The Unmanned Challenge

How counter-drone warfare is shaping the research in defensive warfare

Junaid Suhais

The modern battlefield has been irrevocably altered by the proliferation of small, low-cost Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), commonly known as drones. Conflicts from the Nagorno-Karabakh war to the ongoing hostilities in Ukraine have demonstrated that these systems can deliver disproportionate strategic effects for a fraction of the cost of traditional military hardware. They have shattered the long-standing economic and operational calculus of air defence. For decades, air defence was a contest between high-value assets: multi-million-dollar fighter jets versus sophisticated, expensive surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems. Today, a nation’s most critical infrastructure or frontline military positions can be threatened by a commercially available quadcopter modified to carry an explosive payload, costing only a few hundred dollars.

This creates a severe cost-asymmetry dilemma. Expending a USD 100,000 interceptor missile to neutralise a USD 1,000 drone is an unsustainable economic model, especially when faced with the prospect of coordinated ‘swarm’ attacks designed to saturate and overwhelm defences. The drone threat is no longer a niche concern but a central challenge to national security, forcing a fundamental rethink of airspace control, layered defence, and technological investment. The global anti-drone market reflects this urgency, projected to grow from approximately USD 4.48 billion in 2025 to USD 14.51 billion by 2030, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 26.5 per cent.

For India, with its complex and contested borders, dense civilian airspace, and vulnerability to state-sponsored and non-state asymmetric threats, the challenge is particularly acute. The imperative is not merely to acquire counter-drone technology but to develop a comprehensive, integrated, and economically viable national Counter-Unmanned Aerial System (C-UAS) posture.

The C-UAS Kill Chain 

Effective counter-drone operations are not a single ‘silver bullet’ solution, but a layered, integrated system-of-systems approach. This process, often called the ‘kill chain’, involves detection, tracking, identification, and mitigation. Each stage presents unique technical challenges and relies on a diverse set of technologies.

Detection, Tracking and Identification: The first and most critical step is to find the threat. Drones are inherently difficult to detect due to their small size, low Radar Cross Section (RCS), slow speed, and ability to fly at low altitudes, often lost in ground clutter.

Radar Systems: Specialist drone-detection radars are the primary long-range sensors. Unlike conventional air-surveillance radars designed to ignore small, slow targets like birds, C-UAS radars are fine-tuned for this specific target set. Advanced systems utilise micro-doppler technology, which can detect the unique frequency shift caused by a drone’s rotating blades, allowing them to distinguish a drone from a bird, thereby reducing false alarm rates. They offer 360-degree coverage, provide accurate location and altitude data, and can track multiple targets simultaneously, which is crucial against swarms.

Radio Frequency (RF) Analysers: Most drones communicate with their operator via RF links. RF analysers are passive sensors that scan the electromagnetic spectrum to detect these control signals. By matching the signal signature to a library of known drone protocols, they can often identify the drone’s make and model. More advanced systems can even triangulate the position of both the drone and its operator, providing critical intelligence for a response. However, their primary limitation is their inability to detect autonomous drones operating on pre-programmed flight paths or those using non-standard communication links, such as 5G networks or fibre-optic tethers.

Indrajaal

Electro-Optical (EO) and Infrared (IR) Sensors: High-resolution cameras (EO) and thermal imagers (IR) provide visual confirmation of a detected object. They are essential for identifying the threat and assessing its payload. Modern systems increasingly incorporate AI-powered image recognition algorithms to automatically classify a detected object as a drone, reducing operator workload. Their main drawback is a shorter detection range compared to radar and performance degradation in adverse weather conditions like fog or heavy rain. 

Acoustic Sensors: Microphone arrays can detect the unique sound signature produced by a drone’s propellers. While limited to very short ranges (typically under 500 meters) and less effective in noisy urban environments, they serve as valuable gap-fillers, especially for detecting drones hovering or operating close to the ground where other sensors might struggle. 

Neutralising the Threat 

Once a threat is detected and identified, a decision must be made on how to neutralise it. Mitigation techniques are broadly categorised into ‘soft-kill’ (non-kinetic) and ‘hard-kill’ (kinetic) methods, along with emerging directed-energy weapons. 

Soft-Kill/ Non-Kinetic Countermeasures: These methods aim to disable the drone without physically destroying it, minimising collateral damage. 

RF Jamming: The most common soft-kill method involves broadcasting powerful radio signals to disrupt the communication link between the drone and its operator. This can cause the drone to land, return to its home point, or fall out of the sky. The limitation is that jammers can also interfere with friendly communications and are ineffective against autonomous drones. 

GNSS Spoofing/Jamming: This technique involves either blocking or transmitting false GPS/GNSS signals to confuse the drone's navigation system, causing it to drift off course or fail its mission. 

Cyber Takeover: More sophisticated systems attempt to hijack the drone’s control protocol, allowing the defender to take full control of the UAS and land it safely in a designated area. This is highly effective but technically complex and dependent on exploiting specific protocol vulnerabilities. 

Hard-Kill / Kinetic Solutions: These methods involve physically destroying or capturing the drone. 

Guns and Missiles: Traditional air defence systems, including cannons with programmable airburst ammunition and small, guided missiles, can be used. However, this approach highlights the cost-asymmetry problem and can be inefficient against swarms. Systems like Raytheon’s Coyote interceptor are specifically designed as cost-effective kinetic solutions for C-UAS. 

Nets and Net Guns: A more rudimentary but effective method involves launching a net to entangle the drone’s rotors, causing it to fall. This can be done from the ground or from another ‘interceptor’ drone. 

Directed-Energy Weapons (DEW): DEWs represent the next frontier in C-UAS, offering speed-of-light engagement and a very low cost-per-shot.

High-Energy Lasers (HEL): Lasers focus intense thermal energy on a drone’s critical component (e.g., fuselage, control surfaces, payload) to cause structural failure or detonation. Their effectiveness depends on power level, range, and atmospheric conditions. 

US Army’s DE-MSHORAD: 50kW Stryker lasers operationally deployed

UK’s DragonFire: 50kW achieved 1p/shot precision kills

DRDO: 30kW vehicle-mounted swarm defence

High-Power Microwave (HPM): HPM weapons emit a powerful beam of microwave radiation that overloads and destroys a drone’s internal electronics. A key advantage is their wide beam, which allows them to engage and neutralise multiple drones in a swarm simultaneously with a single pulse, directly addressing the saturation threat. 

Epirus Leonidas: Disabled 49 drones with one shot (August 2025 test)

Raytheon Phaser: Solid-state HPM for base defence, unlimited magazine

DRDO HPM: Truck-mounted S-band system, 5km swarm defence (India 2026)

C2 and Sensor Fusion 

The brain of any modern C-UAS architecture is its Command and Control (C2) software. This platform integrates data from all disparate sensors (radar, RF, EO/IR) into a single, coherent operating picture. Advanced C2 systems, like Northrop Grumman's AiON, use AI and machine learning to fuse sensor data, correlate tracks, reduce false alarms, suggest optimal countermeasures, and automate the engagement process, significantly reducing the cognitive load on the human operator. This integration transforms a collection of individual sensors and effectors into a truly effective, layered defence system. 

The Global Arsenal 

The global C-UAS market is a dynamic ecosystem of established defence primes and agile startups, each pushing the technological envelope. A review of key international players provides context for India’s own efforts and the global state-of-the-art. 

United States

The US has invested heavily in a layered C-UAS strategy, driven by companies like RTX (formerly Raytheon), Northrop Grumman, and Epirus. 

Rafael Drone Dome

RTX (Raytheon): The company’s Coyote interceptor is a cornerstone of the US Army’s Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aircraft Integrated Defeat System (LIDS). The Coyote is a tube-launched UAS that can be configured with both kinetic (warhead) and non-kinetic effectors to defeat single drones and swarms. It is paired with the Ku-band Radio Frequency Sensor (KuRFS) radar for detection and tracking. While effective, the Coyote system is costly, with interceptors estimated at USD100,000-USD150,000 per unit. 

Epirus: This technology company is at the forefront of HPM development with its Leonidas system. Leonidas uses solid-state Gallium Nitride (GaN) semiconductors to generate a powerful microwave beam that can disable multiple drones simultaneously. GaN enables compact, efficient amplification at gigawatt peak powers with superior thermal management vs traditional vacuum tubes. This allows Leonidas’ software-defined waveform optimisation for extended range and rapid pulse repetition against swarms. 

In a landmark demonstration in late 2025, Leonidas successfully defeated a fibre-optic guided drone, a type previously considered immune to traditional RF jamming, by directly frying its onboard electronics. This showcases HPM's critical role against evolving threats. 

Applications: Rich spectrum operation: GaN-on-SiC handles wide bandwidths for countering frequency-hopping drones; Rich pulse formats: Long-pulse HPM penetrates shielding that short-pulse systems cannot; and Modular scalability: Line-replaceable amplifier modules (LRAMs) enable field upgrades.

Northrop Grumman: The company offers a comprehensive C2 solution with its AiON platform, which integrates over 45 different sensors and 50 effectors into a single interface. Evolved from the combat-proven Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD C2) system, AiON uses AI to automate threat assessment and engagement, claiming a 98% reduction in operator workload when countering swarms. 

Dedrone: A Leader in airspace security, Dedrone provides a hardware-agnostic platform that fuses data from various sensors. Its Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML)-powered software, trained on over 18 million images, excels at detection and classification, while its DedroneDefender offers a smart jamming solution. 

Israel 

Israeli firms have leveraged extensive operational experience to develop some of the world’s most effective C-UAS solutions. 

Rafael Advanced Defense Systems: Rafael’s Drone Dome™ is a comprehensive, end-to-end system that integrates a suite of sensors with soft-kill (jamming) and hard-kill (laser) effectors. The system is designed for precise, surgical neutralization with minimal collateral damage, making it suitable for protecting sensitive sites. Rafael is also a key developer of the Iron Beam laser defence system, a component of Israel's multi-layered air defence. 

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI): IAI is another major player, offering a range of C-UAS solutions that are integrated into its broader air defence networks, collaborating with firms like ELTA Systems on advanced radar technologies. 

Australia and European Players 

European defence companies are also significant contributors to the C-UAS market. 

DroneShield (Australia): DroneShield is a global leader in C-UAS, known for its AI-based multi-mission solutions, including handheld jammer guns and vehicle-mounted systems.

Key Products confirmed include, 

Handheld: DroneGun Mk4 and RfPatrol Mk2 (detects 250+ drone models via AI). Vehicle-Mounted: DroneSentry-X Mk2 for mobile convoy protection. Fixed-Site: DroneSentry integrates multi-sensor fusion with smart jamming effectors, all unified through SaaS C2 software with quarterly AI updates.

Market Position: Surpassed 4,000 systems sold globally by late 2025, securing USD95.6 million committed 2026 revenue across military/government clients in 70+ countries

Leonardo: Leonardo provides scalable and modular C-UAS systems that combine advanced EO/IR sensors with RF technology. The company has also collaborated with firms like BlueHalo to demonstrate directed energy weapons on platforms like the Stryker vehicle. 

2024 Live-Fire Test: Leonardo DRS + BlueHalo’s C-UAS DE Stryker destroyed multiple Group 1-3 drones using BlueHalo’s 26kW LOCUST laser weapon system (LWS) alongside 30mm kinetic effectors, demonstrating rapid sensor-to-shooter kill chain integration.

Thales Group: A global technology leader, Thales offers integrated C-UAS solutions for military and civilian applications, leveraging its expertise in radar, sensors, and cybersecurity.

Key Capabilities: EagleShield provides 360 degree long-range (18km) detection with Gamekeeper AESA radar, AI-powered classification of unlimited simultaneous UAS, and modular effectors (jamming, kinetic) for airports and critical infrastructure. 

Partnerships: Thales Australia + Dedrone deliver vehicle-mounted OTM C-UAS with full kill-chain capability, proven in field tests protecting convoys from Group 1-3 drones. 

Naval Solutions: Fully integrated counter-drone systems for fleet protection combining sensors, C2, and hard/ soft-kill effectors.

India’s Layered Shield 

India’s response to the drone threat has accelerated significantly, driven by incidents along its borders and a strategic push for self-reliance (Aatmanirbhar Bharat). The approach is multi-faceted, involving procurement, indigenous development by both public and private sectors, and the formulation of a joint operational doctrine. India is actively establishing a joint Counter Unmanned Aerial System (C-UAS) grid, distinct from existing air defence networks, to create a dedicated shield against drone attacks. The permanent grid links Joint Air Defence Centres (JADCs) with existing counter-drone systems acquired over the past 5-10 years, providing real-time monitoring and rapid neutralisation of low-altitude UAS threats. It forms part of Mission Sudarshan Chakra, PM Modi’s 2025 initiative for comprehensive aerial defence modernisation by 2035.

State-Led Development: The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) like Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) are at the core of India’s state-led C-UAS efforts. 

Integrated Drone Detection and Interdiction System (IDD&IS): The flagship DRDO-developed system productionized by BEL, is the IDD&IS. This is a mobile system designed to provide a comprehensive solution from detection to neutralisation. The initial version featured a 1-kilometer engagement range. An improved IDD&IS Mark 2 is now being procured, featuring a more powerful 10-kilowatt laser capable of engaging targets up to two kilometres away. The army and air force are preparing to place orders for 16 of these indigenous systems. In April 2025, BEL announced securing orders worth Rs 572 crore, which included the IDDIS, among other equipment.  

Directed-Energy Weapons Programmes: DRDO is making significant strides in Directed-Energy Weapons (DEW), which is seen as the ultimate solution to the swarm threat. 

High-Power Microwave (HPM): DRDO’s Microwave Tube Research and Development Centre (MTRDC) in Bengaluru is developing a vehicle-mounted HPM weapon. The prototype has already demonstrated the ability to disable small drones at one kilometer. The ambitious goal is to achieve a 5-kilometer ‘kill range’ by June 2026. The system operates in the S-band, generating a peak power of approximately 450 megawatts with ultra-short pulses, designed specifically to fry the electronics of drone swarms. 

High-Energy Lasers (HEL): Beyond the 10-kW laser on the IDD&IS, DRDO is also testing a more powerful 30-kilowatt laser DEW, intended to engage targets up to five kilometers away. This system is being developed to counter not just drones but also missiles and other aerial threats. 

Mk-II(A) DEW was showcased at National Open Air Range (NOAR), Kurnool in April 2025, using six 5 kW beams to neutralize fixed-wing drones, swarm attacks, helicopters, and surveillance sensors with ‘Star Wars’ precision—costing just ‘a few liters of diesel per shot.’

The truck-mounted 30 kW system targets not only drones but also cruise missiles and low-flying aircraft. DRDO plans 50-100 kW upgrades for miniaturisation onto airborne/shipborne platforms by 2030, positioning India among the US/China/Russia/Israel in operational HEL capabilities

Akashteer Command & Control System: Developed by BEL under a Rs 1,982 crore contract, Akashteer is a critical C2 system for the army’s Air Defence. It integrates all surveillance and weapon assets into a unified network, providing a seamless air situation picture down to the lowest operational units. During recent border tensions, Akashteer was credited with effectively controlling ground-based air defence systems to neutralize numerous drone and missile threats, proving its mettle in a real-world conflict scenario. 

During Operation Sindoor border tensions (May 2025), Akashteer orchestrated ground-based AD systems to neutralise multiple Pakistani drones, missiles, and loitering munitions, preventing airspace breaches and demonstrating automated threat allocation superior to legacy manual processes. 

Key Capabilities: Four-Level Hierarchy: Weapons/radars to Command Posts to Ops Centres to Divisional AD Centres; Sensor Fusion: 3D TCR, LLLR, Akash SAM radars, AWACS feeds; and AI Automation: Reduces engagement time from minutes to seconds with friendly-fire interlocks

Raytheon Coyote

Rise of the Private Sector 

A landmark development in India’s C-UAS journey is the emergence of the private sector as a key innovator. Nagpur-based Solar Defence and Aerospace Limited (SDAL), a subsidiary of Solar Group, has developed the Bhargavastra system, a unique and cost-effective hard-kill solution. 

Developed proactively without a formal military requirement and inspired by lessons from the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Bhargavastra is a multi-layer micro-missile system designed to counter swarms that cannot be jammed or spoofed 

Post-2025 trials at the Seaward Firing Range in Gopalpur, Odisha validated 100 per cent hit rates against live drones. SDAL’s ‘no RF dependency’ approach addresses Pakistan/China’s fibre-optic UAS deployments, marking India’s first private-sector hard-kill C-UAS breakthrough. The development of Bhargavastra signifies a major maturation of India’s private defence industry, providing a globally unique, indigenously designed kinetic solution to the swarm problem.

Other Indigenous Deployments 

Beyond these flagship programmes, the Indian armed forces are deploying a variety of other systems.

Handheld Jammers: The army and navy have placed orders for the IG T-Shul Pulse, a handheld jammer developed by IG Defence. This system can neutralise drones up to 2 km away and is designed for frontline troops and asset protection. 

Man-Portable Systems: In October 2025, Axiscades Technologies secured a contract to supply 12 man-portable C-UAS to the Indian Army, capable of detecting drones at 5 km and jamming them. 

Vajra Sentinel: The IAF has deployed the homegrown Vajra Sentinel C-UAS to protect critical airbases, particularly during heightened operational alerts like the recent Operation Sindoor.

This combination of state-led R&D, private sector innovation, and off-the-shelf procurement forms the basis of India’s evolving, layered C-UAS shield. The government has allocated over Rs 500 crore for indigenous counter-drone technology development, signalling a long-term commitment.  

The Fragility of the Shield

Despite rapid technological advancements, a perfect, impenetrable anti-drone shield remains elusive. C-UAS systems are fraught with limitations, and adversaries are constantly developing countermeasures and novel tactics to exploit these gaps. There is, as of now, no one-size-fits-all solution.

The Saturation Problem: The most significant challenge is the threat of a coordinated swarm attack. Most kinetic systems and many soft-kill systems are designed to engage one target at a time. A swarm of dozens or even hundreds of drones can simply overwhelm the defender’s capacity to engage. 

Individual systems like Coyote missiles (USD100,000 each) or single-target lasers can engage one-two drones per cycle, but swarms of 50+ UAS exploit this limitation through attrition, only 10 per cent need to penetrate for mission kill. Bhargavastra’s 64-micro-rocket salvo (20m kill radius) and Leonidas HPM (49-drone single-pulse defeat) represent scalable countermeasures, though real-world saturation attacks remain untested at 100+ scale. 

China Swarm Benchmark: China’s 2025 demonstration of 200 AI-coordinated drones using federated learning (autonomous formation post-C2 loss) establishes the threat baseline, capable of terrain masking, electronic countermeasures, and precision kamikaze strikes that demand area-effect weapons rather than point defenses

The Detection Gap: Detection remains the weakest link in the chain. Drones with very small radar cross-sections, made of composite materials, are difficult for even specialised radars to pick up, especially in cluttered environments (urban or complex terrain). 

Small quadcopters (Group 1 UAS) exhibit radar cross-sections below 0.01 sqm, 10-100x smaller than birds, while carbon fibre/ radar-absorbent coatings further reduce detectability. Specialised micro-Doppler radars help distinguish rotor signatures, but effectiveness drops significantly beyond three-five km or in multipath environments.

RF detectors are rendered useless against drones that operate autonomously on a pre-programmed GPS route without emitting any communication signals. This is a simple but highly effective countermeasure.

According to Institute of the Study of War (September 2025), Russia’s Shaheds’ inertial/ GPS autonomy forces Ukraine to kinetic interceptors (MANPADS/ guns) since EW fails against offline missions.

Novel Communication: The emergence of drones controlled via fibre-optic tethers, as seen in Ukraine, makes them immune to RF jamming and spoofing. Defeating them requires direct-impact kinetic or DEW solutions, as demonstrated by Epirus’s Leonidas. 

The Cost Asymmetry 

The fundamental economic imbalance persists. Even with ‘low-cost’ interceptors like the Coyote, the defender is spending orders of magnitude more than the attacker, whose drone may cost less than USD1,000. This makes a war of attrition financially ruinous for the defenders. This is the primary driver behind the push for DEW systems, where the cost-per-shot is negligible (limited only by the cost of electricity), and innovative kinetic solutions like Bhargavastra, which uses inexpensive micro-rockets.

Environmental and Logistical Constraints 

Weather and Terrain: EO/IR sensors are heavily degraded by fog, rain, and dust. Radar performance can be hampered by complex terrain that creates blind spots. Lasers suffer from atmospheric attenuation, losing power over distance, especially in humid or dusty conditions. 

Collateral Damage: In urban or populated areas, kinetic solutions that cause a drone to fall uncontrollably or explode pose a significant risk to civilians and infrastructure on the ground. This is a major reason for the preference for soft-kill or controlled-capture methods where feasible. 

Regulatory Hurdles: In most countries, including India, the authority to deploy active countermeasures (especially kinetic and DEW) is strictly limited to military and specific federal agencies. This creates legal challenges for protecting civilian critical infrastructure, where detection and alerting may be the only permissible actions. 

The Next Horizon 

The cat-and-mouse game between drones and anti-drone systems is accelerating, driven by rapid advancements in AI, sensor technology, and directed energy. The future of C-UAS will be defined by greater autonomy, integration, and speed.  

AI-Driven C2 and Sensor Fusion: AI will move from being an aid to being the core of C-UAS. Future C2 systems will not just suggest responses but will autonomously conduct engagements from detection to kill, at machine speed, which is essential for countering hypersonic threats or complex swarm attacks. AI will enable predictive tracking of targets, dynamic allocation of effectors, and real-time adaptation to novel enemy tactics. Northrop Grumman's AiON, with its AI-powered decision aids, is an early indicator of this trend.  

The Ascendancy of Directed Energy: DEW are poised to become the dominant C-UAS solution. Their speed-of-light engagement, deep magazines (limited only by power supply), and extremely low cost-per-shot directly solve the problems of swarm saturation and cost asymmetry. As technologies for power generation, beam focusing, and thermal management mature, HPM and HEL systems will become more compact, mobile, and powerful. India’s focus on developing 5-km range HPM and 30-kW laser systems reflects a clear understanding of this future trajectory.  

Quantum Sensing: On the more distant horizon, quantum technologies promise a paradigm shift in detection. Quantum sensors, such as magnetometers and gravimeters, could potentially detect drones with unprecedented sensitivity, bypassing conventional stealth techniques. Quantum radar could offer the ability to detect low-RCS targets in highly cluttered environments, overcoming the fundamental limitations of classical radar systems. While still in the research phase, quantum sensing represents a potential long-term solution to the detection problem.  

Swarm-on-Swarm Defence: The ultimate counter to an offensive drone swarm may be a defensive drone swarm. This concept involves deploying autonomous interceptor drones that can seek out and neutralise incoming hostile drones kinetically or electronically. This approach offers scalability and mobility, allowing for the defence of large areas or moving convoys. The IAF has already issued a Request for Information (RFI) for ‘Kamikaze Drone Based Anti Swarm Drone Systems,’ indicating active interest in this futuristic concept.  

The Way Forward 

The proliferation of weaponised drones has fundamentally and permanently altered the landscape of air defence. For India, the challenge is not merely technological but also doctrinal, organizational, and economic. While significant progress has been made in developing a credible indigenous C-UAS capability, epitomised by systems like the IDD&IS and the groundbreaking Bhargavastra, the threat continues to evolve at a blistering pace.  

The strategic imperatives for India are clear:  

Accelerate DEW Development: Directed energy is the most promising long-term solution to the cost and saturation challenges. India must continue to prioritise and fund DRDO’s HPM and HEL programmes to achieve operational deployment by the stated timelines.  

Deepen Public-Private Partnership: The success of Solar Defence’s Bhargavastra demonstrates the innovative potential of the private sector. The ministry of defence (MoD) must create more streamlined frameworks to encourage and rapidly integrate such private-sector solutions, moving beyond traditional procurement cycles.  

Invest in AI-Powered C2: A collection of sensors and weapons is not a system. The true force multiplier is an integrated, AI-driven Command and Control network like Akashteer. India must ensure that all new C-UAS assets can be seamlessly networked into a common operating picture to enable automated, joint engagement capabilities across services.  

Evolve Doctrine and Rules of Engagement: Technology alone is insufficient. India needs to develop and war-game clear doctrines for the use of C-UAS in various scenarios, from border skirmishes to the protection of urban critical infrastructure. This includes clarifying the rules of engagement for kinetic and non-kinetic systems in civilian airspace.  

Embrace Asymmetry: India must continue to pursue asymmetric and cost-effective solutions. The answer to a cheap drone is not always an expensive missile. Systems like Bhargavastra, which embrace a low-cost hard-kill philosophy, and DEWs, with their negligible cost-per-shot, represent the correct strategic path.  

The counter-drone equation is not yet solved, and likely never will be. It will remain a dynamic contest of innovation and adaptation. India’s security will depend on its ability to stay ahead in this race, fostering an ecosystem that is agile, technologically sovereign, and strategically prepared for the future of aerial warfare.