EXPO-SEDE_ET_2007_381405_EN.pdf — page 17

the coming decade. Very few countries outside the US and the EU have current plans for 
nal experience has not been the most rewarding. Denmark has now withdrawn the 
ystem because of technical shortcomings and The Netherlands may soon look for a replacement 
. Unlike the US, Israel has successfully used industrial cooperation and 
chnology transfers as a pillar of its UAV exports and EU countries may want to follow a 
ad of at least 500 kg over a range of at 
ast 300 km. The MTCR also limits the possibility of exporting UAVs and UCAVs with ranges 
ed in R&D and local 
roduction using some imported technology. This could result in a proliferation of independent 
access to technology may have less chance to market their products. At the same time, 
                                                
(possible) acquisition. 
 
The most successful European UAV on the export market is the Sperwer. This was exported to 
Canada as a ‘stopgap’ order for immediate use in Afghanistan, and is also used by several EU 
member states. However, the system is already beginning to become outdated and the 
operatio
s
too48.  
 
Surprisingly, a small company in Austria, Siebel, may be the most successful exporter of UAVs 
in the near future. In the spring of 2006 Siebel sold no less then 80 Camcopter S-100 UAVs to 
the United Arab Emirates (UAE), after earlier gaining a small order from Egypt and the interest 
of the US Navy and Coast Guard. While several other EU and US designs are offered for export 
or being developed, this sale is significant because the Camcopter is basically the first sale of 
any helicopter-type UAV capable of VTOL operations. It also shows how successful UAV 
technology does not necessarily come from a larger company with extensive financial and 
technical resources. The involvement of the emerging UAE arms industry in the deal is also 
significant – some parts of the Camcopter will be produced by the UAE Research and 
Technology Centre49
te
similar approach.  
 
One important consideration for any future export of UAVs and UCAVs is the fact that such 
systems – if their payloads and ranges were of sufficient magnitude - would fall within the 
restrictions imposed by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). This basically bans 
exports of complete unmanned airborne systems that could be used as delivery systems for 
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) - specifically including UAVs and UCAVs and their 
technology - if the aircraft is capable of carrying a paylo
le
of 300 km or more regardless of the payload capacity50.  
 
Another area of concern is protection of technology. Several countries planning UAVs seem to 
regard the ‘newness’ of these systems as an opening to get involv
p
UAV producers, whose use and misuse of UAVs cannot be controlled.  
 
A third important consideration is, as with all arms acquisition, the dependence on a supplier. 
This has already been mentioned as an issue for EU countries acquiring UAVs, but for countries 
with less strong, stable and mutually dependent relations with suppliers of either UAVs or 
mission equipment, the issue of dependency plays even stronger – certainly for some of the 
bigger countries like India. Such dependency is often only acceptable when the supplier is 
reliable and able and willing to support the exported UAV over the many years of its life. This 
has implications for potential exports: countries with a record of imposing ‘embargoes’ or 
limiting 
 
48 Note on Denmark; ‘Netherlands prepares for small and mini UAV competitions, flags Sperwer upgrade’, Flight 
International, 11 Sep. 2006, URL http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2006/09/11/208930/netherlands-prepares-
for-small-and-mini-uav-competitions-flags-sperwer.html. 
49 Jane’s Defence Weekly, 26 Apr. 2006, p. 17. 
50 For more on the MTCR, see the SIPRI website, URL 
<http://www.sipri.org/contents/expcon/mtcr_documents.html>. 
 
13