NATO UAV Related Documents

NATO UAV Related Documents
LTC Mihai STIR, ROU AF Future Capabilities Branch NATO Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) The 2007 Meeting of the Maritime Operations WG January 23rd, 2007 NEWPORT, Rhode Island, USA

Overview NATO Documents related to UAVs NATO UAV Specific Documents
National and International UAV Documents

NATO Documents related to UAVs
Prague Capabilities Commitments (PCC) Long Term Capabilities Requirements (LTCR) Force Proposals (FP) Defence Planning Questionnaire (DPQ) NATO Defence Requirement Review (NATO DRR) Combined Joint Statement of Requirements for NATO Response Force (NRF CJSOR) Full Motion Video Concept of Operations (FMV CONOPS) NATO Requirements and National Commitments The details of this documents as they relate to UAS will be covered in a separate presentation. Full Motion Video Concept was released by JFC Brunssum in 2006 in support of ISAF.

STANAGs related with UAS
STANAG 4586 – Standard Interfaces of UAV Control Systems (UCS) for NATO UAV Interoperability, Edition 2 STANAG 4670 – Recommended Guidance for the Training of Designated UAV Operators (DUO) – Not ratified STANAG xxxx – Standard Interoperable C2 Data Link (ICDL) for NATO UAV Interoperability – Draft Primary Imagery – STANAG 7023 Imagery Data Base Secondary Imagery – STANAG 4545 STANAG 4559 GMTI Radar Data – Study (STANAG) 4607 Motion Imagery – Study (STANAG) 4609 Data Formats Data Link STANAG 7085 Tape STANAG 7024 SAMPLE TEXT FOR REPORT. PROB 4 TANKS LOCATED AT COORDINATES N w Text Reports, Annotated Images and Maps Advanced Data Storage STANAG 3377* STANAG 4575 * Not controlled by AG IV

NATO bodies involved in UAVs
Conference of National Armaments Directors, NATO Naval Armaments Group, Joint Capabilities Group for UAVs NATO Standardisation Agency NATO Standardisation Agency, Joint UAV Panel NATO Research and Technology Agency NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency Joint Force Command HQ Brunssum Joint Air Power Competence Centre Others

NATO UAV Specific Documents
Military Requirements for Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition UAV NATO Air Force Armaments Group, Air Group 7 on UAVs Document AC/224(AG7)D/12, 16 October 2002 Comments: A description of an generic operating concept. It states the military requirements and capabilities for performing NATO RSTA missions. Guidance for National Acquisition efforts so as to best meet NATO needs for to maintain the ability to monitor the activities of any enemy.

Pre-Feasibility Study on UAV Autonomous Operations NATO Industrial Advisory Group, Study Group 75 Document NIAG (SG/75), 2004 Comments: In general the study found that the development of autonomous capabilities for UAV systems was feasible and would have significant benefit for UAV operations. The enabling technologies have been identified and some of them are mature enough that a certain degree of autonomy could be demonstrated in 2-4 years.

3. NATO Staff Requirement for a NATO Maritime UAV System NATO Naval Armaments Group, Project Group 35 on a Maritime UAV System Document AC/141(PG/35)D/8-REV5, 15 April 2004 Comments: Provided a statement of an operational requirement for a multi-role MUAV system which affords user interoperability in a number of mission configurations. Guidance for National Acquisition efforts so as to best meet NATO needs for co-operative development and procurement of fully integrated MUAV systems.

4. NATO Staff Requirement for a NATO Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA) High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) System NATO Naval Armaments Group, Joint Capability Group on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (JCGUAV) Document AC/141(JCGUAV)D(2006)0001, 10 March 2006 Comments: A NATO Staff Requirement for HALE – altitudes above 45,000ft, endurance greater than or equal to 24 hours. Guidance for acquiring a NATO Owned and Operated capability or by nations wishing to develop systems compatible with NATO ISR Interoperability Architecture (NIIA).

5. NATO Staff Requirement for a NATO Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA) Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) System NATO Naval Armaments Group, Joint Capability Group on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (JCGUAV) Document AC/141(JCGUAV)D(2006)0002, 10 March 2006 Comments: A NATO Staff Requirement for MALE – altitudes between 10,000 and 50,000ft, endurance greater than or equal to 8 hours. Guidance for NATO partners which specifically details system requirements, including those for sensor, air vehicle, control station and data link for UAVs in the MALE category.

6. Joint UAV Roadmap NATO Naval Armaments Group, Project Group 35 on a Maritime UAV System, Air Group 7 on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Topical Group 2 on Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) Document AC/141(PG/35)D/0021, AC/224(AG/7)D(2005)0003, PFP (NAAG-G/2)D(2005)0002, 28 October 2005 Comments: NATO Naval Armaments Group (NNAG) was assigned to lead the transition towards the JUAVG. The most important documents for the new group would be the TOR and an updated Joint UAV Roadmap. The Joint UAV Roadmap provides an overview of objectives, milestones and deliverables of the new JUAVG.

RSTA = Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition
Joint UAV Roadmap RSTA = Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition RSTA JOINT UAV ROADMAP Air Force L ead Navy Lead Army Lead Joint Co - op Outside Organization 4575, 4607 and 4609 7085 NATO ISR Interoperability Architecture (NIIA) AG/4 Edition 2 Interoperability Edition 1 STANAG 4586 Edition “n” JUAVG Edition 2 Edition “n” STANAG 4586 Implementation and Validation Guide Documents JUAVG IC2DL STANAG JUAVG ATC/ATM guidelines FINAS - ATC/ATM NATMC Certification / Airspace Integration FINAS - Airworthiness JUAVG FINAS - Flight rules for GAT JUAVG Operator Qualification JUAVG Airworthiness Operator Qualification guidelines Guidelines RSTA HALE NSR JUAVG HALE NSR Capability RSTA MALE NSR JUAVG MALE NSR Integration The RSTA Joint Roadmap, already approved and under execution since 2003 expresses the the ongoing process of UAV technology implementation in NATO. I would focus your attention on the left side presented fields of interest for The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation regarding UAS utilisation: - Interoperability (NATO is a multinational organisation) - Certification / Airspace Integration - Capability Integration - Autonomy RSTA HALE/MALE SHAPE CONOPS Tactical TG/2 Systems Classification MND Micro UAV JUAVG Autonomy UAV Autonomous Ops PFS Study Review Autonomous Ops..Enabling Technology Demonstrations (TDP) JUAVG PFS Report 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

7. Joint Group on UAV - Terms of Reference (TOR) NATO Naval Armaments Group, Project Group 35 on a Maritime UAV System, Air Group 7 on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Topical Group 2 on Tactical UAVs Document AC/141(PG/35)D/0020, AC/224(AG/7)D(2005)0002, PFP (NAAG-TG/2)D(2005)0001, 17 October 2005 Comments: Established the Joint UAV Group (JUAVG) under the NATO Naval Armaments Group by January 2006. Provides guidance for JUAVG to coordinate and execute all activities within NATO leading to acceptance, fielding and utilizations of interoperable UAV systems in support of military operations.

8. Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Joint Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Panel (JUAVP) NATO Standardization Agency Document NSA(AIR)0834(2006)-JUAV(TOR), 15 December 2005 Comments: Establishes the JUAV Panel as the operational body to improve NATO forces’ effectiveness by enhancing/facilitating interoperability through coordinating and harmonizing operational UAV related activities between the working groups/panels within the MC and between the MC and CNAD.

9. NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) 4586 (Edition 2) on Standard Interfaces of UAV Control Systems (UCS) for NATO UAV Interoperability NATO Standardization Agency Promulgated on March 2005 Comments: Promote interoperability of present and future UAV systems in a NATO Combined/Joint Service Environment. Enable interoperability between the ground segments, the air segments and the C4I segments of UAV systems.

STANAG 4586 STANAG 4586 Standard Interfaces of UAV Control Systems (UCS) for NATO UAV Interoperability “STANAGs rarely hit the headlines”, but this one “is really good news for NATO’s armaments community.” STANAG 4586 is a 2002 product but represents an important step for the future integration of UAV’s in the future NATO operational environment. Mr. Robert Bell NATO Assistant Secretary General for Defence Support,

STANAG 4586 Aim Promote interoperability of present and future UAV systems in a NATO Combined/Joint Service Environment Objective Achieve interoperability between the ground segments (e.g., UCS), the air segments (e.g., UAVs), and the Command, Control, Communication, Computer and Intelligence (C4I) segments of UAV Systems operating in a NATO Combined/Joint Service environment Specify the interfaces that shall be implemented in order to achieve the operationally required and feasible Level of Interoperability (LOI) according to the respective UAV system’s CONOPS as applicable to the specific system and theatre of operations. It’s aim is to… The document objective is to…

STANAG 4586 Levels of Interoperability (LOI), Edition 1
Indirect receipt of secondary imagery and/or data Direct receipt of payload data by UCS; where direct covers reception of the UAV payload data by the UCS when it has direct line-of-sight with the UAV or a relay device which has direct line-of-sight Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 interoperability and control of the UAV payload by a UCS Level 4 Level 3 interoperability and UAV flight control by a UCS On slide are represented actual accepted Levels of UAV’s Interoperability (LOI) in NATO. Level 4 interoperability and the ability of the UCS to launch and recover the UAV Level 5 Remark: Edition 2 will slightly chance the LOIs with the idea that Level 1 to 3 solely address the payload control and payload data dissemination (reception/transmission), whereas Level 4 and 5 address the flight control of the UAV only.

10. Draft NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) 4670 on Recommended Guidance for the Training of Designated Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Operators (DUO) NATO Standardization Agency Under ratification procedure until 10 April 2007 Comments: Recommends standard procedures for future Unmanned Aerial Vehicles operators training in NATO.

11.Draft NATO Standardization Agreement on Standard Interoperable Command and Control Data Link (ICDL) for NATO UAV Interoperability NATO Standardization Agency Currently under development Comments: Establishes regulations for interoperable C2 data links for UAVs.

12.Draft NATO Doctrine and Procedures for Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Land Operations NATO Standardization Agency Study No. 2289, Edition 1, Draft 1, August 2006 Comments: Guidance for land commanders and staff officers at battle group level up to corps level on doctrine and tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) for the employment of UAV systems (UAVS) within the full spectrum of operations at the tactical level..

13.The Joint Air Power Competence Center (JAPCC) Flight Plan for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in NATO NATO Joint Air Power Competence Center The Final Draft is ready to be approved Comments: The JAPCC Flight Plan brings NATO together - Reviews all of NATO’s UAS Activities - Finds the missing pieces - Identifies NATO organizations to lead each effort and coordinate efforts on UAS - Provides a timeline - Just a step in the process, not the complete answer - A “living” document

UAV Committees Links CNAD NATO NAVAL ARMAMENTS GROUP*
Joint Capability Group on UAV CNAD NATO AIR FORCE ARMAMENTS GROUP* Joint ISR Capability Group CNAD NATO AIR FORCE ARMAMENTS GROUP Land* Capability Group 6 Battlefield Surveillance Target Acquisition Night Observation and Countersurveillance - Electronic Warfare (STANOC-EW) NATO Standardisation Document Database *Access needs special arrangement with MINERVA website master

National and International UAV Documents
1. U.K. MoD Unmanned Aircraft Vehicles Roadmap U.S. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap Ministry of Defense, U.K. Office of the Secretary of Defense, U.S.A. 1994, 4 August 2005 Comments: U.K. MoD UAV Roadmap was produced to seamlessly integrate and operate UAVs and UCAVs in the Joint and Combined Battlespace. U.S. UAS Roadmap describes current funding, the systems, missions, technologies and establishes timelines. It is updated and republished every two years.

2. Multi-Service Tactics, Techniques and Procedures for the Tactical Employment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Air Land Sea Application Center, U.S.A. August 2006 Comments: It describes ways to use UAS for specific effects. This document is not yet releasable to NATO nations.

3. ASTM International Committee - F38 on Unmanned Aircraft Systems – F38 Standards Roadmap ASTM International Standards Worldwide, U.S.A. Achievements: approved standards on UAV to date - 20 drafts in the workflow (6 near completion) Comments: The mission of Committee F38 is to produce cost-effective consensus standards that, when applied, will enhance the safe design, manufacture, maintenance and operation of UAS.

ASTM Committee F38 on UAS Subcommittee Structure: F38.01 Airworthiness Standards – hardware oriented F38.02 Operations Standards – performance oriented F38.03 Pilot & Maintenance Qualifications – crew oriented Approved Standards 1. Explicitly written for UAS - ASTM F Standard Specification for Design and Performance of an Airborne Sense-and-Avoid System (F38.01) - ASTM F Standard Terminology for Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems (F38.02) - ASTM F Practice for Application of FAA Federal Aviation Regulation Part 21 Requirements to UAS (F38.01) - ASTM F Recommended Practices for UAS Airworthiness (F38.01) 2. Existing and directly applicable to UAS - ASTM D910 Specification for Aviation Gasoline

Drafts in Progress 1. F38.01 Airworthiness (partial listing, see for full listing): - WK5673 Standard Guide for Mini-UAS Airworthiness - WK6741 Standard Specification for Design/Performance of an UAS Data Link System - WK6783 FAR Part 27 Review for Civil Unmanned Rotorcraft (CUR) Requirements - WK7066 Quality Assurance in the Manufacture of UAS - WK7067 Continued Operational Safety Monitoring of the Light UAS Systems - WK9560 Standard Practice for Design an Manufacture of Turbine Engines for UAS 2. F38.02 Flight Operations Workflow - WK Standard Practice for UAV Visual Range Flight Operations - WK10505 Standard Practice for UAS liability and Flight Insurance Application - WK10504 Standard Practice for UAS Visual Range Operations 3. F38.03 Crew Qualifications Workflow (partial listing): - WK Certificates and Ratings issued for UAV pilots and operators - WK Standard Practice for Remote Control Pilots operating within Visual Range - WK11174 Commercial Pilot Unmanned Aircraft Practical Test Standards - WK11425 Private Pilot Unmanned Aircraft Practical Test Standards

Summary Documents related with UAVs: NATO activities on UAS:
NATO Documents related to UAVs NATO UAV Specific Documents National and International UAV Documents NATO activities on UAS: Standardization and coordination Integration and interoperability NATO funded programmes JAPCC Flight Plan for NATO UAS: Benchmark current capabilities Coordinate national and NATO future UAV activity Address key issues Contribute to current operations Summarising, NATO is quite active in the arena of Unmanned Aircraft Systems. There is the requirement to integrate national programmes and NATO funded programmes into a coherent operational capability The JAPCC is involved in this activity, and providing a focus for Allied Command Transformation and Allied Command Transformation to make their input into the NATO scene.

Questions This concluded my briefing and I am more than delighted to have the opportunity to answer your questions… Thank you for your patience…

Flight Plan - Key Issues
Integration and Interoperability Air Space Management Command and Control Bandwidth & RF Spectrum Management Force Development Human Factors Training Tactics, Techniques and Procedures Operational Concepts Lessons Learned Concept of Operations for UAS in Afghanistan INTEGRATION AND INTEROPERABILITY ARE KEY ISSUES. ALTHOUGH THERE ARE NATO STANAGS, THESES ARE NOT WELL KNOWN OR ADHERED TO. AIRSPACE MANAGEMENT, AND PARTICULARLY THE INTEGRATION OF UAVS INTO CIVILIAN AIRSPACE IS A VITAL AREA, FOR OPERATIONS AND TRAINING.. TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL ASSIST, BUT ONLY IF WE CAN AGREE ON, FOR EXAMPLE, SENSE AND AVOID TECHNOLOGIES. COMMAND AND CONTROL WILL INEVITABLY BE A DIFFICULT AREA TO RESOLVE. WE NEED TO FIND WAYS OF COORDINATING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL THE POTENTIAL USERS OF UAS SO THAT THERE IS THE MAXIMUM FREEDOM TO OPERATE AND THE MINIMUM RISKS OF COLLISION AND MUTUAL INTERFERENCE. WE ALSO NEED TO AVOID SITUATIONS WHERE WE HAVE MULTIPLE UAVS ALL LOOKING AT THE SAME AREA ON THE GROUND. BANDWIDTH IS GOING TO BE A KEY ISSUE FOR UAS, BUT RF SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT EQUALLY SO. THE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE LATTER ARE ENORMOUS; FOR EXAMPLE, FAILURE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE AND A CONFLICTION WITH CIVILIAN FREQUENCIES COST $900 MILLION DOLLARS TO PUT RIGHT ON THE B2 PROGRAMME. FORCE DEVELOPMENT IS AN AREA WHICH TENDS NOT TO GET MUCH ATTENTION COMPARED WITH THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THE HOUSE. BUT UNMANNED SYSTEMS ARE BUILT, MAINTAINED AND TASKED BY MEN AND WOMEN TO BE OPERATED REMOTELY BY MANE AND WOMEN IN SUPPORT OF MEN AND WOMEN. WE NEED TO ADDRESS ALL THE HUMAN FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH MANNED AC, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COCKPIT ERGONOMICS. WE NEED TO CAPTURE LESSONS LEARNED WITH UAS OPERATIONS SO FAR, AND IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST BY GEN RICHARDS WHO IS COMMANDER OF NATO FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN, FOR CONCEPT OF OPS FOR UAS IN AFGHANISTAN WHERE CURRENTLY A NUMBER OF NATIONS HAVE UAS DEPLOYED, BUT ARE LARGELY OPERATING THEM AS NATIONAL ASSETS, OR AT LEAST NON OPTIMUM MANNER.

JAPCC Mission Statement
The Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) provides innovative and timely advice and subject matter expertise, both proactively and responsively, for the transformation of Joint Air and Space Power to the NATO Alliance and Nations. As a Centre of Excellence (CoE), with a strategic and operational level focus, we offer independent thought, analysis and solutions. The back-up slide…

CNAD NNAG JCGUAV Conference of National Armaments Directors, NATO Naval Armaments Group, Joint Capabilities Group for UAVs FINAS – Flight in Non-segregated Air Space working group Joint UAV Road Map NATO Staff Requirements for HALE and MALE NATO Response Force (NRF) Combined and Joint Statement of Requirements (CJSOR) Requirements for UAS are listed for both the Land Component and Air Component NATO has established standard airfield requirements for aircraft, these can and should be applied to UAS

What NATO has done already?
NATO Staff Requirements (NSR) Impetus In order to face today's threat environment, it is vital to gain Information Superiority (IS) prior to and during political and/or military engagement Reconnaissance Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA) UAVs can provide this capability and are well suited where the situation is unclear and unpredictable Aim In order to support the ambitions of the alliance member states with respect to the utilisation of NATO stated minimum military requirements and capabilities, by drafting NATO Staff Requirements (NSR) for HALE/MALE UAVs performing RSTA missions

NATO Staff Requirements (NSR)
Objective The NSRs for HALE & MALE RSTA UAV may be used in one of three ways: To state system requirements for a NATO Owned and Operated UAV capability, To guide development of national capabilities that would be compliant with the NATO ISR Interoperability Architecture (NIIA) and could be declared for NATO use or made available as a contribution in kind, or To provide a NATO RSTA capability that is a combination of NATO Owned and Operated, and National UAV systems

RSTA = Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition
RSTA Joint UAV Roadmap RSTA = Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition RSTA JOINT UAV ROADMAP Air Force L ead Navy Lead Army Lead Joint Co - op Outside Organization 4575, 4607 and 4609 7085 NATO ISR Interoperability Architecture (NIIA) AG/4 Edition 2 Interoperability Edition 1 STANAG 4586 Edition “n” JUAVG Edition 2 Edition “n” STANAG 4586 Implementation and Validation Guide Documents JUAVG IC2DL STANAG JUAVG ATC/ATM guidelines FINAS - ATC/ATM NATMC Certification / JUAVG Airspace Integration FINAS - Airworthiness FINAS - Flight rules for GAT JUAVG Operator Qualification JUAVG Airworthiness Operator Qualification guidelines Guidelines RSTA HALE NSR JUAVG HALE NSR Capability RSTA MALE NSR JUAVG MALE NSR Integration The RSTA Joint Roadmap, already approved and under execution since 2003 expresses the the ongoing process of UAV technology implementation in NATO. I would focus your attention on the left side presented fields of interest for The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation regarding UAS utilisation: - Interoperability (NATO is a multinational organisation) - Certification / Airspace Integration - Capability Integration - Autonomy RSTA HALE/MALE SHAPE CONOPS Tactical TG/2 Systems Classification MND Micro UAV JUAVG Autonomy UAV Autonomous Ops PFS Study Review Autonomous Ops..Enabling Technology Demonstrations (TDP) JUAVG PFS Report 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

NATO Standardization Agency, Joint UAV Panel
CNAD NNAG JCGUAV NATO Standardization Agency, Joint UAV Panel STANAG (Standardization Agreement) 4586 – Standard Interfaces of UAV Control System (UCS) for NATO UAV Interoperability Dated 20 April 2002 Detailed standards for the Data Link Interface, the Command and Control Interface, and the Human Control Interface pages Draft STANAG – Standard Interoperable Command and Control Data Link (IC2DL) for NATO UAV Interoperability Draft STANAG – UAV Operator Medical Standards Draft STANAG – Training Standards for Designated UAV Operators NATO has established standard airfield requirements for aircraft, these can and should be applied to UAS What NATO has done already? Firstly, I would mention the standardization efforts through the Alliance. STANAG 4586 established since 2002 detailed requirements for UAV related interfaces: data link, C2 and human control interfaces. Meantime, NATO Standardization Agency has started the research on a STANAG for Interoperable C2 Data Link for NATO UAV Interoperability, another study for UAV Operator Medical Standards or a standard for the UAV Operators training. Regarding the NRF SOP’s, in the CJSOR part have already been foreseen HALE and MALE UAV,s as necessary assets to perform the missions.

STANAG 4586 STANAG 4586 Standard Interfaces of UAV Control Systems (UCS) for NATO UAV Interoperability “STANAGs rarely hit the headlines”, but this one “is really good news for NATO’s armaments community.” STANAG 4586 is a 2002 product but represents an important step for the future integration of UAV’s in the future NATO operational environment. Mr. Robert Bell NATO Assistant Secretary General for Defence Support,

STANAG 4586 Aim Promote interoperability of present and future UAV systems in a NATO Combined/Joint Service Environment Objective Achieve interoperability between the ground segments (e.g., UCS), the air segments (e.g., UAVs), and the Command, Control, Communication, Computer and Intelligence (C4I) segments of UAV Systems operating in a NATO Combined/Joint Service environment Specify the interfaces that shall be implemented in order to achieve the operationally required and feasible Level of Interoperability (LOI) according to the respective UAV system’s CONOPS as applicable to the specific system and theatre of operations. It’s aim is to… The document objective is to…

STANAG 4586 Levels of Interoperability (LOI), Edition 1
Indirect receipt of secondary imagery and/or data Direct receipt of payload data by UCS; where direct covers reception of the UAV payload data by the UCS when it has direct line-of-sight with the UAV or a relay device which has direct line-of-sight Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 interoperability and control of the UAV payload by a UCS Level 4 Level 3 interoperability and UAV flight control by a UCS On slide are represented actual accepted Levels of UAV’s Interoperability (LOI) in NATO. Level 4 interoperability and the ability of the UCS to launch and recover the UAV Level 5 Remark: Edition 2 will slightly chance the LOIs with the idea that Level 1 to 3 solely address the payload control and payload data dissemination (reception/transmission), whereas Level 4 and 5 address the flight control of the UAV only.

NATO UAV Related Documents

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "NATO UAV Related Documents"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

NATO UAV Related Documents

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "NATO UAV Related Documents"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback