That’s it in a Nutshell

Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) pointed out last week at a House panel hearing on intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance assets that the difference between the Army and Air Force perspectives about control of unmanned aerial vehicles is one of terminology and tactics. He said, the Army feels tactical capabilities should move with a division, while the Air Force feels that, strategically speaking, it’s not essential for the Army to have assets embedded with specific divisions. In fact, said Marshall, the Air Force says “the terms tactical and strategic really aren’t very helpful; that these assets have capabilities, and we ought to be focusing on what capabilities those assets can provide.” In his opinion, the Army should have individual assets below 3,500 feet and those above that altitude—the medium-to-high altitude assets—should fall under a joint command, “probably Air Force.”