i

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Ikhana

Unmanned Aircraft System

Western States Fire Missions

Peter W. Merlin

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA History Office

Washington, D.C.

2009
ii

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Merlin, Peter W., 1964-

 Ikhana Unmanned Aircraft System : Western States fire missions / by Peter W. Merlin.

 p. cm.

 “August 2009.”

 1. Aeronautics in forest fire control--West (U.S.) 2. Aerial photography in forestry--West (U.S.) 

3. Drone aircraft. 4. Predator (Drone aircraft) 5. United States. National Aeronautics and Space

Administration. I. Title.

 SD421.43.M47 2009

 634.9’6180978--dc22
iii

Contents

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................. IV

Preface ...................................................................................................................................................V

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................VII

Chapter One ...........................................................................................................................................1

Don’t Fear the Reaper

Chapter Two .........................................................................................................................................19

Chariots of Fire

Chapter Three .......................................................................................................................................39

The Fire Down Below

Chapter Four ........................................................................................................................................63

After the Fire

Appendices ...........................................................................................................................................73

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................83

Index ...................................................................................................................................................92

NASA History Publications .................................................................................................................94
iv

Acknowledgments

A great many people helped make this book possible. I am especially indebted to Tony Springer of the 

Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate at NASA 

Headquarters for sponsoring this project. Ikhana 

project manager Thomas K. Rigney, lead operations 

engineer Gregory P. Buoni, project engineer Kathleen 

Howell, and project pilots Mark Pestana and Herman 

Posada provided support and made numerous helpful comments. Vincent G. Ambrosia, senior research 

scientist, California State University, Monterey Bay; 

Dr. Steven S. Wegener, senior research scientist, Bay 

Area Environmental Research Institute; and Dr. Susan 

Schoenung, project scientist, NASA Ames Research 

Center, made sure my descriptions of the sensor systems and their development were accurate. Thanks 

to Sarah Merlin for copy editing of the manuscript. 

I am also grateful to Carla Thomas of the NASA 

Dryden Photo Branch for providing scanned images 

and to Steve Lighthill for layout and graphic design. 

Thanks also to Christian Gelzer for looking over the 

manuscript and for other technical assistance. Special thanks to the Ikhana team and to the firefighters 

who put the technological resources described in this 

monograph to good use combating wildfires in the 

western United States.
v

Preface

In 2006, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 

Edwards, Calif., obtained a civil version of the General Atomics MQ-9 unmanned aircraft system and 

modified it for research purposes. Proposed missions 

included support of Earth science research, development of advanced aeronautical technology, and 

improving the utility of unmanned aerial systems in 

general. The project team named the aircraft Ikhana – a 

Native American Choctaw word meaning intelligent, 

conscious, or aware – in order to best represent NASA 

research goals.

Researchers at Dryden have a long history of 

using remotely piloted research vehicles to expand 

the frontiers of knowledge. Among the first was the 

Hyper III, a Langley-designed lifting body. In support 

of the M2 lifting-body program of the early 1960s, R. 

Dale Reed had built a number of small lifting-body 

shapes and drop-tested them from a radio-controlled 

mothership. Reed and pilot Milton O. “Milt” Thompson wanted to try the remote flying concept on a fullscale design. The remotely piloted research vehicle, 

or RPRV, weighed 484 pounds, measured 32 feet in 

length, and spanned 18 feet. On December 12, 1969, 

the Hyper III was launched from a helicopter at 9,800 

feet, glided three miles, reversed course and glided 

three miles more to the lakebed.

In 1975 a series of stall and spin tests was begun 

at the center with a group of 3/8-scale F-15 RPRVs. 

With it carried aloft by the center’s B-52 mothership and released at about 50,000 feet, a pilot in a 

ground-based cockpit flew the RPRV (essentially a 

miniature F-15 that lacked engines) via instruments 

and a television monitor, stalling and recovering the 

aircraft to see what modifications worked best. 

Flights of another aircraft, dubbed the “MiniSniffer,” took place between 1975 and 1979, testing 

the concepts of an RPRV operating in the Martian 

atmosphere or conducting high-altitude atmospheric 

research around the globe. Again, the pilot remained 

in a ground cockpit to control the vehicle in flight.

The DAST – Drones For Aerodynamic and Structural Testing – program, a high-risk flight experiment 

using a ground-controlled, pilotless aircraft, was 

undertaken at Dryden from 1977 to 1983. Described 

by NASA engineers as a “wind tunnel in the sky,” the 

DAST vehicle was a specially modified TeledyneRyan BQM-34E/F Firebee II supersonic target drone. 

It was flown to validate theoretical predictions under 

actual flight conditions in a joint project with Langley 

Research Center. 

From 1979 to 1983 the HiMAT (Highly Maneuverable Aircraft Technology) aircraft was flown, one of 

two subscale research vehicles meant to demonstrate 

advanced fighter technologies that have since been 

used in development of many modern high-performance military aircraft. About one-half the size of a 

standard manned fighter, and powered by a General 

Electric J85-21 jet engine, the HiMAT vehicles were 

launched from NASA’s B-52 carrier aircraft at an 

altitude of about 45,000 feet. The aircraft were flown 

remotely by a NASA research pilot from a ground 

station, with the aid of a television camera mounted 

in the HiMAT cockpit that gave the pilot a forward 

field of view.

In 1984 Dryden moved from small-scale vehicles 

to full-size aircraft when a pilot intentionally crashed 

a retired Boeing jetliner onto Rogers Dry Lake to 

test a compound meant to reduce post-crash fires on 

airliners. With its fuel tanks filled with anti-misting 

kerosene (AMK), a pilot in a ground cockpit at Dryden 

flew the Boeing 720 from the Edwards Air Force Base 

main runway and, after gaining altitude, descended 

and crashed it onto the lakebed. To the dismay of the 

manufacturer as well as the Federal Aviation Administration, which was ready to issue a requirement calling 

for AMK to be used in all commercial aircraft, the 

airliner burst into a fireball and burned, eliminating 

the additive from potential use.

And Dryden was the center for operations of a 

family of solar-powered aircraft designed to explore 

the potential for such aircraft to monitor Earth’s atmosphere as well as such other factors as moisture content 

in soil. Beginning in the 1990s, Pathfinder, PathfinderPlus, and Helios were all part of the Environmental Research Aircraft and Technology, or ERAST, program 

through which researchers hoped to mature RPRV and 

unmanned aerial system technologies.

Building on experience with these and other unmanned aircraft, NASA scientists developed plans to 

use the Ikhana for a series of missions to map wildfires 

in the western United States and supply the resulting 

data to firefighters in near-real time. A team at NASA 

Ames Research Center, Mountain View, Calif., developed a multispectral scanner that was key to the 
vi

success of what became known as the Western States 

Fire Missions. Carried out by team members from 

NASA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, National Interagency Fire Center, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Federal 

Aviation Administration, and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., these flights represented an 

historic achievement in the field of unmanned aircraft 

technology.
vii

Introduction

From the earliest days of aviation, pilots have 

enjoyed a certain amount of glamour because of 

their apparent willingness to face danger in the skies 

(military or stunt pilots) or their ability to travel to 

exotic locales (airline and cargo pilots). Long before 

the Wright brothers made their first powered flight 

in December 1903, there were also exciting developments in the field of unmanned aviation.

On May 6, 1896, Dr. Samuel Pierpont Langley’s 

steam-powered, pilotless Aerodrome No. 5 successfully completed two flights, each lasting 1.5 minutes, covering a distance of about half a mile and 

reaching a maximum altitude of 100 feet. Just three 

months prior to the Wrights’ historic December 

1903 flight at Kitty Hawk, N.C., German designer 

Carl Jatho demonstrated a gasoline-fueled pilotless biplane that covered a distance of 196 feet at a 

height of 11 feet – further and higher than the Wright 

Flyer. During World War I and World War II, radiocontrolled aircraft served as aerial torpedoes and 

aerial targets, roles that evolved into the development of cruise missiles, airborne decoys, and target 

drones. In the late 1940s and 1950s, drone aircraft 

were pressed into service for such tasks as flying 

through clouds of radioactive fallout from nuclear 

explosions to collect samples without endangering 

aircrews. In the 1960s, improvements in unmanned 

vehicle technology spawned development of tactiIn May 1896, Dr. Samuel Pierpont Langley’s steam-powered 

Aerodrome No. 5 made the world’s first successful flight of 

an unpiloted, engine-driven, heavier-than-air craft. It was 

launched from a spring-actuated catapult mounted on top of a 

houseboat on the Potomac River near Quantico, Virginia. The 

airplane is displayed at the Smithsonian Institution’s National 

Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C.

Courtesy of Brian Nicklas

The General Motors A-1 flying bomb was a conventional highwing monoplane powered by a 200-hp piston engine. It was 

launched from a four-wheeled dolly, and could carry a 500-lb 

bomb over a distance of 400 miles. Initial tests between 1941 

and 1943 were not very successful because basic problems of 

inadequate control had not been resolved.

AFFTC History Office

cal and strategic reconnaissance platforms. By the 

dawn of the 21st century, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) – i.e., airplanes without pilots on board 

– were used more and more frequently for a variety 

of missions.1

The term “unmanned aircraft system” was adopted by the Department of Defense (DoD) and Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) to replace the term 

“unmanned aerial vehicle” (UAV) to better represent the fact that more is involved than hardware that 

flies though the sky. A UAS consists of an aircraft, 

ground-based control system, data link, and related 

support equipment.

While unmanned systems will never entirely 

replace aircraft with onboard crews, they are useful in performing so-called dull, dirty, or dangerous 

missions. Because a UAS can be autonomous or remotely piloted, aircrew members are not subjected to 

the risks ordinarily associated with long-duration or 

high-altitude flight and the hazards inherent in performing certain tasks, such as flying through smoke, 

turbulence, airborne radioactive particles, or chemical residue.

1

Hugh McDaid and David Oliver, Smart Weapons: Top Secret 

History of Remote Controlled Airborne Weapons, Orion Media, 

London, England, 1997.
viii

On a long-duration flight, for example, the length 

of time an airplane can remain airborne is determined 

by such factors as crew fatigue and use of consumables (food, oxygen, etc.). With a remotely operated 

UAS, several pilots can alternate shifts in the ground 

control station (GCS) as often as necessary. Flight 

duration is limited only by fuel consumption and mechanical reliability.

Use of unmanned aircraft prevents aircrew exposure to such hazardous conditions as extreme weather, radiation, or in the case of military UASs, hostile 

fire. This eliminates the risk of physical harm to the 

aircrew and reduces political costs in the wake of 

mission failure. These characteristics have motivated 

military and civilian agencies to expand the use of 

UASs wherever feasible.2

Perseus-A, a remotely piloted, high-altitude research vehicle designed by Aurora Flight Sciences Corp., was towed aloft by a ground 

vehicle and its engine started after it became airborne. The airplane reached an altitude of 50,000 feet on its third test flight.

NASA

The cost and complexity of robotic and remotely 

piloted vehicles is generally less than those of comparable aircraft that require an onboard crew because 

there is no need for life-support systems, escape and 

survival equipment, or hygiene facilities. UAS development has also contributed significantly to many 

technological innovations in aviation. Examples include autopilot systems, data links, and inertial navi2 Office of the Secretary of Defense, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2005-2030,” http://www.acq.osd.mil/usd/Roadmap%20Final2.pdf, 2005, accessed Oct. 12, 2008.

gation systems, among others. During the first 50 

years of powered flight, efforts – primarily involving military requirements – focused on guidance 

and navigation, stabilization, and remote control. In 

the half-century that followed, designers worked to 

improve technologies to support these capabilities 

through integration of improved avionics, microprocessors, and computers.3

The Airborne Antarctic Ozone Experiment 

(AAOE), an international, multi-institutional effort to study a sudden and unanticipated decrease in 

ozone over Antarctica, was a milestone. In July 1989 

a workshop was held in Truckee, Calif., in conjunction with a meeting of the AAOE science team to address the science community’s UAS needs. Known 

as the “Truckee Report,” the resultant white paper 

detailed the need for unmanned science aircraft and 

the goal of making measurements from an altitude of 

85,000 feet.

In the early 1990s, NASA’s Earth Science directorate received a solicitation for research to support 

the Atmospheric Effects of Aviation Project, specifically to assess the potential impact of a commercial 

supersonic transport aircraft. Here again measurements were needed at 85,000 feet. Aurora Flight 

3

Ibid.
ix

As with the Perseus-A, the Perseus-B was flown remotely by a pilot from a mobile flight control station on the ground. A Global Positioning System unit provided navigation data for continuous and precise location during flight. The ground control station featured 

dual independent consoles for aircraft control and systems monitoring.

NASA

Sciences of Manassas, Va., proposed developing the 

Perseus-A and Perseus-B remotely piloted research 

aircraft as part of NASA’s Small High-Altitude Science Aircraft (SHASA) program.

In 1993, the SHASA effort expanded as NASA 

teamed with industry partners for the Environmental 

Research and Sensor Technology (ERAST) project. 

The goal of the ERAST effort was to develop and 

demonstrate aeronautical technologies applicable to 

remotely or autonomously operated aircraft capable 

of carrying out long-duration airborne science missions. Initial ERAST program demonstrations transferred technology to an emerging UAS industry and 

validated the capability of unmanned aircraft to carry 

out operational science missions.

The program was managed at NASA’s Dryden 

Flight Research Center at Edwards, Calif., with significant contributions from the agency’s Ames, Langley, and Glenn research centers. Industry partners 

included such aircraft manufacturers as AeroVironment, Aurora Flight Sciences, General Atomics 

Aeronautical Systems Inc., and Scaled Composites. 

Sensors to be carried by the research aircraft were 

developed by Thermo-Mechanical Systems, Hyperspectral Sciences, and Longitude 122 West.4

General Atomics developed a civilian model 

of an upgraded version of the company’s Predator 

military reconnaissance platform – called Predator 

B – to meet specific requirements of NASA’s Earth 

Science Enterprise for a flight-validated, consumable-fuel UAS to perform on-location science missions. Known as Altair®, it exceeded minimum 

performance requirements and set the stage for the 

Ikhana UAS.

4

“ERAST: Environmental Research and Sensor Technology 

Fact Sheet,” NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, 

CA, 2002.
x
1

Chapter One 

Don’t Fear the

reaper

The Ikhana’s heritage is traced to a family of 

medium-altitude, long-endurance UAS vehicles developed by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems 

Inc. (GA-ASI) of San Diego, Calif., in the late 1980s 

and early 1990s. The first of these was the Gnat 750, 

a long-endurance tactical surveillance and support 

system designed for large payload capacity, ease of 

use, and low operating cost. Following its first flight 

in 1989, the Gnat 750 demonstrated un-refueled flight 

duration of up to 30 hours, 25,000-foot service ceiling, 

and climb rate of 1,100 feet per minute. With a length 

In 1997 NASA researchers used a General Atomics Gnat 750, under the name Altus, to demonstrate the ability to cruise at altitudes above 

40,000 feet for sustained durations on atmospheric science missions.

NASA

of 16 feet and a 35-foot wingspan, the vehicle has 

a gross takeoff weight of 1,140 pounds including a 

330-pound payload.

The Gnat 750 was extensively field-tested during deployments to Albania, Bosnia, and Croatia to 

monitor military facilities, battlefield entrenchments, 

supply-caches, and troop movements. The need to 

relay data from the UAS through a manned aircraft 

that could remain on station for only about two hours 

at a time greatly limited the overall effectiveness of 

the system.

The Central Intelligence Agency has operated a 

Gnat 750-45, called Lofty View, with expanded capabilities. It is reportedly capable of carrying a 450-500-

pound payload consisting of synthetic-aperture radar 

(SAR) with 12-inch resolution, three electro-optical 

(EO) or infrared (IR) sensors in a chin turret, and a 

wideband satellite data-link antenna to allow transmission of real-time data in the form of video.

The most recent improved version, called I-Gnat, has 

been reconfigured with a turbo-charged engine to increase 

its operating altitude to 30,500 feet for up to 48 hours.5

Gnat Grows Up

The RQ-1A/MQ-1A Predator (sometimes called 

Predator A) was introduced in 1994 as a growth version 

of the Gnat 750. Originally serving as an Advanced 

Concept Technology Demonstrator (ACTD) for the 

Air Force, the Predator soon became the most com5

 Maj. William G. Chapman, Organizational Concepts for the 

Sensor-to-Shooter World – The Impact of Real-Time Information 

on Airpower Targeting, Air University Press, Maxwell Air Force 

Base, AL, May 1997.
2 Don’t Fear the Reaper

The MQ-1A Predator of the 11th Reconnaissance Squadron flies over the Nevada Test and Training Range near Creech Air Force Base. 

The Predator provides armed reconnaissance and battlefield support to ground troops.

USAF/MSgt. Scott Reed

bat-proven UAS in the world, providing continuous 

and persistent armed reconnaissance and battlefield 

support to ground troops. The Predator ACTD was 

used in various training exercises, demonstrations, 

and operational deployments before graduating to 

fully operational status in 1996 with deployments to 

Southwest Asia and Europe.

The Predator is a medium-altitude endurance UAS 

with a length of 27 feet and a 48.7-foot wingspan. It 

has an endurance of 40 hours with 24 hours on station 

at a range of 500 nautical miles (nmi), and a service 

ceiling of 26,000 feet. The vehicle has an empty 

weight of 1,130 pounds and a maximum gross takeoff 

weight (GTOW) of 2,250 pounds. It is equipped with a 

C-band line-of-sight communications system, as well 

as UHF and Ku-band satellite data-link capabilities. 

The Predator is typically equipped with EO sensors 

to provide color video and IR sensors for night-vision 

capability. It can also carry a SAR payload plus laser 

designation, spotting, and range-finding systems. An 

armed version, called the MQ-1, carries air-to-air or 

air-to-ground missiles.6

 

An Unmanned Aircraft System for NASA

In 1996, General Atomics produced two civil variants of the Predator called Altus (Latin for “high”). 

Similar in appearance to the Gnat 750, Altus was 23.6 

feet long and featured long, narrow, high-aspect-ratio 

wings spanning 55.3 feet. Powered by a rear-mounted 

Rotax 912 turbocharged four-cylinder piston engine 

rated at 100 hp, the vehicle was capable of cruising 

at 80 to 115 mph. An 84-inch-diameter, two-blade 

propeller was used for flight up to 53,000 feet altitude. 

A 100-inch lightweight carbon-fiber propeller was 

available for flights at higher altitudes. Altus had a 

6

 Dr. Maziar Arjomandi, “Classification of Unmanned Aerial 

Vehicles,” course material for Mechanical Engineering 3016, 

University of Adelaide, Australia, 2007.
3

330-pound payload capacity in a nose compartment 

designed to accommodate a variety of sensors and 

scientific instruments.

NASA Dryden personnel initially operated the 

Altus vehicles as part of the ERAST program. Altus 

II, the first of the two aircraft to be completed, made 

its first flight on May 1, 1996. During developmental 

tests that summer, it reached an altitude of 37,000 feet. 

A few months later, researchers flew the Altus II in 

an Atmospheric Radiation Measurement-Unmanned 

Aerospace Vehicle (ARM-UAV) study sponsored by 

the Department of Energy’s Sandia National Laboratories. During the course of the project, Altus II set a 

single-flight endurance record for remotely operated 

aircraft by remaining aloft for 26.18 hours through a 

complete day-to-night-to-day cycle.7

The ARM-UAV program was designed for colAltus II, seen here over Gray Butte, Calif., was flown in an atmospheric-radiation-measurement study. During a 26-hour mission, the 

Altus II set a single-flight endurance record for remotely operated aircraft.

NASA

lecting data on radiation/cloud interactions in Earth’s 

atmosphere in order to better predict temperature rise 

resulting from increased carbon dioxide levels. Sandia’s payload consisted of state-of-the-art radiometric 

instruments and devices to measure temperature, pressure, and concentration of water vapor. 

The multi-agency program brought together ca7

 “ALTUS II – How High is High?” NASA Fact Sheet FS-1998-

12-058 DFRC, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, 

CA, 1998.

pabilities available among government agencies, universities, and private industry. Sandia provided overall 

technical direction, logistical planning and support, 

data analysis, and a multi-spectral imaging instrument. 

NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center and Ames Research Center, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Colorado State 

University, and the University of California Scripps 

Institute provided additional instrumentation. Participating university scientists were also drawn from the 

University of Maryland, the University of California 

at Santa Barbara, Pennsylvania State University, the 

State University of New York, and others.8

In September 2001, Altus II carried a thermal 

imaging system for the First Response Experiment 

(FiRE) during a demonstration at the General Atomics 

flight operations facility at El Mirage, Calif. A sensor 

developed for the ERAST program and previously 

used to collect images of coffee plantations in Hawaii 

was modified to provide real-time, calibrated, geolocated, multi-spectral thermal imagery of fire events. 

INMARSAT ground-data terminals, with antennas 

that adhered to the side of the Altus payload fairing, 

gave the Altus vehicle satellite communication. In 

8

 W. R. Bolton, “Measurements of Radiation in the Atmosphere,” 

NASA Tech Briefs, DRC-98-32, http://www.techbriefs.com/

Briefs/Sep98/DRC9832.html, 1998, accessed June 10, 2009.
4 Don’t Fear the Reaper

The MQ-9 Reaper, also known as Predator B, has greater payload and performance capabilities than the MQ-1. This made it an ideal 

candidate for NASA research missions.

USAF/MSgt. Robert W. Valencia

order to establish communication, operators steered 

the UAV on a bearing that pointed the antenna toward 

the satellite. This scientific demonstration showcased 

the capability of a UAS to collect remote sensing data 

over fires and relay the information to fire management 

personnel on the ground.9

Reaper Development

In 1999, General Atomics officials initiated development of a larger, turboprop-powered UAS called 

Predator B, later designated MQ-9 Reaper. While the 

company sought to expand the Predator’s reliability 

and performance capabilities to meet ever-increasing 

mission requirements for civil and military applications, NASA scientists were interested in developing 

an aircraft with larger payload capacity, high-altitude 

9

 Vincent Ambrosia, “Remotely Piloted Vehicles as Fire Imaging 

Platforms: The Future is Here!” NASA Ames Research Center, 

Moffett Field, CA, 2002.

performance, and long endurance for Earth science 

missions.

 Development of Predator B became a jointly 

funded effort in partnership with NASA as part of the 

ERAST program in January 2000 after the agency 

selected Altair, one of several competing proposals 

for development that met the agency’s Earth Science 

Enterprise (now the Earth Science Division of NASA’s 

Science Mission Directorate) UAS requirements. As 

joint partners in the project, which included flight 

validation as well as development of the aircraft, 

NASA’s Office of Aerospace Technology invested 

approximately $10 million, while General Atomics 

contributed additional funds, with about $8 million 

earmarked for the Altair project.

Design criteria included the basic reliability of the 

Predator airframe, avionics, mechanical systems, data 

link, and flight control technology. Payload capacity 

was increased 500 percent (compared to the original 

Predator model) to accommodate improved EO/IR 

sensors, SAR, targeting radar, and up to 3,000 pounds 
5

The Altair operated by NASA had an 86-foot wingspan to optimize the aircraft for high-altitude flight. The Altair was designed to carry a 

3,000-pound payload to 52,000 feet.

NASA

of externally mounted ordnance for its military role. 

Designers sought an endurance of over 30 hours, 

speeds greater than 240 knots true airspeed, and operational altitudes above 50,000 feet. A fault-tolerant, 

redundant flight-control system, and triplex avionics 

increased reliability and safety.10

Development of the Reaper began with Predator 

B-001, a proof-of-concept prototype. It had a larger fuselage than the standard Predator airframe with a wingspan of 66 feet. It was distinguishable from the original 

Predator by its Y-shaped tail and ventral vertical fin. 

A 950 standard horsepower (shp) Garrett AiResearch 

TPE-331-10T turboprop engine, de-rated to 700 shp, 

drove a rear-mounted, three-blade, controllable-pitch 

propeller, giving the aircraft a maximum speed of 220 

knots. The B-001 had a 25-hour endurance and was 

capable of carrying a 750-pound payload to an altitude 

of 45,000 feet. B-001 had a maximum gross takeoff 

weight of 7,500 pounds.11

The Predator B-001 logged its first flight on Feb. 

2, 2001, from the El Mirage facility. After completing 

initial airworthiness test flights and various software 

10 “General Atomics Fact Sheet,” General Atomics Aeronautical 

Systems Company, San Diego, CA, 2007.

and systems upgrades, a second series of test flights 

was flown in mid-summer 2001 to expand the flight 

envelope and validate autonomous flight capabilities. 

During a flight over the Edwards Air Force Base test 

range, the prototype reached a maximum sustainable 

altitude of 48,300 feet.12

While refining the configuration, General Atomics designers explored the possibility of building a 

jet-powered variant of the Predator B. It was initially 

proposed that a Predator B-002 with a 2,300-poundthrust Williams FJ44-2A turbofan engine be built. 

NASA initially expressed some interest in a production 

version of the turbofan-powered variant, but development of such a vehicle was delayed until 2005 and a 

prototype, called Predator C Avenger, didn’t fly until 

April 2007.

The Predator B-002 was instead built as a turbo11 “Altair / Predator B – An Earth Science Aircraft for the 21st Century,” NASA Fact Sheet FS-073, NASA Dryden Flight Research 

Center, Edwards, CA, 2001. Additional information from David 

A. Fulghum and Bill Sweetman, “Predator C Avenger Makes First 

Flights,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, Apr. 17, 2009.

12 Ibid
6 Don’t Fear the Reaper

prop-powered craft. It was nearly identical to B-001 

but was equipped with single-string avionics as in 

the earlier Predator A model. The limitations of the 

B-002 design were dramatically highlighted by the 

capabilities of the improved Altair and Predator B-003 

airframes, the first to incorporate triple-redundant 

avionics.

Altair was built with the 7,500-lb. GTOW fuselage 

and wing extensions. The Predator B-003 sported an 

upgraded 10,500-lb. GTOW airframe with an 86-foot 

wingspan. It was designed to carry a 3,000-pound 

The Altair vehicle was the first UAV to feature triple-redundant avionics as well as a fault-tolerant flight control system.

NASA

payload to 52,000 feet with a maximum endurance of 

more than 20 hours. After successful flight demonstrations at El Mirage NASA decided to lease Altair for 

use as a research platform.13

Altair

The Altair vehicle was designed to perform a 

variety of ERAST science missions specified by 

NASA’s Earth Science Enterprise. To demonstrate 

13 Ibid.

its ability to meet those standards, General Atomics 

conducted a multi-flight demonstration of the aircraft 

representative of a scientific data-gathering mission, 

including all integrated logistical support necessary 

when operating from a remote location. Demonstration plans included three long-duration, high-altitude 

flights with a payload consisting of imaging sensors 

and atmospheric-sampling instruments.

In the initial planning phase of the project, NASA 

scientists established a stringent set of requirements 

for Altair. These included mission endurance of 24 to 

48 hours at an altitude range of 40,000 to 65,000 feet 

with a payload of at least 660 pounds. The project team 

also sought to develop procedures to allow operations 

from conventional airports without conflict with piloted aircraft. Additionally, Altair had to demonstrate 

command and control beyond-line-of-sight (BLOS) 

communications via satellite link, see-and-avoid operations relative to other air traffic, and the capability 

to communicate with FAA air-traffic controllers. In 

order to accomplish this, it would be necessary to 

equip the Altair with an automated collision-avoidance 

system and a voice relay to allow air-traffic control-
7

lers to talk to ground-based Altair pilots. Since it was 

expected to be the first UAS to meet FAA requirements for operating from conventional airports, with 

piloted aircraft, in the national airspace (NAS), the 

aircraft also had to meet all FAA airworthiness and 

maintenance standards.14

The final Altair configuration was designed to fly 

continuously for up to 32 hours. Driven by its 700shp 

turboprop, it was capable of reaching an altitude of 

approximately 52,000 feet and had a maximum range 

of about 4,200 miles. It was designed to carry up to 

750 pounds of sensors, radar, communications and 

imaging equipment in its forward fuselage.

Altair’s first checkout flight at El Mirage on June 

9, 2003, was a significant milestone in development 

of high-altitude, long-endurance, remotely operated 

aircraft. The aircraft lifted off gracefully and remained 

at relatively low altitude in the local area while the 

ground-based pilot evaluated its basic airworthiness 

and flight controls. In a post-flight briefing, NASA and 

GA-ASI officials were enthusiastic about the results.

“This is what we’ve been waiting for,” said Glenn 

Hamilton, Altair project manager at NASA Dryden. 

“Now we can move forward with getting UAVs into 

the national airspace and conducting research.”

Thomas J. Cassidy Jr., General Atomics Aeronautical Systems president and chief executive officer, 

echoed Hamilton’s comments, saying, “Altair’s first 

flight is a culmination of 10 years of experience in 

building reliable unmanned aircraft based on a common design philosophy.”15

The Altair was the first UAV to feature tripleredundant controls and avionics for increased reliability, as well as a fault-tolerant, dual-architecture flight 

control system. After initial airworthiness test flights 

it served as an avionics testbed for the production 

version of the MQ-9 before being serving as a NASA 

research platform.

In July 2004, the Altair was deployed to Alaska 

to monitor fishing activities in the Bering Sea and 

the North Pacific Ocean for the U.S. Coast Guard but 

ended up being used to help map wildfires. Personnel 

stationed at the Poker Flat Research Range, 30 miles 

north of Fairbanks, helped secure crucial real-time 

imagery of wildfires raging through remote wilderness areas, including those in their own backyard. 

14 Ibid.

15 Alan Brown, “NASA’s Newest Unmanned Aircraft Makes Successful First Flight,” Press Release 03-193, NASA Headquarters, 

Washington, D.C., 2003.

Operators collected real-time information on fire locations, fire movement, and previously unidentified 

hot spots with the aircraft during a July 9 mission. 

Images of the so-called Boundary fire were used by 

firefighters as they tackled flames that charred portions of the 5,132-acre range in three separate waves 

that caused minor damage.16

In February 2004, General Atomics announced 

the award of a contract with the Canadian Forces to 

deploy the Altair in support of the Atlantic Littoral 

Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance Experiment – ALIX – in which the UAS was integrated with 

multi-mode maritime radar as well as electro-optical 

and infrared cameras for littoral and maritime surveillance off Canada’s east coast. The month-long deployment commenced in August 2004 and involved BLOS 

operation of the aircraft and distribution of radar and 

video imagery to various end users throughout Canadian land, air, and maritime military forces.

Launched from an airfield at Goose Bay, Newfoundland, and flown on an instrument flight plan, 

control of the aircraft and payload was passed to a 

remote operations center in Ottowa for BLOS satellite communication operations. Surface-search radar 

and video imagery were passed to two remote video 

terminals (RVT) at separate locations.17

After returning to the U.S., the Altair was finally 

available for NASA research missions. The first task 

for Dryden researchers was to evaluate various new 

control, communications, and collision-avoidance 

technologies critical to enabling unmanned vehicles 

to fly safely in the national airspace. Three test flights 

for aircraft and payload evaluation were conducted at 

Gray Butte in April 2005. These flights included a full 

payload and reached a maximum altitude of 44,619 

feet and 4.8-hour duration. NASA researchers were 

now ready to deploy the Altair for the first time.18

In May 2005, the National Oceanic and Atmo16 “Rocket launch secures photos for firefighting efforts,” Alaska 

Science Outreach, http://www.alaskascienceoutreach.com/index.

php/main_pages/catchitem/rocket_launch_secures_photos_for_

firefighting_efforts/, accessed 10 June 2004.

17 David W. Fahey, James H. Churnside, James W. Elkins, Albin, J. 

Gasiewski, Karen H. Rosenlof, Sara Summers, Michael Aslaksen, 

Todd A. Jacobs, Jon D. Sellars, Christopher D. Jennison, Lawrence C. 

Freudinger, and Michael Cooper, “Altair Unmanned Aircraft System 

Achieves Demonstration Goals,” EOS Trans., No. 80. pp. 197-201, 

American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C., 16 May 2006.

18 “ALTAIR Unmanned Aircraft to Deploy to Canada,” General 

Atomics Aeronautical Systems Company, San Diego, CA, 2004.
8 Don’t Fear the Reaper

A Ku-band satellite communications system provided the Altair with uplink/downlink capabilities for beyond-line-of-sight control by a 

pilot in a ground station.

NASA

spheric Administration (NOAA) funded the UAV 

Flight Demonstration Project in cooperation with 

NASA and General Atomics. The experiment included 

a series of atmospheric and oceanic research flights off 

the California coastline to collect data on weather and 

ocean conditions, as well as climate and ecosystem 

monitoring and management.19

Science flights began on May 7 with a 6.5-hour 

flight to the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary west 

of Los Angeles, a site thought ideal for exploring 

NOAA’s operational objectives with a digital camera 

system and electro-optical/infrared sensors. The Altair 

carried a payload of instruments for measuring ocean 

color, atmospheric composition and temperature, and 

for surface imaging during flights at altitudes of up 

to 45,000 feet. Objectives of the experiment included 

evaluation of an unmanned aircraft system for future 

19 Beth Hagenauer, “NOAA and NASA Begin California UAV 

Flight Experiment,” Press Release 05-20, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2005.

scientific and operational requirements related to 

NOAA’s oceanic and atmospheric research, climate 

research, marine sanctuary mapping and enforcement, nautical charting, and fisheries assessment and 

enforcement.20

Over the next few weeks, the Altair team made two 

attempts to conduct a 20-hour flight over the Pacific 

Ocean. Problems with the satellite communications 

link, however, resulted in flight durations of less than 

seven hours each. After a hiatus, flights resumed on 

Nov. 14 with a mission that lasted 18.4 hours and 

included ascent and descent altitude profiles at two 

fixed locations, a key aspect of the demonstration. 

The aircraft returned to Gray Butte somewhat earlier 

than planned on Nov. 15 due to fuel-management 

concerns. After landing, however, technicians found 

that fuel reserves would have permitted several hours 

20 Ibid.
9

The Altair was flown over California’s Channel Islands in a joint NASA-NOAA project to collect data on atmospheric chemistry and the 

marine environment.

NASA

of additional operation.21

The joint NASA-NOAA research missions concluded on Nov. 16, 2005. During another flight over 

the Channel Islands, sensors on the aircraft gathered 

ocean color and atmospheric chemistry measurements 

and observed marine mammals and their environment. 

Researchers also evaluated capabilities that would 

be useful for conducting low-tide coastal mapping 

and NOAA law enforcement surveillance of the 

Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. NASA 

coordinated use of Altair with GA-ASI and provided 

mission management expertise to NOAA as well as 

flight planning.22

During these missions, the Altair flew in both restricted and controlled areas of the national airspace. 

The FAA was very cooperative with regard to flight 

plan approval and in-flight coordination with Altair 

through regional air traffic control centers along the 

West coast. The FAA had granted an Experimental 

Airworthiness Certificate for the Altair – the first ever 

for a UAS – in August 2005. The certification was an 

important step toward increasing the aircraft’s freedom 

21 Fahey, et al, “Altair Unmanned Aircraft System Achieves 

Demonstration Goals.”

22 Beth Hagenauer, “Altair UAV Flies Lengthy Science Missions 

For NOAA,” Photo Release 05-73P, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2005.

to operate in the national airspace and recognized the 

quality and reliability of Altair operations. More than 

a dozen Experimental certificates have since been issued for unmanned vehicles, encouraging expanded 

development and use of UAS technology in U.S. 

airspace.23

In 2006, personnel from NASA, NOAA, GAASI and the U.S. Forest Service teamed up for the 

Altair Western States Fire Mission. The experiment 

demonstrated the combined use of a NASA Amesdesigned thermal multi-spectral scanner integrated on 

a large-payload capacity UAV, a data link telemetry 

system, near-real-time image geo-rectification, and 

rapid Internet data dissemination to fire center and 

disaster managers. The sensor system was capable of 

automatically identifying burned areas as well as active 

fires so there was no need to train sensor operators to 

analyze imagery. The success of this project set the 

stage for NASA’s acquisition of an advanced Reaper 

variant and paved the way for future operational UAS 

missions in the national airspace.24

23 Fahey, et al, “Altair Unmanned Aircraft System Achieves 

Demonstration Goals.”

24 “Altair Western States Fire Mission,” http://ntrs.nasa.gov/

archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20070031044_2007032019.pdf, 

accessed June 10, 2009.
10 Don’t Fear the Reaper

Ground crewmen prepare the Ikhana for flight. The vehicle is a civilian version of the MQ-9, modified and instrumented for use in a 

variety of civil research roles.

NASA

Ikhana

In November 2006, NASA Dryden obtained a 

civilian version of the MQ-9 that was subsequently 

modified and instrumented for use in multiple civil 

research roles. These include supporting Earth science missions, development of advanced aeronautical technology, and acting as a testbed to develop 

capabilities for improving the utility of unmanned 

aerial systems.

The project team named the aircraft Ikhana, a 

Native American Choctaw word meaning intelligent, 

conscious or aware. The choice was considered descriptive of research goals NASA had established for 

the aircraft and its related systems at the time.25

“The name perfectly matches the goals we have 

for the aircraft,” said Brent Cobleigh, NASA Dryden’s 

first project manager for Ikhana. “They include collecting data that allow scientists to better understand 

and model our environmental conditions and climate, 

increasing the intelligence of unmanned aircraft 

to perform advanced missions, and demonstrating 

technologies that enable new manned and unmanned 

aircraft capabilities.”26

The Ikhana is 36 feet long with a 66-foot wingspan. 

It can carry more than 400 pounds of sensors internally 

and over 2,000 pounds in external pods. The aircraft is 

25 “Ikhana Unmanned Science and Research Aircraft System,” 

NASA Fact Sheet FS-097, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 

Edwards, CA, 2007.

26 Beth Hagenauer, “Ikhana UAV Gives NASA New Science and 

Technology Capabilities,” Press Release 07-12, NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2007.
11

“Ikhana” is a Native American Choctaw word meaning intelligent, conscious, or aware. The choice stemmed from NASA’s research 

goals for the aircraft.

NASA

powered by a Honeywell TPE 331-10T turbine engine 

and is capable of reaching altitudes above 40,000 feet 

but with limited endurance at such altitudes. It is also 

the first production Predator B equipped with a digital 

electronic engine controller developed by Honeywell 

and General Atomics. This feature makes the Ikhana 

5% to 10% more fuel efficient in some flight regimes 

than earlier versions of the aircraft.27

NASA’s Science Mission Directorate was the 

first primary customer, employing the aircraft for 

Earth science studies. The Airborne Science Program 

uses both manned and unmanned aircraft to collect 

data within the Earth’s atmosphere, complementing 

measurements of the same phenomenon taken from 

space and those taken on the Earth’s surface. Ikhana 

is a versatile platform for such research because a variety of atmospheric and remote sensing instruments, 

including duplicates of sensors carried on orbiting 

satellites, can be installed to collect data during flights 

27 “Ikhana Unmanned Science and Research Aircraft System.”

lasting more than 20 hours. 

“The need to collect data over day-night time 

cycles and over long distances in remote areas drives 

the need for a long-duration unmanned aircraft,” said 

Cobleigh. “Piloted aircraft are limited by crew duty 

requirements that generally restrict science flights to 

10 hours or less. Unmanned aircraft are also more 

suitable for remote missions spanning open oceans 

or the polar regions, where the lack of nearby emergency landing locations increases the risk for piloted 

missions.”28

NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate also uses the aircraft for advanced systems 

research and technology development. Initial experiments included the use of fiber optics for wing 

shape and temperature sensing as well as control and 

structural loads measurements. Six hair-like fibers 

located on the upper surfaces of the Ikhana’s wings 

28 Beth Hagenauer, “Ikhana UAV Gives NASA New Science and 

Technology Capabilities.”
12 Don’t Fear the Reaper

36’

66’

General Atomics

Item Weight/Dimension

Gross Takeoff Weight 10,000 lbs

Empty Weight 3,700 lbs

Maximum Fuel Load 4,000 lbs

Nose Payload 800 lbs

Max Payload with Max Fuel 2,300 lbs

Max Payload 3,800 lbs

Max Landing Weight 6,500 lbs

Inboard Wing 1,500 lbs each

Middle Wing 650 lbs each

Outboard Wing Stations 150 lbs each

Wing Span 66 feet

Wing Area 256 square feet

Wing Aspect Ration 16:1

Wing Root Chord 65.2 inches

Wing Tip Chord 28.8 inches

Overall Fuselage Length 36 feet

Fuselage Height 12.5 feet

provide 2,000 strain measurements in real time, allowing researchers to study changes in the shape of 

the wings during flight. The fibers are small enough 

that they have no affect on aerodynamic lift and drag. 

The sensor system weighs just a few pounds and the 

fibers are thin enough that future versions could be 

embedded within a composite wing structure. Such 

sensors have numerous applications for future generations of aircraft and spacecraft. They could be used, 

for example, to enable adaptive wing-shape control to 

make an aircraft more aerodynamically efficient for 

particular flight regimes.29

Flying the Ikhana UAS

Using the newly built Ikhana aircraft, General 

Atomics personnel trained the NASA Ikhana crewmembers – pilots, systems monitors, and maintenance 

technicians – at the company’s Gray Butte facility. 

This effort culminated in a milestone flight on June 23, 

2007. Herman Posada, flying Ikhana from a Ground 

Control Station at Gray Butte, initiated takeoff and 

flew the aircraft into restricted airspace bordering 

Edwards Air Force Base. He then handed off control 

to Mark Pestana in the GCS at NASA Dryden, who 

landed the aircraft on the main runway at Edwards and 

taxied it to the NASA parking ramp.30 

29 Jay Levine, “Measuring up to the Gold Standard,” X-tra, NASA 

Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2008.

30 Jay Levine “No one on board – Ikhana pilots fly aircraft from 

the ground,” X-tra, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2008.
13

The Ikhana is flown from a ground control station, visible at right. A Ku-band satellite communications system provides data uplink and 

downlink capability.

NASA

000

NASA

Ikhana

Communications

Ku band

Command/Control

(simplified)

C-Band

Command/Control

(simplified)

ATC/Sport

IGLOO GCS

Intercom

Trunk radio

Gnd Crew

Mission

Director

SNOW/

Gnd Config

WSFM

Customer

Sys Mon

RSO SOR

Pilot Pilot

Pilots and mission support personnel control Ikhana from the GCS using direct (C-band) and satellite-relayed (Ku-band) communications. 

Air-traffic control issues are coordinated with FAA ATC personnel and military controllers (Sport) at Edwards Air Force Base.

NASA
14 Don’t Fear the Reaper

NASA research pilots Herman Posada, left, and Mark Pestana 

found flying the Ikhana an exciting challenge due to lack of ordinary physical cues and visibility restrictions.

NASA

In order to fly the Ikhana, NASA purchased a 

GCS and satellite communication system for uplinking flight commands and downlinking aircraft and 

mission data. The GCS is installed in a mobile trailer 

and, in addition to the pilot’s remote cockpit, includes 

computer workstations for scientists and engineers. 

All the aircraft systems are mobile, making the Ikhana 

ideal for missions conducted from remote sites around 

the globe.

General Atomics designed the GCS for high mobility and portability. It can be carried aboard a C-130 

or any larger transport aircraft. The ground pilot is 

linked to the aircraft through a C-band line-of-sight 

(LOS) data link at ranges up to 150 nautical miles. 

A Ku-band satellite link allows for over-the-horizon 

control. A remote video terminal provides real-time 

imagery from the aircraft, giving the pilot limited 

visual input.31

31 “Ground Control Stations Fact Sheet,” General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Company, San Diego, CA, 2007.

Two NASA pilots, Herman Posada and Mark 

Pestana, were initially trained to fly the Ikhana. Posada 

had 10 years of experience flying Predator vehicles for 

General Atomics before joining NASA as an Ikhana 

pilot. He soon discovered he had to adapt to differences 

between the earlier models with single-string avionics 

and the advanced version with triple-redundant avionics and digital electronic engine controls.

“I think it’s just experience,” said Posada. “It’s 

not a perfect system, but there are ways to make it 

work right.”32 

The GCS cockpit features pilot and payload operator stations, the latter of which also serves as a co-pilot 

station with redundant controls. CRT screens provide 

a heads-up display with options for a military-style 

data presentation or one more like what might be 

found in a civilian light aircraft (referred to by pilots 

as the “Cessna display”). Only one pilot at a time can 

fly the aircraft, although the co-pilot assists during the 

demanding takeoff and landing phases and can issue 

commands to configure the various aircraft systems as 

necessary. Unlike in a conventional airplane, control 

inputs are made with a keyboard and joystick. When 

one pilot needs to take a break, another can take over 

so that there is always a fully alert crewmember at 

the controls.

The entire experience of flying the Ikhana remotely is very different compared to conventional 

flying because the UAS pilot lacks such physical 

cues as visibility, motion, sound, feel, and even smell. 

Pestana, who has over 4,000 flight hours in numerous 

aircraft types, had never flown a UAS prior to his assignment to the Ikhana project. He found the experience an exciting challenge to his abilities because the 

lack of vestibular cues and peripheral vision hindered 

his situational awareness and eliminated his ability to 

experience such sensations as motion and sink rate.

“It was like I had lost four of my five senses,” he 

said of his experience in the ground cockpit. “Your 

vision is limited because there is only a single camera 

for forward visibility, you can’t hear the engine, feel 

the aircraft’s motion or acceleration, or smell a fuel 

leak or an electrical fire.”33

The flight controls are also markedly different 

from those of a conventional aircraft. The pilot’s 

station includes a set of rudder/brake pedals, engine 

32 Interview with Herman Posada, NASA Dryden Flight Research 

Center, Sept. 19, 2008.

33 Interview with Mark Pestana, NASA Dryden Flight Research 

Center, Aug. 13, 2008.
15

Herman Posada, right, and Mark Pestana seated in the GCS pilot’s stations. One pilot flies the aircraft while the other assists with communications and checklists, and serves as a relief pilot when necessary.

NASA

throttle, propeller controls, and a control stick grip 

but the similarities end there. On a traditional aircraft, control stick deflection to change pitch or bank 

results in a steady rate of change. On the Ikhana, stick 

deflection sets a specific fixed pitch or bank angle. 

Instead of a standard control panel, the pilot uses two 

systems display screens to access more than 60 pages 

of data.34

“Instead of physical switches – toggle switches 

or dials – you’re using a keyboard and trackball and 

pulling down menus like you would on your personal 

computer to activate systems,” Pestana explained. 

“Understanding where all of these system controls are 

located, and finding the right screen display to access 

the controls, is challenging.”35 

Posada described an Ikhana flight as “hours of 

34 Jay Levine, “No one on board – Ikhana pilots fly aircraft from 

the ground.”

35 Ibid.

On June 23, 2007, Herman Posada flew the Ikhana from Gray Butte 

into restricted airspace bordering Edwards Air Force Base. He 

then passed control to Mark Pestana in the GCS at NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center.

NASA
16 Don’t Fear the Reaper

Above, the Ikhana is guided to its first landing at Edwards by pilot Herman Posada. The flight marked a milestone as Ikhana operations 

were moved from Gray Butte to Dryden.

NASA

At left, the GCS includes stations for systems monitors and project 

scientists. Computer terminals display data downlinked from the 

vehicle.

NASA

boredom punctuated by a couple of moments of sheer 

terror during takeoff and landing.” The demands of 

these maneuvers place a considerable workload on the 

pilot.36

“There’s a lot of stuff you’re looking at while working the radios and checklists. It’s a little too much for one 

(pilot). You need an extra set of eyes because sometimes 

you’re drowning in information. Having other people say 

your speed is high or fast, or telling you to watch your sink 

rate is important,“ he explained, emphasizing that flying 

the Ikhana is a team effort. “There are a lot of people on 

the team. Without their vital support, we couldn’t get the 

airplane in the air.”37

Endurance is a key advantage in using a UAS for a 

variety of science missions. The Ikhana’s range capabilities and the fact that flight crews can be changed without 

the aircraft returning to base allow the vehicle to remain 

aloft for more than 20 hours during a single mission. 

36 Interview with Herman Posada, Sept. 19, 2008.

37 Jay Levine, “No one on board.”
17

“For example, “ said Pestana, “atmospheric scientists 

prefer to have continuous data collection over a full day’s 

cycle, where the presence or absence of sunlight may 

drive chemical reactions in the atmosphere that affect 

weather and climate.”38

These characteristics were at the heart of efforts to 

establish a project to apply UAS technology to fighting 

wildfires.

Forward-looking cameras 

provide visual information 

for situational awareness. 

A head-up display overlays information regarding 

airspeed, altitude, attitude, 

engine performance, and 

landing-gear status. 

NASA

An infrared camera provides 

visibility during nighttime 

operations, allowing the pilot to land the vehicle safely 

in the dark.

NASA

38 Interview with Mark Pestana, Aug. 13, 2008.
18 Chariots of Fire
19

Chapter two

Chariots oF Fire

One obvious application of UAS-based remote 

sensing technology is in the field of emergency response to wildfires. In order to combat fire in rugged 

wilderness terrain, first responders need as much 

information as possible, as quickly as possible. That 

drives a need to use airborne sensors with a wide field 

Smoke and ash can obscure firefighters’ views in densely forested areas. Airborne thermal-infrared sensors provide a bird’s-eye view 

while penetrating the haze layer.

National Park Service

of view (several miles) that can penetrate smoke and 

haze obscuring the firefighter’s view of thick forests 

or brush-filled canyons and rugged terrain. While the 

sensors themselves could be mounted in any number 

of different aircraft, flying such a mission poses a risk 

to aircraft and crews. Hazards include obscured visibility due to smoke, night operations, and turbulence 

from rising columns of hot air. Use of unmanned 

aircraft mitigates these risks while delivering timely 

information.

Previously, on older systems, sensor data had to 

be physically downloaded and processed after landing. 

This meant the information was hours old by the time 

it reached emergency response personnel. Ikhana’s 

high-bandwidth data link enables fire information to be 

transmitted to incident commanders within minutes, a 

vital capability when high winds are carrying embers 

over long distances in rugged terrain.

In September 2001, scientists from Ames Research 

Center led a demonstration of the Altus II UAS as a 

remote sensing platform to gather thermal data over 

wildfires and relay real-time information via satellite 

to fire management personnel on the ground. The First 

Response Experiment, or FiRE, demonstrated the combined use of a multi-spectral scanner, satellite image 

data telemetry, near real-time image geo-rectification, 
20 Chariots of Fire

Crews set a backfire to stop the Poomacha fire from advancing westward. Airborne-sensor data, delivered in near real-time, allow incident 

commanders to deploy firefighting resources more effectively.

FEMA/Andrea Booher

and rapid data dissemination over the Internet to disaster managers.39

Dr. Steven S. Wegener, senior research scientist at 

NASA-Ames (now with the Bay Area Environmental 

Research Institute) spearheaded the FiRE demonstration missions on the Altus II UAS. Vincent G. Ambrosia, senior research scientist at California State University, Monterey Bay, was a fire science team led on the 

FiRE effort with a primary interest in demonstrating 

UAS imaging capabilities for supporting wildfire assessments. The Ames wildfire science team’s interest 

came in response to an upward trend in the number 

and severity of wildfires, a key component of changing 

ecosystems and climate impacts. “We began looking at 

the science of fires,” Ambrosia said, “and then started 

working on improving the capabilities of airborne 

sensors to better observe and study fires.”40 The team 

39 Vincent G. Ambrosia, “Remotely Piloted Vehicles as Fire 

Imaging Platforms: The Future is Here!” See also Wildfire 

Magazine, article available online at http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/

sge/UAVFiRE/completeddemos.html, May-June 2002, accessed 

June 10, 2009.

at Ames developed the Airborne Infrared Disaster 

Assessment System (AIRDAS) sensor package to fill 

that critical fire sensor niche in the early to mid-1990s. 

The AIRDAS was flown on numerous missions on 

manned platforms until Wegener developed the idea of 

integrating the AIRDAS on the Altus II to demonstrate 

the efficacy of using unmanned systems and sensors 

for science and applications support missions.

The AIRDAS is a four-channel line-scan instrument designed to measure the thermal signature of 

wildfires or other natural and manmade disasters, 

accurately resolving fire intensities as high as 600 degrees C. The instrument collects data in four filterable 

electromagnetic channels to provide various types of 

information for analysis. Band 1 (visible) is suitable 

for monitoring smoke plumes as well as distinguishing cultural and topographic features. Band 2 provides 

information for analysis of vegetative composition and 

very hot fire fronts while penetrating most associated 

40 Interview with Vincent G. Ambrosia, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, Aug. 13, 2008.
21

Vincent Ambrosia headed a team that developed an airborne sensor package to collect imagery of wildfires from an unmanned aircraft, 

process the data on board, and transmit them to users in near-real time.

NASA

smoke plumes. Band 3 (mid-infrared spectrum) is 

designed for estimating high-temperature conditions. 

Band 4 is used to collect thermal data on Earth ambient 

temperatures, lower temperature soil heating conditions behind fire fronts, and minute temperature differences in pre-heating conditions. The system operates 

at five to 24 scans per second with a digitized swath 

width of 720 pixels in the cross-track direction as data 

is acquired continuously in the along-track direction. 

The scanning optics have a 108-degree field of view 

in the cross-track direction and an instantaneous field 

of view of 2.62 milliradians. These parameters provide 

a ground resolution of 8.0 meters from an altitude of 

10,000 feet above the ground. Fires smaller than 8.0 

meters are detectable through calibration.41

Image data is downlinked from the aircraft and 

geo-rectified so it can be almost immediately integrated into a map base. Typically, the information is 

available to firefighters within five to 10 minutes of 

acquisition. It can sometimes take as much as 30 minutes because the system can either acquire or downlink 

data, but not simultaneously. “Real-time data is critical 

in a disaster such as a fire incident,” said Ambrosia. 

“Responders need to know where the fire is right now 

and where it is going.”42

FiRE demonstration

The FiRE demonstration took place Sept. 6, 2001, 

at El Mirage. Disaster managers and fire management 

personnel were on hand to view the demonstration and 

participate in evaluation of products and procedures. 

Technicians initiated aircraft system and payload 

checks one hour before scheduled takeoff time, with 

41 Vincent G. Ambrosia, “Remotely Piloted Vehicles as Fire 

Imaging Platforms: The Future is Here!”

42 Interview with Vincent G. Ambrosia.
22 Chariots of Fire

The Altus II was used for the First Response Experiment (FiRE) at El Mirage in September 2001. A sensor package on board successfully 

transmitted data to scientists at NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field.

NASA

“hands off” all systems about 30 minutes later. Altus 

II took off immediately after a controlled burn was ignited adjacent to the runway. After reaching an altitude 

of 6,000 feet above the ground, controllers flew the 

vehicle in a racetrack pattern over the burn area for a 

total of five data-collection passes. Technicians on the 

ground geo-rectified the imagery and passed the data to 

fire managers via computer network within 10 minutes 

of receiving them. Exceeding expectations, the Altus II 

UAS had launched, attained mission altitude, completed five data-collection passes, telemetered AIRDAS 

data over the horizon via satellite to Ames, and data 

were geo-rectified and distributed to fire managers via 

Internet within an hour of takeoff.43

Success of the FiRE demonstration was the result 

of close cooperation among federal and state agencies and private industry. General Atomics personnel 

designed, built, and flew the Altus II vehicle and 

performed systems integration. NASA scientists developed and supplied the AIRDAS thermal imaging 

scanner. Remote Satellite Systems Inc. of Santa Rosa, 

Calif., provided a NERA World Communicator M4 

portable satellite telephone terminal and antenna for 

telemetry. GA-ASI personnel integrated the telemetry 

system into the airplane’s fuselage after NASA technicians modified the equipment for remote aircraft 

operations. Terra-Mar Resource Information Services 

of Mountain Ranch, Calif., performed near real-time 

image geo-rectification.44

In the wake of the Altus II success, the FiRE 

project team focused on further advancements in UAS 

technology, payload capabilities, telemetry, and information processing for disaster management. The next 

phase of research, development, and demonstration 

involved the Altair UAS with plans for long-duration 

missions covering actual wildfires throughout the 

Western United States.

In 2003, NASA funded the Wildfire Research and 

Applications Partnership (WRAP), a five-year project 

43 Ambrosia, “Remotely Piloted Vehicles as Fire Imaging Platforms: The Future is Here!”

44 Ibid.
23

to foster collaborative efforts among NASA and U.S. 

Forest Service personnel to develop and demonstrate 

technologies for collecting and sharing data on 

wildfires. Evolving technologies were exploited to 

improve information content and timeliness of data 

dissemination to fire managers. Plans to accomplish 

these objectives evolved into the Western States Fire 

Mission (WSFM).45

NASA operated U-2C and ER-2 aircraft in a variety of environmental research projects, including collection of wildfire imagery. The 

greatest disadvantages included pilot endurance and the length of time required to retrieve and process data.

NASA

Sensor development

The Autonomous Modular Sensor (AMS), developed by a team at NASA Ames was key to the success 

of the WSFM. This was not, however, the first use of 

NASA resources for imaging wildfires.

In 1971, the Air Force loaned two U-2C airplanes 

to NASA Ames for use as Earth Resources Survey 

45 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire Mapping 

UAS Missions over the Western United States,” presented at the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International Unmanned 

Systems North America Conference, San Diego, CA, June 2008.
24 Chariots of Fire

The EOS-Terra satellite captured this MODIS image of California wildfires on October 25, 2007. Ikhana imagery, acquired at lower 

altitudes, has greater resolution.

NASA

Aircraft. Visual and infrared photography from these 

platforms, taken at altitudes in the vicinity of 65,000 

feet, showed previously unknown access routes to 

advancing fire fronts, indicated ideal placement of 

firebreaks, and identified dangerous terrain where 

firefighters might become trapped. Experience with 

U-2 imagery has shown the data helped emergency 

response personnel contain fires sooner with less 

manpower and equipment than would have been 

possible otherwise. The biggest disadvantage, however, was the length of time necessary to retrieve and 

process the film and deliver the images to incident 

commanders.46

In 1981 and 1989 NASA acquired two ER-2 aircraft, a larger and more capable version of the U-2 that 

offered a marked improvement in payload capacity, 

endurance, and range. The ER-2 was capable of carrying NASA’s Moderate Imaging Spectroradiometer 

– MODIS – Airborne Simulator (MAS) instrument, 

a modified Daedalus Wildfire scanning spectrometer 

that provides spectral information similar to that provided by MODIS launched on the EOS-AM satellite. 

46 Jay Miller, Lockheed U-2, Aerofax Inc., Austin, TX, 1983.
25

Instruments that make up the Autonomous Modular Scanner include data system computers, scan-head, precision navigation subsystem, 

power distributor, and control systems.

NASA

The Wildfire Spectrometer was delivered to Ames in 

April 1991. A single visible-band channel was added 

and several infrared spectral channels were altered 

to configure the instrument for the FIRE Cirrus-II 

experiment. In January 1992 the modified Wildfire 

sensor was then further modified to become MAS. 

Although the instrument is a 50-band spectrometer, 

the digitizer was configured for each mission to record a pre-selected group of 12 spectral bands during 

the flight. For most of these missions the digitizer 

was configured to record four 10-bit channels and 

seven 8-bit channels. A 50-channel digitizer capable 

of recording all 50 spectral bands at 12-bit resolution 

became operational in January 1995.47

NASA officials recognized that a sensor package 

that could be mounted on a remotely piloted aircraft 

would provide greater flexibility, and tasked researchers at Ames with developing instrumentation and 

demonstrating that scientifically valuable data could 

be gathered using UAS technology.

Subsequently, a team of scientists began working 

on an upgraded version of the Daedalus AADS-1268 

Thematic Mapper Simulator (TMS) – a digital multispectral scanner flown aboard the ER-2 – but with 

a lighter, smaller, more autonomous sensor package 

and lower electrical power requirements. The team’s 

engineering goals included development of an accurate scientific sensor that would be compatible with 

a remotely piloted aircraft and capable of providing 

data to users as quickly as possible. The sensor was 

designed to be modular so that the 12-band Wildfire 

spectrometer could be replaced with one of two others, 

which featured different spectral bands optimized for 

47 “First ISCCP Regional Experiment (FIRE) Cirrus 2 NASA 

ER-2 Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer 

(MODIS) Airborne Simulator (MAS) (FIRE_CI2_ER2_MAS) 

Langley DAAC Data Set Document,” Atmospheric Science 

Data Center, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 

http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/GUIDE/dataset_documents/base_

fire_ci2_er2_mas_dataset.html, 1996, accessed June 10, 2009.
26 Chariots of Fire

The Altair carried the sensor pod on a ventral centerline pylon. Sensor data is autonomously processed with georectified topographical 

information to create a fire-intensity map.

NASA

ocean and atmospheric detection, depending on mission 

requirements. The sensor pod was originally configured 

for ventral carriage on the Altair’s fuselage centerline. 

For Ikhana missions, the pod was mounted beneath the 

left wing.

The MODIS was used as a starting point for the 

AMS Wildfire sensor since data from the scanner’s spectral bands could be input into a fire detection algorithm 

used by the Forest Service and other agencies. The new 

sensor system needed the capability to provide general 

Earth resources imaging, and input for the fire detection 

algorithm, and would need to be capable of delivering 

accurate, readily interpreted images of affected areas in 

near real-time, so that firefighting resources can be efficiently deployed.

The result was the AMS, a line scanner with a rotating elliptical mirror that provides a cross-track scan. 

Incoming light reflected off the input mirror is sent 

through a telescope, which collimates the beam. The 

light then enters a 12-band spectrometer assembly. Eight 

wavelength bands cover the spectral range from visible 

to the near infrared. These bands are dispersed through 

a prism and collected by an array of silicon photodiodes. 

Two additional near-IR bands are routed through filters 

and dichroic mirrors to two thermoelectrically cooled 

indium gallium arsenide detectors. Dichroic mirrors and a 

dual-band bandpass filter select the final two mid-infrared 

and far-infrared bands, which are specially defined for 

wildfire applications. The bandpass filter sits in front of 

a sandwiched detector with an indium-antimony detector 

atop a mercury-cadmium telluride detector, cooled by a 

Stirling cycle cryogenic cooler. Data from these bands 

are processed in the fire detection algorithm. Onboard 

blackbody sources calibrate each detector well enough 

that the algorithm can report the temperature of the detected fires up to a temperature of 1,000° C (1,832° F) 

with an accuracy of 0.5° C (16.9° F). The sensor can also 

provide a vector map of hot spots.

While operating, output from the detectors is digitized into 716 16-bit cross-track pixels. For wildfire imagery the pixel angular resolution is about 100 ft/pixel for 

data acquired from 40,000 feet, providing an appropriate 

tradeoff between resolution and coverage. Digitized data 

is combined with navigational and inertial sensor data to 

precisely determine the location and orientation of the 

sensor. In addition, the data is autonomously processed 

with georectified topographical information to create a 

fire intensity map. 

The AMS weighs about 264 pounds, including heating and cooling equipment, optical assembly, digitizer, 

and processor. With blackbody calibration sources and 

detector heaters on, the system can use up to 50 amps 

at 28 volts DC. Data collected by this small package 

are processed on board the aircraft to provide a finished 
27

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc. supplied pilots and 

sensor operators for the Altair Western States Fire Missions.

NASA

product formatted according to a geographical information systems standard, which makes it accessible with 

commonly available programs such as Google Earth.

The AMS records all 12 channels on board so that all 

data is available for post-flight processing. Generally, during a mission, only three channels of desired information 

are downlinked in near real-time. The channels selected 

depend on the needs of the user – day/night imagery, 

active fire data, post-burn data, etc. Data telemetry is 

downlinked via a Ku-band satellite communications 

system. After quality-control assessment by scientific 

personnel in the GCS, the information is transferred to 

NASA Ames and then made available to remote users 

via the Internet.48

The AMS payload also drapes fire information 

over three-dimensional geographic data collected by a 

specially modified radar system that flew on board the 

space shuttle Endeavour during an 11-day mission in 

February 2000. The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission 

(SRTM) obtained elevation data on a near-global scale 

to generate the most complete high-resolution digital 

topographic database of Earth. The NASA Jet Propulsion 

Laboratory released SRTM data for public use through 

the Internet.49

Altair Western States Fire Missions

Goals for the 2006 WSFM included demonstrating 

the capabilities of a long-duration UAS to collect infrared 

imagery of wildfires in the Western United States, west 

of the Rocky Mountains and between the Mexican and 

Canadian borders, and to disseminate the data in near 

real-time to firefighters in affected areas. Partners from 

NASA Ames and the Forest Service addressed scientific 

and mission goals while those at NASA Dryden were 

responsible for operational aspects of flying a remotely 

piloted aircraft in the national airspace. General Atomics was responsible for constructing a pod to hold the 

AMS and integrating the pod and sensor package onto 

the aircraft.50

Three operational objectives were critical to the 

mission. First, the UAS had to remain aloft for long 

durations to image multiple fires throughout the region 

of interest. Second, NASA had to develop a sensor and 

associated equipment and systems capable of collecting, 

processing, and delivering information to firefighters and 

incident commanders within 10 minutes of collection. 

Finally, the team had to demonstrate the ability to safely 

operate a UAS in the national airspace using the same 

FAA procedures required of other aircraft. NASA officials conducted mission planning and were responsible 

for obtaining FAA approval for flights in the national 

airspace. General Atomics provided pilots and sensor 

operators.51

In early 2006, NASA leased time in the Altair 

UAS from General Atomics for the Western States 

48 Richard Gaughan, “An autonomous sensor developed by 

NASA proves its worth in firefighting,” R&D Daily, Issue 0701, 

January 2007.

49 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping UAS Missions over the Western United States.”

50 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned 

Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace System 

– the NASA 2007 Western States Fire Missions,” AIAA-2008-

8967, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, The 

26th Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Anchorage, AK, 2008.

51 Ibid.
28 Chariots of Fire

Equipped with a pod-mounted infrared-imaging sensor, the Altair UAS aided fire-mapping efforts over wildfires in central and southern 

California in late 2006.

NASA

Fire Mission. The NASA Dryden team was responsible 

for mission planning and obtaining a Certificate of 

Authorization (COA) from the FAA, granting permission for Altair to overfly fire incident areas within the 

national airspace.52 

Working with the newly created FAA Headquarters Unmanned Aircraft Systems Program Office, 

the NASA team made significant progress toward 

completing a COA application for flights to capture 

data over wildfires in any of the 11 western states: 

California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and 

Colorado. By September, however, it became clear 

that COA approval would not be possible before the 

close of the 2006 wildfire season. In order to get the 

AMS into the air as soon as possible and begin data 

collection, the team requested a COA for a more limited operating area. On Oct. 19, a COA valid through 

Dec. 1 was granted that allowed Altair to be flown in 

areas directly adjacent to restricted airspace normally 

used Dryden-based NASA research missions.53 

52 Ibid.

53 Ibid.

Using this authorization on Oct. 24, 2006, the 

team flew the Altair on a 23-hour mission over a 

controlled burn near Yosemite National Park, Calif., 

at an altitude of 43,000 feet. The data confirmed 

satellite-based fire detection information and the AMS 

payload also observed a second nearby wildfire. Following this significant milestone, the Western States 

Fire Mission team stood down, removed the sensor 

pod from Altair, and began preparing for the 2007 

wildfire season.

Plans changed quickly when an arsonist set a small 

fire near Cabazon, Calif., that grew to devastate more 

than 40,000 acres, destroy 34 homes, and cause the 

deaths of five firefighters. California governor Arnold 

Schwarzenegger requested emergency support for remote sensing over the burn area of the Esperanza fire, 

as it came to be known. The Altair team responded to 

the crisis by reinstalling the pod, rewiring the Altair 

aircraft, planning the mission, and requesting a COA 

Amendment.54

54 Jamie Wilhite, Robert Navarro, and Brent Cobleigh, “Altair 

Western States Fire Mission,” 2006 Engineering Annual Report, 

pp. 45-47, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, 

CA, August 2007.
29

The Altair was flown over a controlled burn near Yosemite National Park as well as a nearby wildfire to confirm satellite-based firedetection information and to test the AMS sensor.

NASA

NASA planners submitted the request on Oct. 27, 

asking for an extension of the Yosemite COA that would 

allow a flight over the Esperanza fire. Fortunately, the 

FAA had created a process that allowed the extension to 

be granted that evening. Altair was ready to fly again.55

During a 16-hour mission, the team delivered some 

100 visible and infrared images in near real-time to incident commanders along with more than 20 data files 

with detailed maps of the fire’s perimeter. The Incident 

Command Team studied the thermal data and used the 

technology to develop an Incident Action Plan that was 

distributed to firefighters the next morning. The information helped responders better understand the location 

and movement of the fire and distribute resources accordingly.56

55 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace 

System – the NASA 2007 Western States Fire Missions.”

56 Daniel Berlant, “Unmanned aircraft is latest firefighting 

tool,” Communique, California Department of Forestry and 

Fire Protection, Sacramento, CA, http://www.fire.ca.gov/communications/downloads/communique/2007_winter/unmanned.

pdf. Winter 2007, accessed June 10, 2009.

NASA scientists in the GCS at Grey Butte collected AMS images downlinked from the Altair and 

retransmitted them to the wildfire Collaborative Decision Environment (CDE) at Ames via the Internet. 

The images were processed on board the Altair with 

geo-rectification software to precisely overlay them 

onto Google Earth global map and satellite imagery. 

On-site fire commanders could then view these images 

via Internet connections. During the mission, the Altair 

also carried several instruments to collect atmospheric 

data. These included an Argus tunable laser diode 

spectrometer developed at Ames, a NOAA gas chromatograph ozone photometer, and Dryden’s Research 

Environment for Vehicle-Embedded Analysis on Linux (REVEAL) instrument – a programmable gateway 

between onboard instruments and wireless communication paths to and from the aircraft. The Argus sensor 

was used to collect carbon monoxide measurements 

that helped atmospheric scientists better understand the 

dynamics of the atmosphere over a vertical range up 

to 35,000 feet. Besides providing valuable scientific 

data, it gave researchers information on the health of 

the instrument itself on long-duration, high-altitude 
30 Chariots of Fire

The ground control station includes consoles for two pilots and positions for scientists and engineers.

NASA

flights. The Argus also validated information previously collected with NASA’s Aura satellite.57

“As a fire department and especially a wildland 

one, we’re going to look at the technology that’s 

out there,” said Riverside County fire captain Julie 

Hutchinson. “The sooner we get information to the 

ground forces and fire managers, that makes a difference. That’s a huge thing for us.”58

Ikhana Western States Fire Missions

Building on the experience with the Altair, NASA 

acquired the Ikhana UAS for a second series of Western States Fire Mission flights. Team members worked 

hard to complete a significant number of training, 

engineering, and operational milestones in preparation 

for operational missions scheduled to begin in August 

2007. These included training for Dryden pilots, crewmembers, and technicians, as well as integration and 

testing of the GCS. The aircraft was modified to carry 

57 Jamie Wilhite, Robert Navarro, and Brent Cobleigh, “Altair 

Western States Fire Mission.”

58 Berlant, “Unmanned aircraft is latest firefighting tool.”

the sensor pod on a wing pylon, and technicians integrated and tested all associated hardware and systems. 

Management personnel at Dryden performed a flight 

readiness review to assure that all necessary operational and safety concerns had been addressed. Finally, 

planners had to obtain the necessary COA to allow the 

Ikhana to operate in the national airspace.59

NASA flight operations were conducted as a 

coordinated effort with the FAA’s service areas, Air 

Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC), and Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO). Significant 

hurdles included flight approval from the UAPO and 

a NASA Dryden safety board. Each review required 

detailed descriptions of mission plans, procedures, 

and contingencies. Additionally, the Dryden safety 

review included all engineering and training issues. 

The Ikhana’s initial flights originated from Gray Butte 

but on June 23, 2007, the aircraft was flown to Dryden 

– its permanent home.60

59 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping UAS Missions over the Western United States.”

60 Ibid.
31

NASA Ames engineers Sally Buechel and Ted Hildum prepare to 

load the Autonomous Modular Scanner into the Ikhana unmanned 

aircraft’s payload pod.

NASA

Flight planning

Due to the large geographical area involved for 

each fire mission sortie and the flight schedule flexibility being requested, FAA officials considered the 

WSFM one of the most complex UAS missions to date. 

Flexibility was a key issue because the unpredictable 

nature of wildfires makes it difficult to accurately plan 

flight tracks more than a few days in advance.

NASA officials submitted the WSFM COA application in February 2007, building on experience gained 

in the Altair mission planning process. All details of 

the 2007 mission plans and pertinent information 

regarding the Ikhana were submitted electronically 

to the FAA Headquarters UAS Program Office. This 

was followed by a series of informal meetings between 

NASA and FAA officials to clarify details of the COA 

application, mission goals, and operational plans. 

These meetings gave the FAA ample time to review 

and discuss the details with the Ikhana team.61

“The FAA has been very cooperative in helping to 

61 Ibid.

define ways to achieve our mission objectives while 

protecting the safety of the national airspace system,” 

said Greg Buoni, lead operations engineer for Ikhana. 

“Because unmanned aircraft currently have limited 

ability to see and avoid other aircraft and, in some 

cases, have lower reliability than a manned aircraft, 

unmanned flights within the national airspace require 

a COA and are subject to significant restrictions in 

their operation.”62

Plans for the 2007 WSFM called for a total of 

four to five flights of approximately 12 to 24 hours 

duration. Because the FAA required flight plans be 

submitted three business days prior to the planned 

flight, the NASA team had to submit plans on Monday 

for flights scheduled for Thursday. Friday and Saturday 

served as back-up mission days. Crew rest and aircraft 

maintenance requirements precluded back-to-back 

missions.

The magnitude and complexity of the WSFM 

made it necessary for NASA to coordinate with multiple Air Route Traffic Control Centers. To simplify 

planning, the area of interest was divided into three 

zones, each containing no more than three ARTCCs. 

Each mission would be limited to a single zone in order 

to reduce the number of people needed to coordinate 

the flight, particularly within the FAA.63 

Restrictions imposed by the UAPO and NASA 

safety policy precluded flying the Ikhana over densely 

populated areas. In addition, the Dryden Safety Office 

conducted a detailed risk analysis of each proposed 

mission. This resulted in development of zone maps 

showing keep-out areas in red and less-denselypopulated areas in yellow. The Ikhana could be flown 

over yellow areas as long as all aircraft systems functioned normally and the vehicle was under the direct 

control of a remote pilot in the GCS. If a systems 

failure resulted in degraded aircraft control, mission 

rules required avoidance of the yellow areas. In the 

event that direct control was completely lost, a lostlink mission plan was programmed into the Ikhana’s 

autonomous systems to avoid overflying both the red 

and yellow areas, reducing risk to people and property 

on the ground.64 

In April 2007, following discussions with FAA 

representatives from several affected ARTCCs, Ikhana 

62 Hagenauer, “Ikhana UAV Gives NASA New Science and 

Technology Capabilities.”

63 Ibid.

64 Ibid.
32 Chariots of Fire

Ikhana ground crewmen Gus Carreno and James Smith load the thermal-infrared imaging scanner pallet into the Ikhana’s underwing 

payload pod.

NASA

Lead Operations Engineer Greg Buoni and other NASA 

mission planners developed “backbone” flight tracks 

for Ikhana that avoided yellow and red areas. Later, 

“spoke” segments were added to allow the aircraft to 

fly to the fire zones of interest. 

Buoni originally wanted to fly the Ikhana directly 

from fire to fire as long as it could avoid the yellow and 

red exclusion zones but thought that the FAA would 

prefer backbone-and-spoke routes.

“We understood this was not as efficient as we 

would like,” said Buoni, “but we were willing to 

sacrifice a little efficiency to get an approach the FAA 

might approve.”65

The routes were designed to avoid keep-out zones, 

maximize coverage of areas likely to experience wildfires, and avoid adverse winds and turbulence as much 

65 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace 

System – the NASA 2007 Western States Fire Missions.”

as possible. Avoiding adverse weather was important 

for lost-link contingency plans. If the aircraft had 

to autonomously return to Edwards without a communications link to the GCS, the Ikhana team hoped 

the aircraft could avoid areas where extreme weather 

conditions were likely to occur.

In a May 2007 meeting, FAA ARTCC and UAPO 

representatives rejected the backbone-and-spoke approach and agreed that flying a more direct route from 

fire to fire would more closely resemble the behavior 

of other aircraft flying in the national airspace. The 

COA application retained the backbone-and-spoke 

route as an example of what a flight plan might 

look like if there were fires within those areas, and 

backbones were incorporated into mission plans as 

necessary.

Missions were planned several days in advance 

of each flight, with the idea of covering several fires 

by using point-to-point navigation. Mission altitude 

was determined by aircraft performance and airspace 
33

Mission planners established “Keep Out” zones in order to avoid flying the Ikhana over populated areas.

NASA

constraints. Based on the Ikhana’s performance 

characteristics and a desire to avoid bad weather 

during the summer months, the desired altitude range 

fell between 35,000 and 45,000 feet. The original 

2007 WSFM plan called for flight within Class A 

(positively controlled) airspace and above Reduced 

Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) airspace. 

Due to performance limitations and the fact that the 

aircraft was not certificated to operate in the RVSM 

band from 29,000 to 41,000 feet, flight was restricted 

to between 18,000 and 29,000 feet. Flight planners 

would request an operating altitude of 23,000 feet 

but real-time altitude changes would be performed as 

requested by FAA air traffic controllers at any time 

during the mission.66 

“See and avoid” capability is a requirement for 

flight in the national airspace but limitations of the 

camera system provided on board the Ikhana reduce 

66 Ibid.

the pilot’s visual awareness of the aircraft’s surroundings. The pilot must rely on air traffic controllers to 

maintain adequate separation between the UAS and 

other aircraft. To accommodate these restrictions, 

the Ikhana was flown through initial climb and final 

descent within the restricted airspace surrounding 

Edwards Air Force Base and then transitioned to 

Class A airspace.

To allow time for dissemination of flight plans 

to ARTCCs and to brief air traffic control personnel 

who would be on duty during a WSFM flight, the FAA 

required 72 hours notice before each mission. Scientific and operational staff had to assemble a flight 

plan containing navigational waypoints that would 

provide access to each defined fire area and track 

lines designed to avoid yellow and red populated 

areas. Air traffic controllers cleared other aircraft 

out of the airspace in the vicinity of the fire so the 

Ikhana could fly track lines and repeat as necessary 

without the UAS pilot overburdening controllers 
34 Chariots of Fire

“Backbone” routes provided the most direct flight path over each zone of interest while avoiding keep-out areas.

NASA

with radio calls.

The workload imposed on WSFM personnel was 

intensive. Flight planning began three or four days 

before a scheduled mission so the paperwork could 

be submitted to the FAA on a Monday, allowing for 

a Thursday takeoff. Aircraft preflight preparations 

usually began several hours before scheduled takeoff, 

generally in the early morning hours to take advantage of calm wind conditions and optimum sun angles 

for the sensor. Flexibility in the schedule allowed the 

67 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping.”

flight to slip to Friday in the event of unforeseen difficulties, creating a practical limitation of one flight 

per week maximum.67

Loss of command link and emergency 

procedures

Increasing use of unmanned vehicles in the 

national airspace has raised concerns about their 

potential to cause harm to persons and property in 

the air and on the ground. The Ikhana WSFM team 

worked hard to reduce potential risks to an acceptable 

level. Mission planners must allow for contingencies 
35

With its sensor pod under the left wing, NASA’s remotely piloted Ikhana unmanned aircraft cruises over California during the Western 

States Fire Mission.

NASA

and alternatives for every point along the flight track. 

Due to a lack of real-time situational awareness, all 

available emergency landing sites are identified prior 

to each mission.

 During each flight, a lost-link mission plan is 

loaded and maintained in the aircraft’s computer in 

the event of a total communications failure between 

the Ikhana and the GCS. In the event of a commandand-control link malfunction, the aircraft will autonomously proceed to a specified point over unpopulated 

terrain and eventually return to Edwards and a location that virtually guarantees pilots will be able to 

regain control of the aircraft. The pilot continually 

updates the lost-link mission plan during the flight 

to reflect the current aircraft position.

The Ikhana’s electric power is normally generated by engine operation. In the event of electrical 

system failure, the vehicle has batteries capable of 

supplying power for approximately three hours. This 

would allow the aircraft to fly approximately 400 nmi, 

including descent and landing maneuvers. Alternate 

contingency landing sites were identified and made 

available for instances in which Ikhana was more than 

400 nmi from Edwards when a malfunction occurred. 

For the Western States Fire Mission, primary emergency landing sites included Mountain Home Air 

Force Base, Idaho and Michael Army Airfield, Utah. 

Agreements with the Air Force and Army specified 

risks and hazards associated with landing the Ikhana 

under satellite control as well as necessary ground 

procedures following landing at remote locations.

If the aircraft loses thrust – due to engine or 

propeller malfunction, or any other reason – an 

emergency landing site must be identified within the 

Ikhana’s gliding distance based on mission altitude. 

At a cruising altitude of 23,000 feet, the aircraft can 

glide for approximately 50 nmi. Planners determined 

secondary emergency landing sites spaced no more 

than 100 nmi apart throughout the entire area defined 

by each COA. Additionally, a runway of at least 4,000 

feet in length, and preferably 5,000, is necessary for 

a safe landing.

Because Ikhana lacks sufficient capability to detect and avoid other aircraft in the airfield’s landing 

pattern or in the nearby vicinity, the FAA directed 

that these sites could not be active civil or joint-use 
36 Chariots of Fire

NASA research pilot Mark Pestana prepares to fly the Ikhana 

unmanned aircraft remotely from the GCS at NASA Dryden.

NASA

airports. NASA Dryden officials stipulated that no 

military airports could be considered without prior 

coordination. As best it could, a five-member team 

from NASA Dryden spent two months surveying the 

Western United States for potential landing sites, 

reviewing those sites with the Dryden Range Safety 

Office, and gathering additional information on sites 

deemed acceptable.68

Suitable landing sites included dry lakebeds, 

abandoned runways, farm fields, and other open 

spaces that would serve as suitable landing sites 

away from populated areas. Flight personnel rated 

each site according to its suitability for a safe landing. Marginally suitable sites would only allow for 

a crash landing that would not endanger the public. 

This analysis resulted in compilation of a database 

of more than 280 emergency landing sites, many of 

which would be appropriate for any given flight. During each flight, the Mission Director would maintain 

real-time situational awareness of the nearest suitable 

emergency landing site.69

Ikhana project engineer Kathleen Howell and project manager Brent Cobleigh check the planned flight paths in Ikhana’s ground control 

station before takeoff.

NASA

68 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace 

System.”

69 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping.”
37

An additional challenge in making an emergency 

landing is that real-time control of the aircraft via the 

Ku-band satellite link has an inherent signal delay of 

up to two seconds. During the landing phase, when 

pilot control inputs are particularly dynamic and need 

to be applied in a timely manner, this delay can lead to 

pilot-induced oscillation. The pilot must anticipate the 

control inputs necessary to avoid making an incomplete flare or hard landing, or even loss of aircraft control. In order to reduce risk and satisfy both FAA and 

NASA management’s acceptance of this risk, NASA 

pilots spent many hours flying the Ikhana simulator. 

Hosted on a desktop computer system, the simulator 

is capable of emulating the signal delay. The pilots 

learned to compensate by reducing power and flaring 

early – “flying in the future,” as Pestana put it.70

Ready to fly

The WSFM team’s desired COA area included all 

parts of the Western United States that have shown a 

history of wildfires. This includes a region from the 

Canadian border to the Mexican border and from the 

Pacific Ocean to Denver. Planners made every effort 

to include as much of this region as possible for the 

2007 fire season.

In late July 2007, NASA received approval for 

initial WSFM flights but with significant restrictions. 

The COA as approved by the FAA was not identical 

to that requested in the application. The most notable 

change was a limitation of the operating boundary 

to within 75 nmi from three defined backbone routes 

(one in each zone), thus preventing the AMS sensor 

from imaging any fires beyond this limit. The backbone had no spokes; unfortunately backbone routes 

had not been selected so as to pass over areas with a 

high-likelihood of wildfires.

Flights were also prohibited in areas that might 

be affected by known solar storms, planned Global 

Positioning System (GPS) testing, or outages in Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (a system 

that indicates the integrity of GPS signals). Weather 

restrictions included a prohibition of flights into turbulence or icing conditions forecast to be moderate 

to severe. Despite these limitations, the Ikhana team 

was ready to perform operational missions.71

70 Mark Pestana, comments on draft manuscript, December 

2008.

71 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire.”
38 The Fire Down Below
39

Chapter Three 

The first four Ikhana flights in the national airspace set a benchmark for establishing criteria for 

future science operations. During these missions, 

the Ikhana traversed eight western U.S. states, collecting critical fire information and relaying data in 

near real-time to fire incident command teams on the 

ground as well as to the National Interagency Fire 

Center (NIFC) in Boise, Idaho. Data from the AMSCarrying its sensor pod, the Ikhana banks away during a checkout flight in the Western States Fire Mission.

NASA

Wildfire instrument was downlinked to the GCS 

and then transferred to a server at NASA-Ames and 

autonomously redistributed to a Google Earth data 

visualization capability – CDE – that served as a Decision Support System (DSS) for fire data integration 

and information sharing. This system allowed users 

to see and use data in as little as 10 minutes after it 

was collected.72

The Google Earth DSS CDE also supplied other 

real-time fire-related information including satellite weather data, satellite-based MODIS fire data, 

Remote Automated Weather Station readings, realtime lightning strike detection data, and other critical fire database source information. Google Earth 

imagery layers allowed users to see the locations of 

manmade structures and population centers in the 

same display as the fire information. Shareable data 

and information layers, combined into the CDE, al71 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire.”
40 The Fire Down Below

Flight tracks in red, green, blue, and yellow indicate the routes of 

the first four Ikhana Western States Fire Missions.

NASA/Google

lowed the incident commanders and others to make 

real-time fire management strategy decisions. Personnel throughout the U.S. who were involved in the 

mission and imaging efforts also accessed the CDE 

data. Fire incident commanders used the thermal 

imagery to develop management strategies, redeploy 

resources, and direct operations to critical areas such 

as neighborhoods.73 

During these four sorties, the Ikhana flew a total 

of 56 hours, operating in the national airspace for 

nearly 50 hours. The aircraft overflew and imaged a 

total of 26 fires, providing real-time data to incident 

commanders and the NIFC.74

The Ikhana team also collected post-fire burnassessment imagery over various fires to aid teams 

in fire ecosystem rehabilitation on those major 

events. The Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation 

72 “Completed Missions,” Wildfire Research and Applications 

Partnership (WRAP), http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sge/WRAP/current/com_missions.html, 2008, accessed June 10, 2009.

73 Ibid.

(BAER) project examined the effects of the fire 

on soil, watershed, wildlife, vegetation, and other 

resources for potential threats to life and property. 

After experts complete an assessment of an area, the 

BAER team can propose alternative prescriptions for 

a rehabilitation plan to local Forest Service officials 

to minimize the fires’ effects on resources, life, and 

property within and directly adjacent to the fire. 

Rehabilitation efforts can include such activities as 

seeding, use of hay mulch, and vegetation planting 

designed specifically to meet resource objectives, 

such as minimizing erosion.75

Three additional missions were flown after requests from several government agencies responding to a wildfire emergency in Southern California. 

These flights demonstrated the Ikhana team’s ability 

to provide critical sensor data and distribute it to users in a timely manner under extremely challenging 

circumstances.76

Four states ablaze

The first WSFM flight took place Aug. 16 and 

was limited to about 10 hours duration in order to 

verify planning and coordination procedures. During 

an unexpectedly short pre-mission teleconference, 

representatives of the FAA ARTCCs accepted route 

plans submitted by the NASA team even though 

one wildfire was at the 75 nmi limit from the Route 

A backbone. The FAA granted permission for the 

Ikhana to fly slightly beyond the COA boundary to 

cover this fire.77 

Based on the approved route, approximately 12 

emergency landing sites were selected from a list of 

more than 280 pre-designated sites within the flight 

zones. During the mission it appeared that local air 

traffic controllers had, for the most part, been briefed 

in advance and were expecting the aircraft. Over 

74 Ibid.

75 “BAER: Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation,” Lytle Fire 

2003, IncidentControl.com, http://www.incidentcontrol.com/

lytlefire/b_a_e_r.htm, October 2003, accessed June 10, 2009.

76 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned 

Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace System.”

77 Ibid.
41

During WSFM-1, sensors on board the Ikhana covered the Zaca fire (lower left), Tar fire, Babcock fire, and Colby fire (upper left).

NASA/Google

the course of 9.5 hours, the Ikhana flew over four 

wildfires in southern and central California (the Zaca, 

Tar, Colby, and Babcock fires), covering a distance 

of 1,400 nmi. Incident commanders at the Zaca fire 

were able to access and use data between four and 

nine minutes after acquisition. The Zaca fire incident 

commander was so impressed by the WSFM team’s 

contributions that he appealed to California Senator 

Barbara Boxer’s office for additional Ikhana imaging flights.78

During WSFM-2 on Aug. 30, the Ikhana remained 

aloft for 16.1 hours. Data passes were accomplished 

over five active fires and several previous burn areas, in California (Jackrabbit, Zaca, Tar, Colby, and 

Babcock), Nevada, Utah, Idaho (Trapper Ridge and 

78 Ibid.

Castle Rock), Montana (WH Complex fires), and 

Wyoming (Columbine, Hardscrabble, and Granite 

Creek). The total distance covered was about 2,500 

nmi. The WSFM team had to cope with momentary 

loss of color nose-camera imagery during takeoff as 

well as a mission-planning software editing problem 

after takeoff and before landing.79

Researchers and firefighters were extremely 

interested in getting coverage of wildfires north of 

the approved COA boundary in Idaho and Montana, 

so the Ikhana team requested a COA extension from 

the FAA. Unfortunately, the request was denied. 

Since multiple large wildfires were burning within 

the approved COA boundaries in Idaho, Montana, 

and Wyoming, the team submitted a second route 

79 Ibid.
42 The Fire Down Below

In the WSFM-1 flight plan, the known perimeter of the Zaca fire is indicated in light green. MODIS hot detects are shown in yellow, 

orange, and red.

NASA/Google

plan using the original COA boundary but the real 

challenges were just beginning.

In the wake of a recently created Air Traffic 

Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA – extension 

of Military Operating Area activities above 18,000 

feet), officials at Salt Lake Center requested several 

waypoints along the Ikhana’s planned route be moved 

so the aircraft could avoid this area. The suggested 

alternative route would have passed directly over one 

of the keep-out zones and was unacceptable.

Eventually, a route was approved that successfully avoided both the ATCAA and the populated 

keep-out zone. Now, however, there was a conflict 

with GPS testing that impacted part of the route and 

the mission was delayed 24 hours. Because of the 

areas covered, the Ikhana team always had to coordinate flights so as to avoid conflict with GPS testing 

activities at Naval Air Warfare Center China Lake, 

the Nevada Test and Training Range, and the Utah 

Test and Training Range.

On the morning of the rescheduled flight, the 

Edwards runway was closed for repairs, resulting in 

an additional postponement. The mission was flown 

a week later, after coordinating with scheduled GPS 

tests.

Two data runs on the Castle Rock fire were 

coincident with overpasses by a satellite carrying a 

MODIS sensor. Earth Observing System spacecraft 

– called Terra and Aqua – equipped with MODIS sensors view the entire Earth’s surface every one to two 
43

A mosaic of images of the Zaca fire was georectified and draped over Google satellite imagery of the terrain. Bright areas indicate active fires.

NASA/Google

days, acquiring data in 36 spectral bands to improve 

researchers’ understanding of global dynamics and 

processes occurring on the land, in the oceans, and 

in the lower atmosphere. Such data can be compared 

with that collected with the Ikhana’s more sensitive 

instruments.80

This mission provided an opportunity to demonstrate real-time weather re-routing. En route to Utah, 

FAA officials allowed a significant deviation around 

thunderstorms in northern Nevada, demonstrating 

that they could treat the Ikhana like any other aircraft 

in the national airspace.

The third sortie followed an ambitious flight plan 

for the first true long-duration mission. FAA officials 

were initially concerned about plans to fly the Ikhana 

in close proximity to airspace that was used heavily 

during daylight hours. After considering alternative 

routes, the time of day Ikhana was to fly though the 

airspace in question, and assurances that the aircraft 

could be safely re-routed in real-time, FAA officials 

approved the route as originally submitted.

GPS testing delayed the planned takeoff time, 

80 Ibid.
44 The Fire Down Below

A close-up image of the southeastern portion of the Zaca fire reveals hot spots in rugged terrain.

NASA/Google

resulting in changes to the timing of passes over 

wildfires along the route. This necessitated reversal 

of the route’s direction of flight in order to take advantage of more favorable sun angles over the active 

fires and burn areas to be imaged. Fortunately, the 

FAA permitted this change.81

WSFM-3 covered 12 fires in California (Butler, 

North, Fairmont, Grouse, Zaca, Bald, Moonlight, 

Lick), Oregon (GW and Big Basin), and Washington 

(Domke Lake and South Omak) in the course of a 

20-hour mission on Sept. 7 and 8. During the 3,200 

81 Ibid.

nmi flight, the Ikhana flew from Southern California 

to within 50 miles of the Canadian border. Multiple 

passes were made over four of the major fires and several fires were imaged during night and day passes. 

Five imaging lines were run over the Zaca fire burn 

area using a spectral band suitable for the BAER 

project. Ikhana WSFM project representatives were 

deployed to the NIFC to assist with data evaluation. 

Teams were also sent to two active fires to help incident commanders with data interpretation and CDE 

visualization. One team, led by Tom Zajkowski of 

the U.S. Forest Service, assisted with the GW fire in 

Oregon, while another from NASA Ames worked the 
45

The route for WSFM-2 covered fires as far away as Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Air traffic controllers rerouted the Ikhana to avoid 

potential weather hazards over northern Nevada.

NASA/Google

Lick fire near San Jose, Calif.82

FAA Air Traffic Control flexibility was demonstrated during a real-time movement of one of the 

wildfire incident loiter locations. Coordination with 

controllers allowed a seven-mile deviation from the 

filed flight plan at the Lick fire, which had seen significant movement since the route plan was developed 

and submitted three days prior to flight. The Ikhana 

team had excellent FAA support throughout the 

mission. Mission planners opted to bypass a repeat 

collection opportunity on the Domke Lake Fire in 

82 Brent Cobleigh, Ikhana Flight Reports, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2007.

Washington due to flight time allocation restrictions. 

Additionally, the Los Angeles Air Traffic Control 

Center could not give sufficient routing to image 

the Butler fire due to early evening air traffic in the 

vicinity of the Ikhana’s flight path.83

Near the end of the flight, the aircraft exhibited 

a pitch disturbance when the pilot keyed his microphone. Discussions with Air Force and General 

Atomics personnel revealed that this same behavior 

had been seen on several early production aircraft 

during the previous few weeks. Electromagnetic interference between wiring bundles was suspected.

83 Ibid.
46 The Fire Down Below

The Castle Rock fire burned hillsides above populated areas. Hot spots are shown in red.

NASA/Google

At left, MODIS data (red and orange dots) from sensors on board 

the EOS Terra satellite were compared with Ikhana AMS hot detects 

(yellow). Data collected with the Ikhana were substantially more 

detailed.

The fourth mission, on Sept. 27, focused on 

BAER data collection with overflights of four burn 

areas throughout California (Butler, Grouse, Lick, and 

Moonlight). Because this mission primarily involved 

returning to areas covered during earlier flights, the 

FAA approved the three-day-prior flight plan submission with little discussion. The Ikhana’s route covered 

1,800 nmi in 9.9 hours. During the final hour of the 

flight, the aircraft climbed to 40,000 feet with approximately half its total fuel load to collect fuel flow 

performance data with the pod attached.84

84 Ibid.
47

During WSFM-3 the Ikhana covered 12 fires in California, Oregon, 

and Washington. The mission was highly successful but a few instances of uncommanded pitch bobble were cause for concern.

NASA/Google

In this 3-D image of the Lick fire zone, shades of red and purple 

highlight the burn area. Yellow hot spots indicate active fires.

NASA/Google
48 The Fire Down Below

Use of 3-D projection, as in this image of the Moonlight fire, allowed incident commanders to better visualize challenging terrain while 

developing plans to deploy firefighting resources.

NASA/Google

Southern California emergency firestorm 

support

In late October 2007, hot, dry Santa Ana winds 

fanned nearly a dozen major wildfires in the Los 

Angeles and San Diego regions of Southern California. Spread by 40-80 knot winds, flames pushed 

through populated areas and devastated vast regions 

of wilderness, neighborhoods, and businesses. More 

than 500,000 people had to be evacuated in the endangered areas. On Oct. 22, officials at the California 

Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and NIFC 

requested NASA airborne remote sensing resources 

to assist in monitoring the fast-moving fires. The 

Wildfire Research and Applications Partnership team 

at Ames and the Airborne Sciences team at Dryden 

accepted the challenge to rapidly develop a series 

of mission profiles to support emergency services 

personnel battling the firestorm. Although the sensor 

pod had been removed from the Ikhana following the 

recently completed WSFM flights and the aircraft was 

being configured to support the Fiber Optic Wing 

Shape Sensing project, the two NASA teams quickly 

reconfigured the platform and sensor and prepared 
49

A helicopter drops water and retardant on the Harris fire near the Mexican border during the 2007 Southern California wildfire emergency.

FEMA/Andrea Booher

On October 24, 2007, the Ikhana was flown over more than 10 wildfires throughout Southern California.

NASA/Google
50 The Fire Down Below

In order to collect this mosaic of images of the Harris fire, the Ikhana had to be flown within 10 miles of the Mexican border. Active fire 

is indicated in yellow. 

NASA/Google

for an emergency support mission just two days after 

receiving the request from the governor’s office.

The Ikhana team experienced a flurry of activity 

while striving to monitor fires from the vicinity of Lake 

Arrowhead in the San Gabriel Mountains to as far south 

as San Diego County. Because the area of interest was 

south of the approved COA boundary, the FAA quickly 

amended the existing COA to authorize the Ikhana to fly 

to within 10 nmi of the U.S.-Mexico border. The threeday advance flight plan submission request deadline 

was reduced to 48 hours, and later to 24 hours in order 

to expedite the mission planning process.

At one point, planners at Dryden learned that GPS 

testing in the vicinity of Nellis Air Force Base, NV, 

would impact the mission. Consultation between NASA 

and Air Force officials ensued regarding the emergency 

situation. Nellis officials agreed to a three-day standdown of GPS testing so Ikhana missions could proceed. 

The FAA was notified of the coordination effort.85

On the morning of Oct. 24, the Ikhana took off to 

begin a nine-hour mission over more than 10 California 

wildfire locations. The airplane covered a distance of 

1,350 nmi while collecting thermal imagery data over 

the Harris, McCoy, Witch/Poomacha, Coronado Hills, 

Rosa, Slide, Grass Valley, Buckweed, Ranch, Magic, 

and San Clemente fire zones. Real-time mission replanning allowed adaptation to changing fire conditions. 

This capability allowed coverage of a fire that broke out 

within the boundaries of the U.S. Marine Corps base at 

Camp Pendleton. 

85 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned 

Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace System.”
51

This 3-D image shows the Harris fire tracing rugged mountain ridges. Blue and purple indicate charred terrain, with active fire in yellow

NASA/Google

The information collected with the Ikhana was provided to fire Incident Command Centers (ICC) and various County Emergency Operations Centers (EOC) as 

quickly as possible. By the time the Ikhana landed in the 

late afternoon the sensor had collected, processed, and 

transmitted approximately 100 thermal-infrared data 

scenes and numerous fire-detection shape files. These 

products were in the hands of disaster managers within 

minutes of collection. This success led to a request for 

further support by the agencies and an additional three 

missions were subsequently flown.86

WSFM-6, a 7.8-hour sortie on October 25, was 

another emergency wildfire response mission at the 

request of the California Office of Emergency Services 

86 “Completed Missions,” Wildfire Research and Applications 

Partnership.

(CA-OES). All active fires were visited twice during the 

mission, including the Harris, Rice, Witch/Poomacha, 

Ammo, Slide, Grass Valley, Buckweed, and Ranch 

fires along a 1,350 nmi route. Imagery was fed to officials at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

NorthComm fire dispatching agency in San Diego 

County, CA-OES, and on-scene fire commanders. A 

post-flight debrief with FAA officials – required after 

each flight – confirmed that no air traffic control issues 

were encountered during the mission. General Atomics 

provided two pilots during the mission to provide breaks 

to the two NASA pilots. NIFC officials requested that 

the project team continue flying the Ikhana the following day.87 

87 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned 

Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace System.”
52 The Fire Down Below

In a 3-D mosaic of images of the Grass Valley and Slide fire areas, active fire is indicated in yellow while hot, previously burned areas 

appear in shades of dark red and purple. Unburned areas are green and brown.

NASA/Google

WSFM-7 took place on Oct. 26. For the third 

consecutive day, the joint NASA/Forest Service team 

responded to the California wildfire emergency at the 

request of the NIFC and CA-OES. The NASA Dryden 

Range Safety Office (RSO) approved a route that 

included all the fires previously imaged as well as the 

Santiago fire in Orange County. With dense population 

zones on three sides, the RSO had to identify safe entry 

and exit routes to the burn area. Because so many people 

had been evacuated from threatened areas, one of the 

previously existing keep-out zones was removed, allowing expanded imaging of the Poomacha fire.88

During an early morning preflight briefing, planners decided to reverse the direction of the route due to 

weather concerns. Since Air Force weather personnel at 

Edwards were not yet on duty to accept this flight plan 

revision, the Ikhana team filed the flight plan directly 

with a civilian Flight Service Station (FSS). This posed 

a challenge because the plan began with the aircraft 

exiting a restricted area and ended with it entering a 

restricted area, an unusual circumstance not accounted 

for in standard FSS flight plan procedures. Personnel 

at the FSS resolved the issue by entering an explanation in the “Remarks” section of the flight-plan form. 

A second challenge arose when planners had to explain 

to the FSS that there were “0” souls onboard since the 

Ikhana carried no pilot or passengers.

General Atomics provided one relief pilot during 

the 8.7-hour mission that traversed 1,350 nmi. FEMA 88 Ibid.
53

Crews man a firebreak on the Poomacha fire in brush-covered hills west of the Salton Sea. Incident commanders studied AMS imagery 

from the Ikhana while developing a deployment strategy for firefighters combating the blaze.

FEMA/Andrea Booher

Expanded imagery of the Santiago fire was possible because 

a large number of people had been evacuated from threatened 

areas.

NASA/Google

officials again requested that Ikhana flights continue 

through the weekend. A sortie was scheduled for Oct. 

27 but was cancelled due to fog over the desired coverage areas. The AMS sensor cannot penetrate fog. The 

final mission of the 2007 fire season, WSFM-8, was 

completed Oct. 28. It encompassed 11 fires and 1,350 

nmi in just 7.1 hours, including a BAER assessment of 

the one-year-old Esperanza fire zone.

BAER imagery shows the extensive burn area caused by the Santiago fire. Note the proximity of neighborhoods on the southern 

perimeter.

NASA/Google

Active fires included Harris, Rice, Witch, Poomacha, Ammo, Santiago, Slide, and Grass Valley. BAER 

imagery was also taken at the Buckweed and Ranch 

fire zones. Once again, General Atomics provided a 

relief pilot.89

Department of Defense officials requested authorization to fly other unmanned aircraft over the fire areas, 

89 Cobleigh, Ikhana Flight Reports, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.
54 The Fire Down Below

Real-time mission re-planning allowed adaptation to changing 

fire conditions. This capability allowed coverage of the Ammo 

fire that broke out within the boundaries of the U.S. Marine Corps 

base at Camp Pendleton.

NASA/Google

but the FAA limited the number of unmanned aircraft in 

the Los Angeles Center’s airspace to one at a time, and 

the Ikhana mission was given priority. Ikhana project 

management learned that the missions would be briefed 

in the White House Situation Room.90

In responding to the California wildfire emergency, 

the Ikhana team faced a significant challenge. Each mission profile changed depending on the emergency priority for each fire as conditions changed and as data were 

relayed in real-time to the ICCs and EOCs. Ikhana’s 

sensor collected approximately 100 images each day 

and relayed them to the ICC and EOC personnel. As fire 

activity decreased, some of the mission focus shifted 

to collection of BAER imagery to support ecological 

recovery efforts in the affected areas. Researchers used 

the multi-channel capabilities of the AMS-Wildfire sensor to execute real-time sensor reconfiguration during 

the course of the mission for either active fire mapping 

or burn-severity data collection.

During the four Southern California wildfireimaging missions, Ikhana UAS operators logged a 

total of approximately 36 flight hours and collected 

more than 400 AMS-Wildfire images. Data was used 

tactically by the individual ICCs as well as strategically 

by the EOC to allocate firefighting resources arriving 

90 Gregory P. Buoni, “Ikhana Weekly Notes,” NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, Oct. 26, 2008.

BAER imagery shows the extent of the Ammo fire burn area.

NASA/Google

During the four Southern California wildfire emergency missions, 

Ikhana operators logged more than 36 flight hours and collected 

more than 400 images with the AMS sensor package.

NASA/Google

from other states to fires deemed highest priority based 

on analysis of AMS imagery. Incident response teams 

readily adapted Google Earth visualization capabilities 

into their operations to allow AMS-Wildfire information to be integrated with other critical data layers 

such as weather, terrain, and local population density. 

Total downloads of Ikhana imagery exceeded 40,000 

files. A spectacular success, the emergency support 
55

missions demonstrated the importance of integrating 

capabilities of various federal agencies for improved 

disaster response.91

WSFM principal investigator Vincent Ambrosia 

had anticipated an event like the wildfire siege in Southern California occurring in October. Plans were already 

in place to have team members at various fire camps 

to assist with integration of data and imagery derived 

from the AMS-Wildfire sensor on Ikhana while other 

personnel remained in place at Dryden, Ames, Google, 

and the National Interagency Fire Center.

“When the call came on Monday from the National 

Interagency Fire Center, the California Governor’s 

Office of Emergency Services, and colleagues within 

the Incident Command structure on the fires, we were 

ready to quickly deploy our teams and initiate a mission 

plan to over fly the fires and provide critical thermal 

infrared intelligence on the various wildfires,” Ambrosia 

explained.92

2008 California fire missions

Firestorms again swept California in early summer 

2008, bringing calls from the state capitol for more 

Scientists used AMS imagery to map actively burning areas of the Basin Complex fire in Monterey County, Calif., on July 8, 2008, as 

seen here in yellow. Known fire perimeters are seen in green, purple, blues and reds. Multiple California state agencies distributed the 

information to firefighting officials within minutes of collection, enabling near-real time tactical decision-making.

NASA/Google

91 “Completed Missions,” Wildfire Research and Applications 

Partnership.

92 Aviation.com staff, “NASA Flies Ikhana UAV to Help California Firefighters,” Aviation.com, http://www.aviation.com/

technology/071024-nasa-ikhana-california-wildfires.html October 

2007, accessed June 10, 2009.
56 The Fire Down Below

The AMS captured this image of the Gap fire in Santa Barbara County, Calif., on July 8, 2008. The yellow areas depict actively burning fires. The red, pink, and blue tones map burned areas. Multiple California state agencies distributed the information to fire officials 

minutes after collection for analysis of new fire locations and fire size.

NASA/Google

Ikhana missions. The NASA/Forest Service team 

gathered six weeks earlier than originally planned and 

started working on plans to provide state and federal 

agencies with critical fire intelligence.

“Because Forest Service assets are stretched thin, 

NASA was asked to provide additional resources as 

a supplement to existing infrared fire imaging operations,” said Jim Brass, co-principal investigator for 

the WSFM at Ames.93

93 Beth Hagenauer and Mike Mewhinney, “NASA Responds to 

California Wildfire Emergency Imaging Request,” Release 08-

30, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, July 

11, 2008.

 “California’s unprecedented number of fires this 

early in the season make it all the more important that 

we use every tool at our disposal to protect property 

and save lives, “ said Gov. Schwarzenegger. “NASA’s 

Ikhana is one more incredible tool that we are able 

to use this year to bring real-time pictures and data 

to fire commanders, even when our other aircraft are 

unable to fly.”94

The WSFM team applied for a new COA. It was 

94 General Atomics Aeronautical Systems press release, 

“Governor Schwarzenegger and NASA Highlight Infrared 

Scanning Technology Helping to Fight California’s Wildfires” 

(GAAS:525:08), July 14, 2008.
57

A flight plan for the second WSFM sortie of 2008 shows the aircraft’s route over the Sierra Nevada mountain range. Keep-out areas are 

indicated in yellow and red.

NASA/Google

approved without the limitation of having to fly within 

75 nmi of the backbone route. There was, however, 

a restriction to remain within 50 nmi of restricted 

airspace and Military Operating Areas.

The first attempted WSFM sortie of 2008 began on 

the morning of July 1. Planners scheduled passes over 

12 blazes spanning California from the southern Sierra 

Nevada mountain range to Big Sur on the northern 

California coast. The plan included coverage of the 

Havilah, Clover, Piute, Basin Complex, Friant, North 

Mountain, American River Complex, Yuba River 

Complex, Amedee, Cub Complex, Antelope, Gap, 

and Mill Complex fires. Just 1.5 hours into the flight, 

following a pass over the Piute fire, a problem with the 

sensor caused the mission to be aborted. Technicians 

added a heating system to the sensor prior to the next 

flight attempt.95

The Ikhana team re-flew the sortie on July 8, im95 Ikhana flight plans (6/29/08) and meeting notes, Ikhana Team 

Meeting, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 

July 3, 2008.
58 The Fire Down Below

Flight plan detail shows planned routes over the Cub Complex 

and Canyon Complex fires.

NASA/Google

aging almost 4,000 square miles from Santa Barbara 

north to the Oregon border. This time, everything went 

as planned and the aircraft remained aloft for 9.9 hours 

while covering 10 individual and complex fires along a 

route that took the aircraft west over the Sierra Nevada 

range, north to the Cub Complex fires, and south to 

the Basin fire in Monterey County and the Gap fire 

in Santa Barbara County. Imagery was transmitted to 

the Multi-Agency Coordination Center in Redding, 

Calif., and the State Operations Center in Sacramento 

for distribution to incident commanders in the field. 

Data from the AMS-Wildfire sensor was used to 

identify previously undetected hotspots near the town 

of Paradise in Butte County. As a result, some 9,500 

residents were evacuated and firefighting resources 

were re-allocated to protect populated areas.96

The second mission flew as scheduled on July 19. 

In a little over five hours, Ikhana and the AMS-Wildfire 

96 General Atomics Aeronautical Systems press release, “Governor Schwarzenegger and NASA Highlight Infrared Scanning 

Technology Helping to Fight California’s Wildfires.” Interview 

with Thomas Rigney, Aug. 13, 2008.

sensor covered the American River Complex, Camp, 

and Canyon Complex fires in central California. The 

Ikhana team also took the opportunity to image the 

results of a mudslide that destroyed several structures 

near Independence, Calif., and to briefly revisit the 

Piute fire area. During the mission, the team received 

feedback from Canyon Complex Situation Unit Leader 

Randy Herrin.

“Thanks for the imagery on the Canyon Complex,” 

he wrote in an email to Ikhana project manager Tom 

Rigney. “I was able to follow along on the CDE and 

video and show the project to the Operations Chief 

and Deputy IC. They were impressed, to say the least. 

The imagery showed a significant amount of heat in 

the SW of our complex, which we were not expecting, 

so that was good to know. Congratulations to everyone 

on another successful mission.”97

In a separate message to Ikhana scientist Steve 

Wegener, Herrin wrote, “The products that we’ve 

received here on the incident are very useful and well 

received. There were several pairs of eyes opened up 

here to what the future may hold, and how close that 

future may be.”98

The final WSFM sortie of 2008 took place on 

Sept. 19 with planned coverage over the Rattle and 

Bear Wallow fires in Oregon and the Klamath Theater, Cascadel, and Hidden fires in central California. 

Due to predicted cloud cover over the two Oregon 

fires, they were eliminated from the mission data 

acquisition plan. Focus, therefore, was on the central 

California fires.

Preparations began at NASA Dryden in the darkness of the predawn hours. Mark Pestana and Herman 

Posada completed preflight activities in the GCS for 

an 8 a.m. takeoff. Forty-five minutes later Posada, 

using the forward-facing camera, spotted two plumes 

of gray smoke rising above a mountain ridge. Pestana 

called Oakland Center to request a 60-minute loiter 

time over the fire area.

At the request of the science staff, the Ikhana was 

flown first over the Hidden fire, followed by two passes 

97 Email from Thomas K. Rigney, Ikhana Project Manager, 

to distribution, “Subject: Ikhana Fire Mission Status,” NASA 

Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 19 July 2008.

98 Email from Randy Herrin, Situation Unit Leader, PNW IMT 

3, “Subject: Re: WSFM Cal Fire Mission 2 is on ground,” Canyon Complex ICP, Chico, CA, July 19, 2008.
59

Fires over the American River Fire Complex in Placer County, Calif., are seen as taken by the AMS wildfire scanner aboard the Ikhana, 

July 8, 2008. The yellow areas depict active fire areas. The image provides officials not only with fire information but also with vegetationtype and burned-area information.

NASA/Google

over the Cascadel fire. Following a repeat set of data 

passes, the pilots changed course to scan the fire from 

a different angle.

Smoke filled the canyons in rugged, mountainous 

terrain, visible in the optical cameras but transparent 

to the AMS-Wildfire sensor. The science team recalibrated the sensor as the pilots prepared to fly additional 

data passes. “This is tight maneuvering space here,” 

Pestana commented as he completed a turn.99

As the science team collected images and had 

99 Ikhana flight plans (9/19/08) and notes taken during WSFM2008-03 by Peter W. Merlin, NASA Dryden Flight Research 

Center, Edwards, CA, Sept. 19, 2008.

them automatically overlaid onto Google Earth imagery, Pestana flew the UAS just as he would any 

other research aircraft. He maintained awareness of 

aircraft systems and performance, communicated 

with FAA controllers, maneuvered per instructions 

from FAA controllers to facilitate the smooth flow of 

other air traffic, and flew precision passes over the 

fires. Finally, he turned toward Edwards Air Force 

Base and – once inside restricted airspace – began a 

descent for landing. The Ikhana touched down on the 

runway 3.5 hours after takeoff, completing another 

successful WSFM sortie.100 In order to better acquaint 

100 Ibid.
60 The Fire Down Below

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, left, talks with NASA Ames Research Center director S. Pete Worden during the governor’s visit 

to Ames on July 14, 2008. Schwarzenegger visited Ames for a behind-the-scenes tour and briefings about NASA’s support to firefighters 

battling California wildfires.

NASA Ames Research Center/Eric James

state authorities with NASA’s firefighting technology, Ames Research Center director Simon “Pete” 

Worden hosted California governor Schwarzenegger 

during a tour of Ames in which the AMS sensor and 

the Ikhana were the centerpieces. Representatives 

of the California Department of Forestry and Fire 

Protection (CAL FIRE) were also in attendance. 

Worden praised the cooperative firefighting effort as 

a great example of how the federal government and 

the state can work together in the face of natural and 

manmade disasters.

 “The Ames Research Center here at Moffett 

Field and the Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, along with NASA’s Goddard 

Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, are each 

playing vital roles in this effort,” said Worden. “We’re 

also working with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory 

in Pasadena, the California Department of Forestry 

and Fire Protection, the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and the National Interagency Fire 

Center to help fight these numerous wildfires.”101

Chief Del Walters, CAL FIRE executive officer, 

was equally ebullient. “I’m very excited about the 

technology and perhaps equally as excited about the 

partnership that’s developing here,” he said. “Having 

been a field firefighter for many years, I wish I had 

had this tool 20 years ago. You can only imagine the 

feeling of seeing a fire take off up a hill and lifting 

embers and the wind blowing. And you don’t know, 

from where you’re standing, whether it’s gone over 

101 Press release, “Governor and NASA Highlight Infrared Scanning Technology Helping to Fight California’s Wildfires,” http://

gov.ca.gov/speech/10186/, Office of the Governor, Sacramento, 

CA, July 14, 2008.
61

the next road, over the next hill, over the next creek 

and what’s out in front of you. You have an idea, 

because you’re used to the area that you’re fighting fire in – although we fight fire all over the state, 

the Forest Service fights fire all over the nation, so 

you’re not always in an area that’s known to you. So 

to know if there’s a community out there that’s being threatened and that you need to stop what you’re 

doing and change gears and employ different tactics 

is of tremendous value to the firefighters and to the 

community that we serve.”102

102 Ibid.
62 After the Fire
63

Chapter Four

The Ikhana Western States Fire Mission flights 

of 2007 and 2008 resulted in a number of significant 

accomplishments and lessons. Multiple government 

agencies and corporate entities worked together to 

develop the capabilities of a UAS for use as a disaster 

response tool.

With smoke from the Lake Arrowhead area fires streaming in the background, NASA’s Ikhana unmanned aircraft heads out on a wildfireimaging mission.

NASA

WSFM accomplishments

The Western States UAS Fire Missions, carried 

out by team members from NASA Ames Research 

Center, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, the 

National Interagency Fire Center, NOAA, the FAA, 

and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., were 

a resounding success and a historic achievement in the 

field of unmanned aircraft technology. 

In the first milestone of the project, NASA scientists developed improved imaging and communications 

processes for delivering near real-time information to 

firefighters. They realized that providing firefighters 

with critical information in a timely manner required 

an improvement in sensor technology as well as autonomous analysis and visualization tools that a NASA 

partnership could deliver. NASA’s Applied Sciences 

and Airborne Science programs and the Earth Science 

Technology Office developed the AMS-Wildfire sensor with the intent of demonstrating the capabilities 

during the WSFM and later transitioning those capabilities to operational agencies.

The WSFM project team repeatedly demonstrated 

the utility and flexibility of using a UAS as an effective tool to aid disaster response personnel through 

the employment of various platform, sensor, and 

data dissemination technologies related to improving 

near real-time wildfire observations and intelligence 

gathering techniques. Each successive flight expanded 

capabilities of the previous missions for platform endurance and range, number of observations made, and 

flexibility in mission and sensing reconfiguration.

Team members worked with the FAA to safely and 

efficiently integrate the unmanned aircraft system into 

the national airspace. NASA pilots flew the Ikhana in 

close coordination with FAA air traffic controllers, 

allowing the aircraft to maintain safe separation from 

other aircraft.

WSFM project personnel developed extensive 

contingency management plans to minimize the risk to 

the aircraft and the public, including the negotiation of 
64 After the Fire

This timeline shows the major milestones of the Ikhana Western States Fire Mission project from 2005 through 2007.

NASA

emergency landing rights agreements at three government airfields and the identification and documentation 

of over 300 potential emergency landing sites in the 

event of an engine failure or other malfunction. 

The missions included coverage of more than 60 

wildfires throughout eight western states. All missions 

originated and terminated at Edwards Air Force Base 

and were operated by NASA crews with support from 

General Atomics. During the mission series, near realtime data was provided to Incident Command Teams 

and the National Interagency Fire Center. 

Many fires were revisited during some missions 

to provide time-induced fire progression. Whenever 

possible, long-duration fire events were imaged on 

multiple missions to provide long-term fire monitoring capabilities. Post-fire burn-assessment imagery 

was also collected over various fires to aid teams in 

fire ecosystem rehabilitation. The project Flight Operations Team built relationships with other agencies 

that enabled real-time flight plan changes necessary 

to avoid hazardous weather, to adapt to fire priorities, 

and to avoid conflicts with multiple planned military 

GPS testing/jamming activities.

Critical, near real-time fire information allowed 

Incident Command Teams to redeploy fire-fighting 

resources, assess effectiveness of containment operations, and move critical resources, personnel, and 

equipment from hazardous fire conditions. During 

instances where blinding smoke obscured normal 

observations, geo-rectified thermal-infrared data 

enabled the use of Geographic Information Systems 

or data visualization packages such as Google Earth. 

The images were collected and fully processed on 

board the Ikhana and transmitted via a communications satellite to NASA-Ames, where the imagery 

was served on a NASA Web site and provided in the 

Google Earth-based CDE for quick and easy access 

by incident commanders.
65

AMS imagery allowed incident commanders to chart the progress of wildfires and identify previously unknown hot spots.

NASA/Google

The Western States UAS Fire Mission series also 

gathered critical, coincident data with the EOS Terra 

and Aqua satellite sensor systems orbiting overhead, 

allowing for comparison and calibration of those 

resources with the more sensitive instruments on the 

Ikhana.

The WSFM team received an award for Group 

Achievement at the NASA Ames Research Center 

Honor Awards ceremony on Sept. 20, 2007. The 

team’s award recognized excellence in providing 

operational near real-time fire condition information 

on the Esperanza fire from a UAS operating in the 

national airspace.103

Ikhana team members at Dryden and Ames were 

also recognized, along with the FAA and Forest Service, with a 2009 Federal Laboratory Consortium for 

Technology Transfer Interagency Partnership Award 

for collaborative use of unmanned aircraft to combat 

103 “Western States Fire Mission Team Award for Group 

Achievement,” NASA Ames Research Center Honor Awards 

ceremony, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, 

CA, Sept. 20, 2007, and Status Report, “NASA’s Ikhana UAS 

Resumes Western States Fire Mission Flights,” http://www.nasa.

gov/centers/dryden/home/wsfm_status.html, NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, Sept. 19, 2008.

forest fires. Dryden deputy director David D. McBride 

told team members, “The award you are receiving recognizes the contribution Ikhana has made to the transfer of UAS technology to civil applications.” McBride 

also noted another benefit. “During this recession,” he 

added, “it is important to appreciate the value technology has in moving the economy forward.”104

The utility of near real-time data was dramatically 

illustrated on numerous occasions. During the July 

2008 fire near Paradise, Calif., incident commanders were unaware of approaching danger because 

an undiscovered hotspot was concealed by smoke. 

After data from the Ikhana revealed the approaching 

flames, nearly 10,000 people were safely evacuated 

as firefighters allocated resources to protect the town. 

Lives and property were saved as a result. Firefighters 

were also able to use AMS-Wildfire data to study the 

dynamics and progression of various fires. In the short 

term, this allowed incident commanders to position 

firefighting assets in the most efficient manner. In the 

long term, it provided researchers with a valuable tool 

104 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping.”
66 After the Fire

Post-burn imagery of the Zaca fire zone was collected as part of the Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation project. Scientists used the 

data to examine the effects of fire on soil, watershed, wildlife, and vegetation.

NASA/Google

for fire science studies.

The Ikhana UAS proved a versatile platform for 

carrying research payloads. Since the pod that housed 

the AMS-Wildfire sensor can be reconfigured, Ikhana 

could carry instruments for a variety of research projects. “There is interest in using Ikhana to study other 

types of phenomena such as weather, hurricanes, etc.,” 

said Tom Rigney.105

Operational issues and lessons learned

Several significant operational issues were discovered during the WSFM project. The first of these was 

105 Interview with Thomas K. Rigney, Aug. 13, 2008.

a 2007 COA limitation to remain within 75 nmi of a 

backbone route. Because of this, the Ikhana science 

team could only investigate fires that were within the 

limited area. During the Aug. 30, 2007, flight major 

wildfires located in northern Idaho and Montana were 

beyond the approved operations area. FAA officials 

denied a NASA request to extend flights into this region, so only lower-priority fires were studied during 

that mission. The geographical restriction remained in 

effect through the end of the initial WSFM flight series 

because FAA officials wished to assess several Ikhana 

fire missions before extending the COA into new 

areas. Finally, during the 2008 Southern California 

Emergency Response Missions, the 75 nmi restriction 

was lifted and the Ikhana was permitted to fly beyond 
67

the boundaries initially specified in the 2007 COA. 

This gave mission planners greater flexibility and allowed more complete coverage of dynamic wildfire 

conditions.

An additional restriction to remain clear of regions 

of scheduled GPS testing initially did not appear significant even though planners had to schedule Ikhana 

flights around GPS testing/jamming exercises at military bases in the vicinity of WSFM routes. The FAA 

initiated this restriction because if the GCS were to 

lose the command link with the aircraft, the Ikhana’s 

internal GPS and inertial navigation system would 

have to be used to fly a lost-link programmed route 

to return to Edwards airspace. During pre-mission 

planning for several flights, the NASA team had to 

coordinate directly with personnel at Nellis Air Force 

Base and China Lake Naval Warfare Center to keep 

Ikhana flight plans and GPS test operations at those 

sites from conflicting. In most cases, GPS testing had 

higher priority. On one occasion, an Ikhana flight was 

delayed 24 hours due to nearby GPS testing activities. 

During the California wildfire emergency, however, 

the WSFM team negotiated with Air Force authorities 

to give Ikhana flights priority over GPS testing/jamming exercises, thus allowing the mission to proceed. 

Affected regions were identified by FAA Notices to 

Airmen and typically consisted of an inverted cone 

centered at the test site and increasing in radius with 

increasing altitude. Although specifically how GPS 

testing/jamming might affect the Ikhana’s navigation 

capabilities is unknown, it is thought that when flying 

at 25,000 feet, Ikhana performance could be affected 

at a range of up to 300 nmi from that test site. 

Flight planning posed numerous challenges, beginning with the two-month long COA application 

process. Overall, the time spent preparing a complete 

and thorough application package paid off because, 

once submitted, there were few complications during the FAA review process. Face-to-face meetings 

and teleconferences between WSFM team members, 

FAA UAS Program Office personnel, and officials 

at affected Air Route Traffic Control Centers were 

invaluable in solving any problems with proposed 

flight plans and ensured a common understanding of 

the missions.

One weakness of the original COA application 

process was the fact that there was no single location 

at which the entire application resided after submission to the FAA. To complicate matters, when the FAA 

requested and received clarification from the WSFM 

team on specific matters, there was no guarantee that 

the initial application would be amended with the new 

information. This issue was resolved with the advent 

of a UAS COA online system to streamline the process 

by providing the applicant with a structured framework 

within which to answer questions and provide attachments with additional information.106

Because access to line-of-sight (LOS) communications frequencies was considered crucial, Ikhana 

mission planners had to carefully coordinate radio 

frequency management. For flight within approximately 70 nmi of Edwards, the Ikhana is controlled 

via a direct LOS radio link. The presence of significant 

military UAS operations in the vicinity required NASA 

planners to work around military flight schedules in 

order to have access to necessary radio frequencies. 

In many cases this meant that Ikhana flight operations 

in the local area were given lower priority and were 

therefore conducted outside of normal business hours. 

As a result, some of the Ikhana crew had to begin work 

as early as 3 a.m., further complicating scheduling issues for personnel that performed multiple duties on 

long-duration flights. 

Unexpected weather along the flight route offered 

additional challenges. Each COA restricted flight from 

areas of adverse turbulence, convection, and icing. 

During the flight planning process it was difficult to 

account for weather variations, as these were inherently unpredictable. Flight tracks had to be designed 

and transmitted to FAA officials more than 72 hours 

in advance, meaning weather forecasts for the day 

of flight were not accurate to any meaningful extent. 

Weather forecasts, especially Airmen’s Meteorological 

Information (AIRMETs) and Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMETs), were closely watched as 

the flight day approached but surprises sometimes occurred. The flight on Aug. 30, 2007, was launched with 

several convective SIGMETs issued for areas that were 

not along the planned route. Approximately two hours 

into the mission, the Ikhana was over Nevada when the 

weather service indicated the boundaries of a convective SIGMET along the flight track. The Ikhana team 

requested a significant heading deviation that took the 

106 Gregory P. Buoni and Kathleen M. Howell, “Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace 

System.”
68 After the Fire

When a Significant Meteorological Information (SIGMET) bulletin 

indicated adverse weather along the Ikhana’s flight route, air traffic controllers approved a heading deviation so the aircraft could 

avoid areas of high turbulence.

NASA/Google

aircraft several hundred miles from its original track 

to avoid the weather. Air traffic controllers approved 

the change, providing the necessary flexibility to allow 

the flight to continue safely. 

FAA coordination for flights within the national 

airspace was absolutely crucial to WSFM objectives. 

Successful coordination of airspace access for Ikhana 

flights with FAA personnel was a groundbreaking 

achievement. Officials from both NASA and the FAA 

formed an effective partnership to plan and approve 

WSFM sorties. ARTCC personnel communicated 

their concerns and suggested resolutions whenever 

necessary. Thanks to the professionalism of both FAA 

and NASA staff members, no significant misunderstandings or miscommunications occurred. When the 

Ikhana was tasked to image fires during the emergency 

in Southern California, cooperation and coordination 

between the WSFM team and FAA was outstanding. 

Staffing requirements, particularly for long-duration flights, created further challenges. Flights lasting 

longer than 10 hours required multiple crewmembers 

for all operational positions due to crew duty day limitations. This included pilots, system monitors, mission 

directors, and electronics and maintenance technicians. 

For flights longer than 12 hours, multiple shifts were 

implemented to comply with crew duty hour regulations. Since NASA did not have enough trained personnel to fill all duty stations, General Atomics was 

contracted to provide additional staff such as pilots and 

Brent Cobleigh, left, the original Ikhana project manager, and his 

successor, Tom Rigney, oversaw NASA Dryden’s participation in 

the Western States Fire Missions.

NASA

technicians. Non-standard flight schedules, intermittent sleep schedules, and extended on-call status have 

the potential to subject crewmembers to excessive 

fatigue. At crew briefings, project pilots made crew 

rest and readiness issues top priority in order to ensure 

that all members of the team were sufficiently rested 

and safety was not compromised.

Emergency response capabilities were tested 

during the Southern California firestorms. After conclusion of the last planned WSFM flight of 2007, the 

AMS-Wildfire pod was removed from the aircraft and 

preparations began for another experiment involving substantial modifications to the wing surfaces 

for sensor integration. When the California Office 

of Emergency Services made a request for Ikhana 

imagery, there were nearly a dozen active fires. More 

than 500,000 people had been evacuated, a number 

that would eventually double as the flames advanced. 

The Ikhana had to be reconfigured and the sensor pod 

reinstalled. The WSFM team quickly designed and 

submitted mission plans to the FAA with a request 

for an emergency COA. The keep-out zones were 

updated with re-evaluated population areas taking the 
69

evacuations into account. The emergency COA, based 

on the established WSFM COA, relieved some previous restrictions by allowing 24 rather than 72 hours’ 

notice of a flight plan. The southern COA boundary 

was also extended to within 10 nmi of the Mexican 

border to allow greater sensor coverage. All of this 

demonstrated the ability of the Ikhana team to adapt 

quickly to a dynamic situation.107

Availability of contingency landing sites for 

the Ikhana was a concern that required a great deal 

of planning to provide successful risk management 

and to protect public safety. Primary landing sites 

included selected military airfields while secondary 

sites encompassed rural roads and open fields. Prior to 

the third 2008 WSFM sortie, a civilian at Air Combat 

Command (ACC) reviewed the emergency-landing 

plan for Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, and 

convinced superiors to deny landing rights due to 

concerns about landing the Ikhana via satellite link. 

After a discussion with NASA officials allayed concerns, the base commander agreed to honor the original 

emergency landing rights agreement. When a new 

base commander was assigned to Mountain Home, 

however, he withdrew permission for landing based 

on the ACC recommendation. This action effectively 

eliminated parts of Northern California, Oregon, and 

Washington as operational areas until a different 

primary emergency landing site could be arranged. 

During the 2008 fire season, the NASA Ikhana team 

secured an agreement with the U.S. Army Yakima 

Training Center in Washington to designate an airfield 

for emergency use, thus enabling expansion of areas 

that could be covered during WSFM missions.108

Conclusions

The Western States Fire Mission was a tremendous 

success, enabling science teams and the fire management community to recognize that UAS platform and 

autonomous-operating sensor capabilities represent 

a viable solution to critical, real-time, disaster data 

gathering and support to national disaster management 

107 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping.”

108 “Western States Fire Mission Tech Brief,” NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center, Sept. 26, 2008.

communities. The Ikhana WSFM team demonstrated 

the effectiveness of using a UAS as a disaster response 

asset during multiple long-duration missions over active wildfires as well as for post-burn evaluation. Critical data was collected and disseminated to incident 

commanders in near real-time, allowing firefighters to 

more effectively employ their resources and initiate 

timely evacuation of threatened residents in affected 

areas. The WSFM team also demonstrated that a UAS 

could operate within the national airspace in the same 

way as a manned aircraft, accomplishing significant 

steps toward future “file and fly” missions.109

The Ikhana proved to be a versatile platform for 

the WSFM and other projects. The AMS scanner and 

CDE received strong praise from incident commanders 

at the U.S. Forest Service and National Interagency 

Fire Center, as well as from state and local fire teams. 

Most of all, hard work, dedication, and trust in each 

partner’s key skills ensured the WSFM team’s success. 

Teresa Fryberger, NASA’s Director of Applied Science, called the team “a model for collaboration.”110

Unmanned aircraft systems technology has the 

potential to bridge the gap between space-based and 

surface-based sensors and thus expand scientists’ capabilities to monitor the global environment. Remotely 

piloted and autonomous platforms can provide critical coverage over remote and dangerous areas where 

manned aircraft flights are not practical due to long 

flight durations and hazardous conditions.

NASA remains at the forefront of this new realm 

and the Ikhana is just one of several unmanned vehicles 

in the Dryden fleet. Under a Space Act Agreement 

signed in May 2008, Dryden acquired two Northrop 

Grumman Global Hawk aircraft – the first civilian 

application of this autonomous, high-altitude, longendurance UAS – for airborne science missions. The 

first is expected to fly for Dryden in 2009. And the 

center is also involved in a joint program with the 

Boeing Aircraft Company and Cranfield Aerospace, 

Ltd. of England to explore the characteristics and 

109 Philip Hall, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen 

Howell, “Operational Experience with Long Duration Wildfire 

Mapping.”

110 “Western States Fire Mission Team Award for Group 

Achievement,” NASA Ames Research Center Honor Awards 

ceremony, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA, 

Sept. 20, 2007.
70 After the Fire

capabilities of a blended wing body aircraft. The 

X-48B is a scale, but wholly accurate, aircraft that is 

flown from a ground control station at Dryden. The 

test vehicle, powered by remote control modelers jet 

engines, is flown over Rogers Dry Lake but the pilot 

never actually sees the vehicle itself.

If unmanned aircraft systems are to evolve to 

support additional civil applications, pilot projects 

such as the Western States Fire Mission are critical to 

identifying and resolving technology shortcomings and 

developing operational procedures. The Ikhana and the 

WSFM paved the way for future civil UAS missions.

The Ikhana team was the project’s most valuable asset. Hard work and dedication on the part of each member ensured mission success.

NASA
71
72 Appendices
73

Resources

This section includes a list of NASA Wildfire 

Response Team publications, articles, and technical 

papers, many of which provide additional information 

beyond the scope of this monograph.

Active fire mapping — airborne data

Ambrosia, V.G., S.S. Wegener, D.V. Sullivan, S.W. 

Buechel, J.A. Brass, S.E. Dunagan, R.G. Higgins, E.A. 

Hildum and S.M. Schoenung, 2002. Demonstrating 

UAV-Acquired Real-Time Thermal Data Over Fires, 

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing.

Ambrosia, V.G., 2002. Emerging Technology Development For Disaster Management At NASA-Ames, 

Panel Session: Remote Sensing: New Technologies 

For Disaster Management, Proceedings of the TwentySeventh Annual Hazards Research and Applications 

Workshop, Boulder, Colorado, 14-17 July.

Ambrosia, V.G., 2002. Remotely Piloted Vehicles as 

Fire Imaging Platforms: The Future Is Here! Wildfire 

Magazine, May-June.

Wegener, S.S., V.G. Ambrosia, J. Stoneburner, D.V. 

Sullivan, J.A. Brass, S.W. Buechel, R.G. Higgins, E.A. 

Hildum, S.M. Schoenung, 2002. Demonstrating Acquisition of Real-Time Thermal Data Over Fires Utilizing 

UAVs. Proceedings of AIAA’s 1st Technical Conference and Workshop on Unmanned Aerospace Vehicles, 

Systems, Technologies, and Operations, Portsmouth, 

Virginia, 20-23 May, Paper No. AIAA-2002-3406.

Ambrosia, V.G., S. S. Wegener, J.A. Brass and S.W. 

Buechel, 2002. Demonstrating Acquisition of RealTime Thermal Data Over Fires Utilizing UAV’s, 

RS2002, Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Remote 

Sensing Applications Conference, San Diego, California, 8-12 April.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, R.S. Dann, R.G. Higgins, 

E.A. Hildum, J. McIntire, P.J. Riggan, S.M. Schoenung, R.E. Slye, D.V. Sullivan, S. Tolley, R.Vogler, 

S.S. Wegener, 2001. First Response Experiment 

(FiRE) Using An Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV). 

Proceedings of Fifth International Airborne Remote 

Sensing Conference, San Francisco, California, 17-20 

September, CD paper no. 56, pp 1-9.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, S.S. Wegener, D.V. Sullivan, S.W. Buechel and R.S. Dann, 2001. An Integration 

of Remote Sensing, Satellite Telemetry, and GIS Data 

Management Utilizing UAV Airborne Platforms For 

Application to Forest Fire Management. Proceedings 

of the Third International Workshop: Remote Sensing 

and GIS Applications to Forest Fire Management: 

New Methods and Sensors, European Association 

of Remote Sensing Laboratories (EARSeL), Paris, 

France, 17-19 May (abstract and poster).

Brass, J., V. Ambrosia, R. Higgins, T. Hildum, S. 

Schoenung, R. Slye, D. Sullivan, S. Tolley, H. Tran, 

R. Vogler, S. Wegener, 2000. Development of Tactical 

and Strategic Thermal Reconnaissance of Wildfires 

Utilizing Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Technology, Proceedings, Fire Conference 2000: The First 

National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention and 

Management, San Diego, CA., 27 Nov.-1 Dec., (abstract and poster).

Wegener, S., D. Sullivan, V. Ambrosia, J. Brass, R. 

Scott Dann, 2000. Development and Implementation 

of Real-Time Information Delivery Systems for Emergency Management. Proceedings, First Int’l Global 

Disaster Information Network (GDIN) Information 

Technology Exposition and Conference, Honolulu, 

HI, 9-11 Oct. 2000, (extended abstract).

Ambrosia, V., 1999. An Integration of Remote Sensing GIS, and Information Distribution For Wildfire 

Detection and Management. Proceedings, The Joint 

Fire Science Conference and Workshop, Vol. 1, p. 58-9, 

Boise, ID, 15-17 June, (abstract).

Ambrosia, V.G., S.W. Buechel, J.A. Brass, J.R. Peterson, R.H. Davies, R.J. Kane and S. Spain, 1998. An 

Integration of Remote Sensing, GIS, and Information 

Distribution for Wildfire Detection and Management. 

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 

Vol. 64, No. 10, pp. 977-986.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, and R.G. Higgins, 1996. 

AIRDAS, Development of a Unique Four-Channel 

Scanner For Disaster Assessment and Management. 
74 Appendices

Proceedings of Second International Airborne Remote 

Sensing Conference and Exhibition, ERIM, Vol. III, 

24-27 June, pp. 781-789.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, R.G. Higgins, and E.A. 

Hildum, 1996. Development and Utility of a FourChannel Scanner For Wildfire Research and Applications. Proceedings of the Sixth Biennial Forest Service 

Remote Sensing Applications Conference, 29 April—3 

May, pp. 390-399.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, J.B. Allen, E.A. Hildum, 

and R.G. Higgins, 1994. AIRDAS, Development of 

a Unique Four-Channel Scanner For Natural Disaster 

Assessment. Proceedings of the First International 

Airborne Remote Sensing Conference and Exhibition,

ERIM, Vol. II, pp. 129-141.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, R.G. Higgins, P.J. Riggan, 

and R Lockwood, 1994. Development and Utility of a 

Four-Channel Scanner For Wildland Fire Research and 

Applications. Proceedings of the Fifth Forest Service 

Remote Sensing Applications Conference, pp. 311.

Ambrosia, V.G., 1990. High Altitude Aircraft Remote 

Sensing During the 1988 Yellowstone National Park 

Wildfires. Geocarto International Journal, V.5, No.3, 

pp. 43-47.

Ambrosia, V.G., 1990, High Altitude Forest Fire 

Mapping, Daedalus Enterprises, Inc. Publication.

September 1990.

Ambrosia, V. G., J. A. Brass, R. Lathrop, K. Hibbard, 

P. Riggan, 1990. The Yellowstone Fire One Year Later 

-- Research in Remote Sensing Analysis. Proceedings 

of the Association of American Geographers National 

Meeting, Toronto, Canada, Program Abstracts, p. 3.

Airborne wildfire mapping

Ustin, S.L., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M., Jacquemoud, 

S., Roberts, D., and Green, R.O., 1996. Estimating 

Canopy Water Content of Chaparral Shrubs using 

Optical Methods, Summaries of the Sixth Annual JPL 

Airborne Earth Science Workshop, March 4-8, 1996. 

Vol. 1., AVIRIS Workshop, 4 pp

Ustin, S.L., Roberts, D.A., Pinzon, J., Jacquemoud, 

S., Gardner, M., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M. and 

Palacios, A., 1998, Estimating Canopy Water Content 

of Chaparral Shrubs Using Optical Methods, Remote 

Sensing of Environment. 65:280-291.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Regelbrugge, J., Pedreros, 

D. and Ustin, S., 1998. Mapping the distribution of 

wildfire fuels using AVIRIS in the Santa Monica 

Mountains, Proc. 7th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop 

JPL 97-21, Pasadena, CA 91109, 345-352.

Serrano, L., Ustin, S.L., Roberts, D.A., Gamon, J.A., 

and Penuelas, J., 2000, Deriving water content of chaparral vegetation from AVIRIS data. Remote Sensing of 

Environment, 74: 570-581.

Dennison, P.E., Roberts, D.A., and Regelbrugge, J.C., 

2000, Characterizing chaparral fuels using combined 

hyperspectral and synthetic aperture radar data, Proc. 

9th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, 

CA Feb 23-25, 2000, 119-124

Brass, J.A. P.J. Riggan, V.G. Ambrosia, R.N. Lockwood, J.A. Pereira, R.G. Higgins, 1996, Brazil Fire 

Characterization and Burn Area Estimations Using 

the Airborne Infrared Disaster Assessment System. 

Biomass Burning and Global Change, ed. J. Levine, 

MIT Press, Vol. 2, Chapter 54, pp. 561-568.

Cofer, W.R., III, J.S. Levine, D.I. Sebacher, E.L. 

Winstead, P.J. Riggan, B.J. Stocks, J.A. Brass, V.G. 

Ambrosia and P.J. Boston, 1989, Trace Gas Emissions 

from Chaparral and Boreal Forest Fires, Journal of 

Geophysical Research, 94:2255.

Ambrosia, V.G. and J.A. Brass, 1989, Remote Sensing 

Thermal Analysis of the 1988 Yellowstone National 

Park Wildfires. Association of American Geographers 

National Meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, Program 

Abstracts, Sec. VI, p. 3.

Cofer, W.R., III, J.S. Levine, P.J. Riggan, D.I. Sebacher, E.L. Winstead, E.F. Shaw, Jr., J.A. Brass, and 

V.G. Ambrosia, 1988, Trace Gas Emissions from MidLatitude Prescribed Chaparral Fire, Journal of Geophysical Research, V.93, No. D2, pp. 1653-1658.

Ambrosia, V.G., and J.A. Brass, 1988, Thermal 

Analysis of Wildfires and Effects on Global Ecosystem 

Cycling. Geocarto International Journal, V.3, No. 1, 

pp. 29-39.

Cofer, W.R., III, J.S. Levine, P.J. Riggan, D.I. Se-
75

bacher, E.L. Winstead, P.J. Riggan, J.A. Brass, and 

V.G. Ambrosia, 1988, Particulate Emissions from a 

Mid-Latitude Prescribed Chaparral Fire, Journal of 

Geophysical Research, 93, No D2, 5207-5212.

Ambrosia, V.G. and J.A. Brass, 1988, Estimations of 

Thermal Gradients and Nutrient Cycling from Thermal 

Remote Sensing Data of Controlled Biomass Combustion. Association of American Geographers National 

Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, Program Abstracts, p. 2, 

Sec. VII.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, and P.J. Riggan, 1988, 

Analysis of Fire/Fuel Characteristics as Related to 

Trace Gas Generation. National Conference on Fire 

Management, Los Angeles, California, April.

Ambrosia, V.G. and J.A. Brass, 1987, Thermal Analysis of Wildfires and Effect on Global Ecosystem Cycling. Association of American Geographers National 

Meeting, Portland, Oregon. Program Abstracts.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, and P.J. Riggan, 1987, 

Characterization of the Thermal Properties of Prescribed Wildland Fires Using Thermal Infrared Remote Sensing and Correlation to Nutrient Mobilization 

Due to Combustion. Three Decades of Life Science 

Research in Space, Space Life Sciences Symposium, 

Washington, DC, pp. 2, June.

Brass, J.A. and V.G. Ambrosia, 1987, Uses of Remote 

Sensing in Fire/Fuel Management. Proceedings of 

the National Conference on Fire Management, Los 

Angeles, California, June.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, P.J. Riggan, J.S. Myers, and J.C. Arvesen, 1987, Aircraft and Satellite 

Thermographic Systems for Wildfire Mapping and 

Assessment, American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics, AIAA-87-0187, January.

Brass, J.A. and V.G. Ambrosia, 1986, Uses of Remote 

Sensing in Fire/Fuel Management. Proceedings of 

the National Conference on Fire Management, Los 

Angeles, California, June.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, and P.J. Riggan, 1986. 

Biomass Combustion Characterization for Nutrient 

Movement Modeling Using Remotely Sensed Data. 

Proceedings of the Ecological Society of America, 

67(2): 151, June 1986.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, and P. Riggan, 1985. Remotely Sensed Information of Biomass Combustion 

and Effects on Mobilization of Nutrients at the San 

Dimas Experimental Forest, California. AIBS/ESA 

Conference, ESA Bulletin, (ESA), 66(2): 146, pp. 1.

Satellite wildfire mapping

Brass, J.A., P.J. Riggan, V.G. Ambrosia, R.N. Lockwood, Raposo, J.A.P. and R.G. Higgins, 1997. Fires 

and Global Change: Prospects For Remote Sensing 

Assessment. In World Resources Review, Cambridge, 

MA, 10 pages.

Hlavka, C.A., V.G. Ambrosia, J.A. Brass, A. Rezendez, and L.S. Guild, 1996. Mapping Fire Scars in the 

Brazilian Cerrado Using AVHRR Imagery. Biomass 

Burning and Global Change, ed. J. Levine, MIT Press, 

Vol. 2, Chapter 53, pp. 550-560.

Guild, L.S., C.A. Hlavka, J.A. Brass, R.B. Chatfield, 

P.A. Matson, and V.G. Ambrosia, 1993, Biomass 

Burning In The Brazilian Cerrado: Early Results. 

Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 74(2), 

Addendum, 1993.

AMS algorithm development

Adams, J.B., Sabol, D., Kapos, V., Almeida Filho, R., 

Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Gillespie, A.R., 1995, 

Classification of Multispectral Images Based on Fractions of Endmembers: Application to Land-Cover 

Change in the Brazilian Amazon, Remote Sensing 

Environment, 52:137-154.

Dennison, P., Roberts, D.A., Reith, E., Regelbrugge, 

J., and Ustin, S.L., 1999, Integrating Polarimetric Synthetic Aperture Radar and Imaging Spectrometry for 

Wildland fuel Mapping, Proc. of the Joint Fire Science 

Conference and Workshop, June 17-19, 1999, Boise, 

Idaho, Vol. 1, 37-42.

Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Adams, J.B., Sabol, 

D.E., Gillespie, A.R., and Willis, S.C., 1990, Isolating Woody Plant Material and Senescent Vegetation 

from Green Vegetation in AVIRIS Data, Proc. 2nd 

AVIRIS Workshop, Pasadena, Ca., June 4 and 5, 1990, 

pp. 42-57.

Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Sabol, D.E., Adams, J.B. 

and Ustin, S., 1992, Mapping the Spectral Variability 
76 Appendices

in Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation, 

Soils and Shade using AVIRIS, Summaries 3rd Annual 

JPL Airborne Geoscience Workshop: Vol. 1, AVIRIS, 

Pasadena, CA. June 1 and 2, 1992, pp. 38-40.

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., Sabol, D.E. and Adams, J.B., 1993, Temporal Changes in Endmember 

Abundances, Liquid Water and Water Vapor over 

Vegetation at Jasper Ridge, Summaries of the 4th 

Annual JPL Airborne Geoscience Workshop, Oct 

25-29, 1993, Vol. 1. AVIRIS Workshop, Washington 

D.C., 153-156.

Roberts, D.A., Adams, J.B., and Smith, M.O., 1993, 

Discriminating Green Vegetation, Non-Photosynthetic 

Vegetation and Soils in AVIRIS Data, Rem. Sens. Environ., 44: 2/3 255-270.

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., Adams, J.B., Cothern, 

J.S., Sabol, D.E., and Smith, M.O., 1994, Temporal 

and Spatial Relationships Between Topography, Atmospheric Water Vapor, Liquid Water and Vegetation 

Endmember Fractions Determined Using AVIRIS. 

IGARRS ‘94, Pasadena, CA Aug 8-12, 1994, 3 p.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S., 

Scheer, G., and Green, R.O., 1996, Mapping Chaparral 

in the Santa Monica Mountains using Multiple Spectral 

Mixture Models, Summaries of the Sixth Annual JPL 

Airborne Earth Science Workshop, March 4-8, 1996. 

Vol. 1., AVIRIS Workshop, 5 pp

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., and Adams, J.B., 

1997,Temporal and Spatial Patterns in Vegetation and 

Atmospheric Properties from AVIRIS, Remote Sens. 

Environ. 62: 223-240.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S.L., 

and Green, R.O., 1997, Optimum Strategies for Mapping Vegetation using Multiple Endmember Spectral 

Mixture Models, in SPIE Conf. Vol 3118, Imaging 

Spectrometry III, 108-119., San Diego, CA July 27-

Aug 1, 1997.

Roberts, D.A., Brown, K.J., Green, R., Ustin, S., and 

Hinckley, T., 1998, Investigating the relationship 

between liquid water and leaf area in clonal Populus, 

Proc. 7th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop JPL 97-21, 

Pasadena, CA 91109, 335-344.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S., 

Scheer, G.,and Green, R.O., 1998, Mapping Chaparral in the Santa Monica Mountains using Multiple 

Endmember Spectral Mixture Models, Rem. Sens. 

Environ. 65: 267-279.

Roberts, D.A., Batista, G., Pereira, J., Waller, E., and 

Nelson, B. 1998, Change Identification using Multitemporal Spectral Mixture Analysis: Applications 

in Eastern Amazonia, Chapter 9 in Remote Sensing 

Change Detection: Environmental Monitoring Applications and Methods, (Elvidge, C. and Lunetta 

R., Eds.), Ann Arbor Press, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 137-

161.

Roberts, D.A., Dennison, P., Ustin, S.L., Reith, E., 

and Morais, M., 1999, Development of a Regionally 

Specific Library for the Santa Monica Mountains using High Resolution AVIRIS Data, Proc. 8th AVIRIS 

Earth Science Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, CA 349-354, 

Feb 8-11, 1999.

Roberts, D.A., Dennison, P.E., Morais, M., Gardner, 

M.E., Regelbrugge, J., and Ustin, S.L., 1999, Mapping 

Wildfire Fuels using Imaging Spectrometry along the 

Wildland Urban Interface, Proc. of the Joint Fire Science Conference and Workshop, June 17-19, 1999, 

Boise, Idaho, Vol. 1, 212-223.

Roberts, D.A., Numata, I., Holmes, K.W., Batista, G., 

Krug, T., Monteiro, A., Powell, B., and Chadwick, 

O., 2002, Large area mapping of land-cover change 

in Rondônia using multitemporal spectral mixture 

analysis and decision tree classifiers, J. Geophys. Res. 

Atm., in press.

Rogan, J., Franklin, J., and Roberts, D.A., A comparison of methods for monitoring multitemporal vegetation change using Thematic Mapper imagery, 2002, 

Remote Sensing of Environment, 80 143-156.

Ustin, S.L., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M., Jacquemoud, 

S., Roberts, D., and Green, R.O., 1996, Estimating 

Canopy Water Content of Chaparral Shrubs using 

Optical Methods, Summaries of the Sixth Annual JPL 

Airborne Earth Science Workshop, March 4-8, 1996. 

Vol. 1., AVIRIS Workshop, 4 pp

Ustin, S.L., Roberts, D.A., Pinzon, J., Jacquemoud, S., 

Gardner, M., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M. and Palacios, A., 1998, Estimating Canopy Water Content of 

Chaparral Shrubs Using Optical Methods, Rem. Sens. 
77

Environ. 65:280-291.

Integrated assessment of fire danger and fire 

spread modeling

Bossert, J.E. R.R. Linn, J.M. Reisner, J.L., Winterkamp, P. Dennison and D. Roberts, 2000, Coupled 

atmosphere-fire behavior model sensitivity to spatial 

fuels characterization, Third Symposium on Fire and 

Forest Meteorology, Amer. Meteor. Soc. 80th Annual 

Meeting, Long Beach, CA, 9-14 January 2000. pp. 

21-26.

Fire effects, post-fire recovery, and 

hydrology

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, P.J. Riggan, R. Ewing and 

P.D. Sebesta, 1997. Long-Term Stream Nitrate and 

Phosphate Changes Following Watershed Wildfires. 

International Journal of Wildland Fire, pp. 53-57.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, P.J. Riggan, and P.D. 

Sebesta, 1996. Consequences of Fire on Aquatic Nitrate and Phosphate Dynamics in Yellowstone National 

Park. Ecological Implications of Fire in Greater Yellowstone, IAWF, pp. 53-57.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, P.J. Riggan and P. Sebesta, 

1994, Remote Sensing of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystem Alterations Following the 1988 Yellowstone 

National Park Wildfires: Five Years of Research. 

Proceedings of the Second Thematic Conference on 

Remote Sensing for Marine and Coastal Environments, 

ERIM, Vol. II, pp. 243-256,

Loaiciga, H.A., Pedreros, D., and Roberts D.2001, 

Wildfire-stream flow interactions in a chaparral 

watershed, Advances in Environmental Research, 5 

295-305.

Riano, D., Chuvieco, E., Ustin, S., Zomer, R., Dennison, P., Roberts, D., and Salas, J., 2002, Assessment 

of the vegetation regeneration after fire through the 

multitemporal analysis of AVIRIS images in the Santa 

Monica Mountains, Remote Sensing of Environment, 

79(1), 60-71.

Sinha, R.P., J.A. Brass, V.G. Ambrosia and C.A. 

Hlavka, 1998, Global Warming and Burning of the 

Brazilian Cerrado. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Remote Sensing for Marine and 

Coastal Environments, ERIM, Vol. II, p. 505.

Souza, C. Jr., Firestone, L., Silva, L.M., and Roberts, 

D., Mapping forest degradation in the Eastern Amazon 

from SPOT 4 through spectral mixture models, Remote 

Sensing of Environment.

Education and outreach

Roberts, D.A., 1999, Camp on Fire, California Alliance for Minority Participation in Science, Engineering and Mathematics, Spring Quarterly, pp. 18-22.

Posada, Herman, 2008, NASA Western States Fire 

Mission, UVS International Conference, Paris 

France.

Hall, Philip, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen Howell, 2008, Operational Experience with Long 

Duration Wildfire Mapping UAS Missions over the 

Western United States, AUVSI-2008 Conference, San 

Diego, Calif.

Buoni, Gregory P. and Kathleen M. Howell, 2008, 

Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the 

National Airspace System - the NASA 2007 Western 

States Fire

Missions, 8th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, 14-19 Sep. 2008, 

Anchorage, AK.
78 Appendices

FAA Certification of UAS
79
80 Appendices
81

Ikhana WSFM preflight submission

This was the NASA Dryden Ikhana project L-1 day submission to the FAA for a COA authorizing WSFM-2, scheduled 

for July 19, 2008.

The following information is being provided to the FAA by the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (DFRC) Ikhana 

project to fulfill Special Provision #4 of the FAA COA issued to NASA DFRC Operations and signed 7 July 2008. This 

notification will be followed by an IFR flight plan filing per the conditions of the COA.

The selected flight date is Saturday 7/19/2008 with take-off from KEDW at ~0800 PDT and planned landing at KEDW on 

Saturday 7/19/2008 at ~1500 PDT for a 7 hour flight. 

The area of operations is wholly within R-2508/R-2515, and ZOA airspace with the route described below. All points in 

the NAS will be planned at FL230, unless otherwise directed by ATC per the conditions of the COA

Name 

Point/ 

Fire 

FRD 

Loiter 

Radius 

(nm) 

Est 

Delay 

 Est 

Time DMS 

Lat 

DMS 

Lon 

Dist 

Leg 

Dist 

Total 

R-2508

Within 

1 KEDW 0 

2- 

within R2508 

complex 

5 37.7 95.1 

FAANG 

6 BIH189025 

36 59 

N 

46.8 34 45.6 

W118 98.2 193.3 

the NA

In 

S 

7 

American 

River 

Complex 

SWR247018 15 30 

min 39 8 

N 

37.2 38 43.8 

W120 161.7 354.9 

8 

Cub, Camp, 

Canyon 

Cplxs 

CIC053023 30 90 

min 39 55 

N 

40.8 23 0 

W121 58.2 413.1 

9 

American 

River 

Complex 

SWR247018 15 30 

min 39 8 

N 

37.2 38 43.8 

W120 58.2 471.3 

10 MOD051026 

37 47 

N 

10.2 27 10.2 

W120 81.9 553.2 

Within 

R-2508 

11 

SWOOP 

TTE025032 

36 19 0 

N 

35 4.8 

W118 125.7 678.9 

12 – 

15 within R2508 

complex 

736.4 

16 KEDW 831.4 

Estimated time in ZOA airspace is from approximately 0930 – 1400 hours PDT

The fire locations, loiter radii and delay times are estimates and they may need to be adjusted somewhat during the flight 

to accommodate real-time fire conditions.

There appear to be less than 48 elements for an IFR flight plan in the NAS.

Per Special Provision 3 of the COA, the flight will be within 400 nm of identified Primary Emergency Landing Sites (ELS), 

and within 100 nm of secondary ELS. 
82 Bibliography

Governor’s statement

This statement was released to news media on July 14, 2008 from the Office of the California State Governor.

07/14/2008 GAAS:525:08 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Governor Schwarzenegger and NASA Highlight Infrared Scanning Technology 

Helping to Fight California’s Wildfires

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today joined NASA and federal and state fire 

officials at the NASA Ames Research Center in Moffett Field to tour the facility and 

discuss the important role of NASA’s remotely piloted aircraft, named Ikhana, to California’s firefight. The unmanned aircraft carrying a NASA infrared scanning sensor flew 

over much of California this past week, gathering information that was delivered to fire 

commanders in the field-helping them understand the terrain and behavior of the state’s 

most dangerous fires. “ California’s unprecedented number of fires this early in the 

season make it all the more important that we use every tool at our disposal to protect 

property and save lives,” Governor Schwarzenegger said. “NASA’s Ikhana is one more 

incredible tool that we are able to use this year to bring real-time pictures and data to 

fire commanders, even when our other aircraft are unable to fly. The federal government 

has been an active partner in helping California fight fires, and NASA’s assistance is one 

more example of that cooperation. “ The Ikhana’s most recent mission was on Tuesday, 

July 8. It flew for more than nine hours and covered approximately 10 individual and 

complex fires along a route over the Sierra Nevadas, west to the Cub Complex fires and 

south to the Gap Fire in Santa Barbara County. The images are collected onboard the 

Ikhana and transmitted through a communications satellite to NASA’s Ames Research 

Center in Moffett Field, CA, where they are superimposed over Google Earth and Microsoft Virtual Earth maps to better visualize the location and scope of the fires. The 

imagery is then transmitted to the Multi-Agency Coordination Center in Redding and 

the State Operations Center in Sacramento, which distributes it to incident commanders 

in the field, so they can deploy resources where it will have the greatest benefit. NASA 

satellites are also capturing imagery of the wildfires to fill in gaps in airborne imagery. 

For these images and additional information, visit:

 www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/fire_and_smoke.html.
83

Biblograph

Adams, J.B., Sabol, D., Kapos, V., Almeida Filho, R., Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Gillespie, A.R., “Classification 

of Multispectral Images Based on Fractions of Endmembers: Application to Land-Cover Change in the Brazilian 

Amazon.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 1995. 

“Altair Western States Fire Mission.” http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20070031044_2007032019.

pdf, accessed 10 June 2009.

“Altair / Predator B – An Earth Science Aircraft for the 21st Century.” NASA Fact Sheet FS-073, NASA Dryden 

Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2001. 

 “ALTAIR Unmanned Aircraft to Deploy to Canada.” General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Company, San Diego, 

CA, 2004.

“ALTUS II – How High is High?” NASA Fact Sheet FS-1998-12-058 DFRC, NASA Dryden Flight Research 

Center, Edwards, CA, 1998.

Arjomandi, Maziar. “Classification of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.” Course material for Mechanical Engineering 

3016, University of Adelaide, Australia, 2007.

Ambrosia, V.G. “High Altitude Forest Fire Mapping.” Daedalus Enterprises, Inc. Publication, September 1990.

________. “An Integration of Remote Sensing GIS, and Information Distribution For Wildfire Detection and 

Management.” Proceedings, The Joint Fire Science Conference and Workshop, Vol. 1. Boise, ID, 15-17 June 1998 

(abstract). 

_________. “High Altitude Aircraft Remote Sensing During the 1988 Yellowstone National Park Wildfires.” Geocarto International Journal, V.5, No.3, 1990.

________. “Emerging Technology Development For Disaster Management At NASA-Ames, Panel Session: Remote Sensing: New Technologies For Disaster Management.” Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Hazards 

Research and Applications Workshop, Boulder, Colorado, 14-17 July 2002.

________. “Remotely Piloted Vehicles as Fire Imaging Platforms: The Future Is Here!” Wildfire Magazine, MayJune 2002.

Ambrosia, V. G., J. A. Brass, R. Lathrop, K. Hibbard, P. Riggan. “The Yellowstone Fire One Year Later -- Research 

in Remote Sensing Analysis.” Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers National Meeting, Toronto, 

Canada, Program Abstracts, 1990.

Ambrosia, V.G. and J.A. Brass. “Remote Sensing Thermal Analysis of the 1988 Yellowstone National Park Wildfires.” 

Association of American Geographers National Meeting, Baltimore, MD, Program Abstracts, Sec. VI, 1988.

________. “Thermal Analysis of Wildfires and Effects on Global Ecosystem Cycling.” Geocarto International 
84 Bibliography

Journal, V.3, No. 1, 1988.

________. “Estimations of Thermal Gradients and Nutrient Cycling from Thermal Remote Sensing Data of Controlled Biomass Combustion.” Association of American Geographers National Meeting, Program Abstracts, Sec. 

VII Phoenix, AZ.

________. “Thermal Analysis of Wildfires and Effect on Global Ecosystem Cycling.” Association of American 

Geographers National Meeting, Program Abstracts, Portland, OR. 1987.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, P.J. Riggan, R. Ewing and P.D. Sebesta. “Long-Term Stream Nitrate and Phosphate 

Changes Following Watershed Wildfires.” International Journal of Wildland Fire, 1997.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, P.J. Riggan and P. Sebesta. “Remote Sensing of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystem 

Alterations Following the 1988 Yellowstone National Park Wildfires: Five Years of Research.” Proceedings of the 

Second Thematic Conference on Remote Sensing for Marine and Coastal Environments, ERIM, Vol. II, 1994.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, S.S. Wegener, D.V. Sullivan, S.W. Buechel and R.S. Dann. “An Integration of Remote 

Sensing, Satellite Telemetry, and GIS Data Management Utilizing UAV Airborne Platforms For Application to Forest Fire Management.” Proceedings of the Third International Workshop: Remote Sensing and GIS Applications 

to Forest Fire Management: New Methods and Sensors, European Association of Remote Sensing Laboratories 

(EARSeL), Paris, France, 17-19 May 2001.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, J.B. Allen, E.A. Hildum, and R.G. Higgins. “AIRDAS, Development of a Unique 

Four-Channel Scanner For Natural Disaster Assessment.” Proceedings of the First International Airborne Remote 

Sensing Conference and Exhibition, ERIM, Vol. II, 1994.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, and R.G. Higgins. “AIRDAS, Development of a Unique Four-Channel Scanner For 

Disaster Assessment and Management.” Proceedings of Second International Airborne Remote Sensing Conference 

and Exhibition, ERIM, Vol. III, 24-27 June 1996.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, R.G. Higgins, and E.A. Hildum. “Development and Utility of a Four-Channel Scanner For Wildfire Research and Applications.” Proceedings of the Sixth Biennial Forest Service Remote Sensing 

Applications Conference, 29 April—3 May 1996.

Ambrosia, V.G., J.A. Brass, R.G. Higgins, P.J. Riggan, and R Lockwood.” Development and Utility of a FourChannel Scanner For Wildland Fire Research and Applications.” Proceedings of the Fifth Forest Service Remote 

Sensing Applications Conference, 1994.

Ambrosia, V.G., S.W. Buechel, J.A. Brass, J.R. Peterson, R.H. Davies, R.J. Kane and S. Spain. “An Integration of 

Remote Sensing, GIS, and Information Distribution for Wildfire Detection and Management.” Photogrammetric 

Engineering and Remote Sensing, Vol. 64, No. 10, 1998.

Ambrosia, V.G., S.S. Wegener, D.V. Sullivan, S.W. Buechel, J.A. Brass, S.E. Dunagan, R.G. Higgins, E.A. Hildum 

and S.M. Schoenung. “Demonstrating UAV-Acquired Real-Time Thermal Data Over Fires.” Photogrammetric 

Engineering and Remote Sensing, 2002.

Ambrosia, V.G., S. S. Wegener, J.A. Brass and S.W. Buechel. “Demonstrating Acquisition of Real-Time Thermal 
85

Data Over Fires Utilizing UAV’s.” RS2002, Proceedings of the Ninth Biennial Remote Sensing Applications Conference, San Diego, CA, 8-12 April, 2002.

“BAER: Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation.” Lytle Fire 2003, IncidentControl.com, http://www.incidentcontrol.com/lytlefire/b_a_e_r.htm, October 2003, accessed 10 June 2009.

Berlant, Daniel. “Unmanned aircraft is latest firefighting tool.” Communique, California Department of Forestry and 

Fire Protection, Sacramento, CA, http://www.fire.ca.gov/communications/downloads/communique/2007_winter/

unmanned.pdf. Winter 2007, accessed 10 June 2009.

Bolton , W. R. “Measurements of Radiation in the Atmosphere.” NASA Tech Briefs, DRC-98-32, http://www.techbriefs.com/Briefs/Sep98/DRC9832.html, 1998, accessed 10 June 2009.

Bossert, J.E. R.R. Linn, J.M. Reisner, J.L., Winterkamp, P. Dennison and D. Roberts. “Coupled Atmosphere-Fire 

Behavior Model Sensitivity to Spatial Fuels Characterization.” Third Symposium on Fire and Forest Meteorology, 

American Meteorological Society 80th Annual Meeting, Long Beach, CA, 9-14 January 2002.

Brass, J.A. and V.G. Ambrosia. “Uses of Remote Sensing in Fire/Fuel Management.” Proceedings of the National 

Conference on Fire Management, Los Angeles, CA, June 1987.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, and P. Riggan. “Remotely Sensed Information of Biomass Combustion and Effects on 

Mobilization of Nutrients at the San Dimas Experimental Forest, California.” AIBS/ESA Conference, ESA Bulletin, 

(ESA), 66(2): 1985.

________. “Analysis of Fire/Fuel Characteristics as Related to Trace Gas Generation.” National Conference on 

Fire Management, Los Angeles, CA, April 1988.

________. “Biomass Combustion Characterization for Nutrient Movement Modeling Using Remotely Sensed 

Data.” Proceedings of the Ecological Society of America, 67(2), June 1986.

________. “Characterization of the Thermal Properties of Prescribed Wildland Fires Using Thermal Infrared Remote 

Sensing and Correlation to Nutrient Mobilization Due to Combustion.” Three Decades of Life Science Research 

in Space, Space Life Sciences Symposium, Washington, DC, June 1987.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, P.J. Riggan, J.S. Myers, and J.C. Arvesen. “Aircraft and Satellite Thermographic Systems for Wildfire Mapping and Assessment.” American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, AIAA-87-0187, 

January1987.

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, R.S. Dann, R.G. Higgins, E.A. Hildum, J. McIntire, P.J. Riggan, S.M. Schoenung, R.E. 

Slye, D.V. Sullivan, S. Tolley, R.Vogler, S.S. Wegener. “First Response Experiment (FiRE) Using An Uninhabited 

Aerial Vehicle (UAV).” Proceedings of Fifth International Airborne Remote Sensing Conference, San Francisco, 

CA, 17-20 September, CD paper no. 56, 2001.

Brass, J., V. Ambrosia, R. Higgins, T. Hildum, S. Schoenung, R. Slye, D. Sullivan, S. Tolley, H. Tran, R. Vogler, S. 

Wegener, 2000. Development of Tactical and Strategic Thermal “Reconnaissance of Wildfires Utilizing Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Technology.” Proceedings, Fire Conference 2000: The First National Congress on Fire 

Ecology, Prevention and Management, San Diego, CA., 27 November-1 December, (abstract and poster).
86 Bibliography

Brass, J.A., V.G. Ambrosia, P.J. Riggan, and P.D. Sebesta. “Consequences of Fire on Aquatic Nitrate and Phosphate 

Dynamics in Yellowstone National Park.” Ecological Implications of Fire in Greater Yellowstone, IAWF, 1996.

Brass, J.A., P.J. Riggan, V.G. Ambrosia, R.N. Lockwood, Raposo, J.A.P. and R.G. Higgins. “Fires and Global 

Change: Prospects For Remote Sensing Assessment.” World Resources Review, Cambridge, MA, 1997.

Brass, J.A. P.J. Riggan, V.G. Ambrosia, R.N. Lockwood, J.A. Pereira, R.G. Higgins. “Brazil Fire Characterization 

and Burn Area Estimations Using the Airborne Infrared Disaster Assessment System.” Biomass Burning and Global 

Change, J. Levine, ed., MIT Press, MA, Vol. 2, 1996.

Brown, Alan. “NASA’s Newest Unmanned Aircraft Makes Successful First Flight.” Press Release 03-193, NASA 

Headquarters, Washington, D.C., 2003.

Buoni, Gregory P. “Ikhana Weekly Notes.” NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 26 October 2008.

Buoni, Gregory P., and Kathleen M. Howell. “Large Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in the National Airspace 

System – the NASA 2007 Western States Fire Missions,” AIAA-2008-8967, American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics, The 26th Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Anchorage, AK, 2008.

Chapman, William G. Organizational Concepts for the Sensor-to-Shooter World – The Impact of Real-Time Information on Airpower Targeting, Air University Press, Maxwell Air Force Base, AL, May 1997.

Cofer, W.R., III, J.S. Levine, P.J. Riggan, D.I. Sebacher, E.L. Winstead, E.F. Shaw, Jr., J.A. Brass, and V.G. Ambrosia. “Trace Gas Emissions from Mid-Latitude Prescribed Chaparral Fire.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 

V.93, No. D2, 1988.

Cofer, W.R., III, J.S. Levine, D.I. Sebacher, E.L. Winstead, P.J. Riggan, B.J. Stocks, J.A. Brass, V.G. Ambrosia and 

P.J. Boston. “Trace Gas Emissions from Chaparral and Boreal Forest Fires.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 

1989.

 “Completed Missions,” Wildfire Research and Applications Partnership (WRAP), http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sge/

WRAP/current/com_missions.html, 2008, accessed 10 June 2009.

Dennison, P.E., Roberts, D.A., and Regelbrugge, J.C. “Characterizing Chaparral Fuels Using Combined Hyperspectral and Synthetic Aperture Radar Data.” Proceedings of the 9th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, 

CA February 23-25, 2000.

Dennison, P., Roberts, D.A., Reith, E., Regelbrugge, J., and Ustin, S.L. “Integrating Polarimetric Synthetic Aperture 

Radar and Imaging Spectrometry for Wildland fuel Mapping.” Proceedings of the Joint Fire Science Conference 

and Workshop, June 17-19, 1999, Boise, ID, Vol. 1, 1999.

“ERAST: Environmental Research and Sensor Technology Fact Sheet.” NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 

Edwards, CA, 2002.

Fahey, David W., James H. Churnside, James W. Elkins, Albin, J. Gasiewski, Karen H. Rosenlof, Sara Summers, 

Michael Aslaksen, Todd A. Jacobs, Jon D. Sellars, Christopher D. Jennison, Lawrence C. Freudinger, and Michael 

Cooper. “Altair Unmanned Aircraft System Achieves Demonstration Goals,” EOS Trans., No. 80. pp. 197-201, 
87

American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C., 16 May 2006.

“First ISCCP Regional Experiment (FIRE) Cirrus 2 NASA ER-2 Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer 

(MODIS) Airborne Simulator (MAS) (FIRE_CI2_ER2_MAS) Langley DAAC Data Set Document” Atmospheric 

Science Data Center, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/GUIDE/dataset_documents/base_fire_ci2_er2_mas_dataset.html, 1996, accessed 10 June 2009.

Fulghum, David A., and Bill Sweetman. “Predator C Avenger Makes First Flights,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, 17 April 2009.

Gaughan, Richard. “An autonomous sensor developed by NASA proves its worth in firefighting,” R&D Daily, 

Issue 0701, January 2007.

“General Atomics Fact Sheet.” General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Company, San Diego, CA, 2007.

“Governor and NASA Highlight Infrared Scanning Technology Helping to Fight California’s Wildfires.” http://

gov.ca.gov/speech/10186/, Office of the Governor, Sacramento, CA, 14 July 2008.

“Ground Control Stations Fact Sheet.” General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Company, San Diego, CA, 2007.

Guild, L.S., C.A. Hlavka, J.A. Brass, R.B. Chatfield, P.A. Matson, and V.G. Ambrosia. “Biomass Burning In The 

Brazilian Cerrado: Early Results.” Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 74(2), Addendum, 1993.

Hagenauer, Beth. “NOAA and NASA Begin California UAV Flight Experiment.” Press Release 05-20, NASA 

Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2005.

________. “Altair UAV Flies Lengthy Science Missions For NOAA,” Photo Release 05-73P, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2005.

________. “Ikhana UAV Gives NASA New Science and Technology Capabilities.” Press Release 07-12, NASA 

Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2007.

Hagenauer, Beth, and Mike Mewhinney. “NASA Responds to California Wildfire Emergency Imaging Request,” 

Release 08-30, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 11 July 2008.

Hall, Philip, Brent Cobleigh, Greg Buoni, and Kathleen Howell. “Operational Experience with Long Duration 

Wildfire Mapping UAS Missions over the Western United States,” presented at the Association for Unmanned 

Vehicle Systems International Unmanned Systems North America Conference, San Diego, CA, June 2008.

Hlavka, C.A., V.G. Ambrosia, J.A. Brass, A. Rezendez, and L.S. Guild. “Mapping Fire Scars in the Brazilian Cerrado 

Using AVHRR Imagery.” Biomass Burning and Global Change, J. Levine, ed., MIT Press, MA, Vol. 2, 1996.

“Ikhana Unmanned Science and Research Aircraft System.” NASA Fact Sheet FS-097, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2007.

Levine, Jay. “Measuring up to the Gold Standard.” X-tra, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 

2008.

________. “No one on board – Ikhana pilots fly aircraft from the ground.” X-tra, NASA Dryden Flight Research 
88 Bibliography

Center, Edwards, CA, 2008.

Loaiciga, H.A., Pedreros, D., and Roberts D. “Wildfire-stream Flow Interactions in a Chaparral Watershed.” Advances in Environmental Research, 2001.

McDaid, Hugh, and David Oliver. Smart Weapons: Top Secret History of Remote Controlled Airborne Weapons, 

Orion Media, London, England, 1997.

Miller, Jay. Lockheed U-2, Aerofax Inc., Austin, TX, 1983.Missions, 8th American Institute for Astronautics and 

Aeronautics Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, 14-19 September 2008, Anchorage, 

AK.

“NASA Flies Ikhana UAV to Help California Firefighter.” Aviation.com, http://www.aviation.com/technology/071024-

nasa-ikhana-california-wildfires.html October 2007, accessed 10 June 2009.

Office of the Secretary of Defense. “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2005-2030,” http://www.acq.osd.mil/

usd/Roadmap%20Final2.pdf, 2005, accessed 12 October 2008.

Posada, Herman. “NASA Western States Fire Mission, UVS International Conference.” Docks Event Centre, Paris, 

France, 2008.

Riano, D., Chuvieco, E., Ustin, S., Zomer, R., Dennison, P., Roberts, D., and Salas, J. “Assessment of the Vegetation 

Regeneration After Fire Through the Multitemporal Analysis of AVIRIS Images in the Santa Monica Mountains.” 

Remote Sensing of Environment, 79(1), 2002.

Roberts, D.A. “Camp on Fire, California Alliance for Minority Participation in Science.” Engineering and Mathematics, Spring Quarterly, 1999.

Roberts, D.A., Adams, J.B., and Smith, M.O. “Discriminating Green Vegetation, Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation 

and Soils in AVIRIS Data.” Remote Sensing Environment, 44: 2/3, 1993.

Roberts, D.A., Dennison, P., Ustin, S.L., Reith, E., and Morais, M. “Development of a Regionally Specific Library 

for the Santa Monica Mountains using High Resolution AVIRIS Data.” Proceedings of the 8th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, CA, February 8-11, 1999.

Roberts, D.A., Dennison, P.E., Morais, M., Gardner, M.E., Regelbrugge, J., and Ustin, S.L. “Mapping Wildfire 

Fuels using Imaging Spectrometry along the Wildland Urban Interface.” Proceedings of the Joint Fire Science 

Conference and Workshop, June 17-19, 1999, Boise, ID, Vol. 1.

Roberts, D.A., Brown, K.J., Green, R., Ustin, S., and Hinckley, T. “Investigating the Relationship Between Liquid 

Water and Leaf Area in Clonal Populus.” Proceedings of the 7th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop, JPL, Pasadena, 

CA, 1998.

Roberts, D.A., Batista, G., Pereira, J., Waller, E., and Nelson, B. “Change Identification using Multitemporal 

Spectral Mixture Analysis: Applications in Eastern Amazonia.” Chapter 9 in Remote Sensing Change Detection: 

Environmental Monitoring Applications and Methods, (Elvidge, C. and Lunetta R., Eds.), Ann Arbor Press, Ann 

Arbor, MI, 1998.
89

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S., Scheer, G., and Green, R.O. “Mapping Chaparral in the Santa 

Monica Mountains using Multiple Spectral Mixture Models.” Summaries of the Sixth Annual JPL Airborne Earth 

Science Workshop, Vol. 1, March 4-8, 1996.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S.L., and Green, R.O. “Optimum Strategies for Mapping Vegetation using Multiple Endmember Spectral Mixture Models.” SPIE Conference. Vol. 3118, Imaging Spectrometry, 

San Diego, CA July 27-Aug 1, 1997.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Church, R., Ustin, S., Scheer, G., and Green, R.O. “Mapping Chaparral in the Santa 

Monica Mountains using Multiple Endmember Spectral Mixture Models.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 65, 

1998.

Roberts, D.A., Gardner, M., Regelbrugge, J., Pedreros, D. and Ustin, S. “Mapping the distribution of wildfire fuels using AVIRIS in the Santa Monica Mountains.” Proceedings of the 7th AVIRIS Earth Science Workshop JPL, 

Pasadena, CA, 1998.

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., and Adams, J.B. “Temporal and Spatial Patterns in Vegetation and Atmospheric Properties from AVIRIS.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 62, 1997.

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., Adams, J.B., Cothern, J.S., Sabol, D.E., and Smith, M.O. “Temporal and Spatial Relationships Between Topography, Atmospheric Water Vapor, Liquid Water and Vegetation Endmember Fractions 

Determined Using AVIRIS.” IGARRS ‘94, Pasadena, CA August 8-12, 1994.

Roberts, D.A., Green, R.O., Sabol, D.E. and Adams, J.B. “Temporal Changes in Endmember Abundances, Liquid 

Water and Water Vapor over Vegetation at Jasper Ridge.” Summaries of the 4th Annual JPL Airborne Geoscience 

AVIRIS Workshop, October 25-29, 1993, Vol. 1 , Washington D.C.

Roberts, D.A., Numata, I., Holmes, K.W., Batista, G., Krug, T., Monteiro, A., Powell, B., and Chadwick, O. “Large 

Area Mapping of Land-Cover Change in Rondônia Using Multitemporal Spectral Mixture Analysis and Decision 

Tree Classifiers.” J. Geophys. Res. Atm., 2002, in press.

Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Adams, J.B., Sabol, D.E., Gillespie, A.R., and Willis, S.C. “Isolating Woody Plant 

Material and Senescent Vegetation from Green Vegetation in AVIRIS Data.” Proceedings of the 2nd AVIRIS Workshop, Pasadena, Ca., June 4-5, 1990.

Roberts, D.A., Smith, M.O., Sabol, D.E., Adams, J.B. and Ustin, S. “Mapping the Spectral Variability in Photosynthetic and Non-Photosynthetic Vegetation, Soils and Shade using AVIRIS.” Summaries 3rd Annual JPL Airborne 

Geoscience Workshop, Vol. 1, Pasadena, CA. June 1 and 2, 1992.

“Rocket launch secures photos for firefighting efforts.” Alaska Science Outreach, http://www.alaskascienceoutreach.

com/index.php/main_pages/catchitem/rocket_launch_secures_photos_for_firefighting_efforts/, accessed 10 June 

2004.

Rogan, J., Franklin, J., and Roberts, D.A. “A Comparison of Methods for Monitoring Multitemporal Vegetation 

Change Using Thematic Mapper Imagery.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 80, 2002.

Serrano, L., Ustin, S.L., Roberts, D.A., Gamon, J.A., and Penuelas, J. “Deriving Water Content of Chaparral Vegetation from AVIRIS Data.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 74, 2000.
90 Bibliography

Sinha, R.P., J.A. Brass, V.G. Ambrosia and C.A. Hlavka. “Global Warming and Burning of the Brazilian Cerrado.” 

Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Remote Sensing for Marine and Coastal Environments, 

ERIM, Vol. II, 1998.

Souza, C. Jr., Firestone, L., Silva, L.M., and Roberts, D. “Mapping forest degradation in the Eastern Amazon from 

SPOT 4 through spectral mixture models.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 2000.

Status Report, “NASA’s Ikhana UAS Resumes Western States Fire Mission Flights,” http://www.nasa.gov/centers/

dryden/home/wsfm_status.html, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 19 September 2008.

Ustin, S.L., Roberts, D.A., Pinzon, J., Jacquemoud, S., Gardner, M., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M. and Palacios, A. 

”Estimating Canopy Water Content of Chaparral Shrubs Using Optical Methods.” Remote Sensing of Environment, 

65, 1998.

Ustin, S.L., Scheer, G., Castaneda, C.M., Jacquemoud, S., Roberts, D., and Green, R.O. “Estimating Canopy Water 

Content of Chaparral Shrubs using Optical Methods.” Summaries of the Sixth Annual JPL Airborne Earth Science 

AVIRIS Workshop, March 4-8, 1996. Vol. 1.

Wegener, S.S., V.G. Ambrosia, J. Stoneburner, D.V. Sullivan, J.A. Brass, S.W. Buechel, R.G. Higgins, E.A. Hildum, 

S.M. Schoenung. “Demonstrating Acquisition of Real-Time Thermal Data Over Fires Utilizing UAVs.” Proceedings of AIAA’s 1st Technical Conference and Workshop on Unmanned Aerospace Vehicles, Systems, Technologies, 

and Operations, Portsmouth, Virginia, 20-23 May, Paper No. AIAA-2002-3406, 2002.

Wegener, S., D. Sullivan, V. Ambrosia, J. Brass, R. Scott Dann. “Development and Implementation of Real-Time 

Information Delivery Systems for Emergency Management.” Proceedings, First International Global Disaster 

Information Network (GDIN) Information Technology Exposition and Conference, Honolulu, HI, 9-11 October 

2000, (extended abstract).

“Western States Fire Mission Team Award for Group Achievement,” NASA Ames Research Center Honor Awards 

ceremony, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA, Sept. 20, 2007.

Wilhite, Jamie, Robert Navarro, and Brent Cobleigh. “Altair Western States Fire Mission.” 2006 Engineering Annual Report, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, August 2007.

Unpublished Sources

Interviews with the author:

Vincent G. Ambrosia. 13 August 2008.

Mark Pestana 13 August 2008

Henana Posada 19 September 2008.

Thomas K. Rigney, 13 August 2008

Cobleigh, Brent. Ikhana Flight Reports. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, 2007.

Herrin, Randy. Situation Unit Leader, PNW IMT 3, email, “Subject: Re: WSFM Cal Fire Mission 2 is on ground.” 

Canyon Complex ICP, Chico, CA, 19 July 2008.

Ikhana flight plans (6/29/08) and meeting notes, Ikhana Team Meeting. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 
91

Edwards, CA, 3 July 2008.

Ikhana flight plans (9/19/08) and notes taken during WSFM-2008-03 by Peter W. Merlin, NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 19 September 2008.

Rigney, Thomas K. Ikhana Project Manager, email, “Subject: Ikhana Fire Mission Status.” NASA Dryden Flight 

Research Center, Edwards, CA, 19 July 2008.

“Western States Fire Mission Tech Brief,” NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, 26 September 2008.
92 Index

Aerodrome No. 5-vii

Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate-iv, 11

Airborne Antarctic Ozone Experiment (AAOE)-viii

Airborne Infrared Disaster Assessment System 

(AIRDAS)-20, 22

Airborne Science Program-11

Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC)- ix, 31, 

32, 33, 34, 40, 67, 68

Altair-4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

Altus-1, 2, 3, 4, 19, 20, 22

Ames Research Center-iv, vi, 3, 4, 19, 22, 39, 44, 

48, 55, 56, 60, 63, 64, 65, 69, 82

Atmospheric Radiation Measurement-Unmanned 

Aerospace Vehicle (ARM-UAV)-3

Autonomous Modular Sensor (AMS)-23, 26, 27, 28, 

29, 37, 39, 46, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 63, 65, 66, 

68, 69

Brass, Jim-56

Buoni, Gregory P.-27, 29, 32, 36, 40, 50, 51, 54, 67

Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER)-40, 

44, 46, 53, 54, 66

Certificate of Authorization (COA)-28, 29, 31, 33, 

36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 56, 66, 67, 68, 69

Cobleigh, Brent-10, 23, 27, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 

39, 45, 65, 68, 69

Collaborative Decision Environment (CDE)-29, 39, 

40, 44, 58, 64, 69

Dryden Flight Research Center-v, ix, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 

12, 14, 15, 20, 29, 45, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 

65, 69

Environmental Research and Sensor Technology 

(ERAST)- v, ix, 3, 4, 6

EOS-AM satellite-25

ER-2-23, 24, 25

Federal Aviaton Administration (FAA)-vii, 6, 7, 9, 

13, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 

46, 50, 51, 54, 59, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 78

fiber optics-11

First Response Experiment (FiRE)-3, 19, 20, 21, 22

Fryberger, Teresa-69

Gobal Positioning System (GPS)-37, 42, 43, 50, 64, 

67

Gnat-1, 2, 69

Google-27, 29, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 

49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 64, 65, 66, 

68

Gray Butte-3, 7, 8, 12, 15, 16, 31

Ground Control Station (GCS)-viii, 12, 13, 14, 15, 

16, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 39, 58, 67

Hamilton, Glenn-7

Howell, Kathleen-23, 27, 31, 35, 36, 37, 39, 65, 69 

Jatho, Carl-vii

Langley, Dr. Samuel Pierpont-vii

McBride, David D.-65

Moderate Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)-24, 

25, 26, 39, 42, 46 

MQ-1-1, 2, 4, 5

MQ-9-v, 4, 7, 10

National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC)-39, 40, 44, 

48, 51, 52

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA)-8, 9, 30, 63
93

Perseus-viii, ix

Pestana, Mark-iv,12, 14, 15, 17, 36, 58

Posada, Herman-iv, 12, 14, 15, 16, 58

Predator-ix, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 11, 14

Reaper-1, 4, 5, 9

Rigney, Tom-58, 66, 68

Sandia National Laboratories-3

Schwarzenegger, Arnold-29, 60, 82

Small High-Altitude Science Aircraft (SHASA)-ix 

Truckee Report-viii

U-2-23, 24

Unmanned Aircraft Program Office (UAPO)-31, 33

Walters, Del-60

Wegener, Dr. Steven S.-iv, 20

Wildfire Research and Applications Partnership 

(WRAP)-23, 40

Worden, Simon “Pete”-60
94 NASA History Publications

Documentary Histories

Exploring the Unknown

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Linda J. Lear, Jannelle Warren Findley, Ray A. Williamson, and Dwayne A. Day. 

Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume I, Organizing for Exploration. NASA SP-4407, 1995.

Logsdon, John M., ed, with Dwayne A. Day, and Roger D. Launius. Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents 

in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume II, External Relationships. NASA SP-4407, 1996.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Roger D. Launius, David H. Onkst, and Stephen J. Garber. Exploring the Unknown: 

Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume III, Using Space. NASA SP-4407, 

1998.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Ray A. Williamson, Roger D. Launius, Russell J. Acker, Stephen J. Garber, and 

Jonathan L. Friedman. Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume IV, Accessing Space. NASA SP-4407, 1999.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Amy Paige Snyder, Roger D. Launius, Stephen J. Garber, and Regan Anne Newport. Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume V, 

Exploring the Cosmos. NASA SP-4407, 2001.

Logsdon, John M., ed., with Stephen J. Garber, Roger D. Launius, and Ray A. Williamson. Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in the History of the U.S. Civil Space Program, Volume VI: Space and Earth Science. NASA SP-2004-4407, 2004. 

The Wind and Beyond

Hansen, James R., ed. The Wind and Beyond: Journey into the History of Aerodynamics in America, Volume 1, 

The Ascent of the Airplane. NASA SP-2003-4409, 2003. 

Hansen, James R., ed. The Wind and Beyond: Journey into the History of Aerodynamics in America, Volume 2, 

Reinventing the Airplane. NASA SP-2007-4409, 2007.

Brief Histories of NASA

Anderson, Frank W., Jr. Orders of Magnitude: A History of NACA and NASA, 1915-1980. NASA SP-4403, 1981. 

Bilstein, Roger E. Orders of Magnitude: A History of the NACA and NASA, 1915-1990. NASA SP-4406, 1989. 

Bilstein, Roger E. Testing Aircraft, Exploring Space: An Illustrated History of NACA and NASA. Baltimore: 

Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003. 

Critical Issues in the History of Spaceflight

Dick, Steven J. and Launius, Roger D. Critical Issues in the History of Spaceflight. (NASA SP-2006-4702).
95

Societal Impact of Spaceflight

Dick, Steven J. and Launius, Roger D. Societal Impact of Spaceflight. (NASA SP-2007-4801). 

Memoirs

Chertok, Boris. Rockets and People, Volume 1. (NASA SP-2005-4110). Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.

html for a pdf version of this document.

Chertok, Boris. Rockets and People: Creating a Rocket Industry, Volume II. (NASA SP-2006-4110).

Mudgway, Douglas J. William H. Pickering: America’s Deep Space Pioneer. (NASA SP-2007-4113). 

Aeronautics and Space Report of the President

The annual “President’s Report” is a summary of the Government’s aerospace activities each year. Mandated 

by law, it contains information on aerospace activities conducted by 14 Federal departments and agencies. 

It also contains an executive summary organized by agency, narrative sections organized by subject, as well 

as extensive appendices containing useful historical data on spacecraft launches, budget figures, key policy 

documents from the fiscal year, and a glossary. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.html for pdf versions of 

these documents.

NASA Historical Data Books

Van Nimmen, Jane, and Leonard C. Bruno, with Robert L. Rosholt. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. I: NASA 

Resources, 1958-1968. NASA SP-4012, 1976, rep. ed. 1988. 

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. II: Programs and Projects, 1958-1968. NASA SP-4012, 

1988. 

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. III: Programs and Projects, 1969-1978. NASA SP4012, 1988. 

Gawdiak, Ihor, with Helen Fedor. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. IV: NASA Resources, 1969-1978. NASA 

SP-4012, 1994.

Rumerman, Judy A. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. V: NASA Launch Systems, Space Transportation, Human 

Spaceflight, and Space Science, 1979-1988. NASA SP-4012, 1999.

Rumerman, Judy A. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. VI: NASA Space Applications, Aeronautics and Space 

Research and Technology, Tracking and Data Acquisition/Support Operations, Commercial Programs, and 

Resources, 1979-1988. NASA SP-4012, 1999. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics Chronology

Eugene M. Emme, comp. Aeronautics and Astronautics Chronology, 1915-1960. Aeronautics and Astronautics: 

An American Chronology of Science and Technology in the Exploration of Space, 1915-1960 (Washington, DC: 
96 NASA History Publications

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1961). Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.html for a pdf version of this document.

Eugene M. Emme, comp. Aeronautical and Astronautical Events of 1961. Report of the National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration to the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, 87th 

Cong., 2d. Sess. (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962). Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.

html for a pdf version of this document.

Astronautical and Aeronautical Events of 1962. Report to the Committee on Science and Astronautics, Report 

to the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Eighty-eighth Congress, first 

session (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963). 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1963: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4004, 1964. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1964: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4005, 1965. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1965: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4006, 1966. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1966: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4007, 1967. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4008, 1968. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1968: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4010, 1969. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1969: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4014, 1970. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1970: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4015, 1972. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1971: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4016, 1972. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1972: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4017, 1974. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1973: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4018, 1975.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1974: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4019, 1977. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1975: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4020, 1979. 

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1976: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4021, 1984.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1977: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4022, 1986.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1978: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4023, 1986.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1979-1984: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4024, 1988.

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985: Chronology of Science, Technology, and Policy. NASA SP-4025, 1990.
97

Gawdiak, Ihor Y., Ramon J. Miro, and Sam Stueland, comps. Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1986-1990: A 

Chronology. NASA SP-4027, 1997.

Gawdiak, Ihor Y. and Shetland, Charles. Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1991-1995: A Chronology. NASA SP2000-4028, 2000.

NASA Publications by Special Publication (SP) Numbers

Reference Works, NASA SP-4000

Grimwood, James M. Project Mercury: A Chronology. NASA SP-4001, 1963. 

Grimwood, James M., and Barton C. Hacker, with Peter J. Vorzimmer. Project Gemini Technology and Operations: A Chronology. NASA SP-4002, 1969. 

Link, Mae Mills. Space Medicine in Project Mercury. NASA SP-4003, 1965. 

Ertel, Ivan D., and Mary Louise Morse. The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Volume I, Through November 7, 

1962. NASA SP-4009, 1969. 

Morse, Mary Louise, and Jean Kernahan Bays. The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Volume II, November 8, 

1962-September 30, 1964. NASA SP-4009, 1973. 

Brooks, Courtney G., and Ivan D. Ertel. The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Volume III, October 1, 1964-

January 20, 1966. NASA SP-4009, 1973. 

Ertel, Ivan D., and Roland W. Newkirk, with Courtney G. Brooks. The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Volume 

IV, January 21, 1966-July 13, 1974. NASA SP-4009, 1978. 

Newkirk, Roland W., and Ivan D. Ertel, with Courtney G. Brooks. Skylab: A Chronology. NASA SP-4011, 1977.

Van Nimmen, Jane, and Leonard C. Bruno, with Robert L. Rosholt. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. I: NASA 

Resources, 1958-1968. NASA SP-4012, 1976, rep. ed. 1988. 

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. II: Programs and Projects, 1958-1968. NASA SP-4012, 

1988. 

Ezell, Linda Neuman. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. III: Programs and Projects, 1969-1978. NASA SP4012, 1988. 

Gawdiak, Ihor, with Helen Fedor. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. IV: NASA Resources, 1969-1978. NASA 

SP-4012, 1994.

Rumerman, Judy A. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. V: NASA Launch Systems, Space Transportation, Human 

Spaceflight, and Space Science, 1979-1988. NASA SP-4012, 1999.
98 NASA History Publications

Rumerman, Judy A. NASA Historical Data Book, Vol. VI: NASA Space Applications, Aeronautics and Space 

Research and Technology, Tracking and Data Acquisition/Support Operations, Commercial Programs, and 

Resources, 1979-1988. NASA SP-4012, 1999. 

Noordung, Hermann. The Problem of Space Travel: The Rocket Motor. Edited by Ernst Stuhlinger and J.D. 

Hunley, with Jennifer Garland. NASA SP-4026, 1995. 

Gawdiak, Ihor Y., Ramon J. Miro, and Sam Stueland, comps. Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1986-1990: A 

Chronology. NASA SP-4027, 1997.

Gawdiak, Ihor Y. and Shetland, Charles. Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1991-1995: A Chronology. NASA SP2000-4028, 2000.

Orloff, Richard W. Apollo by the Numbers: A Statistical Reference. NASA SP-2000-4029, 2000. Visit http://

history.nasa.gov/series95.html for a pdf version of this document..

Management Histories, NASA SP-4100

Rosholt, Robert L. An Administrative History of NASA, 1958-1963. NASA SP-4101, 1966. 

Levine, Arnold S. Managing NASA in the Apollo Era. NASA SP-4102, 1982. 

Roland, Alex. Model Research: The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1915-1958. NASA SP-4103, 

1985.

Fries, Sylvia D. NASA Engineers and the Age of Apollo. NASA SP-4104, 1992. 

Glennan, T. Keith. The Birth of NASA: The Diary of T. Keith Glennan. Edited by J.D. Hunley. NASA SP-4105, 

1993.

Seamans, Robert C. Aiming at Targets: The Autobiography of Robert C. Seamans. NASA SP-4106, 1996.

Garber, Stephen J., editor. Looking Backward, Looking Forward: Forty Years of Human Spaceflight Symposium.

NASA SP-2002-4107.

Mallick, Donald L. with Peter W. Merlin. The Smell of Kerosene: A Test Pilot’s Odyssey. NASA SP-4108.

Iliff, Kenneth W. and Curtis L. Peebles. From Runway to Orbit: Reflections of a NASA Engineer. NASA SP2004-4109.

Laufer, Alexander, Post, Todd, and Hoffman, Edward. Shared Voyage: Learning and Unlearning from Remarkable Projects. NASA SP-2005-4111.

Dawson, Virginia P. and Bowles, Mark D. Realizing the Dream of Flight: Biographical Essays in Honor of the 

Centennial of Flight, 1903-2003. NASA SP-2005-4112.
99

Project Histories, NASA SP-4200:

Swenson, Loyd S., Jr., James M. Grimwood, and Charles C. Alexander. This New Ocean: A History of Project 

Mercury. NASA SP-4201, 1966, reprinted 1999.

Green, Constance McLaughlin, and Milton Lomask. Vanguard: A History. NASA SP-4202, 1970; rep. ed. 

Smithsonian Institution Press, 1971.

Hacker, Barton C., and James M. Grimwood. On Shoulders of Titans: A History of Project Gemini. NASA SP4203, 1977, reprinted 2002.

Benson, Charles D. and William Barnaby Faherty. Moonport: A History of Apollo Launch Facilities and Operations. NASA SP-4204, 1978. University Press of Florida has republished the book in two volumes, Gateway 

to the Moon and Moon Launch!

Brooks, Courtney G., James M. Grimwood, and Loyd S. Swenson, Jr. Chariots for Apollo: A History of Manned 

Lunar Spacecraft. NASA SP- 4205, 1979. 

Bilstein, Roger E. Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicles. NASA SP4206, 1980 and 1996. Reprinted by the University Press of Florida.

Compton, W. David, and Charles D. Benson. Living and Working in Space: A History of Skylab. NASA SP4208, 1983.

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell. The Partnership: A History of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project.

NASA SP-4209, 1978. 

Hall, R. Cargill. Lunar Impact: A History of Project Ranger. NASA SP-4210, 1977. 

Newell, Homer E. Beyond the Atmosphere: Early Years of Space Science. NASA SP-4211, 1980. 

Ezell, Edward Clinton, and Linda Neuman Ezell. On Mars: Exploration of the Red Planet, 1958-1978. NASA 

SP-4212, 1984. 

Pitts, John A. The Human Factor: Biomedicine in the Manned Space Program to 1980. NASA SP-4213, 1985. 

Compton, W. David. Where No Man Has Gone Before: A History of Apollo Lunar Exploration Missions. NASA 

SP-4214, 1989.

Naugle, John E. First Among Equals: The Selection of NASA Space Science Experiments. NASA SP-4215, 

1991. 

Wallace, Lane E. Airborne Trailblazer: Two Decades with NASA Langley’s 737 Flying Laboratory. NASA SP4216, 1994.

Butrica, Andrew J. Beyond the Ionosphere: Fifty Years of Satellite Communications. NASA SP-4217, 1997.
100 NASA History Publications

Butrica, Andrew J. To See the Unseen: A History of Planetary Radar Astronomy. NASA SP-4218, 1996.

Mack, Pamela E., ed. From Engineering Science to Big Science: The NACA and NASA Collier Trophy Research 

Project Winners. NASA SP-4219, 1998.

Reed, R. Dale. Wingless Flight: The Lifting Body Story. NASA SP-4220, 1998.

Heppenheimer, T. A. The Space Shuttle Decision: NASA’s Search for a Reusable Space Vehicle. NASA SP-4221, 

1999.

Hunley, J. D., ed. Toward Mach 2: The Douglas D-558 Program. NASA SP-4222, 1999.

Swanson, Glen E., ed. “Before This Decade is Out...” Personal Reflections on the Apollo Program. NASA SP4223, 1999.

Tomayko, James E. Computers Take Flight: A History of NASA’s Pioneering Digital Fly-By-Wire Project. NASA 

SP-4224, 2000.

Morgan, Clay. Shuttle-Mir: The United States and Russia Share History’s Highest Stage. NASA SP-2001-4225.

Leary, William M. We Freeze to Please: A History of NASA’s Icing Research Tunnel and the Quest for Safety. 

NASA SP-2002-4226, 2002.

Mudgway, Douglas J. Uplink-Downlink: A History of the Deep Space Network, 1957-1997. NASA SP-2001-4227.

Dawson, Virginia P. and Mark D. Bowles. Taming Liquid Hydrogen: The Centaur Upper Stage Rocket, 1958-

2002. NASA SP-2004-4230.

Meltzer, Michael. Mission to Jupiter: A History of the Galileo Project. NASA SP-2007-4231.

Heppenheimer, T.A. Facing the Heat Barrier: A History of Hypersonics. NASA SP-2007-4232. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series 95.html for a pdf version of this document.

Tsiao, Sunny. “Read You Loud and Clear!” The Story of NASA’s Spaceflight Tracking and Data Network. NASA 

SP-2007-4233.

Center Histories, NASA SP-4300:

Rosenthal, Alfred. Venture into Space: Early Years of Goddard Space Flight Center. NASA SP-4301, 1985. 

Hartman, Edwin, P. Adventures in Research: A History of Ames Research Center, 1940-1965. NASA SP-4302, 

1970. 

Hallion, Richard P. On the Frontier: Flight Research at Dryden, 1946-1981. NASA SP-4303, 1984. 

Muenger, Elizabeth A. Searching the Horizon: A History of Ames Research Center, 1940-1976. NASA SP-4304, 

1985. 
101

Hansen, James R. Engineer in Charge: A History of the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, 1917-1958. NASA 

SP-4305, 1987. 

Dawson, Virginia P. Engines and Innovation: Lewis Laboratory and American Propulsion Technology. NASA 

SP-4306, 1991.

Dethloff, Henry C. “Suddenly Tomorrow Came...”: A History of the Johnson Space Center, 1957-1990. NASA 

SP-4307, 1993. 

 

Hansen, James R. Spaceflight Revolution: NASA Langley Research Center from Sputnik to Apollo. NASA SP4308, 1995.

 

Wallace, Lane E. Flights of Discovery: An Illustrated History of the Dryden Flight Research Center. NASA 

SP-4309, 1996.

 

Herring, Mack R. Way Station to Space: A History of the John C. Stennis Space Center. NASA SP-4310, 1997.

 

Wallace, Harold D., Jr. Wallops Station and the Creation of an American Space Program. NASA SP-4311, 1997.

 

Wallace, Lane E. Dreams, Hopes, Realities. NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center: The First Forty Years.

NASA SP-4312, 1999.

 

Dunar, Andrew J. and Waring, Stephen P. Power to Explore: A History of Marshall Space Flight Center, 1960-

1990. NASA SP-4313, 1999.

 

Bugos, Glenn E. Atmosphere of Freedom: Sixty Years at the NASA Ames Research Center. NASA SP-2000-

4314, 2000.

 

Schultz, James. Crafting Flight: Aircraft Pioneers and the Contributions of the Men and Women of NASA Langley 

Research Center. NASA SP-2003-4316, 2003.

 

Bowles, Mark D. Science in Flux: NASA’s Nuclear Program at Plum Brook Station, 1955-2005. NASA SP2006-4317.

 

Wallace, Lane E. Flights of Discovery: Sixty Years of Flight Research at the Dryden Flight Research Center.

NASA SP-4318, 2007. 

General Histories, NASA SP-4400:

Corliss, William R. NASA Sounding Rockets, 1958-1968: A Historical Summary. NASA SP-4401, 1971. 

 

Wells, Helen T., Susan H. Whiteley, and Carrie Karegeannes. Origins of NASA Names. NASA SP-4402, 1976. 

 

Anderson, Frank W., Jr. Orders of Magnitude: A History of NACA and NASA, 1915-1980. NASA SP-4403, 

1981. 

 

Sloop, John L. Liquid Hydrogen as a Propulsion Fuel, 1945-1959. NASA SP-4404, 1978. 
102 NASA History Publications

Roland, Alex. A Spacefaring People: Perspectives on Early Spaceflight. NASA SP-4405, 1985. 

 

Bilstein, Roger E. Orders of Magnitude: A History of the NACA and NASA, 1915-1990. NASA SP-4406, 

1989. 

 

Siddiqi, Asif A., Challenge to Apollo: The Soviet Union and the Space Race, 1945-1974. NASA SP-2000-4408, 

2000.

 

Hogan, Thor. Mars Wars: The Rise and Fall of the Space Exploration Initiative. NASA SP-2007-4410, 2007.

Monographs in Aerospace History (SP-4500 Series):

 

Launius, Roger D. and Aaron K. Gillette, comps. Toward a History of the Space Shuttle: An Annotated Bibliography. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 1, 1992. 

 

Launius, Roger D., and J.D. Hunley, comps. An Annotated Bibliography of the Apollo Program. Monograph in 

Aerospace History No. 2, 1994. 

 

Launius, Roger D. Apollo: A Retrospective Analysis. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 3, 1994.

 

Hansen, James R. Enchanted Rendezvous: John C. Houbolt and the Genesis of the Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous 

Concept. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 4, 1995.

 

Gorn, Michael H. Hugh L. Dryden’s Career in Aviation and Space. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 5, 

1996.

 

Powers, Sheryll Goecke. Women in Flight Research at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center from 1946 to 1995. 

Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 6, 1997.

 

Portree, David S.F. and Robert C. Trevino. Walking to Olympus: An EVA Chronology. Monograph in Aerospace 

History, No. 7, 1997. 

 

Logsdon, John M., moderator. Legislative Origins of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958: Proceedings of an Oral History Workshop. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 8, 1998. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/

series95.html for a pdf version of this document. 

 

Rumerman, Judy A., comp. U.S. Human Spaceflight, A Record of Achievement 1961-1998. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 9, 1998.

 

Portree, David S. F. NASA’s Origins and the Dawn of the Space Age. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 10, 

1998.

 

Logsdon, John M. Together in Orbit: The Origins of International Cooperation in the Space Station. Monograph 

in Aerospace History, No. 11, 1998.

 

Phillips, W. Hewitt. Journey in Aeronautical Research: A Career at NASA Langley Research Center. Monograph 

in Aerospace History, No. 12, 1998.
103

Braslow, Albert L. A History of Suction-Type Laminar-Flow Control with Emphasis on Flight Research. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 13, 1999.

 

Logsdon, John M., moderator. Managing the Moon Program: Lessons Learned From Apollo. Monograph in 

Aerospace History, No. 14, 1999.

 

Perminov, V.G. The Difficult Road to Mars: A Brief History of Mars Exploration in the Soviet Union. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 15, 1999. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.html for a pdf version of this 

document..

 

Tucker, Tom. Touchdown: The Development of Propulsion Controlled Aircraft at NASA Dryden. Monograph in 

Aerospace History, No. 16, 1999.

 

Maisel, Martin, Giulanetti, Demo J., and Dugan, Daniel C. The History of the XV-15 Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft: 

From Concept to Flight. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 17, 2000.

 

Jenkins, Dennis R. Hypersonics Before the Shuttle: A Concise History of the X-15 Research Airplane. Monograph 

in Aerospace History, No. 18, 2000.

 

Chambers, Joseph R. Partners in Freedom: Contributions of the Langley Research Center to U.S. Military Aircraft of the 1990s. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 19, 2000 (NASA SP-2000-4519).

 

Waltman, Gene L. Black Magic and Gremlins: Analog Flight Simulations at NASA’s Flight Research Center.

Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 20, 2000 (NASA SP-2000-4520).

 

Portree, David S.F. Humans to Mars: Fifty Years of Mission Planning, 1950-2000. Monograph in Aerospace 

History, No. 21, 2001 (NASA SP-2001-4521).

 

Thompson, Milton O. with J.D. Hunley. Flight Research: Problems Encountered and What They Should Teach 

Us. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 22, 2001 (NASA SP-2001-4522).

 

Tucker, Tom. The Eclipse Project. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 23, 2001 (NASA SP-2001-4523).

 

Siddiqi, Asif A. Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958-2000. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 24, 2002 (NASA SP-2002-4524).

 

Merlin, Peter W. Mach 3+: NASA/USAF YF-12 Flight Research, 1969-1979. Monograph in Aerospace History, 

No. 25, 2001 (NASA SP-2001-4525).

 

Anderson, Seth B. Memoirs of an Aeronautical Engineer: Flight Tests at Ames Research Center: 1940-1970. 

Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 26, 2002 (NASA SP-2002-4526)

 

Renstrom, Arthur G. Wilbur and Orville Wright: A Bibliography Commemorating the One-Hundredth Anniversary of the First Powered Flight on December 17, 1903. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 27, 2002 (NASA 

SP-2002-4527).

 

No monograph 28.
104 NASA History Publications

Chambers, Joseph R. Concept to Reality: Contributions of the NASA Langley Research Center to U.S. Civil 

Aircraft of the 1990s. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 29, 2003. (SP-2003-4529).

 

Peebles, Curtis, editor. The Spoken Word: Recollections of Dryden History, The Early Years. Monograph in 

Aerospace History, No. 30, 2003. (SP-2003-4530).

 

Jenkins, Dennis R., Tony Landis, and Jay Miller. American X-Vehicles: An Inventory- X-1 to X-50. Monograph 

in Aerospace History, No. 31, 2003 (SP-2003-4531).

 

Renstrom, Arthur G. Wilbur and Orville Wright: A Chronology Commemorating the One-Hundredth Anniversary 

of the First Powered Flight on December 17, 1903. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 32, 2003. (NASA 

SP-2003-4532).

 

Bowles, Mark D. and Arrighi, Robert S. NASA’s Nuclear Frontier: The Plum Brook Research Reactor. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 33, 2004. (SP-2004-4533).

 

Matranga, Gene J.; Wayne C. Ottinger; Calvin R.; Jarvis, and D. Christian Gelzer. Unconventional, Contrary, 

and Ugly: The Lunar Landing Research Vehicle. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 35, 2006. (NASA SP2004-4535).

 

McCurdy, Howard E. Low Cost Innovation in Spaceflight: The History of the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous 

(NEAR) Mission. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 36, 2005. (NASA SP-2005-4536).

 

Seamans, Robert C. Jr. Project Apollo: The Tough Decisions. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 37, 2005. 

(NASA SP-2005-4537).

 

Lambright, W. Henry. NASA and the Environment: The Case of Ozone Depletion. Monograph in Aerospace 

History, No. 38, 2005. (NASA SP-2005-4538).

 

Chambers, Joseph R. Innovation in Flight: Research of the NASA Langley Research Center on Revolutionary 

Advanced Concepts for Aeronautics. Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 39, 2005. (NASA SP-2005-4539). 

This monograph is only available on-line. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.html.

 

Phillips, W. Hewitt. Journey Into Space Research: Continuation of a Career at NASA Langley Research Center. 

Monograph in Aerospace History, No. 40, 2005. (NASA SP-2005-4540). This monograph is only available online. Visit http://history.nasa.gov/series95.html.

 

Rumerman, Judy A., comp. U.S. Human Spaceflight: A Record of Achievement, 1961-2006. Monograph in Aerospace History No. 41, 2007. (NASA SP-2007-4541). This is an updating by Chris Gamble and Gabriel Okolski 

of the similarly titled Monograph 9 that was published in 1998. 

Dryden Historical Studies

Tomayko, James E., and Christian Gelzer, editor. The Story of Self-Repairing Flight Control Systems. Dryden 

Historical Study #1.

 

Dana, William H. X-38: Flight Testing the Prototype Crew Recovery Vehicle. Dryden Historical Study #2.
105

Electronic Media (SP-4600 Series)

Remembering Apollo 11: The 30th Anniversary Data Archive CD-ROM. (NASA SP-4601, 1999) 

 

Remembering Apollo 11: The 35th Anniversary Data Archive CD-ROM. (NASA SP-2004-4601, 2004). This is 

an update of the 1999 edition.

 

The Mission Transcript Collection: U.S. Human Spaceflight Missions from Mercury Redstone 3 to Apollo 17. 

(SP-2000-4602, 2001). Available commercially from CG Publishing.

 

Shuttle-Mir: the United States and Russia Share History’s Highest Stage. (NASA SP-2001-4603, 2002). This 

CD-ROM is available from NASA CORE.

 

U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission presents Born of Dreams ~ Inspired by Freedom. (NASA SP-2004-4604, 

2004).

 

Of Ashes and Atoms: A Documentary on the NASA Plum Brook Reactor Facility. (NASA SP-2005-4605).

 

Taming Liquid Hydrogen: The Centaur Upper Stage Rocket Interactive CD-ROM. (NASA SP-2004-4606, 

2004).

 

Fueling Space Exploration: The History of NASA’s Rocket Engine Test Facility DVD. (NASA SP-2005-4607).

 

Altitude Wind Tunnel at NASA Glenn Research Center. An Interactive History. (NASA SP-2008-4608).

Conference Proceedings (SP-4700 Series)

Dick, Steven J. and Cowing, Keith L, ed. Risk and Exploration: Earth, Sea and the Stars. (NASA SP-2005-4701).

 

Dick, Steven J. and Launius, Roger D. Critical Issues in the History of Spaceflight. (NASA SP-2006-4702).

Historical Reports (NASA HHR)

Boone, W. Fred. NASA Office of Defense Affairs: The First Five Years. (NASA HHR-32, 1970).

 

Research in NASA History: A Guide to the NASA History Program. (NASA HHR-64, revised June 1997).

NASA Special Reports (NASA SP-4900)

Kloman, Erasmus H. Unmanned Space Project Management: Surveyor and Lunar Orbiter. (NASA SP-4901, 

1972). 

Other NASA Special Publications, not in the formal NASA History Series

The Impact of Science on Society. NASA SP-482 by James Burke, Jules Bergman, and Isaac Asimov, 1985.

 

Space Station Requirements and Transportation Options for Lunar Outpost. NASA, 1990.
106 NASA History Publications

Space Station Freedom Accommodation of the Human Exploration Initiative. NASA, 1990.

 

Why Man Explores. NASA EP-125, 1976.

 

Results of the Second Manned Suborbital Space Flight, July 21, 1961. NASA, 1961. 

 

Results of the Second U.S. Manned Orbital Space Flight. NASA SP-6, 1962. 

 

Results of the Third U.S. Manned Orbital Space Flight. NASA SP-12, 1962. 

 

Mercury Project Summary including Results of the Fourth Manned Orbital Flight. NASA SP-45, 1963. 

 

X-15 Research Results With a Selected Bibliography. NASA SP-60, 1965. 

 

Exploring Space with a Camera. NASA SP-168, 1968.

 

Aerospace Food Technology. NASA SP-202, 1969.

 

What Made Apollo a Success? NASA SP-287, 1971.

 

Evolution of the Solar System. NASA SP-345, 1976.

 

Pioneer Odyssey (NASA SP-349/396, revised edition, 1977) by Richard Fimmel, William Swindell, and Eric 

Burgess.

 

Apollo Expeditions to the Moon. NASA SP-350, 1975. 

 

Apollo Over the Moon: A View From Orbit. (NASA SP-362, 1978) edited by Harold Masursky, G.W. Colton, 

and Farouk El-Baz.

 

Introduction to the Aerodynamics of Flight. (NASA SP-367, 1975) by Theodore A. Talay.

 

Biomedical Results of Apollo. (NASA SP-368, 1975), edited by Richard S. Johnston, Lawrence F. Dietlein, 

M.D., and Charles A. Berry, M.D.

 

Skylab EREP Investigations Summary. (NASA SP-399, 1978)

 

Skylab: Our First Space Station. (NASA SP-400, 1977), edited by Leland F. Belew.

 

Skylab, Classroom in Space. (NASA SP-401, 1977), edited by Lee Summerlin.

 

A New Sun: Solar Results from Skylab. (NASA SP-402, 1979) by John A. Eddy and edited by Rein Ise.

 

Skylab’s Astronomy and Space Sciences. (NASA SP-404, 1979), edited by Charles A. Lundquist.

The Space Shuttle. (NASA SP-407, 1976)

 
107

The Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence. (NASA SP-419, 1977), edited by Philip Morrison, John Billingham, 

and John Wolfe.

 

Atlas of Mercury. (NASA SP-423, 1978) by Merton E. Davies, Stephen E. Dwornik, et. al.

 

The Voyage of Mariner 10: Mission to Venus and Mercury. (NASA SP-424, 1978) by James A. Dunne and Eric 

Burgess.

 

The Martian Landscape. (NASA SP-425, 1978)

 

The Space Shuttle at Work. (NASA SP-432/EP-156 1979) by Howard Allaway.

 

Project Orion: A Design Study of a System for Detecting Extrasolar Planets. (NASA SP-436, 1980), edited by 

David C. Black.

Wind Tunnels of NASA. (NASA SP-440, 1981). 

 

Viking Orbiter Views of Mars. (NASA SP-441, 1980)

 

The High Speed Frontier: Case Histories of Four NACA Programs, 1920-1950. (NASA SP-445, 1980.)

The Star Splitters: The High Energy Astronomy Observatories. (NASA SP-466, 1984) by Wallace H. Tucker.

 

Planetary Geology in the 1980s. (NASA SP-467, 1985) by Joseph Veverka.

 

Quest for Performance: The Evolution of Modern Aircraft. (NASA SP-468, 1985.) 

 

The Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF): Mission 1 Experiments. (SP-473, 1984) ed. by Lenwood G. 

Clark, William H. Kinar, et. al.

 

Voyager 1 and 2, Atlas of Saturnian Satellites. (NASA SP-474, 1984) edited by Raymond Batson.

 

Far Travelers: The Exploring Machines. (NASA SP-480, 1985) by Oran W. Nicks.

 

Living Aloft: Human Requirements for Extended Spaceflight. (NASA SP-483, 1985) 

 

Space Shuttle Avionics System. (NASA SP-504, 1989) by John F. Hanaway and Robert W. Moorehead.

 

Life Into Space: Space Life Sciences Research, Volumes I - III. 1965-2003 (NASA SP-534).

 

Flight Research at Ames, 1940-1997. (NASA SP-3300, 1998).

 

The Planetary Quarantine Program. (NASA SP-4902, 1974).

 

Spaceborne Digital Computer Systems. (NASA SP-8070, 1971).

 

Magellan: The Unveiling of Venus. (JPL-400-345, 1989)
108 NASA History Publications

Guide to Magellan Image Interpretation. (JPL-93-24) by John Ford, Jeffrey Plaut, et. al.

 

The Apollo Program Summary Report. (Document # JSC-09423, April 1975)

 

Saturn Illustrated Chronology. (MHR-5, Marshall Space Flight Center, fifth edition, 1971) prepared by David 

S. Akens.

 

Celebrating a Century of Flight. (NASA SP-2002-09-511-HQ). Edited by Tony Springer.

Present and Future State of the Art in Guidance Computer Memories. (NASA TN D-4224, 1967) by Robert C. 

Ricci.

NASA Educational Publications

Apollo 13 “Houston, we’ve got a problem.” (NASA EP-76, 1970). 

 

On the Moon with Apollo 16: A Guide to the Descartes Region. (NASA EP-95, 1972)

 

Skylab: A Guidebook. (NASA EP-107, 1973), by Leland F. Belew and Ernst Stuhlinger.

 

Spacelab: An International Short-Stay Orbiting Laboratory. (NASA EP-165) by Walter Froehlich.

 

A Meeting with the Universe: Science Discoveries from the Space Program. (NASA EP-177, 1981).

NASA Publications (NPs)

Science in Orbit: The Shuttle & Spacelab Experience: 1981-1986. (NASA NP-119, 1988). 

NASA Conference Proceedings

 

Life in the Universe: Proceedings of a conference held at NASA Ames Research Center Moffet Field, California, 

June 19-20, 1979. (NASA CP-2156, 1981), edited by John Billingham.

 

Proceedings of the X-15 First Flight 30th Anniversary Celebration of June 8, 1989.

NASA Technical Memoranda

Destination Moon: A History of the Lunar Orbiter Program. (NASA TM-3487, 1977) by Bruce Byers. 

New Series in NASA History Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics.

 

Peebles, Curtis. The X-43A Flight Research Program: Lessons Learned on the Road to Mach 10. AIAA, 2008. 

 

Merlin, Peter. From Archangel to Senior Crown: The Design and Development of the Blackbird. AIAA, 2008.

 
109

New Series in NASA History Published by the Johns Hopkins University Press:

Cooper, Henry S. F., Jr. Before Lift-off: The Making of a Space Shuttle Crew. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987.

 

McCurdy, Howard E. The Space Station Decision: Incremental Politics and Technological Choice. Baltimore: 

Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990.

 

Hufbauer, Karl. Exploring the Sun: Solar Science Since Galileo. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 

1991.

 

McCurdy, Howard E. Inside NASA: High Technology and Organizational Change in the U.S. Space Program. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.

 

Lambright, W. Henry. Powering Apollo: James E. Webb of NASA. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 

1995.

 

Bromberg, Joan Lisa. NASA and the Space Industry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.

 

Beattie, Donald A. Taking Science to the Moon: Lunar Experiments and the Apollo Program. Baltimore: Johns 

Hopkins University Press, 2001.

 

McCurdy, Howard E. Faster, Better, Cheaper: Low-Cost Innovation in the U.S. Space Program. Baltimore: Johns 

Hopkins University Press, 2001.

 

Johnson, Stephen B. The Secret of Apollo: Systems Management in American and European Space Programs. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002.

 

Lambright, W. Henry, editor. Space Policy in the 21st Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 

2002.

 

Bilstein, Roger E. Testing Aircraft, Exploring Space: An Illustrated History of NACA and NASA. Baltimore: 

Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.

 

Butrica, Andrew J. Single Stage to Orbit: Politics, Space Technology, and the Quest for Reusable Rocketry. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005.

 

Conway, Erik M. High-Speed Dreams: NASA and the Technopolitics of Supersonic Transportation, 1945-1999. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005.

 

Launius, Roger D. and Howard E. McCurdy. Robots in Space: Technology, Evolution, and Interplanetary Travel. 

Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008.

 

Conway, Erik M. Atmospheric Science at NASA: A History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008. 
110 NASA History Publications

NASA History Titles Published by Texas A&M University Press

Schorn, Ronald A. Planetary Astronomy: From Ancient Times to the Third Millennium. College Station: Texas 

A&M University Press, 1998.

NASA History Titles Published by The University Press of Kentucky

Gorn, Michael H. Expanding the Envelope: Flight Research at NACA and NASA. Lexington: The University 

Press of Kentucky, 2001.

 

Reed, R. Dale. Wingless Flight: The Lifting Body Story. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2002.

 

Ed. by Launius, Roger D. and Dennis R. Jenkins. To Reach the High Frontier: A History of U.S. Launch Vehicles. 

Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2002.

NASA History Titles Published by the University Press of Florida

Ed. by Swanson, Glen W. “Before This Decade is Out...”: Personal Reflections on the Apollo Program. Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 2002.

 

Benson, Charles D. and William B. Faherty. Moon Launch!: A History of the Saturn-Apollo Launch Operations. 

Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 2001.

 

Benson, Charles D. and William B. Faherty. Gateway to the Moon: Building the Kennedy Space Center Launch 

Complex. Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 2001.

 

Bilstein, Roger E. Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicles. (Originally 

published as NASA SP-4206 in 1980 and reprinted in 1996). Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 

2003.

 

Siddiqi, Asif A. The Soviet Space Race with Apollo. Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 2003.

 

Siddiqi, Asif A. Sputnik and the Soviet Space Challenge. Gainesville: The University Press of Florida, 2003.

 

Lipartito, Kenneth and Butler, Orville R. A History of the Kennedy Space Center. Gainesville: The University 

Press of Florida, 2007.

NASA History Titles Published by Harwood Academic Press

Ed. by Roger D. Launius, John M. Logsdon and Robert W. Smith. Reconsidering Sputnik: Forty Years Since the 

Soviet Satellite. London: Harwood Academic Press, 2000.

NASA History Titles Published by the University of Illinois Press

Ed. by Roger D. Launius and Howard McCurdy. Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential Leadership. Urbana, 

IL: University of Illinois Press, 1997.
111

NASA History Titles Published by Greenwood Press

Launius, Roger D. Frontiers of Space Exploration. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998.

NASA History Titles Published by the Smithsonian Institution Press

Heppenheimer, T.A. Development of the Shuttle, 1972-1981. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 

2002.

 

Dethloff, Henry C. and Ronald A. Schorn. Voyager’s Grand Tour: To the Outer Planets and Beyond. Washington, 

DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2003.

 

Hallion, Richard P. and Michael H. Gorn. On the Frontier: Experimental Flight at NASA Dryden. Washington, 

DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2003.

NASA History Titles Published by CG Publishing, Inc.

The Mission Transcript Collection: U.S. Human Spaceflight Missions From Mercury Redstone 3 to Apollo 17.

(NASA SP-2000-4602).

NASA History Titles Published by Abrams Press

Dick, Steven, editor, et. al. America In Space: NASA’s First Fifty Years. New York: Abrams, 2007.

America in Space, published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc., New York.

Miscellaneous Publications of NASA History

Dawson, Virginia. Ideas Into Hardware: A History of the Rocket Engine Test Facility at the NASA Glenn Research Center. Cleveland, 2004.
112 NASA History Publications