Counter – Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) in an Urban Environment
As drones continue to proliferate in skies across the globe, the necessity for effective countermeasures has become increasingly evident. The ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Israel showcase the military's evolving expertise in drone warfare, while domestically, there is a burgeoning concern over unauthorized drone incursions into restricted airspaces, including airports and correctional facilities. According to the US Government Accountability Office, there have been approximately 2,000 reported drone incidents at U.S. airports since 2021, indicative of a growing challenge for aviation security. Furthermore, these unmanned aerial vehicles have been linked to significant increases in contraband smuggling within correctional institutions. To effectively address these challenges, comprehensive strategies must be developed that employ a layered approach, integrating various sensors and both non-kinetic and kinetic solutions for neutralizing rogue drones. At Parva Industries, we are committed to focusing on kinetic solutions tailored for both urban environments and battlefield operations, aiming to enhance safety and security in the face of this evolving threat.
In urban Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) operations, adopting a multi-layered approach is essential to effectively locate, categorize, identify the operator, and safely neutralize unauthorized drones. Each layer of this approach utilizes a combination of advanced technologies and strategies to ensure comprehensive surveillance and response capabilities. In the following sections, we will explore the various methodologies and systems currently employed within each layer, detailing how they work in concert to create a robust defense against drone incursions in urban settings.
Location & Categorizing
The first step in addressing a drone problem is detecting and locating drones within restricted airspace. Several technologies can assist in this task, including radar, radio-frequency (RF) sensors, electro-optical (EO) systems, and infrared (IR) cameras, with many systems combining these methods for enhanced detection capabilities. Drones can be categorized based on their use of remote ID systems. As of March 16, 2024, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates that all drones in the United States be equipped with remote ID systems. These systems must broadcast the following information:
Drone ID
Drone location and altitude
Drone velocity
Control station’s real-time location and elevation
Timestamp
Emergency status
This data enables law enforcement and personnel managing restricted airspace to quickly identify and locate drone operators. It also aids in determining whether a drone poses a security threat or if it is merely a standard drone that has deviated from its intended flight path. In the absence of a remote ID, the drone is typically categorized as a rogue drone, which is more likely to be engaged in illicit activities.
Identity of Operator
By quickly locating the drone's controller through the remote ID system, we can efficiently deploy resources to track them and remove the drone if it poses no threat. This process is streamlined with drones equipped with remote ID systems. However, when dealing with drones lacking remote ID, identifying and tracking the controller becomes significantly more challenging. In such cases, it is crucial to have a robust system and process in place to intercept and manage drones whose origins and operators cannot be determined. This ensures that even in the absence of remote identification, appropriate measures can be taken to address potential security concerns.
Neutralizing Roue Drones
The final line of defense involves neutralizing rogue drones, which can be achieved through either non-kinetic or kinetic methods.
Non-kinetic options include:
RF Jamming: Disrupts the communication between the drone and its controller. However, it is limited as it cannot cover the entire RF spectrum, and drones equipped with frequency-hopping systems can evade jamming.
RF Takeover: Allows a system to remotely commandeer the drone and redirect it to a safe location.
GPS Spoofing: Misleads the drone’s navigation system, sending it to a designated safe area. This method can be ineffective against drones that use fixed internal navigation systems not reliant on external signals.
Each non-kinetic method has limitations, such as the potential for drones to evade RF jamming or GPS spoofing.
Kinetic options include:
Projectile Systems: Utilize bullets or missiles to shoot down the drone. This approach poses risks of unintended damage to civilians and infrastructure due to the potential for crashes.
Lasers: Aim to destroy the drone’s internal components through intense heat.
High-Power Microwave Systems: Generate microwave bursts to disable the drone’s electronics.
At Parva Industries, we are developing kinetic solutions designed to address these challenges in urban environments. Our high-powered air-based system employs projectiles specifically engineered to disable drones while minimizing risks to civilians and infrastructure.
Conclusion
According to Skykam, as of January 2021, there are 1,782,479 registered drones in the United States. While the majority of these drones operate without issue, a small subset is used improperly within restricted airspace for various reasons. To address these challenges effectively, a Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System (C-UAS) must employ a comprehensive, layered approach. This system should encompass capabilities to locate and track drones, categorize them as either friend or foe, identify their operators, and neutralize them when necessary. It should be adaptable, incorporating both non-kinetic and kinetic methods based on the specific situation. This multi-faceted strategy ensures a robust response to potential threats while managing the complexities of modern drone usage.
