This post is also available in:
עברית (Hebrew)
The rapid proliferation of drones has created a new challenge for military forces and critical infrastructure operators. Modern threats range from small commercial quadcopters to coordinated swarms and increasingly sophisticated systems that rely on fiber-optic control links, making them difficult to disrupt using traditional electronic warfare techniques. As a result, no single countermeasure is sufficient against every type of unmanned aerial threat.
A recently demonstrated counter-drone architecture (DRONEDEF by ASELSAN) addresses this problem through a layered approach that combines detection, command-and-control, electronic attack, directed-energy systems, and kinetic defenses into a single operational framework.
The concept integrates multiple subsystems designed to identify, track, prioritize, and engage drones using different methods depending on the nature of the threat. At the center of the architecture is a command-and-control system that receives information from sensors and automatically assigns the most appropriate response.
According to NextGenDefense, in one demonstration scenario, surveillance radar (İHTAR) detected a swarm of fiber-optic-controlled drones. Unlike conventional drones that depend on wireless links, fiber-optic-controlled systems are resistant to many traditional jamming techniques. Once the threat was identified, the command center assigned the engagement to a directed-energy microwave system, which reportedly neutralized the drones by disrupting their onboard electronics.
A second scenario focused on wirelessly controlled drones approaching from different directions simultaneously. After detection and tracking, the system (EJDERHA) intercepted the targets before they reached their operational engagement range.
The final phase involved another fiber-optic-controlled drone. This time, the engagement was carried out using a high-energy weapon system (GÖKBERK) designed to physically defeat the target rather than relying on electronic disruption.
The architecture supports both “soft-kill” and “hard-kill” responses. Soft-kill methods seek to disable or disrupt a drone through electronic or electromagnetic effects, while hard-kill systems physically destroy the aircraft when disruption alone is insufficient.
From a defense perspective, layered counter-UAS systems are becoming increasingly important as drone threats diversify. Critical infrastructure, military bases, convoys, and tactical units may face multiple drone types simultaneously, each requiring a different response mechanism.
The demonstrated concept reportedly supports detection ranges of up to 10 kilometers and incorporates artificial intelligence to assist with threat evaluation and engagement management. As drone technology continues evolving, integrated systems that combine sensors, electronic warfare, directed energy, and kinetic defenses are increasingly viewed as a practical way to counter a wide spectrum of aerial threats.
