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 theatre.
Iran-backed and non-state actors are deploying FPV kamikaze drones worldwide.
Established air defence fails — repeatedly.
FPV kamikaze drone sets US base on fire.
An Iran-backed FPV kamikaze drone breached the perimeter of the US base near Baghdad airport for the first time — helicopter and Sentinel radar struck. Multiple follow-up strikes within days, no conventional air defence 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 armoured 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 confirms the strike; the Israeli military responds by deploying thousands of metres of fishing nets across southern Lebanon. When the world's most advanced air defence system can no longer protect itself, the asymmetry is undeniable.
How the Herakles interceptor neutralises 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 — and the systems too expensive and immobile for infantry protection.
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 — and they scale only by adding more platforms, not by unit count per soldier.
ARCHITECTURE PRINCIPLE
RADICAL SIMPLICITY BY DESIGN.
Our autonomous interceptor deliberately omits GPS, LIDAR, stereo cameras, gimbals, fixed wings, and launch rails. One fixed-mounted camera and an IMU is enough — onboard AI computes the intercept trajectory directly from the camera image. Vertical takeoff from anywhere. No ground station, no launch rail, no assembly, no moving sensors.
THE ANSWER: DRONE VS. DRONE
We're building a drone that intercepts FPV drones. 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.
GPS-denied & explainable
Localization via camera and IMU. Edge-AI for detection, classical control engineering for the trajectory — no black-box NN. One of the few kinetic responses to fiber-optic FPV drones — the threat class against which any RF jamming is structurally ineffective.
Kinetic without warhead
Pure collision as effector mechanism. No UXO, no fragmentation effect — operational also in civilian environment.
COMPLIANCE & SYSTEM FRAME
Deployment Contexts
Bundeswehr & NATO Forces
Infantry and convoy protection in the 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. Dual-Use 2021/821 compliant, ITAR-free.
Critical Infrastructure (DE/EU)
Airports, energy infrastructure, ports, major events. Detection-first mode; kinetic deployment exclusively via authorized state operator.
FROM SIM TO INTERCEPT.
[ SIM ]
In-house simulation environment with full flight dynamics, calibrated sensor-noise models and parameterised 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 ]
Standardised bench routines for every hardware iteration: powertrain characterisation, 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. Step-wise 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.