What the US Army is flying is around 90% crewed, 10% drone. Leadership wants to flip that.
In the coming years, the Army wants to operate far more unmanned aircraft than manned.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wants the Army to reduce its crewed attack helicopter force and replace it with drones.
US Army leadership told Business Insider it wants to be flying a lot more uncrewed aircraft than crewed ones in the coming years. We are talking about a tremendous increase in the number of drones.
Its ambitions, which align with goals outlined by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's recent directive, come from a vision for what Army officials and the Trump administration have described as a more lethal force ready for future warfare.
In an interview with Business Insider, US Secretary of the Army Daniel Driscoll and Gen. James Rainey, the commanding general of Army Futures Command, said that unprecedented changes in warfare are fueling plans to overhaul what the Army flies.
"We believe there's a role for some manned aircraft," Rainey explained, "Big picture-wise, right now, about 90% of the things we're flying have humans in them and 10% don't. And I believe over the next several years, we would like to invert that."
The plans to give every division 1,000 drones within the next two years, he added, speak to the "aggressiveness" with which the Army is going after the new uncrewed objectives.
Earlier this year, Hegseth sent out a memo on strategic transformations within the Army, laying out goals and timelines for the service, including force restructuring and cuts to certain programs and systems that altogether represent one of the largest Army revamps since the end of the Cold War. The push is estimated to cost around $36 billion over the next five years.
In the memo, Hegseth indicated that crewed attack helicopter formations would be reduced, restructured, and augmented with drone swarms capable of overwhelming adversaries.
War-winning Army capabilities and the ones that aren't
Driscoll said this big change, along with others identified in the DoD memo, is already underway and largely focused on examining what systems no longer make sense in the context of the Army's vision for its future and what systems will replace them.
He mentioned the AH-64D Apache attack helicopter as one platform that no longer aligns with plans for the transformation of the force. "The flying costs on that were $10,000 an hour," the secretary said of the older Deltas, pointing out that the figure is about twice the cost of the newer Echo variant of the aircraft.
"Those are the kinds of decisions that I think we had let linger and fester for too long as an Army for all sorts of reasons," Driscoll said. "What we are trying to do is take a hard look at these things," he explained, and decide whether they align with what the warfighter needs.
Last month, Lt. Gen. Joseph Ryan, the Army's deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and training, said that the Deltas are no longer "a war-winning capability that we can fight with and win today." Even the more advanced Echos, he said, are "on the cusp of being capabilities where we don't necessarily see them contributing to the fight the way they have done perhaps in the past."
The Army plans to shelve the Delta variant and further examine other crewed aircraft that may no longer be sufficiently effective. It is also reviewing other helicopter models and plans to reduce the number of helos operated.
The future of war is robotic
More broadly, uncrewed aircraft are being seen as alternatives that soldiers can send forward on the battlefield to do missions that crewed aircraft have traditionally done.
There's still a place for crewed aircraft in the Army. Some helicopters, for example, still boast value for landing troops behind or around enemy positions to surprise and surround them. But future operations are expected to be a whole lot more robotic, with an Army aviation portfolio that more heavily relies on unmanned systems integrated with manned ones.
The Army sees itself at a turning point. Senior defense officials appointed by President Donald Trump have called out what they see as excessive spending, outdated systems and weapons, and a need to expedite changes to be prepared to deter or fight a future conflict. It's part of efforts to maximize readiness, increase lethality, and get soldiers what they need most.
Such aims aren't entirely new, though, and execution will be key. During the previous administration, for instance, the Army was already discussing the need for more uncrewed systems and changes to its aircraft fleet, especially with the cancellation of the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft program.
Last year, Rainey told lawmakers that for scouting and recon missions "the right thing to do is to use unmanned systems and not put humans in harm's way."
A major motivator for many of the ongoing transformation efforts is China, which the Pentagon has referred to as a pacing challenge. Officials and lawmakers in Washington see China's meteoric military growth and modernization and are pursuing capabilities that will allow the US military to deter aggression and, if necessary, overcome that rapidly evolving fighting force in armed combat.
Drones, from pocket-sized aircraft to quadcopters to bigger warfighting assets, are a key part of these efforts, providing a range of combat capabilities en masse for a relatively low cost compared to some other US weapons programs.
The Pentagon has been working to expedite the development and deployment of uncrewed aerial systems across the services, recognizing their value as this technology sprints onto the scene in big ways. Army soldiers have been testing different types of reconnaissance and strike drones are being tested in areas like the Indo-Pacific region, learning how to adapt unmanned systems to the challenges of different missions and environments.
That's a key aspect of an ongoing "transformation in contact" initiative, which focuses on Army units being given free rein to use different capabilities during training and exercises to see how the systems might work best.
The value of drones, particularly the smaller systems, has been especially visible in the war in Ukraine, which Army leaders continue to study. Ukrainian operators fly drones for intelligence-gathering and strike missions, among others.
Due to extensive electronic warfare countermeasures on the battlefield, both sides are heavily relying on fiber-optic drones to maintain a stable connection between the operator and system while also exploring new technology, like AI-enabled drones that can resist jamming. The US is not in a similar situation, but it is looking to innovate as if it were.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Amazon cloud chief says replacing junior employees with AI is the 'dumbest thing I've ever heard'
Matt Garman, Amazon's cloud boss, has a warning for business leaders rushing to swap workers for AI: Don't ditch your junior employees. The Amazon Web Services CEO said on an episode of the "Matthew Berman" podcast published Tuesday that replacing entry-level staff with AI tools is the "dumbest thing I've ever heard." "They're probably the least expensive employees you have. They're the most leaned into your AI tools," he said. "How's that going to work when you go like 10 years in the future and you have no one that has built up or learned anything?" Garman said companies should keep hiring graduates and teaching them how to build software, break down problems, and adopt best practices. He also said the most valuable skills in an AI-driven economy aren't tied to any one college degree. "If you spend all of your time learning one specific thing and you're like, 'That's the thing I'm going to be expert at for the next 30 years,' I can promise you that's not going to be valuable 30 years from now," he said. Instead, he said students should focus on developing critical reasoning, creativity, and the ability to adapt as technology evolves. Garman and Amazon did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider. AI is coming for junior employees Tech leaders have been vocal about how AI could replace the work of entry-level staff. Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said in June that AI is already beginning to act like junior-level coworkers. "You hear people that talk about their job now is to assign work to a bunch of agents, look at the quality, figure out how it fits together, give feedback, and it sounds a lot like how they work with a team of still relatively junior employees," Altman said of AI agents during the Snowflake Summit 2025. Google's chief scientist, Jeff Dean, said earlier this year that AI will soon be able to replicate the skills of a junior software engineer, adding that it could happen within the next year. The pressure is also showing up in data. According to Goldman Sachs, the unemployment rate for 20- to 30-year-olds in tech has risen by nearly 3 percentage points since early 2024, over four times the increase in the overall jobless rate. "While this is still a small share of the overall US labor market, we estimate that generative AI will eventually displace 6-7% of all US workers," Jan Hatzius, Goldman Sachs' chief economist, wrote in August. Others don't agree that junior staff are expendable. GitHub CEO Thomas Dohmke said last month that young engineers frequently bring fresh perspectives and are more likely to have been early adopters of AI. "Folks that go to high school now, or to college, or even kids earlier in their education, they get to use AI much faster," Dohmke said in a July episode of "The Pragmatic Engineer." "They get it because they are taking this with an open mind. They don't have the, 'This is how we've always done it,'" he added.


Digital Trends
3 hours ago
- Digital Trends
Atlanta's robotaxi fans spark a quirky Uber trend
Waymo partnered with Uber a couple of months ago to offer robotaxi rides in Atlanta, with the autonomous-car company reportedly deploying dozens of fully driverless vehicles for paying passengers in the city. But while Waymo offers its service in other locations via its Waymo One app, in Atlanta it's currently only offering robotaxi rides via the Uber ride-hailing app. And that's led to a quirky new habit among some riders. Recommended Videos As reported by Business Insider (BI), those keen to hop in a Waymo robotaxi are now in the habit of canceling human drivers on the app until it serves up a robotaxi. One rider said he even spent a whole hour rejecting rides until he was able to secure a Waymo robotaxi, adding that on average he has to reject around 20 human drivers on Uber before he can get a Waymo car to collect him. And that was despite setting an option in the Uber app that lets it know you prefer to ride in an autonomous taxi. 'These driverless vehicles seem to be amassing a contingent of enthusiasts who prefer them over human drivers,' BI said in its report. Another robotaxi fan who's in the habit of canceling Uber drivers until he gets a Waymo pickup said that he's started to notice the kinds of rides that Waymo seems to go for. For example, they'll cost under $12 and won't require heading to a freeway. An Uber spokesperson confirmed this with BI, saying that riders can increase the likelihood of getting a Waymo car by avoiding trips that would ordinarily involve hitting a freeway, riding outside busy times like evenings and weekends, and ensuring the ride is within the 65-square-mile Atlanta service area currently applied to Waymo's autonomous taxi trips. Canceling human drivers in pursuit of Waymo rides appears to indicate a growing interest and enthusiasm for autonomous rides, though for now at least, the vast majority of Uber rides are still taken care of by living, breathing humans … much to their relief, no doubt.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Billionaires say a private jet is one of life's greatest luxuries. Here's how much it costs.
A private jet is one of the most expensive assets money can buy. The costs don't end when the aircraft is purchased. Maintenance, crew, fuel, and a hangar can easily add up to seven figures a year. More than 15 years ago, Oprah Winfrey shared one of her famous nuggets of wisdom: "It's great to have a private jet," she said at Duke University's 2009 commencement. "Anyone that tells you that having your own private jet isn't great is lying to you." But she did leave out one detail: Having a private jet is expensive — really expensive. Costs such as crew, custom features, and maintenance can add to the already hefty price tag of purchasing a private plane, companies that manage these and charter fleets told Business Insider. "There is a lot that goes into owning an airplane, a lot of expenses that aren't on the surface," said Jamie Walker, the executive chairman of jet management company Jet Linx. Some of the most popular private jet models — the Bombardier Challenger 300 and 350, the Embraer Phenom 300, the Cessna Citation XLS+, and the Gulfstream G550 — cost between $9.5 million and $33 million brand new, Walker estimated. The cost fluctuates by model. But even when purchased used, many list for sale for eight figures. That's not including customization, which is "where things get fun," Walker said. See: Paris Hilton's "SlivAir," a Gulfstream G450 with a Barbie pink paint job and "That's Hot" written on a wing. "We've seen clients spend anywhere from a few hundred thousand to several million on customizations," Walker said, who compared it to "building a luxury home." Interior upgrades like custom cabinetry and headrests imprinted with logos start at about $65,000. Premium woodwork and Hermès leather seats can exceed $1 million. WiFi from Starlink or L5 can cost between $120,000 and $450,000. A private jet can cost more than $1 million a year to run Once a jet is delivered, the costs of operating it start to add up. Leona Qi, the president of the US division of charter firm VistaJet, estimated that it typically costs more than $1 million a year to run a single jet. Members of a private jet's crew — at least two pilots, sometimes an air host — are typically considered full-time employees. Each can earn between $150,000 and $400,000 a year. They also have to be properly certified, trained, and insured, at the owner's cost. While some jet maintenance is scheduled — much like a car's, it's based on mileage and crew — unexpected fixes can leave an unlucky owner seven figures in the red in a bad year. An engine overhaul, for example, can cost as much as $1.5 million per engine, Walker estimated (and most jets have two). Then there's a hangar. A parking spot in New York or Miami can cost as much as $450,000 a year, significantly more than one in smaller cities like Omaha or St. Louis. Fuel can make up about one-third of all ownership costs, Walker said. And most private jet owners hire a company to manage it all. Jet Linx said it charges between $7,000 and $12,000 a month for its management services. To charter or not to charter? That is the multimillion-dollar question. The expenses and headaches of owning a plane have some uber-wealthy turning to charter. Qi at the jet charter company said she doesn't think it makes financial sense to own an aircraft unless you fly more than 350 hours a year, want a completely personalized jet with a toothbrush and a set of fresh clothes on board, or need it at a moment's notice. Through charter companies like VistaJet, members can buy a certain number of flying hours a year, while fractional ownership firms like NetJets sell members a share in a specific aircraft. Even when money is no object, some of the wealthiest in the world choose to charter out of privacy concerns. Privately owned jets can be tracked by the public, while charter jets — whose passengers aren't revealed publicly — are much more discreet. "The group had a plane and we sold it," LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault said of his company's jet, speaking in 2022 on a French radio station. "The result now is that no one can see where I go because I rent planes when I use private planes." Others charter jets when they can't use their personal planes. As many as 50% of VistaJet's clients own their own jets but use VistaJet as a backup service when their aircraft is undergoing maintenance or is already in use, the company said. On the other hand, there are private jet owners who don't use their planes very often and charter them out to mitigate some of the costs associated with ownership. (They do something similar with their superyachts.) "Most people who are unfamiliar are surprised," Walker said. "They're like, 'Really, people with that much wealth and companies that are that big that make that much money care about offsetting half a million bucks?' And they do. They absolutely care about that." Well, they care, but not enough to forgo a plane altogether. Look at the infamously frugal Warren Buffett, who resisted a private jet for years. Once he splurged, there was no looking back. "Were I to die tomorrow, you could be sure Berkshire's earnings would increase by $1 million annually, since Charlie would immediately sell our corporate jet, The Indefensible (ignoring my wish that it be buried with me)," he wrote in Berkshire Hathaway's 1990 investor letter. Read the original article on Business Insider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data