The Ministry of Defence has announced a rapid £140 million investment in drone and counter-drone technology through the newly formed UK Defence Innovation (UKDI), marking the organisation’s first year of operation.
According to the Government, UKDI will invest more than £142 million this year into new uncrewed systems, including around £30 million specifically for counter-drone capabilities to protect the UK homeland and allies “in the face of increasing Russian-linked drone incursions across Europe”.
UK Defence Innovation, launched in July by Defence Secretary John Healey, has been set up as the focal point for innovation within the MOD, backed by a ringfenced annual budget of at least £400 million. The department says UKDI is designed to use faster and more flexible contracting approaches to allow British companies to scale up innovative prototypes at speed.
While many of the firms involved remain unnamed, the MOD confirmed that this year’s drone investment includes 20 British SMEs, 11 British micro-SMEs, and two British academic institutions. The programme is intended to strengthen frontline capability while supporting growth across the domestic defence industrial base.
The investment is framed as a direct response to the Strategic Defence Review, which called on the UK to absorb lessons from the war in Ukraine, particularly the rapid evolution of drones and unmanned systems, to ensure Britain remains “at the leading edge of innovation in NATO”.
John Healey said the funding surge reflected both the security environment and an industrial strategy focus. “After years of hollowing out and underfunding, I am determined to put Britain’s Armed Forces, and British businesses, at the leading edge of defence innovation,” he said. He added that “Russia’s continued bombardment of Ukrainian civilians and their grey-zone drone incursions across Europe show why this drone drive is so urgent”.
Healey also described the programme as part of a broader effort to “make defence an engine for growth”, arguing that the investment would “make the UK secure at home and strong abroad, while ensuring the UK is the best place in the world to start and grow a defence business”.
The MOD highlighted several specific projects funded through the programme. These include more than £25 million for the Royal Navy’s uncrewed AI submarine Excalibur, part of the Atlantic Bastion programme aimed at countering undersea threats. A further £20 million will support additional laser weapons to complement the DragonFire system, alongside an existing £300 million contract to install DragonFire on Type 45 destroyers from 2027.
Other investments include £7.5 million for a new uncrewed helicopter, £12 million for an air-launched collaborative uncrewed air vehicle, and £5 million in seed funding for land-based autonomous systems intended to support British Army operations.
The government says the investment aligns with wider commitments in the Defence Industrial Strategy, which aims to position the UK as a global hub for defence innovation and manufacturing.
Or they could have spent £140m on actual MSI Terrahawk Paladin 30mm gun systems to protect key sites.
Depends how effective it has been. Assuming it works as promised,.a problem will be range, and terrain will make that even lower.
Either way £140m seems like a token measure, but guessing that is because the tech just isn’t out there currently. The US hasn’t managed to put anything into service as yet and is still focused on big expensive drones rather than cheap single use ones.
However a order of some mobile paladin units would at least be something.
I do think it important to invest in Uk innovation here, after all it has always been at the forefront of Uk military advantage and greatly undermined in recent times. It’s small companies and even individuals who have been at the forefront of British achievements and they need to be spotted, promoted and financed if we are to have any chance of competing with big foreign players, we can’t just rely upon the few big boys in the sector that remain. Until last week I had never heard of despite my research in all things technology, of Vertical Aviation and their innovative E-copter which has exploited our pre-eminence in F-1 to literally get off the ground and we already know how Williams has provided vital technology for laser weapons. There’s YASA and Evolito it’s aviation offspring in electric power trains and Pulsar who generate electric Ion thrusters presently who are designing a practical fusion rocket engine without actually using a fusion reactor, It’s these smaller concerns and their ideas where we excel. They need to be nurtured. What concerns me however is despite our leading position in universities and the immense investments we make in them, only two establishments seem to be involved in this. Sounds disappointing to me as many of the innovations that fuelled the establishment of these small but fast growing companies (YASA being one vital one) came out of University research and where much pure and fundamental research without any immediate practical purpose is carried out.
Well HMG has a fair number of 40CTCs hanging around without a home..maybe a terra hawk system based around those.. far greater range and kinetic potential than a 30mm.. they have a an effective engagement range out to the 4-5km range vs the 2 ish for a 30mm.
40CTA = £250 a round
True but an airburst 30mm will set you back 80 dollars.. and the 40mm is a hell of a lot more effective out to a far longer range than that 30mm
It depends how cheap you want to go for effect.. after all any drone that is likely a risk to the UK is going to have cost a far bit to get hear so downing it with a £250 round is not extravagant.
And Allies? this is mainly for Ukraine dressed up as it for the UK etc, half truths and nearly out and out lies.
Amongst Healey’s endless “engine for growths” and “safe at home and strong abroad” statements, literally like a Parrot as ministers repeatedly say the same thing, he failed to answer a single question this afternoon.
What is the point of Parliament if HMG are not held to account for their failure to act or even just produce a plan which is backed by common sense, realism, and real funding?
Till then, the SDR is as irrelevant as all the others. Big plan long on words short on detail makes headlines, the accompanying finances don’t follow, making the whole thing pointless.
On the investment detailed here, this should in my view be in addition to AA gun systems, which I understand are widely used throughout NATO, have British options available, yet MoD seem utterly terrified of buying them.
Why?
What is wrong with good enough?
I was watching the Battle Of Britain film the other day and could see a similar scenario of enemy weapons heading in considerable numbers towards the UK. However, instead of piston aircraft, it would be swarms of drones from multiple platforms, from aircraft, ships, to a container truck parked in a layby on the A1. I fear we don’t have a lot of time to get our anti-drone systems up and running but I welcome this inicative.
I see a lot of words. I see no ships,; i see no planes; i see no tanks…..
I was just reading about the new NMITE degree being billed as training “drone warfare specialists”. As far as I can tell it’s the first undergraduate degree in the UK explicitly developed with the Army for autonomous systems / military drone applications, rather than the usual MSc-level UAS or robotics courses we already have.