Droning On

While the drone revolution in warfare continues to accelerate, old inter-service rivalries are hindering our development of the technology. The Army and Air Force have been at each others throats since 1947; the advent of drones hasn't change that one iota. They're both making mistakes -- completely independent mistakes, mind -- in how they employ drones. Those mistakes are driven by the internal culture of each service:

While for Army officers deploying to war is central to their identity, for Air Force leaders flying planes is what defines a pilot. The most senior Air Force position has always been occupied by a pilot, and in fact only by a non-fighter or bomber pilot twice. The importance of this identity label explains why the Air Force has gone to such great lengths to attempt to rebrand unmanned aircraft as “remotely piloted,” and why automation that takes control out of the hands of pilots has been resisted.

For the Army, on the other hand, piloting is not central to their identity, which is why even though the Army resists remote operations, it has embraced multi-aircraft control. The Army’s new ground control station, scheduled to come online next year, will allow one operator the ability to control two aircraft at the same time, which is possible because of the high degree of automation in Army Gray Eagles.

The article's author goes on to point out that this division of cultural identity goes right down to the MOS level: grunts, redlegs, pogues... they're all their own sub-tribes. That creates ever-deeper divisions and differences of opinion concerning how drones should be employed and controlled. Drones are the first truly new technology in warfare since the advent of the airplane. Just as in the 1920s, nobody has really figured out how to use them in the best way. We risk falling behind other powers if we don't jump on it quickly and effectively.

So what's the solution? Form a United States Drone Force? The last thing we need is another independent service in the mix, as anyone who has ever tried to coordinate cross-service fire support or logistics will tell you. Reintegrate the Army and Air Force? Ha! You may as well try to stuff a 13 year-old child back into its mother's womb.

Obviously there's no quick and easy solution, but the first thing you do is have the DoD put a stop to this sort of childish nonsense:

Air Force Predators, on the other hand, are flown by a pilot—in a flight suit, with a joystick, and sitting in a mock “cockpit” on the ground.

A flight suit? Really? Come on, guys; the Army flies them with a mouse and keyboard while drinking a cup of coffee and reading their email.

I understand the disappointment that unmanned aircraft represent for the Air Force, I truly do. It's comparable to what firearms did to knights: suddenly the armor was useless and the years of training were wasted. The gallant charges of shining knights on huge destriers, clad in armor which cost more than the combined worth of a thousand peasants, could be halted by one of those peasants with an Infernal Device. They were crushed, as are the modern knights of the sky. It's unromantic and drab and oh-so-proletarian to sit at a desk and direct a drone to blow up a target. I am not without sympathy. But the reality is that the days of manned combat aircraft are rapidly drawing to a close. You can embrace the future or you can be trampled by it.

When it comes to national defense, emotional perceptions and tribalism must take a back seat to practical warfighting. If "practical warfighting" means a 20 year-old kid with hyperfast reactions who grew up playing RTS games can control a dozen drones at once, fight through an enemy CAP and wipe out a logistics dump while he's sipping Mountain Dew and popping zits, then you must learn to deal with that reality. Because war doesn't give any awards for Best Dressed or Most Romantic or Second Place. It's the quick and the dead.