Forterra, a U.S. developer of autonomous vehicles, has disclosed that more than 100 of its self-driving all-terrain vehicles have been operating in Ukrainian conflict zones for roughly nine months. The company characterizes this as the largest deployment of autonomous ground vehicles in combat by any American defense technology firm. The vehicles, built on Polaris ATV platforms and outfitted with a custom sensor and computing package, are being used in logistics and casualty evacuation roles.
The revelation came through an interview-based report published by TechCrunch, which spoke with Forterra executives, a U.S. Army non-commissioned officer overseeing autonomous vehicle programs, and a Ukrainian soldier who has worked with the vehicles and who remains unidentified for security reasons.
According to the company, since the vehicles arrived in Ukraine last October, they have logged more than 2,500 miles across over 1,100 missions. They have carried a cumulative total of 777,440 pounds of cargo and completed 88 casualty evacuations. Some vehicles have been lost in combat, particularly in cases where they became stuck in deep mud or difficult terrain and were then targeted by Russian forces.
The deployment is funded by U.S. defense dollars. Forterra's chief growth officer, Scott Sanders, a former U.S. Marine officer, told TechCrunch that the company believes this is the first large-scale combat deployment of its kind by a U.S. firm. He also acknowledged the inherent uncertainty of battlefield technology: until equipment meets the realities of combat, its true performance cannot be known.
The Ukrainian soldier interviewed by TechCrunch described the vehicle as the most important uncrewed ground vehicle for logistics and defense in the country, adding that Ukrainian forces are eager to receive more. That sentiment, however, was not immediate. The soldier noted that Ukrainian forces have had mixed experiences with Western contractors bringing new technology to the battlefield, and Forterra's initial offering felt tailored to the high-end requirements of the U.S. Army. A key modification — adding a Starlink satellite internet antenna — transformed the vehicle into a significant value add.
For now, Ukrainian soldiers have mostly been teleoperating the vehicles in combat zones. This is partly because the vehicles are considered too valuable to risk in fully autonomous mode, and partly because the autonomy systems are not yet ready for the full complexity of warfare. The vehicles can navigate autonomously across varied terrain, but they cannot yet identify unexpected enemy forces and respond appropriately in real time. The Ukrainian soldier explained that the military needs to respond to enemy threats live, while the vehicle is in front of the enemy, and the current autonomy does not know how to do that yet.
Forterra, which began work on autonomous vehicles two decades ago, is now exploring how to combine classical robotics algorithms — the kind that underpinned early self-driving car development — with newer generative AI software that allows machines to react to their surroundings in a more generalized way. Sanders told TechCrunch that a major obstacle is data collection. Many tasks required in military contexts, such as navigating a minefield or operating a weapon system, are not things humans do in everyday life, so they are not readily available in open-source models. The company is working on a hybrid approach: using classical robotics methods where they are reliable and leveraging AI where it can add value.
The company has raised more than $500 million in venture funding from investors including XYZ Venture Capital and Moore Strategic Partners. Forterra is also positioning itself for lucrative national security contracts; it recently secured a U.S. Marine Corps production award for its Rogue Fires program alongside prime contractor Oshkosh Defense, according to a company announcement referenced in the TechCrunch report.
Why it matters for European robot service
For European readers of Robot Service Map, this deployment is significant for several reasons. It marks a shift in how military ground robotics are being validated: not in controlled test ranges, but in active combat. The lessons Forterra is learning in Ukraine — about electronic warfare, remote software updates, maneuvering in challenging terrain, and vehicle reliability — are directly relevant to any organization considering autonomous ground vehicles for demanding environments.
The report also highlights a broader trend in the U.S. military's approach to innovation. The funding for Forterra's mission comes from U.S. defense dollars, and it is part of a larger effort to transform the U.S. military through support of Ukrainian resistance to Russian invasion. While aerial drones have dominated public attention, the dynamics they have created — extensive no-go zones where surveillance can lead to death from above — have pushed Ukrainian strategists to seek ground-based autonomy as well.
Sergeant Major Corey Wilkens, who leads a U.S. Army program developing autonomous vehicles and tactics, explained that there is nowhere to hide on the modern battlefield. Troops become highly vulnerable to first-person view drones, other drones dropping munitions, artillery, mortars, and the full range of threats available to the enemy. This vulnerability is driving demand for ground-based autonomy that can move supplies, evacuate wounded, and perform other logistics tasks without putting human lives at risk.
For European defense and robotics companies, the Ukrainian experience offers a real-world case study in what works and what does not. The fact that Ukrainian forces initially found Forterra's offering too geared toward U.S. Army high-end requirements suggests a gap between military procurement specifications and actual battlefield needs. The modification that made the difference — adding a Starlink antenna — underscores the importance of connectivity in modern autonomous operations. European operators should note that rugged, field-ready connectivity solutions may be as critical as the autonomy software itself.
The report also reveals the current limits of autonomy in combat. Teleoperation remains the primary mode of operation in combat zones, not because the autonomy is poor, but because the stakes are high and the technology is not yet capable of handling unexpected enemy contact. This is a crucial data point for European buyers: full autonomy in unpredictable, hostile environments is not yet a mature capability. Any vendor claiming otherwise should be asked pointed questions about their real-world deployment data.
Forterra's approach to combining classical robotics with generative AI is also worth watching. The company's chief growth officer noted that many military tasks — navigating minefields, operating weapon systems — are not represented in open-source models because humans do not perform them in everyday life. This means the training data problem for military autonomy is fundamentally different from the civilian self-driving car problem. European companies working on similar challenges should expect to invest heavily in proprietary data collection and validation.
The scale of the deployment — more than 100 vehicles, 2,500 miles, 1,100 missions, 777,440 pounds of cargo, 88 casualty evacuations — provides a rare public dataset for evaluating autonomous ground vehicle performance in extreme conditions. European defense ministries and robotics firms should study these numbers carefully, while also recognizing that the report does not disclose certain operational details, such as the specific failure modes of lost vehicles or the full maintenance burden.
What buyers and operators should know
For organizations considering autonomous ground vehicles — whether for defense, security, or civilian applications — the Forterra deployment offers several practical takeaways.
First, the gap between Ukrainian-built UGVs and Forterra's Lancer vehicles is instructive. According to the Ukrainian soldier interviewed, Ukraine is already building its own uncrewed ground vehicles to move supplies and munitions or evacuate wounded soldiers. However, those domestically produced vehicles are typically battery-powered and can carry up to 250 kilograms. Forterra's Lancer vehicles, by contrast, are gas-powered and can carry 750 kilograms of cargo, making them more versatile and useful for logistics missions. Buyers should carefully assess payload capacity and power source against their operational requirements; battery-powered systems may be sufficient for some missions but inadequate for others.
Second, the report indicates that teleoperation is currently the dominant mode of control in combat zones. This has implications for connectivity requirements, operator training, and bandwidth planning. The addition of a Starlink antenna was a key enabler for Forterra's vehicles, suggesting that robust satellite communication is essential for remote operations in contested or infrastructure-poor environments. Buyers should budget for connectivity solutions and verify that their chosen platform can integrate with available satellite services.
Third, the limitations of current autonomy should be clearly understood. The vehicles can navigate autonomously across diverse terrain, but they cannot yet identify unexpected enemy forces and react appropriately. For buyers, this means autonomous ground vehicles are not yet a replacement for human decision-making in dynamic, hostile situations. They are best suited for structured missions — moving supplies along known routes, evacuating casualties from established positions — where the environment is relatively predictable and the risks of unexpected contact are manageable.
Fourth, the report highlights the importance of remote software updates and electronic warfare resilience. Forterra has learned lessons about updating its software from afar and ensuring vehicles do not break down in the field. Buyers should ask vendors about their remote update capabilities, their approach to electronic warfare threats, and their track record on vehicle reliability in demanding conditions. The report does not disclose specific reliability statistics or maintenance intervals, so buyers should request this data directly from vendors.
Fifth, the funding and competitive landscape matters. Forterra has raised more than $500 million in venture funding and is competing for national security contracts. Competitors in the space include Scout AI, which raised $100 million earlier this year to train foundation models and develop autonomous platforms for the military, including UGVs. Other startups like Field AI and Overland AI are trialing UGVs with the U.S. military. European buyers should be aware that this is a rapidly evolving market with significant venture capital flowing in, and that the competitive pressure is likely to drive rapid improvements in capability and cost.
Sixth, the report underscores the value of direct operational feedback. Scott Philips, Forterra's chief innovation officer, visited a Ukrainian unit's operations center to see the vehicles in action. He told TechCrunch that what struck him most was seeing exactly where the seams are: which steps are still manual, where data has to be re-entered or re-verified by hand, and where the team has already found ways to automate or speed things up. This kind of ground truth cannot be obtained from a slide deck. Buyers should insist on direct observation of their systems in operational environments, and vendors should be willing to embed personnel with users to identify workflow bottlenecks and automation opportunities.
Finally, the report makes clear that the technology is still evolving. Forterra is working on combining classical robotics algorithms with generative AI to enable more generalized reactions to surroundings. The key obstacle is data: many military tasks are not represented in open-source models because they are not things humans do in everyday life. Buyers should expect continued development in this area and should be cautious about vendors that overpromise on near-term autonomous capabilities in complex, contested environments.
The report does not disclose several details that buyers might want to know, including the specific cost of the vehicles, the full maintenance and logistics burden, the exact number of vehicles lost and the circumstances of each loss, and the contractual terms between Forterra and the U.S. government. These details are not publicly available in the source material, and any vendor claiming to have them should be asked for verification.
Sources
The first American autonomous ground vehicles are fighting in Ukraine
Published by Vigla Media OÜ (Estonia).