Exclusive: China to develop anti-drone armor for tanks shaped by lessons from the Ukrainian battlefield.

China’s new add-on protection kit for infantry fighting vehicles surfaces this week via the BTVT Telegram channel, which posted patent-style drawings and a short technical note attributed to Chinese industry. The images show a composite lattice and net system wrapped around a tracked vehicle, with extra frames above the turret and at the rear ramp. The concept is pitched as an answer to the new battlefield problem set created by cheap first-person-view drones, top-attack munitions and repeatable precision strikes. The kit is not tied to one chassis, although it is clearly sized for IFVs in the ZBD or VN families that typically carry a 30 mm cannon or, in the ZBD-04A’s case, a 100 mm gun paired with a 30 mm. In other words, frontline troop carriers that must fight under drone threat, not just move troops from A to B.
Follow Army Recognition on Google News at this link

Modular anti-drone shield adds side cages and an overhead canopy to intercept FPV strikes protect optics and hatches and improve crew survivability without permanent changes to the base vehicle (Picture source: BTVT Telegram channel).

What China proposes is a composite additional lattice armor platform, essentially a double layer of slat armor supported by external frames and covered with light protective nets. The drawings label side modules, a roof platform, a turret cage and a long rear frame, with several fold-out or hinged sections for access. The stated spacing from the hull is unusually specific: side modules stand off 50 to 60 cm, the upper platform sits 10 cm from the roof, the elevated canopy above the turret is 70 to 80 cm high, and a fourth multifunction module is also set 50 to 60 cm away from the vehicle. That geometry creates multiple “air gaps” that disrupt shaped-charge jets and detonate or deflect FPV warheads before they reach the armor.

The outer lattice forms the first protective layer. Slats break or yaw the incoming nose of a rocket or drone and can force premature initiation. The inner lattice becomes a second layer and is deliberately designed to carry other armor types. The note mentions dynamic protection and ceramics, which implies the inner frame can be used like a mounting rail for tiles or panels as missions demand. On top, the canopy and mesh shield the turret ring and crew hatches from bomblets dropped by quadcopters, a pattern seen again and again in recent conflicts. Nets are shown on the side and roof frames, acting like a lightweight catchment for low-mass threats that might slip between slats.

There is more than passive protection here. The platform is modular and multifunctional, with reserved spaces for active and soft-kill systems. The text names electronic warfare, early-warning radar and active protection. In practice that means the same frame that holds the slats can carry a set of radio jammers to disrupt FPV control links or satellite navigation, a small radar to cue alerts, and potentially a hard-kill countermeasure if the user can accept the weight and power demand. The sketches even show plate-like panels along the long rear section and brackets near the turret, which look like planned locations for sensors or emitters. It is an integrated approach, even if the aesthetic is unapologetically utilitarian.

The package aims to buy time and margin. Against FPV swarms, the outer slat layer and netting should cut down direct hits on vulnerable points like optics, fuel filler caps or the engine deck. Overhead, the canopy creates a stand-off space that can catch a small charge before it penetrates into the crew compartment. The modular spacing allows users to mix and match, for example retaining the heavy roof canopy for urban fighting while removing some side frames for transport. There are obvious trade-offs. Width grows, which complicates movement in forest or rubble. Weight goes up, and even if the lattice is light, the sum of frames, nets, brackets and optional armor tiles will eat into payload and might trim acceleration. Maintenance access always matters, so the inclusion of hinged panels in the drawings is not cosmetic; crews need to service engines and suspensions without stripping the entire cage. The upside is that the same outer frame gives real estate for antennas, jammers and even extra storage, which troops always value.

The distances quoted by the source are worth dwelling on because they reveal intent. A 50 to 60 cm side standoff is significantly deeper than classic slat kits seen in earlier wars, reflecting the higher energy of modern tandem-charge rockets and the growing use of improvised FPV warheads. Ten centimeters from the roof to the first platform is close, likely to preserve hatch function, while the 70 to 80 cm canopy above creates a true sacrificial volume to catch a top-attack drone or a mortar-size bomblet. This layering hints at a system designed after closely watching Ukraine and the Middle East, where ad hoc “cope cages” appeared first, then evolved into denser, two-tier structures once operators learned where drones actually aim.

The broader context is hard to miss. Everyone is racing to harden vehicles against small aerial threats, from simple steel cages to factory roof tiles and soft-kill boxes. China’s proposal pushes that idea toward a standard kit that can be cataloged, exported and scaled. For the People’s Liberation Army, it fits a wider push on counter-UAV at echelon, from platoon jammers to vehicle-mounted lasers in test units. For export, many customers operating Chinese 8x8s or tracked IFVs lack the budget to retrofit Western hard-kill APS across entire fleets, yet they still face FPVs in internal security or high-end combat. A lattice-plus-net kit with optional electronics is a pragmatic offer.

Beijing has been studying lessons from Ukraine as closely as anyone and prefers responses it can industrialize quickly. By turning battlefield improvisations into a modular product, China positions itself as a supplier of “good-enough” survivability packages to partners in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. If fielded, such kits could appear first on export VN-series IFVs guarding bases and convoys, then on PLA vehicles in training areas as doctrine adjusts. It also nudges the arms race toward layered vehicle protection, where armor, sensors and electronic effects are blended on relatively cheap platforms. That trend will pressure manufacturers elsewhere to reply with their own standardized cages and counter-FPV suites, not just ad hoc barwork.

As always with early imagery, caution is healthy. We are looking at drawings and a descriptive note, not a confirmed production fit seen on exercises. Even so, the design choices make sense. They answer the threat as it is today, with room for the next tweak when drones get faster or smarter. It is not elegant, but elegance is not the point. Survivability is, and China’s composite lattice kit is clearly aimed at giving IFV crews a fighting chance under a sky filled with small, cheap and very persistent enemies.

Written by Evan Lerouvillois, Defense Analyst, Army Recognition Group.

Evan studied International Relations, and quickly specialized in defense and security. He is particularly interested in the influence of the defense sector on global geopolitics, and analyzes how technological innovations in defense, arms export contracts, and military strategies influence the international geopolitical scene.