[GK3]

More nonsense;https://breakingdefense.com/2025/07/hegseth-signs-unleashing-us-military-drone-dominance-memo/
Every squad to be equipped with drones?  Who carries them and their payload?  What do you leave behind so you can carry them?  I can understand the desire to get these things out there, but at the squad level?  What is my weapons platoon doing?  Why not put the drones there, fits far better for most missions I would think. 
Here is what most infantry squad members today have to deal with:


So what do you leave behind to carry a single drone?

Keep in mind that the average non combat loadout weighs close to 70 lbs, a combat loadout can weigh over 100, maybe as high as 120.  I say put the drones in the weapons platoon and do away with a mortar or two.

I totally agree that the weapons platoon at the company level is where the one-way attack drones belong in the US Army. This is clearly true in mechanized units where the weapons platoon has mortar carriers. The extra weight of the drones can be traded off for 120 mm ammunition or the 81 mm dismountable mortar. IMO there is really no question that is the correct group to handle the attack drone capability. For light infantry formations, special forces, and the USMC the weapons platoon is still probably where they belong, but as you point out there is a significant trade-off. It isn't just the drone. If it is an FPV device you also need a viewing screen and a control console. That has to be carried as well. IMO the "best" loadout will have to be determined by war games at the NTC. There may be cases where no drones at all are carried, there may be cases where no mortars are carried, depending on the situation.
 
The situation is even more complicated than it first appears. If the drone is being used for reconnaissance, the weapons platoon probably isn't the best place for it to be in the TO. Possibly it should be part of the headquarters platoon. If the drone is the electric quadcopter type, it needs recharging after use. The 15C operating it can't do without that very long at all. He needs a generator of some kind, even if is hand-cranked. The headquarters company probably has at least a reliable generator for the radios, so that seems like the place to have the reconnaissance drones.
 
This needs to be thought out. The memo from the SecDef seems to indicate he is fine with the troops figuring out something themselves and making that doctrine, much as happened in Ukraine and Russia. While I am 100% on board involving the troops early and often in deciding what the US Army needs just leaving it to happenstance is obviously a bad idea. SecDef seems to believe that all of the Army's weapons development problems stem from too many regulations and too much risk aversion. IMO that is only a small part of the story. There is also plenty of fuzzy thinking at the highest levels coupled with too many leaders that believe they know exactly what is needed but are unwilling to put their ideas to the test BEFORE deciding what to buy. A very long, sad story. It seems the current SecDef is determined to add his name to the above list.

Ukraine and Russia both operate their drone units at the battalion level. These units can be attached to specific companies or operated as stand-alone entities. This choice is partly due to the "usual" Soviet practice for such "special purpose" units and to the fact the war in Ukraine is an ad-hoc "happening". The Ukrainians started out with separate units because they were actually private citizens helping the army, not part of the army itself.

Drones are nice, I am an admitted fan of the concept, but they have their time and place. Open terrain, desert, scattered forest OK, dense forests or jungles like Vietnam then not so much.

Amen! Drones have a role to play. Exactly what that role is will evolve very quickly, as it already has been. It isn't just terrain. As you point out for light infantry, everything you bring displaces other things you didn't. Realistic exercises at the NTC can sort a lot of this out, if the leadership is actually willing to listen.

I agree completely with your comments, particularly testing everything at the NTC.  Every potential operational theater will have different issues that have to be considered and hardware and tactical and strategic philosophies need to be tested across the board.  You do not want to be the Company or Battalion commander  whose senior NCO comes and asks, " Sir,  What the you know what am I supposed to do with this stuff?" and your reply is "What stuff?"

George S. Patton Jr is credited with once saying that he who sweats more in training will bleed less in battle. The time to figure out how to use all these fancy new toys is in training, not in the middle of combat.  That said, far too often that is not the way things work out.

Headquarters Company is almost certainly where the recon stuff should be operated from.

[GK3]

More nonsense;https://breakingdefense.com/2025/07/hegseth-signs-unleashing-us-military-drone-dominance-memo/
Every squad to be equipped with drones?  Who carries them and their payload?  What do you leave behind so you can carry them?  I can understand the desire to get these things out there, but at the squad level?  What is my weapons platoon doing?  Why not put the drones there, fits far better for most missions I would think. 
Here is what most infantry squad members today have to deal with:


So what do you leave behind to carry a single drone?

Keep in mind that the average non combat loadout weighs close to 70 lbs, a combat loadout can weigh over 100, maybe as high as 120.  I say put the drones in the weapons platoon and do away with a mortar or two.

I totally agree that the weapons platoon at the company level is where the one-way attack drones belong in the US Army. This is clearly true in mechanized units where the weapons platoon has mortar carriers. The extra weight of the drones can be traded off for 120 mm ammunition or the 81 mm dismountable mortar. IMO there is really no question that is the correct group to handle the attack drone capability. For light infantry formations, special forces, and the USMC the weapons platoon is still probably where they belong, but as you point out there is a significant trade-off. It isn't just the drone. If it is an FPV device you also need a viewing screen and a control console. That has to be carried as well. IMO the "best" loadout will have to be determined by war games at the NTC. There may be cases where no drones at all are carried, there may be cases where no mortars are carried, depending on the situation.
 
The situation is even more complicated than it first appears. If the drone is being used for reconnaissance, the weapons platoon probably isn't the best place for it to be in the TO. Possibly it should be part of the headquarters platoon. If the drone is the electric quadcopter type, it needs recharging after use. The 15C operating it can't do without that very long at all. He needs a generator of some kind, even if is hand-cranked. The headquarters company probably has at least a reliable generator for the radios, so that seems like the place to have the reconnaissance drones.
 
This needs to be thought out. The memo from the SecDef seems to indicate he is fine with the troops figuring out something themselves and making that doctrine, much as happened in Ukraine and Russia. While I am 100% on board involving the troops early and often in deciding what the US Army needs just leaving it to happenstance is obviously a bad idea. SecDef seems to believe that all of the Army's weapons development problems stem from too many regulations and too much risk aversion. IMO that is only a small part of the story. There is also plenty of fuzzy thinking at the highest levels coupled with too many leaders that believe they know exactly what is needed but are unwilling to put their ideas to the test BEFORE deciding what to buy. A very long, sad story. It seems the current SecDef is determined to add his name to the above list.

Ukraine and Russia both operate their drone units at the battalion level. These units can be attached to specific companies or operated as stand-alone entities. This choice is partly due to the "usual" Soviet practice for such "special purpose" units and to the fact the war in Ukraine is an ad-hoc "happening". The Ukrainians started out with separate units because they were actually private citizens helping the army, not part of the army itself.

Drones are nice, I am an admitted fan of the concept, but they have their time and place. Open terrain, desert, scattered forest OK, dense forests or jungles like Vietnam then not so much.

Amen! Drones have a role to play. Exactly what that role is will evolve very quickly, as it already has been. It isn't just terrain. As you point out for light infantry, everything you bring displaces other things you didn't. Realistic exercises at the NTC can sort a lot of this out, if the leadership is actually willing to listen.

I agree completely with your comments, particularly testing everything at the NTC.  Every potential operational theater will have different issues that have to be considered and hardware and tactical and strategic philosophies need to be tested across the board.  You do not want to be the Company or Battalion commander  whose senior NCO comes and asks, " Sir,  What the you know what am I supposed to do with this stuff?" and your reply is "What stuff?"

George S. Patton Jr is credited with once saying that he who sweats more in training will bleed less in battle. The time to figure out how to use all these fancy new toys is in training, not in the middle of combat.  That said, far too often that is not the way things work out.

Headquarters Company is almost certainly where the recon stuff should be operated from.