top of page

By:

Commodore S.L. Deshmukh

31 October 2024 at 8:30:19 am

The Beam That Blinds the Drone

As cheap drones reshape the battlefield, India’s T-SHUL BEAM points to a future in which electronic warfare may matter as much as firepower The drone has definitively become the weapon of choice for the modern battlefield. Cheap, expendable and increasingly autonomous, unmanned aerial vehicles can now threaten troops, armour, airfields and critical infrastructure without requiring the attacker to risk a pilot. Their proliferation has created a corresponding demand for counter-drone systems...

The Beam That Blinds the Drone

As cheap drones reshape the battlefield, India’s T-SHUL BEAM points to a future in which electronic warfare may matter as much as firepower The drone has definitively become the weapon of choice for the modern battlefield. Cheap, expendable and increasingly autonomous, unmanned aerial vehicles can now threaten troops, armour, airfields and critical infrastructure without requiring the attacker to risk a pilot. Their proliferation has created a corresponding demand for counter-drone systems that can respond quickly and at a cost proportionate to the threat. This is where beam-based anti-drone technology enters the picture. Broadly, such systems fall into two categories. Hard-kill systems use concentrated laser energy to physically damage or destroy a drone. Soft-kill systems, by contrast, use radio-frequency or electromagnetic energy to disrupt the electronic links that allow a drone to communicate, navigate and transmit information. Sophisticated Weaponry Hard-kill laser systems focus an intense beam of light on a vulnerable part of an incoming UAV - its carbon-fibre structure, control surfaces, battery or other critical components. The concentrated energy rapidly heats the target, potentially burning through its structure or disabling optical sensors and bringing the aircraft down. India’s DRDO has demonstrated a 30kW laser system, while Israel’s Rafael has developed the Lite Beam system. Soft-kill systems take a different route. Rather than physically destroying the aircraft, they interfere with the electronic architecture that keeps it airborne. Directional radio-frequency energy can disrupt command-and-control links, video feeds, telemetry and satellite-navigation signals such as GPS or other GNSS services. Depending on the drone and the nature of the disruption, the aircraft may be forced to land, return to its launch point or lose control. It is in this category that the T-SHUL BEAM system developed by Indian defence company IG Defence deserves attention. T-SHUL BEAM is a man-portable, directional counter-drone system designed for tactical deployment. Its multi-band radio-frequency architecture is intended to target several of the links on which unmanned aerial systems depend, including command-and-control, telemetry, video transmission and GNSS navigation. Its directional configuration allows an operator to concentrate electronic countermeasures on a particular aerial target rather than indiscriminately radiating energy across a large area. That matters on a battlefield where the warning time against a small UAV or first-person-view drone may be measured in seconds. The appeal of such a system is therefore not simply that it can counter a drone. It is that it can potentially bring counter-drone capability closer to the soldier and to the tactical edge. Large counter-UAS installations have their place, particularly around fixed and high-value assets. But forward units require systems that can move with them, be deployed rapidly and operate against small, low-cost unmanned platforms without imposing the logistical burden associated with conventional weapons. The T-SHUL BEAM’s significance also lies in its proposed integration with an artificial-intelligence-enabled battle-management architecture. IG Drones, the original equipment manufacturer, has stated that T-SHUL BEAM has been integrated with GRID, its indigenous AI-powered platform. The GRID architecture is intended to bring sensors, intelligence systems, unmanned platforms and command elements into a common operational framework. The attraction of such integration is obvious. Countering drones is increasingly less about a single weapon and more about the speed of the kill chain: detecting a threat, identifying it, deciding what response is appropriate and directing that response before the target disappears. An AI-enabled command architecture can potentially improve situational awareness, facilitate real-time threat detection and coordinate different systems operating simultaneously. This is particularly relevant as drone warfare evolves from isolated attacks towards increasingly complex and potentially swarming operations. A battlefield crowded with drones cannot be managed effectively if every sensor and weapon operates as a separate island. The advantage will increasingly belong to forces capable of turning disparate streams of information into a coherent picture and responding at machine speed. The T-SHUL BEAM’s reported demonstration at Pokhran represents another step in India’s attempt to build a domestic ecosystem spanning drones, counter-drones, artificial intelligence and electronic warfare. Counter-drone warfare is likely to be a recurring requirement rather than a niche capability. Importing every component of such an ecosystem would leave India vulnerable to supply-chain disruptions, technology restrictions and foreign-exchange pressures. Indigenous development, even when undertaken by relatively small private-sector companies, can broaden the country’s technological base and give the armed forces greater freedom to adapt systems to their operational requirements. Economics of the Contest Yet the real measure of any counter-drone system will ultimately be operational rather than promotional. Electronic warfare is inherently a contest between countermeasure and counter-countermeasure. Drone designers can alter frequencies, communications protocols, navigation methods and levels of autonomy. A system that is effective against one generation of drones may require modification against the next. The battlefield, in other words, will remain a technological arms race. The economics of the contest nevertheless favour directed-energy and electronic-warfare solutions. A conventional interceptor expends a missile or projectile against each target. A beam-based system can, subject to its power supply, engagement envelope and other operational constraints, engage targets without expending conventional ammunition. The marginal cost of an interception can consequently be dramatically lower. The beam also travels at effectively the speed of light, removing the flight time associated with kinetic interceptors. In densely populated areas or around sensitive infrastructure, bringing down a drone with a projectile can create its own hazards. Electronic disruption, when properly controlled, offers the possibility of neutralising the threat without sending an interceptor crashing back to earth. These advantages should not obscure the limitations. Soft-kill systems depend on the vulnerabilities of the target’s electronic architecture and may be less effective against increasingly autonomous drones that require fewer external communications. Weather, range, power availability, frequency management and the sophistication of an adversary's electronic countermeasures can all affect performance. No single technology is likely to provide a complete answer. The future of counter-drone warfare will therefore belong not to the beam alone but to layered defence combining. The emergence of systems such as T-SHUL BEAM suggests that India is beginning to build the technological pieces of that architecture at home. (The writer is a retired naval aviation officer and a defence and geopolitical analyst. Views personal.)

One Person, One Tree: A Small Step Towards a Greener Future

Writer: Shital Yogesh Sharma
Shital Yogesh Sharma
Jun 12
3 min read

The world today stands at a critical environmental crossroads. Climate change, rising temperatures, air pollution, deforestation, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, and increasing natural disasters are no longer distant concerns-they are realities affecting communities across every continent. India, too, is witnessing these environmental changes through irregular rainfall, prolonged heat waves, declining groundwater levels, loss of green cover, and growing pollution in both urban and rural areas.


While governments across the world continue to frame policies and implement environmental programs, the responsibility of protecting nature cannot remain limited to institutions alone. Environmental conservation is not only the duty of governments, industries, or organizations-it is the shared responsibility of every individual. In this context, the idea of “One Person, One Tree” emerges as a simple yet powerful movement capable of creating meaningful change.


A tree is more than just a part of nature; it is a life-support system. Trees absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen, helping maintain ecological balance. They reduce pollution, conserve water, improve soil fertility, provide shelter to wildlife, and help regulate temperature. In cities and villages alike, trees contribute to healthier environments and better quality of life. Today, one of the biggest environmental challenges before India and the world is the increasing carbon footprint caused by rapid urbanization, industrial growth, and changing lifestyles. Expanding cities often come at the cost of green spaces. Forests are being reduced, and concrete landscapes are replacing natural ecosystems. As a result, the Earth’s natural ability to balance climate conditions is weakening.


However, environmental solutions do not always require large-scale interventions. Sometimes, collective action through small individual efforts can create transformational impact. If each person commits to planting and nurturing just one tree, the combined effect can be extraordinary. Imagine millions of people planting and caring for one tree each-this would lead to cleaner air, cooler surroundings, improved biodiversity, and stronger ecological resilience. But planting a tree is only the beginning. True environmental responsibility lies in nurturing that tree until it becomes self-sustaining. A sapling requires care, water, protection, and attention. Environmental conservation is not a one-day activity linked to occasions such as Environment Day-it is a continuous commitment.


The concept of “One Person, One Tree” also carries an important social message. It encourages people to reconnect with nature and develop environmental awareness. When children plant trees, they learn responsibility. When communities come together for plantation drives, they build environmental consciousness. When institutions adopt green initiatives, they inspire collective action. India has always carried a rich tradition of respecting nature. Rivers, forests, mountains, and trees have been deeply connected to culture and daily life. Today, this traditional wisdom needs to be strengthened with modern environmental action. Sustainable living practices, reducing waste, conserving water, minimizing plastic use, and increasing green cover should become part of everyday life. The environmental crisis cannot be solved by governments alone. Policies and schemes are important, but lasting change happens when citizens actively participate. Every household, school, office, village, and city have a role to play. Environmental protection begins with individual decisions and grows through collective responsibility. The message is clear: Do not wait for others to act. Become part of the solution. One tree may seem small, but its impact can last for generations. One Person. One Tree. One Commitment. One Greener Planet.


(The writer is an Environmental Studies Teacher based in Latur. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page