# Lessons from Ukraine and Middle East on Countering Drones | Robert Fetters posted on the topic

**By:** Robert Fetters  
**Published:** 2026-07-16T12:51:33.029Z  
**Source:** [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/robfett92_jiatf-401-cuas-ugcPost-7483503588661645313-A6rp)

---

Lessons from Ukraine and Middle East on Countering Drones
   This title was summarized by AI from the post below. 
          Robert Fetters 
 4d 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Trying to get my reading in this morning.... At nearly 100 pages, a painfully long read that I had to cheat my way through. It doesn't present any revolutionary ideas, but it does a good job of organizing many of the lessons from Ukraine and the Middle East into a practical framework. A few points stood out. 1. Think about drone systems, not drone platforms. The report argues that every drone threat consists of four elements: the operator, the platform, the control process, and the payload. Too often we focus exclusively on the aircraft. In reality, disrupting any one of those four components may neutralize the threat before the drone ever reaches its objective. 2. Counter-UAS begins before launch. One of the report's strongest arguments is that successful defense starts with understanding likely operators, identifying launch locations, recognizing patterns of life, and building enough warning time to make decisions. By the time a drone is overhead, several opportunities to shape the engagement have already passed. 3. Defeating the drone should not be the first objective. The framework the authors propose is Detect, Deny, Disrupt, Defeat, underpinned by Discipline. Kinetic defeat is only one part of counter-UAS, and often the least efficient one. If a drone can't find, identify, or effectively attack its target, you've already succeeded. 4. Layered sensing matters more than individual sensors. The report repeatedly emphasizes that radar, RF detection, EO/IR, acoustic sensors, and human observation each have blind spots. The goal isn't perfect detection from one sensor. It's combining multiple sensors to create what the authors describe as "decision-grade confidence." 5. AI's primary value is reducing cognitive overload. This was probably my favorite chapter because it avoids the usual hype. Rather than replacing operators, AI is presented as a way to correlate sensor data, identify anomalies, prioritize information, and reduce the number of things humans need to pay attention to simultaneously. That feels much closer to where operational value exists today. 6. Counter-UAS is ultimately an organizational problem. Perhaps the biggest takeaway is that the report spends as much time discussing training, reporting procedures, communications, decision authorities, and rehearsals as it does technology. That mirrors much of what we've seen in Ukraine. The organizations that adapt fastest generally outperform those with marginally better hardware because they shorten the time between observing a problem and changing how they operate. For anyone working in air defense, force protection, or autonomous systems, it's worth reading. Technology will continue to evolve quickly, but the principles for countering drones are likely to remain far more stable than the platforms themselves. #CUAS #UAS #DroneWarefare #JIATF401 #Drones #CounterUAS
       17        1 Comment 
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
     More Relevant Posts
               Samson Alhat PhD 
 3w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Overcoming Jamming and Spoofing in Drone Systems 1. Understanding the Threats RF Jamming floods the communication or GPS frequency with noise thereby disrupting the signal. Spoofing sends fake signals (especially fake GPS) to deceive the drone into thinking it's somewhere it isn't. 2. Anti-Jamming Techniques A. Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS) The drone's control link rapidly switches frequencies in a pseudorandom pattern known only to the transmitter and receiver. A jammer would need to cover the entire band simultaneously, which requires far more power and is easier to detect. B. Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) The signal is spread across a wide bandwidth using a chipping code. The receiver can correlate and reconstruct the original signal even in the presence of narrowband interference. C. Adaptive Null Steering / Beamforming Antennas Phased-array antennas can electronically detect the direction of a jamming source and create a null (dead zone) in the antenna pattern pointing toward the jammer, while maintaining sensitivity toward the legitimate ground station. D. Increased Transmission Power Boosting the legitimate signal's power-to-noise ratio can overcome low-to-medium power jammers, though this has regulatory and hardware limits. E. Redundant Communication Links Using multiple independent communication channels simultaneously (e.g., 900 MHz + 2.4 GHz + satellite link), so jamming one doesn't sever control. F. Autonomous Pre-programmed Flight (Fail-Safe) If the control link is jammed, the drone executes a pre-loaded mission or returns to home using onboard inertial navigation, without relying on external signals. 3. Anti-Spoofing Techniques A. Multi-Constellation GNSS Receivers Using GPS + GLONASS + Galileo + BeiDou simultaneously. Spoofing all four independent systems coherently is vastly more difficult than spoofing just GPS. B. Signal Authentication (Galileo OSNMA, GPS Chimera) Modern satellite navigation systems are implementing cryptographic authentication of navigation messages, so the drone can verify the signal is actually from a legitimate satellite. C. Inertial Navigation System (INS) Cross-Verification An onboard IMU (accelerometers + gyroscopes) tracks movement independently. If GPS position suddenly jumps inconsistently with inertial data, the system flags it as a spoof attack. D. Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) The receiver monitors internal consistency of satellite signals. Inconsistent pseudo-range measurements across satellites are a signature of spoofing. E. Visual / LiDAR Odometry The drone uses cameras or LiDAR to track its position relative to terrain features. This is entirely independent of RF signals and cannot be jammed or spoofed remotely. F. Barometric Altitude Cross-Check A spoofer trying to alter altitude data must fool both GPS and the barometer simultaneously, a much harder task. 
    
       7        
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             Janusz Wierzchowski 
 2w 
 
      Report this post 
  
    ☕ Second coffee. Let me tell you about the thing that made me laugh at my own screen this week. Last post: one microphone array can point at a drone. "It's over there, roughly 40°." Cool. But a bearing is a line, not a point — and you can't do much with a line except squint down it. So I put three arrays on a map and let them argue about where the drone actually is. The idea's simple: each node throws out a bearing — a line across the map. Two lines cross → there's your drone. Add a third, they almost never meet at exactly one point, and how badly they miss is a free confidence check. First run: three nodes, 200–400 m apart, drone pinned to ~3 meters. From sound. No radar, no RF, no camera. I was pretty pleased with myself. 💥 Then I did the thing you're supposed to do — I broke it. I turned the SNR down on one node. Just one. Like it was sitting in the wind, or just further from the drone. Its bearing started to wander a couple of degrees. The fix went from 3 meters to 90. One noisy sensor. 30× worse. Because plain triangulation trusts every node equally — so one confidently-wrong line drags the whole answer with it. Three sensors didn't make it robust. It made it outvoted by the one that couldn't hear. The fix is almost annoyingly obvious in hindsight: don't trust every node the same. Weight each bearing by how well that node can actually hear — its own SNR. Do that, and the buried node quietly gets ignored. 88 meters back down to 3.7 — with one sensor practically drowning. Not quite the 2.9 I started with; I'm effectively running on two good nodes now. But 3.7 versus 88 is the whole difference between a fix and a failure. One catch I only spotted afterwards: that "free confidence check" runs on disagreement — so the more I distrust a node, the less its vote counts, and the sanity signal quietly fades on exactly the sensor that's failing. Buying accuracy cost me a little self-awareness. Next problem. 💡 And that's the real lesson, and it's not really about drones: redundancy isn't robustness. More sensors doesn't help unless each one knows how much to trust itself. Usual honesty, because I'd rather say it than have you catch it: still simulation, still free-field. I'm intersecting angles (AOA) and assuming the bearings line up in time. The nastier, more accurate cousin — time-difference (TDOA) — needs the nodes to share a clock down to microseconds. That's a hardware problem (PPS/GPSDO), and a whole post of its own. Series so far: one array → direction. Three arrays → position. Next: giving them a shared sense of time. If you've built multi-sensor fusion — how do you decide which sensor to trust when they disagree? Confidence weighting, outlier rejection, something smarter? Genuinely curious. 👇 #DSP #SensorFusion #DroneDetection #CounterUAS #Beamforming #AcousticSensing #SignalProcessing #RnD
  …more            7        
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
    
             Tim De Zitter 
 5d 
 
      Report this post 
  
   𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲’𝘀 𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗼 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Ukrainian-Estonian defence-tech company Farsight Vision has unveiled FSV Localizer, software designed to geolocate an enemy UAV from intercepted footage or a live onboard video stream. The operator selects an approximate search area. The software then analyses individual frames, matches visible terrain against geospatial data and plots the drone’s estimated positions and direction of travel on a map. The company says this can reveal where the drone came from, where it is heading and approximately where it is now—in seconds and without dedicated radio direction-finding equipment. That is potentially significant. An intercepted video link has traditionally provided insight into what the enemy operator sees. It may now also expose the aircraft’s route, target approach and, in favourable circumstances, clues to its launch area or control team. The previously intercepted footage from a Russian Molniya strike drone is exactly the type of material such a system could exploit: roads, buildings, fields, power infrastructure and other persistent terrain features pass beneath the camera throughout the flight. But this does not make RF direction finding obsolete. The stream must first be intercepted, the broad search area must be known, and the imagery must contain terrain distinctive enough to match reliably. Darkness, smoke, cloud, featureless ground and outdated reference data will all complicate the result. The real value is therefore fusion. Combine visual geolocation with RF detection, radar tracks and acoustic or optical sensors, and every intercepted frame becomes another measurement in the counter-UAS picture. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘦’𝘴 𝘦𝘺𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘢 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘦.
    
         96        9 Comments 
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             Bryan S. 
 5d 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Fascinating development. With the right operator, certain characteristics of Orqa FPV systems can mitigate this capability. Human creativity, awareness of a system's "edge use cases" and an understanding of how a potential adversarial technology works can overcome that tech. If a system doesn't give you the flexibility to be creative, consider your use cases carefully before committing to mass adoption.
        Tim De Zitter 
  Lifecycle Manager – ATGM, VSHORAD, C-UAS & Loitering Munitions @Belgian Defence 
 5d 
 
 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲’𝘀 𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗼 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Ukrainian-Estonian defence-tech company Farsight Vision has unveiled FSV Localizer, software designed to geolocate an enemy UAV from intercepted footage or a live onboard video stream. The operator selects an approximate search area. The software then analyses individual frames, matches visible terrain against geospatial data and plots the drone’s estimated positions and direction of travel on a map. The company says this can reveal where the drone came from, where it is heading and approximately where it is now—in seconds and without dedicated radio direction-finding equipment. That is potentially significant. An intercepted video link has traditionally provided insight into what the enemy operator sees. It may now also expose the aircraft’s route, target approach and, in favourable circumstances, clues to its launch area or control team. The previously intercepted footage from a Russian Molniya strike drone is exactly the type of material such a system could exploit: roads, buildings, fields, power infrastructure and other persistent terrain features pass beneath the camera throughout the flight. But this does not make RF direction finding obsolete. The stream must first be intercepted, the broad search area must be known, and the imagery must contain terrain distinctive enough to match reliably. Darkness, smoke, cloud, featureless ground and outdated reference data will all complicate the result. The real value is therefore fusion. Combine visual geolocation with RF detection, radar tracks and acoustic or optical sensors, and every intercepted frame becomes another measurement in the counter-UAS picture. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘦’𝘴 𝘦𝘺𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘢 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘦.
    
  
       6        3 Comments 
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
    
              Investair 
  7,391 followers 
 1w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Nanoveu, (ASX: NVU), a technology company specialising in advanced semiconductor, visualisation and materials sciences, has announced the results of the second phase of its live drone evaluation program. Following initial trials that recorded gains of up to 27.8% on simpler flight paths, these latest tests utilised more complex flight paths and higher speeds, delivering peak cruise-efficiency gains of up to 51.0% in live flight conditions. The trial program maintained the same controlled, empirical methodology established in the first phase, isolating battery savings as the sole variable of interest across all runs. The distinction in this second phase was the introduction of three new flight trajectories, designed specifically to replicate the complexity of real-world commercial drone operations. These routes featured continuous direction changes, sharp angles, and dense transitions, in contrast to the simple, three-column lawnmower patterns used in initial trials. The results demonstrate a material improvement in energy efficiency, with average gains increasing consistently with flight speed across all three trajectories, from +5.7% at 3 m/s up to +48.5% at 7 m/s. Performance gains also peaked at +51.0% over the baseline autopilot on the most complex path tested. Flight log analysis indicates that ECS-DoT's value proposition scales directly with the operational demands placed on the drone, as its real-time onboard speed optimisation delivers the greatest advantage where conventional autopilots struggle most. The three trajectories tested were: an irregular polygon with diagonal crossings, featuring sharp angular turns and highly non-linear segments; a sinusoidal or zigzag pattern, requiring repeated S-curves and continuous direction reversals across the flight area; and a dense zigzag with diagonal crossings, representing the most complex path tested, with continuous, rapid transitions. These routes are highly indicative of the paths flown during urban reconnaissance, precision agriculture spraying, and complex infrastructure inspection, where drones rarely fly in straight, uninterrupted lines. The jump from +40.7% at 6 m/s to +51.0% at 7 m/s on the most complex path indicates that, as the baseline autopilot's speed variance becomes greatest, ECS-DoT's tight real-time control delivers its maximum advantage. The mechanism driving these gains is adaptive and optimal speed control, as conventional autopilots struggle with complex paths, constantly decelerating into turns and over-accelerating out of them, creating a wide speed variance that wastes significant energy. Dr. Mohamed M. Sabry Aly, Director and Founder of EMASS, commented: "When we published our first live flight results, we were clear that 27.8% was a starting point, not a ceiling. These latest results support that. Flying more complex, real-world flight paths at higher speeds, we are now seeing gains of up to 51.0%. The mechanism is the same; ECS-DoT holds the drone tighter to its aerodynamic optimum than any conventional autopilot can, at under ten milliwatts of power. What changes with more complex paths is that the baseline gets worse, and ECS-DoT does not. That gap is where the value lives." Dr Tan Chee How, CEO of Spinoff Robotics, a wholly owned subsidiary, also commented: "A 51.0% efficiency gain on a real-world flight path is not an incremental improvement. It is a fundamental shift in what is achievable through software and AI control alone. The drone industry has spent years chasing endurance through hardware. What this data shows is that the bigger gains were always in the control layer. ECS-DoT is now demonstrating that on the most demanding paths operators actually fly, not simplified test... Investair - Know the market before you raise. Capital markets intelligence for ASX-listed companies https://lnkd.in/gGisJZfD #ASXTech #DroneInnovation #EdgeAI #EnergyEfficiency #CommercialDrones 
    
     Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             Ilan Sharon 
 1w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Over the past year, I have been noticing a pattern across the defense and HLS market that feels bigger than another acquisition cycle. Companies are launching new drones, UGVs, sensors, C-UAS systems and EW capabilities. At the same time, they are acquiring companies, hiring, building partnerships and trying to connect technologies that until recently were sold as separate product lines. At first glance, it looks familiar: some M&A activity, a few strategic announcements and the usual photo of very happy engineers standing beside a drone. But I don't think this is "business as usual". The competition is moving away from “who has the best platform?” toward a harder question: who can make platforms, sensors, communications and operators work as one coordinated system? Ondas Autonomous Systems is a useful example. Sentrycs | Counter-Drone Solutions Adapting at the Speed of Threats added cyber-over-RF C-UAS capabilities, while Roboteam added tactical UGVs for EOD, ISR, route clearance, logistics and other high-risk missions. Combined with Ondas’ aerial systems, AI analytics and communications infrastructure, this looks less like a product catalogue and more like a multi-domain autonomy stack. Elbit Systems approaches the same problem from another direction. It already operates across air, land, sea, EW, ISR, communications and C4I, while investing in AI, robotics, automation and land-domain production. Systems such as #Dominion -X point to the same goal: coordinating heterogeneous unmanned platforms rather than treating every one as a separate island. The trend is global. Anduril Industries acquired Klas to strengthen tactical edge computing and communications. Rheinmetall is integrating Anduril autonomous air systems into its #Battlesuite framework, while blackned GmbH ’s Tactical Core provides digital infrastructure for connecting platforms, sensors and tactical networks. The physical layer gets most of the attention because it photographs better. A UGV climbing through rubble will almost always outperform middleware in the LinkedIn beauty contest. But the durable advantage may sit in the software layer. #AuterionOS is built around vendor-independent fleet operations, Tomahawk Robotics’ #Kinesis focuses on common control across unmanned systems, and blackned connects operators, sensors, networks and deployed assets. This is where “System of Systems” stops being a phrase in a strategy deck and becomes an engineering problem: can a UAV hand over a usable track to a UGV, can one operator supervise multiple systems, and can products from different vendors cooperate without requiring three integration teams and an invoice large enough to need its own project manager? That, to me, is the real race. The winners may be the companies that make different platforms behave like one operational system, while keeping the human operator in control of what matters. #PhysicalAI #DefenseTech #AutonomousSystems #SystemOfSystems #C4I
    
       30        11 Comments 
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             Coty Vann 
 1w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   The drone industry does not have an innovation problem. It has a product-discipline problem. Too many platforms are still built around a capability checklist: • Longer endurance • More payload • Better camera • More AI • More autonomy Those things matter. But none of them, by themselves, answer the only question that matters: Does this system make the mission more achievable for the operator and organization using it? The lessons coming out of Ukraine, the Middle East, and the broader shift toward distributed unmanned systems are increasingly clear: A drone can be technically impressive and still be operationally irrelevant. If it cannot be deployed quickly, repaired in the field, operated under degraded communications, adapted to a changing mission, or integrated into the user’s actual workflow, it will eventually lose to a less sophisticated system that can. I frequently see the well known pattern: our allies go high-tech and the enemy goes low-tech to gain the advantage. That is why the next generation of successful drone products will be defined less by the airframe alone and more by five things: 1. Mission based architecture over individual features 2. The aircraft, payload, communications, ground-control experience, data flow, and operator workflow must function as one system 3. Resilience over ideal-condition performance - Performance in a clean demo environment is not the same as performance in weather, RF congestion, GNSS degradation, time pressure, or an inexperienced user’s hands. 4. Operator workload as a core product requirement - Autonomy should reduce cognitive load, not create another system the operator has to manage. 5. Field sustainment as a design input - Modularity, repairability, common components, documentation, and clear fault isolation are not support considerations. They are product decisions. 6. A tight field-to-product feedback loop - The companies that win will be the ones that can turn real operator feedback into product changes faster than the mission changes around them. This applies across defense, public safety, inspection, logistics, and enterprise operations. The mission may be different. The product principle is the same: Technology should serve the mission, not define it. The future of UAS product development will belong to companies that build from the operator and mission backward not from the feature list forward. 📸: Initial flights of the Draganfly Heavy Lift Hybrid Outrider platform in AZ #UAS #DroneIndustry #ProductStrategy #Autonomy #DefenseTech #Robotics #MissionCritical 
    
        13        
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             Gowtham Saravanan 
 1w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   🚁 𝗙𝗣𝗩 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗝𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆 | 𝗗𝗮𝘆 𝟴/𝟭𝟬𝟬 𝗜 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗺𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲. 𝗜𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁. When I first got into FPV, I assumed my radio transmitter communicated directly with the motors. But there's another tiny component that makes the entire connection possible. It's called the 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿. Think of it like this: 🎮 𝗥𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 = 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗩𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲 📡 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿 = 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲'𝘀 𝗘𝗮𝗿𝘀 The receiver listens to every command from the transmitter and sends that information to the Flight Controller. Without it, your drone has no idea what you're asking it to do. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗘𝗟𝗥𝗦? While researching radio systems, I came across names like: • FrSky • FlySky • Crossfire • ELRS (ExpressLRS) After reading, watching reviews, and learning from the FPV community, I decided to go with 𝗘𝗟𝗥𝗦. Here's why: ✅ Open-source and constantly improving ✅ Extremely low latency for quick response ✅ Excellent long-range performance ✅ Affordable compared to many alternatives ✅ Strong support from the FPV community For someone learning FPV, it felt like the best long-term ecosystem to invest in. 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗜 𝗰𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝗘𝗟𝗥𝗦 This is the transmitter I'm using for my build. I chose it because: ✅ Compact and comfortable to carry ✅ Built-in ExpressLRS ✅ Beginner-friendly while still offering advanced features ✅ Great value for the price Most importantly, I wanted a transmitter I could continue using even after building more drones in the future. 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗜 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆... The transmitter doesn't control the motors directly. Every command follows this path: 🎮 𝗥𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 ⬇️ 📡 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿 ⬇️ 🧠 𝗙𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗿 ⬇️ ⚡ 𝗘𝗦𝗖 ⬇️ 🚁 𝗠𝗼𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 Understanding this communication chain helped me understand how every component depends on the next. Every day, my FPV build teaches me that a drone isn't just a collection of parts—it's a complete system where hardware, software, and communication all work together. 📅 𝗧𝗼𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄: I'll explore one component that completely changes the flying experience... 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗣𝗩 𝗖𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗮. 💬 𝗪𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗵 𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺 𝗱𝗼 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘂𝘀𝗲—𝗘𝗟𝗥𝗦, 𝗖𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗲, 𝗙𝗿𝗦𝗸𝘆, 𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗹𝘀𝗲? 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝘁? #FPV #Drone #ELRS #ExpressLRS #Engineering #AeronauticalEngineering #SoftwareEngineer #EmbeddedSystems #LearningInPublic #BuildInPublic
    
       3        
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
             HK New Ark Intelligent Technology Ltd ( Low-Altitude Security Solutions ) 
  2,108 followers 
 3w 
 
      Report this post 
  
   Drone Detection | Acoustic Drone Detection | AI Drone Tracking | FPV Drone Technology | Critical Infrastructure Protection 🌍 ONE PLATFORM. MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS. Critical infrastructure facilities face increasing challenges from unauthorized low-altitude drone activities. Early detection, accurate tracking and real-time situational awareness are becoming essential for industrial security, public safety and infrastructure protection. Our integrated solution combines Acoustic Drone Detection, AI Visual Tracking, Thermal Imaging and Laser Rangefinding technologies into a unified intelligent monitoring platform designed for complex operational environments. 🔹 Acoustic Detection + Triple Optics Recognition Tech | AI Empowered High-Speed FPV ✅ Acoustic Detection: 2–1200m ✅ Visible-Light Tracking: 2–1200m ✅ Infrared Thermal Imaging: 2–1200m ✅ Laser Rangefinding: 2–1200m ✅ 360° Full Acoustic Coverage ✅ Network Coverage: 2–5km ✅ Single Array Tracks 8–10 Drones Stably ✅ Supports Up To 16 Simultaneous Targets ✅ Real-Time Situational Awareness with AI-Assisted Drone Tracking 🚀 AI Empowered High-Speed FPV Platform ✅ Maximum Speed: 400km/h ✅ Payload Capacity: 350–500g ✅ AI Tracking Range: 400–1200m ✅ Optional Thermal Imaging Module 📍 Application Solutions ▶ Energy Facilities ▶ Industrial Parks ▶ Hazardous Materials Storage Areas ▶ Logistics Distribution Centers ▶ Airports & Aviation Infrastructure ▶ Ports & Transportation Hubs AI Vision Systems • Drone Detection Solutions • Acoustic Detection Technology • Drone Security Platforms • Infrastructure Protection • Industrial Monitoring • Public Safety Applications • Emergency Response Support 💬 How important is multi-sensor drone detection for protecting critical infrastructure from unauthorized drone activities? #DroneDetection #DroneSecurity #FPVDrone #DroneTracking #AcousticDetection #AITracking #VisualTracking #ThermalImaging #CriticalInfrastructure #InfrastructureProtection #DroneTechnology #LowAltitudeSecurity #UAVSecurity #SituationalAwareness #IndustrialMonitoring
    
       1        1 Comment 
  Like Comment    
  To view or add a comment, sign in 
 
   
  
     
   7,569 followers 
    152 Posts 
  
  View Profile Follow 
 
  Explore content categories
    Career
 Productivity
 Finance
 Soft Skills & Emotional Intelligence
 Project Management
 Education
 Technology
 Leadership
 Ecommerce
 User Experience