U.S. Army plans rapid drone buildup

United States Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll said the Army plans to acquire at least one million drones within the next two to three years, with the potential to purchase between half a million and one million drones annually afterward.

He detailed the plan in an interview with Reuters, describing it as a major expansion of the Army’s unmanned systems portfolio and a restructuring of how the service approaches future combat.

Driscoll acknowledged that the Army currently acquires about 50,000 drones each year. Increasing production to the scale he outlined would require rapid expansion of manufacturing capacity, changes in procurement strategy, and support for domestic component suppliers. He framed the increase as a response to trends observed on current battlefields.

He said that Ukraine and Russia are each producing roughly four million drones per year, and that China is likely capable of producing twice that amount. These comparisons, Driscoll noted, have underscored the need for the United States to prepare for conflicts in which drones are used continuously, at scale, and with high attrition.

Driscoll said his priority is to ensure that the United States can produce enough drones for any future war by strengthening domestic production of core components including electric motors, sensors, batteries, and circuit boards. He stated that the Army has already begun shifting resources away from some older weapon systems to increase funding for drone acquisition. He added that he is confident the necessary funding will be available.

Driscoll also said he intends to change the Army’s view of drones as equipment. Instead of treating unmanned aircraft as complex, high-value systems designed for long service life, he wants them to be regarded as expendable munitions that can be used frequently and replaced quickly.

He said, “Drones are the future of warfare, and we’ve got to invest in both the offensive and defense capabilities against them.”

The shift reflects lessons from ongoing conflicts, where drones are used for reconnaissance, targeting, electronic disruption, and direct attack. In such environments, the number of available drones and the speed at which they can be replaced have become decisive factors. Driscoll’s comments signal that the Army intends to institutionalize this logic rather than treat it as a temporary wartime adaptation.

As noted in the interview, the plan is not simply to increase procurement but to create a stable industrial pipeline that can sustain high-rate production over multiple years. That involves partnerships with commercial drone producers, investment in component manufacturing, and the adoption of standardized platforms that are easy to operate and replace.

The approach also implies changes in logistics and training. If drones are used in large numbers at the tactical level, units will need reliable access to spare systems, batteries, and replacement parts. Training will need to focus on operating and deploying drones routinely, rather than on preserving specialized equipment.

Driscoll’s remarks indicate that the Army sees this shift as both necessary and urgent. If the procurement plan proceeds at the scale outlined, it would represent one of the largest changes in Army acquisition strategy in decades and would shape how the United States prepares for future conflict across multiple theaters.