A booming drone detection market is the result of the technology for drones rapidly evolving and people becoming more aware of their potential threat. Technology companies offer trustworthy detection techniques, but now businesses must deal with a new problem: how to react to an alert? Choosing the best drone countermeasure is difficult because each one has advantages and disadvantages of its own.
There are numerous drone countermeasures, just as there are numerous drone detection methods. Organizations must consider the regulations about the airspace around them, as well as the viability and advantages and disadvantages of each countermeasure when developing a drone response plan. No one response fits every threat or even every company within a single industry perfectly.
This strategy has several benefits. Depending on the use, it might be quite successful. It can be used in conjunction with the aforementioned countermeasures and doesn’t require official authorization. It lessens the possibility that someone will suffer injuries in a collision. However, the drone is not stopped, which is the main drawback of this countermeasure. While you work to reduce the risk to your workers and other assets, production may suffer and a harmful payload may still be delivered.
The detected drone is physically stopped by active means. This is their greatest asset. Drones are typically a crash danger when they are stopped, especially in densely populated places where they can result in physical harm and even fatalities. Another disadvantage is that, in the majority of nations, law enforcement can only make use of these in the event of an immediate threat. Among the active countermeasures are:
A crash is less likely if a counter-drone defeats an encroaching drone. However, it necessitates having a capable pilot on call around-the-clock to deal with trespassers. The counter-drone must also be exceedingly potent. This countermeasure is too expensive for most firms to use due to both of these concerns.
Precision is Difficult
The level of accuracy needed to precisely jam the drone signal without affecting other signals that use the same radio frequency is technically challenging to achieve. “The person jamming the RF signal should point the jammer at the moving object and account for multiple variables – from speed to distance, direction, angle of arrival, and altitude – while at the same time making sure they are not going to point at or near any objects that could be negatively impacted by jamming RF signals in the area,” says Dave Preece, CDO at airspace safety and security firm Fortem Technologies.
Another jamming issue is that it frequently necessitates the jammer to guess the band on which the signal is operating. Any technology operating inside the standard 2.4 to 5.0 MHZ range would likewise be interfered with. This would be problematic and potentially disastrous in an airport setting. Radio is used by air traffic controllers to connect the pilot and the tower. This transmission could be easily interrupted by a signal jammer. Airport ground staff use radio connections with pilots to monitor runways and guide aircraft to gates in between runways.
Restrictions and Concerns
In particular, the employment of electromagnetic disruption techniques is criticized since it may result in accidental electromagnetic interference (EMI) and impair the functionality of the equipment used for air navigation services on the ground and/or inside aircraft.
An anti-drone jammer can be a very effective instrument for thwarting drone misuse. It’s crucial to keep in mind though that they can also be utilized for other things, like minimizing radio signal interference. Whatever the motivation, it is obvious that an anti-drone jammer is a potent technology that warrants careful examination.