RIPS Policy Perspectives
No.13

Summary Report
RIPS Symposium 2011

New High-Techs
for Disaster Relief and National Defense

February 20121

Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments

The Symposium on New HighHigh-Techs for Disaster Relief and National
National Defense
was held by Research Institute for Peace and Security (RIPS) at Grand Hill
Ichigaya, Tokyo, on October 4, 2011. Experts from U.S. and Japaneseindustries made the presentations and participated in the panel discussions.
Junichi Nishiyama, Former Deputy General Manager, Aerospace
Headquarters, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, presided over the discussion.
RIPS wishes to thank all the panelists and the moderator for making the
program such a success.
success. This
This report was compiled
compiled by Yukari Kubota, Osaka
University.

2

Contents

Welcoming Remarks by Masashi Nishihara

3

Greetings by Masanori Nishi

3

Opening Remarks by Junichi Nishiyama

4

Presentations

6

UAV Technology in Support of Future Missions
by James F. Armington

6

UAV Imagery Considerations in National Defense and Disaster Relief
by Curtis L. Orchard

10

Satellite Imagery
by Andy Stephenson

14

Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs)
by Hirotaka Kumakura
Panel Discussions

18
22

Summary and Comments by Junichi Nishiyama
Profiles of Moderator and Panelists

26
28

3

Welcoming Remarks

Masashi Nishihara
President, Research Institute for Peace and Security (RIPS)

Japan’s Self-Defense Forces played an important role in disaster relief after
the Great East Japan Earthquake. One of the lessons we learned from thiswas that some defense systems and technologies, such as unmanned vehicles
and imagery-processing systems, can also be used for disaster relief, as thetechnologies for disaster relief and for national security largely overlap. How
should we and how will we be able to maximize the use of these technologies
in the future? What can Japan’s Self-Defense Forces learn from the UnitedStates? Today’s symposium will be a good opportunity to consider theseissues.

Greetings

Masanori Nishi
DirectorDirector-General, Defense Policy Bureau, Ministry of Defense

Japan’s private sector has made dramatic technological progress creating
industrial robots and is now fully utilizing them. The Great East Japan
Earthquake, however, taught us that we should have robots that also can beused for disaster relief, where we confront problems similar to those in the4

battlefield. Unfortunately, Japan’s R&D on robot technology for defense
purposes has fallen behind that of other countries.
The disaster also presented another problem. Although Japan has beenusing infrared sensors for a long time, the Ministry of Defense’s TechnicalResearch and Development Institute has had great difficulty using thesesensors to determine the accurate temperature of the affected nuclear
reactors in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. Japan has thus
learned an important lesson: the Ministry of Defense must establish
requirements for new technologies like unmanned vehicles andimagery-processing systems. Because this disaster has presented a newchallenge, I hope that the experts will consider the applicability of new hightechnologies to both disaster relief and national defense.

Opening Remarks

Junichi Nishiyama, Moderator
Former Deputy General Manager,
Aerospace Headquarters,
Headquarters, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

The Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011, devastated much of the
Tohoku district and caused about 20,000 casualties, most of whom were killed
and many of whom are still missing. Furthermore, the tsunami that followed
extensively damaged Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, leading tohydric explosions and a partial meltdown.
Satellite information, unmanned aerial vehicles, and robots all played5

important roles in relief operations. The United States’ sophisticated UAV
Global Hawk took photographs flying over the nuclear power plant. In
addition, the Japanese-made remote-controlled construction machinery that
had been developed to deal with the explosion at Unzen-Fugendake,
Nagasaki, in 1990 and Swedish-made remote-controlled demolition machines
were used to clear away much of the debris from the explosions.
According to one of the Japan’s robot engineers, although the country
does have the technological capability of developing and manufacturing arobot, it does not have the specifications for one that can be used for disaster
relief activities. Moreover, at least ten years of R&D and an actual operations
unit would be needed to develop robots and robotic technologies for a specificpurpose. The U.S. military, however, has developed robots to the point that it
can use them in combat missions, and feedback from their performance andutility has led to their continual improvement.
The U.S. iRobot Corporation lent to Japan both its remote-controlled
military robots, PackBot and Warrior, and their operators to deal with thenuclear accident in Fukushima. According to iRobot, “Fukushima gives us
real experience using robots to help in disasters.” In fact, because the UnitedStates has been experimenting with military robots for use in a nuclear war,
they were able to play an important role in the Fukushima nuclear accident.
As a result, it is clear that military robots would be extremely useful inlarge-scale disasters as well as in a more confined disaster, such as in a
nuclear power plant, in which using humans would be too dangerous.
Today, distinguished experts on UAVs, UGVs, and imagery systems will
discuss how these new high technologies have, and have not, been able tohelp in disaster relief activities.

6Presentations

UAV Technology in Support of Future Missions
James F. Armington,
Armington, Vice President, International Business
Development, Defense, Space and Security, Boeing JapanThe technology to design and build air vehicles that can fly without a humanon board has been around for many decades. However, using this technology
to accomplish useful missions has taken more time and effort. The UnitedStates and its allies have learned a lot over the last twenty years from actual
mission experience with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Over the same
period, rapid advances in information and communication technology,
computer-processing power, and sensor technology have made new
applications possible.
Although machines can now perform many specialty tasks faster andwith greater accuracy, human judgment is still needed on board to carry out
highly complex missions such as air-to-air combat and in situations in whichremote on-scene decision making is needed, such as special operations andsearch and rescue. Multi-mission aircraft can still be operated more
efficiently by human beings in cases in which the environment may call for
rapid changes in tactics.
There are many reasons, however, that remotely connecting the humanto the vehicle is becoming more practical than having him in the cockpit. The
UAV’s main advantage is removing the constraints of the human’s physicallimitations. First, unmanned systems have greater endurance. Second, they7

can operate with less risk in dangerous environments, such as those withchemical, biological, or radiological contamination; in hostile airspace; or inforest fires. Third, UAVs offer much greater degrees of stealth and surprisethrough their smaller size and special characteristics that larger mannedsystems lack. Fourth, unmanned systems are preferable to manned aircraft
when recovery is less reliable because of weather, remote location, or fuellimitations. Fifth, unmanned systems are not so constrained by g-force
limitations as manned aircraft are. Sixth and finally, another benefit of UAVs
is their lower cost.
Although these advantages are compelling, remotely connecting thepilot or mission system operator to the aircraft also has limitations, such as
the cost and bandwidth of data links, the risk of signal loss from jamming,and latency in feedback cycles that slow decision making and make accidents
more likely. In our early experience with the Predator UAV, 75 percent of the
major accidents were due to human factors. These challenges are leading to
the development of increasingly more autonomous UAVs. The more that thevehicle can manage itself, the less dependent it will be on the operator,
thereby freeing up precious bandwidth and human attention. In addition,
computer-controlled machines are more effective in repetitive methodical
missions, such as large-area surveillance for which the data coverage must be
precise and human attention spans are short.
The next evolution of air systems will consist of a combination ofmanned, remotely operated, and autonomous vehicles. The U.S. Air Force is
examining some future innovations to optimally integrate human andmachine abilities. For instance, according to the USAF’s 2009 Unmanned
Aerial System (UAS) Flight Plan report, “as autonomy and automation

8

merge, UAS will be able to swarm (one pilot directing the actions of many
multi-mission aircraft) creating a focused, relentless, and scaled attack.” Just
as flying insects work together to increase their collective effect, a swarm ofcooperating UAVs could rapidly overwhelm a target’s defense or efficiently
complete a wide-area surveillance task.
The UAV has come of age and proved to be valuable tool for bothmilitary and civil operations. Although remotely piloted and autonomous
UAVs will increasingly work in partnership with manned aircraft, they will
not completely replace them. This combination of new tools will allow global
reach, indefinite persistence, hypersonic speeds, remote access, secrecy andsurprise, and extreme precision. To reach this future, we will need moreengineering and technology development in materials, propulsion, sensors,
computers, and software, combined with advanced mission management
modeling and simulation. The cost of research and development will continue
to be one of our greatest challenges. At Boeing, we are continuing to push theenvelope in many of these areas.
UAV technology also will be increasingly important to Japan, forseveral reasons. First, Japan is a large maritime nation with many islands
and an expansive marine territory to defend. The high potential for natural
disasters also creates a need for flexible and responsive surveillancecapabilities, and UAVs are ideally suited to the surveillance of large areas.
Second, listening for potentially threatening activity in Northeast Asia
requires collecting long-range signals intelligence with no gaps in time orspace. UAVs that can remain continuously airborne are best for this mission.
Third, because Japan’s shortage of manpower is increasing, using unmannedsystems will free human resources for more complex decision tasks. Fourth,9to defend itself against advanced threats in the future, Japan’s militarycapability will have to maintain a qualitative edge. With fewer mannedsystems, Japan can increase its leverage against more numerous adversaries
by investing in smaller, cheaper, faster, and stealthier unmanned air vehicles
to work in swarms. Fifth and finally, Japanese industry can make significant
contributions to many of the new technology areas.
The mission capabilities of UAVs for natural disasters and for national
defense are very similar. The remote sensing and persistent surveillancechallenges in the aftermath of the recent earthquake and tsunami disasterand the nuclear accident in Japan call for many of these unique attributes of
UAV and systems.

10

UAV Imagery Considerations in National Defense and Disaster Relief
Curtis L. Orchard, Vice President Japan, Northrop Grumman
International

Imagery is just one important product produced by UAVs. Collecting signals
data, tracking data from radar or an AIS (automatic identification system),and relaying communications are examples of equally important ISR(intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) products and capabilities.
Today, some operations use hundreds of different types of UAVs, as no single
one can meet all ISR needs. What are their roles in layered ISR when theyvary from handheld Dragon Eyes to Predator UAVs?
First, to help understand UAVs’ contributions to military intelligence,
we will reverse “ISR” and apply the sequence described by “RSI.” Here,reconnaissance is the first task—to investigate, scout, or explore.
Surveillance is the second—to maintain close watch. Many UAVs provide
important capabilities in these two areas, whether they fly at an altitude of
50 feet using a small camera or at 25,000 feet using radar and multiple
cameras.

Intelligence is the last term in the sequence. One definition for military
intelligence is to “exploit information collection and analyses to provide
guidance to commanders in support of their decisions.” Of the thousands of
UAVs in operation, however, relatively few fully meet this definition. The
concept of an RSI value chain for UAVs is a way to include each UAV’s
contribution, as each has limitations in space or volume, weight, and power
capacities, which translate into limits in persistence, sensing, and11communicating. Continuous support for military intelligence is the goal ofthe value chain, and it also makes the most demands on people and aircraft.
Manned aircraft cannot match the persistence of UAVs, as evident in the U.S.
Navy’s recent announcement that Scan Eagle has flown for more than 65,000
hours.
Second, it is important to look beyond the UAV aircraft to address
process and standards to involve external users. Operational commanders
require UAV imagery that contributes to intelligence, not necessarily from asingle image, but as a more complex product that is exploited using otherinformation. For example, intelligence is not just an image of a ship at sea;
the imagery should be exploited to add historical and situational awarenessdata as well as analysis. A systems-engineering approach to UAV that
addresses some of these complexities is the “TPED” process—tasking,processing, exploitation, and dissemination—to make imagery into
intelligence. TPED requires direct and timely engagement with external
users, commanders who do not fly the UAVs but need their intelligence. The
cycle may take days, hours, or minutes.
Standardization is vital as well if a varied number of entities
participate in the imagery TPED process. One such standard is the U.S.
government’s National Imagery Transmission Format (NITF) to exchange,
store, and transmit digital imagery. Other image formats can beaccommodated only in a single system, but the NITF is required forinterchanges between systems. For “exploitation,” the NITF format also
allows for additional intelligence analyses to be added to the imagery. Japan
currently uses the NITF format, and Japanese industry is well versed in
integrating commercial software and hardware applications to generate its

12own TPED system.
Third, let me relate these points to some released images of NITF from
Electro-Optic, Infrared and Synthetic Aperture Radar, each of which wastaken by a Northrop Grumman Global Hawk at an altitude of about 60,000
feet. In the 2006 RIMPAC (Rim of the Pacific Exercise), before theElectro-Optic image was taken, the Global Hawk detected and tracked
Japan’s Maritime Self-Defense Force’s ship Samidare using radar at longrange (reconnaissance). When determined to be a military vessel, theElectro-Optic image was taken at medium to short range (surveillance). Onceenlarged, it was evident how the ship was equipped, what its hull number
was, and that its H-60 class helicopter was ready for flight (intelligence).
Another example is that high-altitude infrared (IR) proved to be very
effective in responding to the huge wildfires in California in 2007. The images
provided by the Global Hawk operating at night illustrated well the dense
smoke and high winds propelling the fires. These same conditions would havemade nighttime manned and UAV operations at lower altitudes unsafe and ofless value.
Operation Tomodachi remains fresh in our minds. The use of UAVs isemerging as an important “lesson learned” from the enormous disaster andresponse. The Pacific commander, Admiral Willard, testified to the U.S.
Congress on the value of Global Hawk’s creating an IR image “map” ofFukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, through repeated monitoringover several weeks. This enabled us to look for temperature variances inorder to evaluate critical risks. Among the lessons learned, we discoveredthat it may be possible to forecast how a small UAV can be used to image thedemand infrastructure in a dangerous environment, which requires getting a13

camera as close as possible without risking human life.
While UAVs will not replace manned ISR in the foreseeable future, they
do represent a tremendous opportunity to close gaps cost-effectively througha layered ISR concept. By the end of this decade, the U.S. Pacific Command(PACOM) will rely on UAVs for long-persistence missions to provide imagery,radar data, and signals collection. PACOM’s missions include the full
spectrum of both civil and military tasks, since today’s UAV mission could be
military intelligence, and tomorrow’s could be disaster relief. PACOM
considers UAV-ISR to be a “low density, high demand” asset, meaning that it
will be stretched thin to meet all demands within a region. Partners andallies will need to contribute their own UAV solutions. Japan’s Mid-term
Defense Plans and the Joint Statement of the Security Consultative
Committee (2+2 statement) over the past seven years have emphasized thenecessity of improving information sharing between the United States andJapan. Collecting, exploiting, and sharing UAV imagery must be one of the
key measures to strengthen the Japan-U.S. alliance.

14

Satellite Imagery
Andy Stephenson, Senior Regional Director Asia Pacific, GeoEye

GeoEye is known for providing highly accurate satellite imagery to support
many critical missions, primarily for defense and intelligence. Today I would
like to talk about “EyeQ,” which is GeoEye’s solution to delivering timely
online geospatial data and intelligence. It allows us to catalog and manage
our data and to perform product provisioning. We can also distributegeospatial information widely in hours and days rather than weeks andmonths. Typically, it takes much time and great expense to collect andproduce data and deliver physical media to our customers. Therefore, what
we had in mind when creating the online geospatial delivery platform was tochange the existing paradigm by shortening the time frame and reducing thecost.
EyeQ enables us to take high-resolution satellite imagery from a broad
area and then to select a particular or precise area of interest by just clipping
the actionable information that we need and eliminating what we do not need.
For instance, from an 8-gigabyte full image, we may get only the 20-megabyte
image that we need. Using what we call “cloud” technology or “Internet”
technology, we can put geospatial content into the hands of users in a very
timely manner. The initial purpose of EyeQ was to change the paradigm ofaccessing imagery, which allows us to stream and download contents on
demand. Later, EyeQ evolved into a set of platform services that include theability to grab and discover content from existing infrastructure holdings,
national assets, and resources. It also will be able to grab and process another15

source of information, such as data sets from UAVs, and relay it to a numberof different user points, whether public or behind firewalls. Then EyeQ will
deliver the data and content to users who require intelligence on the ground.
Let me briefly talk about some of the deployments of EyeQ technology.
Before the Great East Japan Earthquake in March 2011, we had begun
support operations for Japan Space Imaging Corporation. So as soon as asatellite became available, GeoEye delivered 30,000-square-kilometerhigh-resolution satellite imagery to the first responders on the ground forhumanitarian relief, just hours after the crisis. By chance, because GeoEye
was also working closely with the New York Times to create interactive slider
technology, the images delivered by EyeQ enabled us to develop a site ofimage capture, which generated about 13 million page-views in the first 24
hours that this interactive tool became available. Satellite photos taken by
EyeQ at previous points of time and an image taken within days of thedisaster were made publicly available on websites around the world. When
the New York Times, using the same slider technology, published satellite
images of before and after the disaster, we were able to superimpose or
overlay one on the other to detect changes and thereby to look at intelligenceon the ground.
EyeQ technology also was used in Libya from February to June 2011.
GeoEye started by collecting satellite images of a significant part of the key
conflict areas. Taking photos of certain areas at multiple times produced atime-series stock of data, which allowed us to detect changes. In a satellite
image of Ras Adjir refugee camp, located about three miles inside theTunisian border checkpoint, which was taken a few days after the civil war
began, we can see the camp already taking shape. A satellite image taken

16four days after this shows that a few more tents have been set up in thewestern clearing and also that the many buses on the northern road havebrought more refugees to the camp. Three weeks after the civil war began,
the camp had expanded much farther west, with more makeshift housing as
more people arrived. When zooming in to a particular area, we can actually
see a line of people starting to congregate at a food distribution point.
Another image shows fighter and training airplanes stationed at theMisurata Airfield Base in Libya before NATO imposed the no-fly zone. In thenext image, just after NATO began enforcement, we can see that some of thefighters and one trainer have been destroyed. The reason that not all theaircraft were destroyed was that the image analysts determined, based on afull-resolution image, that those aircraft had been stripped down for spareparts or had otherwise been taken out of service. GeoEye provided theseimages of the base both before and after the strike, for JARIC (the Joint Air
Reconnaissance Intelligence Center), the United Kingdom’s National
Imagery Exploitation Center.
Our customers use EyeQ in a number of innovative ways, often creating
derivative products through additional analysis based on satellite imagery.
For instance, HIS Jane’s Defense & Security Intelligence & Analysis used
EyeQ to gather information about the Libyan border at Ras Adjir refugee
camp, from additional analysis based on a satellite image, and to disseminate
it to commanders on the ground so that they could draw up an actionable
intelligence report. UNOSAT (United Nations Institute for Training andResearch’s Operational Satellite Application Program) analyzed the Libyan
conflict, providing a detailed commentary of activities on the ground, which
also showed mobile artillery.

17

EyeQ technology was well received for the amount of data and contents
that were made available to detect changes based on time-series analysis.
Indeed, GeoEye has become a leading source of geospatial information for
decision makers who need a clear understanding of our changing world.

18

Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs)
Hirotaka Kumakura, General Manager, IHI Aerospace

IHI Group has been working on unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) mainly inthe two fields: robots used for operations in its plants and construction works,
and robot technologies for space and defense. Today I would like to briefly
describe how our UGV technologies are used for disaster relief and national
defense.
First is the unmanned construction machinery used as a UGV for
disaster relief. This is a remote-controlled ground robot capable of carryingout engineering operations in areas too dangerous for people to enter.
Unmanned construction machinery has been put to use in various disaster
relief operations since the eruption of Unzen-Fugendake, in Nagasaki in 1990.
Japanese general contractors have led in the development and utilization of
unmanned construction machinery in cooperation with Japanese machinery
manufacturers. Whenever a disaster occurs, the general contractors have theappropriate equipment to deal with the reconstruction and engineering. As aresult, unmanned construction machinery has played an active part indisaster relief.
Rescue robots are used for life-saving activities in confined and/or
dangerous areas that humans cannot enter. Since 1995, when the Great
Hanshin Awaji Earthquake happened, the national government has allocatedfunds to Japanese universities and robot manufacturers to conduct R&D on
rescue robots. Nonetheless, rescue robots have rarely been used for disaster
relief, largely because the Fire and Disaster Management Agency has not had

19any to use in their disaster relief activities.
Various kinds of robots that can be used to deal with accidents innuclear power plants have been created since the JCO Co. Ltd. Tokai Plant’s
critical accident in Ibaraki Prefecture, in 1999. Tokyo Electric Power
Company, however, did not have a ground robot to use at Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station. The so-called safety myth, which is a kind ofgroundless belief that Japanese infrastructure is absolutely safe, hasprevented the Japanese government from appropriating funds formaintaining and utilizing these robots. PackBot, developed by the U.S.
company iRobot, which has frequently been used in U.S. military operations,
was deployed to determine radiation levels in the Fukushima power plant.
Before PackBot arrived in Fukushima, Japanese-made unmanned
construction machinery began removing debris from the radiation-affectedarea near the building housing the nuclear reactor.
UGVs are effective for disaster relief operations because they can workin dangerous environments such as nuclear power plants, volcanic eruptions,and earthquakes. Agencies involved in disaster relief operations must
maintain UGVs so that they can be immediately and effectively used in thefield and should subsequently be improved based on feedback from users.
GVGs is for national defense. The characteristics
The second use of UG
and environment of battlefield operations have changed, typically toasymmetrical combat with terrorists. The U.S. military has led in the use ofUG
GVGs, in order to avoid casualties. It uses three types of UGVs for
disposing of explosive ordnance: the small-sized MK1 (iRobot’s PackBot), themedium-sized MK2 (QinetiQ’s TALON), and the large-sized MK3 (Northrop
Grumman’s ANDROS). More than 8,000 of these UGVs have been deployed20

in Iraq and Afghanistan, from which U.S. military has received abundant
feedback about their performance. The U.S. military also uses the SUGV
(downsized PackBot) for reconnaissance at close range: discovering enemies
hiding among their own soldiers.
The United States has been working on the next generation of UGVs,
especially the semiautonomous UGV that, under the guidance of a soldier, iscapable of traveling by itself while avoiding obstacles. Lockheed Martin
developed the semi-navigable UGV named SMSS, which is being deployedexperimentally to support a squadron in combat operations. The versatility ofthis robot is expected to range from transportation support, reconnaissance,and electricity supply to communication node. The U.S. military also is
experimenting with an autonomous UGV for logistics support. Convoys in
Iraq and Afghanistan have constantly been plagued by IEDs (improvised
explosive devices). To protect against them, the U.S. military needs to beequipped with UGVs.
The CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology) program of the U.S.
Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center, istrying to develop a completely unmanned convoy system that uses UGVtechnology. When this unmanned system is put to use in the future, only the
first of a convoy of tanks will be driven by a human soldier. Those in the tanks
following him will not need to navigate them and so will be able toconcentrate solely on surveillance.
In the case of Japan, although it has not yet deployed UGVs, theMinistry of Defense’s Technical Research and Development Institute has
been urging that UGVs be put to practical use. These include small-sized
robots capable of going up and down stairs and moving up to 10 km/h;

21spherical-shaped robots that can change their shape for traveling and thenreconnaissance after going indoors; and robots capable of disposing of
explosive ordnance. In addition, IHI Aerospace has been working on
small-sized UGVs that specialize in traveling. We also are conducting R&D intechnologies for the surrounding recognition and action control needed forautonomous UGVs.
UGVs are expected to become indispensable defense equipment thatwill reduce the number of combat casualties. The U.S. military and industry
and also Japanese manufacturers are continuing to improve the current UGVtechnology.

22

Panel Discussions

Although Japanese companies and the Ministry of Defense have excellent
UGV technology,
technology, it was not used for Fukushima Nuclear Power Station.
Station. The
performance of JapaneseJapanese-made unmanned vehicles will not be proven until
they are actually used in the field.
field. What should Japan do to become
become theglobal leader in this area?
 Hirotaka Kumakura:
Kumakura
Robots used for defense purposes are still undergoing R&D, which was stillin the early stage at the time of the Fukushima plant’s meltdown. The
Japanese people should have learned from the Great East Japan
Earthquake in March 2011 that they must have an independent,
specialized organization that can deal quickly with unforeseen
circumstances for at least a few days immediately after an accident. Japan
also needs to understand and think about expanding its use of robot
technologies.

If Japan deploys the UAVs and imagery technologies presented here by thepanelists,
panelists, does it need an expansive infrastructure on the ground?
 Curtis Orchard:
The United States has very large infrastructures not only for supporting
both UAVs but also for rapidly providing information to various businesssources. The U.S. government can simultaneously exploit the intelligence
gained from UAVs for thirty different platforms worldwide, although data
often need to be collected and exploited from only a few assets. Most of23

these technologies are part of a secure, web-based or cloud-based
computer-processing environment. Whether Japan needs to build a similar
infrastructure depends on its customers’ requirements. As Japan alreadyhas most of these technologies, what will be needed is just to integratethem into its own system.
 James Armington:
How large this infrastructure should be depends on what type of vehicles
will be deployed. A large UAV like the Global Hawk needs an enormous
infrastructure, but a small, flexible, affordable, and deployable UAV needs
only a runway and a hanger. Helicopter UAVs are useful in that they do
not need much infrastructure. Furthermore, the equipment for groundcontrol is becoming progressively smaller. Data exploitation is being
integrated with commercial technologies such as Google-type Internet
Protocol-based data, which enables the infrastructure to be much smaller
than that for combat operations.
 Andy Stephenson:
When the global imagery infrastructure is in place, users will be able toobtain data in a highly compressed format and much more quickly on theweb, and they will be able to download megabytes, rather than gigabytes,of data. This will reduce the cost of the infrastructure.

Are there any disadvantages to deploying UAVs and UGVs,
UGVs, especially inregard to data communication
communication vulnerability and functional limitations?
 James Armington:
There are some concerns about the communications vulnerability of
unmanned vehicles and remotely piloted vehicles. A link is needed to24

control these vehicles, and data links are vulnerable to communication
jamming. If that happens, the UAVs gathering information might not beable to respond to commands. When the United States deploys Predator
UAVs in Afghanistan, which are controlled from a site in Nevada, thesatellite communication takes a few seconds, creating some blind spots
during critical operations. To remedy this, the United States has been
looking at semiautonomous vehicles, on which guidance, logic, and mission
management programs could be installed, thereby limiting the dependence
on communication links. Reducing frequency spectrum consumption could
help resist jamming.
 Hirotaka Kumakura
The issue is not just about communication links. There are many kinds ofrisks in the situations in which UAVs and UGVs are used. For instance, inFukushima Nuclear Power Station, two robots were used, but it would
have been more effective to use several robots, not just two, to be preparedfor every possible risk.

The panelists refer to the engineering term autonomous in regard tounmanned vehicle operations. How do they define autonomous? Also,
manufacturing unmanned vehicles to cover more specifications could makethem more costly. How, then, do they think this autonomous vehicle will be
designed?
designed?
 James Armington:
In regard to the degree of autonomy, there are completely autonomousvehicles that are capable of completely self-contained launching missions
programmed by computers. Today, however, semiautonomous vehicles are25

more technologically mature. They still need some program updates andsome communication between the unmanned vehicle and another vehicle.
The basic meaning of autonomous here is that the vehicle is controlled
through preprogrammed intelligence run by a computer on board the UAV;
that is, all the basic functions for controlling the vehicle are on the vehicle.
 Hirotaka Kumakura:
UGVs are different from UAVs. UGVs on the ground are more complicatedthan UAVs flying in the air because ground robots must avoid obstacles orbarriers and search for an appropriate route. They should be able to movesteadily over a long distance and to traverse difficult terrains. In the caseof UGVs, such hurdles should not be ignored. In addition, the humanoperator might want a robot “to do something specific at that corner” orsomething similar, which does not allow us to have completely autonomous
UGVs. Right now, the UGVs must be semiautonomous. But after
overcoming these challenges, the next step for autonomy will be strategic
actions, another level of autonomous operations, in which we hope aground robot could become one of the troops.

The modernization of China’s military power is a serious concern to thesecurity of AsiaAsia-Pacific region. How would you evaluate the industrial
competitiveness of the major developed countries, including China, in
unmanned system and imagery technologies?
 James Armington:
With the technological evolution in these areas taking place around theworld, the United States and Japan will want not only to stay ahead of therest of the world, especially in defense technologies, but also to share those26

technologies with each other. The United States also shares technologies
with its European allies. Because technological gaps necessitate additional
investment, commercial technologies are often incorporated in unmannedsystem engineering. With these concerns in mind, it is important for ourallies to invest in these technologies so as to take the lead over othercountries. Many countries have major barriers to developing unmannedsystems.
 Andy Stephenson:
Stephenson:
Generally speaking in regard to the global industrial outlook, the UnitedStates and Japan excel in earth observation systems and remote-sensing
technology, with some European countries close behind in resolution
technology. Imagery technologies have made dramatic progress; in the past,high resolution was considered to be from 2.5 to 5 meters, but now highresolution is less than 1 meter. In the next ten to twenty years, a number ofcountries, including China, will launch high-resolution satellites. The
technological gap in this area will narrow as countries compete with one
another for advanced technology for either industrial or defense purposes.

Summary and Comments
Junichi Nishiyama, Moderator
I would like to thank both the distinguished speakers and the participants inthis symposium. Today we discussed new high technologies for disaster relief
and national defense. The importance of space-based surveillance andintelligence is an evident fact. As the speakers pointed out, Japan needs a
rapid intelligence-gathering capability, from either UAVs or satellites. We
also will need remotely piloted and autonomous systems as well as small-,27

medium-, and large-sized vehicles. The combination and deployment of thesesystems will be determined by their particular purpose.
As I stated earlier, Japanese general contractors are continuing theirwork on unmanned construction machinery in preparation for use in disaster
relief operations.
In June 2011, former Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa declared at
the tenth IISS (International Institute for Strategic Studies) Asia Security
Summit (Shangri-La Dialogue) that Japan must begin using UAVs, UGVs,
and robots and also participate in international cooperation. To enable
Japanese industries and entities to do this, the Japanese government needs
to relax the Three Principles on Arms Exports.1 Japan is constrained in its
pursuit of offensive activities, so that dual-use robots are allowed, but
military robots are not, even though they use the same systems.
Although 100,000 Japanese Defense-Self Forces participated in thedisaster relief activities, the Japanese people must understand that theirprincipal mission is to secure Japan’s national security. University
researchers might work with the Ministry of Defense to make sure the people
are aware of this. In summary, Japan needs to improve its robotic
technological capability and develop unmanned systems, which will help leadto a national understanding of Japan’s security issues.

1 The Yoshihiko Noda administration decided on December 27, 2011, to relax

the Three Principles on Arms Exports, under which the export of weapons
and related technologies is essentially banned. The Japanese government
also set new criteria for authorizing the international development andproduction of defense-related equipment as well as its export forpeace-building purposes and humanitarian objectives, albeit under strict
conditions.

28

<Profiles of Moderator and Panelists>

Junichi Nishiyama just retired from the Mitsubishi Heavy Industry thisSeptember after 40 years of service for MHI, whose Nagoya department hejoined in 1971. He served, among others, as General Manager of the Guided
Weapon Systems Department, as Deputy General Manager of the Aerospace
Hq. and finally as its Senior Advisor. He has a M.A. degree in mechanicalengineering from Hokkaido University. He is now a Consultant with MHI.

James F. Armington is Vice President of Japan Business Development for
Boeing Defense, Space & Security. Prior to it, he was with Raytheon, serving,
among others, as Vice President of its Tokyo office, and as Director ofinternational business development in its Washington, DC office. He was a
U.S. Air Force fighter pilot, and served as a foreign exchange officer with
ASDF, and country director for Japan in the Pentagon where he wasinstrumental in establishing cooperative defense programs with Japan.

Hirotaka Kumakura is General Manager of the Unmanned Ground Vehicle
Development Office, Defense Systems Department, IHI Aerospace Co., Ltd.
He joined Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. in 1984 and worked in its Aerospace
Department. In 2000 he moved to IHI Aerospace Co., Ltd. He has a Ph.D. inengineering from Hokkaido University.

Curtis L. Orchard is Vice President for Japan and Regional Director in Asia for
Northrop Grumman International Inc. He joined Grumman Aerospace in291985 and worked in AEW&C and fighter aircraft programs around the world.
In 1989-96 he directed the Tokyo office. He served in the U.S. Navy for 15
years and he is a Distinguished Author for the US Naval Institute. He has a
MA from Georgetown University.

Andy Stephenson is Senior Regional Director Asia Pacific, GeoEye Inc. USA
and Director, GeoEye Asia Pte Ltd., Singapore. He joined GeoEye in 2007.
Prior to that, he held a number of executive management positions withleading global telecom equipment manufacturers and service providers of
network solutions. He served in the British armed forces for a number ofyears. He has a MBA degree from the University of Leicester.

30