By Cdr Rahul Verma (r)
“Every once in a while, a new weapon, a new technology comes along that changes things. Einstein wrote a letter to Roosevelt in the 1930s saying that there is this new technology nuclear weapons that could change war, which it clearly did. I would argue that [AI-powered] autonomy and decentralized, distributed systems are that powerful.” – Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google
In 1932, the British statesman Stanley Baldwin gave a speech to the British Parliament in which he stated that “there is no power on earth that can protect the man in the street from being bombed. Whatever people may tell him, the bomber will always get through.” Today armed drones have shifted this offense defence balance (ODB), i.e. whether drones “will always get through,” to paraphrase the above statement. A loitering munition occupies a unique position between a cruise missile and an armed drone. It serves as an aerial weapon equipped with a warhead that has the ability to ‘loiter’ around a specific target area before ultimately crashing into it. The utilization of loitering munitions presents several advantages. Firstly, it enables swift response times when engaging valuable targets, all while avoiding the need to position high-value platforms in close proximity to the target area. Additionally, these munitions offer the flexibility of adjusting the target mid-flight or even aborting the mission if necessary, thereby ensuring accurate and selective targeting. Lastly, due to their expendable nature, loitering munitions are designed to be cost-effective and readily available in large quantities.
To understand the technology behind the unmanned drones of the present and of the future, we need to travel in the past, with dogfights between manned fighter jets during the Korean War. USAF pilot and military strategist John Boyd wondered why American F-80 fighter planes got better than Soviet Mig 15 jets in air-to-air combat. Boyd realized that the advantage lay with the pilot whose decisions were faster and more accurate than his opponent. He distilled this decision-making process into four step process OODA. The “OODA Loop” transformed the way we think of combat. It also influenced other fields, including Business, Sports and engineering, in short, everything I have seen in the Corporate world, anywhere a competitor seeks an edge. Today’s drones require help from humans in order to complete the OODA loop. For instance, contemporary drones often lack the sophisticated software necessary for the on-boarding processing of the video they capture. Instead, humans are primarily responsible for interpreting data, considering variables, gauging risks and deciding how to act. But as the AI engines improve, drones will be able to cycle through the OODA loop with less and less human assistance. Let’s refer to the AI-enabled RF seeker LM’s, they are like fire-and-forget systems. These systems once fed with the details such as centre frequency, prioritization of target and when to shift to seeker (distance from target) would not be able to distinguish whether it is a transmission for help or a transmission for detection, they would just engage the target. Hence, the distance between the machine and the operator has increased and tech has begun to feel qualitatively different. These technologies have been around for decades. The proximity fuse was created during World War II to detonate artillery shells at specific distances from their targets. This increased the effectiveness of the shells by increasing human decision-making and in some cases removing the human from the equation entirely.
The difference lies in the distinction between “automation” and “autonomy”. Automated machines can operate without humans by stringing together roles and pre-programmed operations in sequence. Automated machines simply replace routine manual processes. Automated sentry guns, certain anti-vehicle landmines and sensor-fused munitions are some examples of this category. On the basis of the above definition, some military authorities/ stakeholders have argued that Unmanned Air Systems (UAS), such as drones, should not be considered neither fully “automated”, as they can be remotely piloted, as functions such as navigation, take-off and landing can be “automated” but can’t be totally remote. The Royal British Army attempted to provide an all-encompassing definition of automated systems, i.e. those that “in response to inputs from one or more sensors, are programmed to logically follow a pre-defined set of rules in order to provide a predictable outcome”. Autonomous machines in contrast, have the more ambitious goal of emulating humans. They have also defined autonomous machines as “systems capable of understanding higher level intent and direction, from this understanding and its perception of its environment, such a system is able to take appropriate action to bring about a desired state; it is capable of deciding a course of action, from a number of alternatives. There is no bright line distinction between automation and autonomy, instead shift occurs in degrees, the degree to which a machine is autonomous turns on three capabilities, ie, the frequency of operator interaction needed in order to machine to function, the ability of the machine to successfully navigate environmental uncertainty and the machine’s level of assertiveness as to each one of the operational decision required in the course of a mission. As of today most of drones are highly autonomous in observing its environment and orienting themselves but less autonomous at the decision and action stages.
The number and complexity of loitering munitions have rapidly increased over the past decade. Today, more than 20 countries are producing and using these systems, a trend expected to continue rising in the coming years. Loitering munitions differ from drones in that they are a type of unmanned aerial vehicle designed to identify, track, and engage targets beyond visual range using an explosive warhead. They are made to be portable, easy to launch, and single-use, making them a more cost-effective, safer, and flexible alternative to artillery and complex missiles. Thanks to these features, loitering munitions can supposedly conduct various missions like intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, precision strikes, and counter-battery operations while loitering over an area for extended periods, allowing more decision-making time. While take-off and landing are automated for most systems, more advanced loitering munitions have varying levels of autonomous capabilities like navigation, target detection, tracking, and even engagement. The Israeli Harpy and Harop, Russian Lancet-3, Turkish Kargu-2, and American Switchblades are equipped with GPS guidance and electro-optical/infrared sensors with image processing, enabling autonomous target identification and tracking to some degree. Analysts widely consider the Harpy and Harop as prime examples of autonomous weapons that can engage targets like radar signatures from air defences with minimal human input. One of the newest is Turkey’s Kargu-2 quadcopter, which has a 10 km range and 30 minutes of remote or autonomous flight time. It allegedly uses cameras, and automatic target recognition via machine learning, and can be deployed in swarms. While the manufacturer says it operates on a “human-in-the-loop” principle, a UN investigation suggested the Kargu-2 may have autonomously attacked targets in Libya without remote connectivity.
Fully autonomous weapons have been part of the United States’ arsenal since at least 1979 when the Captor Anti-Submarine Mine was fielded. This mine held a torpedo anchored to the bottom that would launch when onboard sensors detected the designated target was in range. Today, the U.S. has many Quickstrike smart sea mines that autonomously select targets using onboard sensors once activated. The Navy’s Mark 48 ADCAP torpedo can operate with or without wire guidance, using active and passive homing. In fact, the fastest-growing torpedo segment is autonomous models. Victim-initiated mines, which detonate when stepped on or encountered, have also been around for over a century. These are essentially autonomous unattended weapons that kill without human input. While critics argue lethal autonomous weapons could spur a global arms race, history shows the arms race is perpetual. Therefore, it is prudent for India to remain ahead by leveraging the inherent cost and effectiveness advantages of its own startups and industries. Several Indian autonomous systems like ALS 50, Nagastra-1, and Avision are already deployed. Newspace, Artemon, Sagar Defence, Redon Systems and others also offer promising autonomous technologies. Speed, ease of use, onboard storage, and autonomous targeting/prioritization will define success in this domain.
Investment growth and the LM industry is growing rapidly, with the market value expected to reach US$6.85 billion by 2031, showing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.6 % for 2023-2031. This strong growth is driven by tight defence budgets, the need for specialized and accurate weapons capabilities, and the growth of these systems across the global armed forces. It is worth noting that major defence contractors and technology companies are investing heavily in the research, development, and production of these weapons, thus pushing technological progress and innovation in this field. The expansion of this industry increased cooperation and communication between nations, thus advancing the development and integration of these systems into new military equipment. As the market for loitering munitions continues to burgeon, it is poised to reshape the defence industry and play a pivotal role in shaping the future of warfare.
As the age of affordable and intelligent loitering munitions dawns, it heralds not just a mere change, but a seismic shift in the landscape of modern warfare. This shift brings with it a cascade of profound questions, echoing through the corridors of ethics, legality, and strategy. Picture a world where these sleek, deadly machines roam the skies, their autonomy and lethality pushing the boundaries of warfare into uncharted territory. It’s a world where the rules of engagement must be rewritten, where defence strategies and international governance frameworks must adapt or risk obsolescence. The rapid proliferation of loitering munitions, coupled with their projected market growth, serves as an urgent call to action. Military forces worldwide must arm themselves not just with conventional weapons, but with innovative countermeasures fit for this new era. As we navigate this turbulent sea of technological advancement, one thing is abundantly clear: we cannot afford to remain passive observers. It’s time for proactive discourse, for decisive action, to ensure that the potential benefits of loitering munitions are harnessed responsibly, without compromising the safety and security of our world.
I would only say, “In the era of loitering munitions, the stage is set, the actors are poised, and the script of warfare has been rewritten. As we stand at the precipice of this technological revolution, let us heed the warning of history’s ink, for in the silence of innovation, the echoes of our choices will resonate across the battlegrounds of tomorrow”, to end my article.
Commander Rahul Verma (r) is an Emerging Technology and Prioritization Scout for a leading Indian Multi-National Corporation, focusing on advancing force modernization through innovative technological applications and operational concepts. With 21 years as a Naval Aviator, including a distinguished role in the Indian Navy’s Technology Development Acceleration Cell, he brings diverse aviation experiences, from Seaking Pilot to RPAS Mission Commander and Flying Instructor. Through his written contributions, he aims to leverage his deep domain knowledge for the advancement of space, unmanned and autonomous systems, creating significant value for Atmanirbhar Bharat
