DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS: 

MICRO-AIR VEHICLES IN THE SERVICE 

OF AIR FORCE MISSIONS 

by 

Arthur F. Huber II, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Air Force 

July 2002 

Occasional Paper No. 29 

Center for Strategy and Technology 

Air War College 

Air University 

Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 
DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS: 

MICRO-AIR VEHICLES IN THE SERVICE OF AIR 

FORCE MISSIONS 

Arthur F. Huber II, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Air Force 

July 2002 

The Occasional papers series was established by the Center for Strategy

and Technology as a forum for research on topics that reflect long-term 

strategic thinking about technology and its implications for U.S. national 

security. Copies of No. 29 in this series are available from the Center for 

Strategy and Technology, Air War College, 325 Chennault Circle, 

Maxwell AFB, Alabama 36112. The fax number is (334) 953-6158; 

phone (334) 953-6460. 

Occasional Paper No. 29 

Center for Strategy and Technology 

Air University 

Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112 

Contents 

Page

Disclaimer............................................................................i 

Tables and Illustrations............................................................ii 

Preface and Acknowledgements................................................iii 

Author...............................................................................iv 

Abstract..............................................................................v 

I. Introduction......................................................................1 

II. Why Micro Air Vehicles?......................................................3 

III. The State of Micro-Air Vehicle Technologies.............................13 

IV. Micro Air Vehicle Support to USAF Functions..........................31 

V. Summary and Concluding Thoughts.......................................47 

Notes................................................................................51 

Disclaimer 

The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and 

do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense, 

the United States Government, or of the Air University Center for Strategy

and Technology. 

i
Tables and Illustrations 

Page

Table 1. UAV Classifications, Characteristics, and Examples...............4 

Figure 1. Comparison of Micro-Air Vehicle Flight Regime ................5 

Table 2. Baseline MAV Weight Distributions ..............................14 

ii 
Preface and Acknowledgments 

What are the potential Air Force applications of emerging micro-air 

vehicle (MAV) systems and supporting technologies and what are the

implications of this potential for the execution of military operations? 

These are the central questions that motivated the development of this

research paper. As an Air War College (AWC) student in an elective class 

sponsored by the Center for Strategy and Technology (CSAT), I was 

afforded the chance to delve into this area, one that I have been watching

with interest for several years. I have found this area to be of personal 

and professional interest, because it harks back to the aerodynamics 

research I conducted as a graduate student at the University of Notre 

Dame. Also, it opens up possibilities for enhancing the asymmetric 

advantages of air power enjoyed by the United States as compared with 

the rest of the world. 

While I am solely responsible for the work represented by this 

research paper, it could not have come to fruition without the key

contributions of several people. At the top of the list are my wife, Beth,

and daughter, Juliann, who endured many late nights during which I 

worked away on this research. I am pleased to acknowledge the sage

guidance and key insights provided by my CSAT advisors, Dr. Grant 

Hammond and Colonel (Ret., USAF) Ted Hailes. Several professionals in 

the field of micro-air vehicle development also deserve praise for 

reviewing this manuscript and they include Dr. William Davis and Mr. 

David Johnson of MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Dr. Thomas Mueller of the 

University of Notre Dame, and Dr. Steven Walker of the Air Force Office 

of Scientific Research. Lastly, I thank my fellow CSAT and AWC 

Seminar 3 classmates for their genuine interest in this research topic and

their constructive comments to make it a better product. 

iii
The Author

Lieutenant Colonel Arthur F. Huber, II, is a flight test engineer 

whose career has spanned various assignments within the weapon systems 

acquisition process. He holds Bachelor degrees in Aerospace Engineering 

and Government & International Relations as well as a Master of Science 

degree in Aerospace Engineering, all from the University of Notre Dame. 

He is a distinguished graduate of the Air Force Reserve Officers Training 

Corps and Squadron Officer School. He has served as an Air Force 

Fellow at RAND for in-residence Intermediate Service School, and is a 

recent graduate of the Air War College. 

Lieutenant Colonel Huber started his military career assigned to the

Air Force Space Technology Center as a staff plans officer, space-based 

surveillance technology program manager, and executive officer to the 

commander. While there, he was selected to attend Air Force Test Pilot

School and graduated in June as a flight test engineer. He was then 

assigned to the 46th Test Wing where he was a branch chief while 

managing flight test activities for technology demonstrations, air-to-air 

missile development, safe separations, and avionics integration. While 

assigned to RAND, Lieutenant Colonel Huber performed policy research 

on military acquisition reform, counter-proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction, laboratory quality measurement, and “reachback” operations. 

Subsequently, he transferred to the Pentagon where he performed duties as 

a Program Element Monitor for electronic warfare and air-to-air missile

programs within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for 

Acquisition. Thereupon, he was selected to command the 413th Flight 

Test Squadron during its busiest period ever accruing over 2000 test hours 

per year in support of electronic warfare systems development and testing. 

Lieutenant Colonel Huber has flown in multiple aircraft systems 

accruing approximately 100 hours in utility class planes and another 425 

hours in high-performance aircraft to include the F-4, F-15, F-16, and 

T-38. 

iv 
Abstract 

Technological progress in a number of areas to include aerodynamics, 

micro-electronics, sensors, micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS), 

and micro-manufacturing, is ushering in the possibility for the affordable 

development and acquisition of a new class of military systems known as 

micro-air vehicles (MAV). MAVs are a subset of uninhabited air vehicles 

(UAV) that are up to two orders of magnitude smaller than the manned

systems that permeate our contemporary life. Recent advances in

miniaturization may make possible vehicles that can carry out important 

military missions that heretofore were beyond our reach or could only be 

attained at great risk or resource expenditure. These missions will be 

possible if MAVs can fulfill their potential to attain certain attributes to 

include: low cost, low weight, little to no logistical “footprint,” mission 

versatility, range, endurance, stealth, and precision. 

A review of the literature in this area indicates that the military 

potential of this emerging field remains on the “technological push” side 

of the equation with little to no “requirements pull” from the user 

community. Accordingly, concepts of operations deriving from the war 

fighting community – particularly the United States Air Force (USAF) – 

are sparse. At a higher level, the potential of micro-air vehicles opens up 

new possibilities in the formulation of military strategies that require

investigation. This paper provides an outline of the contemporary 

technological dimension of MAVs and contemplates how they might be 

used to enhance Air Force operations. 

v

Death by a Thousand Cuts....1 

I. Introduction 

A two-ship of enemy fighters taxies to the end of the runway 

to conduct their last checks before take-off. Just as the 

aircraft rev their engines a handful of aircraft a bit smaller 

than model airplanes dive down from an altitude of 300 

feet. Unseen by airfield observers because of their small 

size, these innocuous vehicles home in on the fighters’ 

engine intakes using a combination of imaging infrared and 

acoustical sensors. Darting into the intakes they quickly

cause foreign object damage and engine shutdown. There 

will be no glory in aerial combat for these fighters today. 

—A possible wartime scenario in the not too distant future 

There are many pressures on today’s U.S. military. The variety and 

the nature of threats and other challenges expands daily. Potential 

adversaries get smarter all the time and their access to modern weaponry 

appears uninhibited. There is no reduction in operations tempo. The lag 

between cutting edge technologies and those installed in newly fielded 

military systems appears to be worsening, and efforts to contain costs meet 

with limited success at best. 

That the U.S. continues to exercise its unqualified leadership in 

military matters around the globe in the face of such pressures is a tribute

to its leaders’ vision as well as the hard work and ingenuity of its people. 

The soundness of such leadership and its underpinnings are attested to by 

the preeminence of our nation’s air forces, which more and more are being 

pushed to the “front lines” of conflict. They have become the weapons of 

choice for handling difficult duties throughout the world. Without taking 

anything away from the military people who make this preeminence a 

daily reality, it is no less founded on the superior war fighting capabilities 

inherent in our systems and technology. These advanced technologies 

provide an asymmetric advantage to U.S. forces, at least to the extent the

U.S. acquires them first, and forges their incorporation into concepts of 

operation. 
2....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

One area of technological advancement that holds promise to help the 

U.S. maintain its military leadership is the emerging field of micro-air

vehicles (MAV). Technological progress in a number of areas including, 

but not limited to, aerodynamics, microelectronics, sensors, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), and micro-manufacturing, is 

ushering in the possibility for the affordable development and acquisition 

of this new class of military systems. MAVs are a subset of uninhabited 

air vehicles (UAV) that are roughly two orders of magnitude smaller than 

the manned systems currently in use. Recent advances in miniaturization 

may make it possible for very small vehicles to carry out important 

military missions that are either too risky or too expensive to conduct 

today. These missions should be possible if MAVs achieve the 

characteristic attributes of being low cost, low weight, having little to no 

logistical “footprint,” mission versatility, range, endurance, stealth, and 

precision. Micro-air vehicles may represent a pioneering advancement

providing the U.S. a new asymmetric advantage. 

A review of the literature in this area indicates that the military 

potential of this emerging field remains on the “technological push” side 

of the equation with little to no “requirements pull” from the user 

community. Accordingly, concepts of operations deriving from the war 

fighting community – particularly the United States Air Force – are sparse. 

At a higher level, the potential of MAVs opens up new possibilities in the 

formulation of military strategies that require investigation. This paper

undertakes to ask and provide answers to two essential questions: What

are the potential Air Force applications of emerging micro-air vehicle 

systems and supporting technologies and what are the implications of this 

potential for the execution of military strategy? 

To answer these questions this paper will start with a generic

overview of what is unique about MAVs that makes their development 

inviting and how they compare to other UAV systems. Then, it will assess

their potential and the interest in them and their applications within the Air 

Force, the other military services, and the civilian arena. Subsequently, a 

thorough review of MAV technologies will be presented followed by 

investigation of military functions they might fulfill and potential contexts 

in which they might be employed. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....3 

II. Why Micro-Air Vehicles? 

What Makes Micro-Air Vehicles Unique? 

MAVs are a subset of UAVs characterized by their relatively small 

size. With wingspans in the fifteen-centimeter range, MAVs have a 

number of advantages including the following: 

• MAVs may be more amenable to a “faster, better, cheaper” 

approach to their development, procurement, and fielding 

• It should be possible to design MAVs to have a small (even 

negligible) logistics footprint 

• MAVs may afford a “commodity” approach to mission 

accomplishment either by enabling a variety of payloads to be 

manufactured for a single airframe or by proving flexible enough 

to permit payload variation in the field 

• MAVs may prove a cost-effective augmentation to existing, lowdensity, high-demand systems 

• MAVs may bring mission capabilities to smaller units that

heretofore were not large enough to justify possession and 

operation of traditional systems providing such capabilities 

• MAVs may afford the U.S. asymmetric avenues in the conduct of 

warfare 

While the diminutive nature of micro-air vehicles makes possible 

their employment in a variety of military settings, it also comes with 

constraints that must be acknowledged and taken into account for proper

tactical use. Likewise, the fact that MAVs can be found within a spectrum

of UAV capabilities provides an onus to avoid redundancy and to 

optimally focus use on applications that leverage their unique 

characteristics. 

Table 1 below provides a listing of the spectrum of UAVs and the

relative place of micro-air vehicles within it. 
4....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

Table 1. UAV Classifications, Characteristics, & Examples 

Categories Abbreviation Data link

Range (km) 

Endurance

(hours) 

Maximum Flight 

Altitude (m)

Launch Method Recovery Method 

Tactical UAVs 

Nano Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown 

Example Missions: speculative. Example Systems: none known. 

Meso Unknown Unknown Unknown VTOL Belly

Expendable 

Example Missions: wide-area sensing (in swarms), planetary exploration. Example Systems: Mesicopter 

Micro μ < 10 1 250 H/HL/VTOL Belly, skids 

Expendable 

Example Missions: RSTA, comms relay, scouting, NBC sampling, EW. Example Systems: MicroStar, Hyperav+, Black Widow, Microbat. 

Mini Mini < 10 < 2 250 HL/L/VTOL/

Wheels 

Belly, skids 

Wheels Parachute 

Example Missions: film and broadcast industries, agriculture, pollution measurements. 

Example Systems: Aerocam, RPH2+, R50+, Rmax+, SurveyCopter. 

Close Range CR 10-30 2-4 3,000 HL/L/VTOL/

Wheels 

Belly, skids 

Wheels Parachute 

Example Missions: Recon, EW, artillery correction, mine detection, search & rescue. 

Example Systems: APID+, Camcopter+, Cypher, Dragon, Javelin, Luna, Mini Tucan, Mi-Tex Backpack, Observer, Pointer, Vigilant, 

Vigiplane 

Short Range SR 30-70 3-6 3,000 L/VTOL/ 

RATO

Belly-skids 

Parachute/airbag

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, EW, NBC sampling, mine detection 

Example Systems: Crecerelle, Dragon, Eyeview, Fox, Heliot+, Mirach 26, Phantom, Phoenix, SoOJKY, Sperwer, Vulture 

Medium Range MR 70-200 1 3,000-5,000 L/VTOL/ 

Wheels/

RATO

Skids 

Wheels 

Para/airbag

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, artillery correction, EW, NBC sampling, mine detection, comms relay

Example Systems: Brevel, CL327+, Eagle Eye+, Mucke, Outrider, Pioneer, Prowler, Ranger, Searcher, Seeker, 

 Sentry, Shadow 200, Skyeye, Sniper 

Low Altitude

Deep 

Penetration 

LADP > 250 1 0.12-9,000 RATO Para/airbag

Example Missions: Recon. Example Systems: CL89, CL289, Mirach 100, Mirach 150 

Long Range LR > 500 6-13 5,000 Wheels/ 

RATO

Wheels 

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, comms relay. Example Systems: Hunter 

Endurance EN > 500 12-24 5,000-8,000 Wheels/ 

Launcher

Wheels 

Para/airbag

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, comms relay, EW, NBC sampling

Example Systems: Aerosonde, Hermes 450, Prowler II, Searcher II, Shadow 600, Super Vulture 

Strategic UAVs 

Medium-Alt. 

LongEndurance 

MALE > 500 24-48 5,000-8,000 RLG RLG 

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, comms relay, EW weapons delivery

Example Systems: Altus, Hermes 1500, Heron, I. Gnat, Perseus, Predator, Theseus 

High Altitude 

Long

Endurance

HALE > 1,000 12-40 15,000-20,000 RLG RLG 

Example Missions: RSTA, BDA, comms relay, EW, boost phase intercept launch vehicle. Example Systems: GlobalHawk, Raptor, Condor 

Special Purpose UAVs 

Lethal 300 4 3,000-4,000 Launcher/RATO/

Air-Launch 

Expendable 

Example Missions: Anti-tank/vehicle, anti-radar, anti-infrastructure, anti-ship, anti-aircraft

Example Systems: Harpy, K100, Lark, Marula, Polyphem, Taifun, Sea Ferret, MALI

Decoys 0-500 <1 to few 30-5,000 Canister/ 

RATO/ 

Air-Launch 

Expen

dable 

Example Missions: Aerial and naval deception. Example Systems: Chukar, Flyrt, MALD, Nulka

Acronyms: 

BDA: battle damage assessment L: launcher RSTA: recon, surveillance, target acq 

EW: electronic warfare NBC: nuclear, biological, chemical VTOL: vertical take-off & landing

H: hand-launched RATO: rocket-assisted take-off 

HHL: hand-held launcher RLG: retractable landing gear 

Source: adapted from Peter Van Blyenburgh, “UAVs – Where Do We Stand?” Military 

Technology, March 1999, 29-30. Used with permission from Monch Publishing, Bonn,

Germany.
Death by a Thousand Cuts....5 

As can be seen from this table, micro-air vehicles occupy a niche very 

near the bottom run of UAV systems. MAVs possess wingspans in the 

range of fifteen centimeters (about six inches) as compared to the high end 

UAVs, which can have wingtip-to-wingtip measurements of up to 3500

centimeters, as in the case of Global Hawk. This represents over two 

orders of magnitude difference in size. Figure 1 below provides some 

perspective for this difference in scale. The horizontal axis in the figure 

uses “Reynolds Number” which is an aerodynamic scaling function 

directly proportional to size and speed. As shall be discussed later, the 

small size of MAVs has profound consequences for their design with 

regard to aerodynamics and systems integration as well as for their

mission utility. The example missions listed for MAVs in Table 1 are

verbatim from the table’s source, but as shall be seen later, are only a 

partial listing of the possible mission set. 

Figure 1. Comparison of the Micro Air Vehicle (μAV) Flight Regime 

with Others1
6....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

What Is the Basis for an Air Force Interest in MAVs? 

From a military point of view, micro-air vehicles are attractive for a

number of reasons. The leading motive would appear to be the promise 

they hold in the realm of information operations, particularly support for 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) before, during, and 

after events of interest. These functions will be executed through carriage 

and operation of miniaturized sensors, a key element of Joint Vision

2020.

2

 

The goal here is greater battlespace awareness and reduced decision 

cycle times. To the extent MAVs contribute favorably to these goals, 

compared to other alternatives, their use in military contexts will appear

inviting. 

The USAF is fully on board with this Joint Staff vision. In America’s 

Air Force Vision 2020, the Air Force leadership states, 

[W]e’ll provide the ability to find, fix, assess, track, target and engage

anything of military significance, anywhere. . . . Information

superiority will be a vital enabler of that capability. . . . Capitalizing

more fully on a set of revolutionary technologies – like stealth, 

advanced airborne and spaceborne sensors and highly precise allweather munitions – we’ll operate with greater effectiveness . . . With 

advanced sensors and a range of precise weapons, from large to very

small, we’ll be able to strike effectively wherever and whenever

necessary with minimum collateral damage.

3

 [emphasis added]

With this statement, the central importance of information superiority is 

acknowledged, while the solution space is left open to systems of any size 

that can get the job done. 

Though such vision statements are necessarily broad in scope, the Air 

Force has made a limited number of pronouncements that are more 

specific in their endorsement of systems and technologies similar in kind 

to MAVs. In New World Vistas Air and Space Power for the 21st

Century, published in 1995, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board laid 

out predictions for technologies relevant to the future of the Air Force. To 

their credit, the Study Board members prefaced their predictions with an 

assumption on what the future combat environment will look like. To 

summarize, the Scientific Advisory Board foresees a smaller Air Force 

having to fight a long way from home, in urban and jungle terrain, against 

adversaries from the nation-state level down to terrorist cells, attacking a 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....7 

wide variety of targets from conventional weapons to information systems,

and having to deal with nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapon 

threats. In order to help address these challenges, the study asserts that it 

should be a “goal” of the Air Force to “know at all times the relevant

global military situation,” and ensure “such awareness should be in near

real time.” 

In addition to “Global Awareness,” the study goes on to outline five 

other “capabilities” that it sees as necessary for the Air Force “to continue

into the 21st century as the world's best and most respected” aerospace 

power and posits a number of system concepts to provide such 

capabilities. One “Global Awareness” system mentioned is a “miniature

UAV” (itself carried aboard a “larger UAV”) that could deploy ground

sensors. Of the other five “capabilities,” one has some relevance to 

MAVs, that being “Projection of Lethal and Sublethal Power.” A system 

proposed in this vein is a “robotic micro munition” designed “to attack 

deeply buried hard targets.” The study also identifies key technologies for 

development that will support its vision. Among those worth highlighting 

are micro-sensors having “novel readout methods” and “low probability of 

intercept” as well as “[m]icro-electromechanical systems for sensing and 

manipulating.”4

 

One other official document which speaks to MAV-like systems 

resulted from an effort directed by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force 

known as Air Force 2025. This study outlined several “alternate futures”

or environments to facilitate its strategic planning methodology and 

defined them as “an array of [possible] future worlds in which the U.S. 

must be able to survive and prosper.” Within this context the study team 

identified ten “top systems” among forty-three envisioned, including a 

concept known as “attack microbots.” This concept is described as 

. . . a class of highly miniaturized (one millimeter scale) 

electromechanical systems capable of being deployed en masse and 

performing individual or collective target attack. Various deployment

approaches are possible, including dispersal as an aerosol, 

transportation by a larger platform, and full flying and crawling 

autonomy. Attack is accomplished by a variety of robotic effectors,

electromagnetic measures, or energetic materials. Some sensor 

microbot capabilities are required for target acquisition and analysis. 

Microbots could provide unobtrusive, pervasive intervention into

adversary environments and systems. The extremely small size

provides high penetration capabilities and natural stealth. 
8....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

In assigning this concept a role in future interdiction missions the study

said, “Penetrating sensors and designators, coupled with microtechnology, will permit weapons to have the processing power required to 

‘touch’ targets in the right spot.”5

 

While not one of the “top 10,” the Air Force 2025 study also 

identified a concept known as “miniature unattended ground sensors” to 

support the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance function. These 

devices would be air-dropped as a “swarm” in the vicinity of a “supply 

chokepoint and become a remote sentry reporting on enemy activity.” In 

this capacity, miniature unattended ground sensors would help guide 

munitions as well as report on munitions effects. Predicting just how far 

the technology might advance, the study asserted that miniature

unattended ground sensors of 2025 with a complete suite of 

communications and power capabilities, camouflage, and either motive or 

adhesive systems would be one centimeter square by one millimeter

thick.” It further stated that miniature unattended ground sensors would 

be “ideal for detecting weapons of mass destruction and operating in urban 

environments.”6

To enable these and other concepts to become a reality, the Air Force 

2025 study identified six “high leverage technologies,” which “stood out 

because they are important to a large number of high-value system 

concepts.” Among these were “micro-mechanical devices” which has 

already been alluded to above as MEMS.7

 Such devices are sized on the 

order of hundreds of microns and represent fully functional mechanical

machines – sometimes combined with electronic devices – and 

manufactured through lithography or similar techniques used in computer 

chip production. Given the centrality of micro-electromechanical systems

to MAVs and other micro-robotic systems, their development should be 

viewed as a “critical path” item.

Another organization expressing interest in micro systems for Air 

Force application is RAND. While not an “official” source of Air Force 

opinion, RAND has nonetheless proven itself a significant influence over 

Air Force thinking in the realms of technology and policy. In Technology 

Trends in Air Warfare senior RAND analyst, Benjamin Lambeth, 

envisions “[m]icrosensor-directed micro-explosive bombs . . .able to kill 

moving targets with just grams of explosive.” Additionally, he sees a time

when “[g]round weather sensors can be delivered by small UAVs aboard 

larger UAVs.”8

 Another RAND study, Military Applications of 

Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS), posited a number of concepts 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....9 

to demonstrate how MEMS could have military utility. While none of 

them was specifically a micro-air vehicle type system in itself, each could 

be married up to a MAV to enable a useful mission. These concepts 

included the following: 

• Chemical sensor for the soldier 

• Identification friend or foe 

• Active surfaces 

• Distributed sensor net 

• Micro-robotic electronic disabling system 

The first concept, if carried aloft by a MAV, would allow remote sensing 

of noxious battlefield agents such as nuclear, biological, and chemical 

products. The second could be delivered by MAVs to facilitate targeting 

of enemy resources and avoidance of fratricide. The third could be a 

means at the subsystem level to enhance MAV aerodynamic performance. 

The fourth MEMS concept would “allow the commander to blanket an 

area [with micro-sensors] with a single shot, or to use micro-sized UAVs 

for seeding.” 

The micro-robotic electronic disabling system concept involves target 

attack and disabling via infiltration of the target’s electronics. It would be 

dispensed in the general neighborhood of the target via carrier vehicle 

such as an UAV. The micro-robotic electronic disabling system would be 

contained within small canisters that would fly or glide (via “aerobot,” 

parafoil, etc.) to within a short distance of their target(s). From there they

would then move on their own to infiltrate and deliver the kill mechanism. 

Targets vulnerable to micro-robotic electronic disabling systems would 

include: power plants and relay stations, transportation grid nodes, 

airports, seaports, switching yards, major freeway intersections, television 

and radio stations, telephone exchanges, computer based research centers, 

and electronics at key industrial sites.

9

As can be seen from this limited set of sources, the Air Force

certainly has reason to be interested in micro-air vehicles. They hold

potential to provide military worth by supporting “global awareness” and 

power projection operations. Despite such potential, there is only one 

dedicated research and development (R&D) program under Air Force 

sponsorship known to the author that is looking at how MAVs could be 
10....Death by a Thousand Cuts

optimized for Air Force missions.10 Instead, interest appears to be greater 

in other military circles.

Who Else Is Interested in MAVs? 

The Army, Navy, and Marines currently appear to be showing much 

greater interest in micro-air vehicles than the Air Force. Interest in these 

aircraft has also appeared from civilian quarters as well. 

Military 

Currently, the bulk of U.S. R&D sponsored by the military in microair vehicle technologies comes from the Defense Advanced Research 

Projects Agency. They are now in the third year of a $35 million fouryear program in which MAVs and supporting technologies are being 

developed and demonstrated.11 This program can trace its roots back to

two workshops hosted by RAND in the early 1990s in which several 

technologies were identified “warrant[ing] greater U.S. defense R&D 

investment.” Among these promising program areas was development of 

“miniature (e.g., fly-size) flying and/or crawling systems capable of 

performing a wide variety of battlefield sensor missions.”12 Later, in the

mid-1990s, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory 

did some technical analyses which pointed to the feasibility of MAVs. 

Not stopping there, they devised a conceptual design and presented it to 

then Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Owens. 

Upon being asked if he saw potential utility in such a machine, the

Admiral was impressed enough to encourage the Lincoln Laboratory 

researchers to continue their work in the field and to challenge his brethren 

in the naval R&D community to do the same.

13

According to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

(DARPA) micro-air vehicle program representatives, a shift toward a 

more diverse array of military operations, often involving small teams of 

individual soldiers operating in non-traditional environments is already 

evident in the post-cold war experience.” As a result, there is a need for

small reconnaissance sensors to provide “greatly enhanced situational 

awareness for the small unit or individual soldier.”

14 

The focus of thinking within DARPA is support for the “over-thenext-hill” and “around-the-corner” reconnaissance needs of foot soldiers 

either individually or in small units. Special operations units also 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....11 

function in small groups, often performing missions of extreme sensitivity 

and imminent danger. Thus, it is no surprise that the U.S. Special 

Operations Command saw fit to draft a “first operational requirements 

document for an MAV” in June, 1998.15 The U.S. Army’s Armor Center 

and the United States Marine Corps are also reportedly in the midst of 

drawing up requirements documents for MAV (or slightly larger miniUAV) systems.16

The Naval Research Laboratory has cooperated extensively with 

DARPA on micro-air vehicle work, receiving funding from the latter, but 

has focused MAV payload work in a direction different than intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance. Instead, the Naval Research Laboratory

has looked to MAVs to act as a means to carry out the suppression of 

enemy air defenses mission.17 Their concept of operations has either foot 

soldiers or larger UAVs carrying the MAV to within several kilometers of 

the target. Then, it would fly autonomously with its miniature jammer

package to a landing on the threat radar whereupon it would commence 

interfering with the radar signal. What the jammer lacks in power, would 

be compensated for by reduction in distance to the victim receiver.18

Civilian 

It is difficult to gauge how much R&D is being conducted by 

commercial firms, insofar as almost all the literature dealing with the 

subject relates to military sponsored work. Even for efforts paid for by the 

military, the developers are quick to point out civilian applications for

MAV systems. Dr. Samuel Blankenship at the Georgia Tech Research 

Institute (GTRI) foresees use of MAVs by police and fire officials, 

scientists, and farmers. Tasks might include killing harmful insects,

measuring smokestack emissions, monitoring concentrations of chemicals 

in agricultural or industrial spills, surveying wildlife, and providing 

recreation as toys.19 Still other possibilities mentioned include: traffic

monitoring, border surveillance, forestry, power-line inspections, realestate photography,20 hostage crisis monitoring,21 search and rescue (such

as maneuvering through damaged buildings looking for survivors after a

disaster), locating illegal drugs or weapons,22 surveillance of criminal 

activities,23 replacing weather balloons, serving as temporary antennas,24

crowd monitoring and control,25 home security, and the entertainment 

industry.26 
12....Death by a Thousand Cuts

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 2001, other uses 

of MAVs have come to the forefront. MAVs may be useful for homeland 

security and anti-terrorist applications to include detection of weapons, 

and tracking targets of interest such as personnel or shipments. 

It appears that unlike other trends in defense related R&D, the tide has 

not yet turned for micro-air vehicle technologies. As a result, the military 

cannot yet depend on commercial interests to lead the way in development 

as has occurred in the microelectronics industry. Instead, the military will 

have to continue to provide the “seed” resources and leadership to 

promote advances in this area. Still, as shall be seen, enough progress 

may have been made over the past decade that more of the R&D burden 

can be shared between these communities in the future. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....13 

III. The State of Micro-Air Vehicle Technologies 

We’re at the Wright Brothers stage.27

—Richard Wlezen 

DARPA’s Acting Program Manager for MAVs

The quote above from Richard Wlezen says a lot about the state of the 

art of micro-air vehicles, but it should not be misinterpreted to mean that 

useful military applications for MAVs are a long way away. Even in the 

case of the Wright Brothers, aircraft were flying military missions within a 

decade after their first flight in 1903. Despite the many technical 

challenges remaining for MAV development, “many people working on 

micro air vehicles . . . assert that the necessary technology is rapidly 

becoming available.”28

If size is the driving parameter in micro-air vehicle development, 

what sorts of requirements exist in this vein? As it stands now, no 

“Analysis of Alternatives” has been conducted by any military department

to provide a bounded trade space for mission performance requirements 

versus cost and technological feasibility. Lacking such guidance, the 

development community has had to make their best guess as to what this 

trade space should be. Accordingly, DARPA, in its current program, has 

set out the following goals: 

• A dimensional limit of fifteen centimeters in length, width, and 

height 

• An approximate vehicle weight of fifty grams

29

• A useful payload weight of about twenty grams 

• An endurance of twenty to sixty minutes 

• An operating range out to ten kilometers 

• A cruising speed of between ten and twenty meters per second30

• A unit production cost of $5,000 (near term) down to $1,000 (far 

term)

31
14....Death by a Thousand Cuts

The dimensional limit chosen by DARPA “was no accident” as both 

physics and technology considerations come into play.32 As shall be 

discussed below, aerodynamic characteristics begin to diverge from the 

norm at this size and miniaturization of components becomes hard pressed 

as well. Furthermore, DARPA desired “to push the technology involved, 

on the grounds that this value [fifteen centimeters] ‘is half a foot, and a 

foot looked too easy.’”33

It is self evident that a micro-air vehicle is a system composed of 

constituent subsystems. It is at this subsystem level that many of the 

technology challenges present themselves. That said, it is very important 

to realize that unlike many other, larger systems, MAVs present a rather 

difficult systems engineering challenge. This is because for MAVs to be 

successful, they will require “high degrees of system integration with 

unprecedented levels of multifunctionality, component integration, 

payload integration, and minimization of interfaces among functional 

elements.”34 Additionally, extremely constrained weight and volume

limits and high surface-to-volume ratios mean the traditional practice of 

“stuffing more” into the airframe shell will probably not suffice. Instead, 

each of the MAV’s components must perform as many functions as 

possible.35 An example of this might be antennas embedded in the surface 

skin of the MAV providing signal reception as well as bearing structural 

loads. Beyond the surface, weight, and volumetric concerns; close

coupled, dynamic electromagnetic and thermal interactions will be even 

greater issues than they are for larger systems.36

Table 2. Baseline MAV Weight Distribution 

Component Weight in grams (ounces) 

Airframe 6 (0.2)

Propulsion 36 (1.7) 

Flight Control 2 (0.1) 

Communications 3 (0.1)

Visible Sensor 2 (0.1) 

Total Weight 49 (1.7) 

Source: Adapted from W. R. Davis, et al., “Micro 

Air Vehicles for Optical Surveillance,” The Lincoln

Laboratory Journal 9 (1996): 197-214.

Despite the high level of integration and multi-functionality required, 

it is still useful to break out each major aircraft subsystem to discuss the
Death by a Thousand Cuts....15 

progress made by and issues facing micro-air vehicle designers. Table 2 

above provides an example breakout that reflects mid-1990s technological 

limitations in which propulsion weight (and most likely energy 

storage/conversion as well) dominates. 

While this “component” or subsystem listing is a somewhat

representative one, the discussion here will use a slightly different 

breakdown. To this end the following areas will be treated individually: 

aerodynamics, propulsion, energy generation and storage, guidance and 

navigation, communications, and finally payloads. 

Aerodynamics 

Aerodynamic considerations for micro-air vehicles may motivate 

design engineers to move away from the conventional fixed wing to 

blended wing-body lifting shapes, rotary wings and maybe even flapping 

wings.37 In any case, this area will be dominated by unusual flow

phenomena and flight control challenges. 

Flow Character 

For the flight regime in which micro-air vehicles operate, the 

dominating function is the Reynolds Number, an engineering scaling 

parameter that effectively describes the character of the flow in which an 

object moves. Reynolds Number is essentially the ratio of inertial forces 

to viscous forces that are developed as a vehicle moves through a medium 

such as air. The Reynolds Number is defined by the following equation: 

 ρVc 

 Reynolds Number = ---------- 

 μ 

where ρ is the density of the fluid (air), V is the velocity of the vehicle, c 

is the wing chord length at mid-span (i.e., distance from leading edge to 

trailing edge), and μ is the viscosity of the fluid (again, air). For typical 

aircraft designs, the Reynolds Number ranges between 1 million and 100

million (106-108) and inertial forces (due to speed) dominate. However, 

given the small sizes and relatively slow speeds of MAVs, this parameter 

drops to between 5,000 and 80,000 where viscous forces hold much

greater sway.

38 Under these conditions, the flow behaves quite differently 
16....Death by a Thousand Cuts

and aerodynamic performance is much degraded. While the flow tends to 

remain laminar (i.e., smooth), it separates easily leading to stall, which is a

major loss of lift and increase in drag. More generally, lift performance is 

rather poor in this regime and skin friction drag is elevated due to 

relatively large viscous forces. Thus, while MAVs are likely to see lift-todrag ratios of about five to ten whether the system uses a fixed wing with 

propeller, rotor, or flapping wing design; higher Reynolds Number flight 

vehicles will possess lift-to-drag ratio values on the order of three to four 

times higher.39 As one observer put it, flying at these conditions would be 

akin to swimming in honey if translated to the scales to which humans are 

accustomed.40

At low Reynolds Numbers, the unsteadiness in the free-stream 

velocity becomes more significant which means phenomena such as gusts 

can effect a small vehicle considerably.41 Additionally, a characteristic

known as hysteresis becomes a problem as well. Hysteresis is a 

performance anomaly in which the lift and drag developed by an airfoil 

(wing shape) vary at a given angle of attack depending on whether that 

incidence to the flow was approached from lower or higher values. 

Flight Controls 

Given these unusual flow phenomena, achieving efficient and 

stabilized flight is a significant challenge. The answer may lie in the

pursuit of passive and/or active control strategies using microelectromechanical system type devices to improve aerodynamic

performance and control. For example, it may be possible to create and 

install tiny sensors and actuators to dynamically adjust the camber (i.e., 

curvature) and shape (i.e., profile) of the wing depending on the 

instantaneous conditions.42 These miniature actuators could also be used

to move control surfaces like rudders, ailerons, and flaps. Flow character

over the wing could be controlled by sensor arrays that detect the shear 

stresses or fluid vortices at the wing surface coupled with flexible 

membranes or micro-flaps to affect the flow as desired.43 Flow

separation could also be mitigated employing such exotic approaches as

air suction/injection along the wing surface (which might require microvalves and micro-pumps), wall heat transfer, or electromagnetic body 

force.44 Another proposed approach, called “circulation control,” is to take

advantage of what is known as the Coanda effect.45 In this technique, 

engine thrust, or exhausted air, is directed across a wing surface or out the 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....17 

trailing edge so as to help the flow stay attached and generate additional 

lift.46 Blown air could also be used for providing flight control to include

stabilization and maneuvering, potentially obviating the need for moving 

control surfaces.47

Stabilization will require optimized design and integration of 

whatever sense and control schemes are employed. On the sensor side, 

angular rate, pressure, or acceleration transducers could be used to help

provide stability augmentation. Micro-motors, piezoelectric devices, 

electrostatic or electromagnetic mechanisms, magnetoelastic ribbons, or 

Terfonol-d rods are all alternatives for performing the actuator function in 

a flight control system.

48 Flight controls will range from the 

straightforward to the complex, but even the least ambitious will require a

microcontroller to implement the control scheme selected. In this vein, 

commercial devices will suffice for near-term micro-air vehicles, but those

employing advanced concepts may require custom chips.49 Processing for 

these control systems may use “soft computing” techniques that include 

fuzzy logic, neural networks, genetic algorithms, pattern recognitions, or 

knowledge-based systems.”50 The field of genetic algorithms, which uses 

“global parallelism” for search, optimization, and machine learning, holds 

much promise in this regard.51

Propulsion 

The biggest challenge we need to overcome is propulsion.52 

—William R. Davis 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory 

Propulsion systems for micro-air vehicles will have to satisfy 

challenging requirements for high energy density and high power density. 

They will have to exhibit low vibration, so as not to interfere with payload 

operation such as imaging, and be acoustically quiet to assure 

covertness.53 In general, it appears that near-term, fixed-wing MAVs 

weighing about fifty grams will require on the order of ten watts of 

electrical power, of which the propulsion system will consume about 

ninety percent.54 To meet this demand, a variety of alternative

technologies are possible to include: thermal-cycle machines (internal-
18....Death by a Thousand Cuts

combustion engines, pulse jets, and micro-turbines), electric motors, and 

reciprocating chemical muscles. 

Internal-combustion Engines 

Internal-combustion engines appear to be one of the best bets for 

near-term micro-air vehicle designs.55 While their thermal efficiencies at

MAV scales are low, only about five percent, their power densities are

typically about one watt per gram and they use high-energy fuels.56 Such

engines have already been developed and put to use by model plane 

enthusiasts. One example is the Cox Tee Dee .010 which is only 0.01 

cubic inch in volume and can produce about twenty watts of power.

However, the high thrust specific fuel consumption (pounds of fuel per 

hour per pounds of thrust) of these engines will limit MAV range and 

endurance.57 Furthermore, engines in this class do not meet requirements 

for weight, noise suppression, and reliability.58 According to Lincoln 

Laboratory engineers, a fifteen-centimeter propeller-driven MAV with an

lift-to-drag ratio of five will require about five watts of shaft power for

climbing, turning, or hovering and about half that for cruising. Thus, such 

engines are relatively overpowered.59 Lastly, internal combustion engines 

are also sensitive to low temperatures and humidity, which adversely 

affect starting. Restarting in the air also remains a major obstacle.60

Pulse Jet Engines 

Pulse jet engines consist of hollow tubes with a flapper valve at the 

front end to admit air, a hole in the side for injecting fuel and a pair of 

electrodes to create a spark. These have the advantage of almost no 

moving parts. Researchers at Georgia Tech are working on pulse jet 

engines about the size of a “fat fountain pen” and have built a

demonstrator. Nevertheless, a pulse jet compatible with micro-air vehicle 

requirements is still some years away. Using conventional fabrication 

approaches, weight remains an issue, and micro-electromechanicalsystem-based designs need to overcome high operating temperature 

limitations.61 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....19 

Microjets 

A promising, but technically difficult, propulsion and/or power source 

is the microjet, a micro-electromechanical system based device about the 

size of a dime. These devices are based on micro-turbines that are 

characterized by high power densities, high flight speeds, and relative 

freedom from vibration. Despite such advantages, difficult design and 

production challenges must be overcome.62 Fabrication techniques are a 

major hurdle, and air-bearing dynamics have been characterized as 

“uncharted territory.”63 Still, this technology could conceivably be 

available within a year or two.64 The Massachusetts Institute of

Technology Gas Turbine Lab is working on a silicon carbide engine that 

weighs one gram, is only one centimeter in diameter, and 0.3 centimeters 

thick, yet produces ten to twenty watts of power. A working combustor

has been built, but the compressor, generator, and bearings have yet to be 

perfected at micro scales.

65 The program goal is for the engine to achieve 

a thirteen-to-one thrust-to-weight ratio.66 Eventually, these ratios will 

approach 100:1, a full order of magnitude better than modern fighter 

aircraft engines, and fuel consumption rates of ten grams per hour should 

be possible using hydrogen fuel. Design challenges remain, however. To 

achieve the above goals, MIT’s calculations indicate that the combustor

exit temperature needs to reach 1,000 to 1,500 degrees Centigrade with 

rotor peripheral speeds of between 300 and 600 meters per second. 

MIT is not the only one working in this area as the United Kingdom’s 

(UK) Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) has successfully 

produced and demonstrated an early version of a microjet. Their device is

1.3 centimeters long by 0.5 centimeters diameter and weighs less than two 

grams. It uses a hydrogen peroxide-kerosene fuel mixture and has 

achieved 6.4 grams of thrust (thrust to weight ration of nearly four-to-one) 

with flight duration times of up to an hour. Starting and stopping the 

engine has proven simple and reliable.67

Electric Motors 

When paired with propellers on fixed wing designs or rotor blades on 

helicopters, electric motors are another propulsive option for micro-air 

vehicles. They are quiet, reliable and don’t produce much vibration, but 

suffer the disadvantage of low power to weight ratio when coupled with 

batteries or other power-generation sources.68 According to the NRL, 
20....Death by a Thousand Cuts

small new motors using a brushless neodymium-iron-boron magnet design 

can achieve ninety percent efficiencies. A lightweight system based on a 

high-efficiency electric motor and top-of-the-line lithium batteries could 

run for twenty to thirty minutes. In its sponsored research, the NRL is 

working toward a pencil-shaped motor weighing less than six grams with 

a desired output power of two watts and a system efficiency of eighty 

percent.69 

Reciprocating Chemical Muscle 

Georgia Tech is pursuing a flapping wing design they have dubbed a 

“microflyer,” but which others using similar approaches call an 

“entomopter” or “ornithopter” in reference to its insect-like or bird-like

characteristics. This micro-air vehicle variant employs a reciprocating 

chemical muscle which uses a monopropellant fuel to generate an up and 

down or back and forth motion such as the beating of wings or scurrying 

of feet. Like the micro-turbine, the reciprocating chemical muscle can 

also be used to generate electricity that could be used to power sensors or 

other on-board systems. Georgia Tech researchers believe a “selfconsuming” system is possible in which the microflyer would consume

itself to generate energy as it flies. Alternately the reciprocating chemical 

muscle concept is even amenable to conversion of biomass into usable 

fuel reactions. Thus, future microflyers may be able to gather fuel from 

the environment to continue their operations.70 A fifty-gram microflyer 

possessing a reciprocating chemical muscle with 100 percent efficiency 

would need just over a watt of power. One cubic centimeter of fuel would 

suffice for three minutes of flight.71

Energy Generation and Storage 

As was observed in the last section, internal combustion engines and 

micro-turbines can be used to convert liquid fuel into thrust and electricity 

for use by other subsystems. That said, whether the energy comes as a byproduct of the propulsion process or from a separate dedicated on-board 

source, the relatively large amount of power that must be supplied to the 

propulsion system means less is available for other subsystems. 

Therefore, challenges for micro-air vehicle design are to generate and/or 

store sufficient energy within the tiny craft (i.e., attain high power density) 

and to adhere to strict power budget allocations. As far as energy source 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....21 

options, the two leading contenders appear to be lithium batteries and fuel 

cells with the former more likely to find near-term application. Beamed

microwave energy is also being investigated. 

Compared to a rechargeable NiCad battery of the same weight and at 

a high discharge rate, a lithium battery delivers several times the energy.72 

Nevertheless, lithium batteries need to advance in terms of energy density 

from 200-500 joules per gram to the range of 700-900 joules per gram. 

Likewise, power drain rates need to increase from the present level of

0.06-0.2 watts per gram to about 0.5 watts per gram to enable sustained 

climbing flight.73 One recent advance of note is a new lithium battery that 

can be recharged by sunlight and which comes as a thin, flexible sheet. 

This configuration may allow the battery to double as the surface of a

MAV.”74 One estimate is that this thin-film lithium battery technology

could “provide enough power to allow one gram to hover almost five 

hours or fly ten kilometers and still retain eighty percent of its energy.”75 

While fuel cell technology is less mature, it should provide two to 

four times the energy density of a lithium battery. Fuel cells promise 

clean, quiet operation with instant start-up and cold-weather operation. 

They are also non-toxic and have virtually unlimited shelf life with no 

required periodic maintenance. DARPA is sponsoring development of a 

small, lightweight, one-time use, non-regenerative solid-oxide fuel cell 

roughly one centimeter tall and weighing just twenty-five grams. Such a 

fuel cell would run to completion once the reaction is started, last about 

one to two hours, and provide “all the power a MAV should need.” All in 

all, this technology could be ready in the next few years.76

A last option is to dispense with on-board carriage of stored or 

generated energy and to beam microwave power to the micro-air vehicle 

from the ground. Obviously, the drawback to such a scheme is that it 

depends on a microwave source that must contain a variety of equipment 

including a transmission dish, tracking system, beaming equipment, and a 

transportation system.

77 Researchers at the Naval Postgraduate School are 

working on ways to beam power to a MAV. Included in their efforts is a 

multi-directional antenna able to beam energy to the MAV no matter 

where it is. They have demonstrated power transfer via microwaves using 

the body of the aircraft as an antenna and have resolved a number of safety 

issues. Next, they plan to show how MAVs can be powered using surface 

search radar systems that are commonly found in the Navy.78
22....Death by a Thousand Cuts

Guidance and Navigation 

Guidance and navigation requirements for micro-air vehicles will

depend greatly on the desired mission applications, the technology 

available, and the concept of operations. For example, if a “swarm” of 

MAVs is designed to share geo-spatial data, it could use such knowledge 

to develop situation awareness that a single MAV would have to develop 

by itself. If the goal is to make MAVs fully autonomous, such that they 

will be able to navigate inside buildings or under forest canopy, they will 

have to be able to use sensory data and on-board processing to avoid 

obstacles.79 

Whatever the requirements, those working in this area currently see a 

combination of Global Positioning System (GPS) and inertial sensing as a

minimum capability that will be necessary to meet most guidance and 

navigation needs. That said, the state of the art in GPS systems is that 

they are currently too large, heavy, and power-intensive to meet MAV 

needs. Inertial navigation systems require development of better low-drift 

micro-gyros and accelerometers.80 Until such time as these challenges are

met, MAVs may require real-time human interaction to provide vehicle 

stabilization and guidance. In time, however, more demanding MAV 

requirements will likely make continuous dependence on remote control 

less desirable.81

GPS systems are getting smaller, and are approaching a size useful to 

MAVs. Only a few years ago, GPS systems were not much smaller than 

about 7.5 centimeters, operated on a minimum of 0.5 watts of power, 

possessed antennas weighing twenty to forty grams and required 

substantial data-processing power.82 However, since then the trend has 

been toward greater integration of navigation, guidance, and control on a 

single board with the goal to get it on a single chip.83 This will help

enormously in meeting micro-air vehicle size, weight, and power 

constraints. Greater autonomy could also be facilitated if the MAV were 

endowed with a geographic information system to provide a map of the 

terrain and/or infrastructure layout.84

The guidance and navigation area is one in which microelectromechanical systems could be the saving solution. Microelectromechanical system pressure sensors are being used as altimeters for 

hang-gliders, and the auto industry is seeking to use microelectromechanical systems in cars as part of an inertial navigation system, 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....23 

which would calculate the vehicle’s coordinates relative to its starting 

point.85 According to one source, two new micro-sensors – a hinged 

torsional resonator and a micro-gravity force-balance – will allow microelectromechanical system accelerometers to be used in navigation and 

guidance systems in airplanes and missiles.86 Under DARPA sponsorship, 

Sandia National Laboratories is scheduled to complete the development of

an autopilot/guidance package weighing fifty grams in 2002. Sandia’s 

“MicroNavigator” is supposed to integrate the electronics for gyroscopes, 

three-axis accelerometers, a GPS receiver and the associated processing on 

to a single silicon chip. Another DARPA-sponsored effort is to result in an 

ultra-wideband altimeter and obstacle-avoidance sensor that weighs forty 

grams, draws “little” power and is capable of resolving distances to less 

than thirty centimeters.87 Eventually, extremely small-scale GPS units

could even become a possibility using micro-electromechanical systems.

One ambitious future concept proposes “centimeter-level position sensing 

using carrier-phase differential GPS” with a flight system weight on the 

order of one gram.

88

A completely different alternative for flight guidance and navigation 

could be in the field of “optic flow sensors.” Successes achieved to date 

in this field have made these sensors a possibility for providing “smallscale navigation capability” for micro-air vehicles. These sensors are 

based on the principle of “optic flow,” which “refers to the speed at which 

texture moves in an image focal plane as a result of relative motion

between the observer and objects in the environment.”89 Optic flow

sensors could be used for flight stabilization in the same manner as a 

gyroscope and are capable of being configured to determine altitude or 

perform wall “flanking” as a means of obstacle avoidance. Similar to wall 

flanking is flying down the center of a tunnel or hallway.90 

Communications 

Many projected micro-air vehicle missions require that the MAV be

able to communicate with someone for flight control and/or return of data. 

These communications will occur with the MAV as the originating source

or serving a relay function. While the simplest form of communications 

link is a direct line-of-sight system, there are situations beyond or below 

line of sight in which there would be need of some sort of overhead 

communications relay – either a satellite or another vehicle.91 Line-of-
24....Death by a Thousand Cuts

sight limitations impose severe constraints for military operations in urban 

terrain, so other approaches, such as cellular communications 

architectures, will have to be found.92 Whether line-of-sight or over-thehorizon, a number of missions will require secure links which complicates 

the engineering design and operational trade-offs.93 

The principal communications challenges are due to the small size of 

the micro-air vehicle, which forces the use of small antennae and limits 

power. Thus, the communications subsystem is one that will likely be 

heavily integrated with other subsystems. Wings and other airframe

components may serve as antennae. The limited power budget creates

challenges for omni-directional transmissions which will need to be 

somewhere in the range of two to four megabits per second.94 Microwave 

frequencies will be attractive for this application because of their high data 

bandwidths and their wavelengths of only a few centimeters, which 

translates into small antenna size. As it stands now transmission ranges 

are on the order of a couple kilometers but this should improve in time

such that ten kilometers will soon be possible.95 As an example of 

progress in this area, the MicroStar program sponsored by DARPA is

developing a digital datalink that will provide a range of four to five

kilometers while supporting a one megabit per second transmission rate 

and using only about 200 milliwatts of power.96

MAV Payloads 

The number of useful military functions a MAV could perform is

limited only by the ingenuity of designers and the pace of technological 

improvement. Such promise is magnified by the inherent flexibility of the 

MAV concept itself. In those cases where the need for subsystem 

integration is not too great, MAVs could be built to allow swap out of

some payloads for others in the field. While the number and variety of 

possible payloads is numerous, this section will focus on what has been 

described beyond the stage of a simple concept. Other proposed payloads 

will be mentioned but not elaborated upon. 

Imaging Sensors 

The intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance function is 

probably the leading driver behind the first generation of micro-air 

vehicles because of its military utility and the maturity of the supporting
Death by a Thousand Cuts....25 

technologies. “Chip-on-Flex” technology is being employed to miniaturize 

payload electronics packaging significantly.97 Both tiny chargecoupled-device array cameras and infrared sensors can support

applications for day/night imaging to sufficient quality to meet mission 

needs today. Miniaturization has advanced to the point that researchers at 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory have created a camera lens smaller than a 

coat button.98 An off-the-shelf, one-inch long 300 x 240 pixel, black and 

white video camera weighing 2.2 grams and including a converter for 

standard National Television Systems Committee output, has flown. A

fifteen-gram color camera with a 2.4 gigahertz downlink transmitter has 

also been demonstrated.99 

Another program plans a 512 x 512-pixel day/night camera that can 

be set to take thirty frames per second or freeze frames once per second.100 

This capability should prove particularly useful considering recent 

experiences in the Balkans with UAV operations. When Predator UAV

imaging was first made available, fighter aircrew were provided fullmotion video in which the total delay between the real-time event and 

image presentation was only 1.5 seconds. However, after working with 

this capability, aircrew showed a preference for freeze-frame images 

updated every few seconds. This allowed them to better orient themselves 

on the target as they began their attacks and to obtain battle damage 

assessments within a few seconds of their weapons impact on or near the 

targets.101 This human factors consideration should allow “engineering 

and operational cleverness” to create significant reductions in imager 

power requirements through adjustment of video frame rates.102 

Still another example is the “Black Widow” micro-air vehicle that is 

reported to have carried “the smallest video camera ever flown on a 

remotely piloted aircraft.”103 The Black Widow was equipped with a 

commercial low-resolution, “sugar-cube-sized” video camera that weighed 

two grams. The MAV’s builders were able to greatly reduce the camera’s 

size and weight by integrating the support logic with the camera’s lenses 

in contrast with traditional digital systems that consist of a charge-coupled

device imager wired to four or five support chips.104 

The near future could see a visible-light camera, occupying a volume

of one cubic centimeter and weighing less than one gram. Such a camera 

has been designed by Lincoln Laboratory and would be based on a silicon 

charge-coupled device. It would have an aperture of approximately onetenth of an inch across, contain 1,000 x 1,000 pixels, and produce an 

image every two seconds using as little as twenty-five milliwatts of
26....Death by a Thousand Cuts

power.105 By providing an angular resolution of 0.7 milliradians with a 

million pixels, this camera could produce high-definition television quality 

images that would enable viewers to tell the difference between a tank and 

a truck.106

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) at the California Institute of 

Technology is also pushing the state of the art in miniature solid-state 

imaging sensors. JPL has developed ultra-low-power active pixel sensor

technology that rests on the commercially available complementary metaloxide-semiconductor device fabrication process. This process allows

many components performing different functions to be integrated on a 

single chip thus producing cost savings and making possible reductions in 

system power consumption by a factor of anywhere from 100 to 1,000.107

Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Agent Sensors 

The common wisdom is that biological and chemical agent detectors 

will require substantial development before they can find application on

micro-air vehicles. The anticipation is that “gradient biochemical sensors .

. . will be able to map the size and shape of hazardous clouds and provide

real time tracking of their location.”108 Cited as proof of the challenges 

ahead, is that airborne chemical sensors now weigh about five kilograms

while biological sensors of acceptable military utility and suitability have

yet to be fielded.109 However, the situation may not be so bleak as at first 

appears. Sandia has unveiled on-going work developing its “Lab on a 

Chip” which essentially is a miniaturized microchemistry lab that will be 

capable of collecting, concentrating, and analyzing chemical and 

biological agents “weighing less than a single bacterium.” According to 

Sandia’s managers, the miniature labs should be available within the next 

decade.110 

Research on chemical and biological sensors is also in progress at 

Georgia Tech. There, 

[t]he prototype chemical and biologic sensors are basically small chips 

of glass with optical wave guides fabricated on their surfaces which can 

trap and manipulate light. On the most basic level, the sensor would

have two channels: sensing and reference. When a laser beam is passed 

under the strips, the phase of the light contained in the guides is altered 

by the change in refractive index that occurs when the sensing channel

interacts with the chemical or biological species it is designed to 

measure. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....27 

The information contained in the light is read after the laser beams 

passing under the sensing and reference channels are combined to

generate a unique interference fringe pattern, which moves past a solidstate detector array in proportion to the phase change that has been

caused by the sensing interaction. . . . 

[U]p to two dozen channels [can be put] on a sensor chip to determine 

what [an MAV] is flying through. . . . 

Already small (about 1 centimeter by 2 centimeters), the sensors will 

need to be further reduced.

111 

Little has been said in the literature about any progress in 

miniaturization of radiation sensors that would enable characterization of 

nuclear environments. Such environments could come about as the result 

of the explosion of a nuclear device or damage done to a nuclear weapons 

facility. Should it be possible to sufficiently miniaturize a sensor for such 

a mission, it will most certainly find its way on to a micro-air vehicle.112

Targeting, Tagging, and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) 

Use of micro-air vehicles for the functions of targeting, tagging, and 

identification friend or foe has been mentioned, but little information 

appears available about what the state of technology is in this regard.113 

The U.S. Army Dual Use Science & Technology program has proposed a 

micro-laser rangefinder and designator, as part of a more extensive “micro 

drone” payload.114 A radio-frequency tag would presumably be similar in 

technology to a communications payload, but attributes of low probability 

of intercept (LPI) might be necessary when it is used for strike mission

applications.

115 Since a radio-frequency tag used in this context is

essentially a homing beacon, a LPI capability would mitigate against 

discovery and removal before a strike attack is completed. Lastly, a 

variant of a tag could be used for IFF purposes to aid in sorting friendlies 

from the enemy on a chaotic battlefield. An IFF system would essentially 

be different from a tag in its ability to remain quiet until responding to an 

interrogation. 
28....Death by a Thousand Cuts

Explosives and other Lethal Payloads 

Although the diminutive size of micro-air vehicles does not inspire 

thoughts of their use as explosives delivery platforms, it is possible.116 

The Air Force Research Laboratory currently sponsors work in 

lightweight, high-energy explosives technology, which could lead to 

munitions suitable for delivery by MAVs. It does not necessarily take a 

lot of explosive energy to severely damage a “soft target” like a surfaceto-air missile tracking radar if it is hit in the right place. Some observers

have also proposed MAVs as aerial mine-laying platforms, which could 

have lethal consequences for individual personnel or debilitating effects

on light vehicles.117 

One way a micro-air vehicle could deliver a lethal payload would be

to employ poisons of various kinds. Poisons could take the form of a sting 

or needle in which a toxin is injected into the victim or a dose introduced 

into something more widely distributed like a city water supply.118 Such

payloads would have the advantage of being passive, lightweight, and 

involve available technologies for manufacture, storage, and injection. 

However, such options are not compatible with U.S. moral sensitivities at

least absent an earnest attempt at warning. 

Electronic Warfare Payloads 

Micro-air vehicle payloads for electronic warfare functions are a 

serious possibility. The NRL is sponsoring work to develop a fourteengram radar-jamming payload. The concept behind this approach is that

the mission MAV would be delivered to the vicinity of the target by a 

larger, longer-range aircraft whereupon it would then seek out and fly to a 

victim radar. Then, the MAV would land on the radar near its receiver(s) 

and transmit its jamming energy. What the MAV would lack in transmit

power would be made up in reduced range.119 There is no reason a similar 

approach could not also be used to jam radio frequency communications 

systems. 

With signals intelligence payloads, micro-air vehicles could assist in 

enemy electronic order of battle determination to include emitter types and 

locations. It would take several intelligence MAVs to perform emitter

location through the time-difference-of-arrival technique, but this would 

require extensive avionics miniaturization and access to a good time 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....29 

standard, perhaps through GPS.120 Another possibility is a MAV payload 

optimized for communications intercept to assist in intelligence activities 

by capturing emission externals (frequency, waveform, etc.) or internals 

(voice, data, etc...).121 

Sniffing Sensors 

Still another set of potential payloads includes microelectronic 

“sniffers.” These payloads could be used to uncover the existence of

conventional explosives such as mines, nuclear, biological, and chemical

weapons, or illegal drugs.122 One proposal even has sniffers being 

developed to “track individuals by their scent alone.”123 However, little

exists in the literature to describe how such payloads would work or if it is 

reasonable to predict that they will be available any time soon for 

integration on MAVs. 

Acoustic Sensors 

While the details on the workings of acoustic sensors for micro-air 

vehicle applications are slim, there is evidence of progress in this area. 

For example, the Small Business Innovative Research program within the 

U.S. Army is sponsoring work to “develop an inexpensive micro-acoustic 

sensor for UAVs that would detect and identify ground vehicles and 

provide their location.” Although a bit large by MAV standards, the 

sensor would be similar in size and cost to a commercial pager and would 

possess a range of several kilometers.124 Work sponsored by DARPA 

developing the “Microbat” MAV is also reported to include an option to 

fly a test vehicle fitted with a microphone array for “acoustic homing on 

sounds.”125

Other Payloads 

Two other areas where specialized payloads could be placed on 

micro-air vehicles include applications supporting combat search and 

rescue, and weather measurement. One proposal has MAVs being packed 

into the ejection seat mechanisms of high-performance aircraft, which 

would deploy as the aircrew parachutes to Earth.126 Alternatively, a

MAV could be placed in aircrew survival gear for hand launch after 

parachute landing. These MAVs could carry signal sources, imaging 
30....Death by a Thousand Cuts

sensors, or communications relay packages. However, none of these 

applications requires technologies inherently different than that discussed 

above. 

Weather sensor payloads have also been proposed.127 This concept 

involves distributing micro-air vehicles across an area of interest with each 

possessing specialized sensors that would measure one or more specific 

parameters such as pressure, temperature, winds, humidity, etc.... 

Weather MAVs could begin their measurements while airborne or after 

landing, and continue reporting until energy for measurement and 

communications was no longer available. 

Weather payloads appear particularly well suited for use of 

miniaturized transducer and micro-electromechanical system technologies. 

Indeed, it appears feasible to fly a weather MAV within the next few 

years, though its communications range will initially be limited. One 

reason for such optimism comes from the strides being made in the “Smart 

Dust” program whose goal is to “demonstrate that a complete 

sensor/communication system can be integrated into a cubic millimeter 

package.” This work, funded by DARPA, has demonstrated a cubic inch 

weather package (temperature, humidity, pressure, light intensity, and 

magnetic field sensors) with a laser transmitter that provided one week’s

continuous operation and the ability to report its measurements over a

twenty-one kilometer distance. While continued work is required to

achieve even greater levels of miniaturization, research into “distributed 

algorithms” is also necessary to achieve “sensor fusion,” that is, a melding 

of the all the data collected over an array into a useful summary.

 128
Death by a Thousand Cuts....31 

Chapter 4

Micro-Air Vehicle Support to USAF Functions and 

Likely Employment Contexts 

In Air Force Doctrine Document 1 (AFDD 1), the functions of 

“Aerospace Power” are listed and described.129 Micro-air vehicles would

appear to support many, but not all of these functions and in the listing 

below, those holding promise are indicated by an asterisk (*).

• Counterair (including Offensive* and Defensive Counterair) 

• Counterspace (including Offensive and Defensive Counterspace) 

• Counterland (including Interdiction* and Close Air Support*) 

• Countersea 

• Strategic Attack* 

• Offensive* and Defensive Counterinformation* 

• Command and Control* 

• Airlift/Spacelift 

• Air Refueling 

• Special Operations Employment* 

• Intelligence,* Surveillance,* and Reconnaissance* 

• Combat Search and Rescue* 

• Navigation & Positioning 

• Weather Services 

Each asterisked item above will be defined and discussed in turn to 

investigate how MAVs could play a potential future role in Air Force

functions across the spectrum of military operations. (The definition of 

each term presented here is as given in AFDD 1.) But before doing so, it 
32....Death by a Thousand Cuts

is necessary to address a number of MAV limitations that could have 

significant effects on how well these functions are performed. These 

limitations should be kept in mind in any discussion of potential MAV 

applications.

MAV Operational Limitations 

The most obvious limitations to micro-air vehicle capabilities will be 

in range, autonomy, precision, endurance, damage potential, and from

weather. Ways to mitigate these limitations will have to be found if 

MAVs are to achieve their full promise. 

Range 

The limited range of Micro-air vehicles requires these vehicles to be

delivered to the vicinity of their desired operating locations. To this end a 

number of alternatives have been proposed. MAVs could be dispensed by 

manned aircraft, larger UAVs (to include cruise missiles), or munitions. 

This concept is similar to the new Low Cost Autonomous Attack System 

by a tactical munitions dispenser.130 Another alternative is to package

MAVs for delivery via artillery rounds such as 120-millimeter mortar 

tubes or 155-millimeter howitzers in much the same way that the Army’s 

Tactical Missile System delivers Brilliant Anti-Tank rounds over large 

distances.131

Micro-air vehicle ranges will also be constrained by inherent 

transmission and reception limitations. Small antenna and miniaturized

avionics will necessitate MAVs having to remain close to their launch

controllers and/or intended recipients of video or other data. Enemy 

jamming could prove problematic given their power advantage. One way 

around this constraint would be to use MAVs in swarms wherein 

communication ranges are decreased through use of point-to-point relay. 

Alternatively, a “mother ship” concept could be employed where an 

airborne relay loiters above a MAV operating area to serve as a signal 

booster. 

Autonomy 

To the extent that micro-air vehicles are autonomous, they will have

greater ability to carry out their missions without supporting elements such 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....33 

as human flight controllers. However some missions, such as military

operations in urban terrain, will only be accomplished with limited 

effectiveness until capabilities such as autonomous obstacle avoidance can 

be incorporated. 

Precision 

Lack of positional precision in micro-air vehicle location will 

constrain their use in targeting, strike, intelligence, surveillance, 

reconnaissance, and combat search and rescue. For example, target geolocation uncertainties are a strong driver in weapons selection. Battle

damage assessments will be made more difficult should it be unclear 

which among several similar-looking targets in close proximity, a MAV is 

imaging. A lack of precision in search and rescue might cause rescue

crews to encounter threats that might otherwise be avoided with precise 

downed aircrew location data. 

Endurance

Longer endurance enhances most Air Force functions. Longer

operation translates into greater mission flexibility and less frequent need 

to replace expended MAVs. It also means fewer systems will have to be 

purchased which saves costs. This is why progress in energy generation 

and storage capabilities for MAVs is so important. 

Damage Potential 

Micro-air vehicles are small. Thus, the effectiveness of any minimunitions they are capable of delivering will be directly dependent on 

being extremely accurate in delivery and incorporating a sufficiently 

energetic blast. Potentially an area for system engineering trade-offs, 

advances in precision navigation and munitions technologies will enhance 

the damage potential of MAVs. However, for the near- to mid-term, it 

would be unrealistic to expect MAVs to be capable of anything greater 

than a very localized destructive effect. 

Weather 

As discussed earlier, micro-air vehicles are sensitive to disturbances

in the atmosphere. Aerodynamic control will be difficult under conditions 
34....Death by a Thousand Cuts

of moderate to high winds and precipitation; thus, image stabilization for 

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance variants will be a challenge. 

The upper limit for MAV operations in winds may be no more than thirty 

miles per hour. This limitation may be particularly restrictive in urban

settings where buildings are known to facilitate the production of local 

gusts and downdrafts.132

Aerospace Power Functions Applicable to MAVs 

Offensive Counterair (OCA) 

OCA consists of operations to destroy, neutralize, disrupt, or limit 

enemy air and missile power as close to its source as possible and at a 

time and place of [one’s] choosing. OCA operations include the 

suppression of enemy air defense targets, such as aircraft and surfaceto-air missiles or local defense systems, and their supporting [command 

and control]. 

Micro-air vehicles could support offensive counterair in a number of 

ways. The vignette presented at the start of Chapter 1 in which MAVs 

were used to damage enemy fighters through foreign object damage is one 

such way. MAVs could also be used as target beacons for precision 

strikes against enemy aircraft, surface-to-air missiles, and command and 

control assets. MAVs outfitted with mini-explosives could be used to 

damage these targets to put them temporarily out of action. MAV stealth 

might be a particularly strong asset in helping locate enemy radars that 

otherwise would refrain from emitting for fear of attack from hunter-killer 

platforms. 

Interdiction

Interdiction consists of operations to divert, disrupt, delay, or destroy

the enemy’s surface military potential before it can be used effectively 

against friendly forces. . . . Interdiction attacks enemy [command and 

control] systems, personnel, materiel, logistics, and their supporting 

systems to weaken and disrupt the enemy’s efforts. 

Micro-air vehicles could support interdiction in much the same way 

as they would offensive counterair. The nature and size of the target set, is 

however, more varied and in some respects more vulnerable. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....35 

Close Air Support (CAS) 

“CAS consists of air operations against hostile targets in close 

proximity to friendly forces.” Micro-air vehicles in support of close air 

support would most likely find application enhancing combat 

identification through use of identification friend or foe or target tagging. 

They might also be used in target designation for precision-guided 

munitions. If equipped for imaging, MAVs might also perform a forward 

air controller type mission in support of the close air support function. 

Strategic Attack

Strategic attack is defined as those operations intended to directly 

achieve strategic effects by striking at the enemy’s [centers of gravity 

(COG)]. These operations are designed to achieve their objectives 

without first having to necessarily engage the adversary’s fielded 

military forces in extended operations at the operational and tactical 

levels of war. COGs are those characteristics, capabilities, or localities 

from which a force derives its freedom of action, physical strength, or 

will to fight. 

If the enemy’s fielded forces are a center of gravity, then the nature of 

micro-air vehicle support to strategic attack is subsumed by the other 

aerospace power functions described herein. If, however, an enemy’s

centers of gravity are rooted more in the enemy’s heartland (such as his

electric power grid, transportation infrastructure, leadership, etc...), then 

MAV contributions go beyond that characteristic the above functions. 

MAVs may jam communications nodes, disrupting key utilities and 

industries, attack soft targets, and thus demoralize the enemy and reduce

his will to fight. This last application might be accomplished simply 

through the frustration caused by having to deal with swarming MAVs 

that seem to be everywhere at all times making life difficult if not outright 

dangerous. A populace might feel no less helpless than the poor soldiers 

in the trenches of World War I who faced the constant onslaught of

artillery fire. 

Naturally, the deeper the center of gravity is behind enemy lines, the

greater the need for long-range micro-air vehicle delivery means and for 

autonomous operation. If requirements extend to reconnoitering and/or 

conducting harassment operations inside leadership buildings and other

interior locations, the MAVs to conduct these missions will need to be 

more sophisticated with advanced navigation and power systems. 
36....Death by a Thousand Cuts

Offensive Counterinformation (OCI) 

OCI includes actions taken to control the information environment . . . 

[with t]he purpose [of] disabl[ing] selected enemy information 

operations. OCI operations are designed to destroy, degrade, or limit

enemy information capabilities . . . Examples of OCI include jamming

radars and corrupting data acquisition, transformation, storage, or

transmissions of an adversary’s information; psychological operations;

deception; and physical or cyber attack. 

The same (or similar) micro-air vehicles that can jam radar systems as 

described above, can deceive radar systems rather than jam them outright. 

MAVs could also conduct deception by supporting feints and diversionary 

attacks as well as broadcasting bogus friendly signals. Executing cyber 

warfare or information system attacks via MAVs will be possible to the 

extent that an enemy’s cyber and information systems are accessible 

through communications infrastructure or industrially implanted “trap 

doors.” Should MAVs ever advance to the point that they can land on 

transmission lines (copper or glass) and tap into them, they will be able to 

extend their offensive counterinformation operations beyond the realm of 

the radio frequency spectrum. 

Command and Control (C2

) 

C2 includes the battlespace management process of planning, directing, 

coordinating, and controlling forces and operations. C2 involves the 

integration of the systems of procedures, organizational structures, 

personnel, equipment, facilities, information, and communications

designed to enable a commander to exercise command and control 

across the range of military operations. 

The most obvious ways in which micro-air vehicles could support the 

command and control function are by enabling communications and 

providing own force surveillance. It is unlikely that MAVs will supplant 

more robust systems in which the USAF has invested over the years to 

support its current communications and force tracking infrastructure. 

However, MAVs could find a niche supporting command and control in 

unique situations such as over-the-horizon communications as part of a 

force protection scheme in a newly secured operating zone or imaging 

friendly operations to ensure they are proceeding according to 

commander’s intent. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....37 

Special Operations Employment 

Special operations employment is the use of airpower operations 

(denied territory mobility, surgical firepower, and special tactics) to

conduct the following special operations functions: unconventional 

warfare, direct action, special reconnaissance, counterterrorism, foreign 

internal defense, psychological operations, and counter-proliferation. 

To execute special operations, Air Force special operations forces 

(AFSOF) are normally organized and employed in small formations 

capable of both independent and supporting operations, with the 

purpose of enabling timely and tailored responses across the range of

military operations. 

Uniquely distinctive from normal conventional operations, AFSOF

may accomplish tasks at the strategic, operational, or tactical levels of 

war or other contingency operations through the conduct of lowvisibility, covert, or clandestine military actions. AFSOF are usually 

conducted in enemy-controlled or politically sensitive territories and

may complement or support general-purpose force operations.” 

This extensive quote from AFDD 1 was necessary to bring out two 

things. First, it is the function most amenable to micro-air vehicle 

capabilities given their current developmental impetus on supporting small 

ground force operations (as intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, 

communications, offensive counterinformation, targeting, and deception

assets) at least to the extent the special operations employment function

involves Air Force personnel on the ground in enemy territory. Second, 

special operations employment is the function most likely to emphasize 

the MAV’s qualities of low-visibility, redundancy, persistence and 

covertness. 

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR)

Intelligence provides clear, brief, relevant, and timely analysis on

foreign capabilities and intentions for planning and conducting military 

operations. . . . [I]ntelligence gives commanders the best available 

estimate of enemy capabilities, COGs, and courses of action. 

Surveillance is the function of systematically observing air, space, 

surface, or subsurface areas, places, persons, or things, by visual, aural, 

electronic, photographic, or other means. Surveillance is a continuing

process, not oriented to a specific ‘target.’ 
38....Death by a Thousand Cuts

Reconnaissance complements surveillance in obtaining, by visual 

observation or other detection methods, specific information about the 

activities and resources of an enemy or potential enemy; or in securing

data concerning the meteorological, hydrographic, or geographic 

characteristics of a particular area. Reconnaissance generally has a time

constraint associated with the tasking.

The value micro-air vehicles may have for the intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance function has already been made apparent. 

MAVs could contribute across this spectrum by ascertaining ground and 

electronic order of battle to supporting the intelligence activity of 

targeteering. These functions would be accomplished using data gathered

by MAV imagers, communications intercepts, and signals intelligence 

analyses. MAVs may also be an innovative tool to conduct post-strike 

battle damage assessments. MAVs could be fitted to ride piggyback on a 

precision-guided munition. After launch into the target area, the munition 

and MAV would separate before weapon impact with the latter loitering to 

provide images of the weapon’s effect. Advantages to such a scheme

include lowered combat risk (by obviating the need for post-strike battle

damage assessment by manned reconnaissance), better and more timely 

battle damage assessments especially as regards weapons effectiveness 

and possible need for re-attack, as well as cost savings in operations and 

logistics. 

Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) 

CSAR consists of those air operations conducted to recover distressed 

personnel during wartime or military operations other than war. The most 

likely concept of operation involving the combat search and rescue 

function has micro-air vehicles signaling rescue forces on the whereabouts 

of distressed personnel. Other possibilities include MAVs providing 

“overhead” imagery to enhance downed aircrew and rescue party 

situational awareness, serving as communications relays, and assisting in

SEAD operations during an entire rescue operation from ingress, through 

extraction to egress of the rescue team. Should MAV range capabilities 

become sufficient, MAVs could perform as “homing pigeons” to lead 

combat search and rescue teams back to the exact location a downed 

aircrew launched the MAV, even providing encapsulated messages to 

preclude communications intercept.133 When it is difficult to isolate the

exact current location of distressed personnel, blanketing a region with 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....39 

MAVs might be a particularly efficient way to support wide area search 

activities. 

MAV Employment Contexts 

As has been shown, micro-air vehicles can be used in many different 

ways to support a wide variety of Air Force functions. Thus, it is 

reasonable to expect that they would have utility across the spectrum of 

military operations from peacetime to combat involving nuclear, 

biological, and chemical weapons. This section will explore MAV 

support to Air Force functions within the various contexts making up the 

spectrum of conflict beginning with military operations short of war 

working through increasing levels of conflict. 

Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW). 

“Military operations other than war” is a “catch-all” term used to 

describe a number of different activities military forces can be engaged in 

short of general war. It includes border and area patrol, humanitarian 

operations, peace operations, support during domestic crises, noncombatant evacuation operations, and anti-terrorism. 

Border and Area Patrol. Border patrol operations are generally a 

peacetime operation. Its purpose is generally to support activities such as 

homeland defense, illegal immigration control, and to stop drug 

smuggling. Here, the crucial functions are intelligence, surveillance, and 

reconnaissance. Military involvement typically occurs in cooperation with 

other agencies. In this case, micro-air vehicles may not be a more costeffective solution than larger UAV or aerostat alternatives. Further, Air 

Force involvement is may not be appropriate. 

If, however, the purpose of the patrols is in the context of counterproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Air Force micro-air vehicles 

equipped to search for evidence of such weapons could have a role. This 

role would depend, of course, on such factors as the geographical 

circumstances and political environment. MAVs could augment national 

overhead surveillance assets to keep suspect complexes under continuous 

scrutiny and to sniff for traces of agents associated with the manufacture 

and storage of these weapons. 

Humanitarian Operations. Humanitarian operations extend from 

airlift of medical supplies and foodstuffs to people who have experienced 
40....Death by a Thousand Cuts

a natural disaster to managing refugee relief camps. Many times such

operations must be conducted in remote locales where public 

infrastructure facilities have been severely stressed or are non-existent. 

Micro-air vehicles could prove useful in such contexts as a means to

survey the extent of disasters or to provide communication links to replace 

lost commercial nodes. They could also locate trapped personnel using 

aerial surveillance and serve as homing beacons to guide rescue personnel. 

In this regard they might be the only safe alternative for searching for 

survivors inside burning buildings or amidst rubble from earthquakes or

terrorist bombings. Air Force involvement would probably be limited to 

provision of such assets at the commencement of humanitarian missions 

until full up emergency relief teams arrive on scene with their own. 

Peace Operations. Peace operations are generally divided into peace

keeping and peace enforcement. Because peace keeping rests upon the 

mutual interests of the conflicting parties to avoid bloodshed, the 

probability of armed conflict is lower than in the case of peace 

enforcement where the parties to conflict may wish to keep fighting. 

Accordingly, peace keeping forces tend to be more lightly armed and their 

rules of engagement more conservative. Peace enforcers, on the other 

hand, need to be ready to demonstrate more resolve to keep conflict from 

flaring up. 

In such contexts the most likely role for micro-air vehicles is again as

surveillance platforms. In some ways their stealth may detract from the 

demonstration of presence that enhances the peace operation. The

surveillance role would not be restricted to imaging as signals intelligence

would also be of value to monitor communications levels. Should peace

degenerate into combat, MAVs could be used by isolated forces in much 

the same way as described earlier for combat search and rescue operations. 

In all likelihood, micro-air vehicles will be organic to the groundbased force. However, Air Force involvement may be necessary for wide 

area operations too large to be continuously monitored by a limited ground 

force. 

Domestic Crises. For the purposes of this paper, domestic crises

refers specifically to situations of imminent danger as in riots, stand-offs

between groups threatening violence and law enforcement personnel, and 

natural or man-made disasters in progress. In riot situations micro-air

vehicles could prove particularly adept at providing reconnaissance in 

urban settings where tall buildings block line-of-sight. The psychological 

impact of MAVs should not be underestimated as the mere observation of 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....41 

the presence of MAVs might serve notice to the rioting masses (or 

leadership if there is one) that they are being monitored continuously. This 

could also act to complicate attempts by those wishing to manipulate 

rioting crowds to their own ends. Images taken by MAVs could aid in 

post-riot law enforcement efforts to prosecute criminal actions. MAVs

could be used to provide pinpoint delivery of crowd control agents such as

tear gas thereby reducing the chaos that sometimes ensues over a wide

area when these measures are employed. In ‘Waco-style’ stand-offs, 

MAVs could be used to deliver knockout agents to subdue hostage takers 

before they realize what is going on. While severe weather would 

constrain MAV operations, they could still prove their value 

reconnoitering the extent of floods, chemical spills, noxious agent clouds, 

and the like. Here, the chemical and biological sensor payloads will come

into play depending on the nature of the disaster. As with the border 

patrol role, it is not clear that active DoD units will be primary responders. 

Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations (NEO). Non-combatant

evacuation operations can be described as military missions on foreign soil 

to extract non-military personnel from a dangerous situation. Embassy 

evacuations are the most common example. Micro-air vehicles could

prove useful in a supporting role by providing intelligence and 

reconnaissance, intercepting and/or jamming adversary communications, 

and signaling rescue forces when the non-combatants are distanced from 

planned pick-up points. Air Force use of MAV assets could be envisioned 

for any of these scenarios. 

Anti-Terrorism. Anti-terrorism is another activity that takes on a 

multi-agency flavor especially when focused on the domestic scene. 

Micro-air vehicles have the potential to enhance anti-terrorist operations 

especially as covert intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets 

that could enhance domestic and military authorities’ knowledge of the 

threat they face in a crisis. MAVs capable of negotiating their way into a 

building during a hostage situation and able to maintain a covert presence

for on-going reconnaissance greatly increase the odds in favor of antiterrorist forces. MAVs fitted with nuclear, biological, and chemical 

weapon sniffers would aid immeasurably in understanding the extent to 

which terrorist use of such weapons has contaminated an area. MAV 

contributions in the anti-terrorism context will probably not come through 

Air Force channels on the domestic front, even though they may reside 

within the arsenal of the newly formed Joint Task Force-Civil Support or 

in conjunction with operations in Homeland Security. The purpose of this 
42....Death by a Thousand Cuts

task force is to coordinate military support in terrorist situations involving

use of weapons of mass destruction.134 Nevertheless, it may be 

appropriate for Air Force provision of MAVs if the source of the terrorism 

is in another country and requires MAV long-range delivery. 

Limited Raids 

Limited raids fall in between military operations other than war and 

acknowledged war in the spectrum of conflict. These are conducted by 

nation states against state or non-state actors using standard military or 

special operations forces. Categorically, they involve a single or small 

number of engagements and are conducted over a time interval spanning 

minutes to several days. 

In all important respects, limited raids look like conventional military 

operations in content and tenor. They differ from more general warfare in

that no a priori “state of war” exists between the combatants within the 

international legal understanding of the phrase, although raids could be

used by the attacked party as justification for declaring war. Limited raids

are typically used to “send a message,” to “show resolve,” or as a form of 

retaliation. The may also be used within the context of enforcement of 

international sanctions or military occupational duties. Operation

DESERT FOX conducted by the U.S. against Iraq in 1998 is an example 

of a limited raid. 

Air Force micro-air vehicles could make contributions in support of

limited raids by virtually all of the means mentioned previously: pre-strike

reconnaissance, targeting, and post-strike battle damage assessment; 

electronic warfare to include signals intelligence and communications 

intercept/jamming; communications relay; target area weather monitoring;

combat search and rescue in those cases where aircrew survive shoot 

down; offensive counterair operations including SEAD; and offensive 

counterinformation to include deception and psychological operations. 

The MAVs could be used for strategic attack if the raid were to have that 

purpose. MAVs might prove particularly attractive for use in this context 

in that they are expendable and do not put friendly personnel at risk; two 

considerations that are usually significant factors in the decision to launch 

a limited raid. Due to their stealth, MAVs also facilitate surprise, which is

an important element if limited raids are to achieve maximum effect. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....43 

Insurgent Warfare 

Insurgent warfare has the following characteristics: 

• It almost always involves protracted struggles 

• It relies on an underground infrastructure for concealment and

intelligence and siphons support from the target population 

• It uses military actions as a complement to the political struggle, 

not as the dominant means to attain success 

• It employs guerilla tactics135

Given the capabilities posited earlier for micro-air vehicles and the 

description of insurgent warfare outlined above, it is a simple 

extrapolation to conceive of how such weapons could prove extremely 

amenable to insurgent forces. What may be less obvious, but no less true, 

is that MAVs – along with other specialized weapons and tactics – could 

support an option for conduct of insurgent type warfare by U.S. forces. 

Much is made in the literature about how the U.S. must prepare itself 

for future contingencies in which enemy forces may employ asymmetric 

strategies as a means to overcome U.S. conventional superiority. Very 

rarely do you see proponents of the notion that the U.S. should itself adopt

such asymmetries to enhance its combat power. Micro-air vehicles hold 

this attraction. More explicitly, they make possible the idea of employing

combat power in a manner that resembles an asymmetric strategy like

insurgent warfare at least with respect to the use of guerilla tactics. 

Guerrilla warfare is usually perceived as the means used by a weak 

entity to fight a strong one. This has dictated certain tactics such as heavy 

leverage of the element of surprise, operations in small units or cells, rapid 

massing of locally superior forces on isolated enemy units, actions to 

cause harassment, demoralization, and embarrassment of enemy forces, 

and eschewing the taking and holding of terrain.136 

When one considers the probable types of warfare that the U.S. may 

be faced with in the future, one possibility that stands out as highly likely 

is what has been termed “dirty war.”

137 If faced with such a future where 

failed states and non-state actors combine to produce complex and “dirty” 

conflict, the U.S. should use strategies that avoid heavy involvement of 

ground forces, that minimize exposure of personnel and materiel to attack, 

and that employ tactics which work well against a diffuse and fleeting 

enemy. Strategies of this nature would require new concepts of operations 
44....Death by a Thousand Cuts

and complementary technologies to make them successful. Given their 

characteristics of stealth, flexibility, potential ubiquity through low-cost, 

mass manufacture and employment, micro-air vehicles could fit quite 

nicely within strategies that take on the character of insurgent warfare. 

Through stealth and versatility, they could provide wide area intelligence, 

conduct surprise hit-and-run attacks, and be easily operated by limited 

numbers of indigenous personnel sympathetic to the U.S. cause as the 

Mujahadeen did using Stinger missiles against the Soviets in Afghanistan. 

Depending on the goals of the campaign, successful operations along these 

lines might not require the capture of terrain, would create frustration and 

embarrassment among enemy forces while limiting the exposure of U.S. 

personnel to attack. Such a capability would be extremely useful in 

operations like ENDURING FREEDOM. This would serve to create the

impression of long-term commitment and invincibility. 

Of course, in the more traditional sense, micro-air vehicles could 

prove an ideal weapon to export to insurgencies in other countries that are 

fighting for interests consonant with those of the U.S. Again, the example 

of the Stinger in Afghanistan provides a model for emulation. In this 

context the potential for technological secrets to fall into the hands of 

enemies would be less of a concern for MAVs as compared with other

weapons like the Stinger. This accrues from the fact that the real edge 

comes not from the technological capabilities resident on the weapon itself 

as it does from their manufacture. Furthermore, new technologies that 

come under the title of “anti-tamper” are now available to mitigate the

threat of exploitation.138

Conventional Warfare 

Conventional warfare refers to engagements fought and campaigns 

pursued by regular forces under conditions mutually acknowledged as a 

state of war. The vast majority of considerations for micro-air vehicle 

support within this context have already been examined in the section on 

USAF Aerospace Power functions. Only one more observation in this 

context will be made having to do with operations in urban, mountainous, 

and forested terrains. 

The force structure the U.S. has developed to date is best suited for 

operations in open terrain as is found in the deserts of the Middle East or 

the plains of central Europe. Operations that must be conducted in terrain 

involving extensive urban dwellings, rugged mountains, or forested 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....45 

regions (as exist in the Balkans) greatly complicate securing the goals of 

dominant battlespace awareness and precision attack. Developing and 

procuring weapon systems that overcome such obstacles is fundamental to 

achieving the vision for our future force enunciated in documents like 

Joint Vision 2020. 

It should be evident by now that micro-air vehicles can potentially 

contribute in no small way towards helping reduce the fog and friction of 

war that are exponentially increased for operations in these settings. By 

providing the ability to sense in heretofore denied areas, by extending 

presence into virtually anywhere on the battlefield, and by holding an 

adversary continuously at risk from lethal or non-lethal effects from the 

air, MAVs magnify the effects of our force assets that otherwise would be 

greatly diminished. 

Warfare Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) 

It has already been illustrated how MAVs equipped with nuclear, 

biological, and chemical sensors could aid in battlefield detection of these 

agents and assist in operations to avoid or contain contaminated areas. 

Further, MAVs could also be used to determine the extent of destruction 

and develop consequence mitigation plans. Additionally, MAV use in 

counter-proliferation efforts has also been described. Air Force 

participation in such efforts would appear to be appropriate. Beyond 

these, however, once conflict escalates to massive WMD use, other uses

for MAVs would appear to be of limited consequence. 
46....Death by a Thousand Cuts
Death by a Thousand Cuts....47 

Chapter 5

Summary and Concluding Thoughts 

Micro Air Vehicles are a class of UAVs whose time is near. A 

confluence of key events is about to occur that will enable these versatile 

aircraft to have military effects disproportionate to their diminutive size. 

The supporting technologies are progressing rapidly to the point that 

simple, short-duration missions will soon be possible. With time, more

varied and enduring applications. At the same time, the need for weapons 

that help achieve the Joint Chiefs of Staff vision for dominant maneuver, 

precision engagement, full dimensional protection, and focused logistics 

will be more pressing than ever. The military utility of MAVs in this 

context can only grow as they come closer to realizing their potential. 

At the start, micro-air vehicles could find application by providing 

localized imaging reconnaissance. Then as other key technologies mature, 

uses may expand to electronic warfare, nuclear, biological, and chemical 

agent warning, and battle damage assessment. Later still, we could see 

MAVs autonomously flying through air shafts reconnoitering deeply 

buried bunkers and reporting back to enable proper configuration of 

penetrating weapons. MAVs might then proliferate throughout the force 

structure becoming as much an “arrow in the quiver” of the foot soldier as 

another round on the hard point of a fighter’s wing. 

As micro-air vehicles become credible weapon systems widely 

available and reliable, they will be used at virtually all levels of conflict, 

from peace operations to battlefields on which weapons of mass 

destruction may be unleashed. While the Air Force may not be the 

operator of MAVs in all of these contexts, it will be the appropriate one in 

a great many of them. 

Perhaps the most revolutionary application of micro-air vehicles 

would be their use within the context of “swarms.” Whether swarming is 
48....Death by a Thousand Cuts

accomplished by a great number of vehicles that are in no way integrated 

with each other or by groups that share sensor data, centralized command 

and control, distributed processing, and/or aggregated lethality, such an 

employment concept will present incredible difficulties for any defensive 

scheme. Imagine being tasked with fending off attacks of swarms of 

MAVs as they engage from literally every direction around one’s position 

with stealth and autonomic single-mindedness. The defender will face 

incredible challenges in detection, targeting, and engagement multiplied 

many times over. Swarming MAVs will give the offensive side a distinct 

advantage not easily countered and will represent the exquisite marriage of 

quality with quantity. 

While utility in the operational performance dimension argues for the 

pursuit of micro-air vehicles, there are other reasons as well. These 

include low cost of development and acquisition as well as of operations

and maintenance. Since many applications will entail a “wooden round” 

(i.e., single use) concept, the logistics trail will be minimal. The ability of 

MAVs to support traditional missions as well as their potential to enable 

implementation of new military strategies make them ideal agents to assist 

transitions to alternate force structures and/or concepts of operation. 

There are likely to be spin-offs for commercial and space uses as well.

The micro-air vehicle is hardly a system concept that will find itself

restricted to the alternatives presented here or to the military realm alone. 

For certain, the potential of micro-air vehicles is not unbounded and 

key shortcomings will have to be mitigated for these aircraft to have the 

minimal utility necessary to make them viable candidates to perform Air 

Force missions. Among the challenges yet to be overcome are achieving 

reasonable range capabilities in distance traveled and radio frequency

transmission radius, prolonging endurance both in the air and post-flight 

for unattended ground operation, enhancing navigational precision, and 

acquiring true autonomy. While these challenges may seem daunting 

now, it does not seem unreasonable to look ahead in 20 years to foresee a

time when they may be well in hand. 

If the Air Force is to have a share in a future involving micro-air 

vehicles, now is the time it must step up to the plate and embrace them as 

its own. A recent article in Joint Forces Quarterly makes this argument 

quite pointedly: 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....49 

The military systems of 2020 and 2030 will be based on the science of

the year 2000 just as the high-tech weapons of today are the results of 

investments made by our predecessors in the 1960s and 1970s. . . . 

The 20 to 30 years needed for basic scientific discovery to evolve into a

fielded system means that now is when we must understand the

concepts of far future war and the capabilities we will want. . . . 

Great breakthroughs occur at the interface between scientific 

disciplines and organizations. . . . 

At present the services only influence product development in the latter

stages of the R&D cycle. Industry experience, however, has shown 

that if the customer and designers share in all product development

decisions from the initial design, the degree of innovation is much

higher, the product acceptance rate is much greater, and the pace of 

technological change is much faster.139

The micro-air vehicle is a concept “at the interface between scientific

disciplines and organizations.” It has reached the point in its development

life cycle that operators (i.e., “the customer”) can have a decided effect on 

its progression. The window of opportunity is now presenting itself. Now 

is the time to open the shutters. 

In 1991 the USAF commenced Operation DESERT STORM with 

massive, synergistic, and devastating attacks on the Iraqi Integrated Air 

Defense System and proceeded over the course of days to render it 

useless. In 1999 the USAF again went to war, but this time over

Yugoslavia in Operation ALLIED FORCE, and the going was a bit more 

difficult. While success was achieved at suppressing the Serbians’ air 

defenses, the threat they posed in this regard was far from emasculated at 

war’s end. This enemy had learned some lessons and applied asymmetric 

strategies such as replacing air defense communication links with cellular 

technologies. Is the next enemy going to be even better? How will the 

USAF craft a strategy to defeat the next integrated air defense system it

faces and the thinking enemy behind it? To remain successful, the USAF 

will have to continue advancing itself, adding new capabilities to its bag of 

tricks, and adopting counter-strategies of its own. Micro-air vehicles could 

be a partial answer to this challenge. These aircraft require a high degree 

of systems integration, which is a relative strength of the U.S. industrial 

establishment. If pursued aggressively, MAVs could be in the hands of 
50....Death by a Thousand Cuts

U.S. warfighters well ahead of potential adversaries who would need to 

make substantial efforts to copy and/or counter them. Thus, they could 

prove a substantial asymmetric advantage for the U.S. to enjoy in the 

intervening time between introduction and imitation. 

If this paper has appeared to place too much faith in technological 

solutions, then let it be tempered by the following sage advice. In 

developing our strategies for the future, we have to be careful not to place 

too much trust in nor depend solely on technology as the end or be all. As

the studied strategist, Colin S. Gray, cautions, 

New technology, even when properly integrated into weapons and

systems with well-trained and highly motivated people, cannot erase 

the difficulties that impede strategic excellence. . . . Progress in modern

strategic performance has not been achieved exclusively through 

science and technology.140

Developing, procuring, and integrating micro-air vehicles into our fielded 

forces must be accompanied by the evolution of appropriate tactics, the 

development of an experience base gained through experimentation and 

realistic training, and the creation of responsive organizations to operate 

them professionally. Only then will MAVs reach their true potential. 

If all of these pieces – technology, operational constructs, experience, 

and organization – can be brought together holistically, then the USAF 

will have gained another advantage against almost any opponent. The 

enemies of today have learned the hard way that U.S. aerospace power is

massive, flexible, and overwhelming. It inspires awe. This hard-won 

respect magnifies its influence and enhances its prestige as an instrument 

of national policy. Micro-air vehicles add a new dimension to this 

instrument, one that may be characterized by stealth, seeming ubiquity, 

and persistence. Pursuit of MAVs can only add to what Eliot Cohen has 

described as the “mystique of U.S. air power . . . a mystique that is in the 

American interest to retain.”141 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....51 

Notes 

 1

 Figure from McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro 

Air Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in Flight, 7 August 1997, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 

23 October 2000, available from http://www.darpa.mil/tto/MAV/mav_auvsi.html. 2

 Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Vision 2020 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing 

Office, June 2000), pp. 9-10, available from http://www.dtic.mil/jv2020. 3

 Ryan, General Michael E. and Peters, F. Whitten, America’s Air Force Vision 

2020, no date, p. 12; on-line, Internet, 8 December 2000, available from

http://www.af.mil/vision/. 4

 Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, New World Vistas Air and Space Power for 

the 21st Century--Summary Volume, 1995, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 4 December 2000, 

available from http://www.sab.hq.af.mil/ Archives/1995/NWV/vistas.htm. 5 Air Force 2025, August 1996, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 18 December 2000, available 

from http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/index2.htm. 6

 Ibid. 

7

 Ibid. The other five “high leverage technologies” were data fusion, power systems, 

advanced materials, high-energy propellants, and high performance computing. 

8

 Lambeth, Benjamin S., Technology Trends in Air Warfare, RAND Reprint RP-561 

(Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1996), pp. 139-141. 

9

 Brendley Keith W., and Steeb, Randall, Military Applications of 

Microelectromechanical Systems, RAND Report MR-175-OSD/AF/A (Santa Monica, 

CA: RAND, 1993), pp. 16-30. 

10 This effort, sponsored by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research at Arizona 

State University, is looking at low Reynolds Number aerodynamics and unsteady gust 

effects on MAVs. The grant concluded in 2001. 

11 Dornheim, Michael A., “Tiny Drones May Be Soldier’s New Tool,” Aviation

Week & Space Technology 148, no. 23 (8 June 1998): pp. 42-43. 

12 Hundley, Richard O., and Gritton, E. C., Future Technology-Driven Revolutions in 

Military Operations: Results of a Workshop, RAND Documented Briefing DB-110-

ARPA (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1994), p.11. 

13 Foch, Richard J., Naval Research Laboratory, interviewed telephonically by 

author, 15 November 2000. 

14 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight

15 Keeter, Hunter, “DARPA Says MAV Acquisition Schedule Driven by 

Technology,” Defense Daily, 25 August 1999, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, 

available from http://www.infowar.com/MIL_C4I/ 99/mil_c4i_082599d_j.shtml. 16 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” Janes’s International Defense Review, 

Volume No. 32 (November 1999): p. 27. 

17 Scott, Richard, “Killing It Softly,” Jane’s Defence Weekly 35, no. 6 (7 February 

2001): p. 22. 

18 Carroll, S., “US Navy, DARPA Develop IMINT/EW Payloads for Mini-UAVs,” 

Journal of Electronic Defense 21, no. 9 (September 1998): 30-32. 
52....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

 19 Stone, Amy, “Flying into the Future,” Research Horizons Georgia Institute of 

Technology, 24 February 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.gtri.edu/rh-spr97/microfly.htm. 20 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight, 7 August 1997, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 

2000, available from http://www.darpa.mil/tto/MAV/mav_auvsi.html. 21 Dwortzan, Mark, “Reporter: It’s a Fly! It’s a Bug! It’s a Microplane!” Technology 

Review, October 1997, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.techreview.com/articles/oct97/ reporter.html. 22 Page, Douglas, “Micro Air Vehicles: Learning from the Birds and the Bees,” High 

Technology Careers Magazine, 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available 

from http://www.hightechcareers.com/ doc198e/mav198e.html. 23 United Kingdom Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles,” March 1999, n.p.; 

on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from http://www.ukdf.org.uk/ts6.html. 24 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” Popular Science 252, no. 1 (January 

1998): p. 54. 

25 Pescovitz, David, “Tiny Spies in the Sky,” undated, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 

October 2000, available from http://www.discovery.com/stories/technology/microplanes/. 26 Susac, Denis, “Micro-Air Robots,” 20 July 1999, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 

October 2000, available from http://www.ai.about.com/computer/ai/library/ 

weekly/aa072099.htm. 27 Keeter, Hunter, “DARPA Says MAV Acquisition Schedule Driven by 

Technology” 

28 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 22 

29 There appears to be some variation in this parameter given the different goals 

various researchers appear to be pursuing. A number of sources state weight limits 

roughly twice (100 grams or 4 ounces) or more than what DARPA has set out as the goal 

for their program. See Nordwall, Bruce D., “Micro Air Vehicles Hold Great Promise, 

Challenges,” Aviation Week & Space Technology 146, no. 15 (14 April 1997): p. 67; 

Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane,” and Carroll, S., “US Navy, DARPA Develop 

IMINT/EW Payloads for Mini-UAVs,” p. 30; Also Pescovitz, David, “Tiny Spies in the 

Sky,” undated, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.discovery.com/stories/technology/ microplanes/; and United Kingdom 

Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles.” 

30 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 31 Keeter, Hunter, “DARPA Says MAV Acquisition Schedule Driven by 

Technology.” 

32 Hewish, Mark, “Rucksack Recce Takes Wing,” Janes’s International Defense 

Review 30 (February 1997): p. 63.

33 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 22. 

34 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane,” Mechanical Engineering, February 1998, 

n.p.; on-line, Internet, 16 November 2000, available at 

http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/february98/features/palmsize/ palmsize.html

35 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” New Scientist 154, no. 2076 (5 April 1997): 

p. 41. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....53 

 36 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

37 Wilson, J. R., “Mini Technologies for Major Impact,” Aerospace America 36, no. 

5 (May 1998): p. 42. 

38 Ibid. 

39 Spedding G. R., and Lissaman, P. B. S., Abstract for “Technical Aspects of 

Microscale Flight Systems,” n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://ae-www.usc.edu/rsg/bfd/Lund.html and McMichael, James M., and Francis, 

Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 40 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 39. 

41 Shyy, Wei; Berg, Mats; and Ljungqvist, Daniel, “Flapping and Flexible Wings for 

Biological and Micro Air Vehicles,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences 35 (1999): p. 496. 

42 Ibid., p. 486. 

43 Carroll, Bruce “MEMS for Micro Air Vehicles,” Project Summaries, n.p.; on-line, 

Internet, 24 August 2000, available from http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/MEMS/ 

Projects/individual_66.html and Hogan, Hank, “Invasion of the Micromachines,” New 

Scientist 150, no. 2036 (29 June 1996): p. 31 

44 Gad-el-Hak, Mohamed, “Micro-Air-Vehicles: How Can MEMS Help?” Proceedings of 

the Conference on Fixed, Flapping and Rotary Vehicles at Very Low Reynolds Numbers, 

5-7 June 2000, University of Notre Dame, ed. Thomas J. Mueller, 210-211. 

45 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 55. 

46 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 39, and Page, Douglas, “Micro Air Vehicles: 

Learning from the Birds and the Bees,” High Technology Careers Magazine, 1998, n.p.; 

on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from http://www.hightechcareers.com/ 

doc198e/mav198e.html. 47 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” New Scientist, p. 39. 

48 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane,” Also Gad-el-Hak, Mohamed, “Micro-AirVehicles: How Can MEMS Help?” p.210. Terfonol-d rods are a product of the Northrop 

Grumman Corporation and consist of a novel metal composite that changes its length 

when subjected to a magnetic field. 

49 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

50 Nordwall, Bruce D., “Micro Air Vehicles Hold Great Promise, Challenges,” p. 68; 

and Douglas Page, “MAV Flight Control: Realities and Challenges,” High Technology 

Careers Magazine, 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.hightechcareers.com/doc198e/ flightcontrol198e.html. 51 Gad-el-Hak, Mohamed, “Micro-Air-Vehicles: How Can MEMS Help?” pp. 211-

212. 

52 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 54 

53 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 54 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” pp. 23-24. 

55 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

56 One gram of gasoline combined with air provides over 13 watt-hours of energy. 

For detail, see Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 41. 

57 United Kingdom Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles.” This source states 

the “Estes Cox 010” engine delivers 40 watts of power, but Cox technical representatives 

confirm the figure is 0.028 horsepower (20.9 watts). 
54....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

 58 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

59 Ibid. 

60 United Kingdom Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles.” 

61 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” pp. 38-39. 

62 United Kingdom Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles.” 

63 Dornheim, Michael A., “Turbojet on a Chip to Run in 2000,” Aviation Week & 

Space Technology 151, no. 2 (12 July 1999): pp. 50-52. 

64 Ashley, Steven, “Turbines on a Dime,” Mechanical Engineering, October 1997, 

n.p.; on-line, Internet, 16 November 2000, available at http://www.memagazine.org/ 

backissues/october97/features/turbdime/ turbdime.html

65 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 58. 

66 Dornheim, Michael A., “Turbojet on a Chip to Run in 2000,” p. 50. 

67 “A New Thrust in DERA Micro Air Vehicle Development,” 24 July 2000, n.p.: 

on-line, Internet, 14 December 2000, available from http://defencedata.com/f2000/pagefa1006.htm. 68 United Kingdom Defence Forum, “TS6. Micro Air Vehicles.” 

69 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 27. 

70 Stone, Amy, “Flying into the Future,” Research Horizons Georgia Institute of 

Technology, 24 February 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.gtri.edu/rh-spr97/microfly.htm. 71 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 26. 

72 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 41. 

73 Hewish, Mark, “Rucksack Recce Takes Wing,” p. 63. 

74 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 41. 

75 Page, Douglas, “Micro Air Vehicles: Learning from the Birds and the Bees,” High 

Technology Careers Magazine, 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available 

from http://www.hightechcareers.com/ doc198e/mav198e.html. 76 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane,” 

77 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 41. 

78 Kuska, Dale, “Micro-UAVs Possible in Near Future,” Army LINK News, n.p.; online, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from http://www.dtic.mil/armylink/ 

news/Jun1997/a19970616micro-ua.html. 79 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 37. 

80 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 81 Ibid. 

82 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 57 and Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size 

Spy Plane.” 

83 Nordwall, Bruce D., “Micro Air Vehicles Hold Great Promise, Challenges,” p. 68. 

84 Stone, Amy, “Flying into the Future,” Research Horizons Georgia Institute of 

Technology, 24 February 1998, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.gtri.edu/rh-spr97/microfly.htm. 85 Hogan, Hank, “Invasion of the Micromachines,” New Scientist 150, no. 2036 (29 

June 1996): pp. 29-30, 33; and Pescovitz, David, “Tiny Spies in the Sky,” undated, n.p.; 

on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, available from 

http://www.discovery.com/stories/technology/microplanes/.. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....55 

 86 Paula, Greg, “MEMS Sensors Branch Out,” Mechanical Engineering 118, no. 10 

(October 1996): 66-67. 

87 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” pp. 23-24, 26. 

88 Kroo, Ilan and Kunz, Peter, “Meso-scale Flight and Miniature Rotorcraft 

Development,” Proceedings of the Conference on Fixed, Flapping and Rotary Vehicles 

at Very Low Reynolds Numbers, 5-7 June 2000, University of Notre Dame, ed. Thomas J. 

Mueller, 15. 

89 Barrows, Geoffrey L., “Optic Flow Sensors for MAV Navigation,” Proceedings of 

the Conference on Fixed, Flapping and Rotary Vehicles at Very Low Reynolds Numbers, 

5-7 June 2000, University of Notre Dame, ed. Thomas J. Mueller, 1.

90 Ibid., 8-9. 

91 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

92 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 93 Stone, Amy, “Flying into the Future.” 

94 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles 

–Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 95 Hewish, Mark, “Rucksack Recce Takes Wing,” p. 63. 

96 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 25. 

97 Roos, John G., “Pocket-size Stalker,” Armed Forces Journal, October 1998, p. 90, 

and Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 24. 

98 Page, Douglas, “Micro Air Vehicles: Learning from the Birds and the Bees.” 

99 Dornheim, Michael A., “Tiny Drones May Be Soldier’s New Tool,” p. 47. 

100 Fulghum, David A., “Miniature Air Vehicles Fly Into Army’s Future,” Aviation 

Week & Space Technology 149, no. 19 (9 November 1998): p. 37. 

101 Richardson, Doug, “High-tech ‘Eyes’ for Flying Spies,” Armada International, 

May 1999, 61. 

102 Dornheim, Michael A., “Tiny Drones May Be Soldier’s New Tool,” p. 42. 

103 Richardson, Doug, “High-tech ‘Eyes’ for Flying Spies,” Armada International, 

May 1999, p. 54. 

104 Pescovitz, David, “Tiny Spies in the Sky,” undated, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 

October 2000, available from http://www.discovery.com/stories/technology/ 

microplanes/.. 105 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 27. and McMichael, James M., and 

Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in 

Flight. 

106 Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 58. This design has not yet received 

funding for actual build. 

107 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 28. 

108 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air 

Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 109 Ashley, Steven, “Palm-size Spy Plane.” 

110 Roos, John G., “Pocket-size Stalker,” Armed Forces Journal, October 1998, 

p. 90. 

111 Stone, Amy, “Flying into the Future.” 

112 Kuska, Dale, “Micro-UAVs Possible in Near Future. 
56....Death by a Thousand Cuts 

 113 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air 

Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 114 Richardson, Doug, “High-tech ‘Eyes’ for Flying Spies,” p. 54 

115 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 28. 

116 Advanced materials, high-energy propellants, and high performance computing. 

116 Lambeth, Benjamin S., Technology Trends in Air Warfare, RAND Reprint RP561 (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1996), p. 139. 

117 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 22. 

118 Siuru, Col William D. Jr., USAF (Ret.), “Microflyers: Ultimate Unmanned Air 

Vehicles,” Marine Corps Gazette 82, no. 1 (January 1998): 35. 

119 Carroll, S., “US Navy, DARPA Develop IMINT/EW Payloads for Mini-UAVs,” 

p. 30 

120 Ibid., 32, and Page, Douglas, “Micro Air Vehicles: Learning from the Birds and 

the Bees.” 

121 Fulghum, David A., “Miniature Air Vehicles Fly Into Army’s Future,” p. 37. 

122 Pescovitz, David, “Tiny Spies in the Sky,” undated, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 

October 2000, available from http://www.discovery.com/stories/technology/ 

microplanes/; Also Chandler, Jerome Greer, “Micro Planes,” p. 55; and Page, Douglas, 

“Micro Air Vehicles: Learning from the Birds and the Bees.” 

123 Mullins, Justin, “Palmtop Planes,” p. 31. 

124 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 28. 

125 Dornheim, Michael A., “Tiny Drones May Be Soldier’s New Tool,” p. 43. 

126 McMichael, James M., and Francis, Colonel Michael S. (Ret.), Micro Air 

Vehicles –Toward a New Dimension in Flight. 127 Advanced materials, high-energy propellants, and high performance computing. 

127 Lambeth, Benjamin S., Technology Trends in Air Warfare, p. 141. 

128 Pister, Kris; Kahn, Joe; and Boser, Bernhard, “Smart Dust, Autonomous Sensing 

and Communication in a Cubic Millimeter,” n.p.; on-line, Internet, 23 October 2000, 

available from http://robotics.eecs.berkeley. edu/~pister/SmartDust/. 129 Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 1, Air Force Basic Doctrine, September 

1997, p. 45. While many regard these “functions” as missions, current AF Doctrine 

refers to this list as functions. The reader should note that AFDD1 is under revision at 

press time, and that this list may be retitled in new edition. Further, the introductory 

definitions of each function in the subsections to follow are also taken, without further 

citation, from AFDD1. 

130 Wall, Robert and Fulghum, David A., “New Munitions Mandate: More Focused 

Firepower,” Aviation Week & Space Technology 153, no. 13 (25 September 2000): p. 78. 

131 Hewish, Mark “A Bird in the Hand,” p. 28. 

132 Fulghum, David A., “Miniature Air Vehicles Fly Into Army’s Future,” Aviation 

Week & Space Technology 149, no. 19 (9 November 1998): p. 38. 

133 The author is indebted to USAF Lieutenant Colonel Christian Shippey, Air War 

College student, Academic Year 2001, who proposed this particular application. 

134 Garamone, Jim, “Task Force Counters Terrorist WMD Threat,” American Forces 

Press Service, 13 January 2000, on-line, Internet, available from 

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/January2000/n01132000_ 20001132.html. 
Death by a Thousand Cuts....57 

 135 Drew, Colonel Dennis M. and Snow, Donald M., Making Strategy, An 

Introduction to National Security Processes and Problems (Maxwell Air Force Base, AL: 

Air University Press, 1988), pp. 112-115. 

136 Ibid., p. 115. 

137 Roxborough, Ian and Eyre, Dana, “Which Way to the Future?” Joint Force 

Quarterly, Summer 1999, p. 30. 

138 Huber, Lieutenant Colonel Arthur F. II, and Scott, Jennifer M., “The Role and 

Nature of Anti-Tamper Techniques in U.S. Defense Acquisition,” Acquisition Review 

Quarterly, Fall 1999. 

139 Lieberman, Joseph I., “Techno-Warfare Innovation and Military R&D,” Joint 

Force Quarterly, Summer 1999, pp. 14-17. 

140 Gray, Colin S., “Why Strategy is Difficult,” Joint Force Quarterly, Summer 

1999, p. 9. 

141 Cohen, Eliot A., “The Mystique of U.S. Air Power,” Foreign Affairs 73, no. 1 

(January/February 1994): pp. 109, 124. 
Center for Strategy and Technology 

The Center for Strategy and Technology was established at the Air 

War College in 1996. Its purpose is to engage in long-term strategic 

thinking about technology and its implications for U.S. national security. 

 The Center focuses on education, research, and publications that 

support the integration of technology into national strategy and policy. Its 

charter is to support faculty and student research, publish research through 

books, articles, and occasional papers, fund a regular program of guest 

speakers, host conferences and symposia on these issues, and engage in 

collaborative research with U.S. and international academic institutions. 

As an outside funded activity, the Center enjoys the support of institutions 

in the strategic, scientific, and technological worlds. 

 An essential part of this program is to establish relationships with 

organizations in the Air Force as well as other Department of Defense 

agencies, and identify potential topics for research projects. Research 

conducted under the auspices of the Center is published as Occasional 

papers and disseminated to senior military and political officials, think 

tanks, educational institutions, and other interested parties. Through these 

publications, the Center hopes to promote the integration of technology 

and strategy in support of U.S. national security objectives. 

 For further information on the Center for Strategy and Technology, 

please contact: 

Grant T. Hammond, Director 

Theodore C. Hailes, Deputy Director 

John P. Geis II, Director of Operations 

Air War College 

325 Chennault Circle 

Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112 

(334) 953-6996/2985/5579 

(DSN 493-6996/2985/5579) 

Email: Grant.Hammond@maxwell.af.mil

 Ted.Hailes@maxwell.af.mil

John.Geis@maxwell.af.mil
Titles in the Occasional Papers Series 

1 

Reachback Operations for Air Campaign Planning and Execution

Scott M. Britten, September 1997 

2 

Lasers in Space: Technological Options for Enhancing U.S. Military 

Capabilities 

Mark E. Rogers, November 1997 

3 

Non-Lethal Technologies: Implications for Military Strategy 

Joseph Siniscalchi, March 1998 

4 

Perils of Reasoning by Historical Analogy: Munich, Vietnam, and the 

American Use of Force Since 1945 

Jeffrey Record, March 1998 

5 

Lasers and Missile Defense: New Concepts for Space-Based and GroundBased Laser Weapons 

William H. Possel, July 1998 

6 

Weaponization of Space: Understanding Strategic and Technological 

Inevitables

Thomas D. Bell, January 1999 

7

Legal Constraints or Information Warfare

Mark Russell Shulmann, March 1999 

8 

Serbia and Vietnam: A Preliminary Comparison of U.S. Decisions to Use 

Force 

Jeffrey Record, May 1999 
9 

Airborne and Space-Based Lasers: An Analysis of Technological and 

Operational Compatibility 

Kenneth W. Barker, June 1999 

10 

Directed Energy and Fleet Defense: Implications for Naval Warfare

William J. McCarthy, February 2000 

11 

High Power Microwaves: Strategic and Operational Implications for 

Warfare

Eileen M. Walling, March 2000 

12 

Reusable Launch Vehicles and Space Operations 

John E. Ward, Jr., March 2000 

13 

Cruise Missiles and Modern War: Strategic and Technological 

Implications 

David J. Nicholls, March 2000 

14 

Deeply Buried Facilities: Implications for Military Operations 

Eric M. Sepp, March 2000 

15 

Technology and Command: Implications for Military Operations in the 

Twenty-First Century 

William B. McClure, July 2000 

16 

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Implications for Military Operations 

David Glade, July 2000 
17 

Computer Networks and Information Warfare: Implications for Military 

Operations 

David J. Gruber, July 2000 

18 

Failed States and Casualty Phobia: Implications for Force Structure and 

Technology Choices 

Jeffrey Record, December 2000 

19 

War as We Knew It: The Real Revolution in Military 

Affairs/Understanding Paralysis in Military Operations

Jan S. Breemer, December 2000 

20 

Using Lasers in Space: Laser Orbital Debris Removal and Asteroid 

Deflection

Jonathan W. Campbell, December 2000 

21 

Weapons for Strategic Effect: How Important is Technology? 

Collin S. Gray, January 2001 

22 

U.S. Army Apache Helicopters and U.S. Air Force Expeditionary Forces: 

Implications for Future Military Operations

Brad Mason, June 2001 

23 

The End of Secrecy? Military Competitiveness in the Age of Transparency 

Beth M. Kaspar, August 2001 

24 

Prompt Global Strike Through Space: What Military Value?

Larry G. Sills, August 2001 
25 

Precision Engagement at the Strategic Level of War: Guiding Promise or 

Wishful Thinking? 

Timothy J. Sakulich, December 2001 

26 

Infrared Systems for Tactical Aviation: An Evolution in Military Affairs? 

George B. Hept, January 2002 

27 

Unmanned Undersea Vehicles and Guided Missile Submarines: 

Technological and Operational Synergies

Edward A. Johnson, Jr., February 2002 

28 

Attack Operations For Missile Defense

Merrick E. Krause, May 2002