Morality and Ethics

Morality and Ethics in Warfare with UAS

Shannon D. Gibson

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

ASCI 638 Activity 9

March 8, 2015

             Morality is the ability to make a decision when knowing something is right or wrong. Ethics is the very foundation that the person has been taught that allows him or her to make the distinction between right and wrong.                                                     

            There are numerous issues in regards to the morality and ethics when using UAS’s in modern warfare. Some would say we are taking the human out of the equation, but I believe the human variable is still very much involved. It takes a human to program the UAS to do the job or mission of someone’s choice.  It could possibly make the decision easier in the context that one might not feel the same conscientious choice is made since they are not actually pulling the trigger. However, pulling the “trigger” remotely is still essentially the same thing. In a manned aircraft that has the ability to drop bombs, the person sitting in the cockpit has the final physical authority to hit the switch that actually drops a bomb. When controlling a UAS, depending on the type of ground control station (GCS), the pilot operating the system may have the exact same weapons release choice, and it’s just done remotely as opposed to being in the aircraft itself. Having said this, and the technology that is currently on the market for sale, I am pro (or for) having the UAS do the dirty work remotely. My reasoning brings future problems to the table to dissect, but currently, it provides a safer environment for our pilots. Having been over seas in dangerous areas, and controlling aircraft to “hot-areas”, I prefer to keep Americans safe rather than send them in harms way. On the flip side, this means the technology is available to our enemies as well.

            In a previous assignment we looked at the idea of robots making the “kill” decision. I believe that in the future, if its not already done in classified technology, that this will come to pass in some form. This is the instance that my stance may change. For instance, we have policemen on the streets that add human factor thoughts and judgments to when and where to use lethal force. Although this opens the door to human error, it also saves lives. I am not technology educated enough to speak on programming, but I wonder if a robot can choose when and where it would be appropriate to open fire on a person. The same goes for a UAS that is programmed to open fire.  Can a UAS be programmed to analyze the civilian casualties that would be sustained? Whould a UAS know when the risk is too high to surrounding children and opening fire is simply a bad idea? I think not because it would be feelings and thoughts that would dissuade a human being. A computer can simply not feel and take loss of life when innocents are involved. When a manned aircraft is sent on mission, and is directed to drop a missile or bomb on an area, the aircraft itself is controlled by a pilot and is receiving intel by a large group on specialized people on the ground.  If the pilot fly’s into theater and see’s or realizes that the situation is different than the perceived intel gave him/her, he can simply choose not to release weapons and return to base. If the UAS is given coordinates and sent to destroy something, how can it make the decision that the situation is not as originally perceived? The choice to end lives should never be handed to a computer or a program. Human thought should always be there to provide the moral and ethical decision making process.

Crewmember Selection for ScanEagle

Shannon D. Gibson

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

ASCI 638 Activity 8.4

March 6, 2015 

                                                            ASSIGNMENT

You have been hired by a company that has purchased both the Insitu ScanEagle and a variant of the General Atomics Ikhana UAS to conduct oceanic environmental studies. Now the company needs to select and hire legally qualified personnel to fly and operate these aircraft in the U.S. National Airspace System and in the case of the Ikhana, conduct Beyond Line of Sight (BLOS) missions over the open ocean. As a human factors expert it is your task to identify the required crew positions that need to be filled in order to safely operate these aircraft. Also, you will need to determine the qualification, certification, and training requirements according to the FAA that the selected personnel will need to conduct operations. Finally, provide a minimum and ideal set of criteria that can be used to identify the most highly qualified applicants for these positions to ensure compliance with all applicable rules and regulations.

            ScanEagle UAS, made and produced in collaboration with Boeing and Insitu, is a long endurance system capable of flying for more than 24 hours.  This aircraft can be configured with payload modifications to do missions such as; Search and Rescue Disaster Response, Force Protection, Combined Arms, Target Following, Battle Damage Assessment Pattern of Life, Border Security Asset Protection Wildlife Monitoring, Agricultural Assessment Communications Relay Networked Operations Anti-Piracy and Fire Fighting. Depending on your mission of choice, the team involved to operate this UAS can be restructured in many ways. The basic team needed would be three operators, two maintainers, one mission commander and one sensor operator. Education needed would be inclusive of; system operations, aerodynamics, crew resource management, maintenance and tactics (Boeing, n.d.).

     For your Mission Commander (MC), training in tactics, scheduling, overall functions and limitations of the UAS itself are imperative. Also required is a current certification from Initu, Inc or Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR). The MC should have the ability to give daily mission briefs to crew on past mission lessons learned and brief the upcoming mission and well as work with the Pilot in Charge (PIC) for pre and post flight briefs. The MC is also responsible for ensuring all paperwork required; if flown for civil aviation a current Special Airworthiness Certificate is needed, it may be a restricted category. If governmental, then the MC is responsible for the a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA).

     For your Maintainers, system components launch and recover systems and computer skills are needed. Responsibility for the launch and recovery systems and all functions outside the responsibility of the Ground Control Station fall under the Maintainer. Maintenance of the systems and all logs shall be done in a timely manner and knowledge of current system updates are required.

     For your sensor operators, training and knowledge of all payloads associated with the mission are needed as well as troubleshooting knowledge.  Each individual payload will have training and certifications if available given to the sensor operators.

     For your operators or otherwise known as PIC’s, basic flight and airspace knowledge, as well as full system training is needed to ensure operational success is required. The PIC also must keep a current certification from Insitu Inc or NAVAIR. The PIC must also prepare the pre and post flight briefs and have the ability and communications knowledge for all communications concerning the UAS. The PIC is also responsible for weather conditions and is the final authority for the safety of flight. Flight planning is entirely the responsibility of the PIC, training in these areas are mandated. Your PIC shall have a pilot certificate to operate a UAS in the NAS. If not, they can file for a exemption under Section 333.

     Checklists will be provided to each member of the team to be given prior to and after every mission so as not to forget a step associated with each job for the team.

                                                            References

ScanEagle System. Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://www.insitu.com/systems/scaneagle

Boeing. Boeing Prepares First Military ScanEagle Crews. Retrieved March 6, 2015, from

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2007-03-13-Boeing-Prepares-First-U.S.-Military-ScanEagle-Crews

USCGC Bertholf Notice 3710. ScanEagle Unmanned Aircraft System Standard Operating

Procedure. May 10, 2013. Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://www.unols.org/sites/default/files/ScanEagle_SOP_phase20II_ver1.pdf

FAA. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Fequently Asked Questions. Retrieved March 6, 2015,

from https://www.faa.gov/uas/faq/

Automatic Takeoff and Landing

Automatic Takeoff and Landing

Shannon D. Gibson

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

ASCI 638 Activity 2.4

March 7, 2015 

             Automatic takeoff and landing systems are used by a wide variety of both manned aircraft and unmanned aircrafts. And example of a manned aircraft that can have both hands on or off takeoff and landings is the F/A-18 Hornet. The hands-off takeoff is used during ship board operations, specifically an aircraft carrier. A steam catapult system has a shuttle or a piston attached to a track on the flight deck, which then attaches to the nose wheel of the aircraft. While the aircraft is held in place, steam builds, then when released, it shoves the aircraft off the deck in approximately 3 seconds. This, with the help of the wind created by the ships speed gives the aircraft enough lift to become airborne.

            The F/A-18 can also recover hands off. Depending on the context of hands off, I’ll briefly describe two ways. The first is the arresting system on an aircraft carrier. Arresting gear is a steel rope, or sometimes called a cable, that the aircrafts tailhook catches as it lands. There are typically three laying across the deck and once “caught”, it is described as a controlled crash. The second hands off approach is a system called an ACLS, or Automated Carrier Landing System, which is also used on board aircraft carriers. The ACLS has several Modes a pilot can select that will assist him/her with their landing. A Mode 1 approach is completely hands off in where the pilot has his landing system computer lock onto the ACLS computer and the aircraft fly’s a 3 degree glideslope from approximately 8-10 miles from the back of the ship all the way to an arrested landing on the deck.

            For the UAS portion of the topic, I chose the ScanEagle. One type of launcher the ScanEagle can use is the Mark 4 Launcher. This can be set up and used anywhere due to the power coming from a generator and the gas can be either JP-5 or 8. It is approximately 17ft by 7ft with a height of 6.5 feet. This system has a numerous safety control interlocks that ensure there is no accidental launch. With a two-man team, it can be set up in as little as 10 minutes. For recovery, The ScanEagle uses the Sky Hook recovery system. The is a 50 foot cable that is extending from a folding boom on a trailer. With the use of GPS, the ScanEagle catches the wire with a hook.

            For the F/A-18, the catapult system has multiple safeguards in place to ensure a safe launch, however, once the release button is pressed, it’s done. There is no other option but to launch. For the ACLS, it can be canceled at anytime and the pilot can take over manually as well as the air traffic controller monitoring the approach, can change the type of approach and give a talk-down to the pilot if the system is malfunctioning in anyway. The training is extensive in both these systems and requires numerous people to ensure safety.

            For the ScanEagle systems, these are much more simple than the example with the F/A-18. Once these systems are set up and in place, they can be operated with just one person. They are also manufactured to have safety controls in place to prevent accidents.

                                                            References

Aircraft catapult. Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_catapult

Arresting gear. Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arresting_gear

Launching. Mark 4. Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://www.insitu.com/systems/launch-and-recovery/launchers

Sky Hook. Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://www.insitu.com/systems/launch-and-recovery/recovery#