By Andrew Marszewski – Correspondent-at-Large
Widely reported in late March was a controversial statement by Rheinmetall CEO, Armin Papperger, who, commenting on Ukrainian innovation and decentralised drone production, said “this is not the technology of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, or Rheinmetall. [It is worthy of] Ukrainian housewives… They have 3-D printers in the kitchen and they produce parts for drones … This is not innovation.” Unsurprisingly, Kyiv’s response was swift and indignant.
These questionable remarks shine a light on a lively current debate in the defence drone community. Should the strategic focus be on investing in production of high-end, high-tech systems or, rather, on platforms that are neither sophisticated nor necessarily adaptable to every tactical scenario but that can be produced affordably at pace and at scale? This is Voltaire’s “Perfect versus good enough” debate, which highlights the tensions exciting militaries today and tomorrow.
The Ukraine War has demonstrated the efficacy of mass-produced, high impact, inexpensive drones on the battlefield. Papperger’s remarks reveal that Western defence industries, while learning some lessons from the Ukrainian experience, are still slow in moving away from a dependency mentality, instead prioritising exquisite, high-cost platforms.
Ukraine’s war-driven defence ecosystem provides the clearest evidence for the power of a ‘good enough’ capability. It reportedly produces over eight million FPV drones annually, built by over 160 companies at a pace not yet found anywhere in the West. These drones are not perfect, nor are they designed to be, since they lack such features as advanced sensors, hardened communications and long endurance. However – they work! In the crucible of a high‑attrition conflict, operating drones in vast numbers has been shown to be far more important than deploying a limited number of perfect capabilities available in small numbers and limiting ability to significantly affect tactical outcomes.
Ukraine’s experience, however, also reveals the limitations of a sole dependency on ultra‑cheap mass solutions. Effective battlefield innovation on both sides has resulted in electronic warfare countermeasures neutralising vast numbers of mass‑produced drones. Additional challenges include front-line units often struggling with inconsistent quality, serious supply chain delays and non‑standardised platforms requiring ad hoc field modification in the heat of battle. Such apparent lack of coordination and interoperability does not, however, mean that ‘good enough’ drones are the wrong direction of travel. Rather, the concept needs to achieve balance against the reliability, survivability and smart autonomy found in higher end capabilities to respond to future battlespace needs.
Western defence industry may well have to question its own self-assured belief, as expressed so bluntly in Papperger’s comments, learning from Ukraine’s hard-won experience and evolving towards an approach favouring scalable production to respond to potential future needs. Not every future conflict will mirror the Russo-Ukrainian struggle, but the significant effect of operating swarms of low-cost platforms would still have relevance in most cases.
Belittling small-scale production fails to recognise the resilience and redundancy advantages in diversifying production to the local level. Big factories offer fat, juicy targets to enemy missiles in a way micro-production facilities do not. Rather than discouraging small-scale innovators, big corporations need to embrace a mindset of complementarity and cooperation in working towards common defence goals.
Two British manufacturers offer object lessons in trying to strike an effective balance in his conundrum. Founded in 2024, Seeing-Systems is building modular, survivable, semi‑autonomous systems which address lessons learnt in Ukraine without abandoning Western standards.
Its Bandit drone illustrates this hybrid approach. With a 35+km range, 1.5kg payload and 115km/h speed, it is rugged, simple and affordable: in short, exactly what a NATO infantry battalion, for example, needs for mass training and attritable strike. It is ‘good enough’ by design, but with sufficient quality control to avoid the inconsistency experienced in improvised wartime production.
The Banshee platform, meanwhile, offers a step toward perfect tech without excruciating cost. Engineered for dense EW environments, it features IPX7 waterproofing, 40+km range, 35+ minutes endurance and, crucially, a fibre‑optic guided variant that is nearly immune to jamming. This offers affordable survivability – a reasonable compromise between Ukrainian disposability and Western advanced engineering.
Additionally, the Aerie swarm‑coordination engine introduces genuinely advanced AI autonomy. It allows a single operator to manage multiple drones simultaneously, automating navigation, spacing and multi‑axis manoeuvre. In other words, it offers perfect-tech swarm logic built into an ecosystem of’ good enough’ but still highly effective, reliable drones: at an affordable cost.
Caerphilly-based Drone Evolution takes a different tack, emerging as a sovereign UK supplier of FPV and tethered ISR drones, with systems being integrated into the broader UK defence industrial base. Originally a tethered‑UAV specialist, it produced the Runner and Sentinel systems, capable of lifting a 5kg ISR or EW payload for hours, but requests from Ukraine pushed the company towards FPV development, resulting in the Scimitar range. These are robust, long‑range, reliable FPVs designed to be operated straight “out of the box” for ease of operation under real-world battlefield conditions. Most significantly, Drone Evolution offers a sovereign, non‑Chinese supply chain, reducing dependency on a potential adversary, something which NATO must prioritise as it scales drone production and procurement.
Drone Evolution can also contribute to future swarm‑enabled operations through its partnership with Urban‑Air Port, creating the DBx‑A1, a mobile UAV launch, charging, maintenance and mission‑coordination hub designed as a forward‑operating node for large‑scale FPV and ISR deployment. Thus, perfect tech infrastructure supports ‘good enough’ tactical drones.
Both companies demonstrate the future lies not in a hard and fast choice between the simply ‘good enough’ in mass and ‘perfect tech’ in capabilities, but rather in the ability of key players to cooperate to successfully blend approaches proven to work in real-world conditions. A balanced approach is potentially a credible path to navigate beyond current corporate categories. Planning for a future shaped by EW, attrition and rapid technological evolution requires out-of-the-box thinking and the courageous humility to accept simple solutions that work in conjunction with the more advanced mainstream technological solutions offered by major players.
Andrew Marszewski is Defence Alternatives’ Correspondent-at-Large
Headline image: A Runner drone in flight with payload, courtesy Drone Evolution
