Maritime ISR Gaps (again)

Count me among those sea power advocates who argue that the maritime services deserve a disproportionate piece of whatever defense budget is left after impending cuts. Access to accurate intelligence is as an important component of a maritime-based national security strategy as any other. Regardless of what you prefer to call it: maritime domain awareness, ISR, or the more traditional maritime scouting and patrol, clearly the demand for airborne surveillance from the sea is important as ever and growing. Sea-based long dwell, multi-int sensor, armed ISR platforms – both manned and unmanned – provide the joint force commander a capability that is strategically flexible and operationally responsive.

Some points to reiterate why the Navy must embrace the ISR revolution and kick programmatic efforts for sea-based ISR into high gear:

- Afloat ISR is strategically mobile and can be re-positioned and reallocated between countries more rapidly and efficiently than land based ISR. Moving a land-based aircraft detachment is not as simple as flying from one country to the next and starting operations. Establishing a new launch and recovery element involves extensive negotiations (read months, not weeks) with involved host nations, money and time for infrastructure build up, setting up force protection, etc.

- ISR flying from surface ships doesn’t need host nation approval to base, take off and land, overfly, or carry ordnance. Aircraft flying from the sea do not require continuous diplomatic reengagement to fly a different profile (eg, armed vs. unarmed) as is often the case with land-based aircraft.

- A large percentage of the world’s terrorist targets are accessible from the sea.

- With modular sensors, sea-based ISR is equally adept at supporting overland IW conflicts (primarily CT and COIN) as well as traditional maritime scouting and patrol missions.

****

Although Shadow is a ground-based system, the Marine Corps has taken unilateral action to fill its own ISR gaps. Raytheon's Small Tactical Munition will allow USMC Shadows to enage personnel in a low collateral damage environment such as an urban area or near inhabited compounds. This type of capability is critical in an IW fight. I found this quote from the above article interesting, although inaccurate: "All the other services have an unmanned system that delivers ordinance[sic]." I'm not sure where Lt Col Beach got his information, but the Navy is behind the Army and Air Force, too.

The Navy has deployed unmanned systems capable of carrying weapons (for example, Firescout), yet for a variety of reasons, none of these aircraft have actually operated in an armed configuration. Weaponizing an existing sea-based UAS such as the new SE Integrator with a small precision-guided munition is a logical next step for the Navy’s support to ongoing geographic combatant commander irregular warfare campaigns. Additionally, given current war fighter demands for ISR and the paucity of UAS assets afloat to fill them, the procurement and deployment of additional sea-based UAVs and supporting processing, exploitation, and dissemination (especially beyond line of sight) infrastructure should be accelerated.

****

And in related ISR news, this link is provided with no comment.

The opinions and views expressed in this post are those of the author alone and are presented in his personal capacity. They do not necessarily represent the views of U.S. Department of Defense, the US Navy, or any other agency.