BAE Systems has unveiled Brontanax, described as the UK’s first uncrewed autonomous Collaborative Combat Aircraft, at Farnborough. The platform is intended to operate alongside crewed fighters such as Typhoon, providing electronic warfare and precision-strike mass, with ground testing underway and service entry targeted before the end of the decade. At the same time, the Pentagon is pressing industry for lighter, more efficient directed-energy systems suitable for aircraft and high-altitude platforms, aimed at counter-drone, expeditionary and special-operations roles. One programme multiplies combat aircraft without multiplying pilots. The other seeks a reusable, software-controlled effect against drones and other soft targets. Together they point to an air-combat environment in which autonomy and directed energy sit alongside, and sometimes ahead of, traditional kinetic platforms.
The UK’s CCA path is about mass and risk-sharing. A loyal wingman can absorb attrition, extend sensor and electronic-warfare reach, and force an adversary to treat every radar return as potentially lethal. Software, open architecture and modular payloads matter as much as airframe design. The US directed-energy path is about cost-per-shot and endurance. A laser or high-power microwave that is light enough to fly can engage successive drones without expending missiles, provided power, cooling and targeting keep pace. Both approaches reduce reliance on expensive, crewed platforms for every task. Both depend on software, data links and human trust in machines that act faster than a pilot can intervene.
Asia’s air forces face the same menu under different constraints. India is investing in indigenous combat air and counter-drone systems while weighing collaborative combat aircraft concepts and layered air defence. Japan and South Korea are advancing both crewed fifth-generation fleets and unmanned concepts. The Gulf and Southeast Asian states confront dense drone threats and limited inventory of high-end missiles. The practical question is sequence. Do they buy more crewed fighters first, to hold the high-end fight? Do they prioritise loyal-wingman drones to multiply existing fleets? Do they field counter-UAS networks viz. kinetic, electronic and directed-energy before the next swarm arrives? Or do they wait for airborne lasers that are still wrestling with size, weight and power?
There is no single correct order. Crewed fifth-generation aircraft remain the core of high-intensity air superiority. Collaborative combat aircraft promise affordable mass but require doctrine, datalinks and trust that many forces are still building. Counter-drone systems are already an operational necessity. Directed energy offers a long-term answer to low-cost aerial threats if the technology can be made light and reliable enough for aircraft. The UK is putting a national CCA on the runway. The US is demanding airborne lasers that can leave the lab. Asia will decide which of those futures it funds first and which combination of pilot, drone and beam it believes will still win the fight in 2035.