Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has directed the Pentagon to embark on the largest unmanned systems buildup in U.S. history — an effort that could deliver more than 300,000 small drones over the next several years. The initiative, known as the Drone Dominance Program (DDP), shifts defense procurement toward inexpensive, rapidly fieldable systems that can be produced at scale and used in high-threat, attritable environments.
The Scope of the Buildup
Based on current internal planning and industry documentation, the early production targets are aggressive: approximately 30,000 drones delivered by July 2026, followed by a ramp-up to well over 200,000 units by 2027, with a long-term goal of roughly 300,000 platforms across the services. The drones are intended to be inexpensive to manufacture and expendable in combat, with initial unit costs around $5,000 and potentially dropping as manufacturing scales.
Hegseth has been clear that drones are no longer niche intelligence tools. He has repeatedly framed the initiative as a response to contemporary battlefields where inexpensive, commercially derived systems have shifted tactical realities, especially in Ukraine, Gaza, and the Middle East. His directive instructs the services to “train as we expect to fight,” and to integrate drones into maneuver operations, force-on-force field exercises, and combined arms environments.
The scale of the program represents a notable reorientation: quantity, speed, and industrial mobilization now sit at the center of unmanned strategy, not just exquisite or high-end UAV platforms.
Questions That Remain
As procurement begins, five important planning questions remain central to how the effort will translate into readiness, employment, and long-term capability. The questions are not criticisms of the initiative, but the natural next layer of understanding as the military expands into a domain where volume outpaces legacy sustainment and doctrine.
1. How Will Units Train for Mass Drone Employment?
The directive to incorporate drones into “all relevant combat training” signals a structural shift in how the services intend to prepare forces. What is not yet publicly defined is the scale, frequency, and methodology of that training across different formations. The Army and Marine Corps already have crowded training calendars, and integrating swarms, electronic warfare environments, counter-UAS threats, and complex airspace deconfliction requires time, planning, and resources.
A central question is how quickly operators, maneuver units, and supporting elements will develop real proficiency, not only in flying drones, but in using them under contested conditions, coordinating with ground maneuver, and applying near-real-time reconnaissance or strike data inside combined arms operations.
2. What Sustainment and Storage Infrastructure Will Be Required?
A buildup of tens or hundreds of thousands of drones will create a new sustainment burden across the force. Batteries expire, sensors need replacement, supply chains fluctuate, and drones stored in uncontrolled environments can deteriorate quickly. Even if the platforms are attritable, the sustainment system behind them will need manpower, tools, containers or warehouse space, and processes for repair, refurbishment, tracking, and end-of-service disposal.
The military has decades of experience sustaining aircraft, vehicles, and precision munitions, but the sustainment infrastructure for disposable or semi-disposable unmanned systems is still emerging. Understanding how the services plan to resource storage, spare parts, diagnostics, and lifecycle management will help determine how many drones remain operational at any given time, and for how long.
3. How Will Command and Control Be Organized Across Formations?
The operational advantages of mass drones depend heavily on how they are controlled, prioritized, and integrated into tactical decision-making. Traditional unmanned aircraft systems are controlled at higher echelons or dedicated UAV units. The current model envisions a more distributed capability: platoons, companies, battalions, or even cross-domain teams could have organic drone capacity for reconnaissance, loitering munitions, or strike support.
Understanding where drones will sit in the chain of command, how swarms will be coordinated, and how units will communicate in contested electromagnetic environments remains essential. The employment model, centralized vs. decentralized, will shape doctrine, coordination procedures, software integration, and airspace safety. Clarity will help commanders anticipate field employment, risk mitigation, and integration with artillery, armor, ISR, and aviation elements.
4. How Will Accountability and Lifecycle Management Be Handled at Scale?
Attritable drones are expendable by design, but accountability still matters. Inventory systems, expended-platform reporting, maintenance records, and chain-of-custody procedures will need to adapt to equipment that is not treated like traditional aircraft or vehicles.
For logisticians, auditors, and readiness reporting, the question is not punitive — it is procedural. How will units track what has been used, what remains serviceable, what requires replacement, and what needs disposal or demilitarization? As numbers scale, the military may need updated policies, software tools, and reporting structures to maintain operational clarity without creating administrative burdens that overwhelm field units.
5. Can the Industrial Base Sustain Continuous Production and Component Resilience?
The Drone Dominance Program assumes that American manufacturing — including commercial and nontraditional defense firms — can produce reliable drones at high volume and within short lead times. That vision has strategic benefits: rapid innovation, lower cost, domestic sourcing, and competitive designs.
A key planning question is whether the industrial base can sustain component availability over time. Drone performance depends on motors, sensors, batteries, communications modules, and computing elements that may be vulnerable to supply-chain disruption or foreign market dependency.
Understanding the health, redundancy, and resilience of the domestic supply chain will help shape long-term sustainment planning and ensure that the U.S. military is not constrained if demand accelerates during crisis or conflict.
A Program With Momentum — and Opportunity
Hegseth’s initiative reflects a rapidly changing reality: unmanned systems are no longer an accessory to the battlefield.
They are becoming a central component of how information is gathered, how forces maneuver, and how fires are delivered. If procurement continues on schedule, the United States could enter a period where mass, autonomy, and distributed strike capability are core features of land and maritime operations.
The most significant insights now concern implementation. How forces train, how drones are stored and sustained, how doctrine evolves, and how industry scales will determine the full operational value of a 300,000-drone fleet.
These are planning questions rather than critiques, but they will shape readiness, lethality, and long-term competitive advantage.
