Executive Summary
This paper examines the evolving challenge of defending U.S. Air Force installations against small unmanned aerial systems (sUASs) and other aerial threats. It highlights the historical division of air defense responsibilities between the Army and Air Force, which has created vulnerabilities. The author suggests opportunities for the USAF to assume a greater role in air base defense, particularly through line-of-sight counter-drone capabilities and deployable SHORAD systems, to address current operational gaps.
Why It Matters
This document is crucial for defense analysts as it addresses the critical and evolving challenge of air base defense against drone threats, proposing strategic shifts in military roles and capabilities that could significantly impact U.S. airpower projection and homeland security.
Key Takeaways
- Legacy air and missile defense arrangements leave U.S. air bases vulnerable to modern small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) threats.
Source evidence · PDF page 7
Air base defense is at an inflection point. Legacy arrangements of air and missile defense (AMD) responsibilities between the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force (USAF), designed for traditional air and missile threats, have left U.S. installations vulnerable to emerging aerial dangers—most notably small unmanned aerial systems (sUASs).
- The USAF has an opportunity to expand its role in air base defense, especially with the Army's strained Air Defense Artillery (ADA) force structure.
Source evidence · PDF page 9
The intersection of enduring institutional shortcomings and new threats creates both a challenge and an opportunity for the DAF. The USAF has long sought a greater role in defending its air bases. As the Army faces a growing strain on its ADA force structure, a renewed division of labor may be both practical and mutually beneficial.
- The USAF could pursue narrowly scoped, deployable Short-Range Air Defense (SHORAD) capabilities for installation self-defense, complementing Army efforts and reducing institutional friction.
Source evidence · PDF page 26
If the Army cannot meet both expeditionary and homeland requirements, a narrowly scoped USAF SHORAD capability could provide necessary resilience rather than redundant competition. To reduce friction, any USAF pursuit of deployable SHORAD should be tightly bounded: limited to installation self-defense or expeditionary support under clearly defined geographic and engagement envelopes, subject to joint rules of engagement, and tied to formal MOUs that preserve Army primacy for theater or over-the-horizon air defense artillery.
Strategic Relevance
The strategic relevance lies in adapting U.S. military doctrine and force structure to counter emerging asymmetric threats, specifically sUAS, which have demonstrated significant impact in recent conflicts. Reimagining air base defense ensures the protection of critical airpower assets, maintaining operational readiness and strategic deterrence.