A Pentagon-wide study probing the use of current and future intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets has identified several avenues for proceeding with development of a new spy-plane fleet that was halted -- one of which involves relying solely on an unmanned aircraft, according to Col. Robert Carpenter, the project manager for Aerial Common Sensors.

Following the ACS contract termination earlier this year, officials from the Army, Navy and Air Force set out to conduct a “Joint ISR Study” examining how currently fielded assets, as well as a future spy-plane, could better cover the ISR spectrum, Carpenter told Inside the Army Aug. 8.

To date, the study has been completed, but the findings have not been publicly released because the Defense Department is still vetting them, Carpenter said, adding that recommendations should emerge this fall.

With that said, Carpenter laid out four “thoughts” addressed in the study, which are ways to proceed with the development of an ACS fleet -- including the “Big Bang Theory,” spiral maturation, manned-unmanned teaming and an unmanned fleet.

In terms of acquisition, the Big Bang Theory means taking ACS requirements, building a performance-based specification and presenting the “spec” to industry for bids, Carpenter said. In theory, an ACS aircraft would be fielded with all of the envisioned and matured technologies.

“I am not a big fan of that,” Carpenter told ITA. “I like to shift from a known point. Our known point is what we are currently doing [with ISR platforms], and I will tell you we do that very well. On a daily basis, we have guys in theater getting information from Guardrail and Airborne Reconnaissance Low and then kicking down doors and killing bad guys. So why should we forget about that and go for some Big Bang Theory?”

The second option for an ACS fleet, which Carpenter said he favored over the Big Bang method, is spiral maturation.

Using this approach, a laundry list of requirements would be used to help select a ACS platform. Then, mature technologies would be integrated onto the aircraft for the first spiral. As subsequent intelligence and signal intelligence technologies mature, they would be integrated onto the aircraft in subsequent spirals.

“If we take what we've learned in using [Guardrail and ARL] technologies, then spiraling or evolving that into the next generation platform, we have a certain level of confidence. We've mitigated risk, and we have mature technologies,” Carpenter said.

However, he cautioned that it would be critical to ensure there is room for the payload to grow when selecting a host platform for spiral development.

A third option to conduct the ACS mission could be using manned-unmanned collaboration.

More specifically, a manned ACS platform would be developed and procured with a variety of intelligence payloads. When fielded, the ACS platforms would work in conjunction with unmanned platforms such as Predator B, Warrior, Global Hawk or Fire Scout, with additional intelligence capabilities, according to Carpenter.

In a hostile environment, Carpenter explained that the manned ACS aircraft could be up in the air but removed from the immediate threat. Then, commanders inside the ACS aircraft could guide the unmanned aircraft deeper into the hostile environment to obtain more intelligence.

The final option Carpenter discussed with ITA last week, is to use only unmanned aircraft to accomplish the ACS mission. However, he added that he does not think this is the best way to proceed from an Army standpoint.

“Our thoughts are ‘no,' but we are being a bit parochial there because man-in-the-loop is the key for us,” Carpenter said. “Intel platforms are a theater asset and a national asset, and we are concerned at the Army level with being able to support that tactical ground commander, that [brigade combat team] commander and be able to get him timely and accurate and targetable information. So, there is a lot said to having some sort of manned ISR capability.”

With the study completed, the ACS options and recommendations have been provided to the material development community and requirements community to help plot the course of a future program, Carpenter told ITA.

Accordingly, once ACS requirements are revised, they will again work their way though the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System process. Carpenter predicted last week that an ACS acquisition decision memorandum -- approving a course of action for developing and procuring the fleet -- would not be crafted and signed until the 2008 time frame.

The ACS program is envisioned to be a rapid-response information sensor system that would carry a mix of payloads to detect, classify, locate, track and disseminate time-sensitive data to soldiers at all echelons. The system was expected to replace the Army's ARL and Guardrail Common Sensor aircraft and, possibly, the Navy's EP-3 -- to provide 24-hour coverage for sustained operations of 30 days or more.

In September 2005, Lockheed Martin, the program's prime contractor, was told to halt work on ACS and was given 60 days to develop an alternative plan for the program after the service determined that the contractor's Brazilian-built ERJ-145 aircraft would suffer weight, size, power and cooling issues once the payload package was added.

Accordingly, the Army terminated Lockheed Martin's $879 million system design and development contract for the ACS program in January and said the service will use the remaining contract funds to explore options for a tri-service intelligence-gathering aircraft program.

In addition to exploring ways to proceed with development of an ACS platform, the Joint ISR Study also investigated ways the services could upgrade currently fielded ISR platforms in order to help fill the gap between now and when ACS platforms are fielded, Carpenter told ITA last week.

As it pertains to Army ISR platforms, the service is inserting money into the fiscal year 2008 to FY-13 program objective memorandum, or long-term spending plan, to help maintain and upgrade the Guardrail and ARL fleets, Carpenter said.

Although he declined to quantify how much money would be required to upgrade these assets, he said a “substantial” amount of dollars previously allocated for ACS is being funneled over.

The Bush administration's FY-07 defense budget request sought $58 million for Guardrail modifications in FY-07.

According to the Army's justification document for the FY-07 defense budget request, the service is expected to request a total of $175 million for the Guardrail program between FY-05 and FY-09, not including supplemental requests.

For the ARL program, the justification document said the service would seek $114 million between FY-05 and FY-11.