In late August the US Army fired a high-energy laser at three drones near the Mexican border. All three came down. A week later the Army signed the contract to buy the production version.
AeroVironment announced on Wednesday that it has won a $464.8m award from the Army’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Fires. The company says it is the first production contract for directed energy systems in United States history.
What was bought
The Enduring-High Energy Laser programme covers dozens of LOCUST X3 systems delivered over the next few years. Each is a 30-kilowatt laser designed to work on any platform.
The Army plans to mount them on Joint Light Tactical Vehicles, with palletised versions as an option. AeroVironment says it is also studying whether the system fits on an Infantry Squad Vehicle.
The target set is group 1 to 3 unmanned aircraft, meaning small and medium drones rather than large military aircraft. AeroVironment will also supply support and training.
The X3 carries the company’s own AI targeting software, and sits inside a wider architecture AeroVironment sells for layered air defence. The laser is one effector in that system rather than a standalone gun.
The deal is an Other Transaction Agreement. That mechanism lets the Pentagon buy outside standard federal acquisition rules, and it moves faster than a conventional contract allows.
It was already being used at home
The sequence matters more than the money. On the night of 25 August and into the following morning, a task force under US Northern Command used laser technology from the same programme. The target was a group of drones in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas.
Fernanda González reported the operation for WIRED en Español, in a piece Ars Technica later carried in translation. The lasers destroyed three drones. Officials described the aircraft as a physical threat to US military personnel and to Customs and Border Patrol.
Major General Curtis Taylor, who commands the task force, tied the aircraft to organised crime. Cartel networks, he said in a statement, are increasingly using drones to move people illegally and to spy on American personnel and their law enforcement partners.
Nobody has publicly confirmed who flew the three drones. The Army has not released the exact location either.
Two different lasers, and the difference matters
The systems used at the border ran at 20 kilowatts. They came from the Army Multi-Purpose High Energy Laser programme, the prototype effort that preceded this week’s contract. The LOCUST X3 now entering production is a 30-kilowatt system.
The two are related, but they are not the same weapon. The Army has also declined to say which configuration went to Texas.
AeroVironment delivered the first two prototypes in September 2025 and two more, mounted on tactical vehicles, that December. The newer versions carry their own radar and command systems rather than working as standalone devices.
A laser of this class works by holding a concentrated beam on a moving target long enough to heat it until it fails. How much damage it does depends on range, how long the beam stays on target, and what the drone is made of.
The clearance came first
Firing a laser weapon inside American airspace required permission that did not previously exist. AeroVironment credits testing at White Sands Missile Range, run with a joint task force and the Fires office. That testing produced a safety agreement between the Department of War and the Federal Aviation Administration, validating the system for domestic use.
So the order runs: clear the weapon for use at home, use it at home, then buy it. Each step took weeks rather than years.
That pace is the point AeroVironment is selling. John Garrity, who runs directed energy at the company, called it a production-ready system rather than a future capability.
Where this sits
Counter-drone spending has been climbing for two years. We reported in June that the Pentagon’s drone-dominance push was lifting every defence-tech valuation in the sector, and Europe has produced its own crop of drone unicorns, including Berlin’s Stark.
Lasers are the other half of that trade. A drone costs a few hundred dollars. An interceptor missile costs a great deal more. That gap is the economic argument directed energy has always made, and until now nobody had bought it at scale.
It also lands in a week when federal agencies buying autonomous hardware for domestic use has become its own story. We reported on Tuesday that immigration enforcement plans to buy a fleet of robot dogs without running a competition, and that two states moved against automated licence plate readers in a single week.
Counter-drone systems have appeared at civilian events too, including this summer’s World Cup.
What is not yet established
AeroVironment’s claim to a historic first is the company’s own, made in its announcement. The Army has not described the award in those terms. The distinction the company draws is between prototype purchases, which have happened before, and a production contract, which it says has not.
The company reports quarterly earnings on 9 September. It is expanding an Albuquerque facility with $30m announced in March to handle the production run.
The system has had an unusually public run-up for a weapons programme. It was demonstrated at sea aboard a US Navy carrier in April and featured on 60 Minutes.
What the contract does establish is that a weapon which spent a decade as a demonstration has a delivery schedule, a vehicle to sit on, and a proving ground inside the United States.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.
Facts Only
* The US Army fired a high-energy laser at three drones near the Mexican border in late August.
* A week later, the Army signed a contract with AeroVironment for the production version of these systems.
* AeroVironment won a $464.8 million award from the Army’s Portfolio Acquisition Executive for Fires.
* The program covers dozens of LOCUST X3 systems, each a 30-kilowatt laser.
* The lasers are designed to work on any platform.
* The Army plans to mount the lasers on Joint Light Tactical Vehicles, with palletized versions as an option.
* The target set is group 1 to 3 unmanned aircraft.
* The X3 carries the company’s AI targeting software and is part of a broader layered air defence architecture.
* The contract was executed via an Other Transaction Agreement.
* A task force under US Northern Command used laser technology on drones in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas, on August 25th.
* The prototype systems used at the border ran at 20 kilowatts, while the new LOCUST X3 is 30-kilowatts.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative pivots on the acceleration from demonstrated capability to mass production of directed energy systems for counter-drone defense. The established pathway—prototyping via specialized testing followed by a massive production contract—is highlighted as a key selling point, suggesting that the speed of deployment is as significant as the technology itself. The shift from research and prototype expenditure to a formal production agreement establishes a critical infrastructure loop where testing validates feasibility before large-scale manufacturing begins, bypassing slower conventional acquisition timelines. This mirrors parallel developments in federal procurement regarding autonomous hardware, indicating a systemic impatience with bureaucratic processes when facing tangible security threats.
The economic argument for directed energy rests on bridging a significant cost gap: the low cost of drones versus the high cost of interceptor missiles. The pattern suggests that technological advancement, when tied directly to demonstrable threat mitigation, can rapidly create market and procurement viability, especially when facilitated by non-traditional contracting methods like Other Transaction Agreements. The implication is that the focus shifts from incremental defense improvements to systemic technological dominance in autonomous warfare environments.
The underlying dynamic involves a tension between capability realization and regulatory/political establishment. The process suggests an alignment where demonstrated operational success (laser use) creates the political and logistical necessity for procurement, rather than traditional long-term policy development driving technology adoption. The lack of public confirmation regarding specific deployment locations and exact system assignments introduces an ambiguity that warrants scrutiny regarding how threat perception is managed versus actual implementation.
Bridge Questions: If the pace of production can be leveraged as a strategic advantage, what institutional frameworks must evolve to manage rapid deployment cycles in defense acquisition? How does the demonstrated effectiveness at the border inform future requirements for layered air defence systems beyond kinetic engagement? What are the long-term implications when technology demonstration outpaces established governance structures?