Stress tests during pre-deployment training showed Marines struggle against drone swarms and electronic warfare. The Corps is creating a new counter-drone team and expanding drone training.
The Marine Corps is moving fast to build a dedicated counter-drone capability as realistic training encounters reveal major friction points against unmanned threats.
Stress tests during pre-deployment exercises have shown that even highly trained units can struggle when hostile drones combine surveillance and attack with electronic interference. Marine leadership said during a panel event in Washington. D.C.. Maj.. Gen.. Mark Clingan. who oversees Marine Air Ground Task Force Training Command. described a recent training scenario in which Marines had a particularly difficult time “going downrange and dealing with the drones.” The training was designed to replicate complex battlefield conditions. and the outcome—by his account—was not a surprise so much as a confirmation that the gaps are real.
That reality is increasingly urgent because small drones and drone-adjacent tactics are spreading faster than countermeasures can be fielded. tested. and integrated.. The problem is not just the presence of drones. but the pace at which systems evolve and the way electronic warfare can scramble the operational picture for everyone involved.. Clingan described electronic interference and jamming as a “double-edged sword. ” interfering with equipment on both sides and complicating how units search. identify. and respond.. When jamming is part of the fight. the counter-drone mission becomes as much about maintaining reliable links and sensing as it is about the final interception.
To respond. the Marines are adjusting training lanes for units preparing to deploy later this summer and pushing more drone proficiency across the force.. Clingan said the Corps expects tens of thousands more small drones by the end of the year. aimed in part at making it easier for Marines to practice against the kind of equipment and tactics they will face in future operations.. But he also emphasized that integrating drones with the broader “combined arms” battlefield—working drones alongside machine guns. aviation. and mortars—takes time.. In practice, that means building not only platforms, but muscle memory and command-and-control habits.
Several limitations complicate that effort.. One is the availability of drones and reliable counter-drone systems, which remain uneven across training and operational environments.. Another is the wider defense challenge of scaling defense tools fast enough to match the growth of low-cost offensive drone capabilities.. The Pentagon has pushed for large numbers of small. uncrewed systems and has tried to accelerate counter-drone initiatives. including task forces and new base-defense policies.. Even so. battlefield effectiveness often depends on having counter-drone solutions that can handle drones at the speed of modern campaigns—especially when multiple targets appear simultaneously.
Against that backdrop. the Marine Corps created an attack-drone team last year to develop training and policy for offensive drone operations.. Now leadership is building a similar structure for defense.. Lt.. Gen.. Benjamin Watson. overseeing the Training and Education Command. said the Corps is forming a counter-attack drone team to explore counter-drone solutions available now and potential future options.. The plan. as described. mirrors the approach of the offensive unit: concentrate expertise. develop tactics and techniques. and press forward with technology adoption through a dedicated learning pipeline.
The idea is not just to buy equipment, but to reduce the time between discovering a problem and fixing it.. Watson framed it as pressure to learn quickly. with a small group of specialists dedicated to advancing counter-drone capability at the same speed the Marines have been learning in drone operations.. That matters because counter-drone tactics are not plug-and-play.. Defensive systems have to work against a shifting mix of threats—from small first-person-view drones to loitering munitions—and the defensive challenge changes depending on the electronic environment.
A further complication is training access to the electromagnetic spectrum.. Teaching Marines to operate effectively within that contested environment is difficult in the United States. where spectrum access and availability in training areas are regulated for public safety reasons. including protecting civilian communications and aircraft operations.. Watson pointed to that constraint as a reason the Marines have begun experimenting with fiber-optic drones. described as resistant to electronic warfare.. His “bird on a wire” analogy captured the concept: a workaround when spectrum conditions at home are too restricted to replicate the battlefield fully.
The near-term impact is straightforward for Marine units: training that more closely resembles the drone-heavy reality they may face. with better preparation for how jamming and interference can distort decisions.. The longer-term stakes are broader.. A counter-drone capability built around fast feedback and dedicated expertise could influence how Marines defend bases. protect maneuver elements. and integrate layered systems that must function under stress and uncertainty.
For readers tracking national security and military readiness. this shift is also a sign of where modern combat pressure points are concentrating.. Drone technology is lowering the barrier to entry for reconnaissance and attack. and counter-drone doctrine is struggling to keep up across services.. Misryoum sees the Marine Corps move—focused on dedicated teams. expanded drone training. and adaptation around spectrum limits—as an effort to prevent a widening gap between the speed of drone proliferation and the speed of defense development.