604:TECHNOLOGY HARVESTING BY INDIAN AEROSPACE INDUSTRY: A STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE

 

My article published on the Indus International Research Foundation website on 19 Feb 25.

 

The Indian aerospace industry has made significant strides in technology harvesting, particularly in defence, satellite technology, and aircraft development. Key successes include the development of indigenous fighter jets like the HAL Tejas and the successful launch of ISRO satellite missions, such as the Mars Orbiter Mission. These achievements demonstrate the growing capability of India’s aerospace sector in adopting advanced technologies and adapting them to local needs. However, there are notable misses, primarily in producing high-performance engines and strategic aerospace systems, where India still relies heavily on imports. Despite efforts to indigenous technology, challenges like bureaucratic inefficiencies, limited R&D funding, and a lack of skilled workforce hinder complete technological independence. The industry must address these gaps through improved collaboration, investment in cutting-edge research, and focused policy support to achieve self-reliance and compete globally in the aerospace sector.

 

Technology Harvesting: The Process.

 

Technology harvesting refers to acquiring, utilising, and leveraging existing or newly developed technologies to achieve strategic goals, enhance innovation, or create value. This practice can involve various methods, such as sourcing new technologies, adapting existing ones, commercialising them, or repurposing them for different industries or applications. Technology harvesting often aims to advance an organisation’s capabilities, improve productivity, maintain a competitive edge, or create new products and services. It can involve the following:-

 

    • Identifying valuable technologies. Finding technologies that can benefit a company’s growth or strategic advantage.
    • Acquiring technologies. Through means like acquisitions, licensing, or partnerships.
    • Commercialising or adapting technologies. Transforming acquired technologies into profitable products, services, or processes.
    • Maximising the utility of available technologies. Making the most of existing technological assets by integrating them into new contexts or markets.

 

Ways and Means. Numerous methods help businesses and organisations stay competitive by quickly accessing and implementing new technologies. Some of these are:-

 

    • Internal Research and Development (R&D). Companies and organisations invest in R&D to develop new technologies that can give them a competitive edge. This can be through in-house teams or dedicated innovation labs.
    • Collaborative Research and Development (R&D). Partnerships between universities, research institutes, and businesses allow for technology sharing and joint development, which can expedite innovation.
    • Buying Start-ups: Larger companies often acquire smaller tech start-ups that have developed innovative technologies. This enables quick access to cutting-edge tech and talent.
    • Technology Transfer. Institutions like universities often transfer their research outputs to private companies that can commercialise the technology. This is facilitated through licensing agreements.
    • Technology Licensing. Companies or individuals who hold patents on specific technologies can license them to other firms for a fee or a royalty agreement.
    • Patent Pools. Multiple organisations might collaborate and share patents or licenses to reduce barriers and avoid litigation, accelerating technology adoption.
    • Open-source software. Companies or individuals contribute to open-source projects, allowing others to use, modify, and build upon the technology freely. This can lead to rapid advancement and broader adoption.
    • Open Innovation. Engaging external parties in solving technological challenges, including crowdsourcing solutions and using external ideas and inventions to advance a product or service.
    • Tech Incubators. These programs support early-stage start-ups by providing resources like mentorship, capital, and networking opportunities to help turn nascent technologies into viable businesses.
    • Accelerators. Accelerators are similar to incubators but focus on scaling and rapidly bringing technologies to market. These programs often have a more structured approach.
    • Joint Ventures. Companies often form joint ventures to combine resources and technologies, enabling both parties to leverage each other’s expertise.
    • Industry Collaborations. Corporations in the same industry may collaborate to develop shared technologies that benefit all parties involved.
    • Product Disassembly. Some organisations or individuals harvest technology by disassembling a competitor’s product to understand its design and function. While legally risky, this can provide insights into innovation.
    • Crowdfunding Platforms. Companies and inventors can raise funds to bring their technologies to market by directly engaging with the public. Popular platforms like Kickstarter or Indiegogo can help gauge market interest.
    • Crowdsourcing Ideas. Platforms like InnoCentive allow companies to post problems and offer rewards for solutions, enabling the harvesting of global ideas and innovations.
    • Scanning for Emerging Tech. Firms often employ technology scouts to search for new technologies that could be adopted, licensed, or acquired. This involves monitoring patent filings, academic publications, and industry trends.
    • Subsidies and Funding. Governments often provide grants and funding to develop or commercialise new technologies, particularly in fields like green energy, biotechnology, or defence.
    • Public-Private Partnerships. Governments may partner with the private sector to develop key technologies and infrastructure projects.

 

Indian Aerospace Industry and Technology Harvesting

 

The Indian aerospace industry has undergone a significant transformation in recent decades, shifting from a sector heavily reliant on imports to one that is making substantial progress in indigenous development. This evolution has been primarily driven by government initiatives, defence collaborations, foreign investments, and, most notably, technology harvesting.

 

Evolution of the Indian Aerospace Industry. The foundation of India’s aerospace industry was laid in the early 1940s with the establishment of Hindustan Aircraft Limited (now Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, HAL). Over the years, the Indian government, through organisations such as DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation), ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation), and private-sector initiatives, has fostered aerospace capabilities. Despite significant progress, India still relies heavily on imported technology, particularly in critical areas such as jet engines, avionics, and stealth technology.

 

Technology Harvesting in the Indian Aerospace Industry. Technology harvesting has played a crucial role in advancing India’s aerospace capabilities. The country employs multiple strategies to acquire and integrate advanced technology, including technology transfer agreements, joint ventures, back engineering, and indigenous R&D.

 

    • Technology Transfer. India has effectively utilised offsets and technology transfer agreements in defence procurement deals as a key strategy for technology harvesting. These agreements, which mandate foreign firms to invest a portion of the contract value in India’s defence sector, have fostered local expertise and infrastructure development. For instance, the Rafale Deal with Dassault Aviation, France, involves the transfer of advanced radar, avionics, and composite material manufacturing techniques to Indian firms. Similarly, India’s partnerships with Boeing and Lockheed Martin have led to the domestic manufacturing of C-130J Super Hercules airframes and Apache attack helicopter components.
    • Joint Ventures. The Indian government has encouraged joint ventures between domestic and foreign companies to accelerate technology harvesting. These partnerships allow Indian firms to access cutting-edge aerospace technology while contributing to global supply chains. Notable joint ventures include Tata Advanced Systems and Lockheed Martin for manufacturing C-130J Super Hercules airframes in India, Adani and Elbit Systems (Israel) for UAV production under the “Make in India” initiative, and L&T and ISRO Collaboration for developing reusable launch vehicles and space technologies.
    • Indigenous Aerospace Programs and Achievements. Technology harvesting has significantly influenced India’s ability to develop indigenous aerospace programs. The success of these programs is a testament to India’s growing self-reliance in the sector.

 

Successes

 

India’s aerospace industry has made significant strides in technology development over the past few decades, particularly in indigenous aircraft production, space exploration, and defence technology. Here’s a look at its notable successes and challenges.

 

Indigenous Aircraft Development. One of the achievements is the development of the HAL Tejas, a fourth-generation multi-role light combat aircraft.  The Tejas has proven successful in designing, engineering, and integrating advanced systems, though it still faces some challenges related to production timelines and numbers.

 

Space Technology. ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation) has shown significant technological advances, especially in satellite technology and space exploration. India’s Mars Orbiter Mission (Mangalyaan) and Chandrayaan missions to the Moon were notable successes, signalling India’s growing expertise in space missions.

 

GSLV & PSLV Rockets. India has developed reliable launch vehicles, particularly the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), making India one of the leading providers of commercial satellite launches globally. The Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) has been crucial for launching heavier payloads, demonstrating a significant leap in India’s rocket development.

 

Missile Technology. India’s missile technology, mainly through the Agni and Prithvi series, has significantly succeeded in strategic and tactical weapons. The BrahMos, a joint venture with Russia, is among the world’s fastest cruise missiles and showcases India’s ability to partner internationally while developing cutting-edge technology.

 

Hypersonic and Space Technologies. India is making strides in hypersonic technology, a critical frontier in aerospace innovation. The Hypersonic Technology Demonstrator Vehicle (HSTDV), developed by DRDO, is a significant step toward mastering scramjet propulsion for future hypersonic missiles and aircraft.

 

Challenges.

 

Delays in Aircraft Production. While successful, the HAL Tejas program has faced significant delays. Initially expected to enter service in the late 1990s, the Tejas project has been plagued by issues related to engine integration, production delays, and insufficient numbers for the Indian Air Force (IAF).

 

Missed Opportunities in Commercial Aircraft Manufacturing. India has failed to develop a competitive indigenous commercial aircraft. The RTA-70 was initially conceived as a regional aircraft but has not progressed beyond the conceptual stages. HAL’s failure to enter the commercial aircraft market has kept India from tapping into a potentially lucrative market, especially with rising demand for air travel in Asia.

 

Reliance on Foreign Technology. While India has made strides in many defence technologies, it remains heavily dependent on foreign technology for critical components, such as aircraft engines, avionics, and radar systems. The Kaveri engine, developed for the Tejas, faced performance issues, leading to continued reliance on foreign suppliers like GE Aviation for the Tejas’ engine. Similarly, radar and electronic warfare systems are often imported.

 

Slower Transition to 5th Generation Aircraft. India’s pursuit of a fifth-generation aircraft, specifically the AMCA (Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft), has been slow. While it is an ambitious project, it faces development timelines and funding challenges. Additionally, India’s slow progress in stealth technology has led to delays compared to countries like China and Russia, which are already advancing.

 

Challenges in Commercial Space. While ISRO has achieved remarkable success in government and scientific space exploration, it has not yet fully capitalised on the commercial space sector. Although India has been a competitive player in satellite launches, it faces stiff competition from U.S. and European private companies. The growth of private space players like SpaceX has overshadowed ISRO’s commercial potential in the global space race.

 

Way Ahead

The way ahead for technology harvesting by the Indian aerospace industry lies in a multi-pronged approach, focusing on leveraging global innovations, fostering indigenous capabilities, and enhancing collaboration between government, private sector, and academia. India has historically depended on technology imports to meet the demands of its aerospace sector. Still, with growing aspirations for self-reliance, the industry is actively working on increasing its technological base. A significant step in this direction is the Indian government’s push for the “Atmanirbhar Bharat” (Self-reliant India) initiative, which encourages domestic manufacturing and innovation.

 

Key areas for technology harvesting include advanced materials, propulsion systems, avionics, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Collaboration with global aerospace leaders and partnerships with foreign entities through joint ventures and knowledge exchange programs will enable the Indian aerospace sector to integrate cutting-edge technologies. The private sector’s growing role, exemplified by companies like Tata Advanced Systems and Reliance Aerospace, is crucial in driving innovation and attracting foreign direct investment. These companies are now working to develop advanced systems and technologies that could be exported globally. Additionally, academia and research institutions like the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) play a pivotal role in fostering research and development in key areas such as avionics, artificial intelligence, and machine learning, which are rapidly transforming the aerospace sector.

 

Conclusion.

The Indian aerospace industry is on a transformative path, leveraging technology harvesting to bridge the gap between domestic capabilities and global standards. Through strategic partnerships, reverse engineering and indigenous R&D, India is steadily reducing its reliance on foreign suppliers. The success of projects like Tejas, AMCA, and hypersonic weapons development showcases India’s ability to absorb and innovate upon harvested technology. Further investments in jet engine technology, stealth aircraft, and AI-driven aerospace solutions will be key to solidifying India’s global power position. By strengthening its ecosystem through private sector participation and continued technology absorption, India is poised to achieve genuine self-reliance in aerospace and defence.

 

Please Do Comment.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

Link to the article on the website:-

Technology Harvesting by Indian Aerospace Industry: A Strategic Imperative (by Air Marshal Anil Khosla)

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

Pic: Courtesy Net.

References:-

  1. “India’s Aerospace Industry: The Path Forward” (2021), by Aerospace and Defence Manufacturing Association of India (ADMA).
  1. “Atmanirbhar Bharat and the Indian Aerospace Industry” (2020), Ministry of Defence, Government of India.
  1. “The Indian Space Programme: An Overview” (2018), Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
  1. Subramanian, K., & Iyer, R. (2022). “Technological Developments in India’s Aerospace and Defence Sector: Opportunities and Challenges.” International Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 35(4), 567-589.
  1. Sharma, S., & Dinesh, P. (2021). “The Role of Private Sector in Advancing Aerospace Technologies in India.” Asian Journal of Aerospace Technology, 27(2), 123-139.
  1. Aggarwal, M., & Kumar, A. (2020). “Defence Technology Development in India: The Next Frontier in Aerospace.” Journal of Defence Technology, 8(3), 220-233.
  1. “National Aerospace and Defence Policy Framework” (2019), Government of India.
  1. “Make in India: Aerospace and Defence” (2017), Department of Defence Production, Ministry of Defence, Government of India.
  1. “Aerospace & Defence Industry in India: An Overview” (2021), KPMG India.
  2. “Global Aerospace Outlook 2020” (2020), PwC India.
  1. “Indian Aerospace Industry: Key Trends and Future Potential” (2022), Ernst & Young India.
  1. “India’s Aerospace and Defence Sector is Taking Off” (2022), Economic Times.
  1. “How India’s Aircraft Manufacturers are Making Their Mark” (2021), The Hindustan Times.
  1. “Private Players Taking the Lead in India’s Aerospace Growth” (2020), Business Standard.

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

603: Sequel to Previous Article on Rise of Combat Drones

 

My previous article, “Rise of Combat Drones: Implications for Traditional Air Power,” was well-received. The readers had a few queries and suggestions, which this sequel aims to address.

 

  1. Could you add a supplement or some riders, i.e., limitations in drone speed vis a vis the manned fighter, weapon loads that can be carried over such long distances, and what drones are available today that can overcome these liabilities?

 

Limitations in Drone Speed vs. Manned Fighters

Drones (Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles, or UCAVs) generally lag behind manned fighters in terms of speed due to several factors. One key reason is engine performance and design priorities. Most drones are optimised for endurance rather than speed, using turboprop or low-bypass turbofan engines for fuel efficiency. In contrast, manned fighters rely on high-bypass turbofans or afterburning turbojets, which provide the thrust needed for supersonic flight.

Aerodynamics also play a crucial role in speed limitations. Drones are typically designed for long loiter times and stealth, often requiring subsonic speeds and high-aspect-ratio wings to maximize efficiency. On the other hand, manned fighters prioritize agility, acceleration, and sustained speeds, especially in combat scenarios, where airframe designs enable them to reach speeds exceeding Mach 2.

Another significant factor is structural and cooling limitations. Supersonic flight generates extreme aerodynamic heating, necessitating the use of expensive thermal-resistant materials. Manned fighters incorporate robust cooling systems and heat-resistant materials to withstand these conditions. However, since most drones are optimised for cost efficiency and long-duration missions, they rarely include such features.

Command and control constraints also impact drone speed. The latency involved in remote control or autonomous decision-making can make high-speed operations risky. Pilots in manned aircraft can make split-second decisions during combat, whereas drones depend on AI algorithms or remote human operators, introducing potential delays that could be detrimental in high-speed engagements.

 

Weapon Load Considerations

Long-range drone missions face several challenges in carrying large weapon payloads. One primary limitation is structural capacity. Most drones are built for endurance and fuel efficiency rather than heavy payloads. For instance, the MQ-9 Reaper can carry about 1,700 kg of munitions, whereas an F-15E Strike Eagle can haul over 11,000 kg, demonstrating a significant gap in firepower.

Another issue is the trade-off between drag and fuel efficiency. Carrying heavy external ordnance drastically reduces a drone’s endurance, limiting its ability to remain in the air for extended periods. Additionally, stealth UAVs such as the RQ-170 Sentinel and B-21 Raider must carry weapons internally to maintain low observability, which further restricts payload volume compared to externally loaded fighter jets.

Drones also have limited air-to-air capabilities. Unlike manned aircraft, which can engage enemy fighters using a range of sophisticated air-to-air missiles, drones currently lack the manoeuvrability and situational awareness required for traditional dogfights. Some advanced UCAVs, like the MQ-28 Ghost Bat, are being developed with potential air combat roles, but their capabilities remain limited compared to manned fighters.

 

Drones Overcoming These Limitations

Despite these challenges, new drone designs are emerging to bridge the gap. Some high-speed drones are being developed to complement manned aircraft. The XQ-58A Valkyrie, which flies at Mach 0.85, is designed as a loyal wingman to assist fighters in combat. The RQ-180, a stealth drone reportedly in USAF service, is built for high-speed deep-penetration intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) missions. A hypothetical but much-discussed concept, Darkstar, is believed to be a Mach 6+ reconnaissance drone, possibly inspired by the SR-72 project.

Several solutions exist for drones requiring greater payload capacity and endurance. The MQ-25 Stingray provides aerial refuelling, effectively extending the range of manned fighters. The B-21 Raider, while primarily a bomber, has the potential to take on UCAV roles. The RQ-170 Sentinel, a stealth reconnaissance drone, can perform deep-penetration missions without detection. Russia’s S-70 Okhotnik is another notable UCAV, heavily armed and designed to work alongside the Su-57 fighter.

Looking toward the future, Loyal Wingman drones such as the MQ-28 Ghost Bat and XQ-58A Valkyrie could supplement manned fighters in high-speed combat. Hypersonic drone concepts like the rumoured SR-72 could also revolutionise reconnaissance and strike capabilities, pushing drone technology toward greater autonomy and performance.

 

2. What’s the ballpark cost range of these drones?

The cost of military drones varies widely based on their size, capability, endurance, and payload.

(These approximate figures have been taken from open sources on the net and do vary)

Small Reconnaissance & Tactical Drones ($10,000 – $500,000). These drones are used for short-range surveillance, infantry support, and battlefield awareness. They are usually hand-launched or catapult-launched.

Drone Model Country  Approx. Cost
RQ-11 Raven USA $35,000 – $50,000 per unit
Switchblade 300 (loitering munition) USA $60,000 – $80,000
Skylark 3 Israel $100,000 – $300,000
Black Hornet Nano Norway $195,000 per system (includes multiple drones)

 

Medium-Altitude Long-Endurance (MALE) Drones ($1M—$20M). These drones are used for surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision strikes. They have higher endurance and often carry weapons.

Drone Model Country Approx. Cost
Bayraktar TB2 Turkey $5M – $7M per unit
MQ-1 Predator (Retired) USA $4M – $5M per unit
MQ-9 Reaper USA $15M – $30M per unit (depends on sensors & weapons)
Heron TP Israel $10M – $20M per unit
CAIG Wing Loong II China $2M – $5M per unit
Rustom-II / TAPAS India (DRDO) Estimated $4M – $6M per unit

 

High-Altitude Long-Endurance (HALE) Drones ($30M – $150M). These are strategic UAVs used for intelligence gathering, persistent surveillance, and deep strikes.

Drone Model Country Approx. Cost
RQ-4 Global Hawk USA $130M – $150M per unit
MQ-9B SkyGuardian USA $30M – $40M per unit
Heron Mk II Israel $20M – $25M per unit

 

Stealth & UCAVs (Over $50M). Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs) with stealth and advanced strike capabilities.

Drone Model Country Approx. Cost
XQ-58A Valkyrie USA $5M – $7M per unit
Ghatak UCAV (Under Dev) India Estimated $50M+
S-70 Okhotnik Russia $50M – $100M
nEUROn EU (Dassault) $50M – $80M

 

3. While India is developing drones rapidly, what’s holding it back from matching, say, the Turks?

India has made some progress in drone technology, but it’s still behind countries like Turkey, which has established itself as a major drone power with combat-proven UAVs. The main factors holding India back include:-

Gaps in Indigenous R&D and Manufacturing. India’s drone development is largely led by state-owned entities like DRDO, which tend to be slower and less agile than private companies. Turkey has Baykar (Bayraktar TB2, Akıncı) and TAI (Anka, Aksungur), which are aggressive in R&D, production, and exports. Indian private companies are entering the UAV space, but they lack the scale and experience of Turkish firms.

Engine and Sensor Technology Dependence.  India relies on foreign engines for its drones. For example, the indigenous Rustom UAV uses an Austrian Rotax 914 engine. Turkey has worked around this by producing engines (e.g., TEI PD-170 for Anka UAVs). High-end sensors and satellite communication technology are also areas where India still depends on imports.

Delayed and Overregulated Procurement. India’s defence procurement process is bureaucratic and slow, with lengthy approvals, trials, and acquisition delays. The focus on “Make in India” sometimes results in delays when indigenous solutions are pushed over faster foreign acquisitions.

Lack of a Dedicated Drone Warfare Doctrine. While India has UAVs for surveillance and reconnaissance, it lacks a coherent doctrine for using armed drones in combat. On the other hand, Turkey has developed UAV-centric warfare concepts, integrating drones with air and ground operations.

Combat Experience and Export Focus. Turkey has extensively tested its drones in combat (Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh, Ukraine), refining them in real-world scenarios. India lacks such experience, as its military engagement with drones has been limited (primarily surveillance against Pakistan and China). Turkey has aggressively exported drones (to over 30 countries), which helps fund further R&D. India is only now entering the export market.

Lesser Political Will for UAV-centric Warfare. Turkey’s political leadership (especially under Erdoğan) has strongly backed UAV development, using it as a strategic tool for geopolitical influence. India, while investing in UAVs, still prioritises manned aircraft and traditional military assets over a full-fledged drone warfare strategy.

India is trying to catch up.

  • Indigenous UAVs like Tapas (Rustom-II), Archer-NG, and Ghatak stealth UCAV are being developed.
  • India has acquired MQ-9B Reapers from the US for enhanced strike capability.
  • Private sector involvement is increasing, with startups focusing on AI-powered drones, loitering munitions, and swarm technology.
  • India is pushing for exports, with countries like Armenia and Southeast Asian nations showing interest in Indian UAVs.

 

4. What’s the risk of drones escalating warfare? If we and our western neighbor both deploy surveillance drones and start shooting them down, will it increase tensions?

Yes, the deployment of drones—especially if both India and Pakistan engage in shooting them down—can escalate tensions in several ways. While drones reduce the risk to human pilots, they also lower the threshold for conflict by making military engagement seem less costly or provocative at first.

Increased Risk of Tit-for-Tat Escalation. If both countries start shooting down each other’s drones, it could trigger a cycle of retaliation. A drone being shot down is not the same as a manned aircraft loss, but it still represents an attack on sovereign military assets. If both nations were to lose expensive UAVs repeatedly, military pressure to respond would increase.

Ambiguity and Miscalculation. Surveillance drones operate near sensitive borders, making distinguishing between a reconnaissance UAV and a strike-capable drone hard. A country may shoot down a drone assuming it is armed, escalating tensions unnecessarily. The U.S. and Iran have had multiple drone-related incidents, with Iran shooting down a U.S. RQ-4 Global Hawk in 2019, nearly leading to a retaliatory strike.

Crisis Instability and Automated Retaliation. If both sides deploy AI-assisted drone swarms or automated defensive systems, it could lead to uncontrolled escalation. A drone automatically targeting an enemy UAV or launching a retaliatory strike could trigger a rapid, unintended military response. The Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict saw drones targeting command centres—a dangerous precedent if similar attacks happen in South Asia.

Psychological & Political Pressures. The public might demand retaliation for a downed UAV, just as it would for a manned aircraft. With drones capturing and transmitting live footage, propaganda battles could fuel public anger, pushing governments toward escalation. If a drone is shot down over disputed territory and its footage is released, political and military leaders may feel pressure to respond forcefully.

Drone warfare makes escalation more likely because it removes the human cost, making military engagements seem less risky. However, once UAV shootdowns become frequent, the pressure to retaliate more aggressively could lead to conventional military strikes or full-scale escalation. In the India-Pakistan context, drone warfare—if not carefully managed—could become a dangerous flashpoint.

 

5. Till now drones have been employed successfully against a technologically weaker adversary and reducing direct exposure of combatants to the enemy fire. It is difficult to predict the outcome when both contestants have similar capabilities.

When both contestants possess similar drone capabilities, predicting the outcome of a conflict becomes exceedingly complex as technological parity shifts the focus toward strategic, tactical, and logistical factors. The effectiveness of drones in battle is not solely determined by their specifications but by how well they are integrated into broader warfare systems. Electronic Warfare (EW) superiority plays a decisive role, as the side with more advanced jamming, spoofing, or cyber capabilities can disrupt enemy drone operations, rendering them ineffective. Integration with broader military assets is equally crucial; drones do not function in isolation but work alongside air defence. Coordinating drone reconnaissance with precision strikes or air defence suppression can significantly influence the battlefield. Moreover, operational doctrine determines how drones are deployed—whether used in swarms to overwhelm defences, prioritised for ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance), or focused on Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD). Even with comparable drone technology, the side that adapts its doctrine more effectively to the battlefield conditions will have the upper hand. Lastly, logistics and sustainability are often overlooked but are critical to long-term drone warfare. Given the high attrition rate of drones, the ability to rapidly replace lost UAVs, maintain a steady supply of spare parts, and ensure uninterrupted operations becomes a decisive factor. A country with a well-developed domestic production line and efficient supply chain will have a sustained advantage over one dependent on imports or struggling with manufacturing constraints. When both sides have similar drone capabilities, victory does not merely hinge on superior technology but on how effectively drones are employed, defended, and resupplied in the face of constant attrition and evolving battlefield challenges.

 

6.  Cost vs benefit could impose a limit. 

 

Cost vs. Benefit Analysis of Drone Warfare

Drone warfare has transformed modern military operations, offering strategic advantages and introducing new risks and costs. Below is a structured cost-benefit analysis considering various aspects of drone warfare.

Cost-Benefit Comparison: Drone vs. Manned Combat Systems

Factor Drones Manned Aircraft/Troops
Cost per Unit Low High
Operational Cost Low High
Survivability Low High
Effectiveness in Asymmetric Warfare High Moderate
Electronic Warfare Vulnerability High Low
Risk to Human Life None High
Strategic & Psychological Impact High Moderate

Drone warfare offers a high return on investment, particularly in asymmetric conflicts and precision strikes. However, drones remain vulnerable in high-intensity warfare against near-peer adversaries and require integration with traditional military assets to stay effective. While they provide cost-effective alternatives to manned aircraft, the rapid evolution of counter-drone technology will ultimately determine their long-term viability on the battlefield.

 

7. Terrain and sensor limitations could impose a challenge. 

While drones offer significant advantages in modern warfare, they face critical terrain and sensor effectiveness challenges. These limitations can impact reconnaissance, targeting, and overall combat efficiency. 

 

Challenges to Drone Warfare Due to Terrain.

Mountains and Rugged Terrain. Mountainous regions pose several challenges for drone operations. Signal disruptions occur due to steep terrain blocking radio waves, which affects real-time control and data transmission. Additionally, drones rely on line-of-sight (LOS) sensors, such as optical and infrared cameras, which struggle to track targets moving through valleys, caves, and ridges. Wind and air pressure variability in high-altitude areas cause strong turbulence, making drone operation difficult. Furthermore, reduced endurance at high altitudes forces drones to consume more energy to maintain flight, limiting loiter time and operational efficiency. In Afghanistan, U.S. drones had difficulty tracking Taliban fighters who used caves and rugged terrain to evade detection, requiring ground forces and satellites for confirmation.

Dense Forests and Jungles. Drones face significant vision obstruction in dense foliage, reducing the effectiveness of optical, infrared, and LIDAR sensors. High humidity and weather interference in jungles can degrade drone electronics and infrared imaging, reducing reliability. Additionally, drones struggle to locate small or camouflaged units as guerrilla fighters blend into thick vegetation. In a Vietnam War-style scenario, drones would struggle to track Viet Cong-like guerrilla fighters moving under jungle cover, limiting their effectiveness in counterinsurgency.

Urban Warfare Challenges. Urban environments introduce GPS signal interference, as high-rise buildings cause multipath errors that reduce navigation accuracy. Limited sensor coverage in narrow streets and indoor hideouts makes tracking enemy movements difficult. Higher risks of collateral damage require extreme precision in drone strikes to avoid civilian casualties. Moreover, urban areas provide cover for electronic warfare (EW) units that can jam or spoof drone signals. In Gaza and Mosul, drones have been effective but struggled with hidden tunnels, EW disruptions, and difficulty distinguishing combatants from civilians.

Desert and Open Plains. Drones operating in deserts face extreme heat and dust storms, which degrade battery performance and reduce sensor visibility. Additionally, the lack of cover in open plains makes drones easier targets for air defence systems. Thermal imaging is also affected, as high infrared signatures from sand make distinguishing human targets from the environment difficult. In Libya and Syria, drones were less effective during sandstorms, limiting their ability to track mobile convoys.

 

Challenges to Drone Warfare Due to Sensor Limitations

Optical and Infrared Sensor Issues. Drones rely on optical and infrared sensors, but these are affected by weather conditions such as clouds, fog, smoke, and rain, which degrade visibility. Camouflage and deception techniques, including heat-reflecting blankets and decoys, can further confuse infrared sensors. While infrared and thermal imaging assist in night time operations, they still face limitations in extreme cold or cluttered environments. Russian forces in Ukraine have successfully used smoke screens and camouflage nets to evade drone detection.

Radar and LIDAR Limitations. Radar and LIDAR sensors face constraints in complex environments. Limited ground penetration makes it difficult to detect underground bunkers and tunnels. In urban environments, signal reflection and distortion cause errors in target identification. Additionally, low-flying drones use active radar risk detection by enemy air defences. Hamas tunnels in Gaza remain challenging to detect despite drone surveillance due to their underground depth and deceptive entry points.

Electronic Warfare (EW) & Cyber Security Vulnerabilities. Drones are vulnerable to jamming, which disrupts communication links with operators. Spoofing and hacking techniques can mislead drones into incorrect locations or even hijack them. Advanced EMP and directed energy weapons can disable drones using electromagnetic pulses or lasers. In Ukraine, Russian EW systems have jammed and downed thousands of drones, forcing Ukrainian operators to develop alternative navigation methods.

 

While terrain and sensor limitations challenge drone effectiveness, technological innovations gradually overcome these barriers. Drones’ success in future conflicts will depend on their adaptability, resilience against electronic warfare, and integration with other military assets. As adversaries continue developing counter-drone measures, drone warfare will evolve in response, ensuring that UAVs remain a dominant force in modern combat.

 

Please Do Comment.

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

 

600: RISE OF COMBAT DRONES: IMPLICATIONS FOR TRADITIONAL AIRPOWER

 

The rapid advancement of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), known as drones, has revolutionised modern warfare. Once primarily used for reconnaissance and surveillance, drones have evolved into sophisticated combat platforms capable of executing precision strikes, electronic warfare, and logistics support. The proliferation of combat drones challenges the dominance of traditional airpower by altering strategic doctrines, operational tactics, and force structures. This article explores the rise of combat drones and their profound implications for conventional airpower.

 

Armed variants of the Predator, such as the MQ-1 and MQ-9 Reaper, demonstrated the feasibility of unmanned precision strikes, ushering in a new era of aerial warfare. Since then, countries such as China, Russia, Turkey, and Iran have rapidly developed their combat drone capabilities. Technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), sensor miniaturisation, and autonomous navigation have expanded combat drones’ capabilities. Modern drones can operate autonomously, engage in complex swarm tactics (where multiple drones coordinate their actions in real-time), and integrate with network-centric warfare systems. A list of major combat drones is appended.

 

Key Advantages of Combat Drones

 

Combat drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), have rapidly transformed modern military operations. They offer a range of significant advantages that enhance strategic effectiveness and operational efficiency. These advantages are critical for established military powers and smaller nations looking to improve their defence capabilities.

 

Cost-Effectiveness. One of the most prominent advantages of combat drones is their cost-effectiveness. Traditional manned aircraft, such as fighter jets and bombers, involve substantial financial investments in production, maintenance, fuel, and the continuous training of pilots. These high operational and training costs make them financially burdensome, especially for nations with smaller defence budgets. Combat drones, in contrast, are much more affordable to produce, operate, and maintain. This makes drones an attractive option for military forces seeking advanced technology without the prohibitive expenses of traditional aviation.

 

Reduced Risk to Human Life. The ability to operate drones remotely means that military personnel are not physically present in the combat environment, which significantly reduces the risk to human life. Manned aircraft often place pilots in high-risk situations, such as hostile airspace, where the threat of anti-aircraft weapons, enemy fighters, or surface-to-air missiles is constant. This feature makes drones especially valuable for missions in high-risk zones, such as counterterrorism operations, surveillance of enemy positions, or strikes against heavily fortified targets. By minimising human casualties, drones ensure mission sustainability and allow forces to continue operations with fewer limitations.

 

Persistent Surveillance and Endurance. Unlike manned aircraft with limited flight durations due to fuel constraints, combat drones can remain airborne for extended periods, often hours or even days. This endurance allows drones to conduct continuous intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations over extended periods without returning to the base for fuel or rest. Drones can loiter over targets for extended periods, tracking enemy movements, gathering intelligence, and relaying data to commanders. This constant flow of information improves situational awareness and allows military forces to remain proactive rather than reactive in their operations.

 

Precision Strike Capabilities. Modern combat drones are equipped with advanced targeting systems, enabling them to conduct precise strikes with high accuracy. This precision is made possible through advanced sensors, cameras, and laser-guided munitions, which enable drones to accurately identify and engage enemy targets such as vehicles, facilities, or personnel, even in complex environments. Precision is critical in counterinsurgency operations, where avoiding collateral damage is crucial for maintaining local support and reducing the risk of civilian backlash.

 

Operational Flexibility. Another significant advantage of combat drones is their operational flexibility. Drones are highly versatile and can be deployed in various roles, from surveillance and reconnaissance to electronic warfare and decoy operations. They can serve as support platforms for ground troops, relaying intelligence, providing airstrikes, or conducting search and rescue missions. Drones can also be used in electronic warfare, disrupting enemy communication systems or jamming radar signals. Additionally, drones can serve as decoys, drawing enemy fire or confusing adversaries about the location of critical assets. This adaptability makes drones valuable assets in numerous military operations, enhancing their utility in diverse combat scenarios.

 

Drone Usage in Recent Conflicts

 

Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. This conflict saw extensive use of drones by Azerbaijan, which utilised both tactical drones for surveillance and loitering munitions for precision strikes. Azerbaijan’s use of Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones (a medium-altitude, long-endurance tactical unmanned aerial vehicle), alongside Israeli-made drones, played a crucial role in undermining Armenian defensive positions and disrupting supply lines. Drones provided real-time intelligence and executed targeted airstrikes, significantly impacting the battlefield dynamics. The success of drones in this conflict highlighted their role in modern warfare, showcasing their effectiveness in both reconnaissance and offensive operations and marking a shift in how airpower is utilised in regional conflicts.

 

Ukraine-Russia Conflict. In the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, drones have become pivotal for both sides. Ukraine has relied heavily on drones for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR), and precision strikes. The use of Turkish-made Bayraktar drones has garnered international attention due to their success in targeting Russian artillery and supply lines. Russia, in turn, has deployed both reconnaissance drones and loitering munitions such as the Lancet drone. Drones are crucial in this conflict, offering both tactical advantages in real-time battlefield awareness and as weapons of deterrence. The conflict exemplifies how UAVs transform modern armies conducting warfare on the ground and in the air.

 

Israel-Hamas War. During the Israel-Hamas conflict, drones played a significant role in both offensive and defensive strategies. Israel utilised advanced unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) like the Hermes 450 and the Heron TP for surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision strikes, targeting Hamas military infrastructure, leaders, and weapon caches. Drones enable real-time intelligence, improving the effectiveness of airstrikes while minimising collateral damage. Hamas also deployed drones, often for reconnaissance and surveillance, but with increasing sophistication in attacking Israeli targets. The conflict highlighted the growing reliance on drones for modern warfare, as they offer cost-effective, high-precision capabilities in asymmetric conflicts.

 

U.S. Counterterrorism Operations. Combat drones have been central to U.S. counterterrorism operations, particularly in regions like the Middle East and North Africa. The U.S. military has employed drones for targeted strikes against high-value targets, including terrorist leaders and militants affiliated with groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator have provided surveillance and precision strike capabilities without the risk of piloting manned aircraft in hostile environments. These operations, while effective in neutralising threats, have raised ethical and legal concerns about civilian casualties, sovereignty violations, and the long-term strategic consequences of drone warfare.

 

Future Trends in Drone Warfare

 

AI-Driven Autonomy. AI-driven autonomy in drone warfare will revolutionise decision-making, enabling UAVs to analyse data and execute missions independently. This reduces human intervention, enhances speed, and improves operational efficiency, allowing drones to make real-time tactical decisions and adapt to changing battlefield dynamics without relying on constant human oversight.

 

Swarm Tactics. Swarm tactics involve deploying many drones that can communicate and collaborate autonomously to overwhelm targets. This approach maximises impact, confuses enemies, and complicates defence strategies. Swarms can be used for offensive operations, like saturation attacks, and defensive roles, such as countering incoming threats in coordinated formations.

 

Hybrid Manned-Unmanned Operations. Hybrid manned-unmanned operations combine human decision-making with autonomous drone capabilities, enhancing flexibility and situational awareness. Human pilots can control UAVs while receiving support from AI systems that automate data processing and mission planning. This synergy allows for optimal control and strategic execution while reducing the cognitive burden on operators.

 

Miniaturisation and Stealth. Miniaturisation and stealth technologies are enhancing drones’ ability to operate undetected. Smaller, quieter UAVs with reduced radar signatures can infiltrate enemy defences, gather intelligence, or carry out strikes without being easily intercepted. These advances improve tactical flexibility and extend the operational range of drones in contested environments.

 

Implications of Combat Drones on Traditional Airpower

 

The rapid advancement and proliferation of combat drones, also known as unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), have fundamentally reshaped the landscape of air warfare. The increasing integration of unmanned systems has now disrupted what was once a domain exclusively dominated by manned fighter jets, strategic bombers, and attack aircraft. While traditional airpower remains indispensable in major military operations, combat drones introduce new doctrines, alter strategic calculations, and challenge long-held assumptions about air superiority. From cost-effectiveness to survivability, from force projection to counter-air missions, the implications of drones on traditional airpower are profound and multifaceted.

 

Changes in Force Structuring. This cost-effectiveness has allowed major and minor powers to expand their air combat capabilities without requiring massive budgets. Countries that could not previously project significant airpower can now field substantial drone fleets, effectively democratising access to aerial warfare. Moreover, drone attrition is far more acceptable than the loss of a piloted aircraft, further changing the strategic calculus. Traditional airpower relies on highly trained pilots, whose combat loss affects military effectiveness and carries significant political and moral weight. The expendability of drones means that military commanders can take more significant risks, leading to more aggressive and flexible operational doctrines.

 

Changing the Nature of Air Superiority and Aerial Combat. The rise of combat drones challenges traditional definitions of air superiority. Historically, air superiority was determined by the ability of manned fighter aircraft to establish dominance over enemy airspace through superior manoeuvrability, advanced sensors, and beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagements. However, drones are now increasingly capable of carrying out air-to-air missions, raising questions about the future role of manned aircraft in achieving air superiority. For example, the Loyal Wingman concept, which pairs autonomous drones with manned fighter jets, represents a hybrid traditional and drone-based airpower model. In this setup, manned aircraft act as command-and-control nodes while drones perform high-risk tasks such as dogfighting, electronic warfare, and decoy operations. Similarly, China is developing drones like the FH-97, modelled after the U.S. XQ-58 Valkyrie, which can operate as autonomous wingmen to piloted aircraft.

 

Changes in Traditional Fighter Combat Tactics. Small, agile drones can operate in swarms, overwhelming enemy defences in ways that traditional aircraft cannot counter easily. Countries such as China and Russia are actively developing swarm drone technology that could neutralise enemy air defences and fighter squadrons by sheer numbers. In such a scenario, traditional air combat tactics based on individual or squadron engagements may become obsolete, replaced by algorithm-driven swarm warfare where AI-driven drones execute complex attack patterns beyond human reaction times.

 

Evolution of Air Defence Systems. The rise of combat drones has forced rapid changes in air defence systems. Traditional air defences, such as surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, were designed to counter high-speed, high-altitude threats from fighter jets and bombers. However, drones present an entirely different challenge, as they are often smaller, slower, and fly at lower altitudes, making them difficult for conventional radar systems to detect and track. Countries have responded by integrating counter-drone capabilities into their air defence networks. Integrated air defence systems, such as Israel’s Iron Dome and Russia’s Pantsir-S1, have been adapted to target drones with high-precision missiles and rapid-fire auto-cannons. Additionally, electronic warfare (EW) has emerged as a crucial element in countering drone threats. Many modern air defence systems now incorporate jamming and spoofing capabilities to disrupt combat drones’ communications and GPS navigation, rendering them ineffective. Despite these adaptations, drones are still proving to be highly disruptive. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict demonstrated how drones could systematically dismantle traditional air defences. Azerbaijani forces used Turkish and Israeli drones to destroy Armenian SAM sites, rendering their conventional air defence network ineffective. This shift suggests that air defence will increasingly rely on layered, AI-driven networks capable of simultaneously countering manned and unmanned threats in future conflicts.

 

Alteration in Roles and Tasks. Traditional airpower doctrine has been built around fighter jets for air superiority, strategic bombers for deep penetration strikes, and Battlefield air support (BAS) aircraft for ground engagements. However, combat drones are altering these roles in significant ways. In battlefield air support missions, drones have already proven their effectiveness. The MQ-9 Reaper, for example, has been widely used by the U.S. military for BAS missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Unlike traditional BAS aircraft requiring significant logistics and support, drones can loiter over a battlefield for extended periods, providing persistent surveillance and rapid strike capability. This persistence gives ground commanders real-time intelligence and strike options that traditional aircraft cannot match. In strategic bombing missions, drones are also beginning to make their mark. While heavy bombers like the B-52 or B-2 Spirit lack the payload capacity, swarming drone tactics could compensate by overwhelming enemy defences with multiple smaller precision strikes. China’s WZ-8 high-speed reconnaissance drone and the U.S. RQ-180 stealth drone suggest that drones may soon take over many roles traditionally assigned to strategic bombers.

 

Shift in Human Role. Additionally, the increasing use of AI in drone operations is shifting the human role in air warfare. While traditional airpower relies on human decision-making, AI-driven drones can process vast amounts of battlefield data in real time, react faster than human pilots, and execute missions with minimal human intervention. This shift raises ethical and operational questions about the future of autonomous air warfare, particularly in conflicts where rapid decision-making can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

 

The Future of Manned Aircraft in a Drone-Dominated Battlefield. While drones are rapidly transforming air warfare, it is unlikely that traditional manned aircraft will become obsolete in the near future. Instead, airpower will likely evolve into a hybrid model where manned and unmanned platforms work together. For example, the U.S. Air Force’s Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program envisions a future where advanced fighter jets operate alongside AI-driven drones in a coordinated battle network.

 

Evolutionary Process. Stealth fighter jets will still be critical for high-end air combat against technologically advanced adversaries. While drones offer many advantages, they still face limitations regarding autonomy, electronic warfare vulnerabilities, and adaptability in complex combat scenarios. Human pilots bring strategic thinking, adaptability, and situational awareness that AI-driven drones cannot fully replicate. That said, as AI and drone technology continue to improve, we may eventually see a shift where manned fighters become command platforms rather than frontline combatants. Future air battles may be fought with autonomous drone swarms controlled by human operators from standoff distances, reducing the need for pilots to engage in direct combat.

 

Conclusion

The rise of combat drones represents a paradigm shift in modern warfare, challenging the supremacy of traditional air power. While manned aircraft will likely remain relevant for the foreseeable future, their role is shifting toward command and control rather than direct engagement. As drone technology continues to advance, the future of air warfare will likely be defined not by individual dogfights but by networks of autonomous systems operating in concert with traditional manned platforms. In this evolving landscape, the key to maintaining air dominance will be successfully integrating drones into traditional airpower frameworks, leveraging human and artificial intelligence to maximise combat effectiveness. 

 

The increasing integration of drones necessitates a revaluation of military doctrines, investment priorities, and force structures. The future of air warfare lies in a balanced approach that leverages the complementary strengths of both manned and unmanned systems.

 

Please Do Comment.

 

1014
Default rating

Please give a thumbs up if you  like The Post?

 

For regular updates, please register your email here:-

Subscribe

 

References and credits

To all the online sites and channels.

References:-

  1. Boyle, M. J. (2015). “The Drone Age: How Drone Technology Will Change War and Peace.” International Affairs, 91(1), 67-84.
  1. Horowitz, M. C., & Fuhrmann, M. (2018). “Droning On: Explaining the Proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.” International Security, 43(2), 7-47.
  1. Zenko, M. (2010). “The Proliferation of Drones.” Council on Foreign Relations Report.
  1. Byman, D. (2013). “Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice.” Foreign Affairs, 92(4), 32-43.
  1. Gartzke, E., & Lindsay, J. R. (2019). “The Influence of Drones on the Nature of Warfare.” Security Studies, 28(2), 245-281.
  1. Scharre, P. (2018). “Drones and the Future of Warfare.” Center for a New American Security (CNAS).
  2. Mehta, A. (2021). “How China’s Drone Strategy Is Shaping the Global Military Balance.” Defence News.
  1. Heginbotham, E. (2019). “The Role of Unmanned Combat Systems in the Indo-Pacific.” War on the Rocks.

 

  1. Johnson, E. (2020). The Integration of UAVs in Modern Air Combat: A Strategic Perspective. [Doctoral dissertation, King’s College London].
  1. Thompson, J. (2018). The Changing Face of Aerial Combat: Drones Versus Manned Aircraft. [Master’s thesis, U.S. Naval War College].
  1. Indian Ministry of Defence. (2022). Drone Policy and Integration in the Indian Armed Forces.
  1. RAND Corporation. (2018). Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems: A Comparative Assessment.
  1. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). (2021). The Impact of Military UAVs on Contemporary Warfare.
  1. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). (2022). The Future of Air Dominance: Evaluating the Role of Combat Drones.

 

Disclaimer:

Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from reliable and accurate sources. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for wider dissemination.

 

English हिंदी