The Terror-Drone from Leipzig

Foiled drone attack in Leipzig—we’ll tell you what we see in this picture and what conclusions can be drawn: That’s an FPV drone, lying upside down; the battery is to the left of it, so it would be mounted on the bottom here, with the explosive charge on top (when flying in the air, it would be the other way around). At the front is the camera through which the pilot flies. And what we see behind it is the mount for the explosive charge.

What we’re missing, of course, is the context—the thing is just lying there—but we do know a few parameters: the explosive charge was 800 gr of Semtex (at the bottom of the drone), and the battery looks very bulky; it could weigh anywhere from 600 grams to over a kilo. So the FPV drone must have been quite powerful: the propeller blades could be 10 inches or slightly smaller (8 or 9 inches).

Here’s a comparable frame: carbon-fiber FPV, camera up front, 10-inch propellers. This thing has no problem flying with a payload and battery totaling nearly 2 kilograms. When lifted by a man (who has nothing to do with Leipzig), it looks extremely impressive.

The explosive charge consisted of 800 gr of Semtex—that’s a lot. The Lockerbie jumbo jet was blown up with 350 gr. Semtex comes from a factory in the Czech Republic and is used for both civilian and military purposes. Since 1991, all plastic explosives must be doped—chemically marked—so that it might be possible to determine which batch the material came from and where it went… (If the explosive is older, this won’t work.)

The FPV drone can be deployed in two ways: with an impact fuse, it would fly toward the target and explode upon contact; or with a release mechanism. In that case, either impact fuses or remote fuses would be used. The fact that the FPV drone in Leipzig “crept up” at low altitude and was “shot down” by the bus driver suggests the latter. The fact that it didn’t explode in the process also suggests the latter.

There was something else: At 0:03, a DHL plane takes off and collides in midair with something—presumably a second drone. This could have been a surveillance drone, allowing the attacking team to see what was happening at the airport. It could also have been a repeater drone, which extends the radio range so that the operators (terrorists) could make a safer getaway after the attack because they were farther away from the target.

If there is no radio repeater, the operator must have been 1,000 to 4,000 meters away. He stands out because he’s wearing goggles and holding a controller—the image shows a military operator in Ukraine. So he’s likely accompanied by a close-protection officer who’s monitoring the surroundings or even flying the observation/repeater drone, if one was present. So at least two people, maybe more (drone operator, observer operator, close-in security officer, driver).

So if you hear the term “disposable agents,” don’t believe it. To fly an FPV well, the pilot needs 3 to 4 months of training. This includes the technical handling of the drone. And handling explosives also requires special skills.

If you’re also interested in FPV: Martin Rosenkranz has written the definitive work on the subject“FPV – Drones as Weapons”; he has tracked its development and describes, from both technical and tactical perspectives, what FPVs can achieve as a weapons system. And, of course, the topic on everyone’s lips is“drone defense”—it’s a gaping wound in the West. Kristóf Nagy has written the definitive guide on this topic, which describes what can be done to counter drones. Both books are available at the SPARTANAT Shop or on Amazon.