Pentagon setting guidelines for aircraft interoperability.

• Author: Peck, Michael

As the number and types of unmanned aircraft continues to grow in the U.S. military services, the Pentagon is pushing the notion that, even though there is no common operating system, UAVs should have standard interfaces so they can interact with each other, Given the diversity of UAV sizes and capabilities, the Pentagon is eschewing a one-size-fits-all approach in favor of common interfaces for specific classes of UAVs, said Dyke Weatherington, deputy of the UAV planning task force at the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

"Certainly in the next two or three years, you'll see some air vehicle interfaces," Weatherington told National Defense. "We're focusing first on defining a standard air vehicle interface for all small UAVs." Small UAVs are first in line because of the ease of receiving data from them, the large number of potential users and the airspace issues that could arise from hordes of organic squad-level UAVs.

The department is working on four general categories of interfaces within a given UAV class:

* Situational awareness. This offers the most basic data for a common operational picture. It will say, "What UAV am I? Where am I going? What sensors am I carrying? What weapons am I carrying? Who owns me? And how do you task me?"

* Payload. The interface will display data and allow control of payload such as sensors, communications, and self-protection. "We'll probably have one interface for electro-optical infrared remote, an interface for radars, an interface for still-framing systems and an interface for signals intelligence systems," Weatherington said.

* A weapons interface. For security and other reasons, weapons need their own interface.

* Air vehicle control. The highest-level interface, this one will allow users to directly control the UAV and its critical subsystems.

Payload interfaces have been fairly well defined at this point, said Weatherington. That's partly because of the work organizations such as the National Security Agency have done in defining standards for UAV equipment for imagery and signals intelligence.

NATO agreements have codified standards for the moving target indicator and other data. But standards and interfaces for vehicle control are fuzzier because the vehicles are evolving so rapidly.

Different classes of UAVs will have similar but not identical interfaces. For example, small UAVs probably will not have a weapons interface, noted Weatherington. Interfaces for small UAVs also will be designed to...