Ukraine’s fiber-optic drones get squeezed by AI data center demand

Tracing back to the source Ukraine competes with Russia and data centers for China’s optical fiber supply. A Ukrainian soldier holds a tangle of fiber optic cable from the Russian FPV (First-Person View) drone that struck her vehicle on July 19, 2026 in Kramatorsk, Ukraine. Credit: Scott Peterson/Getty Images Impervious to battlefield jamming, drones physically connected to human operators by miles of fiber-optic cables have become such a common weapon of war in Ukraine that trees and fields are strewn with tangled cables thinner than fishing lines. But importing such fiber-optic material from China has become more costly as drone warfare’s needs compete with global demand from AI data centers for the same limited supply—and so Ukrainian drone makers have been adapting. Since the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, the Ukrainians have been forced out of necessity to continually develop battlefield innovations involving first-person view (FPV) quadcopter drones and other heavier types of drones. But it was the Russian military that first deployed unjammable fiber-optic drones to repel Ukrainian forces’ cross-border incursion into the Kursk Oblast in 2024. The Ukrainians quickly followed suit in developing their own fiber-optic drones, given the drones’ capability to shrug off electronic warfare jamming that could neutralize radio-controlled drones. Russia and Ukraine have relied on Chinese suppliers for some off-the-shelf drones and a wide array of drone components, including bulk orders of fiber wound around very large spools or sometimes small finished spools ready for installation on drones. The finished spools can hold enough fiber-optic cable for drones to regularly operate at ranges of dozens of miles, and sometimes up to 62 miles (100 kilometers) in extreme cases, as reported by the independent Russian publication The Insider. Ukraine and Russia have been producing an estimated 50,000 fiber-optic drones per month in recent years. That’s a lot of optical fiber that has effectively become a one-time battlefield consumable. But China’s economic and security ties with Russia have enabled Russia to import significantly larger amounts of fiber-optic cable than Ukraine—at least according to China’s official customs data. For example, Russia imported 328,000 miles of fiber-optic cable from China in August 2025 alone, compared to Ukraine getting just 72 miles of cable from Chinese companies, according to The Washington Post. To get a better sense of how drone warfare has increased demand for optical fiber technology, Russia alone bought more than 37 million miles (60 million kilometers) of fiber-optic cable in 2025, according to The Insider and Russian business publication Vedomosti. That means Russia’s purchases amounted to more than 10 percent of all fiber produced worldwide last year, when it had previously never accounted for more than 1 percent of global demand. The global AI boom and ongoing data center buildout have also strained optical fiber supply, with an expected worldwide shortfall of 111 million miles (180 million kilometers) in 2026, according to the market research firm TrendForce. That has further increased the cost of optical fiber purchased by Russia and Ukraine, including the bend-insensitive fiber that is especially coveted for fiber-optic drones. One Ukrainian drone manufacturer navigating these supply chain challenges is BlueBird Tech, which produces fiber-optic drones along with other military drones, a ground robot, drone detection systems, and electronic warfare systems. Ars reached out to BlueBird Tech to learn more. The following Q&A represents written responses from Oleksiy, a BlueBird Tech R&D representative, after an initial conversation with Ars. The responses have been lightly edited for clarity. Oleksiy is only being identified by first name for security reasons. The Zhakh series of FPV quadcopter drones made by the Ukrainian company BlueBird Tech can unspool fiber-optic cable to maintain communications with human operators. Credit: BlueBird Tech The Zhakh series of FPV quadcopter drones made by the Ukrainian company BlueBird Tech can unspool fiber-optic cable to maintain communications with human operators. Credit: BlueBird Tech Ars Technica: How has the use of fiber-optic drones by Ukraine and Russia evolved, and where does the technology stand today? Oleksiy: Fiber-optic drones are a specific type of drone used for particular operations. One of their main characteristics is that they do not produce the same radio-frequency (RF) emissions as conventional RF-controlled FPV drones. That means conventional RF detectors cannot detect them in the same way, and electronic warfare systems cannot disrupt their control link in the same way either. At the same time, fiber-optic drones have their own operational limitations. A pilot who is experienced with a conventional RF-controlled FPV drone cannot necessarily switch immediately to a fiber-optic drone. It requires specific skills, and fiber-optic drones have different flight characteristics. So there are significant advantages, particularly when operating in an electronic warfare environment, but there are also limitations in terms of operation, pilot training, and cost. Because of the high density of electronic intelligence and electronic warfare systems on the battlefield, using conventional radio-controlled FPV drones has become increasingly difficult. Fiber-optic technology provides a way to operate in these conditions, although it also comes with certain limitations. So today, both sides are using fiber-optic drones on the battlefield, but radio-controlled drones still make up the larger share overall. Ars Technica: What are the main disadvantages or limitations of fiber-optic drones? Oleksiy: One of the biggest limitations today is cost. If we compare fiber-optic prices in 2025 and 2026, we have seen increases of roughly six to ten times. The most difficult period in terms of prices and shortages was around March. Since then, the situation has stabilized to some extent. But the underlying issue remains that the material primarily comes from China. That means Ukrainian manufacturers depend on Chinese supply, logistics, availability, and pricing. There is also broader global demand for fiber-optic material. FPV drones are only one application. Data centers around the world consume large amounts of fiber, and the growth of AI infrastructure is also contributing to demand. So Ukrainian drone manufacturers are operating within a much larger global market for fiber optic, and that affects both availability and price. Ars Technica: How are Ukrainian manufacturers adapting to these supply-chain and quality challenges? Oleksiy: One important change is that many manufacturers are moving the spooling process in-house. Instead of buying a finished fiber-optic spool for an FPV drone, they can buy the fiber in much larger spools and produce the smaller drone spools themselves. This does not remove the dependence on China for the material itself, but it gives manufacturers more control over the finished product. Quality is a major reason for doing this. We have seen problems and defects in finished spools supplied from China. By doing the spooling themselves, manufacturers can introduce their own quality-control procedures and achieve a more consistent result. It can also make the finished spool somewhat cheaper than buying a finished product in China and transporting it to Ukraine. But quality is the most important factor. If a fiber-optic spool has a defect, you can lose the drone, lose the mission, and lose the target. Fiber optic is also not the only component in this supply chain. Media converters are another component manufacturers need to source, and China is important for that supply as well. Ars Technica: So Ukrainian companies are buying large quantities of fiber and producing the FPV spools domestically? Oleksiy: Yes. A manufacturer can buy a large spool of fiber-optic material and then use that material to produce smaller spools designed for FPV drones. That also allows the manufacturer to perform its own quality checks during production rather than relying entirely on the quality of a finished imported spool. Ars Technica: Has this become the standard approach across the Ukrainian industry? Oleksiy: It depends on the manufacturer and on the size of the company. Larger companies may have the resources to do the spooling themselves. That requires spooling equipment, people who understand the process, testing capabilities, and quality control. Smaller manufacturers may not have those resources. In those cases, they may buy finished spools from larger Ukrainian manufacturers or from suppliers abroad, including China. So there is no single model across the industry. It largely depends on the scale and capabilities of each manufacturer. Ars Technica: Can Ukraine source fiber-optic material from countries other than China? Oleksiy: You can buy fiber-optic material through suppliers in other countries, but in practice China remains the main source in this market. There can be intermediaries in other countries, and prices can differ depending on the country and the purchasing route. But in the end, China remains the main source of the fiber-optic material we are talking about. Ars Technica: Have Ukrainian companies experienced actual shortages or situations where suppliers were unable or unwilling to fill orders? Oleksiy: Yes, there have been situations like that. It depends on many factors, including how the material is purchased, which supplier is involved, and the logistics. There have also been cases where Chinese manufacturers have told Ukrainian buyers that they did not have material available for them because they were from Ukraine. Russia also has more direct logistics with China, so from a practical supply-chain perspective it has an easier route for sourcing this material. Ars Technica: Are there other important supply-chain challenges beyond availability and price? Oleksiy: Yes. Logistics is another important factor. Once the material reaches Ukraine, it still has to pass through customs and then be transported to manufacturers. Air raid alerts can interrupt this process. Customs operations and other parts of the logistics chain may stop during alerts, which adds time before the material reaches the manufacturer. So companies have to take these delays into account when planning production. There are also security considerations. I cannot discuss specific cases involving attacks on fiber-optic production because of security restrictions. But manufacturers are potential targets for the enemy, so security measures are extremely important for developers, suppliers, and manufacturers. Ars Technica: Is the physical transportation route from China to Ukraine also a challenge? Oleksiy: Yes. The route from China to Ukraine is much longer, and that creates challenges in terms of both time and logistics costs. So the problem is not only obtaining the material itself. Manufacturers also have to account for the time and expense required to transport it over a long distance. Ars Technica: How do these price, logistics, and supply-chain challenges affect how a drone manufacturer approaches fiber-optic systems? Oleksiy: Planning becomes extremely important. You need to plan production and logistics together. If you understand your manufacturing requirements in advance, you can plan your logistics and your next orders accordingly. Having more of the manufacturing process under your own control is also important. Quality is another major factor. If the fiber has fewer defects, you can produce more usable FPV spools from one large spool of material. If there are many defects, you ultimately produce fewer usable spools from the same amount of fiber. So production planning, logistics planning, in-house manufacturing capabilities, material quality, and the skills of the people doing the work are all closely connected. Ars Technica: Does producing fiber-optic spools require specially trained personnel? Oleksiy: Yes. We do not have universities that specifically train people to manufacture these FPV fiber-optic spools. So it comes down to training, training, and more training. When people first learn the process, they naturally make mistakes and create defects. They need practical experience to improve. Training itself also consumes fiber-optic material because people have to practice the actual manufacturing process. So developing skilled personnel is another part of scaling production. The goal is to develop the skills required to manufacture consistently high-quality spools with as few defects as possible. Ars Technica: What makes manufacturing a fiber-optic spool technically difficult? Oleksiy: You need to understand a lot about the fiber itself, about the spooling process, and about what happens when the fiber unwinds from the spool during operation. Fiber-optic cable is fragile and can be damaged or broken relatively easily. If something goes wrong during manufacturing or while the fiber is unwinding, you can damage the fiber and lose the connection. That is why practical experience is so important. You need to practice the manufacturing process, and that can require many kilometers of fiber just for training. The equipment used for spooling also matters. If you use low-quality equipment or the equipment is not configured properly, you can introduce more defects into the finished spool. So both the equipment and the people operating it affect the quality of the final product. Ars Technica: How automated is the spooling process? Oleksiy: It depends on the type of equipment. Some systems require more manual involvement, while others are more automated. But even with automated equipment, skilled personnel are still required. Someone has to configure the equipment correctly and understand how the process works. The way the system is set up also affects the quality of the finished product. So automation does not remove the need for expertise. Ars Technica: How do manufacturers test the quality of finished fiber-optic spools? Oleksiy: There are different levels of testing. Every finished spool should be checked to make sure the optical link itself is working properly. But if you want to ensure consistent production quality, that is not enough. You also need to take a portion of the finished spools from a production batch, install them on actual FPV drones, and fly them under real conditions. That allows you to test not only the optical connection itself, but also whether the finished spool performs properly during an actual flight. So every spool should undergo link testing, while some of the finished spools from each production batch should also be tested in real flights. That combination is important if you want to maintain consistent quality in production. Jeremy Hsu is a reporter exploring a wide range of topics across deep tech and AI. He has previously written for New Scientist, Scientific American, IEEE Spectrum, Wired, Undark Magazine and MIT Tech Review, among many other publications, about topics such as deepfakes, data centers, drones, battery tech, robotics, and GPS jamming. He also has a Master of Arts in Journalism from NYU, and a bachelor's degree from University of Pennsylvania in History and Sociology of Science, with a minor in English. 0 Comments