The Defense Department has released new information in recent weeks about its classified Replicator drone program, leading Washington analysts to question what kind of future the initiative might have in the incoming Trump administration.
The tentative predictions coming from defense analysts rest on several factors, one being the bipartisan support the Replicator program has enjoyed on Capitol Hill. If lawmakers, especially appropriators, continue to support the program it should be able to remain in place. Execution, however, might be another matter.
Analysts argue that a replay of the bureaucratic chaos that was a hallmark of President-elect Trump’s first term could ensure that Replicator becomes less and less of a priority.
After all, they said Replicator is not about one group of weapon systems. It is a new acquisition development and fielding process spearheaded by Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks that rapidly elevates decision-making about multiple thousands of attritable, all-domain, autonomous drones to the highest levels of DOD.
A change in that leadership could have seismic impacts on Replicator, which has been positioned as a future deterrent against China in the Indo-Pacific region.
It is also possible Replicator would be “rebranded” under Trump, the think tankers told Inside Defense.
Replicator 1, announced more than a year ago, focuses on producing and fielding thousands of autonomous drones across all domains by August 2025.
Replicator 2, unveiled in August, will center on counter-technologies to defeat adversaries’ small uncrewed aerial systems.
Bipartisan support remains key
In an increasingly divided Congress, federal lawmakers agree on the importance of autonomous systems and counter-technologies for military use, according to Stacie Pettyjohn, an analyst at the Center for New American Security.
“I do think there’s a lot of agreement that drones and autonomous systems are important and countering them is also important, and there’s bipartisan support for that in Congress,” she told Inside Defense.
Cynthia Cook, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed and said the program’s mission and focus should have no trouble maintaining congressional backing.
“These interests do and must persist across administrations -- the time it takes for requirements, developments and investments in systems -- I mean, it just takes a long time,” she said. “Replicator has been quick, it has been agile, and the department has used creative tools to make these investments, which are directly postured to support DOD capabilities.”
Replicator has been able to field systems in 12 months, compared to DOD’s typical timeline of seven to 10 years for similar-sized capabilities, Hicks told attendees during an emerging technology conference in August.
Pettyjohn also pointed to language supporting Replicator’s goals in Project 2025, a proposed presidential transition plan crafted by some of Trump’s supporters and potential cabinet members.
“There was a strong emphasis on breaking down some of the barriers that prevent the Pentagon from going fast and acquiring new tech, which is obviously a core focus area of Replicator -- and actually, the main reason behind it,” Pettyjohn said of Project 2025.
Previous policies offer clues
The Pentagon already led several policy initiatives during the previous Trump administration that align with Replicator’s mission, such as rapid acquisition and reinforcing a robust supply chain for the defense industrial base.
“The last Trump administration did have -- the Department of Defense did include -- a focus on acquisition innovation and supply chains. So, these are not [just] Biden administration issues,” Cook said.
Additionally, Cook pointed to a policy led by former DOD acquisition chief Ellen Lord, which she said was, in her opinion “as a long-standing acquisition analyst, one of the greatest business process innovations over the last 25 years.”
The Adaptive Acquisition Framework, released in January 2020, created new guidelines -- including six separate pathways for procurement -- to accelerate the Pentagon’s acquisition system.
Cook also pointed to the Trump administration’s 2018 defense industrial base supply chain report.
“That was actually part of the foundation of the National Defense Industrial Strategy -- and the NDIS and the implementation plan offer a cohesive approach to thinking about how to make the supply chain and the defense industrial base as robust as possible,” she said.
“So, these are not partisan issues. These have always and must continue to persist across administrations,” Cook said.
Assumptions of inertia
There’s only so much time to change the fiscal year 2026 budget request, and Replicator just might not be at the top of the incoming administration’s hit list, according to Pettyjohn.
“They’re almost done with the [program objective memorandum] for next year and the budget -- and I’m certain there’s money that’s allocated to Replicator in there across the services, and almost certainly to DIU directly, as well. And the incoming administration will only have so much time to change the budget,” she said.
Even if it were a priority program the incoming administration wanted to change, an acting Pentagon head -- as there were several times during the previous Trump administration -- may not touch it, Pettyjohn said.
“Oftentimes what you see with acting officials is that they aren’t empowered to change things, or they don’t feel empowered to change things, so the previous process goes,” she said.
Pettyjohn noted, however, that Trump often pushed policies in his first term through interim officials who were not confirmed by the Senate, meaning that acting leaders might still have White House approval to make big changes.
Replicator rebranded?
Something both analysts pointed out was that Replicator could look different but remain largely the same under the incoming administration.
“I would assume that the new administration would come in and engage in reviews, as is typical -- and maybe there will be some rebranding -- but I would not expect a new administration to walk away from Replicator,” Cook said.
Pettyjohn agreed, pointing to the “general tendency with new administrations” to want to apply their own branding.
“So, I would imagine that Replicator as it’s been known -- it could still exist, right? It might be rebranded as something else,” she said.
Cook also said Replicator could be an “opportunity” for the incoming administration.
“I would also say that one of the things that folks around the administration have talked about -- the [Elon] Musks and so forth -- does include a rethinking of the way the government does business. And Replicator is a great example of that, and a success story so far. So, it’s an opportunity for them to build on something,” she said.
Remaining uncertainty
Still, what happens to Replicator under the incoming administration is a roll of the dice, according to the analysts.
Pettyjohn said despite the initiative’s small share of the DOD budget, it “could be cut as an efficiency measure.”
One large variable is the president-elect's nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, according to Cook.
“We don’t have any insights into the nominee for secretary and his interest in systems and systems investments and military innovation,” she said.
There’s a lot of uncertainty in terms of policy at the moment, according to Pettyjohn.
“You know, there could be continuity and there could be change,” she said.