The Unseen Threats in Our Skies: Are We Really Protected?
Every minute, an aircraft, airport, or critical facility faces an airspace intrusion.
A single drone can shut down an entire airport. A single drone or bird strike can bring down an airplane:
- Unauthorized drones threaten airports, government buildings, mass gathering events, military infrastructures, and correctional facilities, evading outdated detection systems.
- Aircraft Birdstrikes cause millions of dollars in damage annually, but today’s radars cannot distinguish birds from drones, leading to costly false alarms and missed threats.
Are you prepared to face these invisible dangers?
Drones are getting smarter, cheaper and harder to detect
- Autonomous and fiber-optic guided drones can evade RF jammers, radar systems, and traditional defenses, making them invisible to traditional security measures.
Bird strikes remain one of the greatest threats to aviation safety
- Worldwide, a bird strike occurs every 10 minutes.
- Existing radar systems struggle to distinguish birds from drones, leading to false alarms and safety blind spots.
Why are current security systems failing?
Despite billions spent on security, airports, government facilities, and defense agencies still struggle to detect and stop airspace intrusions due to ineffective and costly technology.
If current solutions are genuinely effective, why are these incidents still occurring worldwide?
Active Radars
Learn More
These systems can detect most types of drone, but they use a lot of power and are easy to detect and jam. They are also very expensive and require special permits to operate because they emit radio waves. For the same reason, it is not possible to use this kind of technology in urban areas.
Pros:
- it can detect, with precision, multiple targets (depending on the object’s size and power transmitted) in all weather conditions
- it can detect autonomous drones.
Cons:
- very limited drone detection range due to the low radar reflecting characteristics of the materials drones are made of;
- it needs specific authorization to operate (i.e., clearance to radiate), as it emits radio waves;
- it requires periodic frequency checks to prevent interference;
- it is easy to locate and jam;
- it has a high cost of procurement and ownership (energy consumption, maintenance, dedicated operators);
- it constitutes a source of electromagnetic pollution (it cannot be installed in urban and populated areas).
- It can be easily jammed
Electro-Optical Sensors
Learn More
These systems are very expensive and often rely on an active radar or an RF system to aim at the target. They also have limitations in low visibility or poor contrast conditions.
Pros:
- They allow the operator to identify the drone and record evidence for possible legal action.
Cons:
- They cannot detect the presence of drones per se.
- Their effectiveness is poor or none in low visibility conditions (fog, haze).
- Drones could go undetected if there is a poor contrast between the drones and the background.
Radio Frequency (RF) analysers
Learn More
These are the most widely used systems in the counter-drone sector. They use one or more antennas to receive radio signals and a processor to analyse the radio frequency spectrum, thus intercepting the communication link between the drone and the remote controller. Some systems can also identify the drone’s manufacturer and model.
By using more than one receiving antenna, these systems can also triangulate the drone’s position.
Pros:
- They have a low-cost compared to an active radar;
- They are passive and thus do not require a permission to radiate and are difficult to locate.
- They can intercept multiple drones.
Cons:
- They mainly identify drones whose communication frequency is present in the database.
- They need an expert operator.
- They are unable to detect autonomous and fiber-optic guided drones because there is no communication link between the drone and an operator.
- They are ineffective in areas of high radio frequency saturation.
- They have a limited range.
- They can be easily jammed.
According to our experience, knowing how the new automatic and autonomous guided drones are developed and operated, these systems may soon become ineffective and obsolete.
Acustic Sensors
Learn More
Consisting of one or more microphones that listen for the presence of a drone in the vicinity, they compare the detected sounds with an internal built-in database of acoustic signals. If the sound of a drone is detected, the direction of origin is calculated. With multiple arrays of microphones, rough triangulation (i.e. localisation) is possible.
Pros:
- It is a passive system (does not require permission to operate);
- It can detect autonomous drones as well.
- It can be effective in frequency-saturated environments.
- It can partially fill the gaps of other sensors.
Cons:
- does not work well in noisy backgrounds like urban environments and airports;
- It has a very limited range (300-500m);
- It can only recognize drones whose acoustic signature is present in the database.
So why are we still relying on outdated security when smarter threats are evolving every day?
We Can No Longer Rely on Old Solutions for New Threats
Airspace security is no longer an option – it is a necessity. Governments, airports, and critical infrastructure operators must act now before the next crisis occurs.
- What if you had a system that could detect drones and birds in real time
- What if it worked in all weather conditions, even in urban environments, without emitting signals or false alarms?
- What if it was cost-effective, easy to deploy, and built for the future of airspace security?
That system is why we created PRIMUS.
Let’s Get Started
Ready To Make a Real Change?
Are you ready to revolutionise air safety with us? At Syncretise, we believe in doing what's right, driving innovation and achieving excellence.
Let's work together to create safer skies.
