MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Beyond Line of Sight (BLOS) Operations

MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Beyond Line of Sight (BLOS) Operations

The Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton unmanned aircraft system (UAS) is a maritime variant of the Air Force’s high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) RQ-4B Global Hawk (Government Accountability Office [GAO], 2015).  The Triton, previously known as the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) UAS, is a component of the Maritime Patrol Reconnaissance Force (MPRF) family of systems (Naval Air Systems Command [NAVAIR], 2014).  It “…is intended to provide persistent maritime intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capability” (GAO, 2015, p. 115) in order to increase the intelligence capability and situational awareness of tactical, operational and strategic units (NAVAIR, 2014).  Triton mission capabilities include, but are not limited to:

·       Maritime and port surveillance,

·       Battle damage assessment,

·       Support of maritime and littoral operations, and

·       Communication relay (NAVAIR, 2014).

MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Operations

Infrastructure

Once fully operational, two operational squadrons will operate and maintain the MQ-4C UAS, which consists of the MQ-4C unmanned aircraft (UA), Mission Control Systems (MCS) and service support systems (SS), from two Main Operating Bases (MOB) (NAVAIR, 2014).  The MOB will, in turn, support a total of five Forward Operating Bases (FOB) (NAVAIR, 2014).  The MOB MCS, designated MD-3A, will be permanently located within the Continental United States (CONUS) at MPRF fleet concentration centers on the East and West coasts (NAVAIR, 2014).  Each MD-3A consists of a primary and secondary MCS, with each MCS manned by three air vehicle operators (AVO), one each for launch and recovery, transit and mission; two mission payload operators (MPO); a tactical coordinator (TC); a Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) coordinator (SC); and two system administrators (SA) (NAVAIR, 2014).  The FOB MCS, designated MD-3B, is a scaled down version of the MD-3A which will be deployed to operational theaters (NAVAIR, 2014).  Although capable of performing other functions, the MD-3A will be used primarily for UA command and control (C2) during launch and recovery operations (NAVAIR, 2014).  Each MD-3B consists of a single MCS manned by two AVOs and a SA (NAVAIR, 2014).

Manning Requirements

To the greatest extent possible, the MQ-4C UAS operational manning requirements have been designed to use capabilities and skill levels that currently exist within the Navy’s manpower structure (NAVAIR, 2014).  The AVO will be a qualified Naval Aviator with an additional MQ-4C aviator qualification designation (NAVAIR, 2014; Navy Personnel Command [NAVPERS], 2015b).  Additionally, “as required by the Federal Aviation Administration, this position is filled by a pilot that maintains an instrument rating” (NAVAIR, 2014, p. I-26).  The TC is a qualified Naval Flight Officer (NFO), also with an additional MQ-4C aviator qualification designation (NAVAIR, 2014; NAVPERS, 2015b).  Initially, qualified Naval Aircrewman Operators (AWO), with specific, established Navy Enlistment Classification (NEC) codes will be utilized for the MPO (NAVAIR, 2014; NAVPERS, 2015a).  A new NEC code has been established specifically for the MQ-4C UAS MPO, but has not yet been activated (NAVAIR, 2014; NAVPERS, 2015a).  The SC is not an aircrew position, but rather a data analyst required for specific missions/operations (NAVAIR, 2014).

Command and Control

            Like the Global Hawk, the Triton is capable of operating via line of sight (LOS) and beyond line of sight (BLOS) command and control (C2) links (NAVAIR, 2014).  A minimum of two C2 links, one primary link and one back-up link, are required between the UA and the MCS in control (NAVAIR, 2014).  Narrow bandwidth (NB) satellite communication (SATCOM) and LOS communications links are used to transmit C2 data only, while wide bandwidth (WB) SATCOM and LOS links are used for C2, sensor management and sensor data (NAVAIR, 2014).  Only the MD-3A includes WB BLOS SATCOM capability for C2.  The C2 architecture used in the MQ-4C “…provides connectivity to existing and emerging United States Navy (USN) and DoD communications infrastructure…” (NAVAIR, 2014, p. I-15).

The MQ-4C is launched by a qualified AVO located at the MD-3B within the specific area of operations (NAVAIR, 2014).  At a pre-determined point along the flightpath, C2 is passed to the AVO located at the MD-3A designated for BLOS transit and mission execution (NAVAIR, 2014).  Command and control is returned to the AVO located at the MD-3B once the UA is within LOS of the FOB airfield (NAVAIR, 2014).  Due to the inherent latencies in BLOS C2, LOS is preferred for launch, recovery and ground taxi operations (NAVAIR, 2014).  Voice communication with external airspace control agencies occur via voice communications coupled to radios on the UA, making communication with a MQ-4C AVO similar to communication with a pilot on a manned aircraft (NAVAIR, 2014).

Discussion

Beyond line of sight operation is essential to the Triton’s mission of providing long-range, persistent maritime ISR.  An advantage of BLOS operation is that, unlike LOS, the UA is not required to remain within a specific range from the MCS throughout the mission (Barnhart, Shappee & Marshall, 2011; Salas & Maurino, 2010).  Disadvantages of BLOS operation, however, include inherent latencies and the greater potential for the C2 link to be interrupted, jammed, compromised or lost (Barnhart, Shappee & Marshall, 2011; Salas & Maurino, 2010).  Inherent delays are a result of “…the many relays and systems…” (Barnhart, Shappee & Marshall, 2011, p. 24) that C2 signals must pass through.  If the C2 link is lost, the MQ-4C “…is capable of an autonomous emergency landing at preplanned / pre-surveyed airfields” (NAVAIR, 2014, p. I-8).  Whether operating using LOS or BLOS, the MQ-4C operates autonomously within the framework of a planned mission profile, which “…contains a route of flight, communications plan, sensor operation plan, and a full set of preplanned contingencies to account for system anomalies or failures” (NAVAIR, 2014, p. I-8).  The AVO is also capable of manually adjusting the flight path at any time during the flight or mission (NAVAIR, 2014). 

A human factors issue that may arise when transitioning between LOS and BLOS, i.e., when switching control of the UA from the FOB to the MOB and back, is the increased potential for mishaps due to decreased situational awareness, procedural errors and/or improper configurations between control stations (Salas & Maurino, 2010; Tvaryanas, 2006).  As Tvaryanas (2006) points out:

Indeed, migration of control may well constitute a critical and potentially high workload phase for UAS operators.²⁷  For example, several military UAS mishaps have occurred either directly during or indirectly as the result of 11 changeovers or handoffs.^27,51,66  In handing off control between stations, mishaps have resulted when the station receiving control was improperly configured.⁶⁶  During changeovers, mishaps have resulted because of the new operator’s decreased systems awareness.⁵¹  More broadly, there is concern for an acute decrement in crew situational awareness when control is transferred to a crew not currently involved in the ongoing mission. (pp. 10-11)

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory restrictions currently restrict UAS access to the national airspace system (NAS; Salas & Maurino, 2010).  Once issues are adequately addressed, and risks are effectively mitigated, potential commercial applications for BLOS UAS operations could include security operations, search and rescue, monitoring and survey operations, disaster management and communications (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems Association, 2016).

References

Barnhart, R. K., Shappee, E., & Marshall, D. M. (2011). Introduction to Unmanned Aircraft Systems. London, GBR: CRC Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu

Government Accountability Office. (2015, March). Defense acquisitions: Assessments of selected weapon programs. Document No. GAO-15-342SP. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/668986.pdf#page=123

Naval Air Systems Command. (2014, October). Navy training system plan for the MQ-4C Triton unmanned aircraft system (UAS). Document No. N2N68-NTSP-A-50-0403A/A.

Navy Personnel Command. (2015a, October). Manual of Navy enlisted manpower and personnel classifications and occupational standards, volume II: Navy Enlisted Classifications (NECs). Document No. NAVPERS 18068F.

Navy Personnel Command. (2015b, October). Manual of Navy officer manpower and personnel classifications, volume I: Major code structures. Document No. NAVPERS 15839I.

Salas, E., & Maurino, D. (Eds.). (2009). Human Factors in Aviation (2nd Edition). Burlington, MA, USA: Academic Press.

Tvaryanas, A. P. (2006, February). Human factors Considerations in Migration of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) operator control. Document No. HSW-PE-BR-TR-2006-0002. Retrieved from http://www.wpafb.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-090121-046.pdf

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems Association. (2016). Civil and commercial UAS applications.  Retrieved from https://www.uavs.org/commercial