Pinned straw:
EOS, one of the laser developers i referred to above won their 1st $100M contract with a Euro NATO country. EOS is an Australian company. Whilst a competitor, the technologies offered by Droneshield and EOS are complementary in application in a multi layered defensive and protective shield.
There are several competitors to EOS globally, but very nice to see successful Australian innovation.
Australia Debuts 100kW Laser Weapon Built to Burn Through Drone Swarms
Published 11th September by NextGen Defense
Apollo, a 100kW high-energy laser weapon, burns through drone swarms with 360° coverage, unlimited external-powered firing, and NATO-ready iintegration.
Australian tech firm Electro Optic Systems (EOS) has unveiled Apollo, a new high-energy laser weapon designed to disrupt the sensors of drones ranging from small quadcopters to larger uncrewed aircraft.
The weapon generates 100 kilowatts of power, expandable to 150, and provides 360-degree coverage during vertical engagements.
When connected to external power, Apollo can reportedly fire without limit. But in isolated mode, it has enough stored energy to carry out more than 200 engagements.
Packaged for mobility, the laser can operate as a stand-alone weapon or be part of a broader counter-drone defense network. It is also built to integrate with NATO air defense and command-and-control systems.
Apollo will be on display at the 2025 DSEI (Defence and Security Equipment International) expo in London under “Team Defence Australia.”
Countering the Drone Era
EOS emphasized that Apollo was developed in response to the growing use of drone warms in modern conflicts.
Designed to sidestep export restrictions, it could serve as an alternative to conventional defense systems, countering aerial threats that are increasingly fast and unpredictable.
“There is strong international interest in high energy laser weapons, and it is increasingly clear they will play a central role in counter-drone defense,” said EOS Group Chief Executive Officer Dr. Andreas Schwer.
“The demand is urgent and accelerating, which is why EOS has invested for years to bring this capability to a level of maturity … Apollo is ready for partners to adopt, localise and sustain as their own.”
EOS announced that it has already secured Apollo’s first export, with delivery planned to a NATO European member
@Scot1963 , I did a bit of a deep dive into counter-drone capabilities as part of reviewing the EOS competitive landscape earlier this year, including where DRO played. My takeaway then, as it is now, is that while both DRO and EOS are offering counter-drone products, and in that sense, were competitors, they were focused on very different areas, different applications, and used different technology, and hence, did not directly compete.
My simple summary then was that DRO was more soft kill/jamming-immobilise-the-drone focused, EOS was more kinetic-laser-shoot-the-damn-thing-down focused ... Thus fully agree with your comment that they are complementary in application in a multi-layered defence set up and for Aussie innovation for both companies!
Had ChatGPT pull up a comparison to check this again and this is what it spat out:
Here’s a comparison of DroneShield (ASX: DRO) vs Electro-Optic Systems (ASX: EOS) in terms of what their products do, their technology stacks, capabilities, and market positioning.
COMPANY FOCUS
DroneShield (DRO):
- Specialises in counter-UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) / counter-drone technology: detection, tracking, identifying, and defeating drones.
- Their solutions are meant to be relatively portable, modular, fast-to-deploy, usable in a variety of contexts (fixed site, on-the-move, dismounted, etc.).
- Heavy use of RF sensing, AI (vision, classification), sensor fusion, software command & control platforms.
Electro-Optic Systems (EOS):
- Wider defence systems integrator with capabilities beyond just counter-drone. Their product lines include remote weapon systems (RWS), force protection systems, marine and land weapon systems, high-energy lasers, counter-drone, and unmanned ground vehicles lethality systems.
- EOS is developing/has developed both kinetic and directed-energy weapon capabilities (e.g. high-power lasers) for defeating drone threats.
Overlap & Trends
- Both companies are in the counter-drone / CUAS market. So there is overlap in the need for detection, tracking, identification, and defeat.
- The market is moving toward layered defenses: soft kill + hard kill + directed energy. EOS seems further along in providing that full spectrum, whereas DroneShield is especially strong at the detection/soft-kill/disruption side and integrating systems. EOS is pushing into high-power lasers which are more resource-intensive.
What that means in practical use
- If you need a lightweight, rapidly deployable detection + soft kill / disruption solution (for say critical infrastructure, mobile operations, law enforcement), DroneShield is likely more tailored.
- If you need hard kill, very high energy effectors (laser, kinetic), weapon system integration (e.g. mounting on vehicles, RWS, turrets, marine, etc.), EOS is stronger.
- EOS’s offerings are likely more expensive, more power / infrastructure demanding, and perhaps longer lead times. DroneShield’s products might be faster to field in more austere environments.
Discl: DRO Not Held, Hold EOS IRL and in SM
The Ukraine Russia war has significantly propelled drone development forward. Fibre spooling drones have been operating there for 18 months or more, increasingly. This has incentivised drone to drone combat as the Ukranians try to defeat the much larger Russian threat. Ukraine has also targeted fibre optic manufacturing plants in Russia. Current developments target directed energy weapons to defeat now in use drones. High energy microwave technology essentially fry the drone electronics, but have some limitations. Energy sources are truck sized or similar, and are very expensive to build ($100M and more), although very very cheap to use - around 12 pence a shot its been calculated. And are very limited in strike distance, in the very low kilometres reach. There is also a need to project the energy from in front of your own resources, else you fry your own stuff. Everything you have has to be behind your directed energy weapon. Both the US and UK have demonstrated their use, taking down swarms of drones.
https://breakingdefense.com/2025/02/high-power-microwave-force-field-knocks-drone-swarms-from-sky/
https://www.euronews.com/next/2025/04/18/what-is-the-uks-microwave-weapon-that-counters-drone-attacks-and-how-does-it-work
High energy microwave technology might be good for specific locations or weapons systems (command centres, naval assets, airfields etc) but of limited use on dispersed battlefields. In the civilian world airports and energy locations might need protection. But, drone development is accelerating so you might expect the technology to be miniaturised in future. Or, for something else to appear. Droneshield would be expected to be across all of this, and working on their strategies to stay within the pack of companies continuing to want to be relevant. In fact, one strategy might be to skip developments, understanding that each generation of technology costs alot to develop. If you were sufficiently engaged in the space, leap frogging can be highly effective but risky.