《反无人机技术报告》-2页_452kb

COUNTER-DRONE TECHNOLOGIES SUMMARY

Core Content

Counter-drone technologies are designed to detect and mitigate the risks posed by unauthorized or unsafe uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS), commonly known as drones. These risks include threats to critical U.S. sites, safety hazards to aircraft, and the use of drones for smuggling and criminal activities. As the number of UAS in the U.S. is expected to increase significantly by 2024, the need for effective counter-drone measures becomes more pressing.

Main Categories of Counter-UAS Technologies

Detection Technologies

• Infrared devices: Track heat signatures of UAS.
• Radio frequency (RF) systems: Scan for control signals.
• Acoustic methods: Recognize unique sounds from UAS motors.
• Radar systems: Used for tracking and identifying UAS.
• Most common technologies: RF and radar systems, as noted in the Bard College 2019 report.

Mitigation Technologies

• Interference signals: Jam or break the communication link between UAS and operator, causing the drone to land or return.
• Net systems: Capture UAS in mid-air.
• Kinetic methods: Use lasers or projectiles to disable or destroy UAS.
• Challenges: Kinetic methods may cause unintended damage; many systems have limited range and effectiveness against small, fast, or unpredictable UAS.

Key Risks and Incidents

• Safety and security risks: Unauthorized UAS near airports, government facilities, and prisons have caused disruptions and potential threats.
• Smuggling activities: Drones have been used to deliver illegal drugs into the U.S.
• Projected growth: By 2024, the commercial UAS fleet is expected to reach 828,000 units, and the recreational fleet around 1.48 million.

Current Status and Authorization

• Domestic use: Limited, with only four federal agencies authorized to deploy counter-UAS technologies: Department of Defense, Energy, Justice, and Homeland Security.
• International use: The Department of Defense has used counter-UAS tech since at least 2014.
• Challenges with current tech: Limited ability to detect and track small UAS, and many mitigation systems are only effective within 1,000 feet.

Opportunities

• Enhanced security: Counter-UAS systems can protect sensitive national security facilities, military bases, and large events.
• Better situational awareness: Tracking UAS activity and analyzing data over time can improve understanding of threats and enable proactive responses.

Challenges

• Effectiveness: Interference from other sources (e.g., power lines, LEDs) and false detections from small airborne objects (e.g., birds) can hinder performance.
• Unintended effects: Jamming may disrupt legitimate communications; kinetic methods may cause property damage or injury.
• Jurisdictional limitations: Only a few federal agencies are authorized to use counter-UAS tech, and state or local agencies lack specific federal permission.
• Privacy concerns: Detection methods may collect personally identifiable information, such as operator data or images of bystanders.

Policy Context and Questions

As UAS use grows, policymakers are considering several key questions:

• Innovation: What research and development could lead to more effective and less intrusive counter-UAS solutions?
• Authorization: What are the trade-offs of authorizing state and local law enforcement to use counter-UAS technologies?
• Coordination and oversight: What level of jurisdictional coordination and regulatory oversight is appropriate for the use of these technologies across federal agencies and others?

GAO Support and Resources

• GAO provides oversight, insight, and foresight on science and technology issues, including counter-UAS technologies.
• Selected GAO work includes reports on legal issues related to commercial and recreational drone use.
• References include the Bard College report on counter-drone systems and the advisory from the FAA, DOJ, FCC, and DHS on federal laws related to UAS detection and mitigation.

Conclusion

Counter-UAS technologies are essential for managing the growing risks associated with drone proliferation. While current systems offer some level of protection, they face limitations in effectiveness, unintended consequences, and legal authorization. Continued development and policy refinement are necessary to ensure these technologies can be used safely and responsibly to address emerging threats.