Rosseti Spends 3 Billion Rubles as Three Drone-Defense Buyers Top 6 Billion

More than 6 billion rubles separates the three largest named buyers from the smaller participants in Russia’s expanding counter-drone market. Rosseti and its affiliated organizations reportedly spent more than 3 billion rubles, while water utility Mosvodokanal purchased 1.7 billion rubles of protection and energy company Inter RAO spent another 1.3 billion rubles.

The figures come from a Novaya Gazeta Europe investigation of company procurement data, which found that energy companies, water utilities and airports increased their purchases in late 2026. The reported orders cover physical barriers, specialized rifles and electronic-warfare systems, indicating that counter-drone readiness is becoming a layered and expensive requirement for essential infrastructure.

Rosseti, the state-owned operator of Russia’s power grids, was the largest identified buyer. Its spending is significant because electricity networks contain geographically distributed equipment that must remain available despite physical threats, equipment failures and other disruptions. Adding protection against small unmanned aircraft creates another operating burden beyond conventional perimeter security and system redundancy.

Mosvodokanal’s 1.7 billion-ruble total broadens the issue beyond the power grid. The company supplies water and wastewater services in Moscow and the Moscow Region and operates nine small hydroelectric plants. Its procurement shows how drone-defense spending can extend across facilities that combine utility operations with electricity generation.

Inter RAO’s reported 1.3 billion rubles brings the three largest named totals above 6 billion rubles. Other energy-sector purchases add to the scale: TGK-2, identified as a Gazprom subsidiary, allocated approximately 400 million rubles, while Lukoil-Ekoenergo reportedly spent 350 million rubles.

Airports add another operating environment

The spending also reaches aviation. Sheremetyevo Airport and Russia’s state air traffic control corporation were identified as major purchasers, although their totals were not reported. Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Airport reportedly spent about 300 million rubles despite its location far from the Ukrainian border.

That geographic spread suggests the procurement drive is moving beyond facilities closest to the conflict and into broader infrastructure planning. Airports present a particularly demanding environment because any counter-drone equipment must coexist with legitimate aircraft operations, communications and regulated airspace. Procurement is therefore only one part of readiness; operators must also address testing, coordination, training, maintenance and reliable identification of activity around protected facilities.

The mix of wire mesh, specialized weapons and electronic systems reflects different defensive functions. Physical barriers can protect selected equipment, while electronic systems are intended to detect or counter aerial threats. No single category provides universal coverage across power plants, substations, water facilities and airports, which differ in layout, operating constraints and the consequences of interrupted service.

This layered approach is not unique to Russia. U.S. utilities have also raised concerns about their ability to protect infrastructure from drones. A North American grid-security exercise found uncertainty around which technologies operators can legally deploy and how government agencies would support them. Utilities are incorporating airspace monitoring and drone detection into broader physical-security programs, according to a review of the exercise and industry response.

Technology assessment remains a continuing requirement because drone capabilities can evolve faster than protection programs. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s counter-unmanned aircraft systems program, for example, evaluates technologies in laboratory and operational environments and helps define requirements for limited deployments. That work illustrates why buying equipment does not by itself establish a dependable defensive capability.

Service disruptions turn protection into a reliability cost

The Russian procurement expansion follows repeated Ukrainian strikes during 2025 and 2026 against electricity-generation and distribution facilities. Some attacks disrupted heat and power supplies for local residents, according to the investigation. Those reported outages give the spending a direct civilian consequence: protection is being funded not only to preserve equipment, but also to reduce the risk that damage will interrupt essential services.

Counter-drone readiness will consequently compete with maintenance, modernization and resilience projects for money and personnel. Equipment must be integrated into existing security operations, supported over its service life and adapted as threats change. Airports and utilities must also avoid allowing protective systems to interfere with their primary missions.

The disclosed totals are incomplete because spending figures were not provided for every major purchaser, including Sheremetyevo Airport and the state air traffic control corporation. Even so, more than 6 billion rubles from Rosseti, Mosvodokanal and Inter RAO alone shows that defending the airspace above civilian infrastructure has become a substantial operating expense rather than a narrow security purchase.

By Stephen Wallace — Editor for AMI’s aerospace integration and unmanned mobility coverage, focused on drone manufacturing, VTOL systems, autonomous networks, and air-ground mobility links.