Rto - Mp - Set - 092

Session 1 was classified, and began with a presentation by Weatherington on various platforms in use by the US DoD, their signal collection types (described as EO & IR, although IR in general is considered an EO technology, so EO may refer to visible in this case), and growth plans for future capabilities. Fenner Milton then presented on tests by the US Army Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate obtained with a small UAV test surrogate that incorporated a body-mounted sensor and uncooled IR imager. As part of questions and answers, it was stressed that these short range, low altitude observations are compatible with low levels of magnification (large FOVs) and the body-mounted approach. However, higher altitudes would require higher magnification and sensor stabilization to maintain regions of interest in the smaller fields of view. The third presentation (by Marchal) was an interesting overview of an operational group’s results in combining capabilities of a higher altitude, piloted F16 with lower altitude UAV sensing capabilities. Such a combination was shown to enhance the relevance of the imagery collected from the UAV. In the fourth paper (by Fetrow), the results of polarimetric data collections were showcased, principally in the LWIR. Key results were presented in which it was seen that certain combinations of sky brightness (reflected from the scene) and target observation angles can mask the useful polarimetric information. This limitation can be overcome in part by emphasizing LWIR over MWIR measurements. The next paper (by Hintz) described a broad range of active and passive considerations for UAVs in support of the Navy. Active sensors included both laser and SAR imagery. A comparison of infrared wavebands for various atmospheric conditions was described for this Naval application.