unmanned aircraft systems: a case of dual use technology

16 Technology, Innovation and Supply Chain Management Competitive Session

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Case of Dual Use Technology and Product Innovation

Professor John Rice

UNE Business School, The University of New England, Armidale, NSW Australia

Email: [email protected]

Professor Peter Galvin

Graduate School of Business, Curtin University, Perth, WA Australia


Dr Nigel Martin

Research School of Management, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT Australia


16 Technology, Innovation and Supply Chain Management Competitive Session

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Case of Dual Use Technology and Product Innovation

ABSTRACT: While Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) have their genesis in military operations,

this paper applied an innovative dual use technology lens to conceptualize UAS as a valuable and

emerging airborne sensory system or ‘eyes in the skies’ with widespread commercial and civilian

applications. The case evaluation also matched commercial and civilian applications of UAS

technology to platform types, subsequently exposing sensor and communication payload, endurance

and range attribute sensitivities. Commercial applications still have legal and regulatory safety of

flight impediments that must be overcome, if civilian variants are to occupy 11-14% of the global UAS

market. Future developmental trajectories suggest that low cost packaged sensors, lean airframe

manufacture, and multi-UAS swarm applications offer growth opportunities in this US$1.6 billion global industry.

Keywords: Emerging Technologies, Product Development, Technology, Technology Innovation.

COMMERCIAL EYES IN THE SKIES

Spillovers of new innovations and dual use technology from military to civilian uses have

been an important spur to economic development, especially in the United States. Mowery’s (1992)

seminal work on the US national innovation system notes the importance of publicly funded military

research on the development of its semiconductor industry. Similar trends have been observed in other

technology-based industries, including aerospace (Niosi & Zhegu, 2005), mobile telecommunications

(Eliasson, 2011) and composite materials (Pett & Wolff, 2011), with technological transfers being

tangential (as was the case in Wichita where aircraft technologies spurred the development of a

medical technology cluster), or potentially more direct in nature (as was the case for Boeing, which

transferred engine technologies between its military and civilian aircraft designs). In the academic

context, it has been observed that universities and institutions of higher learning can also facilitate

these processes of direct and indirect knowledge transfer (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000).

Interestingly, the concept of unmanned air vehicles has a long history dating back to the

1800s when Venice was bombed using unmanned balloons (Boyne, 2003), with similar unmanned

balloon bombardment witnessed during the American civil war (Bowen, 1977; Haydon, 2000). In

terms of information gathering and surveillance, some of the first airborne reconnaissance activities

were undertaken during the Spanish-American War of 1898 where cameras with remote triggers were

mounted on large kites (Brunn, Cutter & Harrington, 2004; Hannavy, 2008). Hence, more recent

developments in UAS technology, also known variously as Drones, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

(UAV) and Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA), has emerged from a long history of technical

innovations (Watts, Ambrosia & Hinkley, 2012), largely characterized by military deployments in

various global trouble spots, including the Middle East and Africa. Notwithstanding some of the

public controversy surrounding their use, military UAS have been used to target hostile forces and

deliver precision guided munitions in tasks for which they are technically well suited (US DOD,

2005).

However, if we divert from these military applications, the concept of Commercial UAS

(CUAS) actually dates back to the mid-1700s. Specific to this time period, Benjamin Franklin

famously flew his ‘electrical kite and key’ in order to prove his hypothesis that lightning was

comprised of electricity (Jernegan, 1928). Since then, the civilian uses of UAS have employed the

capabilities developed for military applications in a myriad of innovative ways (e.g. agriculture,

survey, photogrammetry). In this paper, we look beyond military functionalities and conceptualize the

commercial use of UAS technology as airborne sensory systems or ‘eyes in the skies’. In this respect

we look to explore the broader commercial and civilian use of UAS in the information gathering and

processing context, with commensurate non-agriculture related growth in the non-military UAS

industry segment (see Table 1) (Teal Group Corporation, 2014).

Table 1 UAS Global Market and Forecasts here

In this paper, we examine the conceptual transition of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

from military to civilian applications using an innovative dual use technology lens (Mowery, 2009,

2010) and an adaption of the dual use technology transfer framework developed by Boeing (Blanding,

1997) (see Figure 1). From the theoretical perspective, our adapted framework asserts that the transfer

of dual use technologies (either military to commercial, or commercial to military) can enable

innovative product driven processes; a systematic understanding of the product economics and costs;

a focus on customer value; integration of sound business practices into innovative product designs;

and, greater differentiation between technical and business (commercial) decisions (Blanding, 1997).

Consistent with this framework, the advent of commercial UAS has raised several technical and

business issues, such as low cost manufacturing (Harrison, 2013), commercial and economic viability

(Jenkins & Vasigh, 2013), and safe business operating practices (Mulac, 2011), which will be

discussed through answering the research questions set out below. Hence, UAS provide an important

theoretical and practical example of dual use technology evolution that can be explored in accordance

with the emergence of several commercial and civilian applications of this core technology.

Figure 1 Dual Use Technology Transfer Framework here

Accordingly, this conceptual paper will address two major questions: (i) What commercial

and civilian applications are supported through the future development of non-military UAS? The

deployment of UAS as a non-military system suggests that the applications must draw on systemic

strengths, dependent on platform altitude, endurance and range (Watts et al., 2012). Accordingly,

commercial and civilian applications will need to be tailored to the various forms of UAS, subject to

technical and economic considerations (Harrison, 2013); and, (ii) What are the critical impediments to

non-military UAS industry growth? The growth of the non-military UAS industry sector will be

dependent on resolving some key business and technical issues including the legal and ethical use of

such systems (Finn & Wright, 2012; Stilgoe, Owen & Macnaghten, 2013), and safe commercial flight

operations in regulated airspace (Sharma & Ghose, 2009; Mulac, 2011). In sum, the capacity to

answer both questions will add to our knowledge of UAS concepts and how this evolving dual use

technology might be used as an innovative and economically viable commercial system.

The paper proceeds as follows. The first section will discuss the development of UAS in the

military and non-military context, giving emphasis to dual use technology and industry development

considerations. Next, we will identify the impediments to growing the non-military UAS industry

sector, while also identifying other areas for industry and technology development. The paper closes

with some concluding remarks and future directions for dual use UAS industry research.

DUAL USE TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT

The military focus on UAV

Arguably, the military pedigree of UAV has its most relevant contemporary foundations in

the 1950-1970s period when the United States Air Force (USAF) and Navy (USN) used ‘drones’ for

target practice (Sullivan, 2006). While there was early debate as to whether UAV might be considered

a mature or evolving technology (Erwin, 2003), in 2005 the US Department of Defense (US DOD)

deemed these air vehicles essential for operations with re-designation as UAS (incorporating all

surface elements and aircraft components) (Pappalardo, 2005; Sullivan, 2006), and establishment of a

UAS deployment roadmap through to 2030 (US DOD, 2005).

The US DOD UAS roadmap acknowledged that since 2004, US military forces had flown

over 100,000 hours of critical UAS missions in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi

Freedom as part of the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) (US DOD, 2005). This level of operational

intensity suggested that UAS funding and acquisition needed better decision-making in areas such as

network-centric situational awareness, systems controls, payloads and sensor configurations, and

weapons delivery (US DOD, 2005). Subsequently, while strategic targeting, munitions delivery, and

force multiplication have been offered as key use cases for UAS, the area most likely to benefit from

further evolutions of the system will be military Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance

(Sullivan, 2006; Samad, Bay & Godbole, 2007). This assertion is consistent with other published

studies that points to UAS becoming an advanced airborne platform for non-military applications

(Jenkins & Vasigh, 2013; Teal Group Corporation, 2014).

Creating dual use UAS knowledge and technologies

Since the early 1990s, studies of dual use technologies and innovation in military Research

and Development (R&D) have identified the importance of vertical product integration and

globalization of technologies (Watkins, 1990); exploring commercial uses for military aligned

technologies (i.e. conceptual dual use) (Alic, 1994; Cowan & Foray, 1995; Kulve & Smit, 2003); the

comparative expansion and growth of commercial product markets (Molas-Gallart, 1997; Kulve &

Smit, 2003); and, the use of military R&D as a knowledge trigger for innovative and dual use

products (Molas-Gallart, 1997; Ruttan, 2006; James, 2009).

Further, concomitant models of dual use technology innovation depict military and civilian

influences and operating contexts providing composite shaping of generic technologies (Kulve &

Smit, 2003) and the creation of generic scientific knowledge (Martin, 2001; James, 2009). In applying

these concepts to the CUAS platform, the influential forces can enable the development and evolution

of aerospace, aviation and sensor electronics, communications systems, and computing technologies

that might be shared in dual use formats (Molas-Gallart, 1997; Martin, 2001; Mowery, 2009, 2010,

2012). In addition, UAS developments sponsor the concomitant creation of generic tranches of

knowledge in areas such as aerodynamics and unmanned flight, remote sensing methods,

communications schemas and protocols, and data processing and computational methods (Martin,

2001; Ruttan, 2006; Mowery, 2010). The technology-science exchange process allows scientific

knowledge to be leveraged in the development of dual use technologies (Mowery, 2009, 2012). The

populated model in Figure 2 theoretically depicts how the dual use technology models of innovation

can shape UAS development into commercial and civilian streams with multiple associated

applications.

Figure 2 Model of Dual Use Technology Innovation for UAS here

The end result are highly developed UAS products that, in addition to their military

capabilities and applications, can serve several commercial and civilian roles (Mowery, 2009, 2010,

2012; Austin, 2010). Importantly, we acknowledge that some segments of the industry have already

demonstrated how military grade UAS, such as the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. MQ-9

Predator B, can be modified with different payloads and sensors to take on commercial and civilian

dual use tasks (e.g., NASA Ikhana UAS for research and commercial missions) (Ambrosia, Wegener,

Zajkowski, Sullivan, Buechel, Enomoto, Lobitz, Johan, Brass & Hinkley, 2011) (see Figure 3).

Hence, it can be argued that the technology and scientific knowledge (Guillou, Lazaric, Longhi &

Rochhia, 2009) associated with UAS developments has wider emerging applications beyond military

institutions, and offers an opportunity to conceptualize UAS as a more generic airborne platform with

a broad range of capabilities and functions that can serve different market segments (Teal Group

Corporation, 2014).

Figure 3 USAF Predator weapon system or NASA Ikhana – A dual-use technology conversion here

Refocusing UAS technology on commercial and civilian tasks

Setting to one side the area of military operations, several studies have examined the use of

UAS platforms for various commercial and civilian activities (e.g. farming and agriculture, land

management and survey, environmental monitoring and scientific research, geographic information

capture and mapping, mining and geological survey, archaeological exploration, pollution control,

search and rescue, law enforcement and emergency management) (Sarris, 2001; Nonami, 2007). In

order to integrate the key platform attributes (operating altitude, endurance, and range), we have used

the UAS platform classifications outlined in Watts et al. (2012) (see Table 2). This table depicts the

breadth of operating performance capabilities available to non-military users, including CUAS

missions in public emergency and safety support roles, (see examples 1 and 2, Table 2), dependent on

the air vehicle size and sensor-communications payload selected.

Table 2 UAS platform attributes here

Studies have already confirmed that UAS provide an excellent platform for photogrammetric

workloads that support agriculture and primary production (Hammer, Johnson, Strawa, Dunagan,

Higgins, Brass, Slye, Sullivan, Smith, Lobitz & Peterson, 2001; Herwitz, Johnson, Dunagand,

Higgins, Sullivan, Zheng, Lobitz, Leung, Gallmeyer, Aoyagi, Slye & Brass, 2004). In addition, other

investigations show that UAS have found favor with land managers and park rangers that require high

quality images in order to cover vast areas and establish ‘ground truth’ (including very rough terrain)

prior to recommending agricultural treatments and making decisions (Hardin & Jackson, 2005;

Rango, Laliberte, Steele, Herrick, Bestelmeyer, Schmugge, Roanhorse & Jenkins, 2006; Laliberte,

Winters & Rango, 2011). Hence, the agricultural and land management sectors have presented higher

volume commercial pathways for UAS deployment (e.g. it is projected that approximately 82% of

UAS sales in the United States will be dedicated to agriculture applications by 2025) (Jenkins &

Vasigh, 2013).

The literature also exposes the use of UAS for the command and control functions required

for natural disaster and emergency management (Sarris, 2001; Nonami, 2007; Muttin, 2011). The

researchers were able to deploy advanced thermal infrared (IR) and night vision scanners, and high

resolution photographic and video cameras in order to monitor wild fire and land slide events in real-

time, while also deploying the UAS to conduct post disaster surveys (Casbeera, Kingstona, Bearda &

McLain, 2006; Hinkley & Zajkowski, 2011; Pastor, Barrado, Royo, Santamaria, Lopez & Salami,

2011; Niethammer, James, Rothmund, Travelletti & Joswig, 2012). Importantly, the platforms also

displayed their capacity to conduct search and rescue operations and ballistic damage inspections in

difficult and potentially hazardous situations (Goodrich, Morse, Gerhardt, Cooper, Quigley, Adams &

Humphrey, 2008; Murphy, Steimle, Griffin, Cullins, Hall & Pratt, 2008; Bernard, Kondak, Maza &

Ollero, 2011). The versatility of the UAS, particularly in the system sensor, durability and endurance

contexts, makes it an ideal platform for disaster, emergency and urgent search and rescue missions.

Unsurprisingly, it is probably in the areas of remote sensing; geographic imaging and

mapping; surveying, prospecting and mining; and specialist geological and earth science activities that

UAS have found their most innovative non-military uses (Brunn et al., 2004; Everaerts, 2008;

Hannavy, 2008; Watts et al., 2012). As examples, winged and multi-rotor UAS platforms have

conducted cartographic and photographic work, geological and seismic surveys, and botanic and

fauna observation and monitoring (Hammer et al., 2001; Cress, Sloan & Hutt, 2011; Watts et al.,

2012). In these contexts, the UAS can enter inhospitable environments and gather soil/earth, water

and air samples that may not necessarily be accessible by land vehicles or humans on foot (e.g.

volcanic craters and slopes, mine gas release shafts) (Bartolmai & Neumann, 2010; Watts et al.,

2012).

However, the UAS platform may also be used as a specialist data and information gathering

tool (Eisenbeiss & Sauerbier, 2011). Exemplar studies show us that archaeologists, historians and

paleontologists have deployed the UAS to collect vital photogrammetric information on excavations

and land areas of interest (Chiabrando, Nex, Piatti & Rinaudo, 2011; Hendrickx, Gheyle, Bonne,

Bourgeois, De Wulf & Goossens, 2011). Hence, remote sensing applications are well-suited to the

deployment of UAS for high quality data gathering and information processing, noting that sensor and

communications payloads strongly influence the selection of the UAS size and platform capabilities

(e.g. MUAS quad-rotor fitted with a digital camera for aerial photography versus a MALE fixed wing

UAS fitted with magnetometer, electro-optical IR and laser sensors for mining surveys) (Mining

Technology, 2009; Insitu, 2015; Hendrickx et al., 2011).

In sum, these aforementioned studies demonstrate the adaptability of the airborne platforms

for dual use commercial tasks and missions that deliver command and control and information

gathering functions (Ambrosia et al., 2011; Fladeland, Sumich, Lobitz, Kolyer, Herlth, Berthold,

McKinnon, Monforton, Brass & Bland, 2011). Accordingly, as a summary, we constructed a table

that combines commercial and civilian applications with platform attributes, thereby providing an

instructive set of CUAS use cases (see Table 3 – the top half covers private sector use cases with an

underlying profit motive, while the bottom half addresses not-for-profit public agency functions and

services).

Table 3 Commercial and Civilian Applications for UAS Platforms here

Managerial challenges associated with commercial and civilian UAS tasks

While CUAS might render a range of new and exciting business opportunities, we would

assert that the management of tactical day-to-day operations will continue to challenge most

commercial operators. Probably at the forefront of management concerns will be the statutory

requirement to maintain safe flight operations under the respective regulatory regime (FAA, 2015,

2016). Critically, a failure to comply with air safety regulations and procedures could see a CUAS

operator’s license suspended or potentially revoked (FAA, 2016). In addition, as the competitive

commercial sector develops, it is conceivable that CUAS operations managers will likely face further

pressures to make more frequent lawful, ethical and sound business decisions within shortened time

frames (e.g. time critical law enforcement activities, urgent public safety actions, sensitive media

coverage) (Finn & Wright, 2012; Stilgoe et al., 2013). From the technical perspective, CUAS

operators will also need to routinely maintain and repair air vehicles and sensor payloads in order to

remain commercially competitive and economically viable (Harrison, 2013; Jenkins & Vasigh, 2013).

This, in turn, will place further operational and economic demands on management as modern CUAS

designs can include avionics and highly advanced sensors that require regular systems testing,

calibration, precision maintenance and software upgrades (Austin, 2010). On this basis, we posit that

the projected doubling of the civil UAS market by 2023 (Teal Group Corporation, 2014) will

challenge most CUAS operators in the industry to continually improve the business and technical

dimensions of their enterprise.

CRITICAL IMPEDIMENTS TO UAS INDUSTRY GROWTH

While deploying a CUAS may have great commercial potential, serious legal and regulatory

issues stand as barriers to their future growth (Harrison, 2013). Some contemporary studies call into

question whether UAS represent a threat to society in physical and/or virtual terms (e.g. privacy,

collisions, accidents, economic/costs). As an example, McBride (2009) warns of impacts on personal

privacy, data and information security, and civil liberties should UAS be deployed in widespread

civilian applications. Other studies advance these concerns and raise the prospect of unethical use of

the UAS platform (Stilgoe et al., 2013), potential subjugation and persecution of disadvantaged and

minority groups, and unreasonable (possibly unlawful) actions by law enforcement and national

security agencies (Finn & Wright, 2012). In the larger legal sense, some researchers have argued that

there are insufficient legal protections and remedies for injured parties for UAS deployments in

commercial and civilian scenarios (Wright, Friedewald, Gutwirth, Langheinrich, Mordini, Bellanova,

De Hert, Wadhwaa & Bigo, 2010; Finn & Wright, 2012).

In raising different problems and significant technical issues, other studies have exposed

extreme difficulties associated with system certification and safety of flight, including the ability to

avoid other aircraft operating in the same airspace; conduct autonomous and semi-autonomous

missions; and return to earth safely under routine and system emergency conditions (i.e. system

failure, software corruption) (Dalamagkidis, Valavanis & Piegl, 2008; Sharma & Ghose, 2009; Mulac,

2011; FAA, 2016). As an example, the potential future use of miniaturized electro-optics, radar,

acoustic and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDaR) sensors to avoid mid-air collisions illustrates the

criticality of flight safety in commercial operations and airspace transit (Geyer, Singh & Chamberlain,

2008). As noted in recent years, safety of flight and future changes in commercial operating

regulations will be an ongoing issue as UAS platforms evolve into other non-military formats (e.g.

changes in operating weights, pilot training, time of day operations, and entry and access to

geolocations and controlled airspace) (FAA, 2015).

Importantly, CUAS operations must also remain financially viable and affordable for

commercial customers and clients (Cowan & Foray, 1995; Bellais & Guichard, 2006). Studies show

that while UAS may be cost effective when compared to larger piloted aircraft systems, the advent of

lower cost sensors and imaging technologies should allow manufacturers and operators to resist high

and unreasonable capital and ongoing support costs for CUAS (Cowan & Foray, 1995; Fladeland et

al., 2011; Carrivick, Smith, Quincey & Carver, 2013). This is of critical importance to the ongoing

viability of this dual use technology (Cowan & Foray, 1995). As an example of the importance of the

identified economic (and airspace safety) issues, we have compiled a trend analysis using data from

Jenkins & Vasigh (2013) (see Figure 4). The example shows that, without full CUAS integration into

the US airspace, American industry could forego up to 22,000 aircraft sales per year, and direct

spending growth (i.e. local labor hire, goods and services purchases, and capital works contracts)

approaching over US$700 million per annum, including highly accelerated market growth over 2015-

2018. Hence, economic viability and growth in the industry sector are concomitant and highly

synergized in this area of dual-use technology (Cowan & Foray, 1995). Note, using Lucintel estimates

that 70% of global UAS growth is based in the United States segment of the market, suggests that this

could translate to approximately US$1.01 billion in annual direct global spending increases (Lucintel,

2011). This modelling underscores the importance of resolving the legal, regulatory and safety of

flight issues for CUAS platforms.

Figure 4 Estimated Non-agriculture UAS Sales (Fully integrated into US Airspace) – 2015-2025 here

In sum, the application of UAS as an advanced tool for collecting, processing and storing high

quality information is not without serious legal and safety problems. While much of the literature

argues that UAS is a perfect candidate for ‘3D’ type work activities (dull, dirty and dangerous) (Finn

& Wright, 2012), there are still legal, technical and economic hurdles that must be monitored and

ultimately resolved in the medium to longer term for this dual use technology (Jenkins & Vasigh,

2013).

Further UAS development trajectories

Given our articulation of the CUAS platform, the technical development trajectory for non-

military UAS opens up three key areas of interest for operators and industry. First, the dependency of

the CUAS on its key sensors and communications suggests that a ‘plug and play’ modular packaging

of these payload components is a critical area for product development going forward. The capacity to

‘clip on’ a new payload package, rather than integrate a group of disparate sensors and

communications systems would appear to have some merit in building greater systemic flexibility and

capability (Austin, 2010).

Second, given the ongoing need for collision avoidance behaviours, further product

development efforts and innovations might be directed at UAS squadrons or teams, operating in

complex commercial operations, including swarm patterns (Sharma & Ghose, 2009). Importantly, the

ability to saturate an area of commercial operations with sensors provides enhanced information

gathering functionality built on multiple and largely magnified data sources (more than one sensor on

each target). We would argue that team operations represent significant developmental and innovative

value to CUAS, and a larger source of ongoing revenues in capital and maintenance terms.

Third, although the civilian non-military UAS market is small, the ability to deploy low cost

air vehicles is a critical aspect of future UAS product development (Mowery, 2010). As a

complementary step to packaged sensor development, the ongoing design and promotion of low cost

air vehicles (including lean aero-structures manufacturing) will assist in further penetration of this

form of UAS into commercial and civilian markets. Applying further economies of scale in CUAS

manufacturing would assist market expansion opportunities in all commercial areas including large

scale agriculture applications (Harrison, 2013).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The case of CUAS is an unambiguous example of dual use technologies and innovation

where military R&D has provided a critical lever (Ruttan, 2006; James, 2009; Mowery, 2010) for

examining how a military weapon system and allied technologies (i.e. conceptual dual use) (Alic,

1994; Cowan & Foray, 1995; Kulve & Smit, 2003) might be expanded into other commercial product

and civilian markets (Molas-Gallart, 1997; Kulve & Smit, 2003; Mowery, 2010). Importantly, the

overall process of technical duality also sponsors and augments the creation and use of generic

technologies and scientific knowledge kernels in military and non-military product developments (e.g.

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. MQ-9 UAS) (Mowery, 2010). Hence, dual use UAS

product designs can be considered as highly synergistic in nature, representing strong combinations of

business practices and product designs (Blanding, 1997); deliberate public policies (Mowery, 1998;

Guillou et al., 2009); and close cooperative strategies for system developments (Kulve & Smit, 2003;

Bellais & Guichard, 2006; James, 2009; Mowery, 2010).

Looking forward from the issues and concepts raised in this paper, we suspect that the most

significant problem facing the broad based use of UAS in commercial and civilian applications is the

issue of safe operations in commercial airspace environments (Mulac, 2011; Harrison, 2013; FAA,

2016). In particular, the matter of collision avoidance and safe regulated UAS operations presents a

barrier to those seeking to expand the use of this airborne platform (Dalamagkidis et al., 2008;

Sharma & Ghose, 2009). We note with guarded optimism that some developments, including the

RESQU (QUT-Boeing) project in Australia, offer great promise that these issues will find solutions in

the short to medium term (Silva, 2014). Notwithstanding some of these regulatory and legal

difficulties, the use of UAS as an airborne information collection and processing platform represents

an innovative and commercially viable step forward for the technology.

The case of UAS also highlights the importance of innovation systems at a macro level that

integrate policy, universities and the market. In this particular case, the way that their activity is

regulated will fundamentally affect the profits and economic growth (particularly contributions to

national accounts) that will emerge from the civilian uptake of this technology. Importantly, the

projected growth of CUAS technology deployments is also not without ongoing managerial

challenges, and strong concomitant economic arguments for advancement of the sector. Industry

projections out to 2023 show annual civilian UAS purchases valued at up to US$1.6 billion, and while

the majority of sales would serve precision agriculture applications, UAS platforms delivering

information collection and processing functions and capabilities would potentially generate around

18% of sales by volume or US$288 million (with opportunities for double digit growth beyond 2023)

(Teal Group Corporation, 2014). This typifies the need for good managerial decision making and cost

management (Blanding, 1997), and the significant financial impetus to move forward with evolving

this dual use technology into more customer-driven commercial and civilian functions.

In closing, we suspect that precision agriculture and ‘eyes in the sky’ will be some of many

viable commercial and civilian applications for UAS. Future research might examine the different

applications that emerge over time, and how they are shaped by changes in sensor and collision

avoidance technologies, changed manufacturing processes and economies, and changes in regulatory

and legal settings. Indeed, if current sales and revenue projections prove to be correct, the next ten

years promises to be a fascinating economic and technological journey for the CUAS sector (Jenkins

& Vasigh, 2013; Teal Group Corporation, 2014).

REFERENCES

Alic, J. (1994). The dual use of technology: Concepts and Policies. Technology in Society 16(2), 155-172.

Ambrosia V, Wegener S, Zajkowski T, Sullivan D, Buechel S, Enomoto F, Lobitz B, Johan S, Brass J & Hinkley E. (2011) The Ikhana unmanned airborne system (UAS) western states fire imaging missions: from concept to reality (2006–2010), Geocarto International 26(2), 85-101.

Austin, R. (2010) Unmanned Aircraft Systems: UAVS Design, Development and Deployment, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Son.

Bartholmai M, & Neumann P, (2010) Micro-Drone for Gas Measurement in Hazardous Scenarios via Remote Sensing, In Proceedings of WSEAS 6th International Conference on Remote Sensing

(REMOTE '10), Iwate, Japan, October 4-6.

Bellais, R., & Guichard R, (2006) Defense Innovation, Technology Transfers and Public Policy. Defence and Peace Economics 17(3), 273-286.

Bernard M, Kondak K, Maza I, & Ollero A, (2011) Autonomous transportation and deployment with aerial robots for search and rescue missions, Journal of Field Robotics 28(6), 914-931.

Blanding D, (1997) An assessment of the developing dual use electric actuation technologies for military aircraft and commercial application, In Proceedings of IECE 32

ND Intersociety

Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, July 27 – August 1, Vol. 1, 716-721.

Bowen, D. (1977) Encyclopedia of War Machines: An Historical Survey of the World’s Great

Weapons, London, UK, Peerage Books.

Boyne, W. (2003) The Influence of Air Power on History. Gretna, Louisiana, USA, Pelican Publishing Co. Inc.

Brunn, S, Cutter, S, & Harrington J. (2004) Geography and Technology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Carrivick J, Smith M, Quincey D, & Carver S (2013) Developments in budget remote sensing for the geosciences. Geology Today 29(4), 138-143.

Casbeera, D, Kingstona, D, Bearda R, & McLain, T (2006). Cooperative forest fire surveillance using a team of small unmanned air vehicles. International Journal of Systems Science 37(6), 351-360.

Chiabrando, F., Nex, F., Piatti, D., & Rinaudo, F. (2011). UAV and RPV systems for photogrammetric surveys in archaeological areas: two tests in the Piedmont region (Italy). Journal of Archaeological Science 38(3), 697-710.

Cowan, R. & Foray, D. (1995). Quandaries in the economics of dual technologies and spillovers from military to civilian research and development. Research Policy 24, 851-886.

Cress J, Sloan J, & Hutt M. (2011) Implementation of unmanned aircraft systems by the U.S. Geological Survey, Geocarto International 26(2), 133-140.

Dalamagkidis, K, Valavanis, K. & Piegl L. (2008) Current Status and Future Perspectives for Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the US. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems 52,313-329.

Eisenbeiss, H., & Sauerbier, M. (2011). Investigation of UAV systems and flight modes for photogrammetric applications. The Photogrammetric Record, 26(136), 400-421.

Eliasson, G. (2011). Advanced purchasing, spillovers and innovative discovery. Journal of

Evolutionary Economics 21(1), 121-139.

Erwin, S. (2003) Pentagon revamps management of unmanned aircraft programs, National Defense 87(593), 30.

Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The Dynamics of Innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations. Research Policy 29(2), 109-123.

Everaerts J. (2008) The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for remote sensing and mapping. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry - Remote Sensing Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVII (2008) Part B1, Beijing.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2015). Overview of Small UAS Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking - Summary of Major Provisions of Proposed Part 107, Retrieved March 2, 2015 from: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdf

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2016). UAS, Retrieved May 12, 2016 from: https://www.faa.gov/uas/

Finn, R, & Wright D (2012) Unmanned aircraft systems: Surveillance, ethics and privacy in civil applications. Computer Law & Security Review 28, 184-194.

Fladeland M, Sumich M, Lobitz B, Kolyer R, Herlth D, Berthold R, McKinnon D, Monforton L, Brass J, & Bland G. (2011) The NASA SIERRA science demonstration programme and the role of small–medium unmanned aircraft for earth science investigations, Geocarto

International 26(2), 157-163

Geyer, C, Singh, S, & Chamberlain, L (2008) Avoiding Collisions Between Aircraft: State of the Art and Requirements for UAVs operating in Civilian Airspace. Robotics Institute. Paper 952, 1-19.

Goodrich, M. A., Morse, B. S., Gerhardt, D., Cooper, J. L., Quigley, M., Adams, J. A. & Humphrey, C. (2008), Supporting wilderness search and rescue using a camera-equipped mini UAV.

Journal of Field Robotics 25, 89–110.

Guillou, S., Lazaric, N., Longhi, C. & Rochhia, S. (2009). The French defence industry in the knowledge management era: A historical overview and evidence from empirical data. Research Policy, 38, 170–180.

Hammer, P, Johnson, L., Strawa, A., Dunagan, S, Higgins, R., Brass, J., Slye, R., Sullivan, D., Smith, W., Lobitz, B., & Peterson, D. (2001). Surface reflectance mapping using interferometric spectral imagery from a remotely piloted aircraft. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and

Remote Sensing 39, 2499–2506.

Hannavy, J. (2008) Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-Century Photography. New York, NY, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group,.

Hardin, P, & Jackson. M. (2005). An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for Rangeland Photography. Rangeland Ecology & Management 58, 439–442.

Harrison, G. (2013). Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS): Manufacturing Trends. Congressional Research Service, Report R42938. Washington DC.

Haydon, F.S. (2000) Aeronautics in the Union and Confederate Armies, With a Survey of Military

Aeronautics Prior to 1861. In Military Ballooning During the Early Civil War; Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2000; Volume 1.

Hendrickx, M., Gheyle, W., Bonne, J., Bourgeois, J., De Wulf, A., & Goossens, R., (2011). The use of stereoscopic images taken from a microdrone for the documentation of heritage – An example from the Tuekta burial mounds in the Russian Altay. Journal of Archaeological

Science 38(11), 2968–2978.

Herwitz S, Johnson L, Dunagand S, Higgins R, Sullivan D, Zheng J, Lobitz B, Leung J, Gallmeyer B, Aoyagi M, Slye R, & Brass J (2004) Imaging from an unmanned aerial vehicle: agricultural surveillance and decision support. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 44, 49–61.

Hinkley E, & Zajkowski T (2011) USDA forest service–NASA: unmanned aerial systems demonstrations – pushing the leading edge in fire mapping, Geocarto International 26(2), 103-111.

Insitu (2015). Commercial and Civil Unmanned Solutions, Retrieved March 16, 2015 from: http://www.insitu.com/missions/commercial

James, A. (2009). Reevaluating the role of military research in innovation systems: introduction to the symposium. Journal of Technology Transfer 34, 449–454.

Jenkins, D, & Vasigh, B. (2013) The Economic Impact of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in

the United States. Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. Arlington, Virginia.

Jernegan, M, (1928) Benjamin Franklin's "Electrical Kite" and Lightning Rod. The New England

Quarterly 1(2), 180-196

Kulve, H. & Smit, W. (2003). Civilian–military Co-operation Strategies in Developing New Technologies. Research Policy 32, 955–970.

Laliberte A, Winters C, & Rango A (2011) UAS remote sensing missions for rangeland applications, Geocarto International 26(2), 141-156.

Lucintel. (2011). Growth Opportunity in Global UAV Market. Lucintel Brief, Las Colinas, Texas.

Martin, B. (2001) Technology for Non Violent Struggle, London, UK, War Resistors International.

McBride P. (2009) Beyond Orwell: the application of unmanned aircraft systems in domestic surveillance operations. Journal of Air Law and Commerce 74(3), 627-662.

Mining Technology (2009). UAVs – Mining’s Eye in the Sky, Retrieved July 24, 2009 from: http://www.mining-technology.com/features/feature60074/

Molas-Gallart, J. (1997). Which way to go? Defence technology and the diversity of 'dual-use' technology transfer. Research Policy 26, 367-385.

Mowery, D. (1992). The U.S. national innovation system: Origins and prospects for change. Research Policy 21(2), 125–144.

Mowery, D. (1998). The changing structure of the US national innovation system: implications for international conflict and cooperation in R&D policy. Research Policy 27(6), 639–654.

Mowery, D. (2009). National security and national innovation systems. Journal of Technology

Transfer 34, 455–473.

Mowery, D. (2010). Military R&D and Innovation. In B. Hall & N. Rosenberg (eds), Handbook of the

Economics of Innovation (pp. 1220–1256). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Mowery, D. (2012). Defense-related R&D as a model for ‘Grand Challenges’ Technology Policies. Research Policy, 41(10), 1703–1715.

Mulac B. (2011) Remote sensing applications of unmanned aircraft: challenges to flight in United States airspace, Geocarto International 26(2), 71-83.

Murphy R, Steimle E, Griffin C, Cullins C, Hall M, & Pratt K, (2008) Cooperative use of unmanned sea surface and micro aerial vehicles at Hurricane Wilma, Journal of Field Robotics 25(3), 164-180.

Muttin, F., (2011) Umbilical deployment modelling for tethered UAV detecting oil pollution from ship. Applied Ocean Research, 33(4), 332−343.

Niethammer U, James M, Rothmund S, Travelletti J, & Joswig M. (2012) UAV-based remote sensing of the Super-Sauze landslide: Evaluation and results. Engineering Geology 128, 2–11.

Niosi, J., & Zhegu, M. (2005). Aerospace clusters: local or global knowledge spillovers?. Industry &

Innovation 12(1), 5-29.

Nonami, K (2007). Prospect and Recent Research and Development for Civil Use Autonomous Unmanned Aircraft as UAV and MAV. Journal of System Design and Dynamics 1(2), 120-128.

Pappalardo, J. (2005) Unmanned aircraft roadmap reflects changing priorities, National Defense 89(617), 34.

Pastor E, Barrado C, Royo P, Santamaria E, Lopez J, & Salami E. (2011) Architecture for a helicopter-based unmanned aerial systems wildfire surveillance system, Geocarto

International 26(2), 113-131.

Pett, T. & Wolff, J. (2011). Wichita's Aircraft Manufacturing Cluster, Knowledge Spillovers, and the Emergence of a Medical Device Manufacturing Cluster. Advances in the Study of

Entrepreneurship, Innovation & Economic Growth 22, 141-159.

Rango A, Laliberte A, Steele C, Herrick J, Bestelmeyer B, Schmugge T, Roanhorse A, & Jenkins V. (2006) Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Rangelands: Current Applications and Future Potentials. Environmental Practice 8, 159–168.

Ruttan, V. (2006). Is war necessary for economic growth? Military procurement and technology

development. New York, Oxford University Press.

Samad, T, Bay, J, & Godbole, D (2007) Network-Centric Systems for Military Operations in Urban Terrain: The Role of UAVs. Proceedings of the IEEE 95(1), 92-107.

Sarris Z, (2001). Survey of UAV applications in civil markets. In Proceedings of the 9th

Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 1–11.

Sharma R, & Ghose D (2009) Collision avoidance between UAV clusters using swarm intelligence techniques, International Journal of Systems Science 40(5), 521-538.

Silva, K. (2014) Unmanned aircraft technology takes leap forward thanks to Queensland research, Brisbane Times, Retrieved February 6, 2014, from: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/sci-tech/unmanned-aircraft-technology-takes-leapforward-thanks-to-queensland-research-20140206-323g6.html

Stilgoe, J, Owen, R, & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 42(9), 1568–1580.

Sullivan, J. (2006) Evolution or revolution? The rise of UAVs, IEEE Technology and Society

Magazine 25(3), 43-49.

Teal Group Corporation. (2014). World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems: 2014 Market Profile and

Forecast, Fairfax, VA, Teal Group.

United State Department of Defense (US DOD) (2005). UAS Roadmap 2005-2030.

Watkins, T. (1990). Beyond guns and butter: managing dual use technologies. Technovation 10(6), 389-406.

Watts A, Ambrosia V, & Hinkley E. (2012) Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Remote Sensing and Scientific Research: Classification and Considerations of Use. Remote Sensing 4, 1671-1692

Wright D, Friedewald M, Gutwirth S, Langheinrich M, Mordini E, Bellanova R, De Hert P, Wadhwaa K, & Bigo D. (2010) Sorting out smart surveillance. Computer Law & Security Review 26(4), 343-354.

Figures

Figure 1 Dual Use Technology Transfer Framework, adapted from Blanding (1997)

C2M M2C

Military Technologies

Boeing Aircraft, United States Air Force

Low Cost Commercial Manufacturing Process

Rockwell Automotive, Caterpillar Trucks

Product driven process

Understanding product economics and costs

Integrating sound business practices and product design processes

Technical decision and business decision differentiation

Focus on customer value

Dual Use Technology Transfer

Figure 2 Model of Dual Use Technology Innovation for UAS, adapted from Martin (2001)

R&D R&D

Product development

Military

Influence and

Context

Generic Technologies

Sensor Electronics

Aviation Electronics

Communications Technology

Computing Technology

Aircraft and Aerospace

Propulsion

Civilian

Influence and

Context

Generic Scientific

Knowledge

Computational methods

Communication methods

Aerodynamics

Hydraulics & Pneumatics

Energy conversion & combustion

Civilian and

Military

Applications

“UAS”

Knowledge exchange

Technology sharing

Dual-use

Policies

Figure 3 USAF Predator weapon system (2001) or NASA Ikhana (2006)? – A dual-use technology

conversion

Figure 4 Estimated Non-agriculture UAS Sales (Fully integrated into US Airspace) – 2015-2025

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

ES

TIM

AT

ED

NO

N-A

GR

ICU

LT

UR

E U

AS

SA

LE

S

YEAR

est. US$ 0.212 Billion Direct Spending




Tables

Table 1 UAS Global Market and Forecasts (Dual use Military and Civil use cases)

UAS Market Segment Share/Value

2014 Total Market (US$6.4 Billion)

Military

89% of Total Market Value = US$5.7 Billion

Civil (non-military)


Agriculture: US$0.574 Billion Other: US$0.126 Billion

2023 Forecasts (US$11.5 Billion)

Military


Civil (non-military)


Agriculture: US$1.312 Billion Other: US$0.288 Billion

Table 2 UAS Platform performance attributes, taken from Watts et al. (2012)

UAS Platform Altitude

(m)

Endurance (hrs) Range (m)

1 Miniature UAS (MUAS)

Up to 330

0.1 – 0.5

Up to 500

2 Low Altitude, Short Endurance (LASE) – no runway required

Up to 1,500 0.5 – 1.0 Up to 2,000

3 Low Altitude, Short Endurance (LASE-Close) – runway required

Up to 1,500 1.0 – 10.0 Up to 5,000

4 Low Altitude, Long Endurance (LALE) Up to 3,000 10.0 – 24.0 Up to 500,000 5 Medium Altitude, Long Endurance (MALE) Up to 10,000 10.0 – 24.0 Up to 7,500,000 6 High Altitude, Long Endurance (HALE) Up to 20,000 More than 30 Over 13,000,000

CUAS Example 1 (LALE): NASA and US Forest Service (USFS) deployed an Ikhana UAS for strategic fire imaging missions in the western US (Ambrosia et al., 2011).

3,000m 20 hours 6,000m

CUAS Example 2 (LASE-Close): USFS UAS demonstration flights used the smaller Arcturus T-16 Aerial Vehicle to conduct tactical fire imaging reconnaissance and intelligence gathering (controlled burn conditions) trials (Hinkley & Zajkowski 2011).

600m 4 hours 4,500m

Table 3 Dual-use Commercial and Civilian Applications for UAS Platforms, adapted from Watts et al. (2012).

Commercial/Civilian

Application

UAS

Platform

Notes

Aerial Photography LASE/LASE-C FW/VTOL. Video and digital cameras mounted on quad-rotors. Mainly video and stills footage. No time criticality, real-time processing or security priorities.

Agriculture – farm management LASE-C/LALE FW/VTOL. Video and digital cameras mounted on quad-rotors. Mainly video camera footage. No time criticality, real-time processing or security priorities.

Electricity – network inspection services

LASE-C/LALE FW. Longer distance transmission system inspections using IR sensors and Hi-Res color digital cameras.

Geoscience Research LASE/LASE-C FW/VTOL. Micro-gas sensors mounted on quad-rotors. FW LASE for geo-survey work using EM, IR, digital camera and video technologies.

Mining and Exploration LALE/MALE FW. Fitted with magnetometers and broad range IR sensors and digital color cameras.

Media – News, Movies, Sports LASE-C/LALE FW/VTOL. Mainly fitted with Hi-Res video cameras. Real-time coverage of events. Some IR capability for night filming and television coverage

Oil and Gas – pipeline inspection services

LASE-C/LALE FW. Long distance pipe inspections using Hi-Res video and digital cameras and IR sensors.

Water – reservoir inspection services

LASE-C/LALE FW. Resource inspections using Hi-Res video cameras and IR sensors.

Atmospheric and Meteorological services

MALE/HALE

FW. Mainly for higher altitude and upper atmosphere applications. EO, SAR, IR sensors and streaming video systems. Some on-board data processing. High level atmospheric testing requires high performance UAS.

Customs and Border Protection LASE-C/LALE FW. Need for accurate and complete data in a secure operating environment. Economical collection is of lesser importance. Real-time video systems are typically installed.

Emergency and Fire Services LASE – LALE FW/VTOL. Need for accurate and complete data in a secure operating environment. Timeliness is an important factor - Real-time video systems are typically installed. Economical collection is of lesser importance.

Environmental Monitoring – rivers/lakes

LASE-C/LALE

FW. Fitted with Hi-Res video and digital cameras. Timeliness may be important in some scenarios, such as pollution control. Real-time video streaming systems are typically installed.

Law Enforcement and Policing LASE – LALE FW/VTOL. Need for accurate and complete data in a secure operating environment. Timeliness can be an important factor in tactical response situations. Economical collection is of lesser importance. Real-time video streaming systems are typically installed.

Rangeland and Vegetation Management

LASE-C/LALE FW. Fitted with Hi-Res video and digital cameras. Primarily ground station processing of data to improve accuracy.

Search and Rescue LASE – MALE FW/VTOL. Need for accurate and complete data in a secure operating environment. Time is often critical. Economical collection is of lesser importance. Real-time streaming video is important in this application.

Traffic Management and Control

LASE-C/LALE FW. Need for accurate and complete data. Decision-making information is critical. Real-time streaming video systems are preferable and important in this application. Note: FW = Fixed Wing; VTOL = Vertical Take Off and Landing (Rotary wing)

unmanned aircraft systems: a case of dual use technology

Documents