Drones, the Air Littoral, and the Looming Irrelevance of the USAF

[Kirkhill]

And jobs for AC-130s - a bit more reach.

AC-130 Gunship-Launched Black Arrow Small Cruise Missile Has A 400-Mile Range

Leidos is looking at also making the Black Arrow available for ground and sea-based launch platforms, from HIMARS to warships. The manufacturer has disclosed that the Black Arrow, also known as the Small Cruise Missile, has a range of at least 400 nautical miles.

www.twz.com

Harpoon Anti-Ship Missile-Armed AC-130J Gunships Could Be On The Horizon

Harpoons would give AC-130Js a dedicated tool for engaging enemy ships and fit well with plans to boost their capabilities with new radars.

www.twz.com

As well as

Rapid Dragon (missile system) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kirkhill]

Memo to self:

Bring truckloads of batteries in January.

Chilling effects: What one Army unit learned about cold-weather drone warfare

Frozen propellers and short-lived batteries are just some of the challenges these grunts faced during training in Europe.

www.defenseone.com

The Army also ordered electric-powered versions of the ISV but is pivoting to focus on hybrids only as part of a larger shift away from clean energy initiatives

 

[Kirkhill]

And the C-UAS fight

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2025/05/military-wants-stealthier-smarter-tech-take-down-drones/405058/?oref=d1-skybox-hp

The Pentagon’s Replicator project is asking industry for ways to detect and down enemy drones that can be used without harming surrounding areas—like American territory.

Lawmakers and military officials are increasingly concerned about the rise of illicit drone sightings around military bases, as well as the vulnerability of critical security infrastructure. In 2024, the Defense Department requested $10 billion for counter-drone tech, according to a September report from AUVSI.

But the threat from drones is rising faster than the Pentagon can deploy defenses, Rear Adm. Paul Spedero, vice director for operations for the Joint Staff, told the House oversight subcommittee on military and foreign affairs last week.

"The homeland is no longer a sanctuary. And should our adversary choose to employ drones for surveillance or even attack, we would not be prepared to adequately defend our homeland and only marginally capable to defend our military installations.”

The paper noted the limitations of traditional methods of drone detection such as radar, radio frequency analysis, acoustic sensors, and visual cameras. Radar systems often struggle to identify small, low-flying drones. Radio-frequency analysis doesn’t work on autonomous drones that operate without active communication links. Acoustic sensors detect drones’ sounds but have trouble in noisy settings. Visual cameras’ effectiveness is limited by lighting conditions, weather, and obstructions, and they may struggle to distinguish drones from other small airborne objects.

The paper argues for a hybrid approach fusing these and other data. But that presents an enormous data challenge in synthesizing and analyzing large volumes of dissimilar data. That’s a challenge that the commercial tech sector has been focused on for years, less so the U.S. military.

“The AI-enabled decision support is really a critical area because the volume of data and the speeds that we're talking about…is truly astronomical,” Beck said.

 

[Kirkhill]

Article concerning "sticker shock" on the USAF CCA programme.

CCA sticker shock: Coming soon to a congressional hearing near you? - Breaking Defense

Travis Sharp from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments argues that the Air Force is giving an incomplete picture of the total cost of the CCA program — and that might be a problem down the road.

breakingdefense.com

The results reaffirm that procurement unit cost offers an astonishingly incomplete picture of the total resources required to field a weapon. Even the least expensive CCA included in the analysis ($9 million per aircraft) would have total lifecycle costs through 2045 in the $35 billion to $55 billion range. The most expensive CCA ($37 million per aircraft) would have total costs in the $80 billion to $125 billion range.

I think this comes back to a very simple question:

Is the CCA an aircraft or a munition?

If it is an aircraft designed for multi-mission use then you get one answer.
If it is a munition designed for single-mission use then you get another answer. Even if the munition is recoverable and designed to reuse and recycle.

If the latter case then the life cycle costs are best appreciated, I would think, by comparing the craft to either/or the Tomahawk or reusable target drones.

The USAF seems to be having a discussion between those looking at 3 MUSD solutions and those looking at 30 MUSD solutions.