Ukraine launches production of acoustic sensors for artillery detection
New sound measurement systems can determine the coordinates of Russian artillery at a depth of up to 25 km.
Source: Ekonomichna Pravda
Details: The systems were presented by the Ukrainian company Vidar Systems at the Defense Tech Innovations Forum 2025 by Brave1.
The military uses these systems for the rapid detection and destruction of Russian artillery positions, primarily mortars. A company representative told Ekonomichna Pravda that each system consists of five or ten acoustic sensors.
They work using triangulation and artificial intelligence algorithms. The sensors are placed at specific distances from one another. Each microphone hears the same shot in its own way and determines the direction relative to its position. Then, the computer gathers data on the explosion directions from three or more microphones and overlays them on a map. The intersection point of the three directions is the approximate enemy coordinates.
The developer stated that a system with 5 sensors can cover a 10-kilometer section of the front. The frame and equipment kit weigh about 25 kg, meaning the sensors can be deployed by one or two people.
The software can distinguish artillery explosions from all other sounds. Pre-production batches of these systems have already been deployed and are operational on the front line.
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Growing Drone Threats Lead To Army Modular Shelter Kit Improvements
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) says it has developed upgrades for a family of modular, rapidly deployable protective structures to improve their ability to shield against drone attacks. The announcement follows Ukraine's unprecedented covert drone attacks that destroyed multiple Russian bombers and other aircraft at several bases across that country. The Ukrainian attacks had already underscored a heated debate about whether or not the U.S. military should be building more hardened aircraft shelters and other fortified infrastructure to improve its defenses against uncrewed aerial threats, as well as cruise and ballistic missiles, as you can read more about here. USACE's Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) quietly shared news about the anti-drone updates to the Modular Protective System-Overhead Cover (MPS-OHC) in a recent post on LinkedIn. MPS-OHC was originally developed during the Global War on Terror era in response to indirect fire threats like artillery shells, rockets, and mortar rounds that U.S. forces were facing in Afghanistan and Iraq. The modular structure system first began being employed operationally in the early 2010s. The full MPS family includes other modular structures designed to help provide force protection against other threats, including suicide bombers. 'The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) has improved the Modular Protective System-Overhead Cover (MPS-OHC) to better defend against drone attacks, which are increasingly targeting infrastructure, key assets, and critical resources in conflict areas,' ERDC's LinkedIn post reads. 'In April, the MPS-OHC underwent validation testing to its improvements for use in the Indo-Pacific region. These upgrades – including stronger armor, a new armor arrangement and easier setup on shipping containers – demonstrated a near perfect success rate in protecting against explosive threats.' In addition, 'the updated design can withstand direct hits and is quick to assemble without the need for a concrete foundation, making it ideal for rapidly changing situations. The system is scalable to protect a variety of assets and is already in use now with contracts awarded to send these systems to forward deployed soldiers,' the post added. 'ERDC researchers are creating guides on how to employ the system depending on the drone threat level and working to make upgrade kits widely available.' TWZ has reached out to ERDC for more information about the upgrades to the MPS-OHC. MPS-OHC does already offer a relatively simple and low-cost way to add additional layers of top-down defense against indirect fire threats already mentioned. The structures come in kits packed in standard shipping containers, the primary components of which are armored 'roof' elements covering areas up to 52.5 feet by 15 feet. Kits, some of which also come with their own wall units, can also be combined to create larger structures. As seen in the chart below, the costs per kit range from $57,000 to $359,000, depending on their exact configuration. 'The roof panels are composed of an inexpensive concrete core material combined with a tough elastic outer layer,' according to ERDCWERX, a non-profit 'innovation hub' that is partnered with ERDC. 'This panel eliminates penetration of fragments and debris from natural disasters, explosions, and even munitions.' The modular roof panel design also allows for at least some degree of tailorability to expected threats, according to a separate ERDC fact sheet. As such, the modular structures can be used to protect critical assets and equipment, non-hardened structures/containers, unprotected weapon systems, etc,' according to the fact sheet. 'The MPS-OHC can be assembled with no equipment and requires no special tools for up to a 30-ft span. Only a standard military 10k forklift is required for 30-ft to 52.5-ft spans.' Specialized engineering units are not required to erect the structures, either, the fact sheet adds. At the same time, uncrewed aerial threats are not limited to top-down attacks. The kinds of first-person-view (FPV) kamikaze drones Ukraine used in recent covert attacks on Russian airbases have a demonstrated ability to get inside buildings through any sufficiently sized openings. Many larger kamikaze drones also dive onto their targets at lower angles, rather than attack straight down. As seen earlier in this story, at least in their original configurations, the MPS-OHC kits present wide open fronts and backs, as well as significant gaps on the sides. Ukrainian drone operators located a concentration of Russian hardware inside a large warehouse somewhere in the south of Ukraine, preparing for an very skilled drone operators sent in several drones and eliminated several MBTs, IFVs, trucks and more. In the end, the… — (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) February 20, 2024 Russian correspondent hides from a Ukranian drone … it looks for him like in a scary movie. — Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 11, 2024 How the 'stronger armor' and 'new armor arrangement' for the MPS-OHC may address these and other issues is unclear. It is interesting to point out here that U.S. Air Force officials at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia have at least been looking into the possibility of adding retractable netting to open sunshade-style aircraft shelters at that base to address lower-end drone threats. Leadership at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in North Carolina has also expressed interest in using an unspecified type of 'passive barrier' to provide additional counter-drone protection. Notably, both sides of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine have been making extensive use of nets and other kinds of add-on physical defenses to help shield armored vehicles, forward positions, and static structures against drone attack. Though Ukraine's recent attacks on Russian air bases offer a particularly glaring example, the threats posed by even weaponized commercial drones to critical assets and infrastructure, and well away from established battlegrounds, are not new, as TWZ regularly points out. Even lower-end uncrewed aerial systems are set to grow ever more capable of navigating to designated areas and finding targets on their own with limited, if any human intervention, thanks heavily to advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning. This, in turn, will only present additional challenges for defenders, as you can read more about in this past feature. What Ukrainian forces recently demonstrated in Russia with the use of weaponized commercial-type drones to conduct mass attacks on fragile aircraft exposed in the open on flightlines is a nightmare scenario that TWZ has been specifically highlighting the threat of for years now, as well. СБУ оприлюднила нове відео зі спецоперації «Павутина»: кадри показують шлях одного з FPV-дронів від вильоту з даху модульного будинку до ураження літака — СБ України (@ServiceSsu) June 7, 2025 More recently, a tangential debate about whether or not the U.S. military should be investing more in hardened base infrastructure, particularly new reinforced aircraft shelters, has also emerged around a shift toward preparing for a potential high-end fight in the Pacific against China. That focus is underscored by ERDC having directly linked to the MPS-OHC upgrades to the Indo-Pacific region in the LinkedIn post. Large established air bases would be prime targets for Chinese forces, in general, in such a conflict. The U.S. military does have hardened aircraft shelters and other fortified infrastructure at a number of bases, including in South Korea and Japan, but has not made significant investments on this front since the end of the Cold War. In January, the Hudson Institute think tank in Washington, D.C., published a report assessing that any aircraft parked in the open and fuel storage facilities at key airbases like Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan, Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, or Langley Air Force Base in Virginia could be neutralized by 10 enemy missiles, each with a warhead capable of scattering cluster munitions across areas 450 feet in diameter. The graphic below offers a divisual depiction of the areas such attacks could cover. U.S. military officials, especially those from the Air Force, do not dispute that there will be a need to fight from bases under attack during any future major conflict, such as one with China. However, they have often pushed back against major investments in new hardened facilities, typically citing cost, and arguing in favor instead of more active defenses like surface-to-air missiles. Work now to establish a new and expansive air and missile defense architecture on Guam is a choice example of this 'active' defense focus. 'We've always known that hardening our bases is something that we need to do. And so we have that actually, in our budgets, to be able to get more resilient basing, and we have some hardening for the shelters, and we have some more survivable capabilities of our bases forward,' Gen. David Allvin, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, said at a conference put on by the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think tank las tweek. 'Right now, I don't think it's where we need to be.' 'It's something that we haven't necessarily been ignoring, but it's been a matter of resource prioritization,' he continued, questioning whether it would be an optimal use of funding 'if all we're doing is playing defense and we can't shoot back.' 'So, we will have the need for bases, the main operating bases from which we operate,' Air Force Gen. Kevin Schneider, head of Pacific Air Forces (PACAF), also said at the Air & Space Forces Association's (AFA) 2025 Warfare Symposium in March. 'The challenge becomes, at some point, we will need to move to austere locations. We will need to disaggregate the force. We will need to operate out of other locations, again, one for survivability, and two, again, to provide response options.' In line with Allvin's comments, Schneider added that these were all things that 'cost money' and force the Air Force to 'make internal trades,' such as 'do we put that dollar towards, you know, fixing the infrastructure at Kadena [Air Base in Japan] or do we put that dollar towards restoring an airfield at Tinian.' Though certainly not a silver bullet solution, Army MPS-OHC kits with added features to provide additional defense against drone attacks might provide one option for readily improving physical defenses at air bases and other facilities at a lower cost than traditional hardened structures. The MPS-OHC kits that exist now are orders of magnitude less expensive than new hardened aircraft shelters, which can cost millions of dollars apiece, though they also do not provide anywhere near that level of protection, especially against more powerful direct hits. The baseline kit options that exist now are also not large enough to readily hold a tactical jet, but it is possible they could be adapted to act as an aircraft shelter, especially if combined together. Still, in general, as TWZ has noted in the past, even unhardened shelters could provide at least a modicum of protection against drones with smaller warheads, cluster submunitions, and shrapnel from other munitions. Fully enclosed shelters of any kind would also make it harder for enemy forces to know where exactly to strike, potentially prompting them to waste valuable resources against empty targets. In the meantime, the U.S. military general downplaying of physical hardening at its bases is increasingly at odds with global trends. In recent years, China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, in particular, have been steadily constructing additional hardened and unhardened aircraft shelters, as well as even more robust facilities, some of which are built underneath mountains. Russia's construction spree began well before Ukraine's recent covert drone attacks, but had been largely focused on bases closer to the front lines, including on the occupied Crimean Peninsula. Protective shelters for warplanes are also being constructed by the Russians at the Saki Air Base in the — Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) June 9, 2025 The U.S. military also continues to lag behind in the development and fielding of counter-drone capabilities intended for use by forces downrange and at home. Inside the borders of the United States, an array of often obtuse laws and other regulations present further challenges for expanding counter-drone defenses, as you can read more about here. Passive defenses like hardened shelters and MPS-OHC kits are notably not subject to these stipulations, increasing their potential attractiveness for domestic use, at least in the near term. The U.S. military has been pushing for new counter-drone authorities within the U.S. homeland, as well. The recently announced upgrades to the MPS-OHC kits are an example of a new U.S. counter-drone capability that is actually in the process of being fielded, at least on some level, and one aimed at addressing increasingly glaring gaps in terms of physical defenses. Contact the author: joe@
Business Insider
34 minutes ago
- Business Insider
The AI drone revolution isn't here yet, but Ukraine and Russia are laying the groundwork in battle
Ukraine and Russia are working on implementing artificial intelligence into their drones. But both sides face challenges in mass-deploying that capability, recent research says. There has been some limited use of AI in drones on the battlefield, but it's mostly machine learning. The drone war in Ukraine remains largely human-operated for now. We're seeing glimpses of the future, but we're not there yet. Ukraine and Russia are experimenting with artificial intelligence-enabled drones, but total autonomy and full-scale deployment remain limited in combat, researchers say. AI-enabled autonomy in uncrewed systems has the potential to significantly impact how drones are used on the battlefield, reducing the strain on human operators, bypassing electronic warfare and signal jamming, and speeding up the targeting and decision-making process. It can also analyze data and adapt in real time, which is advantageous in combat. Not quite autonomous and not being used at scale Kateryna Bondar, a fellow in the Center for Strategic and International Studies Wadhwani AI Center, reported in March that autonomy, a system's ability to independently operate in complex environments with limited supervision, isn't "yet present on the battlefield in the war in Ukraine." A new report from Institute for the Study of War expert Kateryna Stepanenko explains that "neither Russia nor Ukraine has leveraged AI/ML drones on the battlefield at scale as of early June 2025," referring to artificial intelligence and machine learning. The report notes that both sides are "increasingly integrating ML capabilities with some limited AI adaptations into new drone variants on the path to developing fully AI/ML-powered drones." Drones that use machine learning, even with some AI, still largely require involvement from an operator. Machine learning could enable the drones to perform pre-programmed tasks, but they lack the autonomy a true AI capability would provide. Not an AI revolution, at least not yet Ukrainian forces have observed Russia flying drone swarms that rely on visual terrain navigation — which uses onboard cameras and maps instead of vulnerable GPS — and can autonomously detect and select targets without operator input. Late last month, Ukraine said it deployed an AI-enabled "mother drone" that can autonomously send first-person view drones to strike targets. And the Security Service of Ukraine reported that the uncrewed systems used in its Operation Spiderweb attack against Russian aircraft at military airbases earlier this month switched to using AI to complete their mission if they lost signal with the operator. The security service said this was done using AI algorithms and manual operator intervention. Bondar's report in March on drones said that the attack systems equipped with AI are three to four times more likely to hit their target than drones piloted solely by humans. But has the revolution come? One commander of another drone unit said last fall that he expected AI-enabled drones that didn't need a pilot to be on the battlefield within six months. That future is not here just yet. Earlier this year, a front-line Ukrainian drone unit told Business Insider that AI-enabled drones weren't being widely used yet. The war has become a proving ground for cheap drones and emerging technology; however, turning prototypes into a scalable, battlefield-ready AI fleet will require data, chips, and coordination that neither side fully has at the moment. For Russia, Stepanenko wrote, further development of these important combat capabilities will depend on gathering, storing, and managing battlefield data to train the AI for missions, as well as, critically, sorting out how best to identify enemy drones from friendly ones. Ukraine has already been working on the latter with situational awareness systems like Delta and Kropyva, which Stepanenko reported are similar to the command and control systems the US Department of Defense has envisioned. Delta, for example, gives Ukrainian forces across branches and command levels coordinated intelligence from a variety of different systems, including drones, sensors, frontline reconnaissance, and satellites. In attempting to overcome the broader development challenges, though, Russia struggles with the centralization of drone innovation and production under the government in a way that could hinder advancement. Ukraine, on the other hand, is struggling with resources. Ukraine also faces problems with a lack of government coordination, computing power, and sustainment. Amid these challenges, Ukraine's drone developers have nonetheless become a model for the rest of the world. Companies are working closely with front-line forces to meet their needs, effectively creating relatively low-cost systems at scale that push the envelope in new capabilities, such as drone swarm technology. But in the meantime, more testing and investment are needed by both sides in this war before autonomous, AI-enabled systems really make their mark on the battlefield. The anticipated changes they could bring, though, would likely overhaul how drone warfare is fought. Ukraine's Typhoon drone unit told BI that once they became prolific on the battlefield, they'd completely change how operators use drones for reconnaissance and strike missions on enemy personnel, positions, and equipment, as well as against aerial targets.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
The Internet System Elon Musk Installed at the White House Is Causing Concerns
Elon Musk's lackeys at his so-called Department of Government Efficiency installed a Starlink terminal on the roof of the White House — and then totally blew off the major security concerns raised by communications experts, the Washington Post reports. This is the latest example of the security risks arising from DOGE's sweeping access to federal systems, alongside the high-profile blunders made by key figures in Trump's cabinet. According to insiders, it sounds like the White House communications experts were totally circumvented by Musk's group: they were given no notice that DOGE was installing the Starlink terminal — and once the satellite-based internet service was online, they had no way of actually monitoring the connections. When they voiced these concerns, the communications experts were ignored. At one point, things got heated. The installation of the Starlink roof terminal caused a confrontation between DOGE staffers and the Secret Service, according to WaPo. There was a lot for them to complain about. According to WaPo sources, a "Starlink Guest" WiFi network that first appeared in February is still active. It asks only for a password, with no username requirement or other form of authentication. This is not — or at least, shouldn't be — standard practice. Personal phones on a guest network at the White House typically need a username and a password, which are tracked and expire after a week, per WaPo. Starlink's network, by contrast, sounds more like the free Wi-Fi at Starbucks. "Starlink doesn't require anything. It allows you to transmit data without any kind of record or tracking," an insider told WaPo. "White House IT systems had very strong controls on network access. You had to be on a full-tunnel VPN at all times. If you are not on the VPN, White House-issued devices can't connect to the outside." "With a Starlink connection, that means White House devices could leave the network and go out through gateways. … It's going to help you bypass security," another insider told WaPo. Starlink is generally considered more secure than traditional telecommunication networks in the US, according to the reporting. But they're not impenetrable, and security experts aren't relishing the fact that they're being kept in the dark about what data is being transmitted in and out of the White House via the satellite network. It's unclear if the rooftop terminal remains installed, or if anything will change now that Musk has stepped back from his role as a "special government employee." That's a substantial loose end, because Musk has recently demonstrated a legendary petty streak that saw him lash out at Donald Trump and seemingly burn all bridges with the administration. If Musk is willing to threaten to cut off the US government's space access using his company's spacecraft, what else would he be willing to do? We've seen Musk personally intervene in Starlink's operations in the past for political reasons. When the Ukrainian military launched an ambush on the Russian naval fleet stationed near the Crimean coast, the billionaire ordered his engineers to shut down Starlink in the region to disrupt the attack. Starlink did not respond to WaPo's request for comment. The Secret Service said it could not discuss specific technology systems for security reasons. "We were aware of DOGE's intentions to improve internet access on the campus and did not consider this matter a security incident or security breach," Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told WaPo. More on Elon Musk: Trump Confronted Musk in Private Before Their Blowout Public Fight
