A new policy on the use of ARCHER is available http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_06_05_ARCHER.pdf .
Here is the results of the long-awaited ARCHER review:
QuoteThe summit attendees analyzed the missions CAP has performed and determined that ARCHER is most useful in assisting with aircraft SAR missions and it is also good for documenting the extent of tree/plant diseases, looking for man-made objects in the water, and for assisting with the secondary effects of situations like oil spills on the surface of the water. ARCHER is also good for
detecting hematite soil and other "disturbed earth" that has been dug up and placed on the surface (e.g., it could aid in tunnel detection) or "disturbed earth" caused by tire tracks of vehicles operating on unpaved surfaces. This and the ARCHER change detection feature could be especially helpful along the U.S. border or around military base perimeters. Finally, the group determined that
ARCHER is great for providing hyperspectral data for universities and research agencies such as the Air Force Research Laboratory. One point to highlight is ARCHER is very good at automatically geo-referencing imagery with a high degree of accuracy. While we have had many positive opportunities, it is important to note that after extensive testing for counterdrug missions, the experts have concluded that ARCHER in its present configuration will not be effective (without an
unacceptable false alarm rate) at detecting specific plants. However, the Air Force is studying a proposal on how to upgrade the ARCHER system so that it can effectively conduct these missions in the future.
Personally, I'm quite skeptical of them claiming it is most useful for SAR. I think its clear that the technology is actually best useful for many of the other tasks mentioned below that and that it may only be tangenitally useful for SAR.
I think that downed aircraft SAR it would do fairly well with. For missing person SAR it is all but useless because of the limitations of the system.
The other possibilities are great though, and it should be interesting to see how it is employed, and subsequently deployed throughout the CONUS.
Very interesting.
Is ARCHER employed in the field (sky?) for use by any other companies or agencies?
I bet the Archer sensor package would fit very nicely in a Predator UAV.
Which the Air Guard just happens to be getting a lot of....
I love how they complain about the lack of operators, yet I, and others, that have taken the pre-test and passed have not heard diddly about going to the course.
Are you within 2 hours of a system?
Quote from: Tubacap on June 11, 2008, 12:25:47 PM
Are you within 2 hours of a system?
We are, and have the same proplem.
Our Wing Finance officer just got trained. Funny thing is the nearest ARCHER is 4-4.5 hours from him.
Quote from: Tubacap on June 11, 2008, 12:25:47 PM
Are you within 2 hours of a system?
LOL....we had one AT OUR SQUADRON! With one of only a handful of Archer operators as our squadron commander!
Of course it is now at National HQ....but still.
Quote from: PHall on June 11, 2008, 04:25:51 AM
I bet the Archer sensor package would fit very nicely in a Predator UAV.
Which the Air Guard just happens to be getting a lot of....
They are already equipped with cameras that can do the "change detection". It can notice vehicle tracks or footprints that weren't there previously - reference FutureWeapons
Quote from: ♠SARKID♠ on June 13, 2008, 12:05:30 AM
Quote from: PHall on June 11, 2008, 04:25:51 AM
I bet the Archer sensor package would fit very nicely in a Predator UAV.
Which the Air Guard just happens to be getting a lot of....
They are already equipped with cameras that can do the "change detection". It can notice vehicle tracks or footprints that weren't there previously - reference FutureWeapons
Take the stuff you see on FutureWeapons with a large dose of skepticism.
The show is basically just a sales video for the defense contractors who make the stuff you're seeing.