The appearance of a 105mm Indian Army field gun fitted with an anti-drone cage demonstrates how rapidly evolving UAV threats are affecting even conventional artillery. Photographs from an Army exercise show a substantial metal mesh structure positioned around the weapon and crew stations. Its purpose is to provide additional protection against attacks from above and the sides without preventing the gun from carrying out its normal duties. Towed artillery has become increasingly vulnerable in an environment where drones can continuously observe battlefield positions. After locating a gun position, an adversary could employ FPV drones or loitering munitions to strike the artillery system or personnel. The Indian Army has already tested similar protective structures on other military platforms, indicating growing interest in passive measures against UAV threats. Depending on the configuration, such cages can be folded, detached or otherwise adjusted when the gun needs greater freedom of movement. The concept is based on a simple survivability principle: placing a physical obstruction between the drone and the most exposed portions of the weapon. However, the cage is not a standalone counter-drone solution. Its purpose is to add another protective layer that may disrupt an approaching UAV or reduce the effectiveness of a drone-dropped munition. The growing adoption of overhead protection has been influenced in part by combat experience from Ukraine, where artillery units have faced extensive drone reconnaissance and repeated FPV attacks. For Indian artillery formations, this underlines the need to combine traditional measures such as camouflage and rapid movement with additional protection against aerial threats. Reported Army procurement requirements in 2026 suggest that anti-drone cage solutions are being considered for guns and other military equipment. This could be especially relevant to legacy towed artillery, which remains an important part of the Army’s inventory despite the arrival of more mobile mounted and self-propelled systems. Because a lightweight cage is comparatively simple, it could improve protection without requiring a major redesign of an existing gun. Nevertheless, such equipment would need to complement rather than replace electronic countermeasures, kinetic counter-UAS systems and air-defence assets.
