DSEI 2025: Estonian company Frankenburg presents Mark 1 affordable counter drone interceptor for layered air defense
{loadposition bannertop}
{loadposition sidebarpub}
Frankenburg Technologies presented its Mark 1 counter-drone missile in early September 2025, in London during DSEI, supported by a live show-floor display. The pitch is simple: small drones are cheap and numerous, so the interceptor must be quick off the rail, easy to handle, and affordable enough to buy in large numbers. The firm’s stand showed a compact twin-pod launcher on a light mount and a blunt-nosed missile closer in size to a shoulder-fired round than to classic short-range air defense stock. It is a purpose-built antidote for Shahed-type one-way attack drones, FPV threats that now plague forward lines, and loitering munitions that slip past jamming or guns. The company describes the system as European built and optimized for serial production rather than bespoke performance.Follow Army Recognition on Google News at this link
Frankenburg’s twin-pod launcher fires a lightweight solid-rocket counter-drone missile with onboard guidance for autonomous short-range intercepts. Vehicle or tripod mount compatible and radar cueable, it is built for mass production, quick reloads, and shoot-and-scoot defense (Picture source: Army Recognition Group).
The mark 1 missile is a solid rocket motor which provides immediate acceleration, bringing the round quickly into an intercept geometry suitable for slow or medium-speed unmanned aircraft. Guidance is handled on board. Once fired, the round does not require a persistent data link to the launcher, which keeps the engagement chain short and less vulnerable to local jamming or network dropouts. The warhead is sized for small aerial targets with a focus on producing a lethal fragment cloud in the last meters of flight. The body is light, which is not only a handling benefit for the crew but also a logistics advantage when hundreds of rounds must be moved by pickup or utility truck rather than by a dedicated ammunition column.
The launcher is deliberately minimal. The display unit combined two sealed pods on a compact traversing mount with integral power and guidance electronics. It can sit on a light vehicle roof, a static tripod, or a small boat, and it looks simple to bolt down and remove. The form factor is friendly to dispersed units that move frequently and do not want to tow a heavy trailer every time they reposition. Setup appears quick: a crew rolls in, powers up, accepts a sensor cue, fires, and relocates before the enemy triangulates the site. In base defense, the same launcher can be tucked into shelters or behind revetments to cover final approach lanes that guns or non-kinetic systems sometimes miss.
Industrialization is the headline claim: Frankenburg talks about affordable components, short supply chains, and a design that trades materials for repeatable assembly. European sourcing is a recurring theme, which several ministries now ask for because wartime demand has chewed through imported stocks. The company’s target is not to out-range classic SHORAD but to change the arithmetic of the fight. If a battlefield receives dozens of hostile drones in a night, the defenders must be able to fire dozens of interceptors without agonizing over cost. That shift is more important than a few extra kilometers of range on a spec sheet.
Compatibility with the broader counter-UAS ecosystem appears central to the concept. The launcher can be cued by compact 3D radars already fielded with European users and, based on the demonstrations, accepts tracks from electro-optical sensors or acoustic arrays at the edge. Open interfaces matter here because frontline units rarely enjoy a neat, unified air picture. In practice, a perimeter team around a depot or a battalion command post will stitch together the radar they have, an EO tracker, and a local display. The interceptor’s autonomy after launch reduces the need to push bandwidth through that improvised network at the critical moment.
This is a point defense tool that sits close to what commanders want to protect. The missile’s quick boost and onboard endgame allow short reaction times against drones that pop up from cover or dive in from modest altitude. A typical drill would see a small radar catch the track, a tablet operator confirm type and heading, and the launcher execute a two-round ripple to raise kill probability without wasting expensive ammunition. Because the system is light and the pods are sealed, reloads should be relatively fast. Crews can carry spare pods in the same vehicle that transports the mount. That lends itself to shoot-and-scoot behavior and to dispersed tactics where several launchers cover overlapping sectors rather than one large battery drawing fire.
Operational employment extends beyond the front line. Critical infrastructure has learned the hard way that drones come at odd hours and from odd angles. Air bases, fuel farms, ports, and power plants need the last layer of kinetic insurance to complement electronic warfare and guns. A missile like this slots into that inner ring where the cost of a miss is high and the engagement window is short. It also offers naval utility. Fast attack craft and auxiliary ships that cannot spare deck space for a heavy mount can still bolt down a small twin-pod and gain a hard-kill option against slow UAVs probing a task group.
European states are rebuilding air defense capacity after watching the Ukraine war drain magazines and reveal gaps at the low end of the spectrum. Budgets have risen but so have demands for domestic production and predictable delivery schedules. Countries on NATO’s eastern flank, along with several Middle Eastern buyers coping with repetitive drone harassment, want systems that arrive on time and can be replaced in bulk. The political conversation is less about exquisite technology and more about volume, sustainment, and sovereignty over supply chains. A European-made missile with simple manufacturing steps fits that mood. It also aligns with alliance pressure to thicken layered defenses without waiting years for complex batteries to reach unit level.
There are still practical questions. Range bands, fuze logic, seeker specifics, training loads, and safety procedures will shape procurement decisions once formal trials begin. Buyers will also look hard at the true cost per shot, reliability in bad weather, and the learning curve for conscripts or reservists. None of those caveats diminish the underlying idea. A small, fast interceptor that can be built in numbers and fired without an elaborate network has value right now. If Frankenburg can prove consistent performance in live trials and keep production steady, it will find customers that need exactly this tool to close the last gap in their counter-UAS defenses.
Written by Evan Lerouvillois, Defense Analyst, Army Recognition Group.
Evan studied International Relations, and quickly specialized in defense and security. He is particularly interested in the influence of the defense sector on global geopolitics, and analyzes how technological innovations in defense, arms export contracts, and military strategies influence the international geopolitical scene.
{loadposition bannertop}
{loadposition sidebarpub}
Frankenburg Technologies presented its Mark 1 counter-drone missile in early September 2025, in London during DSEI, supported by a live show-floor display. The pitch is simple: small drones are cheap and numerous, so the interceptor must be quick off the rail, easy to handle, and affordable enough to buy in large numbers. The firm’s stand showed a compact twin-pod launcher on a light mount and a blunt-nosed missile closer in size to a shoulder-fired round than to classic short-range air defense stock. It is a purpose-built antidote for Shahed-type one-way attack drones, FPV threats that now plague forward lines, and loitering munitions that slip past jamming or guns. The company describes the system as European built and optimized for serial production rather than bespoke performance.
Follow Army Recognition on Google News at this link
Frankenburg’s twin-pod launcher fires a lightweight solid-rocket counter-drone missile with onboard guidance for autonomous short-range intercepts. Vehicle or tripod mount compatible and radar cueable, it is built for mass production, quick reloads, and shoot-and-scoot defense (Picture source: Army Recognition Group).
The mark 1 missile is a solid rocket motor which provides immediate acceleration, bringing the round quickly into an intercept geometry suitable for slow or medium-speed unmanned aircraft. Guidance is handled on board. Once fired, the round does not require a persistent data link to the launcher, which keeps the engagement chain short and less vulnerable to local jamming or network dropouts. The warhead is sized for small aerial targets with a focus on producing a lethal fragment cloud in the last meters of flight. The body is light, which is not only a handling benefit for the crew but also a logistics advantage when hundreds of rounds must be moved by pickup or utility truck rather than by a dedicated ammunition column.
The launcher is deliberately minimal. The display unit combined two sealed pods on a compact traversing mount with integral power and guidance electronics. It can sit on a light vehicle roof, a static tripod, or a small boat, and it looks simple to bolt down and remove. The form factor is friendly to dispersed units that move frequently and do not want to tow a heavy trailer every time they reposition. Setup appears quick: a crew rolls in, powers up, accepts a sensor cue, fires, and relocates before the enemy triangulates the site. In base defense, the same launcher can be tucked into shelters or behind revetments to cover final approach lanes that guns or non-kinetic systems sometimes miss.
Industrialization is the headline claim: Frankenburg talks about affordable components, short supply chains, and a design that trades materials for repeatable assembly. European sourcing is a recurring theme, which several ministries now ask for because wartime demand has chewed through imported stocks. The company’s target is not to out-range classic SHORAD but to change the arithmetic of the fight. If a battlefield receives dozens of hostile drones in a night, the defenders must be able to fire dozens of interceptors without agonizing over cost. That shift is more important than a few extra kilometers of range on a spec sheet.
Compatibility with the broader counter-UAS ecosystem appears central to the concept. The launcher can be cued by compact 3D radars already fielded with European users and, based on the demonstrations, accepts tracks from electro-optical sensors or acoustic arrays at the edge. Open interfaces matter here because frontline units rarely enjoy a neat, unified air picture. In practice, a perimeter team around a depot or a battalion command post will stitch together the radar they have, an EO tracker, and a local display. The interceptor’s autonomy after launch reduces the need to push bandwidth through that improvised network at the critical moment.
This is a point defense tool that sits close to what commanders want to protect. The missile’s quick boost and onboard endgame allow short reaction times against drones that pop up from cover or dive in from modest altitude. A typical drill would see a small radar catch the track, a tablet operator confirm type and heading, and the launcher execute a two-round ripple to raise kill probability without wasting expensive ammunition. Because the system is light and the pods are sealed, reloads should be relatively fast. Crews can carry spare pods in the same vehicle that transports the mount. That lends itself to shoot-and-scoot behavior and to dispersed tactics where several launchers cover overlapping sectors rather than one large battery drawing fire.
Operational employment extends beyond the front line. Critical infrastructure has learned the hard way that drones come at odd hours and from odd angles. Air bases, fuel farms, ports, and power plants need the last layer of kinetic insurance to complement electronic warfare and guns. A missile like this slots into that inner ring where the cost of a miss is high and the engagement window is short. It also offers naval utility. Fast attack craft and auxiliary ships that cannot spare deck space for a heavy mount can still bolt down a small twin-pod and gain a hard-kill option against slow UAVs probing a task group.
European states are rebuilding air defense capacity after watching the Ukraine war drain magazines and reveal gaps at the low end of the spectrum. Budgets have risen but so have demands for domestic production and predictable delivery schedules. Countries on NATO’s eastern flank, along with several Middle Eastern buyers coping with repetitive drone harassment, want systems that arrive on time and can be replaced in bulk. The political conversation is less about exquisite technology and more about volume, sustainment, and sovereignty over supply chains. A European-made missile with simple manufacturing steps fits that mood. It also aligns with alliance pressure to thicken layered defenses without waiting years for complex batteries to reach unit level.
There are still practical questions. Range bands, fuze logic, seeker specifics, training loads, and safety procedures will shape procurement decisions once formal trials begin. Buyers will also look hard at the true cost per shot, reliability in bad weather, and the learning curve for conscripts or reservists. None of those caveats diminish the underlying idea. A small, fast interceptor that can be built in numbers and fired without an elaborate network has value right now. If Frankenburg can prove consistent performance in live trials and keep production steady, it will find customers that need exactly this tool to close the last gap in their counter-UAS defenses.
Written by Evan Lerouvillois, Defense Analyst, Army Recognition Group.
Evan studied International Relations, and quickly specialized in defense and security. He is particularly interested in the influence of the defense sector on global geopolitics, and analyzes how technological innovations in defense, arms export contracts, and military strategies influence the international geopolitical scene.
