October 14, 2024: The United States Marine Corps is seeking to learn from the experiences of Russian and Ukrainian forces using various types of drones for a growing number of combat operations. The marines have specific uses for drones that are not common in Ukraine. This includes operating drones from amphibious ships and assisting in landing operations. The marines want to equip all their units, down to companies and platoons, with appropriate drone technology.

The use of drones in combat is no longer theoretical. For nearly three years now drones have demonstrated that they are now a major factor in modern warfare. Armed forces worldwide are rushing, or stumbling, to adapt.

One of the most interesting drone developments in Ukraine is the use of cheap, at about $500 each, quadcopter drones controlled by soldiers a kilometer or more away, who use FPV (First Person Viewing) goggles to see what the day/night video camera on the drone can see. Adding night vision doubles the cost for each drone, so not all of them have that capability. Each of these drones carries half a kilogram of explosives, so it can instantly turn the drone into a flying bomb that can fly into a target and detonate. This is an awesome and debilitating weapon when used in large numbers over the combat zone. If a target isn’t moving or requires more explosive power that the drones can supply, one of the drone operators can call in artillery, rocket, or missile fire, or even an airstrike.

A major limitation is the need for trained drone operators. These troops need over a hundred hours of training before they are able to start operating these drones, and another hundred hours of actual use before they are able to make the most out of the system. These drones are difficult to shoot down until they get close to the ground and the shooter is close enough, as in less than a few hundred meters, away to successfully target a drone with a bullet or two and bring it down. Troops are rarely in position to do this, so most of these drones are able to complete their mission, whether it is a one-way attack or a reconnaissance and surveillance mission. The recon missions are usually survivable and enable the drone to be reused. All these drones are constantly performing surveillance, which means that either side commits enough drones to maintain constant surveillance over a portion of the front line, to a depth, into enemy territory, of at least a few kilometers.

This massive use of FPV-armed drones has revolutionized warfare in Ukraine and both sides are producing as many as they can. Not having enough of these to match the number the enemy has in a portion of the front means you are at a serious disadvantage in that area. These drones are still evolving in terms of design and use and are becoming more effective and essential.

One countermeasure that can work for a while is electronic jamming of the drones control signal. Drone guidance systems are constantly modified or upgraded to cope with this. Most drones have flight control software that sends drones with jammed control signals back to where they took off from to land and await. The jammers are on the ground and can be attacked by drones programmed to home in on the jamming signal and detonate their explosives on the source of the jamming signal. As a result, even countermeasures can be overcome and the side that can do this more quickly and completely has an advantage. That advantage is usually temporary because both sides are putting a lot of effort into keeping their combat drones effective on the battlefield. A new countermeasure for jamming is use of wire-controlled drones, though these inherently have very short ranges from their controller.

Ukraine was not where extensive use of these drones first occurred. Innovative use of small drones is something that has been going on for several decades and is evolving all the time. This began in 2010, when the French firm Parrot introduced the first consumer friendly quadcopter. By 2017 Parrot had competition from the Chinese firm DJI, which innovated more quickly than anyone else and soon dominated the market for commercial quadcopters. This is why both Russia and Ukraine first turned to Mavic quadcopters as models for new militarized quadcopters they would produce. Both sides soon designed and built their own drones or heavily modified commercial models like Mavic. Russian troops had a more difficult time doing this. Russian troops also used Mavic quadcopters, when they could get them. Corruption in Russia made importing Mavic quadcopters difficult. This isn’t just about Mavic because corruption became more widespread in Russia in 2022 when the Ukraine War started, and subsequent sanctions disrupted the Russian economy. Russian bureaucracy discourages and disrupts any private efforts to design and build not merely drones, but private efforts to build most anything which might compete with government ways of building or doing things. This has been true since the 1920s, originally because of the Communist system, then because that was normal even after the Communists were overthrown, and then because that private enterprise interferes with government corruption. Ukrainians have noticed that one of their assets in the war is the disruptive effect Russian bureaucracy has on the Russian military. The Ukrainians are faster in developing new weapons, and particularly new drones.

While there is some corruption in Ukraine, there is also a lot more popular anger and active opposition to any corruption hurting the war effort. Less corruption in wartime Ukraine means there are a lot more opportunities for innovation without interference from some corrupt official or supplier. Russian troops still had a lot of drones but not as many as the Ukrainians and not with all the innovations found in many Ukrainian drones. This made a difference and still does, even though the Russians have been quick to use new forms of jamming to disrupt or destroy Ukrainian drones. Both sides suffer heavy, as in the thousands, of drone losses each month and Ukraine, with NATO support and unencumbered by economic sanctions, is able to maintain a drone edge on the battlefield.

Ukrainians were particularly adept at modifying quadcopters to carry explosives. If the operator found an enemy tank or lighter armored vehicle with a top hatch open, the vehicle could be destroyed when an explosive was dropped through the open hatch. The explosives were often used against Russian troops in foxholes or open trenches. This capability is bad for Russian morale and the Ukrainians made the most of it.

DJI quadcopters are popular with military customers worldwide, as well as with gangsters, drug smugglers and Islamic terrorists. American forces were banned from using DJI products from 2017 to 2020 because of fears that DJI, which thrives and survives by cooperating with the Chinese government, might have hidden capabilities in the control software that would enable DJI quadcopters to be monitored by the Chinese, especially in wartime. Several years of trying to prove this failed to discover anything and the American ban was quietly dropped.

NATO troops in places like Syria, Iraq, Mali and Afghanistan found that both Islamic terrorist and local security forces were eager users of high-end Chinese-made DJI commercial quadcopters. A particular favorite is DJI Matrice 200/210. This is an industrial-grade quadcopter costing up to $20,000 each. The DJI 210 weighs 4.7 kg and can carry up to 1.45 kg of cameras, additional batteries, or improvised weapons. Max endurance is about 30 minutes and top speed is 60 kilometers an hour. When under user control the 210 can operate up to eight kilometers away although five kilometers is more common. The 210 can be programmed to use its GPS/GLONASS navigation system to cover a specific route and return. If the control system is lost for any reason, the quadcopter will automatically return to where it started and land. While the 210 is mainly used for surveillance and reconnaissance though some have been equipped with an explosive dispenser. Anything from grenades to IEDs (improvised explosive devices) can be used. The 210 can be rigged as a one-way cruise-missile but that is expensive and increasingly common with groups backed by Iran as well as other well-funded Islamic terrorists. High-end models like the 210 are favored because they are rugged and can handle wind and incorporate obstacle avoidance. This is important when operating in urban areas, forests or at night using a night-vision camera.

While popular with Islamic terrorists, gangsters and less-well equipped police and military units, Western forces tended to avoid DJI products because of fears that China may have ordered the manufacturer to include secret features that would allow the Chinese military to disable or take-control of DJI products. No one has ever found such a back door in the quadcopter software and these Chinese quadcopters, especially those made by DJI, are the most popular models worldwide. That’s because DJI models offered are the best value as well as being the most reliable.

Sometimes these bans were issued after troops had already obtained and were using DJI quadcopters. For example, in early 2018 the U.S. Marine Corps announced a new squad and platoon organization, based on its experience so far this century, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the unique changes to the new 12-man squad was that each one would get a commercial quadcopter. These were smaller, more compact models costing less than two thousand dollars each. The Marines had already bought 600 and ordered another 200 when the U.S. Department of Defense ordered a ban on the use of Chinese quadcopters. The Marines did manage to get an exemption to the new ban and sought government approval to purchase commercial quadcopters. These are out there but none as inexpensive as the Chinese models. The complaints about the DJI ban from military users in the United States and other NATO countries played a role in the ban being lifted in 2020.

The U.S. Army banned the use of DJI quadcopters in 2017. The troops had been encountering these DJI quadcopters in combat zones for years and some troops had bought them with their own money to use (successfully) in combat. It’s no secret that DJI quadcopters have been showing up in combat zones with increasing frequency since 2014. Initially the most popular of these was the DJI Phantom quadcopter. Phantom 3 showed up in 2015. It cost about a thousand dollars, weighed 3.9 kg, could stay in the air about 20 minutes per flight and can go up to 2,000 meters from the operator. The operator can see, at 720p resolution, what is under the Phantom using a small display and capture a higher resolution 1080p video on a 16 GB micro memory card on the drone. The Phantom 3 was widely available. It is easy to operate and has flight control software that makes it easy to operate and keeps the video image stable. You can equip these with a night vision camera. Max altitude is over 500 meters (1,600 feet) but most Phantoms operate lower down because getting to higher altitude takes time. DJI kept upgrading its Phantom line of quadcopters from the moment the first one hit the market in 2013.

For combat troops cost is an important feature because something low-cost and capable in the combat zone equipment is quickly worn out. This is especially true with quadcopters. As a result, the troops have become accustomed to buying commercial products whenever they can get away with it. America did not initially have a viable quadcopter industry but that changed as successful foreign drone manufacturers opened factories in the United States. There are now six major drone manufacturers in the United States, most of them American branches of foreign companies or U.S. firms building foreign drones under license. Because the United States is the major supplier of military aid to Ukraine, the Ukrainians were willing to share their experiences with using, and now manufacturing many different types of drones.