V-BAT drones: defense procurement with the smell of scandal

Reuters reported about dozens of drone accidents V-BAT and claims to Shield AI. For Greece this is no longer a technical detail, but a critical national security issue in the background Turkey’s drone program.

Issue of purchasing V-BAT drones by the Greek Ministry of Defense, again found himself at the center of questions after an investigation Reuters due to problems of an American company Shield AI. The agency reported dozens of crashes, complaints from former employees, military injuries during operation and allegations that the company may have hidden or altered crash data. For Greece, this story is especially sensitive: the country has already received such drones, and one V-BAT earlier, according to media reports, crashed Rhodes.

According to Reutersfor the last 18 months more 50 from approximately 200 modernized V-BATs located in the internal fleet Shield AIwere destroyed in accidents during testing or training. The company, for its part, told Reuters that V-BAT remains one of the most field-proven VTOL drones, and since 2019 the system has flown approximately 18,000 hours.

The Reuters investigation also describes serious security incidents. In May 2026 A representative of the Romanian Navy suffered a severe hand injury during a training session with V-BAT off the coast of Texas: her hand got caught in the propeller of the device, as a result of which two fingers were torn off and a third was damaged. Shield AI told the agency that the case involved a violation of established safety procedures and not a product defect.

What Reuters writes about Greece

A separate block of investigation concerns Greece. According to a former employee’s complaint Shield AI Jacob Miller, cited by Reuters, during one of the tests, the company allegedly told the Greek military that the V-BAT was flying autonomously, although in fact the device was controlled manually. This is not a minor marketing stretch, but a fundamental question: If the army is selling an autonomous system, it should demonstrate autonomy, and not a beautiful performance with an operator behind the scenes.

The company also allegedly changed or deleted data in accident reports to paint a more favorable picture of V-BAT’s performance, Miller said. According to Reuters, this data, according to the applicant, was used to promote contracts not only in the United States, but also in countries such as Greece, Japan, Norway, Taiwan And Ukraine. It is important to emphasize: these are allegations from a complaint by a former employee, and not a court verdict.

Shield AI denies accusations of dishonesty and defends the reliability of its systems. In a response to Reuters, the company said the V-BAT has a strong safety history and operational incidents are not unusual for a drone of this type. And here the favorite gray area begins: for the manufacturer it is “operational incidents”, for the army it is the risk of losing expensive equipment, data, tasks and, in the worst case, people.

Rhodes incident

The Greek context is also reinforced by the story of V-BAT, which, according to Greek and specialized publications, crashed into Rhodes in the spring 2026. This incident was written about, in particular, Greek City Times and other publications, commenting on the Reuters investigation and Greek participation in the V-BAT program.

The accident of one drone in itself does not mean that the entire system is unusable. Military equipment breaks, falls and undergoes modifications. But when the accident in Greece overlaps with a Reuters investigation into dozens of crashes and complaints from former employees, the question stops being technical and becomes political: who tested the system, how the purchasing decision was made, what tests were carried out and what exactly did the Greek side know before the contracts were awarded?

Purchasing, “gifts” and market entry

In the Greek discussion, the topic of the so-called “donations” or demonstration supplies, which could pave the way for larger purchases. The logic here is simple and as old as bureaucracy itself: the system first appears as a gift, demonstration or “pilot project”, then departmental interest is formed around it, and then the full promotion of the contract begins.

A gift or demonstration of technology in itself is not a violation. The problem starts then when they replace independent assessmentnormal tests and comparison with alternatives. If the system has not been fully tested in Greek conditions, if its real capabilities were presented too optimistically, and the accident rate and limitations remained behind the scenes, then this is no longer “innovative procurement”, but a classic way to make a country expensively dependent on unproven technology.

It looks especially unpleasant against the background other controversial defense decisions. After the story with canceled by the Accounts Chamber purchase of aircraft Air Tractor For the government’s firefighting efforts, a new reputational risk arises: it seems that in the procurement sector, fancy presentations sometimes run faster than real tests. And then the government wonders why expensive equipment suddenly turns out to be not what was promised in the slides.

What does this mean for Greece

For Greece The V-BAT story is important on three levels. The first is operational: the army must understand how reliable the system it plans to use for reconnaissance, surveillance and operations in the complex environment of the Aegean Sea is. The second is financial: every lost device of this class is expensive, and maintenance and training of operators also do not appear out of thin air, as ministerial press services would like.

The third level is political and institutional. If an international investigation raises allegations of possible data corruption, demonstrations of manual controls under the guise of autonomy and accidents, the Greek Ministry of National Defense should not remain silent, but publicly explain:

• how many V-BAT have been purchased or are planned to be purchased;
• what tests were carried out before the decision was made;
• whether the Greek military was informed about international incidents with the system;
• what conclusions were drawn after the fall of the device in Rhodes;
• whether claims about the actual autonomy of the V-BAT have been verified;
• Is there an independent technical assessment of the system’s reliability?

So far there has been no official response Greek Ministry of National Defense The Reuters investigation has not been published. But silence does not work well in such a situation. It does not reassure, but creates the feeling that the department hopes to wait out the news, like the summer heat in an air-conditioned office.

Editorial comment

The V-BAT story is not a debate about whether a particular drone is “good” or “bad.” It’s a question of how Greece makes decisions in the field of defense procurement. If the army really needs the system, it must be tested strictly, for a long time and without advertising enthusiasm. If the system is in an emergency or its real capabilities were presented differently than they are in practice, this must be clarified before the contract, and not after the device crashes.

The logic of “gifts”, demonstrations and pilot deliveries, which then turn into full-fledged purchases, is especially dangerous. In defense, free entry often turns out to be the most expensive: first the country receives a “sample”, then infrastructure, training, dependency, contract, maintenance – and only after that it begins to understand that what it bought was not exactly what was shown.

Reuters investigation is not a verdict Shield AIbut it provides enough reasons for parliamentary questions, a technical audit and a public response from the Ministry of Defense. Because when it comes to military equipment, autonomy, accidents and millions of euros, citizens do not need another presentation about the “digital defense of the future.” They want a simple answer: who checked what they checked, who signed and who is responsible if the system turns out to be another expensive fiasco.

Source link