Drone

Drone (pronounced drohn)

(1) A male bee in a colony of social bees, stingless and making no honey whose sole function is to mate with the queen

(2) An unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously, without manned control or beyond line of sight.

(3) In casual use, any unmanned aircraft or ship that is guided remotely.

(4) A person who lives on the labor of others; a parasitic loafer.

(5) A drudge.

(6) To make a dull, continued, low, monotonous sound; a hum or buzz.

(7) To speak in a monotonous tone.

(8) To proceed in a dull, monotonous manner.

(9) In music, originally, a continuous low tone produced by the bass pipes or bass strings of musical instruments (later extended to the notion of "drone music", a "clearing house" term for a range of sub-genres and elements).

(10) The pipes (especially of the bagpipe) or strings producing this tone or the bagpipe equipped with such pipes.

Pre 1000: From the Middle English drane & drone (male honeybee), from the Old English drān & drǣn (male bee, drone), from the Proto-Germanic drēniz, drēnuz & drenô (an insect, drone), from the primitive Indo-European dhrēn- (bee, drone, hornet); the Proto-Germanic was the source also of Middle Dutch drane, the Old High German treno (the German Drohne, is from Middle Low German drone), the origin of which may have been imitative (there was the Lithuanian tranni and the Greek thronax (a drone)).  It was cognate with the Dutch drone & Middle Dutch drōnen (male bee or wasp), the Low German drone & German drohne (drone), the dialectal German dräne, trehne & trene (drone), the Danish drone (drone) and the Swedish drönje & drönare (drone).  An earlier variation was the Old English drān, related to the Old High German treno (drone), the Gothic drunjus (noise) and the Greek tenthrēnē (asp) which was the source of the sense of a sound, the meaning emerging 1490–1500, related also to the Middle English droun (to roar), the Icelandic drynja (to bellow) and the Gothic drunjus (noise).

The meaning referring to pilotless airframes appears first to have been used by the military in 1945-1946, initially in the sense of towed target drones, the "pilotless aircraft directed by remote control".  Even in 1946, military theorists were speculating about the potential use of "drones" although much of what was then described was closer to the modern smart bombs or guided missiles.  The meaning "a deep, continuous humming sound" emerged circa 1500, apparently an independent imitative formation in the sense of the 1630s noun threnody (song of lament), from the Greek thrēnōdia (lamentation), the construct being thrēnos (dirge, lament) + ōidē (ode).  The Ancient Greek thrēnos was probably from the primitive Indo-European imitative root dher- (to drone, murmur, hum), source also of the Old English dran (drone), the Gothic drunjus (sound) and the Greek tenthrene (a species of wasp).  The specific technical use "bass pipe of a bagpipe" was first adopted in the  1590s.   The figurative sense of "an idler, a shiftless, lazy worker" (based on the idea of the male bees which make no honey), dates from the 1520s.  Drone quickly became a popular way to describe a mono-tonal, boring speech delivery.

Drones and UAVs

The modern military term for what most people casually call a drone is unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) a more accurate descriptor given the original target drones were either objects towed by “target tugs” or radio controlled aircraft dumbly flying on pre-set paths.  Research on the concept of unmanned flying devices for reconnaissance target practice or even ordnance delivery had begun even before the military had adopted combat aircraft and by the mid-1930s, the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the UK had hundreds of radio controlled biplanes but the word drone appears to have been adopted only in 1945-1946 to describe the objects towed behind piloted aircraft.  Used to provide a moving target for either air-to-air or surface-to-air target practice, the target tugs towing the drone tended to be painted in lurid color schemes to differentiate tug from target although tugs still suffered hits from "friendly fire".  Over time, slang developing as it does, the terms “target drone” and “drone” came often to refer not just to the towed target-object but also the “target tug”, the aircraft towing the target, less a leakage from military use than just a misunderstanding that caught on.  Now, most UAVs sold to hobbyists or for commercial use are marketed as drones.

Paint scheme for target tug towing drone used for surface-to-air target practice on de Havilland Mosquito TT (target tug) Mark 35, No 3 CAACU (Civilian Anti-Aircraft Co-operation Unit), Exeter, UK, 1963.

The use as a target tug (TT) was the last operational role for the Mosquito, one of the more remarkable aircraft of World War Two.  Developed as a private venture by de Havilland, it was greeted by the by the Air Ministry with not their usual mere indifference but outright hostility to the very concept of a light, unarmed bomber made from plywood which relied for protection on speed rather than firepower.  The company however persisted and the Mosquito, which first flew in 1940, became one of the outstanding and most versatile combat aircraft of the war deployed as a fighter, fighter-bomber, night-fighter and bomber in roles as diverse as photo-reconnaissance, maritime strike, long-range surveillance, ground-attack and pathfinder missions guiding heavy bombers.  There was even a naval version for carrier operations, operated by the Fleet Air Arm.

The post-war career too was notable.  Equipped with the latest radar, the Mosquito was retained as a front-line, all-weather fighter until 1951-1952 when night-fighter versions of the Gloster Meteor and de Havilland Vampire entered service.  The last of the 7771 Mosquitos produced did not leave the production line until 1950, the long Indian summer necessitated by the UK’s technology deficit and although few probably thing of the Mosquito as a Cold War fighter but that was its unexpected penultimatum.  The less celebrated but valuable swansong came as a target tug, painted in vivid colors to decrease the danger from “friendly fire” and these platforms remained in operational service until finally retired in 1963, some of the decommissioned aircraft subsequently used by film studios for wartime features.  In addition to the RAF’s Mark 35s, a number of Mark 16 bombers were converted to TT Mark 39s, operated also by the Royal Navy and two ex-RAF Mark 6 (fighter-bombers) were in 1953-1954 converted to the TT Mark 6 standard for the Belgian Air Force which used them as target tugs at the Sylt firing ranges.  For an airframe which the authorities were at the time inclined to reject, the Mosquito enjoyed a remarkable operational life of over two decades; the Treasury got their money's worth.

The Germans, the Russians and Drone Music

Although musicologists categorize “drone music” as a sub-genre in the minimalist tradition, when produced thus it’s really an application of a element of sound which has been a component of many pieces nobody would describe as even vague drone-like.  Ethno-musicologists also object to the usually Eurocentric treatment of the topic, pointing out that musical traditions from Morocco to Mongolia contain much that can only be called a drone and along with a rhythmic beat, the two are probably the basis of most of the early music created by humans.  As a modern form however, to be thought of as “drone music”, compositions tend to be long and characterized by slight or sudden, jarring harmonic shifts.  The form obviously pre-dates means of electronics production but the availability in the twentieth century essentially allowed the genre to be created and it was figures such as Karlheinz Stockhausen (1928–2007) and Pierre Schaeffer (1910–1995) who created the works which first came to public attention.  The critical response varied, those attracted to the avant-garde anxious not to seem reactionary while others would probably have agreed with comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) who condemned as “formalists” those artists who pursued novelties and technical challenges just to impress their peers and a small elite cohort.  The public reaction to the form in its early years seems mostly to have varied between scepticism and the dismissal of the very idea such sounds could be called “music”.  Still, it endured and although never more than a niche as a stand-alone product, continues to underpin many popular forms, notably those listened to in clubs or at festivals by those under the influence of some substance and as the artists well know, there is a relationship between the drone and the chemicals.

By the time the German experimentalists Tangerine Dream released Zeit (Largo in four movements, 1972), it’s possible all that could be done in droning had been done and it can be argued everything since has been a variation but that hasn’t stopped the explorations, the Europeans especially entranced although it was the film-makers who found snatches of drone so useful in creating dramatic effects.  Curiously, there are those who have argued the credit (or the blame, depending on one’s view) for the emergence of drone music belongs to Richard Wagner (1813–1883), on the basis that by the end of his career, tonality had constantly shifting key centres, modulated so often there was little but ambiguity about what the final notes should be.

That’s fine but, so the argument goes, if there are more and more shifting key centres, there comes a point at which there’s no longer a centre of pitch, thus Arnold Schoenberg (1874–1951) twelve-tone system in which instead of a composition being based on major or minor scales and chords, a tone row was created, the twelve appearing in a specific order (thus the nickname “tone row”).  Musically (and politically, according to some), the idea of a tone row is methodically to avoid a preference for one note over another; all are equal.  Unlike tonal music in which pull active tones “pull” to resolve to resting tones, what came to be called “atonal music” came about because so far had Wagner pushed the boundaries that tonality could do nothing but disintegrate.  For the avant-garde, this created a gap in the market for “critic-ready compositions” because just as a visual form like cubism deconstructed the “bits” of the image and let them be seem in isolation as part of a whole, music could be rediced to a collection of drones and these could be performed singularly, in parallel or as a lineal set.  “By Schoenberg, out or Wagner” is an intriguing explanation for the origin of drone music and not all will agree.