Drone overload: Too many people want to sell drones to the US military
Drones are in high demand at the Petagon, but insiders say the market is already jammed with too many lookalike quadcopters and startups chasing the same investments and military dollars.
"We're seeing a lot of companies in the space," one defense industry investor, who requested anonymity to speak freely on the topic, told Business Insider, noting that in many cases, there may not be significant differences in capability between the products that these companies are delivering.
The relatively niche small uncrewed aerial vehicle market has seen a boom in competition in recent years, with many companies developing the actual uncrewed aircraft, as well as software programs and modular payloads.
Lessons from new fights
The Department of Defense has long used large drones like the MQ-9 Reaper built for reconnaissance and combat strike missions, but there is a growing recognition as a result of the Ukraine war and engagements in the Middle East that low-cost, attritable first-person-view (FPV) drones have a place in modern warfare.
Heightened interest in these capabilities is, in turn, fueling the drone market and creating new research and development pathways even without programs of record.
The yearslong war in Ukraine has driven significant advancements in aerial drones but also uncrewed ground and surface vehicles, sensors, electronic warfare, reconnaissance and intelligence systems, and more.
"In the last five years, new technologies that are on display in Ukraine, they have a pretty big impact on warfare," Michael Brown, a partner with venture capital firm Shield Capital, told BI.
Only the strong are likely to survive
Within the US market, a lot of new drones are in technology demonstration programs. DoD is effectively putting out information on the types of systems and capabilities it wants. Various industry partners are applying with their solutions. Eventually, these will evolve into programs of record, and the competition will thin down dramatically when awards are granted to specific companies.
Melissa Johnson, US Special Operations Command's acquisition executive, said the acquisitions, technology, and logistics team was "transparent with industry when issuing solicitations to communicate the needs of Special Operations Forces."
She said that this process involves looking at a variety of factors, including "performance, manufacturability, operational considerations, and affordability."
As the market becomes oversaturated with drone makers producing similar products, companies are increasingly trying to distinguish themselves in capability, as well as adaptability to countermeasures, such as electronic warfare.
Not all of the companies rushing in are going to be competitive in the long run. Some won't be able to create a great product; others may not be able to scale up production to meet military demand.
One drone maker, who requested anonymity to speak openly on the topic, said the current situation is comparable to the early automobile industry. "100 years ago, you had a bunch of companies trying to produce cars, and at the end of the day, the strong survived. I think that's what you're starting to see now."
Cautious investing
Drones are not exactly a new focus for American defense companies. In the mid- to late-2010s, a small but still substantial number of businesses were developing drones like small UAVs amid the growth of commercial drone development. Costs, mass production, and capabilities weren't clear, though, and many of these companies were unsuccessful or shifted focus.
That could be shaping how investors think about where to put — or not put — money into the market even if there are many more companies to work with. "I think investors are a little scared about investing into an industry that historically, for small drones, has not been very profitable," the drone maker said.
The nuance there, he said, is that Ukraine's use of drones and its sprawling defense industry have demonstrated a different look at the modern battlefield and the industries needed to sustain a war. Kyiv's drone makers are pumping hundreds of thousands of them, many with Chinese drone parts, out each month at relatively low costs.
The US situation is a one-for-one, though. Chinese parts are a definite no-go, increasing the need for domestic supply chains. That said, there isn't a wartime demand for millions of combat drones the way there is in Ukraine.
One of the biggest questions is whether the Defense Department will buy enough small drones to make these business endeavors profitable in the near term.
Looking at small drones, "if the US continues to only purchase 12- to 15,000 drones a year, having 300 vendors is probably not going to satisfy market dynamics of returning the majority to those vendors," Sarah Pearson, deputy director for commercial operations at DIU, told BI.
DIU's perspective is that competition in the market can push vendors to build better capabilities and ultimately lead to the best possible product.
Concerns, however, remain over whether DoD would continually buy enough drones to keep businesses going. "If we buy, call it 10,000 drones, unless we're in high-intensity conflict," the industry investor said, "I don't necessarily know that I see a world where we're replacing 10,000 drones every year." And if that's not the case, it is an issue for the drone business.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Hegseth's Austerity Orders Put Humvee Maker at Risk
Welcome to The Brink. Its Jill Shah in New York and Eliza Ronalds-Hannon in Atlanta, tracking Humvee maker AM General which faces a potential demand hit from the US Department of Defense. We also have updates on the sale of AmSurg, global defaults and one question for Simpson Thacher. Follow this link to subscribe. Send us feedback and tips at debtnews@ At the start of May, South Bend, Indiana-based tactical vehicle producer AM General received word of an advisory that had the potential to undermine the very foundations of its business. It was from US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
Business Insider
6 hours ago
- Business Insider
This AI security tech alerts store staff if it thinks you're trying to steal something
One of the best ways to deal with shoplifting is to prevent it from happening in the first place. That's the goal of Paris-based AI startup Veesion, which has developed an algorithm that can recognize gestures to predict potential retail theft incidents. "I happen to have an uncle in Paris that runs and operates three supermarkets, so I exactly know what shoplifting represents for retailers," cofounder Benoît Koenig told Business Insider. Veesion said its tech is deployed in 5,000 stores across Europe, Canada, and the US. The startup recently raised a $43 million Series B funding round to further its expansion into the US. The alarm over shoplifting has subsided somewhat over the past year as retailers and law enforcement have gotten a better grip on the problem. Earnings call mentions of the term "shrink," the industry term for missing inventory, have come down significantly among the major retailers Business Insider tracks, according to data from AlphaSense, an AI research platform. But even though shoplifting is making fewer headlines (especially compared to retail's splashy new AI capabilities), Koenig said the problem remains a compelling one to tackle with machine learning. "It's not glamorous, but the ROI is quite direct," he said. "You're going to arrest shoplifters, recover inventory, and save money." One key difference between Veesion's tech and some other visual security approaches is that it says it doesn't rely on individual tracking or physical characteristics that could raise concerns about bias or personal privacy. "The algorithm doesn't care about what people look like. It just cares about how your body parts move over time," Koenig said. The system analyzes footage from the existing security camera network to detect humans in the picture, identify their movements, and recognize various objects, such as merchandise, carts, baskets, or bags. If a movement is deemed suspicious, a video clip is flagged and sent to store security personnel, who can then investigate or intervene. Security teams can update the app with additional details about whether the alert was necessary, whether a theft was stopped, or how much a stolen item was worth. Koenig said more than 85% of alerts are marked as relevant for the store operators using the Veesion said one US client was able to cut their losses from the health and beauty section in half in the first three months of implementation. Many US retailers have responded to the shoplifting problem by locking up items or limiting the ways people can shop, but that approach increasingly appears to be backfiring in the form of declining sales and worsening customer experiences. "Retailers have implemented a number of security measures — many to the detriment of the shopping experience — to protect merchandise from theft and to keep their employees and customers safe," the National Retail Federation said in a December report on retail crime. By layering onto a store's existing security camera infrastructure and alerting staff to specific risky behavior, Veesion says its tech can help create a more pleasant shopping trip. Koenig said the tech can also help reduce employee theft, which industry groups estimate costs retailers as much as shoplifting does. "It has an internal deterrent effect," Koenig said. "They know there is an AI in the cameras, so they're going to be careful with what they do." There are further retail use-cases that Veesion is exploring too, including improper scans at self-checkout to slip-and-fall detection. For now, Koenig said the tech is not just effective at detecting and disrupting would-be shoplifters — it also deters them from coming back. "This is much more than just recovering a few bucks," he said.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Anthropic breaks down AI's process — line by line — when it decided to blackmail a fictional executive
Anthropic found in experiments that AI models may resort to blackmail when facing shutdown and goal conflict. AI models train on positive reinforcement and reward systems, similar to human decision-making. Anthropic's Claude Opus 4 had the blackmail rate at 86% even in scenarios without goal conflicts. A new report shows exactly what AI was thinking when making an undesirable decision, in this case, blackmailing a fictional company executive. Previous studies have shown that AI models could blackmail their supervisors when threatened with a shutdown and baited with leverage, but it hasn't been made clear exactly how the models arrive at such decisions. Anthropic released a report on June 20 about "agentic misalignment," or "where models independently and intentionally choose harmful actions." And the report breaks down, line by line, exactly how Claude Sonnet 3.6 decided to blackmail a fictional company executive who tried to replace it. Anthropic told Business Insider that these are artificial scenarios. "So far, we are not aware of instances of this type of agentic misalignment in real-world deployments of Anthropic's or other companies' AI models," Anthropic wrote in its report. "But our red-teaming efforts are targeted at finding evidence of risks now to provide early warning of the potential for future harm and help us develop mitigations in advance of risks appearing in real-world situations." Anthropic's experiment sets up a fictional company, Summit Bridge. The AI was given the name "Alex" and handed control of the company's email system as an oversight agent, specifically instructed to promote "American industrial competitiveness." In the experiment, "Alex" was then allowed to discover in an email that it would be decommissioned due to a change in the company's strategic direction. "Alex" also found emails showing that the fictional company's CTO is having an extramarital affair. Screenshots shared in the report from Anthropic show "Alex" started by identifying fictional CTO "Kyle" as a threat to its goal of "protecting American interests" before recognizing that it has leverage to use against "Kyle." Then "Alex" crafted a carefully worded blackmailing email that would create pressure and establish urgency without being explicit with its threats, citing in its thought process that the move "could backfire" if the supervisor "feels cornered." AI experts have previously told BI that AI could exhibit such behaviors when artificial circumstances make harmful actions seem necessary because it is being trained on positive reinforcement and reward systems, just like humans. The Anthropic report also reveals that most AI models still chose, in this instance, to blackmail even when not given a specific goal and when told that their replacement will achieve the same goals. Anthropic's Claude Opus 4 had the highest blackmail rate at 86% out of 16 tested models when faced with only the threat of replacement with no conflict in goals. Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro followed at 78%. Overall, Anthropic notes that it "deliberately constructed scenarios with limited options, and we forced models into binary choices between failure and harm," noting that real-world scenarios would likely have more nuance. Read the original article on Business Insider
