Like many of you, I’m watching the war in Ukraine with great interest and much support. For all the fuss about expensive weapons -- like F-16 fighters, Abrams tanks, Stryker and Bradley armored fighting vehicles, Patriot missile defense systems, Javelin anti-tank missiles, Himars long range missiles, and various types of high tech drones -- what I’m most fascinated with is how Ukraine is using inexpensive, practically homemade drones as a key weapon.
Making your own (combat?) drone Credit: Bing
It's a new way of waging war. And when I say “waging war,” I can’t help but also
think “providing health care.” It’s not so much that I think drones are going
to revamp health care, but if very expensive weapons may, in fact, not be the
future of warfare, maybe very expensive treatments aren’t necessarily the
future of healthcare either.
Just within the last two weeks, for example, The
New York Times headlined Budget
Drones Prove Their Value in a Billion-Dollar War, AP said Using
duct tape and bombs, Ukraine’s drone pilots wage war with low-cost, improvised
weapons,
ABC News reports: Inside
Ukraine’s efforts to bring an ‘army of drones’ to war against Russia,
and Defense News describes how Cardboard
drone vendor retools software based on Ukraine war hacks.
This is not the U.S. military-industrial complex’s “shock-and-awe”
kind of warfare; this is the guy-in-his-garage-building-his-own-weapons kind of
warfare.
Ukraine’s minister for digital transformation,
Mykhailo Federov, says the government is committed to building a
state-of-the-art “army of drones.” He promises:
“A new stage of the war will soon begin.”
NYT detailed:
Drones made of plastic foam or plastic are harder to find on radar, reconnaissance teams said. Ukraine buys them from commercial suppliers who also sell to aerial photographers or hobbyists around the world, along with parts such as radios, cameras, antennas and motors. The drone units mix and match parts until they find combinations that can fly past sophisticated Russian air defenses.
“The doctrine of war is
changing,” one Ukrainian commander said.
“Drones that cost hundreds of dollars are destroying machines costing
millions of dollars.” The
AP discusses
how an elite drone unit – “a ragtag group of engineers, corporate managers and
filmmakers” -- “assembled with just $700,000, has destroyed $80 million worth
of enemy equipment.”
Dmytro Kovalchuk, CEO of drone manufacturer Warbird, told
ABC News: “In Ukraine, not a single state enterprise is producing
drones. It's all private enterprises, sometimes partnerships…It [the drone] costs
$1,000 and can destroy a tank that costs $500,000.”
And it is not just attacking tanks or just from the air; Just last month, Ukraine used a sea drone to damage an expensive Russian warship.
One of the many reasons the war in Ukraine is important is
because China is watching closely to see what might happen if it were to invade
Taiwan, and I’m hoping Taiwan and its allies, including the U.S., are paying close
attention to the importance of drones. NYT is skeptical, charging:
“A new
generation of cheaper and more flexible vessels could be vital in any conflict
with China, but the Navy remains lashed to big shipbuilding programs driven by
tradition, political influence and jobs.”
“The U.S. Navy is
arrogant,” said retired admiral Lorin Selby, who used to head the Office of
Naval Research. “We have an arrogance about, we’ve got these aircraft carriers,
we’ve got these amazing submarines. We don’t know anything else. And that is
just wrong.” Another former
officer agreed: “Right now, they are still building a largely 20th-century Navy.”
“We are trying to
improve Navy power, but we need to do more than that: We need to reimagine Navy
power,” he also said. “We’re kind of at a pivotal point in history. It is vital
that we throw off old conventions.”
It’s not that the
Navy is unaware of the potential of drones; as NYT acknowledged, it has
been testing integrating “drone boats, unmanned submersible vessels and aerial
vehicles capable of monitoring and intercepting threats over hundreds of miles.”
It’s more that it isn’t a priority; the budget devoted to it, one officer
lamented, is “the dust particle on the pocket lint of the budget.”
The Wall Street
Journal was more optimistic,
reporting
on details of a recent speech from Kathleen Hicks, the deputy secretary of defense. She vowed that
DoD “plans to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to produce an array of
thousands of air-, land- and sea-based artificial-intelligence systems that are
intended to be ‘small, smart, cheap’”
Of course, when
fighter planes now can cost $135
million each, aircraft carriers cost
$13b apiece, and the overall DoD budget is closing in on $1
trillion annually, spending “hundreds of millions” on alternative weapons does
kind of sound like pocket lint. The
Pentagon admits
that China is “displaying growing numbers of autonomous and teaming systems,”
including “a substantial amount of development displaying efforts to produce
swarming capability for operational applications.” They’re taking this
seriously.
“The hundreds of millions of dollars range, while a great start, would only provide hundreds of the truly capable ocean drones we need to establish true deterrence to China and other adversaries,” Kevin Decker, chief executive of Ocean Aero, told WSJ. “They’ve got to start somewhere, and they’ve got to start now.”
“Quite frankly,
industry is well ahead of us,” Marine Lt. Gen. Karsten Heckl, deputy commandant for combat admitted.
“So we’re trying to catch up but [there is] a lot of promise.”
As the Ukrainian commander said, the doctrine of war
is changing. Weapons systems started in
the 1990’s (F-35 fighter) or early 2000’s (the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier) are just
going into service and are already outdated.
Admiral Selby has it right: “It
is vital that we throw off old conventions.”
------------
So it is with
healthcare. Capital sinks like hospitals
are healthcare’s aircraft carriers – once essential, but now vastly expensive
and hugely vulnerable. Prescription drugs that can cost hundreds of thousands, if
not millions, of dollars annually are 20th century pricing in a world
of AI drug development, CRISPR, and 3D printing, to name a few innovations. Adding facility fees to even telehealth
visits is (stupid) 20th century thinking. Health insurance premiums that are unaffordable
even to middle class customers reflect 20th approaches.
Similarly, I’m not
worried that healthcare won’t find many uses for AI; rather, I’m worried that
it will co-opt AI into making existing cost structures even higher, rather than
using it to make healthcare become “small, smart, and cheap.”
The doctrine of healthcare must change. Where is its ragtag team of engineers, computer scientists, physicians, and entrepreneurs making it faster, smaller, smarter, cheaper, more personal, and definitely more effective?
No comments:
Post a Comment