 kt, but best endurance was at 40-50 kt. Maximum endurance with
the 6 hp Sachs engine at 5,000 ft was 16 hours. 22
The Gnat 400AT was developed by the DARPA-sponsored Amber program, which ordered 6 examples for
avionics qualification and pilot training. It could also be used as a target drone. The 400AT was 132 lb empty and
375 lb at maximum gross weight. Maximum level speed was 170 kt true airspeed, but best endurance was at 40-50
kt indicated airspeed. Maximum endurance with the 25 hp NGL342 engine at 5,000 ft was 24 hours. By June 1989,
Leading Systems had made 10 flights for a total of 9 hours. 21
Leading Systems also developed a new, low-fuel consumption engine, the KH-800. The initials stood for Abe
Karem and Hans Hermann, a legendary race car engine designer; 800 indicated the displacement in cubic
centimeters (49 cubic inches). The engine was a horizontally-opposed, liquid-cooled, four-cylinder, four-stroke,
geared piston engine. It was extremely compact with a
minimal frontal area, high power at a moderate rpm, very
low fuel consumption, very low vibration and capable of
medium and high altitude operations. 16 prototypes were
built, with 750 hours of bench testing, 300 hours in an
altitude chamber and 450 flight hours. Ten pre-production
KH-800 engines demonstrating 1800 test hours and 120
hours on Amber No. 02. The engine generated 65 hp at
7200 rpm, with a best fuel consumption of 0.4 lb/hp-hr;
maximum operating altitude was 33,000 ft. A KH-800T
engine with a turbocharger and aftercooler was also
developed, demonstrating 150 hp at 10,000 ft and 6400
rpm and 30 hp at 60,000 ft. 21
Furthermore, Leading Systems also started designing
advanced diesel powerplants that would be lightweight
enough to be applicable to an Amber-sized UAV. The
KH-1200D was begun in December 1985; it was a liquidcooled, three-cylinder/twin crankshaft, two-stroke,
geared, advanced multi-fuel piston engine. In addition to
replacing the Amber engine, a derivative of the KH1200TD was proposed as a candidate for the Navys
UAV Heavy Fueled Engine program.21 Only now,
however, after 25 more years is the US military fielding a
UAV with a lightweight, compact, high-power internal
Figure 24. Leading Systems DGCS87 digital
combustion engines capable of running on heavy fuel
ground control system (courtesy of Leading
(diesel or jet fuel), with the introduction of the Armys
Systems). 21
MQ-1C Warrior (a Predator derivative).
13
Leading Systems also developed a Digital Ground Control System, shown in Figure 24, that was capable of
controlling more than one UAV simultaneously. It was fully digital, programmable and configurable. Three
prototype ground stations were built and ground tested over 2000 hours. By mid 1989, they had been used for over
200 flight test hours. (The ground station hasnt changed much in appearance from that used today for the Predator.)
22
A maturation version, referred to as Amber I made its first flight in August 1988, with six delivered to DoD
by the end of 1989. It had a 29.5 ft wingspan, a 14.8 ft fuselage length, an empty weight of 485 lb, a payload up to
440 lb and a maximum launch weight of 1191 lb. By July 1989, Amber I demonstrated 38 hr 28 min of endurance at
5,000 ft as well as a minimum speed of 50 kt indicated air speed (the endurance record was set at the Association of
Unmanned Vehicles International 1988 symposium in a public demonstration). 12 Amber I also had accrued 69
flights and 347 hours, for a grand total of 107 flights and 487 flight hours for the A45, B45 and Amber I versions.
Amber I was integrated with the Pioneer TV and FLIR payloads, or could carry three payloads simultaneously:
FLIR, ESM and Radio Relay or FLIR, ESM and IR Linescan. It was also integrated with L-Band, L/S-Band and CBand data links. 22
More advanced Amber variants were
also proposed, including Amber III,
intended to be the production version with
more payload volume, more fuel, INS, GPS,
IFF, flight video recorder and a ballistic
parachute. Amber III featured a 37 ft
wingspan on a 18.6 ft fuselage; empty
weight was 535 lb and maximum launch
weight was 1200 lb, with up to 565 lb of
payload and up to 400 lb of fuel. A high
altitude long endurance version, Amber IV,
used a 65 ft span wing, and a 31.2 ft
fuselage. Maximum payload was 1000 lb
and maximum weight was 2000 lb. Amber
Figure 25. Three variants of the Leading Systems Amber
IV required the higher performance KHfuselage displayed in a July 1989 brochure (courtesy of
21
800T engine, and added a much larger wing,
Leading Systems).
more fuel, and double the payload weight,
but with 90% system commonality with Amber III. Company funding had developed the tooling for Amber III, with
the tooling nearly complete for Amber IV. 21 None of the advanced versions were flown, however. 19
Unfortunately, after DARPA transferred Amber to the Navy in September 1987, the program lost out to
competing priorities. 41 In an AIAA article published in February 1989, acting DARPA Systems and Technology
Office Director Bob Moore stated:
Unfortunately, DARPA turned the program over to the services prior to the system maturation and user evaluation.
Despite congressional support, unquestioned need for a long endurance systems on the battlefield, and success of
the technology demonstration, DARPAs decision to turn AMBER over to the services could [and did] prove fatal
to the program. The services are having difficulty finding adequate funding for field evaluation of AMBER while
40
simultaneously meeting the expense of fielding PIONEER.
The issue had been compounded when, in late 1987 (as part of the the FY88 Defense Budget), Congress
concerned about the failure of the military to deploy UAVs and the direction of UAV development in general
consolidated all UAV developments into a Joint Program Office (JPO) in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
However, the operational concepts focused on short-range and short-endurance tactical operations. The Amber III
was proposed as a candidate for the Short Range UAV mission, while Amber IV was suggested for the HALE
mission. Ambers capabilities, however, were so far beyond those of the existing UAV, the Pioneer, which was
proposed for artillery spotting for naval ships, that the military had no concept of operation for its use, and it was not
selected for operational development. In September 1989, the McDonnell Douglas/Developmental Sciences SkyOwl
and the Israel Aircraft Industries/TRW Hunter were selected to fly-off for the Short Range UAV over the
LSI/Hughes proposal for Amber; as a result, Amber did not transition to the U.S. military. The twelve surviving
Amber/Amber I aircraft were put in storage when the projected ended in 1990. 19,43
A lower technology export version, the Gnat 750, had been designed using some of the Amber and Gnat 400
tooling and hardware, but with a new, lower cost package, including a low-cost, commercially available engine. The
14
Gnat 750, developed entirely at company expense, replaced the high mounted pivoting wing with a longer (35.3 ft
span) low wing. The fuselage length was 16.4 ft. Empty weight was 440 lb and gross weight was 880 lb. The
maximum level speed was 155 kt and best endurance was 45-58 kt; maximum endurance was calculated to be 55
hours at 5,000 ft. A pre-production vehicle began flight testing in 1989 with the Rotax 532 engine. Leading Systems
envisioned a higher performance version with longer wings using their KH-800T engine. The US government
approved release of technical data on the Gnat 750 to 42 countries for export and/or co-production.21 Six were sold
to Turkey, and four for intelligence work in Bosnia.
But, without a customer, Leading Systems was sold to Hughes and then to General Atomics. Karem and his team
continued testing of the Gnat 750 and demonstrated a 40 hour endurance. In February March 1994, the Gnat 750
was flown over Bosnia to monitor the conflict there and demonstrated real time electro-optical and infrared video;
the data feeds were relayed through a manned aircraft to the ground station and then transmitted via satellite to the
Pentagon. 12 Although cumbersome, this method proved the potential. As a result, Karem (who stayed with General
Atomics until mid 1994) modified a Gnat 750 to the Whale configuration (shown in Figure 26) a teardropshaped wideband satellite antenna pod carried on top of the Gnat fuselage and a beyond-line-of-sight
demonstration was conducted. This effort was funded by the Joint Precision Strike Demonstration (JPSD) program
office for US Southern Command. 19
Figure 26. Gnat 750 Whale demonstrator with Ku SATCOM dish installed in a fairing (left) led to the
Predator (courtesy of General Atomics). 19
Soon thereafter, as a consequence of this test, the operational capability of the Gnat 750 aircraft was recognized
to be a Revolution in Military Affairs by the Vice Chairman of the Joint Staff and a rapid competition was held
under a new approach, called an Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD). The Gnat 750 was then
modified to incorporate the satellite antenna in the nose; with a stretched fuselage and longer wings, the aircraft
became the now famous Predator UAV, which first flew in July 1994. The so-called acquisition miracle of the
Predator ACTD took place in only about 6 months, but few realize today that it contained the developmental
systems from almost 15 years of DARPA and private UAV investments. The extraordinary success of the Predator,
fueled by DARPAs early Amber effort, quickly led to the rapid fielding of many other developmental systems
using the ACTD mechanism. Today, the Predator family of aircraft are among the most widely produced UAVs in
the world. 23
Condor Spreads its Wings
In parallel with the Amber development, Boeing was also developing an autonomous long-endurance UAV,
dubbed Condor (Figure 27). The huge aircraft with a 200 ft wingspan was powered by two six-cylinder piston
engines, with two-stage turbochargers for high-altitude flight and a gearbox to shift the propellers to a higher RPM
at these high altitudes. The wing aspect ratio was 36.6 and the lift-to-drag ratio was 40.24
The Condor featured lightweight composite and honeycomb structures, autonomous controls, high-altitude
aerodynamics, and a fuel-efficient propulsion system (design input was also gained from legendary composite
aircraft builder, Burt Rutan).25 The aircraft was initiated as a Boeing-funded development to demonstrate that these
15
four technology challenges could be integrated in a full-size aircraft. The aircraft was rolled out on March 31, 1986.
26
Beginning with its involvement in July 1986, DARPA

funded Boeing to define the utility of a high altitude long
endurance (HALE) aircraft for military roles. Condor also
provided a large volume suitable for a wide range of
reconnaissance, surveillance or other mission payloads.
Boeing was tasked with integrating a representative
mission payload suite, as well as a line-of-sight and
satellite high bandwidth datalink. DARPA was also
interested in assessing the survivability and vulnerability
characteristics, indentifying typical payload suites for
various missions, and performing a series of trade studies
to indentify an operational HALE configuration. 26
DARPA funded flight tests under the Teal Rain
program, with first flight on October 9, 1988, operating
from Boeings test facility at Moses Lake, Washington.
As shown in A preprogrammed mission was uploaded to
Figure 27. One of the two all-bonded composite,
the onboard computers to direct the aircraft during its
all-electric Boeing Condors set an endurance
mission, with autonomous vehicle control and flight
record of 58.2 hours. The ventral and dorsal
management function through the digital avionics.
radomes and engine superchargers were added
Condors mission could be updated in flight if needed, but
after first flight (courtesy of Boeing Historical
more importantly, the aircraft was capable of making
Services).25, 12
contingency decisions in the event of component failures,
such as loss of an engine.26 The flight control surfaces were effected via electromechanical actuators (EMAs). The
fly-by-wire aircraft used only electrical secondary power to operate all the subsystems in the vehicle, making it an
all electric airplane. This approach was selected since the outside air temperature could get as low as -120 F, a
situation that would have required a huge amount of power for hydraulics.
Table 2, Condor set an altitude record for piston-powered aircraft of 67,028 ft, as well as an endurance record of
58.2 hours on its final flight. It accrued a total of 140 flight hours. It had an estimated maximum range of 19,000
nautical miles. 12,24,44
A preprogrammed mission was uploaded to the onboard computers to direct the aircraft during its mission, with
autonomous vehicle control and flight management function through the digital avionics. Condors mission could be
updated in flight if needed, but more importantly, the aircraft was capable of making contingency decisions in the
event of component failures, such as loss of an engine.26 The flight control surfaces were effected via
electromechanical actuators (EMAs). The fly-by-wire aircraft used only electrical secondary power to operate all the
subsystems in the vehicle, making it an all electric airplane. This approach was selected since the outside air
temperature could get as low as -120 F, a situation that would have required a huge amount of power for
hydraulics. 27
Table 2. Boeing Condor flight log (two aircraft). 24
Flight
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Date
October 9, 1988
December 15, 1988
January 25, 1989
February 15, 1989
April 29, 1989
September 15, 1989
November 4, 1989
November 28, 1989
Max Radar
Altitude (ft)
4,192
12,352
30,376
67,028
50,111
54,682
54,500
55,000
Flight Time
(hr:min)
1:33
2:55
6:15
12.24
29:23
19:18
11:00
58:11
Comments
First flight
World altitude record for a piston engine aircraft
First flight with payload
Unmanned, unrefueled endurance record
The gross take-off weight was about 20,000 lb, with about 12,000 lb being fuel. The wing weight amounted to
less than 2 lb/ft2 compared to about 19 lb/ft2 for a Boeing 747 made possible by the all-bonded advanced
16
composites. The Condor could be partially dismantled for transportation in a C-5 Galaxy. In addition, the 66 ft long
fuselage featured removable side panels for easy access to the payload, which could be as large as 1800 lb. 24,27
Although the Navy had planned to buy 50 Condors, the consolidation of the program into the JPO again derailed
production plans. But, just as Praeire had given birth to the Pioneer, and Amber led to the Predator family of aircraft,
so too had Condor proven the concept for a high-altitude, long-endurance aircraft.
Reaching for a New Tier
In 1993, the Office of the Secretary of Defense consolidated the development and operations of all airborne ISR
assets under a newly formed organization, the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office. DARO conducted a
comprehensive ISR requirements study to determine the appropriate mix of ISR assets. 12
The results of that study led to a three-tier approach to acquiring endurance UAVs for the critical need for nearreal-time reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition, command and control, signals intelligence, and similar
missions. Tier I was to be a quick reaction capability to address an urgent need in Bosnia; Tier II was medium
altitude endurance system, and Tier III was a high altitude endurance capability. It was expected that the first two
could be satisfied by the General Atomics Gnat 750 and Predator, respectively. Tier III was intended to be a large,
stealthy, highly sophisticated solution; however, due to cost concerns, the effort was terminated.28
It was eventually recognized that the Predator did not address all of the Tier II requirements, while the objective
Tier III system was unaffordable. A new strategy was soon put forth to develop so called Tier II+ and Tier IIIsystems. Both systems were to have unit flyaway costs of $10M. Tier II+ was to be highly capable and moderately
survivable, Tier III- was to be highly survivable and moderately capable. This mix of systems was envisioned to
address the full spectrum of warfighter requirements. DARPA was asked to undertake the development of the high
altitude endurance aircraft Tier II+ and Tier III- in a joint office with the Air Force. Based on their previous
work, Lockheed and Boeing submitted an unsolicited proposal to address the Tier III- requirements with a smaller,
less capable, but still stealthy, high altitude endurance concept. The aircraft was to carry either an electrooptical/infrared (EO/IR) or synthetic aperture radar (SAR) with moving target indication (MTI), allowing day/night,
all-weather reconnaissance over hostile terrain. It was expected to reach an altitude of 50,000 ft, have a range of 500
nm, and fly with an endurance of 8 hours. 28
Lockheed and Boeing were awarded a contract in June
1994 for their concept; the DarkStar UAV was rolled out
less than a year later and made its first flight on March 29,
1996. Unfortunately, the next month, the demonstrator
crashed on take-off for its second flight. Due to the fast pace
of designing and building the demonstrator, the landing gear
configuration, as well as the general aerodynamic design,
were found to have been compromised. A modified, more
stable design (the RQ-3A) first flew on June 29, 1998, and
made a total of five flights. The additional redesign
necessary for an operational concept was deemed to be too
expensive, and the unit cost had now exceeded the $10M
requirement. The aircraft did, however, successfully
Figure 28. The second Tier III Minus DarkStar
demonstrate the ability to execute a fully autonomous flight
flies over the Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., on
from takeoff to landing utilizing differential GPS. Two
June 29, 1998 (courtesy of DARPA).
additional RQ-3As were built, but never flew. 28
There was speculation for many years that DarkStar had
continued its development at least in some form. After photos from Afghanistan of a swept flying wing UAV
appeared during 2009, the Air Force provided the following information: The Air Forces RQ-170 [Sentinel]
program leverages the Lockheed Martin Advanced Development Programs (ADP) and government efforts to rapidly
develop and produce a low observable UAS. The RQ-170 will directly support combatant commander needs for
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance to locate
targets. The RQ-170 is flown by Air Combat Command
(ACC), 432nd Wing at Creech Air Force Base, Nev., 30th
Reconnaissance Squadron at Tonopah Test Range, Nev.29
Meanwhile, six-month study awards were made in March
1994 to five contractor teams for Phase I of the Tier II+
program: 30
17
Figure 29. Frontier Systems Shadow high
altitude endurance demonstrator. 31
Loral Systems Co. with Frontier Systems, Inc.

Northrop Grumman Aerospace Corp. with Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Orbital Sciences Corp. with Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Raytheon Co. Missile Systems Division with Lockheed Advanced Development Co.
Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical with E-Systems Corp.
Frontier Systems was the company that Abe Karem and key members of Leading Systems founded after Amber.
Loral provided the overall program management and sensor integration management. One of the development
efforts they had working on was a 26,000 lb flying wing concept for theater missile defense, called the W570A. (A
slightly smaller version for ISR and communications relay missions for export and civilian use, was called the
Arrow.) Reportedly, $10M was invested in its development. A scaled down version of the W570, the 3500 lb
Shadow flying wing (Figure 29), was studied under the Tier II+ Phase I, and built in April 1996 as a high altitude
endurance flight test bed and high altitude UAV trainer. 31
The award of the Tier II+ Phase II contract was made in April 1995 to Teledyne Ryan (which was arguably the
leading manufacturer of unmanned aircraft) for their Global Hawk concept, which could simultaneously carry both
an EO/IR and SAR sensor with MTI modes. A separate contract was also awarded to Raytheon to develop the
Common Ground Segment control system for both Global Hawk and DarkStar. 28
Global Hawk (Figure 30) simultaneously carries both sensor packages planned for DarkStar (which never flew
with a payload), but was intended to have longer endurance and more range, albeit over less hostile threat areas.
First flight of the Global Hawk was in February 1998. Two aircraft were initially built and they were tested
extensively. Initial flights were so successful and the ISR capability so compelling that three more aircraft were
built. The Air Force soon embraced the basic system concept and utilized the (now Northrop Grumman) Global
Hawks in numerous military exercises around the world.32
Three Global Hawks were deployed to Afghanistan in late
2001 to support Operation Enduring Freedom, and were flown to
Iraq for Operation Iraqi Freedom. With the ability to fly 1,200
nm and remain on station at 65,000 ft for 24 hours and the
ability to be controlled from anywhere in the world through
global communications the Global Hawk has helped to
transform the battlefield by providing incredibly high-resolution
imagery. A single aircraft can provide wide area coverage of up
to 40,000 square nautical miles roughly the size of the state of
Illinois per day. 32
Global Hawk provided Air Force and joint war-fighting
commanders with more than 17,000 near real-time, highresolution ISR images to support Operation Enduring Freedom,
flying more than 60 combat missions and logging more than
1,200 combat hours. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, the
system flew only 5% of the Air Forces high altitude
reconnaissance sorties, but accounted for more than 55% of the
time sensitive targeting imagery generated to support strike
missions. By mid-2007, the Global Hawk had flown a total of
over 1,000 flights more than half of which were combat
missions and had amassed more than 10,000 combat hours.
Global Hawk is the only UAV that currently meets the military
Figure 30. Northrop Grumman Global
and the Federal Administration Aviations airworthiness
Hawk (courtesy of Northrop Grumman).
standards and has been approved to fly regular flights within
U.S. airspace, providing, for example, real-time observation of the California wildfires in Fall 2007. 32
In addition to the seven original demonstration Global Hawks, called Block 0 aircraft, nine Block 10
production RQ-4A Global Hawks, including two for maritime demonstrations with the Navy, were built. The first of
the larger and more capable Block 20 aircraft flew in March 2007; a total of 47 RQ-4B systems are planned for
delivery to the Air Force. 32
V. Stealthier and Deadlier

Another major interest for DARPA has been in enabling unmanned aircraft to conduct complex, dangerous
missions, including lethal attack over denied enemy territory. Based on studies begun in 1994, DARPA initiated the
18
Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) program in 1998. One of the major goals was to significantly reduce the
militarys cost per target destroyed; this resulted in revolutionary approaches to cost reductions in development,
production, and operations and support. The initial missions selected were suppression of enemy air defenses
(SEAD) and deep strike: the most hostile missions possible, ones that would put pilots at extremely high risk. The
UCAV program also embraced a novel systems approach that would permit multiple aircraft to operate
collaboratively in order to cope with the difficult threats they were to face.
A development contract was awarded to Boeing in March 1999 for two X-45A demonstrators (Figure 31), with
first flight occurring in May 2002. Breaking the paradigm
of multiple operators per UAV, the UCAV program
demonstrated one operator controlling two highly
autonomous X-45As in flight; the operational goal was
for an operator to control as many as four aircraft
simultaneously and for them to collaboratively identify
and attack targets. Another goal was to take affordable
stealth to the next level.
The UCAV program made aviation history on many
fronts. In April 2004, an X-45A autonomously released an
inert GPS-guided bomb, directly hitting its target. In July
2005, control of two X-45As was transferred to another
operator 900 miles away over satellite control links. The
two aircraft also performed coordinated multi-ship attacks
Figure 31. Boeing X-45A (courtesy of DARPA).
on multiple targets, including simulated weapons release
and battle damage assessment against the targets.
Computer simulations of up to four UCAVs controlled by
a single operator were also conducted.
Meanwhile, DARPA had initiated a Naval UCAV
(UCAV-N) study in June 2000 and Northrop Grumman
built a demonstrator aircraft, the X-47A Pegasus (Figure
32), which flew in February 2003. In order to synchronize
these separate development efforts, the Joint DARPA/Air
Force/Navy Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS)
program was initiated under the sponsorship of OSD in
Figure 32. The Northrop Grumman X-47A
October 2003. This program sought to develop an
Pegasus made a single flight on February 23, 2003
integrated system that incorporated advanced air vehicle
(courtesy of Northrop Grumman).
designs from Northrop and Boeing with a single common
operating system to demonstrate the technical
feasibility, military utility, and operational value for a networked system of high-performance, weaponized UAVs to
effectively and affordably prosecute 21st century Air Force and Navy combat missions.
Despite significant progress, wavering interest from the military services led through a twisting path of
development. In November 2005, the management of the J-UCAS program was transferred to the Air Force. The
next month, however, it became clear that the Air Force
would withdraw from the program. The Navy assumed
responsibility and renamed the program UCAS-D (for
demonstrator). An award was made in August 2007 for
Northrop Grumman to build three X-47B demonstrators
(Figure 32) with first flight expected in 2010. The
demonstration is intended to show that carrier flight
operations can be routinely and safely conducted by
advanced unmanned aircraft. An operational capability is
envisioned by 2020.
Similarly, an Unmanned Combat Armed Rotorcraft
(UCAR) program was initiated in 2001 to develop a highly
autonomous advanced helicopter for armed reconnaissance
Figure 33. Northrop Grumman X-47B UCAS-D
roll-out, December 2008 (courtesy of Northrop
19 Grumman).
and attack missions. By operating close to its targets, the stealthy UCAR was intended to demonstrate the capability
to affordably and effectively identify and prosecute masked ground targets. UCAR was developing the key
technologies to enable the next generation of autonomous and collaborative operations: enhanced survivability at
altitudes above nap-of-the-earth, low-altitude autonomous flight, and standoff target identification. Despite
extremely promising progress, the Army pulled out of the program in late 2004, terminating the effort.
VI. Smaller and Quieter

Although the above discussion has primarily centered on
large, long range unmanned aircraft, DARPA has also made
significant contributions to miniaturizing sensors and
systems to the point of providing significant capability in a
vehicle that can fit in your hand. DARPAs Micro Air
Vehicle (MAV) program was started in fall 1996 to consider
technologies that could be used to develop an airborne
system for reconnaissance and surveillance with a maximum
dimension of 6 inches. Early MAVs were specifically
intended to fly autonomously to allow relatively untrained
soldiers to use them to scout out what lay beyond the next
hill or around a building. From the beginning, however, it
was hoped that the MAVs would progress to the ability to
operate in more difficult environs, such as urban centers and
building interiors. Impressive results were developed, and
the constituent technologies were matured over several
Figure 34. Honeywell RQ-16A T-Hawk MAV
years, with a few fits and starts.
(courtesy of Honeywell).
Although the military utility of the approach led to a size
increase, a contract to Honeywell Aerospace in 2003 matured its ducted-fan concept to the point that assessments by
several services have confirmed military utility. The Army Division that performed the Military Utility Assessment
of the MAV elected to take the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration residual assets when they deployed
in early 2008 to Iraq. Successful experimentation by Navy-led Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) teams
with 10 MAV systems (20 airframes) in theater led to a decision to procure systems for development. In January
2008, the US Navy placed an order for 372 MAVs, designated RQ-16A T-Hawk (named for the tarantula hawk
wasp).33 The UK ordered T-Hawk systems in January 2009; the Miami-Dade County police department also
evaluated the systems for civil purposes. 5
The Honeywell MAV uses a ducted fan with a 13 inch diameter, and weighs 18 pounds when fully fueled. It is
small enough to carry in a backpack and is equipped with video cameras or infrared sensors that relay information
back to foot soldiers using a portable handheld terminal. The MAV can hover and stare, providing a persistent lineof-sight into complex and urban terrain, even under bridges or jungle canopy. The vertical launch and recovery
capability enables operations from and to almost any site with no footprint. The Army Future Combat Systems
(FCS) Class I UAV was based on the MAV.
In 1999, DARPA released a Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) solicitation for a Clandestine
Unmanned Air Vehicle (CUAV) capable of delivering 2-20 lb sensor packages into hostile territory. A Phase I
contract was awarded to Aurora Flight Sciences for a UAV that
could transit at a relatively high speed, search a selected area,
transition to a hover, select a perch point on which to emplace
the package, and make a vertical landing. The GoldenEye 100,
as it was named, used the same engine as the Armys Shadow
200 UAV, powering a propeller within a 3 ft (outer diameter)
duct. The tailsitter UAV sat 5.5 ft tall and had a gross weight
of 150 lb. With a 20 lb payload, it was calculated to have a 160
kt maximum speed and a cruise range of 500 nm well in
excess of other UAVs then available. A unique feature of the
GoldenEye was its pivoting, torsionally-decoupled wings (10 ft
overall span), which could be independently trimmed for hover
(feathered into the wind for gust rejection), transition (sharing
lift with the propeller) and cruise (independently trimmed to
20
Figure 35. The Aurora GoldenEye 100
American Institute of Aeronautics developed
and Astronautics
as a DARPA Clandestine UAV
(courtesy of Aurora Flight Sciences).
provide a maximum lift-to-drag) for increased range and performance. 34,35 Flight testing of the GoldenEye 100
began on September 8, 2003.
Although tests of the GoldenEye 100 were ended before the performance envelope was thoroughly explored, the
much smaller GoldenEye 50 made its first flight in July 2004. First autonomous transition to and from horizontal
flight was performed in April 2005. The GoldenEye 50 is 28 inches tall, has a wingspan of 4.6 ft, has a gross takeoff
weight of 22 lb, and has a payload of 2 lb. The aircraft can cruise up to 1 hour at 50 kt with a maximum speed of 150
kt. The GoldenEye 50 was followed by the 65 inch tall GoldenEye 80. At 150 lb, this version uses a diesel engine,
which is expected to be compatible with Army requirements for future battlefields.36 The GoldenEye 80 first flew on
November 4, 2006.37
A parallel program to MAV has been the Organic Air Vehicle (OAV), which offers a self-contained (i.e.
organic) capability to company commanders to detect, track, and engage targets using precision-guided (offboard) weapons. Whereas MAV is backpackable, the OAV is intended to be transportable by Humvee for use at the
company level. The OAV system leverages the MAV autonomous ducted-fan technology, adding obstacle
avoidance for safe autonomous flight, remote start for mid-mission perch and stare or ground loiter, and a small
and lightweight mission equipment package with optical and infrared sensors as well as laser ranging and
designation on a stabilized gimbal. The OAV technology was developed and demonstrated to support the Army FCS
Class II UAV, and may be considered for other military needs as well. Both Honeywell, with a larger derivative of
their MAV, and Aurora, with the GoldenEye 80 (itself a scaled down version of the GoldenEye 100) were
competing for selection as the Armys FCS Class II UAV, before it was terminated in 2007.
VII. DARPAs Continuing Legacy

Today, DARPA is building on its impressive legacy of advanced aircraft developments. In the areas of
miniaturization, extending endurance, increasing speed, and exploring novel concepts, DARPA continues to push
the aerospace community to rethink basic assumptions, seeking high-risk, high-payoff approaches that will lead to
revolutionary aircraft designs.
DARPAs efforts to develop small aircraft have continued. Another spin-off from the MAV program is the
AeroVironment Wasp. The Wasp I is a fixed-wing UAV with a 14-inch wingspan, and weighs about a half-pound.
The air vehicle is capable of loitering at over 35 mph, and provides unobtrusive, real-time imagery from low
altitudes. The Wasps payload consists of two color video cameras, a GPS sensor, an altimeter, a compass, and a
sophisticated autopilot enabling hands-free operation. Wasp I prototypes were evaluated by the military in Iraq. The
initial prototypes eventually resulted in the much larger and more capable Wasp III, which is now in production for
the US Air Force. Now weighing over 1 lb, the Wasp III has a 28 inch wingspan and can carry 100 g (3.5 oz) of
sensors.
Meanwhile, the Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program objectives are to get even smaller: air vehicle systems less
than 7.5 cm (about 3 inches) in size, ultra-lightweight (less than 10 grams or one-third of an ounce), and with the
potential to perform indoor and calm weather outdoor military missions. The program is exploring novel,
biologically inspired conventional and unconventional configurations to provide the warfighter with unprecedented
capability for urban mission operations. This effort will push the limits of aerodynamic and power-conversion
efficiency, endurance, and maneuverability for very small air vehicle systems. The program is advancing
technologies that enable collision avoidance and navigation systems for use in GPS-denied environments and
developing efficient methods for hovering flight and deployment or emplacement of sensors.
In 1998, DARPA began investing in an advanced concept for a high speed rotorcraft. Boeings X-50 Canard
Rotor/Wing (CRW) technology demonstrator was to achieve high speed cruise by stopping and locking the rotor
and using it as a wing to achieve high speed forward flight; the canard and tail provided additional lifting and
control surfaces. Speeds as high as 400 kt were expected from an operational CRW design. Nine flights were made
between 2003 and 2006, but, unfortunately, both aircraft crashed before demonstrating the conversion.
That same year, DARPA started another long-endurance UAV program with Abe Karem, with his new
company, Frontier Systems, with similar range, altitude, and endurance goals as Amber, but capable of vertical
takeoff and landing. The A160 Hummingbird is a conventional-looking main-rotor helicopter with a very
lightweight and stiff graphite-composite rotor that can vary its rotor speed down to 50% of maximum. First flight of
the A160 was in January 2002, using an automotive piston engine. Subsequent demonstrators have changed from
three blades to four as the payload capacity has grown, and to a turbine engine version, dubbed the A160T. The
objective is to have an endurance of over 18 hours and an altitude capability approaching 30,000 feet. In May 2008,
the A160 (shown in Figure 36) demonstrated hover at 20,000 feet altitude and an un-refueled endurance of 18.7
hours, landing with over 90 minutes of fuel remaining. The A160 promises to provide a vertical takeoff and hover
21
Predator capability that will permit the use of staring radars, ladars, and other sensors to monitor the real-time
evolution of the conflict area in day/night, all weather, camouflaged and concealed target environments. Boeing
acquired Frontier Systems and the A160 project in May 2004; the program transitioned to the Army in 2009, and
Boeing is currently developing A160T aircraft for the
Army and other military services.
With Global Hawk and other UAVs capable of days of
endurance and some current efforts striving toward a
week DARPA is now looking to the next huge leap: Is it
possible to develop an aircraft with a useful payload of
1,000 pounds and able to generate 5 kW of power that
would be capable of staying aloft for five years? Can the
constant cycle of takeoff, landing, and undergoing
maintenance be broken? The Vulture program seeks to
have a sub-scale demonstrator by 2012 to see if aircraft
can be operated like satellites, which have already proven
that such long-term reliability is possible. An aircraft
operating in this manner could act as a persistent satellite
that would circle indefinitely over points of interest for
future battlefield commanders, providing all the
communication and ISR capability they require.
The solution to this DARPA-hard challenge could be
Figure 36. Boeing A160T Hummingbird with
to service the aircraft in flight. While aerial refueling is
removable logistics pod (courtesy of Boeing).
now commonplace for manned aircraft, in August 2007,
DARPA demonstrated autonomous airborne refueling that was described as being more accurate than a skilled pilot.
VIII. Conclusions
Since its first involvement with the Gyrodyne QH-50 DASH in the late 1960s, DARPA has made investments in
UAVs, maturing high-risk, high-payoff technologies that could only be tested in flight, transforming theory into
reality. While the demonstrators themselves were important because they proved that the aircraft concepts were
viable, perhaps even more important were the design tools. DARPAs legacy is not just the demonstrations or the
data; much more important is the advancement of the state-of-the-art across the industrial base. In addition to the
ongoing DARPA programs discussed above, numerous air vehicle and payload seedling study efforts are
underway today, each one with the possibility to further advance the capabilities of future unmanned aircraft.
Due to DARPAs efforts in advancing the state of the art of unmanned systems, the world has seen a
democratization of UAVs in a few short years, they have been transformed from national or strategic assets to
being operated by dismounted squads of soldiers. Much of industry is providing UAVs to the military services that
are built around DARPA technology investments. DARPAs current efforts continue to be focused on determining
what the fundamental limits of aircraft design are.
Due to investments over the past half-century, DARPA has developed a long legacy in aerospace technology,
and the efforts underway today and tomorrow will continue that legacy for decades to come.
IX. Acknowledgements
This paper would not have been possible had it not been for so many people that helped fill in the missing
pieces; foremost, former DARPA program managers, Mike Francis (now with United Technologies Corp.), Harry
Berman (now with Airborne Technologies) and George Baum and Bob Williams (both now at Directed
Technologies). Peter P. Papadakos (Gyrodyne), Graham Gyatt and Ray Morgan (both former AeroVironment),
Frank Pace (General Atomics) and Stephen Waide (former Leading Systems) were also instrumental. A special
thanks to DARPA employees Steve Welby, Dan Newman, Tom Beutner and Jan Walker. Angelo Collins, CENTRA
Technology, Inc., also provided invaluable assistance in preparing this paper.
22
X. References
1
Van Atta Richard, Fifty Years of Innovation and Discovery, DARPA 50 Years of Bridging the Gap,
Faircount Media Group, 2008.
2
, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Technology Transition, DARPA, 1997.
3
Van Atta, Richard H., et al, Transformation and Transition: DARPAs Role in Fostering an Emerging
Revolution in Military Affairs, Volume 2 Detailed Assessments, Paper P-3698, Institute for Defense Analyses,
November 2003.
4
Hirschberg, Michael J., American Attack Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): A Century of Progress, paper
2003-01-3064, SAE Aerospace, World Aviation Congress & Exposition, Montreal, Canada, September 2003.
5
Graham Warwick, DASH Paved the Way for Naval UAVs, Aviation Week & Space Technology, Ares A
Defense Technology Blog, April 16, 2009.
6
US Congress, testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, (Y4.Ar5/3:P94/6/1975/pt. 6, p. 3038),
March 1974.
7
, Defense, FLIGHT International, 13 June 1974
8
, Defense, FLIGHT International, 25 December 1975
9
, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Technology Transition, DARPA, 1997.
10
Munson, Kenneth, World Unmanned Aircraft, Janes Information Group, April 1988.
11
Parsch, Andreas, Directory of U.S. Military Rockets and Missiles, Appendix 4: Undesignated Vehicles,
Teledyne Ryan 262 Manta Ray, http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/tra-262.html, 2004.
12
Newcome, Laurence R., Unmanned Aviation: A Brief History of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, American Institute
of Aeronautics & Astronautics, September 30, 2004.
13
Daso, Dik A., Pioneer RQ-2A UAV, Collections Database, Smithsonian Institution National Air and Space
Museum, November 11, 2001.
14
Richard H. Van Atta, Sidney Reed, and Seymour J. Deitchman, DARPA Technical Accomplishments, Volume
II: An Historical Review of Selected DARPA Projects (IDA Paper P-2429), Institute for Defense Analyses,
Alexandria, VA, April 1991.
15
Boucher, Robert J., History of Solar Flight, AIAA paper 84-1429, AIAA/SAE/ASME 20th Joint Propulsion
Conference, Cincinnati, Ohio, June 11-13, 1984.
16
Cowley, M., Wings in the Sun: the Evolution of Solar Challenger, FLIGHT International, 13 June 1981
17
Morgan, W. Ray, comments to the author, December 10, 2007.
18
Berman, Harry, comments to the author, November 8, 2007.
19
Williams, Bob, comments to the author, November 2007.
20
Waide, Stephen, comments to the author, November 2007 and December 2009.
21
, Leading Systems, Inc., brochure, July 1989.
22
, Leading Systems, Inc., brochure, 1988.
23
Thirtle, Michael R., Robert V. Johnson, John L. Birkler, The Predator ACTD A Case Study for Transition
Planning for the Formal Acquisition Process, MR-899-OSD, RAND, 1997.
24
Nixon, David, The Boeing Condor, paper 2001-01-3029, SAE Aerospace, World Aviation Congress &
Exposition, Seattle, Washington, September 2001.
25
Yenne, Bill, Attack of the Drones, Zenith Books, St Paul, MN, 2004.
26
Johnstone, Robert (DARPA) and Neil J. Arntz (Boeing Military Airplanes), Condor - High Altitude Long
Endurance (HALE) Autonomously Piloted Vehicle (APV), paper AIAA-1990-3279, AIAA AHS, and ASEE,
Aircraft Design, Systems and Operations Conference, Dayton, Ohio, Sept 17-19, 1990.
27
Mehdi, I. S., R. N. Johnson and W. J. Hastings (Boeing Military Airplanes), Condor: An All Electric
Airplane, paper 912184, Aerotech Conference & Exposition, Long Beach, CA, September 1991.
28
Drezner, Jeffrey A., Geoffrey Sommer and Robert S. Leonard, Innovative Management in the DARPA High
Altitude Endurance Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Program Phase II Experience, MR-1054-DARPA, RAND, 1999.
29
U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet, RQ-170 Sentinel, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, Directorate of Public
Affairs, December 2009.
30
Sommer, Geoffrey, et al., The Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Acquisition Process A Summary of
Phase I Experience, MR-809-DARPA, RAND, 1997.
23
31
, Air Vehicle Specifications Developmental Systems, Shephards Unmanned Vehicles Handbook 2007,
The Shephard Press, 1996.
32
Northrop Grumman, Fact Sheet: RQ-4 Global Hawk High-Altitude, Long-Endurance Unmanned Aerial
Reconnaissance System, http://www.as.northropgrumman.com/products/ghrq4a/assets/HALE_Factsheet.pdf, May
2008.
33
Trimble, Stephen, US Navy unveils surprise order for ducted-fan UAVs, Flight International, January 25,
2008.
34
Schaefer, Jr., Carl G. and Lawrence J. Baskett, GoldenEye: The Clandestine UAV, Aurora Flight Sciences
Corporation, AIAA 2003-6634, 2nd AIAA Unmanned Unlimited Systems, Technologies, and Operations, San
Diego, California, 15 - 18 September 2003.
35
Schaefer, Jr., Carl G., Development and Test of the GoldenEye Clandestine UAV, Aurora Flight Sciences
Corporation, American Helicopter Society 59th Annual Forum, Phoenix, AZ, May 6-8, 2003.
36
, GoldenEye Ducted-Fan VTOL UAV Aurora Flight Sciences Corp (USA), Defense Update
International Online Defense Magazine, Year 2004, Issue 2.
37
Morris, Jefferson, GoldenEye 80 UAV Gearing Up For Second Flight, NetDefense/Aviation Week,
December 7, 2006.
38
Holder, Bill, Unmanned Air Vehicles An Illustrated History of UAVs, Shiffer Publishing, 2001.
39
Papadakos, Peter P., comments to the author, January 2010.
40
Morgan, W. Ray, comments to the author, January 2010.
41
Moore, Robert A., Unmanned Air Vehicles A Prospectus, Aerospace America, February 1989.
42
Rumpf, Richard and Irwin R. Barr, PIONEER is operationally capable, Aerospace America, February 1989.
43
Murphy, Ronald D., AMBER for long endurance, Aerospace America, February 1989.
44
Goo, Abraham M.S., Neil Arnitz and Ronald D. Murphy, CONDOR for High altitudes, Aerospace America,
February 1989.
24

DARPA Unmanned History

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

DARPA Unmanned History

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

4 - 7 January 2010, Orlando, Florida

To Boldly Go Where No Unmanned Aircraft Has Gone Before:

Through 45 years of development efforts, the Defense Advanced Research Projects

II. Early DASH Successes

In 1962, the U.S. Navy began operating unmanned

Figure 6. Nite Panther with three

Surveillance: base perimeter defense using MTI radar and low-light TV

Surveillance (day or night) sensor payload-classified

III. The Long Road before the Pioneer

Figure 10. Philco-Ford Praeire I Mini-RPV.

IV. Longer and Higher

Another DARPA/AeroVironment demonstration

Figure 21. Leading Systems Albatross (top), Amber

Beginning with its involvement in July 1986, DARPA

Loral Systems Co. with Frontier Systems, Inc.

V. Stealthier and Deadlier

VI. Smaller and Quieter

VII. DARPAs Continuing Legacy

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi