AQM-34 role in current UAV/UAS design and technology

This morning as I drove to the airfield like I do on most mornings I was thinking about what I should write about in this week’s blog on an early design UAV/UAS. At that very moment I was crossing the intersection at Plant 42 I noticed the name of a street that I’ve passed dozens of times on this familiar route. Ryan Aeronautical Way. I had my answer.
Unmanned aerial vehicles of the pre-1970’s area were designed to conduct two missions. Reconnaissance and as an air to surface weapon both of which could, in theory, guide themselves to their intended target or named area of interest and execute command intent. Depending on the difference between the missions, one way or return, that system should be able to deliver itself to the target with accuracy or to return to a predetermined location and drop its reconnaissance payload and either crash, be recovered or self-destruct. (Mitchell Institute for Airpower Studies, 2015). Many designs had been tested during this time but the one that sticks most in my mind is the Ryan Aeronautical AQM-34 Firebee and the Israeli’s version, the 1241, bought for the 1973 Yom Kippur war. The Israeli’s, due to the purchase agreement, weren’t allowed to use the Firebee’s for certain missions in the current configuration so they changed it to perform recon and decoy missions. (Tulli, 2012). This version was modified to take off from a rail launcher using RATO (rocket assisted take-off) that would be jettisoned soon after separation from the rail. The systems was covered in radar absorbing paint and covers for the engine cowl installed to lower the radar signature. (Ambrosia, Wegner & Schoenung, 2011). The early US systems were recovered through the use of MARS (mid-air retrieval system) with the use of a hook, parachute and the helicopter. The updated Israeli version used a ground hook for retrieval much like the Scan Eagles retrieval system. During the war in 1973 the Firebees successfully evaded 32 of the missiles and destroyed 11 with their Shrike anti-radar missiles. (Ambrosia, Wegner & Schoenung, 2011). As a result the Egyptians fired their entire inventory of surface-to-air missiles at the Firebees—43 missiles in all. This mission was accomplished with no injuries to Israeli pilots, who soon swooped in over the depleted defenses. (Ambrosia, Wegner & Schoenung, 2011).

The Scan Eagle is similar in the reconnaissance intent and not so much the decoy piece. One can definitely draw parallels to the Firebee if for nothing more than LRE (launch and recovery element) and MCE (mission control element) as well as, possibly, the ground control. Early versions of Firebee were controlled from the launch aircraft a C-130. The 1241, after redesign, utilized a GCS (ground control station) of sorts and radar much like the predator family of UAVs which can be seen in attached YouTube video. (Tulli, 2012). The Firebee utilized a jet engine for propulsion whereas most, not all, systems today use either a normally aspirated engine or turbo-prop. The MQ-1 Grey Eagle utilizes a diesel engine, the MQ-9 Reaper a turbo-prop and the all new Avenger C a traditional jet engine. (General Atomics, 2015). It’s very evident that designs such as the firebee have influenced the designs of today. These systems also acted as testbeds for the low absorbable technology in the form of radar absorbing materials and paint created in the late 1950’s. (Richelson, 2015). In December 1971 the Air Force, after 9 months of testing and resolving issues, tested a Firebee with the new model 234 weapons system. The AV (air vehicle) was launched from the underbelly of a DC-130 via the microwave commanded GCS. After significant redesign of the systems which included the RPV flight control systems a newly designed weapons and launch system the Air Force tested an electro-optical missile utilizing a commercial grade video camera. This missile was successfully deployed off the rail of the Firebee and destroyed a simulated SAM missile site. (Quinty, 2015). Today, MQ-9 and MQ-1 systems launch hellfire missiles at military targets as a direct result of the testing conducted using the AGM-34 and 1241 Firebee. New technology of today will influence the designs of tomorrow most notably computing, autopilot systems, networking ability as well as sense and avoid in the national airspace.

REFERNCES

Ambrosia, V., Schoenung S., & Wegener, S. (2011) History of unmanned aerial systems. Retrieved from ftp://eco.arc.nasa.gov/pub/VinceA/Spain/

General Atomics. (2015). Predator C Avenger. Retrieved from http://www.ga-asi.com/predator-c-avenger

Mitchell Institute for Airpower Studies. (2010). Air Force UAVS: The secret history. Arlington, VA: Ehrhard.

Quinty, J. (2014). First Missile Launch & Direct Hit from a Drone-RPV: Firebee BGM-34A 1971 US Air Force-Ryan. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9JIZa_meVU

Richelson, J. (2015). Science, technology and the CIA. Retrieved from http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB54/

Tulli, Til. (2012). Teledyne Ryen 124I FireBee a reconnaissance jet UAV recovered in mid-air by helicopter. [Video File] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV8jbGo2X68

Posted in Uncategorized.