Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Hunter System Is Not Appropriate for Navy Fleet Use (Letter Report, 12/01/95, GAO/NSIAD-96-2)
GAO reviewed the Navy's Joint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) program, focusing on the development of a shipboard variant of the Hunter UAV for the Navy's use. GAO found that: (1) the Joint Tactical UAV Projects Office's plans to proceed with the acquisition of the Hunter shipboard variant even though Navy fleet commanders oppose its deployment on Navy ships; (2) the Navy's participation in the Hunter UAV program is expected to continue until system performance testing is completed; (3) Navy fleet commanders oppose the system's shipboard deployment because they do not believe it will meet their UAV performance and space requirements; and (4) fleet commanders are expected to complete their assessment of UAV shipboard requirements by May 1996. --------------------------- Indexing Terms ----------------------------- REPORTNUM: NSIAD-96-2 TITLE: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Hunter System Is Not Appropriate for Navy Fleet Use DATE: 12/01/95 SUBJECT: Military aircraft Military procurement Advanced weapons systems Naval warfare Air defense systems Combat readiness Testing Systems evaluation IDENTIFIER: Hunter Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Joint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle ************************************************************************** * This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a GAO * * report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles, * * headings, and bullets are preserved. Major divisions and subdivisions * * of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are * * identified by double and single lines. The numbers on the right end * * of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the * * document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the page * * numbers of the printed product. * * * * No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure * * captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble * * those in the printed version. * * * * A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document * * Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your * * request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015, * * Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders * * for printed documents at this time. * ************************************************************************** Cover ================================================================ COVER Report to the Secretary of Defense December 1995 UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES - HUNTER SYSTEM IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR NAVY FLEET USE GAO/NSIAD-96-2 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (707117) Abbreviations =============================================================== ABBREV DOD - Department of Defense UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Letter =============================================================== LETTER B-266159 December 1, 1995 The Honorable William J. Perry The Secretary of Defense Dear Mr. Secretary: As part of our ongoing review of the $4.2 billion Joint Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) program, we are assessing the development of a shipboard variant of the Hunter UAV for Navy use. We are issuing this interim report to bring your attention to a conflict over Navy requirements for the Hunter UAV shipboard variant that we believe should be resolved before the Navy portion of the program proceeds. BACKGROUND ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1 The Hunter UAV shipboard variant is planned for deployment on Navy amphibious assault ships to accomplish reconnaissance, target acquisition, and other military missions. Each system is to include eight UAVs with payloads and modified Hunter support equipment for launching and recovering UAVs, controlling UAVs in flight, and processing information from the UAVs during flight missions. The Joint Tactical UAV Projects Office, which manages the program, is currently identifying the UAV system modifications as well as the ship modifications required for the Navy's use of Hunter. Current plans are to acquire 9 complete systems\1 for the Navy, begin deployment to the fleet in 1998, and outfit the Navy's entire fleet of 12 amphibious assault ships with shipboard control stations that could be used to operate Hunter air vehicles. -------------------- \1 The Navy is acquiring eight complete systems for deployment on the ships and one complete ground system for training. RESULTS IN BRIEF ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2 The Joint Tactical UAV Projects Office is proceeding with the acquisition of the Hunter shipboard variant even though all Navy fleet commanders have stated that they do not want the system on Navy ships. Thus, the Department of Defense (DOD) is at risk of investing in a system that will not be used. NAVY FLEET COMMANDERS DO NOT WANT HUNTER UAV ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3 In April 1995, the Commander of the Atlantic Fleet informed the Chief of Naval Operations that he, the Commander of the Pacific Fleet, and the Commander of Naval Forces in Europe did not support deploying Hunter UAVs on Navy ships. Fleet officials told us that they opposed Hunter because of the adverse impact that it would have on flight operations of other aircraft on the ships. Some fleet representatives also opposed Hunter because its performance capability was insufficient and because the system required too much space on the ships. Fleet officials provided the following details of their opposition to Hunter: First, all aircraft currently operating from amphibious assault ships, typically including some 25 helicopters and 6 AV-8B Harriers, can take off and land vertically from up to 9 designated points on the ship's flight deck. Since Hunter cannot take off or land vertically, a ship's crew would have to clear the back half of the ship's deck to allow Hunter operations, moving the helicopters and Harriers to the front of the ship or below to the hangar deck. For Hunter landings, the crew would also have to erect a protective barrier to shield parked aircraft from a possibly errant, or out-of-control, 1,500 pound Hunter UAV. Moving aircraft and erecting the barrier to allow for each Hunter operational cycle would take about 1 hour. This, coupled with the need for frequent Hunter takeoffs and landings necessitated by Hunter's limited flight endurance, would severely disrupt flight operations by other aircraft. Fleet representatives pointed out that when other aircraft were moved to allow Hunter landings, the area remaining would be too crowded to safely conduct routine flight operations. Hunter's limited performance capability detracts from its potential use by the Navy. Hunter's range capability of about 100 miles is considered to be inadequate in the vast Pacific. In addition, when Hunter is viewing land targets, its limited range means that the ship must move closer to shore, increasing the risk from shore patrol attacks, mines, and other threats. Finally, because of weight limitations, Hunter cannot carry payloads capable of seeing in poor weather conditions. Use of Hunter would compound an already existing space problem on amphibious assault ships. Atlantic Fleet and Naval Forces Europe representatives also told us that because of a lack of available space, storage of Hunter air vehicles and related equipment (estimated to take up 12,000 cubic feet on each ship) would dictate that other combat mission equipment, such as helicopters and artillery pieces, be removed. The number of Marines stationed on the ships for assault missions would also have to be reduced to make room for personnel needed to operate and maintain Hunter. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY PROCEEDING WITH PLANS FOR SHIPBOARD VARIANT ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4 Representatives of the Chief of Naval Operations told us that despite the position of the Fleet Commanders, the Navy's participation in the Hunter program would continue at least until testing shows whether Hunter will meet its performance requirements. The Joint Tactical UAV Projects Office is proceeding with plans to identify and perform the UAV and ship modifications required to install and operate Hunter. The first modified UAV system and ship are to be ready for testing in 1997. The cost of the Navy's portion of the Hunter program is estimated to be about $340 million. We discussed with fleet representatives the Department of the Navy's intention to continue with the Hunter program at least until testing shows whether it will meet its performance requirements. They told us that they consider Hunter inadequate to meet shipboard requirements even if it meets all of the UAV performance requirements. FLEET UAV REQUIREMENTS ARE UNCERTAIN ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5 Fleet commanders plan to complete an assessment of their UAV requirements by May 1996 and will not know what their specific requirements will be until that time. However, the Pacific Fleet Commander believes that a UAV with substantially more capability is needed while the Atlantic Fleet Commander and the Commander of Naval Forces Europe believe that a system requiring less space than Hunter is needed. RECOMMENDATION ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6 We recommend that the Secretary of Defense stop all acquisitions of shipboard variants of the Hunter UAV System until the Navy (1) allows fleet commanders to complete their assessments of shipboard UAV requirements, (2) resolves the issue of whether Hunter will meet those requirements, and (3) determines whether fleet commanders will use Hunter if Navy acquisition officials procure it. AGENCY COMMENTS AND OUR EVALUATION ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :7 In commenting on a draft of this report, DOD stated that it plans no further acquisition of the Hunter shipboard variant until an assessment is completed. However, DOD also indicated that the concerns of the Fleet Commanders about the Hunter system had been resolved and cited a message from the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations as representing a coordinated Navy position on the matter. Our review of the message and follow-up contacts with Fleet Commanders' representatives indicate that the objections to Hunter have not been resolved. In addition, the Defense Acquisition Board will meet shortly to consider a Joint Chiefs of Staff recommendation to terminate the Hunter program. This further indicates that the issue remains unresolved. DOD's comments are presented in their entirety in appendix I along with our evaluation of them. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :8 Our examination of the shipboard variant requirements controversy was done as part of our ongoing review of the Joint Tactical UAV program. We discussed the fleet commanders' objections to using the Hunter shipboard variant with representatives of the Commanders in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, Norfolk, Virginia; U.S. Pacific Fleet, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; and the Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe, London, England. To better understand their objections, we visited a deployed amphibious assault ship, the USS Kearsarge, and another operational ship, the USS Nassau, and discussed with the ships' commanders and crew the potential problems associated with use of the Hunter UAV shipboard variant. We also discussed the issues with representatives of the Chief of Naval Operations in Washington, D.C., and reviewed the Joint Tactical UAV Project Office's plans for acquiring the shipboard variant. We conducted our work from June 1995 to October 1995 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. ---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :8.1 We are sending copies of this report to appropriate congressional committees; the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will make copies available to others on request. Please contact me at (202) 512-4841 if you or your staff have any questions concerning this report. Major contributors to this report were Jack Guin, Mark Lambert, John S. Warren, and Charles A. Ward. Sincerely yours, Louis J. Rodrigues Director, Systems Development and Production Issues (See figure in printed edition.)Appendix I COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ============================================================== Letter (See figure in printed edition.) (See figure in printed edition.) (See figure in printed edition.) The following are GAO's comments to the Department of Defense's (DOD) letter dated November 8, 1995. GAO COMMENTS ------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :9 1. Our review of the N8 message and follow-up contacts with Fleet Commanders' representatives indicate that the objections to Hunter have not been resolved. The message from the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations to the Fleet Commanders summarized Navy plans for acquiring various UAVs. With respect to Hunter, the message stated, in part, that (1) continued Navy participation in the Hunter program was pending results of a user demonstration in October 1995\2 and (2) fleet concerns about Hunter would be resolved in an upgrade process, including consideration of a vertical takeoff and landing air vehicle. The message also requested comments and concurrence with the plans. In their response message dated October 3, 1995, the Fleet Commanders stated that they supported the "focus" of the plans and concurred in the need for an endurance UAV and certain other aspects of the plan. However, they did not mention the Hunter in their response to the N8 message. In an attempt to clarify the Fleet Commanders' position on Hunter, we recontacted their representatives on October 20, 1995, to determine if they had changed their position and supported the Hunter system. None would state that they supported Hunter. The fact that the Defense Acquisition Board will meet shortly to consider a Joint Chiefs of Staff recommendation to terminate the Hunter program further indicates that the issue remains unresolved. 2. These comments appear to be aimed at discrediting the Fleet Commanders' opposition to Hunter. We did not attempt to independently determine whether Hunter is suitable for shipboard operations. Rather, we point out the Fleet Commanders are opposed to it and outline the reasons for their opposition. We believe that these issues should be settled by the Navy before DOD allows the Navy portion of the program to proceed. 3. We do not question the Navy's need for a tactical UAV, but show why the Fleet Commanders believe that the Hunter System is not appropriate for Navy Fleet Use. -------------------- \2 This demonstration was not held because the Hunter system has been grounded due to technical problems.
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
