Acoustic Sensing: From Zapping Mosquitos to Drones

Recently, at-large Corporate Journalist Curtis Hand spoke one-to-one with DroneShield CEO Oleg Vornik.  While his personal and professional stories are unique, uniquely DroneShield has emerged far away from NATO Europe (Australia) to become one of the Alliance’s popular counter-UAS solutions. On the advent of announcing its new Belgium production and testing facility, Hand explores Vornik’s background, leadership, the company’s roots and its evolutionary technological advances that set it apart from other soft-kill drone counter measures.

The Back-Story

Curtis Hand (Hand): “The technology world evolves as fast as the earth revolves”, a defence industry analyst once said of the military’s industry. Much has happened and evolved over the past dozen years since Drone Shield’s technology was first developed – and yours is an unusual story, how did you come to DroneShield?

Oleg Vornik (Vornik): I joined DroneShield in the company’s very early days, but the path to get there wasn’t typical. I was born in Russia and migrated to New Zealand as a child with my mother, who was a doctor but unable to practice when we arrived. We started out in humble circumstances, living in social housing. Those early experiences shaped a lot of my drive and ultimately pushed me toward a career in finance.

After about a decade in the finance industry, a fund I was working with approached me about a small new venture called DroneShield, founded in 2014. I came onboard as employee number one. The early years were very hands‑on as we built the company from the ground up, culminating in DroneShield listing on the Australian Stock Exchange in 2016.

Following DroneShield’s growth and our work supporting Ukraine’s defence after the invasion, I was personally sanctioned by the Russian government. For me, that’s very much a badge of honour and a reflection of the impact our technology is having in protecting people on the front lines.

Hand: I often ask CEOs about their motivations, et cetera; why DroneShield? What makes it special for you each day?

Vornik: What motivates me every day at DroneShield is the opportunity to work with some of the smartest people in the world who are solving some of the hardest defence and technology challenges. The threat landscape is evolving constantly, and drone technology moves fast. Our job is to make sure our technology stays ahead. It really is a continuous cat and mouse environment, and that pace keeps the team sharp and focused.

What also matters to me is the purpose behind what we build. A software update or a new capability might seem like a small technical milestone, but for someone serving on the front line it can be a lifeline. Knowing that our work can protect people in real situations is what makes DroneShield special and what drives me every day.

Hand: From where do you draw your own leadership inspiration? How does this invigorate your company’s stakeholders to achieve more?

Vornik: My leadership inspiration comes from pushing people to be the best versions of themselves. We have incredibly talented individuals at DroneShield, some of the smartest people I have met, and when people are supported, challenged and trusted, they consistently achieve more than they thought possible.

I am also driven by the impact our work has on people’s lives. Seeing DroneShield systems protecting those on the ground in places like Ukraine is a powerful reminder of why our team’s efforts matter.

Culturally, I often say people always remember how they first met someone, just like parents always see their children as they were when they were babies. I still see DroneShield through the lens of its start‑up days, even though we are now a mature, established company. Holding on to that mindset – the energy, the hunger, the closeness – helps keep us agile and fast, which are two of our biggest strengths.

That combination of purpose, speed and a “start‑up spirit” inside a company that delivers mature technology is what energises our people to keep pushing forward.

Development Roots 

Hand: How did the founders go from mosquito detection (and “why that ?”)  to creating one of the world’s most popular counter drone solutions?

Vornik: DroneShield’s founders initially worked on an acoustic sensing concept designed to detect mosquitoes for automated mosquito‑zapping devices. Very quickly, they recognised the parallel between identifying a mosquito by sound and identifying a drone the same way. At that time, drones were still seen mostly as toys, but the founders had the foresight to understand they could eventually be used for harmful purposes.

One of our early demonstrations to a national security agency used those acoustic sensors. That meeting was a turning point. It became clear that while acoustics had a role, radio‑frequency technology would be the foundation of effective counter‑drone detection. From there, we shifted our focus to building advanced RF‑based capabilities.

As drone technology has evolved, so has DroneShield. Today we should be viewed as a software‑driven technology company, not just a hardware company with a well‑known drone gun. Effective counter‑drone systems require a layered approach, bringing together RF sensors, radar and optical technologies into a single ecosystem.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine accelerated the global understanding of how modern warfare has changed. Drones are now central to both offence and defence, which means militaries must treat counter‑drone capability as core, not optional. That shift has driven strong demand for mature and battle‑tested technology.

With the threat environment changing so rapidly, defence forces, law enforcement and critical infrastructure operators want mature solutions. That focus on proven performance is a key reason DroneShield has grown into one of the leading counter‑drone providers in the world.

Hand: Where have DroneShield solutions been most effective in terms of active operational theatres? Do you see more civilian or military uptake? …Or have C-UAV solutions become a grey area wherein HLS and defence overlap, making the end-user market one in the same?

Vornik: Counter‑drone technology has become essential for militaries, in response to the evolution of modern warfare. In parallel, we are now seeing a growing grey zone where drones are being used for unknown or nefarious purposes in civilian environments. Europe has experienced this first‑hand, with unidentified drones operating around airports and other critical infrastructure. This has highlighted that the challenge is no longer limited to the military sector.

In 2025, DroneShield released a Total Addressable Market report showing that demand for counter‑drone technology is now almost evenly split between military and civilian sectors. We expect civilian requirements to grow, particularly among frontline users such as law enforcement and airport operators. As drones continue to proliferate, both sectors are recognising that counter‑drone capability is now a core part of modern security planning.

Hand: What are the prospects for more solution technology evolution in the CUAV detection and deterrent sector?

Vornik: The counter‑drone sector is evolving rapidly because our technological competitors are drone manufacturers, who constantly innovate to avoid detection and develop systems that are resistant to jamming or disruption. As drone technologies advance, our technology must advance just as quickly. It is very much a continuous cat and mouse dynamic.

A major part of staying ahead comes from software. Hardware is important, but world‑leading counter‑drone performance relies on powerful artificial intelligence. This is where technologies like DroneShield’s RFAI engine play a key role. It uses advanced AI to detect, classify and track drones with high accuracy, even in congested and contested environments. As drones become more autonomous and more unpredictable, AI‑driven detection is essential.

Another area where we expect to see significant technological evolution is in the way counter‑drone systems are layered. No single sensor is a silver bullet for drone detection, so a key focus for us is ensuring that different sensors and effectors can work seamlessly together. Customers increasingly want a unified solution that brings together RF detection and defeat, radar, and optical systems into one coherent picture. The ability for these inputs to work together is critical for accuracy and rapid decision‑making.

As counter‑drone sensors and effectors mature, our team is continuously identifying, assessing and building interoperability with complementary technologies. We put a lot of work into interoperability to make it easier for customers, so they don’t have to manage complex interoperability challenges themselves. Instead, they receive a solution that is ready to deploy, which reduces technical risk and speeds up operational adoption.

Our focus is to stay ahead of emerging threats, ensuring that as drone technology evolves, our counter‑drone ecosystem evolves faster.

Application Expansion

Hand: What do you think about resilience and critical infrastructure protection solutions needing to function seamlessly together these days, when addressing C-UAV requirements?

Vornik: Across different jurisdictions, the responsibilities for protecting critical infrastructure are often split across several agencies and levels of government. That can make information sharing fragmented, even when everyone is working toward the same outcome. When you are dealing with fast‑moving drones, that fragmentation may become a real operational challenge.

This is why we developed our C2 Enterprise solution. It is designed to give operators the access they need based on their role, legal authority or jurisdiction, while still enabling a unified operational picture when appropriate. In practice, that means each stakeholder can see the information they are responsible for, but national command centres or higher‑level decision makers can pull everything together into a single common operating view. It creates a balance between security, clarity and coordination, which is essential when multiple organisations need to respond as one.

Hand: How does the location of customers influence your plans for expanding the company’s manufacturing capacity?

Vornik: The ReArm Europe Plan / Readiness 2030 initiative has shown an increase in military spend across the EU, but strategically, this initiative is also focused on harnessing military spend to build up military capability, support Ukraine, and use military budgets to drive industrial strength.

This is why DroneShield have announced the establishment of manufacturing of a number of our products in the region, which will harness local supply chains.

However, this is not only about meeting the expectations as laid out by government initiatives – but also about building our manufacturing capacity. In 2025, our manufacturing capacity was around AUD$500 million. With our expansion of manufacturing in Europe and elsewhere, we are aiming to grow our global manufacturing capacity to AUD$2.2 billion in 2026.

Hand: When will we see this expansion take place and achieving which objectives first?

Vornik: DroneShield’s European Centre of Excellence has been established, and this will serve as the foundation for a broader expansion of our footprint across the region. It will support manufacturing, research and development, testing and logistics, giving us the ability to deliver technology more rapidly to our European customers.

We have also established our first physical office in Europe. This is an important step because it allows our team to respond more quickly and more effectively to customer needs on the ground. The immediate objective is to strengthen regional support, shorten response times and build deeper partnerships with governments and industry across Europe. From there, we will continue scaling our capabilities as demand grows.

Future Tense

Hand: Where do you see opportunities for collaboration coming from?

Vornik: We see strong opportunities for collaboration across several areas. One is with mature sensor and effector providers. As the counter‑drone landscape becomes more complex, customers want systems that work seamlessly together, and there is real value in building deeper interoperability between technologies that are already proven in the field.

There are also important opportunities across broader defence industry, including with traditional platform manufacturers. Many of their customers are coming to expect counter‑drone capability as part of their complete solution. Working alongside these companies allows us to embed our technology directly into their platforms, creating a more cohesive offering that aligns with end‑user requirements.

Finally, one of the most meaningful forms of collaboration is with our military and civilian customers themselves. By being part of their forward planning and capability roadmaps, we ensure that what DroneShield is developing not only meets their immediate needs but anticipates what they may require in the future. That dialogue shapes our innovation pipeline and ensures our solutions remain relevant, scalable and effective.

Hand: What are you witnessing from drone manufacturers developing countermeasures for existing C-UAV systems? (i.e., countermeasures against countermeasures)

Vornik: Naturally drone manufacturers invest heavily in countermeasures designed to evade or reduce the effectiveness of traditional counter‑UAV systems. As drones become more capable, manufacturers are working to make them harder to detect and defeat. This includes greater use of autonomy, encrypted communications, frequency‑hopping and even attempts to minimise RF emissions altogether.

Vornik: These developments are not surprising. Whenever a threat and a technology evolve in parallel, you naturally see cat and mouse dynamic. In our sector, that dynamic is accelerating. For example, we are seeing drones that rely less on remote control links, meaning they can continue operating even in contested electromagnetic environments. We are also seeing attempts to reduce visual and acoustic signatures, along with increased experimentation with swarming behaviours.

There are a few ways that we stay ahead. Firstly, our RFAI engine gives us the ability to identify new drones, even as manufacturers try to conceal them. Secondly, by combining RF detection with radar and optical sensors, we create a layered picture that is much harder to evade.

In short, the threat is evolving, and our multi‑sensor, AI‑driven approach must evolve with it.

Hand: What is it that we should be addressing in terms of C-UAV solutions or technology that we are not talking about now?

Vornik: One thing we don’t talk about enough is the speed at which governments are recognising the drone threat and then actually taking action. The question is whether they can afford to wait. What we saw with Operation Spiderweb in Ukraine is a reminder that no Air Force Chief wants a similar event occurring on their own airbase. Without counter‑drone technologies deployed, they are exposed.

Another point is that there is no value in waiting for the “next” technology before making a decision. Innovation in this sector is continuous. If customers hold back for the perfect moment, they are already behind the threat.

Militaries and civilian operators need to understand that technologies will keep evolving, which is exactly why we push software updates every quarter. It’s similar to having a smartphone. A new model may come out every few years, but in the meantime software updates ensure you stay current and secure. For our customers, those updates are what keep them prepared for the challenges they’re facing today.

Hand: Thank you, sir, for all of your time this afternoon.

Curtis Hand

Click here to read the latest issue of ESD.