logo
The West's drone tech risks becoming irrelevant if it's not tested daily on the Ukrainian battlefield, defense exec says

The West's drone tech risks becoming irrelevant if it's not tested daily on the Ukrainian battlefield, defense exec says

The dizzying pace of drone development is now part and parcel of the war in Ukraine, where the fastest-moving companies are battle-testing their products in real-world combat.
Increasingly, Western militaries understand that their drone tech will be functionally obsolete unless the technology they import or develop is field-tested in conflicts like Ukraine.
"If your system is not in day-to-day use on the frontline of Ukraine, it becomes very quickly out of date," Justin Hedges, a former Royal Marine and cofounder of military intelligence company Prevail, told Business Insider.
Prevail has partnered with Ukrainian drone company Skyeton to bring Raybird, a small surveillance and targeting drone, to production in the UK.
It's being done with a shrewd eye on the British Army's plans to replace its troubled Watchkeeper drone program with an uncrewed surveillance and targeting capability more suited to the scenarios playing out in Ukraine.
More broadly, a recent data and drone tech-sharing agreement made between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the UK's Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that Ukrainian insight is to be "plugged into UK production lines."
It chimes with a drive across the West to see the Ukrainian battlefield as a live laboratory — out of necessity for the country's defense, but increasingly, as a crucial way for smaller companies to develop systems and services that have a technological edge.
The UK armed forces minister Luke Pollard underscored the point at a drone conference in Latvia in late May, saying, "If you are a drone company and you do not have your kit on the frontline in Ukraine, you might as well give up."
Raybird, Skyeton's drone, has a combined 350,000 hours of flight time on Ukraine's front line, in use "from the Black Sea to Kharkiv," Skyeton's founder Alex Stepura told BI.
Per Stepura, Raybird can fly more than 28 continuous hours and uses an array of sensors — including optical, electromagnetic, and various radar capabilities — to collect data from "far behind" the front line, sometimes from more than 125 miles away.
Many of its sensors can be swapped out in a minute, enabling forces to react quickly.
Ukraine's Ministry of Defence has hailed the drone as being capable of tasks normally reserved for much larger models. Its size — just 25kg, or 55 pounds — gives an added advantage: it's "relatively stealthy," Hedges said.
Small, advanced drones are crucial to spotting enemy movements and high-value targets like vehicles and air defenses.
In response, Russia has deployed an ever-evolving array of electronic warfare tactics that aim to scramble signals, spoof GPS positions, or overwhelm radio frequencies.
Hedges said that Skyeton's engineers are continually adapting to these tactics. "The proof is in the data," he added, saying that Ukrainian forces are getting more than 80 missions out of each drone before they're lost.
In contrast to the cumbersome procurement processes of major companies, the Ukrainian drone industry is peppered with small, fast-moving producers who iterate quickly and often interact directly with forces on the ground.
Milrem Robotics, an Estonian company, is creating autonomous ground robots that are being regularly battle-tested in Ukraine.
Its CEO, Kuldar Väärsi, told BI that the conditions in Ukraine are "totally different" to those found in peacetime exercises.
Milrem's THeMIS robot had been designed to be simple to operate, but after a stint in Ukraine, the company's engineers realized they needed it to be even simpler, Väärsi said.
Kit might be designed for use by soldiers trained on how to use it, he added, but in actual war, "anybody who needs that equipment will use it."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump suggests he'll know if Putin wants a peace deal with Ukraine soon into their meeting
Trump suggests he'll know if Putin wants a peace deal with Ukraine soon into their meeting

American Press

time15 minutes ago

  • American Press

Trump suggests he'll know if Putin wants a peace deal with Ukraine soon into their meeting

President Donald Trump said Monday that he expected to determine mere moments into his meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin this week whether it would be possible to work out a deal to halt the war in Ukraine. 'At the end of that meeting, probably the first two minutes, I'll know exactly whether or not a deal can be made,' Trump said at a White House press conference that he called to announce plans for a federal takeover of Washington's police force to help combat crime. He said he thought Friday's sitdown with Putin in Alaska would be 'really a feel-out meeting.' Trump added that 'it'll be good, but it might be bad' and predicted he may say, 'lots of luck, keep fighting. Or I may say, we can make a deal.' Putin wants to lock in Russia's gains since invading Ukraine in February 2022 as Trump presses for a ceasefire that has remained out of reach. Trump's eagerness to reach a deal has raised fears in Ukraine and Europe about such an agreement favoring Russia, without sufficient input from Ukraine. Trump has alternately harshly criticized both leaders after promising — and so far failing — to swiftly end the conflict. The Trump-Putin meeting so far isn't going to include Zelenskyy Trump on Monday ducked repeated chances to say that he would push for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to take part in his discussions with Putin, and was especially dismissive of Zelenskyy and his need to be part of an effort to seek peace. He said the Ukrainian president had been to 'a lot of meetings' without managing to halt a war that Russia started. Trump also noted that Zelenskyy had been in power for the duration of the war and said 'nothing happened' during that time. He contrasted that with Putin, who has wielded power in Russia for decades. Trump said that, after his meeting with Putin, 'The next meeting will be with Zelenskyy and Putin' but it could also be a meeting with 'Putin and Zelenskyy and me.' European allies have pushed for Ukraine's involvement, fearful that discussions could otherwise favor Moscow. To that point, Trump said he would call Zelenskyy and European leaders after his discussion with Putin to 'tell them what kind of a deal — I'm not going to make a deal. It's not up to me to make a deal.' Trump spent the early part of his administration decrying Zelenskyy, even suggesting he was a dictator because his country has not held elections during the war. Zelenskyy was hounded out of the Oval Office in February after Trump and Vice President JD Vance suggested he hadn't been grateful enough for U.S. support. Trump's up and down relations with Putin More recently, Trump has expressed frustration with Putin that Russia hasn't appeared to take a push for a ceasefire more seriously, and softened his tone toward Zelenskyy. His comments Monday suggested he might have had another change of heart. 'President Putin invited me to get involved,' Trump said. He noted that he thought it was 'very respectful' that Putin is coming to the U.S. for Friday's meeting, instead of insisting that Trump go to Russia. 'I'd like to see a ceasefire. I'd like to see the best deal that can be made for both parties,' Trump said. The president repeated that any major agreement could involve land swaps, without elaborating. He had threatened Moscow with more economic sanctions if more isn't done to work toward a ceasefire, but suggested Monday that, should Friday's meeting be successful, he could see a day when the U.S. and Russia normalize trade relations. Putin is expected to be unwavering in his demands to keep all the territory his forces now occupy and to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, with the long-term aim of returning it to Moscow's sphere of influence. Zelenskyy insists he will never consent to any formal Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory or give up a bid for NATO membership. Putin believes he has the advantage on the ground as Ukrainian forces struggle to hold back Russian advances along the 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) front. On the front lines, few Ukrainian soldiers believe there's an end in sight to the war.

How much will Gaza occupation cost Israel? Expert weighs in
How much will Gaza occupation cost Israel? Expert weighs in

Yahoo

time34 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How much will Gaza occupation cost Israel? Expert weighs in

Professor Elise Brezis estimates Gaza's annual food supply costs at 3.4 billion shekels, highlighting the challenges of feeding its 2 million residents if Israel assumes control. The annual cost of feeding the 2 million residents of the Gaza Strip is estimated at 3.4 billion shekels, Professor Elise Brezis , Chair of the Israeli Macroeconomics Forum and a faculty member at Bar-Ilan University, told N12 on Sunday. Brezis argued that the current figures being circulated about Gaza's food needs are inaccurate, as they are viewed through a Western lens. "It's like asking someone living in Mea She'arim how much it costs them to live and then giving them the figure for Tel Aviv," Brezis says. In her opinion, the cost of food in Gaza should be compared to countries such as Burkina Faso and Congo, not European nations. "You can't compare the cost of living in Gaza to a country where people dine at restaurants, buy groceries at supermarkets, and purchase shoes. The lifestyle in Gaza is more akin to that of Africa," she continues. Brezis argued that when comparing Gaza to countries like Burundi, the cost of feeding Gaza's population drops to 2 billion shekels. "If you keep throwing European food at them from planes, it will clearly cost more, but that would be a mistake," Brezis explained. She points to wartime African countries where locals survive by growing their own food as a more accurate comparison. In an interview with Professor Brezis, N12 attempted to estimate the economic cost of an Israeli occupation of Gaza. Despite recent focus on food supply issues, Brezis stressed that this represented the least expensive aspect of the process. "The real reason we won't be able to survive [in a situation of control over Gaza] is the price inside the country: 350,000 reserve soldiers. This was feasible in the early days after October 7. We're two years after that now," she said. 'If we're talking about two weeks or a month, we might somehow survive that. But if we're talking about a year, we can't afford it. The security costs would rise to 50 billion shekels per year,' she estimated. These figures also include the costs of recruiting reserves and armaments. Additionally, she highlighted the long-term economic impact of massive reserve mobilization: 'They aren't working, they aren't learning. These are the young people who represent the next generation of our human capital. The problem isn't how much Gaza will cost us, it's how much the war will cost us.' Brezis noted that even after occupying the strip, security expenses will remain high. "The military will manage the strip. It will stay the same. You won't send a tax clerk; you'll send a soldier." Additional factors increase incurred cost of Israeli occupation in Gaza Other estimates point to similar costs. A study by Ofer Guterman from the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), published last April, suggested that maintaining a military occupation of Gaza could cost 25-30 billion shekels annually. Approximately 20 billion of this would go towards military operations, including reserve days. The additional 5-10 billion shekels would be allocated to running a civil administration mechanism and providing minimal civil services to Gaza's residents. Guterman noted that prior to Israel's 2005 disengagement, a significant portion of the funding for civil administration came from the profits and taxes generated by Gaza's economy. However, in the current situation of destruction in Gaza, this source of income is no longer available, significantly raising the cost for Israel. 'You need a bureaucratic system, and that has a price,' Brezis said. 'In the '70s and '80s, Israel placed civil servants there because it wasn't dangerous. Today, they'll place military personnel as civil servants, so we won't be able to reduce much from the reserve mobilization.' As someone whose research focuses on development, Brezis also offered suggestions for severing the link between Hamas and Gaza's population. The key, she asserted, lies in addressing the high percentage of youth in Gaza, an issue she refers to as the "youth bulge." "Development and demographic studies show that in places where the fertility rate exceeds four children per woman and youth constitute 30%-50% of the population, the likelihood of war is 80%. In contrast, in countries with a fertility rate of two children per woman and youth making up 20%, the likelihood of war drops to 5%-8%," she explained. "If we don't address this, how can we discuss Gaza? There, over 40% of the population is youth, and this helps explain why Hamas took control." According to Brezis , this age group is particularly vulnerable. "Hormones are raging," she noted, making young people in Gaza susceptible to recruitment by groups like Hamas or other terror or criminal organizations. She argued that Israel must address the population growth rate in Gaza to solve the attraction of such groups. A policy that encourages reducing birth rates, she suggested, is what helped Japan make an economic leap after World War II, and also helped Qatar reduce its birth rate from seven children per woman in the 1950s to fewer than two today. "The UN deliberately avoided addressing the population growth rate, silencing groups that called for it," she accused. The solution, she argued, lies in limiting state aid to families with fewer children. "In every country with more than four children per family, there is a 'Hamasland,'" she concludes. Sign in to access your portfolio

Ahead of Putin sitdown, Trump says he hopes to get 'prime territory' back for Ukraine
Ahead of Putin sitdown, Trump says he hopes to get 'prime territory' back for Ukraine

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

Ahead of Putin sitdown, Trump says he hopes to get 'prime territory' back for Ukraine

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said he would try to return territory to Ukraine as he prepares to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin Friday and lay the groundwork for a deal to bring an end to the grinding multi-year war between Ukraine and Russia. 'Russia has occupied a big portion of Ukraine. They've occupied some very prime territory. We're going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine,' Trump said during a press conference at the White House on Monday. Trump said he's going to see what Putin 'has in mind' to end the war and, if it's a 'fair deal,' he will share it with European and NATO leaders, as well as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who have been liaising closely with Washington ahead of the meeting. Asked on Monday if Zelenskyy was invited to Alaska, Trump said the Ukrainian leader 'wasn't a part of it' and that despite his having participated in numerous sitdowns over the course of the war, little has come of them. 'I would say he could go, but he's gone to a lot of meetings. You know, he's been there for three and a half years — nothing happened,' Trump added. The president's first call out of the Putin meeting, which he referred to as 'really a feel-out,' would be to Zelenskyy 'out of respect.' He noted that he might tell Zelenskyy "'lots of luck, keep fighting,' or I may say, 'we can make a deal.'" The comments came during a winding press conference to discuss efforts to fight crime in Washington, D.C., with a plan to federalize the city's police force. During his remarks, the president noted how even following 'a great call' with Putin in the past, 'missiles would be lobbed into Kyiv or some other place, and you'd have 60 people laying on a road dying,' a nod to the challenge of reaching a deal. A follow-up meeting could include Zelenskyy and Putin, and perhaps Trump himself, the president added. He said he would 'be there if they need.' But Trump said a Zelenskyy and Putin meeting was the only way to bring the conflict to a close. 'Now, I will say this, ultimately, I'm going to put the two of them in a room, I'll be there or won't be there, and I think it'll get solved,' the president added. He said he would like to see a ceasefire and reach the 'best deal that could be made for both parties.' But 'there'll be some swapping, there'll be some changes in land,' Trump said, returning to the idea of so-called 'land swaps,' which he said on Friday would be 'to the betterment of both.' Zelenskyy, though, has been unwavering in his position that Ukraine should not cede any territory to Russia; European allies have agreed that giving up lands would encourage further Russian aggression. 'The answer to Ukraine's territorial question is already in the constitution of Ukraine,' Zelenskyy said Saturday. 'No one will and no one can deviate from it. Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.' Trump announced last week that he is meeting with Putin on Friday in Alaska as he tries to reach a ceasefire in Ukraine. The White House had initially held out a meeting with Putin and Zelenskyy as a condition for a meeting between Trump and the Russian president to take place, but Trump later said that was not a precondition. The White House emphasized over the weekend that the priority is the upcoming one-on-one with Putin, even as it weighed the prospect of a future meeting with Zelenskyy. 'Next Friday will be important, because it will be about testing Putin, how serious he is on bringing this terrible war to an end,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said over the weekend on ABC. Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met with Putin in Moscow last week ahead of an Aug. 8 deadline that the president had set for the Russian leader to agree to a ceasefire or face new sanctions. Putin proposed the outlines of an agreement to end the war that would allow Russia to hold sweeping Ukrainian territory, but has not agreed to a ceasefire. Zelenskyy has urged stronger international pressure on Russia, warning against concessions to Moscow. 'Another week has ended without any attempt by Russia to agree to the numerous demands of the world and stop the killings,' the Ukrainian leader said on X. 'Russia is dragging out the war, and therefore it deserves stronger global pressure. Russia refuses to stop the killings, and therefore must not receive any rewards or benefits. And this is not just a moral position — it is a rational one. Concessions do not persuade a killer. But truly strong protection of life stops the killers,' he added. Katherine Doyle

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store