“Defeat” By Drones Teaches U.S. Army Hard FPV Lessons The Easy Way

Ranger competitor in the “Last Line of Defense” exercise takes aim at an incoming FPV drone

U.S. Army

A soldier’s worst nightmare is an FPV drone buzzing straight for them. Armchair pundits say they would just shoot the drone down, but real life is not so easy. 40 elite U.S. Ranger teams took part in a “Last Line of Defense” exercise this month with live ammunition against FPV drones coming at them. We do not know the full details or how many engagements there were in total, but only 15 drones were downed. In real life there could have been heavy casualties.

“The training effectively demonstrated both the difficulty of engaging small, fast-moving aerial targets and the importance of repetition under realistic conditions,” Brett Velicovich, Co-Founder of Powerus who supplied the Matrix-T drones told me. (My emphasis).

In other results, U.S. forces were reportedly humiliated by drones dropping tennis balls simulating grenades into vehicle hatches in a recent exercise, while NATO armored battalions were easily defeated by a small force of Ukrainian drone operators.

None of this means the U.S. Army is outmatched and outdated in the drone age. Instead it highlights the importance of building understanding and learning new tactics on the training ground, rather than in the middle of a shooting war.

Testing Times

The FPV shootout was part of this year’s Best Ranger Competition, an annual event for two-person teams. All competitors are Ranger Qualified active military and the line-up of events changes each year with tests of physical fitness, including runs and obstacle courses, and marksmanship challenges. This year they include drone shooting.

“Scenarios included realistic threat profiles where FPV drones were maneuvered toward competitors to simulate modern battlefield conditions,” says Velicovich.

The Matrix-T FPV is a 130 mph quadcopter modeled on those used in Ukraine, with similar speed and maneuverability. It is used both for operator training and counter-drone exercises. Velicovich says the main difference is in the safety features, and that the Matrix-T is designed to be flown repeatedly rather than single-use. But it is not too precious to be shot at.

“Live ammunition was used,” says Velicovich, but there were few losses. “Small, fast FPV drones—especially at higher speeds—are inherently difficult to engage consistently with small arms.”

5 FPVs were destroyed during the exercise, and another 10 were damaged but repaired on the spot for another round. The weapons used are not known, but likely included standard M4 carbines.

“In many cases, impacts affected components like rotors or outer structures that can be quickly replaced, allowing the drone to be returned to operation,” says Velicovich.

The exercise made its point. Rangers, the best of the best, may outshoot human adversaries, but drones are not so easy. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following the war in Ukraine. Even if the first FPV fails, multiple follow-ups may go for a foot soldier until one succeeds, as they are now produced by the million.

“Firing from small arms is ineffective,” advises a Russian manual on counter-drone tactics, saying that stopping to fire reduces the chances of survival. “…when shooting you are static, which makes it easier for the operator to aim the drone,”

A handful of videos show Ukrainians shooting down drones with rifles but these are rare. So, even if you are a crack shot, trying to shoot down an attacking drone may be a terminally bad idea,

Ukrainian troops greatly prefer shotguns for drone defense, and these are common. Re-training and re-arming the U.S. Army soldiers with shotguns would be a major undertaking, but there is another approach.

The Shotshell Solution

Also this month, troops from XVIII Airborne Corps got hands on with new counter-drone ammunition and again Matrix-T drones were in the firing line.

This is new 5.56mm L-variant made by Drone Round, effectively a shot shell which releases 5 projectiles mid-flight, each capable of downing a drone, giving a greatly increased chances of a hit. It is claimed to be effective out to 100 meters. This approach in principle gives the advantage of a shotgun without having to carry a second weapon.

Similar designs have proliferated in Ukraine, with Ukrainian and Russian forces fielding a huge variety of “shotgun rounds” for standard assault rifles. Exactly how well these work, and whether they are a useful addition is a matter of hot debate. By carrying out actual shooting exercises in lifelike situations, the U.S. is finding out what actually works. The cost is a few destroyed Matrix-T drones without the need for any bloodshed.

Contrast this with a Russian video of a Marine unit coming under repeated attack by FPVs and trying fending them off with small arms fire, taking hits in the process.

Meanwhile the Israeli military is urgently seeking measures to counter fiber-controlled FPVs drones. These drones have been used for two years in Ukraine, but the Israelis do not seem to have considered the need for countermeasures until Hezbollah started using them a few weeks ago, scoring multiple hits on Israeli armor. Realistic training exercises would have highlighted this issue.

FPV drones are everywhere, and many potential adversaries have them — including Iran. Far better for U.S. forces to learn lessons and suffer the mild humiliation of “death” in a training exercise than in real life. And better to avoid scrambling to find solutions while casualties are racking up.

But not everyone is getting the message.

“In some Western defense circles, there is still a dismissive view of the threat that FPVs and other cheap UAS pose to NATO militaries,” Rob Lee of the FPRI wrote on X on April 16th.

The problem may not be that U.S. forces are getting beaten by drones in exercises, but that not enough soldiers have yet had first hand experience of simulated FPV attack and how to survive it.