The Massed Modular Aircraft program envisions a $10M airframe—plus sensor and system costs.
The loss of dozens of MQ-9 Reapers to Iranian air defenses is speeding up the U.S. Air Force effort to replace its venerable strike-and-sensor remotely piloted aircraft with something cheaper yet better, service leaders say.
“As we get to the end of the MQ-9 life, there was some early talk of where do we want to go afterwards, and candidly, as a result of some of the losses that we've experienced in combat operations, that discussion sort of got accelerated,” said Lt. Gen. Christopher J. Niemi, the Air Force’s chief modernization officer, at a Thursday roundtable with reporters.
The service has lost at least 45 MQ-9s during Donald Trump’s war on Iran, roughly one-quarter of its fleet, the Washington Post reported in August. It’s not clear just how much that fleet cost, but an Air Force fact sheet puts the unit cost of one MQ-9 variant at $51 million in 2011 dollars—or nearly $82 million today.
Niemi said the service wants to buy at least 180 MQ-9 replacements, dubbed Massed Modular Aircraft, or MMA, and at a much cheaper price point. He said the price of one MMA should be about half of the $20 million Collaborative Combat Aircraft, whose first production contracts were awarded in June, four months ahead of schedule.
But those rough price goals—$20 million for a CCA, $10 million for an MMA—are for bare airframes, not the pricey sensors and systems that enable the drones to do their jobs.
As a service spokesperson put it later, the numbers “do not refer to total missionized costs.”
Niemi said this reflects lessons from past and ongoing wars.
“What we're seeing, in part based on our assessment of the threats around the world, and in part based on our real-world experience, is that you're going to lose more military hardware in future conflicts than you have historically, and that's what's driving us to this sort of fundamental principle that we need things that are easier to produce, cheaper to buy, and that we can afford to lose more of them,” he said. “Right now, we don't have a whole lot of that, so we're sort of trying to move the needle by bringing on things like MMA, so we have more options for the warfighter in the future.”
For that $10 million price tag, the service also wants an increased payload of 2,800 pounds and an unfueled combat radius of 2,300 nautical miles and 8,000 nautical miles for a one-way mission, according to a July Defense Innovation Unit solicitation. General Atomics, the Reaper’s manufacturer, has a souped-up version of the MQ-9, the SkyGuardian, which boasts a larger wingspan, range, and endurance. But top service officials don’t seem as likely to bet on it.
“One of the options that would be considered would be something like an MQ-9B, which is basically an updated and improved MQ-9A, but there are some reasons that we don't think that's the direction that we want to go as an Air Force,” Niemi said. “The main reason is, and and we're seeing this in our experience in the Middle East and as we look at threats around the world, that you need to have a portfolio of assets that's more attritable than the ones we've historically had.”
General Atomics spokesperson C. Mark Brinkley defended the Reaper’s service record and pointed out that the Air Force’s top uniformed leader has praised the aircraft’s use during Operation Epic Fury. He also said the company has worked with the Air Force “to hit cost targets for three decades” and that it would continue with other programs.
“The MQ-9’s unique combination of endurance, payload, range, sensors, weapons, connectivity, adaptability and reliability is precisely what enables mission effects that others struggle to replicate,” Brinkley said. “Today’s Reaper isn’t the same Reaper that rolled out 25 years ago. It’s been enhanced and upgraded many, many times. It’s also been called the MVP of Epic Fury, for good reason. We can debate many things, but at least we all agree that it’s a special aircraft that gets the job done.”
The Senate Armed Services Committee is backing the platform in its version of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act by placing limits on how many can be retired and calls for more to be purchased by 2028.
General Atomics has also reportedly teased a new MMA offering with a 10,000-nautical-mile ferry range and claims that it can carry four Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles. Brinkely, while still defending the Reaper, also boosted its next-generation aircraft.
“Our new Wildfire aircraft addresses all of the concerns posed by the MMA solicitation. We can deliver years earlier and maintain the same high quality,” Brinkley said. “You can have everything that makes Reaper special, plus more, at a price that doesn’t break the bank. Reaper is special. Wildfire is special, too.”
NEXT STORY: The US military gets its own ChatGPT today
Facts Only
* The Massed Modular Aircraft program envisions a $10 million airframe cost plus sensor and system costs.
* The U.S. Air Force lost at least 45 MQ-9 Reapers during operations in Iran, according to reports from August.
* The unit cost of one MQ-9 variant was estimated at $51 million in 2011 dollars or nearly $82 million today.
* Lt. Gen. Christopher J. Niemi stated the discussion for replacing MQ-9s accelerated due to combat losses.
* Niemi indicated the service wants to buy at least 180 MQ-9 replacements, dubbed MMA, at a much cheaper price point.
* The target price for one MMA should be about half of the $20 million Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) price.
* Price goals focus only on bare airframes, excluding the cost of sensors and systems.
* Service leaders stated that the numbers do not refer to total missionized costs.
* A July solicitation sought a payload of 2,800 pounds and an unfueled combat radius of 2,300 nautical miles or 8,000 nautical miles for one-way missions.
* General Atomics teased an MMA offering with a 10,000-nautical-mile ferry range and the ability to carry four Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles.
* The Senate Armed Services Committee supports the platform by limiting retirements and calling for more purchases by 2028.
Executive Summary
The U.S. Air Force is accelerating efforts to replace its aging MQ-9 Reaper fleet following significant losses in Iran by pursuing the Massed Modular Aircraft (MMA) program. Service leaders cite combat losses as a catalyst, aiming for a replacement that is cheaper and more capable than the current system. The goal is to acquire at least 180 MMA replacements, with targets suggesting an MMA cost of about half the $20 million projected for the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA). While these price goals focus only on the airframe, service leaders note that sensor and system costs are excluded from these estimates, as they do not account for total missionized costs.
The impetus for this change is rooted in lessons from recent conflicts, suggesting a need for military hardware that is easier to produce, cheaper to acquire, and more expendable. The program seeks capabilities beyond the current platform, with aspirations for enhanced performance metrics like increased payload and combat radius. While General Atomics' SkyGuardian offers upgrades, service leadership seems less inclined toward incremental updates, favoring fundamentally different approaches reflected in the MMA concept.
Full Take
The narrative frames technological replacement not merely as an engineering upgrade but as a strategic response to perceived attrition risk in global conflicts. The shift toward MMA reflects a paradigm where hardware value is inversely proportional to the cost of loss, implicitly accepting a higher rate of material expenditure in exchange for greater operational flexibility and survivability. The friction point arises between the stated pursuit of lower cost and the reality that essential mission effectiveness depends on integrated sensor and system costs—a dimension deliberately excluded from the initial budget goals.
A critical tension exists between vendor assurances regarding legacy systems, exemplified by General Atomics defending the Reaper’s comprehensive feature set, and the service drive for fundamental platform change. The argument pivots on defining what constitutes 'mission effects' in future conflict: whether it is the retention of a highly reliable, albeit expensive, system or adopting a portfolio of more attritable assets that provide superior strategic flexibility. This dynamic suggests that the pursuit of cheaper airframes may inadvertently lead to mission degradation if the necessary sensor and system integration is not prioritized equally across all developmental tracks. The future implication rests on whether military strategy prioritizes hardware economics over integrated situational awareness, and who ultimately bears the cost associated with this trade-off between platform affordability and operational efficacy in an increasingly contested environment.
Bridge questions: If performance goals are strictly defined by total mission costs rather than airframe cost alone, how will system integration be managed across disparate new platforms? What assumptions about future conflict risk are driving the current valuation of expendable hardware versus sustained capability? How should stakeholders weigh the immediate savings from procuring cheaper airframes against the long-term strategic value of specialized sensor and system capabilities?
Sentinel — Human
This appears to be standard, fact-based reporting grounded in official statements, with predictable structuring that leans toward journalistic narrative rather than pure AI generation.