In a small workshop in England’s East Midlands, engineers from the British startup Skycutter are building drones for Ukraine. A row of 3D printers produces the fuselages for interceptor drones, while parts like motors and navigation chips are assembled by hand. The same process is repeated hundreds of thousands of times each month in partner factories across Ukraine.
The swarms of cheap, deadly, and often autonomous drones used in that war have already transformed combat. Troops far behind the front lines must keep moving to avoid aerial attacks, traveling through net-covered tunnels and landscapes crisscrossed with fiber optic cables that guide drones past radio jamming. Cities are terrorized by guided missiles that are cheaper and therefore more widely used than earlier models.
European militaries are scrambling to catch up, planning to spend billions on weapons—with added pressure from Donald Trump’s uncertain stance on the NATO alliance and his insistence that member countries boost defense budgets.
The unsettling combination of Trump and a war on Europe’s doorstep has sharpened long-standing criticism that the continent has relied too heavily on US weapons manufacturers.
The EU has responded by pledging to spend €800 billion on defense over four years. The UK has also promised to increase spending, and Keir Starmer is likely to face pressure to show progress after Labour’s heavy losses in Thursday’s elections.
With a new focus on defense sovereignty—the ability to make and use weapons without relying on an unreliable America—much of this money is flowing into homegrown companies. A wave of well-funded startups is gaining momentum and expanding production, making big promises (many still unproven) that they can outperform traditional manufacturers and Silicon Valley rivals.
Survivable vs. Attritable
Militaries don’t believe they can completely do without people—infantry—or heavy equipment like tanks, artillery, and ships. But a large portion of planned spending will go toward drones of various sizes, whether for air, land, sea, or underwater.
General Sir Roly Walker, the UK’s chief of the general staff, said last year that he wants the military’s equipment to be 20% “survivable” (because it carries people), 40% “attritable” (you’re not too worried if it’s destroyed), and 40% “consumable” (single-use).
The growing feeling across Europe is that “we should be able to stand on our own two feet,” according to one person at a fast-growing weapons startup. “Sovereignty is about control. If you buy things off the shelf from elsewhere, you’re always giving up some control.”
That also applies to parts and materials. The UK is consulting on how much of a product needs to come from Britain for it to be considered sovereign. Manufacturers can’t always rely on parts and materials from countries that could become adversaries—especially China.
“A lot of supply chain diversification dreams have evaporated,” says Kusti Salm, a former Estonian defense official who is now CEO of the anti-drone missile startup Frankenburg. “I think it’s natural if Europe wants to sustain its prosperity and freedom.”
Ricardo Mendes, CEO of drone maker Tekever, says the rise of unmanned aerial vehicles has sparked “a radical transformation in how defense technology is built,” with companies betting on future demand for equipment rather than locking in long-term contracts before starting production.
Tekever, which Mendes co-founded in Portugal in 2001, reached a billion-dollar “unicorn” valuation last year and now has 1,200 employees, including new factories in the UK’s drone hub in Swindon, Wiltshire, and another in Cahors, southwest France.
Other European defense tech unicorns include Helsing, a German company backed by Spotify founder Daniel Ek, and German drone maker Quantu.m Systems and Stark Defence. Stark and Helsing recently won contracts from Germany’s military for attack drones, and all except Quantum are investing in UK factories. British missile maker Cambridge Aerospace—controversially chaired by former defence secretary Grant Shapps—is reportedly close to joining the billion-dollar club too.
US rival unicorns include drone maker Shield AI, autonomous boat company Saronic Technologies, and anti-drone weapons firm Epirus. But two companies named after characters from JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings lead the American pack: software company Palantir and autonomous weapons maker Anduril. Both are making significant inroads into Europe, especially the UK, but their expansion is facing scrutiny as European politicians push back against their strongly pro-Trump backers.
Palantir was backed by billionaire Trump donor Peter Thiel. Thiel, a vocal critic of liberal democracies, has also backed Stark, raising concerns in Germany—though Stark says Thiel has no direct operational or strategic influence. Palantir’s CEO, Alex Karp, has repeatedly praised American dominance, while Anduril is run by 33-year-old Palmer Luckey, who has personally hosted a Trump fundraiser and built close ties with the administration.
Cat and mouse game
The falling cost of parts like sensors and motors opened the door for startups. Big, traditional manufacturers were caught off guard by the drone revolution, perhaps because it’s hard to make big profits on mass-produced products.
Armin Papperger, head of the 137-year-old German manufacturer Rheinmetall, caused a stir earlier this year by calling Ukraine’s drones low-tech “Legos” made by “housewives” with 3D printers. Rheinmetall later had to backtrack, but the comment unintentionally highlighted the changing economics of war. Falling prices make it much easier to cause a lot of damage with relatively cheap weapons, like Iran’s Shahed drones—used by Russia to terrorize Ukrainian cities and by Tehran against its neighbours during US-Israeli attacks.
Shaheds are estimated to cost about $30,000 (£22,200). In contrast, many of NATO’s air defence systems use missiles that cost hundreds of thousands, or in the case of US Patriot interceptors, millions of dollars.
Startups have instead focused on knocking down Shaheds and other drones with much cheaper gear. Frankenburg’s guided missiles are understood to cost “in the low five figures” in dollars, while Skycutter says its cheapest ground-to-air interceptors come in at about $2,000.
Every startup stressed the need to be more agile than traditional defence manufacturers, known as primes, as war drives a frantic pace of change.
Skycutter is smaller than many other companies raising hundreds of millions of pounds, with 15 people in the UK and 50 contractors in Ukraine. Its founders turned their hobby into a business making civilian drones for inspecting pipelines in 2018, before Vladimir Putin’s 2022 invasion suddenly made their expertise in demand.
They went to Ukraine and worked directly with frontline units. It’s a constant “cat and mouse” game of adapting the technology to new jamming capabilities, says one of the directors, who asked not to be named after Russia threatened European drone makers.
“Unless you’re there and working with units and what the Russians are trying to do, you fall behind,” they say.
Troops in Ukraine make adjustments to a Tekever AR3 Evo 2 reconnaissance drone. Mendes says Tekever has created more than 100 versions of its main product in the first three years of the Ukraine war, with software updates and the newest sensors or propulsion fitted as soon as they’re ready.“This is constant,” he says. “You are constantly exposed. The only constant you have is that it is evolving.”
Running out of time
Yet there are problems with this pace of change: militaries and governments aren’t used to adapting so quickly. For example, the UK published a strategic defence review last year that called for much greater use of drones, but last month its author accused British leaders, including Keir Starmer, of a “corrosive complacency” towards defence.
A Helsing HX-2 strike drone in flight during testing. Photograph: Helsing
Starmer cut international aid to fund new weapons – a deeply controversial move for many Labour MPs – but so far the money hasn’t materialised. A defence investment plan is months overdue, blocked by the Treasury. BAE Systems, Britain’s main defence contractor, took the unusual step last month of publicly stating that work on a next-generation fighter jet would stop in June unless more funding was provided.
Last week, the Financial Times reported that finalising the defence plan – and covering an alleged £28bn funding gap – would be part of Starmer’s post-election “reset”.
“The UK has been slower than most” to increase spending, says Kevin Craven, chief executive of ADS, a UK aerospace and defence lobby group. “We are disappointed with the pace.”
Skycutter caused a stir recently when it beat a range of rivals in the US military’s Drone Dominance programme. It has been vocal about the risks of delays to UK spending: videos of its interceptors taking down Shahed drones in Ukraine have attracted many offers for it to move to other countries, but funding from the UK hasn’t come through.
“We were knocking at the door of the MoD,” says the Skycutter director. “Unfortunately, the MoD weren’t interested at the time.”
“We need to make a strategic decision as a company,” the director adds. “Do we stay in the UK or leave the UK? The UK is ultimately our home. There’s no money at the moment because there’s no defence investment plan. We’re running out of time.”
Across Europe, there are still doubts about whether those buying the equipment are ready for the dizzying pace of technological change driven by war, although several executives say attitudes are shifting.
“It’s a really fast-moving ecosystem and I don’t think the procurement is ready to deal with it,” says James Acuna, a former officer at the US Central Intelligence Agency and now chief operations officer at Ondas Capital, a US drone investor.
Mike Armstrong, UK managing director at Stark, says military attitudes are changing because “delivery timelines that stretch several years are no longer feasible.”
“Modern defence depends on sustained, industrial-scale production, rather than one-off procurement decisions,” he says. “So long-term signals around demand and procurement really matter, because that gives companies like us the confidence to invest and scale at the pace the current security environment requires.”
Frequently Asked Questions
Here is a list of FAQs about Europes push to build affordable weapons for defense independence
BeginnerLevel Questions
1 Why is Europe suddenly trying to build its own affordable weapons
Europe wants to rely less on the US for its defense Recent global tensions have shown that Europe needs to be able to protect itself without waiting for American approval or supplies
2 What does affordable weapons actually mean
It means weapons that are cheaper to produce and buy in large numbers Instead of building a few superexpensive fighter jets or tanks Europe wants lots of simpler costeffective drones missiles and armored vehicles that are still effective
3 Isnt the US already helping Europe with defense
Yes but many European leaders worry that the US might not always be willing or able to help They want a Plan B so Europe can defend itself independently even if US support slows down or stops
4 What kind of weapons are they trying to build
They are focusing on
Drones
Longrange missiles
Electronic warfare gear
Simple armored vehicles
5 Will this make Europe safer or more dangerous
The goal is to make Europe safer by deterring attacks If potential enemies know Europe can defend itself without outside help they are less likely to start a conflict
IntermediateLevel Questions
6 How is affordable different from cheap
Cheap weapons might break easily Affordable weapons are designed to be costeffectivethey are reliable but use simpler technology common parts and less expensive materials so they can be massproduced
7 What are the biggest challenges Europe faces in doing this
Funding Many countries have tight budgets
Coordination 27 EU countries must agree on one design instead of building 27 different versions
Supply chains Europe lacks factories for key components like microchips and gunpowder
Speed Bureaucracy slows down production
8 How is this different from the Cold War era
During the Cold War Europe built massive expensive tanks and jets Today the focus is on smart cheap and reusable systems
