It’s no secret that U.S. combat aviation is increasingly reliant on unmanned aerial systems (UAS) to execute its important missions and achieve its critical objectives. This reliance has never been more evident than in the recent Operation Epic Fury (OEF) conflict, where UAS platforms have represented the largest number of U.S. aircraft employed, the largest number of sorties flown and flight hours logged, and the largest number of aircraft lost or damaged [1, 2].
Per Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach, the Air Force Chief of Staff (and a seasoned combat pilot himself), the “most valuable player” of OEF has undoubtedly been the MQ-9 Reaper UAS. Flying thousands of sorties, the Reaper has provided U.S. commanders with vital battlefield intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) information, maintaining continuous loiter time in enemy airspace, a capability that simply would not have been possible with other air systems [1]. However, the MQ-9 fleet has also suffered the heaviest casualty numbers of all U.S. platforms involved in OEF, with a total of 24 Reapers lost to date in the conflict [2].
Accordingly, to continuously improve the effectiveness of the MQ-9 and other current and follow-on UAVs, the research, development, test, and evaluation community must maintain an understanding of the unique issues involved with the operations, operators, composition, flight characteristics, performance, current and expected threats, and assessed vulnerabilities of the Reaper and similar unmanned systems. In support of this effort, the Aircraft Survivability journal (ASJ) recently posed the following questions to Air Force Capt. Benjamin “Scraps” Coleman, MQ-9 Evaluator Pilot and Chief of Plans for the 432d WG at Creech AFB, NV.
ASJ: How long have you been flying the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: 8 years.
ASJ: What made you decide to become an MQ-9 pilot?
Capt. Coleman: When applying for rated (flying) positions during my junior year of ROTC/college, I ranked unmanned pilot second. However, the needs of the Air Force directed me toward the Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) career field. Although this was my second choice initially, I really enjoy flying unmanned aircraft. The mission and lifestyle are rewarding. I would not trade it to fly manned aircraft.
ASJ: How many people does it take to operate the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: The MQ-9 cockpit is composed of two crew members: a pilot and a sensor operator. The pilot is responsible for aircraft operation, maneuvering, coordination with outside agencies, and releasing ordinance. The sensor operator is responsible for operating all sensor/payloads onboard the aircraft (including a Multi-Spectral Targeting Sensor, which contains several cameras and imagery filters). Sensor operators also power and direct the use of signals intelligence pods. Their most critical duty is to guide munitions to the ground target, using a Laser Range Designator. In addition, external to the cockpit, intelligence and weather professionals provide essential mission support. RPA units also have a mission commander/operations supervisor that manages the scheduling and missions of multiple aircraft.
ASJ: What are the primary types of missions the MQ-9 flies?
Capt. Coleman: The MQ-9 is essentially the “Swiss Army Knife” of Air Force aircraft. Its predecessor, the MQ-1 Predator, was primarily used for ISR. However, the MQ-1 began carrying munitions, enabling it to conduct dynamic targeting and close air support. The MQ-9 is now capable of executing all of those missions, as well as combat search and rescue, air interdiction, and strike coordination and reconnaissance.
ASJ: What are the major types of threats the MQ-9 faces (and thus MQ-9 pilots must worry most about)?
Capt. Coleman: The MQ-9 faces similar threats that manned aircraft face, including surface-to-air missiles, man-portable air defense systems, enemy aircraft, weather systems, lightning, and turbulence. These threats are, of course, area of responsibility dependent, as MQ-9 units fly in a variety of different environments with their own threat levels.
ASJ: What types of missions have you flown with the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: As primary missions, I’ve flown dynamic targeting, close air support, combat search and rescue, and combat support signals intelligence. As secondary missions, I’ve flown convoy support, troops in contact support, and raid overwatch.
ASJ: What are the main operational advantages of the MQ-9 (as compared to other UAVs and manned combat aircraft)?
Capt. Coleman: The main operational advantage of the MQ-9 is its extended sortie duration. Most manned aircraft have a shortened vulnerability window due to the amount of fuel they burn. Conversely, the MQ-9 is lighter and flies slower, enabling a longer mission time, up to 24 hrs. Another operational advantage of the MQ-9 is its acoustic and visibility signature. Due to its turboprop engine, it’s much quieter, enabling it to loiter on a target for hours without being detected, depending on operational altitude.
ASJ: What are some myths about the MQ-9 and/or piloting it?
Capt. Coleman: The biggest myth is that piloting an MQ-9 is like playing a video game. The MQ-9’s Ground Control Station comprises a stick, throttle, and rudder, just like a manned aircraft. Another misconception is the size of the MQ-9. Most people envision the MQ-9 as a small hand-held drone that is common in the commercial market; however, it has a larger wingspan than an F-16, measuring 66 ft wide.
ASJ: Why do you feel the MQ-9 is still regarded as one of the U.S. military’s best aircraft in the rapidly growing fleet of UAS platforms?
Capt. Coleman: The MQ-9 leads the way in hours flown and targets prosecuted over the last 20 years and has a direct impact on fulfilling National Defense Strategy (NDS) objectives. Lt. Gen. Gary North, former commander of the 9th Air Force and Air Force’s Central Command, stated, “The Reaper, as a close-air-support asset, expands beyond the concept of persistent stare to one of persistent strike. If the ground commander wants us to strike an enemy target, we can do that with precision weapons from the Reaper at the exact point where the ground commander wants a desired effect. It’s an incredibly powerful and flexible capability for the warfighting commander” [3].
ASJ: How is piloting an MQ-9 similar to piloting a manned aircraft?
Capt. Coleman: One similarity is that, like flying manned aircraft, flying an MQ-9 is mostly following instrument procedures. As mentioned previously, the MQ-9 has a stick, throttle, and rudder, so at its core, it’s very similar.
ASJ: How is piloting an MQ-9 different from piloting a manned aircraft?
Capt. Coleman: The core difference, of course, is that we are geographically separated from our aircraft, often piloting them from the U.S. as they are flying thousands of miles away. Another difference is the amount of situational awareness and attention to detail required to fly the MQ-9. At any given time, we are required to monitor six computer screens, all containing pertinent mission data.
U.S. Air Force Photo by Capt. Josephine Rios
There are obvious physiological differences as well. For example, MQ-9 pilots, being in a stationary cockpit, don’t personally feel every turn the plane makes, which can lead to some spatial disorientation. Another difference is that we have advanced software and technology that allows us to use certain autopilot features and preprogrammed missions. These are great tools but can lead to less direct interaction with the aircraft than a pilot has in a manned aircraft. RPA aircrew overcome these physiological and interactive challenges with increased crew breaks and heightened attention to detail to systems and mission resources.
ASJ: What do you like most about flying the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: I like the mission and real-world impact that it has on the NDS. I also enjoy the lifestyle. Because we pilot the aircraft from the United States, I can fly a 6-hr mission and still go home to my family. I also enjoy the aircrew, intelligence, and weather personnel I work with.
ASJ: What do you like least about flying the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: While MQ-9 operators don’t have to deploy for months at a time, the mission is still 24/7/365, so alternating shiftwork can present physiological and personal challenges for aircrew at times. Fortunately, there are programs and policies that assist members in coping with these challenges.
ASJ: How would you describe the MQ-9’s overall survivability?
Capt. Coleman: The MQ-9 is constantly evolving and becoming more survivable. RPA technologies, both inside the cockpit and on the aircraft, are advancing, providing more lethal tactics, enhanced collateral mitigation, and superior airspace and threat awareness. These advancements make our airframe more survivable while making our adversaries less survivable.
Of course, when you separate the aircrew from the aircraft, survivability takes on a different perspective. The survivability community has long combined the two, since, traditionally, if the aircraft is safe, then the aircrew are safe. The MQ-9, however, requires a different definition of survivability—one that separates the aircraft from the aircrew, as it pertains to mental health. Uniquely, MQ-9 aircrew can be exposed to the atrocities of war and then go back to their homes. This can lead to psychological damage, mental illness, heightened stress, and elevated fatigue. As Jean Lin Otto, an epidemiologist at Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, explains, “[RPA] pilots may stare at the same piece of ground for days . . . they witness the carnage. Manned aircraft pilots don’t do that. They get out of there as soon as possible” [4]. RPA units thus offer extensive chaplain, psychologist, and support team access.
ASJ: What does the survivability community most need to know/remember about the survivability of the MQ-9 and other unmanned systems?
Capt. Coleman: Within the survivability community, it’s important to remember that unmanned aircraft, such as the MQ-9, are susceptible to the same threats as manned aircraft, just with more limitations in avoiding or maneuvering away from these threats to ensure their survival. The MQ-9 has a higher level of acceptable risk than manned aircraft, in terms of survivability and mission success. Perhaps most importantly, the loss of an unmanned aircraft could result in lives saved without aircrew lives lost.
ASJ: What is your most memorable moment flying an MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: I was executing overwatch for a troops in contact mission. Years ago, I was called to respond to an event in which U.S. forces were being fired upon by supposed ally forces in the region. As I entered the aircraft stack, I was one of nine aircraft in the Restricted Operations Zone that the Joint Terminal Attack Controller was managing. My mission was to identify where enemy fire was originating and later find a landing zone for a nearby rescue helicopter to perform an evacuation. My sensor operator and I were able to call tally (eyes on) enemy fire and provide ICE (safe landing zone) callouts for the helicopter to successfully evacuate wounded and under-fire personnel. That mission reminds me of why I fly and love the unmanned mission. I fly to remove threats from the battlefield; I fly to defend our troops in the line of fire; I fly to defend America and her interests.
U.S. Air Force Photo by SrA. Victoria Nuzzi
ASJ: What do you envision for the future of the MQ-9?
Capt. Coleman: I envision the future of the RPA enterprise being one heavily influenced by artificial intelligence (AI) and technology. As advanced and autonomous as our aircraft are currently, they will only become more so. That said, I do believe that the aircrew behind the aircraft will continue to be vital. AI is indeed the future, but it should not exist or execute a mission without human intervention and direction behind its movements. And I think this is particularly true in military aviation. We still need human minds, thoughts, and emotions flying the plane and pulling the trigger. This ensures that we don’t lose our humanity even as technology and war progress.
References
- Gordon, Chris. “Air Force Chief: MQ-9 Reaper ‘Most Valuable Player’ of Iran War Despite Losses.” Air & Space Forces Magazine, https://www.airandspaceforces.com/mq-9-reaper-mvp-iran-war-despite-losses-wilsbach/, 20 May 2026.
- Congressional Research Service. “U.S. Aircraft Combat Losses in Operation Epic Fury: Considerations for Congress.” Congress.gov, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IN12692, 13 May 2026.
- U.S. Air Force. “MQ-9 Reaper Enhances Air Force Capabilities in Iraq.” https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/122930/mq-9-reaper-enhances-air-force-capabilities-in-iraq/, 22 July 2008.
- Dao, James. “Drone Pilots Are Found to Get Stress Disorders Much as Those in Combat Do.” The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/us/drone-pilots-found-to-get-stress-disorders-much-as-those-in-combat-do.html, 22 February 2013.
