DUOS Value Chain — Critique of Old Assumptions
DUOS = Dual Use, Unmanned, BVLOS
DUOS value chain is a framework that makes wrong assumptions about how the drone/autonomous systems industry works.
Problem: The frame was invented by the established order (pilots, air traffic control, manned aviation lobby) to protect their monopoly.
Three Wrong Assumptions
1. "Dual Use" as a Separate Category
Assumption (wrong)
"Dual-use is a special category that must be treated separately."
This suggests that dual-use is different from pure civil or pure military.
Why wrong?
Almost all modern tech is dual-use:
- Semiconductors (phones + missiles)
- AI (self-driving cars + targeting)
- Comms (5G + tactical mesh)
- Sensors (agriculture + ISR)
"Dual-use" is not special — it's the norm.
By framing it as "special", you create:
- Extra bureaucracy (export controls)
- Slower innovation (regulatory lag)
- Separation of markets (smaller TAM)
Correct Frame
"Tech is tech — applications are diverse."
Stop labelling "dual-use" as if it's a problem. It's a feature:
- Larger market (civil + military)
- Faster iteration (more users)
- Economies of scale
Governance: Export controls where needed, but not by default.
2. "Unmanned" as Definition
Assumption (wrong)
"Unmanned is the defining characteristic of these systems."
DUOS uses "Unmanned" as a core concept.
Why wrong?
"Unmanned" is a negative definition — it says what something isn't, not what it is.
Problems:
- Focuses on absence (no pilot) rather than capability (autonomous, sensor-rich)
- Suggests that "manned" is the norm (pilot framing)
- Ignores the spectrum (teleoperated → supervised → fully autonomous)
Example:
- Is an autonomous car "unmanned"? (No, there's a passenger inside.)
- Is a commercial airliner "unmanned"? (No, but it's 95% autopilot.)
"Unmanned" is an oversimplification.
Correct Frame
"Autonomous / Supervised / Teleoperated — with different levels."
Focus on what the system can do:
- Level 0: Fully manual (RC)
- Level 1: Assisted (autopilot hold altitude)
- Level 2: Partial autonomy (waypoint nav)
- Level 3: Conditional autonomy (RTL on signal loss)
- Level 4: High autonomy (mission planning, obstacle avoidance)
- Level 5: Full autonomy (swarm coordination, adaptive tactics)
Governance: Regulate based on autonomy level + risk, not "manned vs. unmanned".
3. "BVLOS" as Central Concept
Assumption (wrong)
"BVLOS (Beyond Visual Line of Sight) is the key unlock for scaling drones."
DUOS makes BVLOS central to the framework.
Why wrong?
A. "Visual Line of Sight" is irrelevant for modern systems.
Modern drones/autonomous systems use:
- Sensors (EO/IR/Radar, 10+ km range)
- Datalinks (RF/LEO, 100+ km range)
- Cooperative awareness (ADS-B, mesh)
"Visual" is an archaic concept from manned aviation (where the pilot actually looks with eyes).
B. BVLOS is framed by the pilot lobby.
BVLOS rules were invented to protect pilots:
- Slow regulatory approval (years)
- Expensive compliance (observers, chase aircraft)
- Preserves pilot monopoly
C. Military BVLOS is irrelevant.
Military operations are always "beyond visual" — nobody sees an F-35 at 50km distance.
BVLOS is a civil regulatory construct, not a technical barrier.
Correct Frame
Performance-based modes:
-
SLOS-DAA (Sensor Line of Sight + Detect & Avoid)
- System has sensors (not human eyes)
- DAA capability (radar, cooperative)
-
ELOS-COOP (Electronic Line of Sight, cooperative)
- Datalink maintained (RF, LEO)
- Cooperative awareness (ADS-B, transponder)
-
GEO-ASSURED (Geographically/temporally assured)
- Geographic separation (restricted airspace)
- Temporal separation (time blocks)
-
PROC-SEG (Procedurally segregated)
- Procedural separation (IFR-like)
- Controlled airspace coordination
DUOS Value Chain: What Is It Actually?
DUOS claims to describe a value chain for dual-use, unmanned, BVLOS systems.
Claimed Value Chain
R&D → Prototyping → Certification → Production → Operations
Problem: This value chain is not specific to DUOS — it's every tech value chain.
What DUOS Misses
A. Surge Capacity
DUOS focuses on peacetime production, not wartime surge.
- No mention of time-to-surge
- No tooling pre-positioning
- No capacity credits
B. Ecosystem-SLAs
DUOS remains stuck in traditional procurement:
- Buy X platforms
- No outcome-based KPIs
- No availability fees
C. Open Architectures
DUOS has no focus on interoperability:
- Vendor lock-in is OK (apparently)
- Proprietary interfaces
- No multi-vendor ecosystems
D. Capital Markets
DUOS has no vision on financing:
- Government budget only
- No dual-use capital markets
- No investor access
Alternative Framework: Effects Tech Layer
Instead of DUOS:
Differences from DUOS:
| Aspect | DUOS | Effects Tech Layer |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Platforms (drones) | Effects (ISR, area denial) |
| Definition | Dual-use, Unmanned, BVLOS | Cross-domain, performance-based |
| Value chain | R&D → Production | Surge capacity, ecosystem-SLAs |
| Financing | Government only | Capital markets (dual-use) |
| Governance | BVLOS rules (pilots) | Performance modes (tech-based) |
| Interop | Not mentioned | JEF-wide open architectures |
Who Benefits from the DUOS Frame?
1. Pilots & Air Traffic Control
Why?
- BVLOS rules preserve their monopoly
- Slow regulatory approval = less competition
- "Unmanned" framing = pilots stay relevant
2. Established Defence Primes
Why?
- Traditional procurement (buy platforms)
- Vendor lock-in (proprietary)
- No ecosystem-SLAs = no pressure for performance
3. Bureaucrats
Why?
- "Dual-use" creates extra regulatory layers (job security)
- Slow cycles = less accountability
- No transparency requirements
Who Loses with the DUOS Frame?
1. Innovators & Scale-ups
Why?
- BVLOS barriers (slow approval, expensive compliance)
- No access to capital markets (dual-use stigma)
- Vendor lock-in favours incumbents
2. Military / End Users
Why?
- Slow procurement (years)
- No surge capacity (can't scale in crisis)
- Higher costs (vendor lock-in)
3. Investors
Why?
- "Dual-use" treated as problematic (not opportunity)
- No clear regulatory pathway
- Smaller TAM (civil vs. military separated)
Recommendations
1. Stop Using "DUOS" Terminology
Use instead:
- "Effects Tech" (not "dual-use drones")
- "Autonomous systems" (not "unmanned")
- "Performance modes" (not BVLOS/VLOS)
2. Focus on Surge Capacity
Metrics:
- Time-to-surge ≤ 6 weeks
- Capacity credits
- Pre-positioned tooling
3. Ecosystem-SLAs as Default
Procurement:
- Availability, MTTR, iteration speed
- Not: buy X platforms
4. Capital Markets Access
Financing:
- Zuidas dual-use fund
- Euronext IPO pathway
- Investor transparency (TLP framework)
Next: 10 — Performance Modes