There are some interesting metaphors one could draw, such as having an officer watching over several UAVs at once while enlisted personnel do the actual flying of the UAVs (sort of like the captain of a sub giving orders and enlisted personnel doing the actual moment-to-moment controlling of the boat). A problem comes in, however, with the myopic perspective on cost. Personnel do represent a significant portion of the defense budget (albeit a portion often overlooked by the media and casual discourse) . UAVs cost about the same as manned aircraft on a per-pound basis - the reason MQ-1s and -9s are so much cheaper than F-22s is because they are less capable (fly slower, no low observability, no AESA, …). If we want more of our force structure to be UAVs, then we’ll see the requirements for these platforms increase and they’ll become more expensive. Also, UAVs crash more often than their manned counterparts - the rate is decreasing, but they are earlier on their learning curve. This means that in order to maintain the same number of operational aircraft over a 30-year time horizon, one needs more UAVs than manned aircraft (to replace expected losses). Not that this negates the personnel cost savings a priori but it certainly complicates the analysis. (Another factor is how quickly semi-autonomous UAVs enter the force, because it is possible the single-operator/single-platform model could change before the USAF changes it personnel policies, leading to a world where one USAF officer controls a swarm of UAVs.)
Another issue regards constituencies within a service. Pilots - in particular fighter pilots - are a major constituency within the USAF. If there are fewer UAV billets for officers, then that leads to fewer general officers down the line who came from a UAV background. Such service constituencies are not the only way military innovations are adopted, but they do have a significant influence on the speed and breadth of adaptation to a new force structure.
[H/T ID]
Another issue regards constituencies within a service. Pilots - in particular fighter pilots - are a major constituency within the USAF. If there are fewer UAV billets for officers, then that leads to fewer general officers down the line who came from a UAV background. Such service constituencies are not the only way military innovations are adopted, but they do have a significant influence on the speed and breadth of adaptation to a new force structure.
[H/T ID]
