Skip to content

Reconsider the terminology: Manual-less Vehicles Instead

In recent discussions, the term "uncrewed aerial systems" has gained popularity in military and defense circles, replacing the traditional "unmanned" descriptor. This shift has been observed in documents from the Pentagon, NATO, and various congressional defense publications. Defense...

Reconsider Using Term "Driverless" for Vehicles Instead
Reconsider Using Term "Driverless" for Vehicles Instead

Reconsider the terminology: Manual-less Vehicles Instead

In the realm of military and defense, the composition of drone support crews is a topic of ongoing discussion. This debate is vital in understanding the implications of drones for warfare, as the choice of terminology can significantly impact how these systems are perceived and integrated into operations.

One of the key figures in this debate is Zachary Kallenborn, an MPhil/PhD student in War Studies at King's College London, who has made a name for himself in defense circles. Kallenborn, who is officially a US Army "Mad Scientist," is a researcher with extensive experience in topics such as global catastrophes, drone warfare, critical infrastructure, WMD, and apocalyptic terrorism.

The term "uncrewed" has gained popularity as an alternative to the previously dominant "unmanned" descriptor. Proponents of this change argue that it promotes gender neutrality and inclusivity, as "unmanned" explicitly references "man," which can feel outdated in the context of gender-integrated armed forces. However, critics of "uncrewed" contend that it risks misconceiving the nature of these systems, which often rely on significant human teams for operation, maintenance, and mission execution.

The use of "uncrewed" systems can lead to a lack of clarity in understanding the operating environment, potentially hindering effective employment and acknowledging the complex command-and-control frameworks involved. For instance, calling them "uncrewed" might suggest fully autonomous or robotic systems operating independently, ignoring the critical role of remote operators and support crews essential for mission success.

Recognizing that drones are part of a "manned-unmanned teaming" environment, where human operators collaborate closely with autonomous systems, is crucial. Misleading terminology may obscure the realities of coordination, human oversight, and integrated tactics required. The employment of terms like "unmanned aerial systems" (UAS) is common and encompasses not just the drone aircraft but its entire support system, including operators, control stations, and communication links.

In the United States Air Force, the MQ-9A Reaper requires a crew consisting of a pilot, sensor operator, and mission intelligence coordinator. In contrast, a first-person view (FPV) drone team in Ukraine typically consists of three to four people, including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance specialists, maintainers, and observers.

The annual operating costs for a Reaper unit are about four times higher than those of an F-16 or an A-10 due to personnel costs. Crew costs can significantly change the financial equation of drones, as both sides of the Ukraine-Russia conflict are targeting the drones' crews.

Despite the arguments against "uncrewed," Kallenborn prefers the term "drones" due to its common understanding, gender-neutrality, and lack of confusion. He has appeared in Netflix's "UNKNOWN: Killer Robots" and is on the board of advisors of Synthetic Decision Group, Inc. and the Michael J. Morell Center for Intelligence and Security Studies at the University of Akron.

In conclusion, while "uncrewed" addresses valid concerns about gender inclusivity, it may unintentionally obscure the human component essential to drone operations. Awareness of these nuances is important for doctrinal clarity and effective employment of drone technology in defense contexts. The term "unmanned," despite its flaws, arguably better reflects the reality of remote human crews and operational complexity.

  1. Zachary Kallenborn, who is an expert in topics such as drone warfare, prefers the term "drones" due to its common understanding and gender-neutrality.
  2. The use of "uncrewed" systems can lead to a lack of clarity in understanding the operating environment, potentially hindering effective employment and acknowledging the complex command-and-control frameworks involved.
  3. The annual operating costs for a Reaper unit are significantly higher than those of traditional aircraft like the F-16 or the A-10 due to the high personnel costs associated with drone operations.
  4. In warfare, the integration of drone technology relies heavily on data-and-cloud-computing, technology, and human teams for operation, maintenance, and mission execution, making terminology like "unmanned" or "uncrewed" a subject of ongoing debate in defense circles.

Read also:

    Latest