Doesn’t seem anywhere near enough.

All future and present conflict is fundamentally based around drones.

I'm not sure how true that is. Sure it's what we're seeing in Ukraine right now with both sides using them a lot, but my understanding is that has to due with the fact that neither side is able to get air superiority with conventional aircraft. The same reason Iran is using a lot of drones now. It doesn't seem like the US would be in a conflict where they don't have air superiority.

Now I would agree that the US military can still find uses for drones, and that many of the people it fights will have a large usage of drones, but I don't think it's fair to say all conflict will be based around them.

▲

cco 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The same reason Iran is using a lot of drones now. It doesn't seem like the US would be in a conflict where they don't have air superiority.

Hmmm, this sentence appears to be a paradox? Is the US not fighting Iran right now?

Iran has a very weak air force and the US claims air superiority, yet Iran is using a lot of drones.

I think your comment proves GP's point, regardless of traditional air power, drones will feature heavily in any conflict.

▲

boc 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Iranian drones have done nothing to prevent the US and Israel dropping gravity bombs en-mass over their capital right now. JDAMs and unguided munitions are still far cheaper for the explosion size than any drone today. That's not the situation in the Ukraine war on either side.

The US has used one-way "drones" since the 80s or earlier. The entire Gulf War in the early 90s featured a ton of tomahawk cruise missiles. The only real change is that the new shaheeds are way cheaper, slower, and smaller, but can be spammed in larger numbers.

	▲	anigbrowl 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I disagree. Iranian drones have taken out a lot of US sensing capabilities in the theater, from ground-based radars to AWACS planes, in addition to some logistical support like refueling tankers. That has made US overflight of Iranian territory uch riskier than was expected at the beginning of the conflict, and it's notable that the US has continued to rely heavily on stand-off munitions.

▲

dmix 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Iran launched around 2k drones over the war. Ukraine uses around 200k/m.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/55897

Either way the US needs way more drones instead of just expensive missiles/jets/boats/armor if they are going to face anyone serious like China.

▲

jltsiren 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What we're seeing in Ukraine suggests that drones cannot win the war for you, but they are essential for not losing it. And what we saw in Iran was that US air superiority is no longer a given. While the US had conventional air superiority, it was unable to neutralize the threat from Iranian drones.

▲

GerryAdamsSF 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A million suicide drones is far cheaper than 10,000 infantry.

Very soon, "good enough" robotic autonomous infantry will exist which will make soldiers in the 21st century look as outdated as cavalry.

▲

8note 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

you can keep looking at iran as the example - the US is uneilling to boots on the ground because even with air superiority, the drones are too dangerous

▲

scottyah 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Still seems to be cyber warfare and mass social engineering.

▲

rasz 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The whole selling point of drones is that they are _cheap_. Spending billions brings you back to missile territory.

▲

jMyles 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> All future and present conflict is fundamentally based around drones.

...all the more reason to reduce spending on them.