A new Defense Department report sketched out how it plans to increase the use of open architecture (OA) and modularity in unmanned systems over the next 25 years, starting by expanding its use in command and control and using more modular subsystems to approve platforms faster.

The new 50-page report, Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap 2017-2042, charts the DoD’s unmanned systems strategy over the next 25 years. It was approved by Kevin Fabey, the assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Mary Miller, performing the duties of assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.

unmanned systems roadmap 2017

It aims to provide “overarching strategic guidance” to align the various services’ unmanned systems goals and efforts with DoD strategic vision. It also seeks to reduce duplicative efforts, foster collaboration, identify challenges, and outline major areas where the department and industry can collaborate to expand the potential of unmanned systems.

The report split the main unmanned systems issues into four themes and enabler sub-categories that underscore issues, challenges, opportunities, and ways ahead: interoperability, autonomy, secure network, ad human-machine collaboration.

It argued interoperability is important since, in the future, warfare “will hinge on critical and efficient interactions between warfighting systems” and a “foundation of commonality creates future opportunities for interoperability as new mission needs arise.”

Common/open architecture is a key feature under the DoD’s concept of interoperability. It seeks to use common standards or services in the unmanned system mission space or operating domain.

The report acknowledged while it is difficult to standardize and implement open architecture, doing so will foster innovation because open design allows potential control and integration of multiple platforms simultaneously. Open architectures will also allow for component upgrades to be interchangeable among platforms.

DoD identified some challenges in getting Services and Combatant Commands to collaborate to create a common set of requirements and different domains concurring on having appropriate tests of compliance for unmanned systems. However, the report said the department can move forward by enhancing and using commercially available technologies while seeking consensus on a system of interchangeable architectures to span various domains and military service requirements.

In the near-term, the roadmap argued DoD should focus on implementing OAs and DoD standards for command and control (C2) and common architectures that improve interoperability. The department should also develop a strategic and economical plan to implement common and open architectures, it said.

Then in the mid- and far-term DoD will implement OAs on all new unmanned platforms and then unite a single authoritative source managed for conformance and currency.

At this time “DoD-wide baseline architectures shall be established, well defined, and adaptable to all systems, with seamless interoperability between all manned and unmanned systems enabling robust and agile teaming, with the understanding that advances in autonomous systems technology will challenge our traditional C2 methodologies.”

Relatedly, the report noted the importance of modularity and interchangeability in software, firmware, and hardware parts to reduce how difficult it is to have many systems to manage and support in the field.

The roadmap said modularity is particularly important to facilitating hardware updates in unmanned systems as new missions and requirements become available. It noted an example where pre-certified modular air subsystems can help streamline an unmanned aircraft’s airworthiness certifications, helping save cost and time.

The basis of this kind of modularity uses common messages or using a common software language between subsystems like controllers, robots, cameras, manipulator arms, and sensors. This will be facilitated by using standardized software and hardware interfaces, the report said.

Despite the uses of modularity, the report said DoD has challenges since it has not emphasized modularity in past systems it acquired.

DoD labs are attempting to retrofit parts interchangeability into legacy systems to add flexibility, but since the department has limited data rights in many systems “retrofitting introduces extreme levels of complexity into these projects.”

General Atomics Predator C. (Image: GeneralAtomics).
General Atomics Predator C. (Image: General Atomics).

Even while DoD is spending time trying to define standard interfaces, it said current standard interfaces are still not uniform across all domains and services.

“Ideally several simple standards would be developed that are flexible enough to handle most, if not all, anticipated future capabilities and would streamline the implementation process,” the report said.

To get there, it mapped out near to far term efforts. In the near-term DoD will keep focusing on retrofitting modularity into legacy systems. It also said for now the military services should use common ground control stations, Unmanned Systems Interoperability Profiles (USIPs), software, and common interfaces to make way for more modularity and interchangeability.

The department is also preparing for more part interchangeability in new work “and should ensure rapid acquisitions adhere to the standards as well.”

In the mid to far-term DoD hopes to decrease costs and allow rapid upgrades and configuration changes to systems by optimizing acquisition and shifting functionality from hardware to software.

Notably, the department is looking to incorporate data rights and DoD rights of reuse of software and hardware designs “wherever feasible.”

The department argues other innovative processes like additive manufacturing and designing modularity into systems will enhance shared capabilities and safeguard against any system-wide vulnerabilities.

Additive manufacturing covers technologies that build 3D printed objects by adding layer over layer of materials.