As the U.S. Air Force accelerates its development of Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drones, leaders are increasingly turning their focus to an often-overlooked element of military success: sustainability. For CCAs to be the effective, additive combat force multipliers they are envisioned to be, they must not only fly and fight but do so reliably, repeatedly, and without overwhelming logistics chains. This is the key takeaway from Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, Director of Force Design, Integration, and Wargaming and Deputy Chief of Staff for Air Force Futures.
Kunkel’s comments, delivered during the Mitchell Institute’s rollout of a new study by retired Air Force Col. Mark A. Gunzinger, highlight a looming truth: no matter how advanced or autonomous these drones become, their real-world effectiveness depends on how well they can be maintained and sustained in combat conditions.
“Combat mass” is the new buzzword in Air Force strategy—the idea that the force can overwhelm adversaries through the sheer volume of deployed systems. But, as Kunkel emphasized, combat mass is only effective if it’s sustainable. The Air Force plans to acquire 100 to 150 CCAs in the first increment alone, which includes General Atomics’ YFQ-42A and Anduril’s YFQ-44A. That number could swell to over 1,000 across future increments.
This poses a massive logistical challenge. Distributed operations, especially in contested environments like the Indo-Pacific theater, will place extraordinary stress on logistics and maintenance capabilities. Drones will need to fly hundreds of hours without extensive repairs or technical interventions. Forward operating locations, often austere and vulnerable, won’t have the luxury of conventional support infrastructure.
Kunkel’s call for greater commonality in components across different drone types is both practical and visionary. “Motors that are the same, controls that are the same, actuators, tires… those types of things that we need,” he said, outlining a logistics model where interoperability and modularity reduce maintenance time and inventory requirements.
He’s already engaged General Atomics and Anduril to explore standardization options, pushing back against the conventional procurement model that often results in siloed, proprietary solutions. The goal is not uniformity for its own sake but strategic simplicity that enhances operational readiness.
The Air Force is also looking to commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components to accelerate development and reduce cost. This mirrors broader Pentagon efforts to shift away from expensive, bespoke solutions and embrace the agility of the commercial tech world.
Kunkel also emphasized the role of condition-based maintenance—systems that alert ground crews to emerging mechanical issues in real time. This proactive approach reduces unplanned downtime and increases mission readiness. Still, there’s no illusion that every drone must be perfectly reliable. In fact, Gunzinger proposes a different paradigm altogether.
“CCAs do not need to be anywhere near as reliable or have as large a mean time between failure as crewed aircraft,” Gunzinger noted. He argues for fielding more expendable drones that are cheaper and simpler to replace than repair.
“We can push it off the side of the runway,” Gunzinger said bluntly of a disabled drone during combat. The implication is clear: in high-intensity conflict, perfection isn’t the goal—persistence and volume are.
The Air Force’s CCA plans currently envision up to 16 different variants tailored to various mission profiles: air-to-air combat, electronic warfare, surveillance, sensor networking, and even logistics support. In recent wargames, some CCAs were tasked with transporting ammunition and supplies between forward bases, leveraging lessons from the MQ-9 Reaper’s Rapid Reaper concept.
But this versatility risks complicating sustainment. Specialized roles could lead to fragmented logistics chains, each requiring unique parts, tools, and training. Gunzinger warns against this, advocating for standardization wherever possible: weapons systems, refueling gear, loading equipment—the entire logistical architecture should support interoperability.
Kunkel frequently invokes Agile Combat Employment (ACE), the Air Force’s doctrine for distributed, flexible force projection. CCAs, he notes, are the first aircraft built explicitly with ACE in mind. They are being designed for deployment across numerous small and temporary sites, multiplying the number of potential launch and recovery locations.
This has strategic implications. By dispersing CCAs across a wide battlespace, the Air Force can complicate adversary targeting and force them to stretch their surveillance and strike capabilities. “Increasing the number of ground targets for an adversary is just as important as increasing the number of air targets,” Kunkel said.
To enable this, some CCAs will need to operate independently of runways. Kunkel is open to short or vertical takeoff and landing (STOL/VTOL) capabilities in future iterations. However, he cautions that such features often come with trade-offs in payload and range, necessitating a careful balance.
There’s also the prospect of launching CCAs from other aircraft, further diversifying deployment options and adding another layer of unpredictability for adversaries.
What emerges from these discussions is a reframing of logistics and maintenance as not just support functions but central pillars of strategy. The Air Force’s future CCA fleet will be tasked with complementing, extending, and sometimes replacing crewed platforms in high-risk environments. That makes their reliability—or at least their recoverability—a strategic variable.
The real innovation here may not be the autonomous capabilities of the drones or the advanced sensors they carry, but the systems that keep them flying. Sustainment is the connective tissue that binds operational ambition to battlefield reality.
This shift in focus also places new demands on defense contractors. General Atomics and Anduril, both key players in the CCA program, are being asked not just to deliver advanced platforms but to collaborate on shared solutions. This is a departure from the typical competitive model and moves toward a more integrated defense industrial base.
Kunkel’s push for common components could serve as a precedent for future programs, encouraging a more modular, scalable approach to military procurement. It also aligns with congressional and DoD priorities on cost control, rapid fielding, and operational flexibility.
With the geopolitical landscape heating up—especially in the Indo-Pacific region—the need to field effective, sustainable CCAs is urgent. As Kunkel noted, adversaries like China have spent decades developing missile systems designed specifically to neutralize U.S. airbases. CCAs offer a way to offset this vulnerability by decentralizing air power and reducing the need for heavily defended bases.
The U.S. Air Force’s investment in Collaborative Combat Aircraft represents a major evolution in airpower. But whether these drones become an enduring asset or a logistical liability depends on how well the service integrates sustainment into their design, deployment, and doctrine.
Leaders like Kunkel are pushing for a model where smart logistics, standardized components, and strategic maintenance planning are baked into the DNA of the CCA program. The goal is to field drones that don’t just enhance combat power but do so reliably, sustainably, and at scale.
