Uninhabited aerial vehicles (UAVs) are evolving rapidly and delivering greater and greater operational effects, ranging from conducting surveillance and reconnaissance to offensive force application. Advances in commercial technology, manufacturing, materials, and design are driving down costs and improving effectiveness, presenting both opportunities and challenges to countries large and small. 

UAVs are democratizing airpower and changing warfare in the process. Almost any force can now achieve effects not possible in the past for any but the richest countries. 

The use of UAVs in relatively large numbers dates back to the Vietnam War, when they were primarily used for reconnaissance. It was not until October 7, 2001, that a weapon was fired from an MQ-1 Predator UAV. That signature event simplified the find, fix, and finish kill chain dramatically, reducing the time from detecting a target to destroying it. The combination of a shorter kill chain and vastly improved situational awareness spawned a plethora of UAVs and a revolution in their employment over the next two decades. 

Today, the application of UAVs is expanding even further. More tanks have been destroyed by UAVs in the Russia-Ukraine war than by anti-tank munitions—at a fraction of the cost. Indeed, these tank-killer UAVs can be had for just one to two percent of the cost of conventional anti-tank rounds.ⁱ  This can only increase UAV proliferation. 

Yet as exciting as these developments are, not all applications of this technology are equal. Using small first-person view (FPV) drones in Ukraine to kill Russian tanks a few miles away is in no way the same as engaging troop ships moving across the 100-mile-wide Straits of Taiwan. 

The rise of inexpensive commercial UAVs—commonly called drones, a vague and ubiquitous term lacking any specificity—means this technology is available to anyone. There are now more than 1,200 drone manufacturersⁱⁱ  worldwide. Smart use of these UAVs can achieve dramatic results and have far-reaching implications for the character of warfare the U.S. military can expect to face in future conflicts. At a macro level, these can be summarized as follows: 

• UAVs can be applied in diverse applications and used for various purposes, including intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, targeting, lethal attacks, electronic warfare, cargo delivery, and more. At the same time, UAVs come in a wide range of sizes, payloads, range, and capability. The autonomous, low-observable, jet-powered collaborative combat aircraft (CCA), now being developed by the U.S. Air Force, are intended to complement fifth and future sixth generation combat aircraftⁱⁱⁱ by operating with them. CCA will be force multipliers capable of disrupting and imposing costs on a peer adversary’s air defenses in much the same way as a fighter jet. That’s a world apart from two-pound, two-mile range FPVs.

• UAVs can provide endurance over human performance, allowing UAVs to observe, evaluate and respond to pre-planned and emerging subjects of interest with a persistence humans cannot match. This can either translate to covering a large geographic area or focusing on a smaller number of operating areas for a longer period. As such, UAVs are uniquely suited to precision attack while limiting collateral damage and unintended casualties. Planners can integrate these aircraft into the broader battle enterprise in a highly collaborative, fused fashion regardless of domain: ground, sea, air, space or cyberspace. While initially used in uncontested airspace, UAVs are now being developed to operate in highly contested areas enabled by artificial intelligence (AI). They have also spawned a technological arms race in counter-UAV electronic warfare and other tactics for defeating these aircraft.  

• Counter-drone measures are increasingly important. Recent uses of small drones have disrupted U.S. military operations as well as overseas, sometimes with deadly consequences. Three U.S. service personnel have been killed by UAVs to date. The Chairman and Ranking minority member of the Senate Armed Services Committee agree that “...our nation lacks adequate drone detection capability...clear lines of authority about which agency is responsible for stopping these incursions,” and requires action to “significantly boost our defensive capabilities against hostile UAS at our military bases overseas, nearly all of which lack counter-drone capabilities.”^iv Both offensive and defensive electronic warfare (EW) systems are now being deployed to disrupt or neutralize enemy drones. Jamming signals, hacking control systems and directed energy weapons are all in the pipeline. Lawfare is also being used by our adversaries—and well-meaning, but misguided people—to seek to constrain the U.S. military’s use of autonomous drones by raising legal and ethical questions regarding compliance with international humanitarian law. 

Taken together, these advances require action by the U.S. to ensure U.S. security objectives will be met. Actions the U.S. should pursue include: 
• Policy and Regulation. The nuclear non-proliferation Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) treats UAVs as if they were weapons of mass destruction. They are not. MTCR guidelines undermine U.S. relationships with key allies and partners and diminish coalition warfighting capability and capacity. The result increases operational security risks to the U.S. The U.S. should redefine UAVs in the MTCR as combat aircraft. This strategic shift would align with current technological realities and geopolitical needs, enhancing both national security and international relations. 
• Comprehensive UAV Framework: The Department of Defense should develop a cohesive policy that addresses the use of AI and autonomy in UAV systems. This includes ensuring interoperability between the military services and intelligence agencies while optimizing their use and preventing excessive and unnecessary limitations in combat operations. This framework should also address how UAVs can provide a set of challenges to our adversaries that are so difficult to deal with that they can directly contribute to achieving effective deterrence.
• Ethical Standards: UAVs and specifically autonomous weapon systems can and should be subject to the extensive body of international law regarding armed conflict and associated conventions. However, contrary to some characterizations of lethal autonomous weapon systems, they hold great potential to reduce the loss of life in conflict and may significantly reduce the vagaries of human misconduct and malfeasance in the battlespace._^v 
• Innovation: The U.S. should also invest to accelerate innovation and ensure the nation and its military remain a leader in this crucial arena. That includes advancements in AI, machine learning, and counter-drone technology.
• Capacity: The United States should also work to produce, acquire and field CCA at scale to increase U.S. military capacity to project counterair mass at range into highly contested areas. CCA present a unique opportunity to create a new force design that can achieve the degree of air superiority in contested environments required to execute joint force operations. CCA brings the only possible solution to reducing the ongoing decline in U.S. Air Force warfighting capacity.
• Public-Private Partnerships: Encouraging collaboration between the military and private sector to leverage commercial innovations and accelerate the development of cutting-edge UAV technologies.
• Training and Doctrine: Implementing specialized training programs for UAV operators and integrating UAV operations into military doctrine is required to maximize their effectiveness in various combat scenarios.
• Scenario Planning: Conducting war games and simulations to develop and refine tactics for drone warfare, will ensure preparedness for a range of potential conflicts.

The ongoing advancements in UAV technology are reshaping the character of warfare, presenting both strategic opportunities and complex challenges. The U.S. must adopt a multifaceted approach, incorporating technological innovation, common sense ethical governance that capitalizes on the advantages of AI and autonomy, and strategic adaptation to effectively respond to the evolving security landscape.

Lt. Gen Deptula, USAF (Ret.) is one of the world’s foremost airpower experts. Featured in Airpower Pioneers: From Billy Mitchell to Dave Deptula, he is currently the Dean, Mitchell Institute of Aerospace Studies. He oversaw the first combat employment of a Hellfire off a Predator, and later as the first Air Force chief of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance he transformed the U.S. military drone enterprise changing the character of modern warfare.

Author: Lt Gen Deptula, USAF (Ret.)

Footnotes:
ⁱhttps://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-defense/3885659-ukraines-combat-performance-using-kamikaze-uavs-impresses-aselsan-ceo.html
ⁱⁱEd Alvarado, “Drone Market Map: The Drone World In An Infographic,” Drone Industry Insights, October 10, 2022. https://droneii.com/drone-market-map-2022-drone-world-infographic
ⁱⁱⁱMark A. Gunzinger, “The Need For Collaborative Combat Aircraft For Disruptive Air Warfare,” The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, February 2024.
^ivJack Reed and Roger Wicker, “The U.S. — and its troops abroad — are vulnerable to low-flying drones,” The Washington Post, April 22, 2024. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/22/drone-attacks-us-troops/
^vDavid A. Deptula, “An Operational perspective on the Ethics of the Use of Autonomous Weapons,” Journal of Ethics & International Affairs, Cambridge University Press, December 1, 2023.

CONTRIBUTION: The claims and statements made in this article belong exclusively to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of UAS Magazine or its advertisers. All questions pertaining to this article should be directed to the author(s).

Printed in the 2024 issue of UAS Magazine/Directory