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Very soon, "good enough" robotic autonomous infantry will exist which will make soldiers in the 21st century look as outdated as cavalry.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