Comparing drone identification systems Rain Fog Snow Background


Technology Optical


Accoustic Thermal Radar


Radio Frequency


Night & Day


No


Yes Yes Yes Yes


No No No


No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes


Yes Yes


Technologies for drone identification systems


The following technologies are used in drone identification systems:


• Electro-Optical (EO) – uses a visual signature


• Acoustic – due to noise attenuation has a limited range


• Infrared (IR) or Thermal – uses a heat signature


• Radar – accurate but expensive


• RF (Radio-Frequency) - locates characteristic signals broadcast by most drones, such as 2.4 and 5.8GHz


These technologies are compared in the table above.


Any means of disabling a drone whilst in the sky is not permitted in the UK via the Air Navigation Order, except for limited police powers which can be obtained through Military Assistance to the Civilian Authorities (MACA).


For Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) sites, some suppliers have been evaluated by the CPNI – though no standards exist for Effectors (C-UAS that incapacitate drones). Coordination of C-UAS at a national level is done via the Joint Security and Resilience Centre (JSaRC).


Procuring C-UAS


Crucially, it’s understanding the customer need – simply saying I want to ensure you defend my property against all drones just isn’t possible, for any site in the UK.


Broadly speaking, when procuring a counter- drone system, it’s essential to evaluate these aspects of the proposed system:


• Range • Price • Resilience if attacked with a single source • Installation setup • Customer support • Effectiveness


In a 2019 study of over 500 C-UAS systems, not a single C-UAS manufacturer would provide details about their product’s


© CITY SECURITY MAGAZINE – AUTUMN 2022


Yes Yes


cluster Yes No Yes Yes No


Wide area coverage


No Yes No Yes Yes


autonomous Range Position Detect


Yes Yes Yes Yes No


*** *


Limits v2.0 (July 2022) references four categories of technology that could realise a £45bn industry:


accuracy Price **** **


** *


***** *** ****


*** ***** *** ***


**** ***


performance in real-world use. This information vacuum makes it difficult for would-be C-UAS owners to know what actually works and what doesn’t, anticipate potential issues, or select a system that is best suited to their needs.


An effective intelligence system will be of far more use than physically dealing with a drone itself.


Defending against drones isn’t cheap


In a 2019 study, out of 123 C-UAS products for which pricing information was available, 77 cost more than £100,000.


A study that looked at equipping Germany’s 16 busiest airports with drone detection systems would cost upwards of half a billion euros. Personnel training, maintenance, and staff time to operate the counter-drone system all incur significant additional costs. As drones proliferate, related industrial secrets become just as vital to protect. This was recently evidenced by USA and UK security services in government news about alleged Russian and Chinese engagement and how some Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) systems have been exploited in the current Ukrainian conflict.


The duality of drones and security protection


Multiple drone solutions can enable businesses and their market position. PWC Skies without


(Be)DETECT(ed)


Cooperative threat (ID, position, altitude, relative heading)


Alert


(Electronic display, Audible)


Electronic Conspicuity Avoid


(Monitor, Prevent, Manoeuvre)


www.citysecuritymagazine.com DETECT


Non-Cooperative Air Threat (non EC aircraft)


Non-Cooperative Ground Threat (Obstacle, building, terrain)


Alert (Electronic display, Audible) Avoid


(Monitor, Prevent, Manoeuvre)


> 30


Comparing Detect and Avoid: cooperative and non-cooperative technology


• Unmanned Traffic Management (UTM) • Detect and Avoid (DAA) • Autonomy • Infrastructure (digital and physical)


Two examples include automated patrols from drone-in-a-box solutions or persistent surveillance on coastal waters.


Detect and Avoid


C-UAS is essential for DAA and infrastructure – the flow chart below illustrates the different aspects on both cooperative and non- cooperative technologies from a regulatory perspective. The solutions needed for cooperative and non-cooperative technologies could be the same.


Manned aviation for years has relied on ground-based radar to safely separate aircraft, and C-UAS solutions have an opportunity to do the same for drones.


A linear asset could deploy a suite of mobile C- UAS units to secure a corridor where drones are operating BVLOS (Beyond Visual Line of Sight), and longer term they could be part of the national infrastructure the UK so badly needs to permit BVLOS operations, if done at the right price point to enable this.


Summary


Counter-UAS is naturally something that will be included when developing your security strategy. But organisations must also consider the active use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) as a crucial way to enable the development of regulatory safety cases for other areas of security. Not only can UAS detect and ensure the skies above are clear, but they can help to make a much more robust business proposal for expanding the scope of your operation to BVLOS and automation.


Aleks Kowalski


Business Development Director LiveLink Aeorospace livelinkaerospace.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40