What if there is a way to facilitate precision strikes deep inside enemy territory with the help of ISR drones? Can we establish such a deep strike capability on a large scale? And why is geography important for that?
Let’s take a look at how drones went from collecting information to the execution of precision strikes and find out how both these capabilities got married in order to overcome one of the greatest adversaries of all time – strategic depth.
Rise of Drones in Warfare
Entering the Era of Drones
Drones have been around longer than people would normally expect. The first successful attemps with target drones even date back to the time before the Second World War. These early designs laid the foundation for unmanned aviation, even though they were nowhere near the capabilities of modern drones.
During the Vietnam War, drones were primarily used for reconnaissance. With over 3,000 missions completed and only little over 500 drones shot down, they provided critical information without risking the lives of american soldiers.
In the beginning of the 21th century, drones came to greater prominence during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It was the MQ-1 Predator in particular, that shaped the way how the public perceived drone warfare.
The Foundation for the Precision Strike Capability
Born out of the necessity to counter the insurgencies during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. began to deploy drones in large quantities. Primarily used for Intelligence, Reconnaissance and Surveillance (ISR) missions, the Predator allowed the U.S. to gain the information advantage on the battlefield.
Undeniably, compared to manned aircraft a drone offers some unique advantages, which makes the drone a convenient platform for introducing additional capabilities. Particularly their endurance, already proven sensor capabilities, light logistical footprint, low costs and decreased risk for personnel are beneficial. Moreover, the option to treat drones as attritable assets allows for riskier missions to be carried out, even in contested environments. As a result, the use of drones quickly expanded over the past two decades. Additionally, the gain in capabilities, such as air-to-ground strike, rendered new types of missions possible. Still, most drone missions today remain dedicated to ISR, even if their use for precision strikes has been increasing.
Since information is essential for the execution of any mission, bringing information-gathering (ISR) and the shooter (strike) closer together can significantly shorten the entire process along the kill chain. For example, the information live-feed can reduce the time for the decision-making, while a strike capability allows for engaging the target directly. Therefore, carrying out a strike could be more rapid and efficient, if both capabilities were combined into a single drone.
Eventually, by developing larger and more capable platforms, the introduction of a precision strike capability was an inevitable occurrence. Today, drones are increasingly capable multi-purpose platforms, that can deploy in a wide variety of roles. The decison, whether to deploy specialized drones as part of a larger teamup or just a single drone featuring both ISR and strike capabilities depends on the mission and operational strategy. This high level of versatility and flexibility will be particularly important for strike missions deep within enemy territory or if time is a critical factor.
Note: While using only one multi-purpose drone to execute the mission can be advantageous, deploying two or more drones in specialized roles can also be a benefit. In direct comparison, deploying just a single drone reduces the level of complexity to coordinate all elements. Hence, there are less sources of potential error. On the other hand, if one drone dedicates to ISR and one to precision strike, each platform can reach its full potential. The ISR drone could be light-weight, high-flying and stealthy with extreme endurance, while the strike drone maxes out on payload, speed and range. Depending on the mission, both variants of drone use can be the right choice.
Strategic Depth – Why Geography Reigns Supreme
Ever since nations went to war with each other, their military potential was and still is heavily influenced by geography. Consequently, each nation is facing different challenges or is enjoying specific advantages. Thus, the chances to successfully repel an invasion depends to a large degree on a nation’s ability to take advantage of its unique geographic realities.
In the bigger picture, each nation must protect its industrial, political and demographic heartland in order to secure survival. Because of this heartland’s paramount strategic importance, there is great incentive for an attacker to strike this center of gravity to throw the defender off balance. The distance between this center of gravity and the frontline is generally referred to as ‘Strategic Depth’.
In military terms, the main goal for a nation is to keep the threat as far away as possible. From the perspective of a nation, which is facing an attack, that means to exploit the distance between its heartland and the threat as much as possible. As a basic principle, more space means a better baseline for preparing the defense. The reason for that is simple. Space can be traded for time. Beyond that, taking advantage of natural barriers like large bodies of water, mountains or forests is still and will always be a major consideration of any nation in order to secure its survival.
Therefore, it is clear to say, that even in our modern times of drones, cyberspace and intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), geography is still at the core of strategic planning.
Note: As shown above, a large country like China can take advantage of its vast land mass in different ways. On the one hand, by concentrating the strategic infrastructure near the border, the supply can reach the frontline quicker. However, that will expose the nation’s core to an increasing degree to potential attacks. On the other hand, if the defender capitalized on its depth, a potential attacker would have to cover a larger area in order to reach the strategically important targets. Historically, China’s strategic weakpoint is its coastline, where foreign navies were able to invade China by sea. That is to say, if China continues to secure its coastline, it can benefit from its strategic depth by moving critical assets and structures deeper into the mainland.
How to Protect High-Value Targets against Precision Strikes?
As mentioned before, high-value targets like strategic infrastructures are likely to get struck. Additionally, there are command & control (C2) nodes, air defenses, missile sites and more, which can qualify as legitimate targets for precision strikes. Thus, for the defender it begs the question: How to protect these targets?
If possible from a technical perspective, mobile systems offer a partial solution to the threat of detection. For this reason, modern air defenses are often designed as road-mobile systems. Similarly, ballistic- and cruise-missile launchers are also mostly developed as road-mobile variants. Even though some systems are mobile and concealable, there are limits to that approach. To illustrate this with a trivial example: large facilities or the infrastructure itself can’t be mobile. Maybe, some key elements of the production might relocate once, but not multiple times. Even if that was possible, modern space-based sensors would detect these large structures very quickly.
Therefore, building more key facilities in the country’s deep-rear, could be an effective measure to capitalize on strategic depth. However, as this would also increase logistical efforts, choices must be made with consideration. Additionally, this area needs to be covered by radar and long-range air defenses to prevent any enemy from sneaking in. On the negative side, the larger the country, the more difficult it becomes to cover its entirety with air defenses. Here, the size and the shape of the country’s geography is important, as it can bring advantages and disadvantages at the same time. Therefore, a nation can significantly increase its defensive potential by recognizing its geographical strengths and then adjust its strategy accordingly. On the contrary, if burdened with substantial geographical disadvantages, mitigating them can be a costly enterprise. Eventually, the result strongly depends on what capabilities and how much resources are available to the military effort.
X-47B refueled in flight. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)
MQ-25 (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Brandon Roberson)
Strategic Depth from the Attacker’s Perspective
While strategic depth is especially important for the defender, it is also a relevant factor for the attacker to consider. Keeping that in mind, we should pose the question: How does strategic depth affect the attacking side?
In contrast to the defender, the attacker is all about penetrating defenses to execute precision strikes deep within enemy territory. Usually, the first step in achieving this goal is to gain air superiority, at least at a local level. If that wasn’t an option, the platform to execute the strike should be attritable or at least sufficiently survivable. For example, a cruise missile, a stealth aircraft or a drone might be the right choice to execute the mission.
Moreover, in that context the distance to the target is even more important for the mission success. While long distances pose a substantial obstacle for any side, it’s even more difficult for an attacker to cover long distances. That is especially the case, when the defenses consist of multiple layers, that extend deep into the country. Therefore, the target distance determines, what platform can be considered for the strike in the first place. Even though aerial refueling might be available, tanker aircraft can only safely operate within uncontested airspace. However, maybe the MQ-25 Stingray can perform such missions in the future, if its operational radius further expands.
Given that aircraft and modern precision guided weapons also have limits in terms of range, the attacker must get as close as needed, so that the weapon can reach its target. Thus, the chances for the attacker to not its target is increasing with every kilometer of strategic depth. For example, if an aircraft with a 1,200 km combat range launches a 370 km range cruise missile, it could strike a target 1,570 km away. On the other side, it’s not always an option to fly that close to the target, because of air defenses. In that case, an attacker must rely on cruise or ballistic missiles for long-range precision weapons to execute deep strikes.
In short, strategic depth enables the defender to partly defeat the attacker’s capability to conduct long-range precision strikes via aircraft. By a well-thought-out deployment of air defenses, aircraft would be forced to launch their weapons from greater ranges.
How to Reach Deep into Enemy Territory to Strike High-Value Targets?
In order to gain a victory, it’s essential to have a capability to attack the defender’s strategic assets. From that viewpoint, the consequential question for the attacking side is: How to reach deep into enemy territory in order to strike high-value targets?
First of all, the platform, that is going to execute the strike must provide sufficient range. Otherwise reaching the target would be impossible or at least highly impractical. Furthermore, the distance back to a secure landing or recovery location must also be taken into account. Hence, it’s a significant advantage to have an operational airbase within the region.
Secondly, the platform must be capable to reach the area of operations without much hassle. On the one hand, the platform could launch from an aircraft carrier, which deploys within safe distance to the target. On the other hand, tanker aircraft could refuel the strike platform along its way to the target as long as the airspace is secure.
Thirdly, that platform must be equipped with an effective precision strike weapon. According to the target, the size and weight of the warhead might vary greatly. Correspondingly, only a platform, that is capable of launching the selected munition, can execute the mission.
Lastly, having advanced ISR capabilities is material to the effectiveness of the strike. Without proper information about the target, the chance of success is decreasing. For that reason, there is a wide variety of ISR platforms to gather the necessary data. Yet, it will become more difficult to have ISR assets on station, if the distance to the target increases. Moreover, the ISR assets might also be exposed to air defenses during the mission. Depending on the density of these defenses, sending an asset might not be feasible.
In conclusion, it becomes quite clear, that striking deep within enemy territory is not that simple. Since the distance to the target is a critical factor, manned aircraft might not always be suitable for the mission. Furthermore, it is the ISR role in particular, where it needs a platform unfettered from human limitations. Therefore, putting emphasize on developing an ISR platform, which enables the an effective deep strike capability is of upmost importance.
MQ-9 Reaper (U.S. Air National Guard photo by Tech. Sgt. Lealan Buehrer)
MQ-9 Reaper (U.S. Air Force Photo by Tech. Sgt. Michael Mason)
Drones and the Deep Strike
What is a Deep Strike?
The everlasting competition between defensive and offensive means led to the development of more potent weapon systems with ever-growing ranges. Also, new technologies and procedures allowed for improving the accuracy of these weapons. Over time all these advancements facilitated the capability, which we nowadays refer to as precision strike.
Moreover, in one form or another, the necessity for precision strikes deep within enemy territory has been around for a long time. Greatly oversimplified, that means, from the iconic trebuchet to modern tracked-artillery and hypersonic glide vehicles, all of them have one thing in common – to outrange the enemy’s defenses and strike critical infrastructure and high-value targets inside enemy territory. But as mentioned earlier, the deeper the target is located behind enemy lines, the more difficult it is to strike them.
Consequently, the deep strike aims to master the difficulty of striking these strategically important targets. Here are some key considerations.
- the strike must be rapid, accurate and intense in order to further exploit the temporary shock of the enemy
- strike as many targets as possible simultaneously to maximize the effect
- intelligence, range and precision is key to the effectiveness of the strike
- disrupt the enemy’s communications in order to paralyze its ability to generate and sustain combat power
The drive to achieve that capability eventually led to the development of a range of weapon systems. Each of them addressing specific challenges posed by the various types of missions they are designed to execute. From long-range cruise missiles to stealth aircraft launching laser-guided bombs to loitering munitions, deep strike capabilities are in high demand. As a result of continuous technological advancements, striking critical targets deep inside enemy territory became more feasible.
During past conflicts like the 2001 Afghanistan and 2003 Iraq War, drones were already increasingly deployed for precision strikes. They turned out to be very successul, even though they operated in uncontested airspace. More modern drone designs will finally allow for even longer range missions. Hence, drones could provide a convenient deep strikes capability.
It’s important to note, that there are multiple ways of performing deep strike missions. As illustrated above, a long-range stealth drone could launch from an aircraft carrier within safe distance. Then it would fly along a predefined path through hostile airspace and carry out the strike. After striking the target, the drone will not return to the carrier, but rather continue to a preassigned location in order to meet a tanker aircraft. From there the drone could fly to the next friendly air base.
However, whether or not drones are an appropriate instrument to execute deep strikes, depends on the parameters of each mission. So factors like range, type of target, risk assessment and time criticality play into the decision, which platform to use.
Advantages of Drones
- drones can execute missions, which would be considered too risky for manned aircraft
- a drone is not limited by human abilities
- drones can stay airborne for a long period of time and loiter near the target
- according to the situation, drones can react very quickly, because of their long time on station and near real-time ISR capabilities
- drones can relay information
Disadvantages of Drones
- most drones are vulnerable to air defenses, due to their mostly non-stealthy design, low speed and lack of counter-measures
- jammers and cyber-attacks can disrupt the communication with the drone
- drones have a rather limited payload capacity compared to manned aircraft
- the low cost to operate drones can sometimes be misleading
In consideration of these advantages, drones can provide a high level of versatility and flexibility, that other platforms don’t offer. For this reason, some missions, which were deemed unfeasible before, could then become viable. Therefore, the use of drones could enhance the deep strike capabilities of any military significantly.
RQ-4 Global Hawk
XQ-58A Valkyrie at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., Oct. 3, 2023
How a Flock of ISR Drones Can Enable the Deep Strike
Information is Key for a Successful Strike
Before a strike on a target deep behind enemy lines can be launched, planners need sufficient informations about the target. Otherwise the chances of failure would significantly increase. At the same time, the asset is exposed to greater risk.
In order to gather these informations, there are various assets from different domains available. Space-based sensors, AWACS aircraft, ISR drones and other assets are in the inventory of nations with sophisticated military capabilities. That includes all of today’s great powers. However, not all of these assets are adequate to deal with each and every situation. For example, satellites are almost untouchable platforms, but can’t cover a certain area 24/7, as they move in specific orbits. Then AWACS aircraft have powerful radars and provide command & control (C2) capabilities, but are at risk of being intercepted. Lastly, drones tend to have smaller sensor payloads, but can provide ISR at a closer level. From long-range drones for high and medium altitudes to smaller tactical drones, the spectrum for the use of these unmanned systems has not yet been fully exhausted.
The good thing about this variety of capabilities is, that they can be combined in a complementary manner. Ultimately, this will provide a more complete picture of the situation.
Using Drones to Build a Resilient Communications Network
In general, there is a strong demand for a survivable ISR platform, that can operate behind enemy lines. However, current platforms lack survivability. In addition, the ability to detect and track mobile and elusive targets in contested airspace is also inadequate. Given the importance of information in mission planning, this is a serious problem. Especially when it comes to facing a peer-competitor.
However, sending enough ISR assets into enemy territory is not so easy. First, ISR assets must collect data so that command & control can derive sufficing intelligence from this data. After that, the planning of the actual strike mission can start. For this reason, a functioning communications network must be built. Without that, essential steps in the kill chain that are necessary to execute the strike are missing. For example, information cannot reach C2 elements in time, so that decision-making is delayed. Another case could be that the precision guided munition doesn’t receive updates of the target’s location as it approaches. All of this can lead to an unsuccessful or inadequate strike.
Consequently, the communications network between the ISR and strike assets is as essential as the assets themselves. Now that drones proved to be reliable multi-purpose platforms, they could also form the basis for consolidating communications. For example, deploying a large cluster of drones in a specific area may have some advantages over current systems.
- each drone of the cluster should be low-cost and attritable with a small logistical footprint
- due to the size of the cluster, there is enough redundancy to better compensate losses
- if necessary, parts of the cluster can focus on specific areas to collect higher quality data
- relaying information would be faster and more resistant to interference
- therefore, the cluster could provide a more resilient communications network
Eventually, establishing a potent deep strike capability requires both the ISR and strike asset be embedded in a robust communications network and operated through efficient C2 structures.
An interesting approach describes the use of large quantities of low-cost, attritable drones to cover a specific area. Although its sensor capabilities are limited, the strength of this cluster (referred to as “mesh” in a 2020 paper by RAND) lies in its size. This large-scale deployment would require houndres of drones, which would need personnel for maintenance, launch and recovery. Still, the sheer number of drones would pose a significant problem for any adversary’s air defense.
Deploying a Large Cluster of ISR Drones
Given that military planners are clearly aware of the importance of ISR for offensive operations, the question remains: How to translate the high demand for ISR into a real-world application, that can reliably enable deep strikes?
One concept could rely on low-cost and low-observable drones in order to reduce the overall footprint of the platform. That low-signature approach could enable continuous ISR missions inside enemy territory. However, these drones must be cost-efficient as the concept would require the use of large quantities of these drones. Probably not hundreds, but still enough to cover large areas and compensate for losses.
Whether this approach can be implemented across an entire theater, across a whole country, or inside a specific area remains an open question. In order to determine the extent to which this approach might work, many factors and questions must be considered.
- acquisition costs and operating costs, since a larger quantity means higher financial investments
- technical capabilities of the platform (range, speed, stealth, etc.)
- are there network capabilities, that can translate the amount of data into usable intelligence?
- are there enough capacities to execute the subsequent strikes?
- is there enough maintenance and logistic capacity to provide sufficient support?
Let’s take a look at what such a cluster must consist of in order to improve the deep strike capability. Provided, of course, that the open questions have been properly clarified beforehand.
X-47B (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Michael Smevog/Released)
X-47B (U.S. Navy photo by Capt. Jane E. Campbell/Released)
Key Capabilities to Enhance the Deep Strike
Strength in Numbers – How to Make your Flock of Drones More Versatile
First, the sheer volume of drones could offer a greater level of versatility, given that a technical solution allows it. For example, equipping these drones with different mission modules would bring a variety of capabilities to the battlefield. In fact, modularity is an integral part of almost every modern development. It would definetly make sense to be able to adapt flexibly to the needs of the respective situation. However, it’s important to understant, that overcomplicating the overall system should be avoided. On the one hand for cost reasons and on the other hand because this can make the system more susceptible to failure. Nevertheless, the large volume of the cluster could allow the drones to employ different capabilities depending on the needs of the mission.
For instance, the majority of drones in the cluster could carry light-weight infrared (IR) and electro-optical (EO) sensors. Further than that, the integration of a small AESA radar would enable them to detect targets at longer distances. Beyond that, a smaller number of drones could perform more specific tasks requiring modules for long-range communications, electronic warfare (EW), jamming or decoys. Moreover, the more drones can operate over greater distances, the deeper they can penetrate into enemy territory can collect data.
Furthermore, the idea of adding a small warhead to the drone could open up scope for more flexibility when engaging targets of opportunity. So if a loitering drone spots a target of opportunity during its reconnaissance mission, a built-in munition will allow for a quick strike. Though, such a capability would come at a price of reduced time on station and sensor capacity. However, having a platform, which has the option to quickly add a warhead is certainly an advantage.
Eventually, this versatility could help to enable other weapon systems to carry out deep strikes.
Note: As shown above, there are different ways to deploy ISR drones. On the one hand, large non-stealthy platforms can provide limited ISR, while remaining out of reach of enemy air defenses. This approach is less complex and less expensive. On the downside it can only provide a low-resolution overview of the situation within a limited area. On the other hand, a medium-size low-observable platform could enable ISR missions deep within enemy territory. In constrast to the former approach, the latter is more complex and risky, but provides a higher-resolution image. This allows a larger area to be covered, which would then enable precision strikes much deeper in enemy territory.
From Pinpoint Accuracy to the Bigger Picture
Following the previous argument of strength in numbers, the chances of a successful strike could increase by using a larger quantity of drones. Particularly the cluster’s high sensor density can improve the precision strike regime by providing real time information to C2. Since more drones could cover a larger area, the situational awareness would logically increase. This also means, that emerging threats could be detected earlier. Ultimately, this could help create a more comprehensive picture of the operation and support decision-making on a larger scale.
But drones not only help to gain an overview of the entire operation, but can also focus on specific targets. Hence, more drones could focus on one single target and provide a higher resolution image of that specific target. This way, intelligence has higher quality data to develop a plan for the actual strike. This is particularly important when precision strike weapons are used. In any case, it will be easier to track and monitor targets, if there are multiple drones in the target area. Especially if these targets are mobile and difficult to reach.
Again coming back to the Indo-Pacific region: China has a large arsenal of road-mobile launchers for offensive and defensive missiles. These targets are usually very difficult to detect, track and strike, as they can easily evade, hide and be concealed. For this reason, single ISR assets would most likely not be sufficient to detect and track such targets. Consequently, a comprehensive approach, that focus on deploying a cluster of drones should be considered. Due to the greater amount of sensors covering a larger area, these elusive targets would have a harder time hiding.
Essentially, the ability to paint a larger picture for strategic decision-making and provide a high-resolution image of the target could enable a more efficient deep strike capability.
Finding a Secure Channel for the Deep Strike
Beyond collecting data, another priority of the cluster should be to use its capabilities to create a safe channel for the deep strike weapon/platform so that it can penetrate enemy airspace unnoticed, evade air defenses and strike the target with maximum precision. Following this line of thinking, the mission’s chances of success are likely to increase by deploying a cluster with a broad range of capabilities.
This example is intended to illustrate some capabilities to counter air defenses and radars with the goal to find a safe route for a stealth bomber to execute a deep strike. Firstly, decoys can simulate a strike to distract the enemy’s attention from the actual attack. Secondly, jamming any kind of radar (ground-based or airborne) could prevent detection of the strike platform by enemy forces. Thirdly, drones will constantly surveille the target to ensure that the weapon is precisely guided and hitting the intended target.
First of all, the strike mission could rely on improved situational awareness across the entire area of operations. If a drone then detects an enemy radar, C2 could redirect the strike to avoid detection by the enemy. Provided the platform or munition has sufficient range, such evasive maneuvers could significantly increase the chances of success. While fixed radars are relatively easy to locate and evade, mobile and airborne radar platforms pose a particular threat to the approaching weapon.
In addition, EW equipped drones could jam the enemy’s sensors to conceal the approaching munition. Even though at some point the enemy radar will burn through this protective electronic wall, this effort will take valuable time. Again, this can be a significant advantage in order to strike mobile targets. Since some mobile targets need around 5 minutes to change location, their chances to evade the strike will increase, if they can detect the incoming strike at an early stage. A good example for such target would be a mobile surface-to-air missile launcher of an air defense battery. But even a mobile target has a very small chance of escaping this strike, as long as the munition travels undetected to a distance where it can reach the target within 5 minutes.
As mentioned before, some of these ISR drones could act as decoys in order to distract the enemy. These decoys could simulate incoming missiles and trick the enemy into thinking, that the strike will occur in another location. In the best case scenario, that could force the enemy to divert its defensive resources. Since this could prevent the enemy from responding effectively to the actual strike, the chances of a successful strike would increase. In the end, one could use all sorts of diversionary tactics or exploit weak points in the opponent’s cybersecurity to compromise their ability to defend themselves. The question, as always, is: is it technically feasible and cost efficient to do that?
At last, drones near the target will provide constant updates about the target location as the munition is approaching. That allows the munition to quickly adjust course as soon as the target is changing location. During the final approach of the munition, it will be important to have as many observers as possible on the target. The reason for this is simple: for providing high-quality target data for maximum precision. This is again a particular advantage when striking mobile targets.
When looking at it from above, it might look simple at first glance. However, for that concept to work, it requires advanced networking and communications capabilities as well as computing power to process the raw data. Then, transforming this myriad of data into usable information can benefit the entire decision-making process.
MQ-20 Avenger (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Tabatha Arellano)
MQ-9 Reaper (U.S. Air Force photo by Robert Brooks)
Conclusion
So far, drones with ISR and strike capabilities have contributed much to the modern precision strike regime. Even though they mostly operated within permissive airspace and without much resistance, they proved to be valuable assets. Given this initial success, there remains strong incentive to continue taking advantage of the growing variety of unmanned platforms. Undoubtedly, drones will continue to surprise us with new capabilities and strategies for their use in the foreseeable future.
After all, drones already have advanced strike capabilities, that enable them to carry out deep strikes. Even if the enemy has the advantage of great strategic depth. With strike capabilities already established, the new focus is on gathering high-quality information from enemy territory. Due to that fact, the ISR drone will be the key that pushes the deep strike capability to new heights.
In this case, ISR drones would have to penetrate deeper into enemy territory and provide persistent ISR in contested airspace. Consequently, they are at risk of exposure to enemy air defenses, radar detection or visual sighting. Thus, these drones must incorporate capabilities, which enable them to detect, evade and counter enemy defenses in order to accomplish their mission. What these capabilities look like in reality and how they are employed remains a question that future operations will have to answer. But despite all the appeal of new technologies, there are still the basics, that need to be considered first. Range, low-observability, survivability and cost-efficiency remain the key factors in determining whether a drone is suitable for this type of ISR mission.
As mentioned previously, a large-scale cluster approach incorporating drones, that can be equipped according to the mission, could increase the chances of a successful deep strike. Combined with a C2 structure, that can both manage the amount of intelligence and coordinate the drones within the cluster, the deep strike capability could be further improved. Currently, everything points to the development of more persistent ISR capabilities to gain information superiority on any future conflict. However, improving the way ISR assets are used is just one step along the entire kill chain.
In summary, a drone cluster seems promising, when embedded in a larger interconnected network. For example, its capabilities can be used across the different services, when being a part of the U.S. Joint All-Domain Command and Control or JADC2 concept. Eventually, as long as transparency is omnipresently lurking around every corner, ISR will remain of paramount importance.
What’s Next?
More of the deep strike, more details, some illustrative maps and visualizations to make the content more tangible.
Explore the Pacific
Abbrevations
- A2/AD – Anti-Access/Area-Denial
- C2 – Command & Control
- C4ISR – Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
- GLCM – Ground-Launched Cruise Missile
- IADS – Integrated Air Defense Systems
- IRBM – Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missile
- ISR – Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
- PLA – People’s Liberation Army
- UAS – Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Sources
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Beyond_Precision_Report_CSBA8355_FINAL_web.pdf
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Beyond_Precision_Report_CSBA8355_FINAL_web.pdf
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Evolution-of-Precision-Strike-final-v15.pdf
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/01/the-u-s-militarys-real-foe-the-tyranny-of-distance/
https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/airpower/Air%20Superiority%202030%20Flight%20Plan.pdf, S. 4
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/ASPJ/journals/Volume-34_Issue-1/F-McCabe.pdf, S. 28
https://insideunmannedsystems.com/where-we-are-with-isr/
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/The-Case-for-A-Carrier-Based-Unmanned-Combat-Air-System.pdf, S. 211 ff
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1300/RR1359/RAND_RR1359.pdf, S. 163 ff
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR392.html, S. 133 ff
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/10/24/1062039/us-navy-swarms-of-thousands-of-small-drones/
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/10/24/1062039/us-navy-swarms-of-thousands-of-small-drones/
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/CSBA_AFAIS_Report_v9.pdf
https://www.csis.org/analysis/unmanned-aerial-systems-influences-conflict-escalation-dynamics
https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA1984-1.html
https://www.cairn-int.info/journal-revue-defense-nationale-2023-HS11-page-95.htm#no5
https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/11605/chapter/13#252
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA527332.pdf
https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/11379/chapter/6#89
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09636412.2022.2153734
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/air-defense-and-limits-drone-technology
https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/46/4/130/111172/Why-Drones-Have-Not-Revolutionized-War-The
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA596-1.html
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR4400/RR4407/RAND_RR4407.pdf
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57260
Editor’s Note
All illustrations, tables, pictures and given scenarios in this article are for explanatory purposes only and do not show any information, which is not publicly available. The article and its content refrains from making any political statement.
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.