It is a strategic weapon and a very effective one because it means the pilots of the missile-equipped things don't have to sit in a cockpit and in the potential line of ground fire.
Instead, they sit in front of a screen in a military facility somewhere in Nevada and fly it using controls and buttons from there.
Then at the end of the day, and after another air strike mission half a world away, they hop in the car and go home for tea.
Technology huh?
At the other end of the scale, the entertainment end of the scale, there are little drones with little battery-charged motors which you can buy over the counter and after some basic testing and trialling you can have it circling the lights in the living room.
We did this one Christmas until there was a mid-air collision and the pair of drones became a single-unit squadron.
In good hands a drone can be a very effective device. And a very helpful and practical device.
They can be sent into areas difficult to access in search of something or to photograph and record something.
They are operated by very good "pilots" who in most cases have the training and official avionics clearance papers behind them.
Indeed, in the right and capable hands they are a most valuable part of the aviation landscape.
However ... there's always a "however".
Just ask the pilot crew of the Air New Zealand 777-200 which was set to touch down at Auckland International Airport with 278 people on board about 10 days ago.
The crew had the aircraft into landing descent when they spotted a hovering drone in their path.
It was too late in the descent to take evasive action and they watched, stunned, as this radio-controlled brute missed the aircraft by only a few metres.
There were strong fears it could have been sucked into one of the engines ... it was that close.
Someone, down there on the ground within good sight and sound of the airport, was operating the thing.
Over a busy runway.
That person needs to be found and strapped to a large drone and sent to hover over the simmering sulphur pits of Rotorua for an hour or two.
In the words of one of the airline's safety officers, drone "incidents" are on the rise and something has to be done by the "policymakers".
Stronger action and penalties need to be sorted, although I am suspicious of the pace generally generated by "policymakers".
I fear an investigative committee will need to be set up and reports compiled.
Strategic groups will collate the reports and advise the policymakers of their findings.
And then the policymakers will consult with aviation groups and governmental agencies and then ... and then it will be 2020 and a further 4000 drones will be in active service.
And, as has been the trend thus far, more and more of them will edge into controlled air spaces and their operators, even when tracked down, will get off lightly.
Of the complaints received by the Civil Aviation Authority over the past five years only about 4 per cent have resulted in disciplinary measures.
This whole situation annoys and unsettles me because it is heading down that familiar old path which, it seems, we have not learned to veer from.
The path where you only do something about something AFTER something really bad happens.
These situations are well known as "an accident just waiting to happen".
So policymakers ... get airborne on this fast okay?
For at the start of the day the idea of a simple-to-operate little flying machine that anyone could be entertained with has, at the end of the day, become a concerning liability.
Simply because a very small percentage of people just don't get it.
Or just don't care.
But they certainly seem to get away with it.
Yes indeedy, sorry to drone on, but every silver lining has a dark cloud.
