The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) classifies unmanned aerial systems (UAS) into "Groups" according to their size and capability, a joint system that replaced the service branches' separate categorization schemes in 2011. [1] [2] [3]
The "Group" system has five categories, whose capabilities increase with the number. [4]
UAS Group | Maximum weight ( lb) ( MGTOW) |
Nominal operating altitude ( ft) |
Speed ( kn) | Representative UAS |
---|---|---|---|---|
Group 1 | 0–20 | < 1,200 AGL | 100 | RQ-11 Raven, WASP, Puma, PDW C100 |
Group 2 | 21–55 | < 3,500 AGL | < 250 | ScanEagle, Flexrotor, SIC5 |
Group 3 | < 1,320 | < FL 180 | Shield AI V-BAT, RQ-7B Shadow, RQ-21 Blackjack, Navmar RQ-23 Tigershark, Arcturus-UAV Jump 20, Arcturus T-20, SIC25, Resolute ISR Resolute Eagle, Vanilla Unmanned | |
Group 4 | > 1,320 | Any airspeed | MQ-8B Fire Scout, MQ-1A/B Predator, MQ-1C Gray Eagle | |
Group 5 | > FL 180 | MQ-9 Reaper, RQ-4 Global Hawk, MQ-4C Triton |
From about 2004 to 2011, [4] [5] U.S. military planners used various "Tier Systems" to designate the various individual aircraft elements in an overall plan for integrated operations. [6] The Tiers do not refer to specific models of aircraft, but rather roles the aircraft would fill. The U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Army each have their own tier system.
Role currently filled by the AAI RQ-7 Shadow, although USMC planners do not view this aircraft as meeting future Tier III requirements. [14]
UAS were grouped in four classes under the Future Combat Systems, which was the Army's principal modernization program from 2003 to early 2009:
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) classifies unmanned aerial systems (UAS) into "Groups" according to their size and capability, a joint system that replaced the service branches' separate categorization schemes in 2011. [1] [2] [3]
The "Group" system has five categories, whose capabilities increase with the number. [4]
UAS Group | Maximum weight ( lb) ( MGTOW) |
Nominal operating altitude ( ft) |
Speed ( kn) | Representative UAS |
---|---|---|---|---|
Group 1 | 0–20 | < 1,200 AGL | 100 | RQ-11 Raven, WASP, Puma, PDW C100 |
Group 2 | 21–55 | < 3,500 AGL | < 250 | ScanEagle, Flexrotor, SIC5 |
Group 3 | < 1,320 | < FL 180 | Shield AI V-BAT, RQ-7B Shadow, RQ-21 Blackjack, Navmar RQ-23 Tigershark, Arcturus-UAV Jump 20, Arcturus T-20, SIC25, Resolute ISR Resolute Eagle, Vanilla Unmanned | |
Group 4 | > 1,320 | Any airspeed | MQ-8B Fire Scout, MQ-1A/B Predator, MQ-1C Gray Eagle | |
Group 5 | > FL 180 | MQ-9 Reaper, RQ-4 Global Hawk, MQ-4C Triton |
From about 2004 to 2011, [4] [5] U.S. military planners used various "Tier Systems" to designate the various individual aircraft elements in an overall plan for integrated operations. [6] The Tiers do not refer to specific models of aircraft, but rather roles the aircraft would fill. The U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. Army each have their own tier system.
Role currently filled by the AAI RQ-7 Shadow, although USMC planners do not view this aircraft as meeting future Tier III requirements. [14]
UAS were grouped in four classes under the Future Combat Systems, which was the Army's principal modernization program from 2003 to early 2009:
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)