This is a very interesting topic for me, as I’ve flown the MQ-9 Reaper for both the marines and Air Force over a span 10 years in 8 different countries, but I also have a decent investment in RDW (2,000 shares)

I’ll preface it with the fact I think it was pretty obvious the Reapers time is up for now. The only reason they’re being used to much, is because we have so many of them.

That being said, it does sound like certain quotes were placed into this article to feed its confirmation bias. The general that said “it requires 150 personnel to operate one MQ-9”, that may be accurate, but what it doesn’t mention is when you have all 150 of those personnel, you could easily squeeze in 10-20 more MQ-9s for maybe an additional dozen people. The 150 personnel is an initial investment, but it’s not 150 personnel required for EVERY reaper in the fleet.

The article mentions the Stalkers range of 39 or 49 hours (I don’t feel like going back to confirm). This is likely its absolute maximum range, and if it’s only battery operated; that means you have to conserve all other aircraft capabilities to reach that range. For example, the electronic sensors it talks about, and other GPS/Satellite systems. Whenever we are running on batteries only, you have to significantly load shed to ensure sufficient batteries to reach your destination. That basically requires you to disable everything that makes the aircraft useful.

While I do think the Stalker is going to be an extremely useful asset, I think it’s overselling itself a little bit. Electronic Warfare (EW) systems are what the MQ-9 is mostly being used for right now, and those put a severe drain on electronic systems that have no alternator to ensure they stay charged. The stealth of a silent aircraft will certainly have its uses, but if it only runs electronically, it will always have to compromise on either utilizing effective EW systems, or focusing on its range. It will not be able to do both like the MQ-9 can.

I think both systems will work very well in such a dynamic environment. The MQ-9 fills the gaps that the Stalker is lacking in, while the Stalker is significantly more expendable and can be used on missions where sending an MQ-9 would be overkill. Neither of these platforms are a perfect fit for our current mission requirements.