In most cases it's actually critical. I think with the fusion of data links—voice, radio, full-motion video—that are used to help decision-makers in a very complex world, we're starting to see increased investments in that. In fact, the air force has a major project to replace all of the ground-air-ground radios used by NORAD in air defence, and we're also embedding the ability for beyond-line-of-sights within that.
With the future complexity of warfare, the increased surveillance demand is seeing increased investments in those areas. I would tell you that I think it's critical, and becoming more so every day and in a very complex environment.
I think back to some of the missions we were doing in Iraq, for example, where you would have had normally about 72 hours of non-stop ISR, intelligence surveillance of any type—it could be a UAV; it could be an air-breathing platform like our CP-140—over a target to ensure that we understood how people moved around, what the risk would be to attacking that target. The precision and care that's required with these decisions in the future, and our desire and certainly our government's desire to see collateral damage limited, is making things like the beyond-line-of-sight even more important moving forward.
That's the change I've seen over my career from when I started. The precise demands, certainly of air power, have evolved immensely.