Final answer:
Whether UAS save money compared to manned aviation depends on the application, cost of technology, and operational needs. While they may be cost-effective for tasks like monitoring, they are currently not practical for all uses, such as passenger transport. Costs for increased manned aviation safety measures also play a role in assessing overall expenses.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question of whether Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) save money in all use cases compared to manned aviation depends on multiple factors, including the specific application, the cost of technology, and the operational requirements. In some cases, such as monitoring agricultural fields or surveying, UAS can be much more cost-effective than manned flights due to reduced labor and fuel costs. However, for other applications, such as passenger transport or heavy cargo delivery, the current UAS technologies are not practical or capable enough to supplant manned aviation. Additionally, there are significant investments to be made in UAS technology and infrastructure, which could impact cost savings.
Other considerations, such as improved safety measures in manned aviation, could play into the costs as well. For instance, the introduction of 'sky marshals' and enhanced security measures like three-dimensional baggage scanners has an associated opportunity cost, as these funds could have been used elsewhere if not for the additional security needs
Moreover, it is worth mentioning that the space shuttle was an attempt at economical manned space flight. However, the costs for manned operations were similar to that of unpiloted rockets. Thus, it shows that there isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to cost savings between unmanned and manned flights, as it greatly depends on the intended use and technological developments.