No other technologies have altered the battlefield as rapidly as tiny drones. Long viewed as nothing more than science fiction novelties or hobby toys, the small unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, are quietly revolutionizing infantry warfare in subtle but significant ways. But their adoption has been patchy, particularly in the U.S. military, where culture, bureaucracy, and caution held them back—mirroring past doubts about other game-changing tools.
There is a history lesson. At the beginning of World War I, the British Army went into battle with only two machine guns per battalion. Many commanders just didn’t realize their potential, and as historian John Ellis noted, for some, the machine gun “simply did not exist.” The horrific result was huge casualties on the Somme. Miniature drones are exploding today in wars around the world—but in one region, the American approach is reassuringly old hat: cautious, incremental, and frequently resistant to abandoning conventional ways of doing things.
Why the restraint? In part, it’s an attitude of culture. Militaries prefer tested systems to untested ones, and drones are subject to tight control, especially because they technically fit into the category of aircraft. That means fewer drones actually end up in the hands of soldiers who might tinker with them and learn new ways to use them on the battlefield.
This is no trivial disruption—it’s an actual performance shortfall. Without live-fire, troops lose the chance to learn new tactics, hone countermeasures, and learn fresh solutions that can be the difference between life and death. Consider Ukraine, where toy-sized drones are now mission-critical weapons of war.
They are utilized for surveillance, targeting, and even direct attack. They depend on these drones during combat by Ukrainian forces, and the technology is so prevalent that schools are instructing the next generation to fly and build them.
Although European military deployments are timely, U.S. forces are confronted with a different set of challenges. Security protocol and importation restrictions have stalled commercial adoption of drones, slowing programs such as the Marine Corps’ “Quads for Squads” initiative.
Even if there are exceptions, the clearance is late, and the choices to choose could be old to counter consumer-class systems. Experts caution that the lag can put the military at risk of losing the lead, even to what appears low-tech or simple, but represents a major operating advantage.
But it is on the way. Marines recently fielded small unmanned air systems with live ordnance at Camp Lejeune for the first time in a program-of-record environment. The SkyRaider quadcopter successfully released the Mjolnir, an explosive unit that contains sensors that are able to scatter ball bearings for maximum effect.
This was more than a tech demo—it was an experiment in effectively and safely bringing new tools to infantry war. Capt. Maj. Jessica Del Castillo, commander of the Small Unmanned Aircraft School, explained that these exercises were created to attempt to push the drones as far as they could and see how they could disrupt combat traditions in the future.
Tests also established the benefits of combining drones with current capabilities. Combined with mortars, Stalker UAS aircraft, and Javelins, troops were able to see the entire ground and aerial battlefield. These combined capabilities provide today’s infantrymen the situational awareness and flexibility they need to live and fight in dense, sophisticated battlefields.
But challenges lie ahead. To fully embrace these technologies, the military must rethink how it buys, trains on, and employs drones. Frontline soldiers must be allowed to experiment and improvise. The stakes are high. Experience from Ukraine and other recent wars indicates that small drones are not afterthoughts—they are transforming war. To lag in embracing them could risk something that matters deeply in the future.