2003 IMTA Proceedings - International Military Testing Association

experimentation report. The structured interview schedule continues to be used to
collect data from Canadian Forces personnel employed in MALE UAV positions.
The Pacific Littoral Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Exercise (PLIX)
In the summer of 2003, a field experiment was conducted to assess the utility of a
multi-sensor, MALE UAV to support the construction of the recognized maritime picture
(RMP) within a specific littoral operations area. Construction of the RMP is a
fundamental activity of littoral ISR. Its efficiency and effectiveness is sometimes suspect
due to the potential limitations of current technology to provide an accurate, detailed
assessment of maritime activity within a specific area of interest. This experiment
predicted that if a multi-sensor, MALE UAV patrolled a designated littoral operations
area then all surface contacts would be detected, continuously tracked, and positively
identified in the recognized maritime picture of the operations area before the end of each
patrol. Using conventional methods, less than ten targets were identified and tracked
within the specified area of operation. This ability to identify and track targets was
increased to three times by employing just one MALE UAV.
Concurrent to the overarching objective of this experiment, a richer understanding
of GCS position requirements and the potential suitability of Canadian Forces’
occupational personnel were gained using previously employed field techniques (e.g.,
observations, notes, and structured interviews. A computer-based survey was also
developed and administered as a pilot project to Canadian Forces personnel employed as
MALE UAV Sensor Operators during PLIX. The survey was developed using Microsoft
2000 Access and provided participants with a simple ‘point and click’ navigation system
through four areas of interest with respect to the sensor operator position. These four
areas were tasks and knowledge statements contained within each member’s occupational
specifications that were associated with the UAV sensor operator position. Two other
menus permitted members employed as sensor operators to add and rate additional tasks
performed and knowledge required in the sensor operator position that were not
contained within their occupational specifications.
The MALE UAV sensor operators’ electronic survey asked participants to
identify and rate those tasks and knowledge statements contained in their occupational
specifications that were performed or required in the GCS position they filled. The
electronic survey was well received and provided a rich source of information about the
MALE UAV sensor operator position. Participants found this survey easy to navigate
and easy to complete. Their completion of the additional tasks and additional knowledge
sections of this survey showed a willingness to provide supplemental data on task and
knowledge statements that were not included in their occupational specifications but were
performed in the sensor operator position. This additional information, along with the
task and knowledge data from their occupational specifications, can also be used to
develop job inventories to conduct analysis on this position in future experiments
involving MALE UAVs.
Participation by personnel from three distinct Canadian Forces occupations
further expanded the task and knowledge requirements associated with the UAV sensor
623
45 th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association
Pensacola, Florida, 3-6 November 2003