Page 40 - Security Today, May/June 2021

Do it yourself (DIY) drones are purchased per individual component and then assembled by the consumer/operator. This enables the operator to obtain the best possible components and to tailor the drone to his or her specific needs. Some DIY drones can travel long distances and are classified as dangerous drones.
Mid- and large-size drones with heavy payload capabilities can do significant damage to aircraft, including shattered wind- shields, penetration and inhalation hazards, lost optics and the need for emergency landings after impact, according to the Can- ada National Research Council’s Aerospace Research Center.
At low speeds of around 140 knots, aircraft that collided with drones showed plastic damage and extensive deformation to the aircraft skin, as well as damage to the vessel’s underlying honey- comb structure. At higher speeds of 250 knots, severe deforma- tion of slat curvature, secondary damage to the leading edge, and even penetration of drone debris into the aircraft’s fractured area has been observed.
Consumers, including bad actors, can purchase a long-range, heavy payload drone (off-the-shelf, or DIY) with a 4K camera, a range of more than four miles and decent payload capabilities, along with the ability to hover and automatically avoid obstacles, for about $1,000.
Treating all drones with a generic approach will dilute your defense. Counter-drone strategy should start with understanding accessible drones that present the most significant threat and then calibrating a targeted defense strategy.
THE LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL SOLUTIONS
Traditionally, the defense strategies deployed against drones orig- inated in the military space. When applied to a civilian airport, they are problematic. Airports are sensitive and challenging envi- ronments, and traditional counter-drone mitigation technologies, such as jammer-based and using a kinetic approach (physically shooting the drone) could disrupt necessary communication sys- tems or cause collateral damage.
During detection, radars often have trouble as the main coun- ter-drone component differentiating between small drones and other flying objects, such as birds, and they can be complicated to operate. Jamming-based solutions, or hybrid solutions featuring jammers to handle the drone threat, may affect other radio com- munications, which would pose a huge problem for airports. Ad- ditionally, jamming solutions do not provide full control, as drone operators can regain control of the drone once the jamming ceases.
Kinetic counter-drone solutions, which involve shooting down the sUAS, are risky in crowded situations, because they can cause collateral damage. Optical solutions are ineffective without clear line-of-sight.
ENABLING AIRPORTS’ AUTHORIZED DRONES
Airports increasingly use authorized drones to quickly inspect runways, to see if planes have been damaged following a flight, and to surveil the grounds.
To enable these drones to operate freely, without unexpected disruptions, airports will require a counter-drone system that can tag certain drones as “authorized” to fly in certain areas of the airport. This capability is absent from radars, jammers and other traditional detection systems.
THE RIGHT DEPLOYMENT AND ANTENNA
Vast expanses, such as airports, require long-distance counter- drone coverage. This is difficult, in part because most airports contain multiple airfields and large runways, making comprehen- sive and holistic counter-drone coverage difficult. Some mitiga-
“An EasyJet plane carrying 186 passengers and traveling at 320 miles per hour just after leaving the Manchester, UK airport, nearly collided with a recklessly piloted drone, according to MSN.”
tion methods, such as jamming or kinetic methods, are not suit- able for airports, as they may disrupt necessary communication systems, or cause collateral damage.
Airport staff are seeking a counter-drone deployment kit de- signed primarily for stationary, long-range coverage deployments. This requires a dual-sensor solution that can protect spaces such as take-off air corridors, often referred to as obstacle limitation surfaces (OLS). The antenna in a long-range counter-drone con- figuration is the true differentiator. It should be designed for fixed deployment and provide 30° azimuth coverage and 30° elevation, which extends the directional coverage range to long distance. Since the system will be stationary and outdoors, it must be able to operate in extremely hot and cold environments, and withstand precipitation and dust.
Airport personnel sometimes need to shift their counter-drone systems quickly to a different area or airfield, so they require a C- sUAS system whose core components can be easily transferred, mounted and configured within a matter of minutes, providing the ability to move anywhere at any time.
CLEAR SKIES AHEAD
A fresh anti-drone approach is needed for airports. One that en- ables security and safety staff to take complete control of the hostile drogue, or a swarm of hostile drones, to ensure a safe out- come. A cyber-takeover approach involves disconnecting, tak- ing over and then controlling the signals, and sending the rogue drone via a safe route to a safe landing without interfering with other drones and communication signals.
Since takeover systems do not rely upon jammers or kinetic technology – they transmit a precise and short signal that takes control of the rogue drone without interfering with other drones and communication signals; they avoid collateral damage, in- terference, disruption or disturbance. Continuity is preserved as communications, commerce, transportation and everyday life proceed smoothly.
Cyber-takeover systems extract drone identifiers for a classifica- tion process. The telemetry signal is decoded to extract the drone position with GPS accuracy. This includes the take-off position near the pilot in real-time, so that law enforcement can be alerted, preventing future airport disruptions. Authorized drones can con- tinue to function without interruption, while the system tracks the rogue drone remote controller position for selected drone commu- nication protocols.
Focusing on the real risk and using the most suitable technol- ogy will result in a neutralized threat and the uninterrupted func- tioning of airports and aircraft. This approach
can change the “low altitude, high risk” slogan
to “low altitude, lower risk and higher levels of
safety, control and continuity.”
Jeffrey Starr is the chief marketing officer at D- Fend Solutions.
40
MAY/JUNE 2021 | SECURITY TODAY
DRONES