against Class I FPV drones.
The only sustainable response to fiber-optic FPV.
Built for threats others have no answer for.
THE RULES HAVE CHANGED
In three years, FPV kamikaze drones have become the dominant tactical weapon in asymmetric conflicts.
Ukraine is not the only theater.
Iran-backed and non-state actors are deploying FPV kamikaze drones worldwide.
Established air defense fails — repeatedly.
FPV kamikaze drone strikes US military aircraft.
An Iran-backed FPV kamikaze drone struck a US military aircraft at the base near Baghdad airport for the first time — a helicopter and a Sentinel radar hit. Multiple follow-up strikes within days, no conventional air defense could intercept the Class-I platforms.
First IDF soldier killed by FPV drone.
A Hezbollah FPV kamikaze drone with fiber-optic control — structurally immune to RF jamming — struck an Israeli armored unit. 90 fiber-optic FPVs in three months against IDF positions, Iron Dome and Electronic Warfare ineffective.
First documented FPV strike on an Iron Dome position.
A Hezbollah fiber-optic FPV drone strikes an Iron Dome position in northern Israel. The IDF did not deny the strike footage published by Hezbollah; the Israeli military responded by deploying thousands of meters of fishing nets across southern Lebanon. When the world's most advanced air defense system can no longer protect itself, the asymmetry is undeniable.
How the Herakles interceptor neutralizes the threat.
Pick an attack pattern and the asset to defend — the simulation shows each run from detection to hit.
WHY EXISTING SYSTEMS FAIL
Conventional jammers reach their limits — modern FPVs hop frequencies, and fiber-optic FPVs are increasingly adopted and structurally immune to RF jamming. Kinetic interception is the only documented response.
Conventional air defense is designed for larger platforms. FPV kamikaze drones are too small, too fast, too agile for targeted hits. Plus: due to their sheer size these systems are immediately spotted, draw fire and become targets for drone swarms that eventually overpower them.
FPVs operate in unpredictable trajectories and exploit surprise. Reliably hitting them with small arms AND achieving an immediate kill within the seconds of an approach is not systematically achievable.
Designed against Class II/III long-range drones — proven against loitering munitions and larger platforms. Against Class I FPV threats at close range, the geometry breaks down: minimum airspeed and turn radius are too large for agile quad targets that exploit proximity and surprise. Plus logistical overhead: launch rails and pre-flight assembly make them impractical for mobile frontline force protection.
Promising complementary capabilities, but vehicle- or platform-bound and power-intensive. Lasers are additionally constrained by atmospheric conditions (fog, rain, dust) and require dwell time per target. Neither is an infantry-portable answer for mobile frontline force protection. Plus: due to their size and platform binding they are immediately spotted — becoming targets for drone swarms that eventually overpower them.
ARCHITECTURE PRINCIPLE
THE ANSWER: DRONE VS. DRONE.
Radically simple by design.
A drone that intercepts FPV drones — radically reduced. One fixed-mounted camera, one IMU, vertical takeoff from anywhere. No GPS, no LiDAR, no stereo cameras, no gimbals, no fixed wings, no launch rails. Three architectural decisions carry the system:
Quad platform under 2 kg
Meets FPV drones in their own geometry — agile, high-acceleration, precise in close range. Where conventional air defense is structurally over-dimensioned.
Minimalist & explainable
Onboard AI computes the intercept trajectory directly from the camera image — without metric depth estimation. Edge-AI only for detection, classical control engineering for the trajectory — no black-box NN. One of the few kinetic responses to fiber-optic-controlled FPV drones.
Kinetic without warhead
Pure collision as effector mechanism. No UXO, no fragmentation effect — also operational in civilian environments.
COMPLIANCE & SYSTEM FRAME
Deployment Contexts
Bundeswehr & NATO Forces
Infantry and convoy protection at tactical close range. Vertical Takeoff, infantry-deployable, kinetic effector under Operator-Authorization.
EU Allied Forces
Counter-UAS layer for armed forces facing active Class I FPV threats. Established defense validation channels. ITAR-free; dual-use across defense and critical infrastructure.
Critical Infrastructure (DE/EU)
Airports, energy infrastructure, ports, major events. Detection-first mode; kinetic deployment exclusively via an authorized state operator.
FROM SIM TO INTERCEPT.
[ SIM ]
In-house simulation environment with full flight dynamics, calibrated sensor-noise models and parameterized threat profiles. Batch-evaluation across thousands of engagement scenarios against evasive, accelerating and sensor-noisy targets. Identical code path between simulation and flight hardware closes the classic sim-to-real gap.
[ BENCH ]
Standardized bench routines for every hardware iteration: powertrain characterization, sensor calibration, failsafe verification and authorization logic under realistic load profiles. Automated regression tests safeguard function and safety before any field deployment.
[ REAL-FLIGHT ]
Controlled flight campaigns on secured test ranges. Stepwise escalation from platform verification through tracking engagements to a fully-autonomous intercept of an evasive FPV threat under operator authorization. Every real flight feeds sim and bench back with empirical data.