3D-printed drones made on frontlines offer glimpse of future digital warfare

Tighter budgets are one factor in the next stage of modern warfare

The Royal Navy's Merlin helicopter fires flares. Reuters

Digital targeting and frontline munitions factories are part of a wave of the battlefield future as upstart tech innovators start to win major defence contracts.

A new target of a tenfold increase in firepower has been set for the UK military, largely driven by data-driven digital systems that promise to improve the speed and accuracy of weapons in combat.

“We will invest in technology to give our troops the edge in the battlefields of the future; transforming our armed forces and boosting our war-fighting readiness," said John Healey, the Defence Secretary. “This will increase our lethality, provide a powerful deterrent to our adversaries, and put the UK at the leading edge of innovation in Nato."

Trying to predict what AI, drones, quantum or any emerging tech will look like in three years, let alone five to 10, is impossible

David Sully,
founder

The incentive in Britain has increased substantially following the government’s strategic defence review (SDR) that called for innovation and much closer collaboration with small but advanced companies that bring in cutting-edge technology.

This already appears to be happening in France where a 3D drone factory packed into a shipping container that can be hauled to the front line and can manufacture 10 drones an hour has been commissioned by the French army.

But, analysts have said, there are still significant barriers for companies that are not defence giants to work more closely with the UK Ministry of Defence, with red tape proving a major obstacle.

Defence Secretary John Healey holds the remains of a domestic drone which was destroyed as it flew by the Dragonfire system (to the right), as he visits Warminster Garrison, United Kingdom. Getty Images

Creative independence

Many start-ups operate in Britain and tap into its world-leading university system, alongside generous grants, “setting the UK apart from other countries” in "early stage creativity", a leading innovation firm executive told The National.

Chris Daniels, chief commercial officer for Flare Bright, also warned that in a fragmenting world every nation needs to have independence to deliver “whatever other countries may do to prevent this”. This also means that, “when at war it will be critical” to have an independent supply chain to ensure the supply of vital components.

Flare Bright, which specialises in AI and drone navigation, is like many other small companies that rapidly adapt “which is critical in the cat-and-mouse game of technological innovation and counter-measures we see in defence”. He added that UK defence should consider not just buying a product but a company’s ability to “adapt and rapidly produce innovative technology”.

HMS Defender's Sea Viper air missile defence system. MOD

Frontline factories

That innovative approach is already being pursued by the French, despite their reputation for burdensome bureaucracy, with Paris understanding the need to change and adapt in a more dangerous world. Which is why the proposal from Per Se Systems for a mobile micro-factory that can make drones on the front line is being trialled by 12 French regiments.

Using a shipping container filled with 3D printers, it can produce ten FPV (first person view) drones per hour allowing a relentless supply of weapons without relying on a long logistics chain. The small factory operates in total autonomy, powered by a generator that gives it 19 hours of supply and solar panels for lighting, all of which can be towed by a light lorry.

“This approach addresses a growing need in modern conflicts: fast, autonomous and decentralised production of tactical drones, particularly FPV models considered single-use or expendable on the battlefield,” said the military outlet, Army Recognition.

Ukrainian soldiers take part in a trench warfare training exercise in Britain. Getty

Bureaucracy wars

But questions are being asked about whether Britain can really match the intent shown in its well-received SDR. David Sully, founder of the defence AI start-up Advai, posed what he called a “controversial thought” that the review was limited when it came to emerging technology.

“Trying to predict what AI, drones, quantum or any emerging tech will look like in three years, let alone five to 10 is impossible. Two and a half years ago GenAI had only just arrived and drone warfare looked nothing like it does today,” he wrote on LinkedIn.

The review’s success hinged on the MOD’s ability to “adapt and adopt at pace and scale as technology evolves”, and it had to be built into their requirements that there will be “advances we can't predict right now”. His call for procurement projects to be run over weeks rather than quarters was going to require a radical change in government thinking, said military analyst Francis Tusa.

He gave the example of a British firm that had rapidly made thousands of drones for Ukraine as part of an urgent operational requirement that included testing them on MOD sites, only to face major bureaucracy when asked to provide them for the UK military.

“Suddenly they received a 400-page request for a quotation document and an 800-page request for information,” he said. “It was both ridiculous and massively time-consuming.”

A Ukrainian explosives expert examines parts of an Iran-designed Shahed 136 military drone in Kharkiv. AFP

Capital inadequacy

There was also a problem over “capital adequacy” in which a small British company involved in AI had the product the MOD wanted but as they only had a turnover of £5 million it was felt they could not be trusted with a £100 million contract.

“This comes back to the trust on both sides as the MOD capital adequacy rules are not suited to dealing with a faster-paced technology environment,” Mr Tusa said. With warfare quickly evolving, it was necessary for there to be three partners in procurement with the MOD, major companies like BAE Systems and the “novel industry” of start-ups.

“If all three sides are working on an open playbook none of this ought to be a deal breaker,” he added. Ultimately, wrote Mr Sully, it required the same risk-taking that the armed forces took in “split-second, life-and-death operational decisions” to be matched with the procurement process.