The rapid evolution of uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) and uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) has fundamentally reshaped the nature of modern conflict. The use of commercially available drones is increasingly widespread and nations around the world are responding.
The US military, for example, is working overtime to accelerate its adoption and exploitation of drones. What’s more, the UK’s Strategic Defence Review makes multiple references to harnessing drones, AI-powered systems and autonomous capabilities alongside “the ‘heavy metal’ of tanks and artillery”.
Within the context of hybrid warfare, UAVs act as low-cost, high-impact enablers across conventional, irregular, informational and cyber domains – typically operating as part of wider uncrewed systems. In this blog, the first of a two-part series, I examine the key characteristics and challenges of the UAS threat.
The role of UAVs in hybrid warfare
Hybrid warfare relies on merging traditional military tactics with irregular, informational and cyber operations to achieve strategic advantage – characterised by distributed and often autonomous operations. Within this evolving landscape, UAVs – both military-grade and commercially available – have emerged as significant force multipliers across these dimensions.
Their accessibility, adaptability and affordability make them ideal for hybrid warfare applications. Along with the ability to provide near-real-time situational awareness, UAVs are often used in loitering and swarming operations to impose persistent psychological and operational pressure on adversaries.
They can also be integrated with cyber and electronic attack campaigns, further amplifying disruption for significant operational effect and making them well suited to today’s highly dynamic and ambiguous operating environment. This places considerable demands on defenders who must protect dispersed and critical infrastructure while maintaining operational tempo.
“UAVs are often used in loitering and swarming operations to impose persistent psychological and operational pressure on adversaries.”Huw D., BAE Systems Digital Intelligence
Detection challenges abound
One of the most persistent operational challenges facing today’s militaries regarding UAVs is detection. These platforms possess small radar cross-sections, produce minimal acoustic and thermal signatures, and often operate at low altitudes within ground clutter. Many are capable of autonomous flight with little or no radio frequency (RF) emission, making traditional detection methods unreliable.
Urban and vegetated terrain further complicate detection, as buildings and foliage create blind spots and signal reflections that mask UAV movement. Consequently, single-sensor systems are often insufficient, with reliable detection depending on multi-sensor fusion.
The same challenges apply to Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities, which face limitations in dense or complex operational landscapes. Urban landscapes introduce physical barriers that create shadow zones where EW signals are ineffective, electromagnetic clutter reduces predictability, and the proximity of civilian systems creates difficulties in isolating targets without causing unintended interference.
If that wasn’t enough, many modern UAVs are equipped with anti-jamming technologies or can operate autonomously, rendering simple jamming measures inadequate – requiring EW to form one component of a broader, integrated defensive system.
A connected challenge is distinguishing between hostile and civilian UAVs. Doing this effectively requires a layered approach that draws on multiple sources of corroborating information. No single sensor or data point can provide reliable classification. Instead, systems must combine data such as flight paths, geofencing and airspace authorisations, cooperative transponder signals, RF fingerprinting and command-link analysis.
Behavioural analysis, including loitering patterns and approach vectors, can indicate hostile intent, while comparison against intelligence databases of known operators provides additional assurance. Technological capability must then be matched with legal and procedural safeguards to minimise the risk of misidentification and collateral damage – particularly important in hybrid or ambiguous environments.
Effective Counter-UAV practices
So, with these challenges in mind, how can UAVs and the broader UAS threat be mitigated? The most effective counter-UAV systems adopt a layered defence approach that integrates detection, command and control (C2) fusion and a spectrum of defeat mechanisms. Detection involves radar tuned to identify small UAVs, supplemented by passive RF sensors, EO/IR imaging and acoustic arrays. These data streams should then be fused within an AI-enabled C2 network that allows for rapid classification and prioritisation of threats.
Defeat mechanisms must include both non-kinetic and kinetic options. Non-kinetic methods such as RF and command-link disruption, global navigation satellite system (GNSS) spoofing or denial, and cyber interference can neutralise UAVs without physical destruction. Kinetic responses – such as interceptors, directed-energy weapons or automated gun systems – are used where non-kinetic options are insufficient or where collateral risk is acceptable.
Automation and integration are vital to success. By reducing human decision latency and providing robust control mechanisms, integrated systems ensure that operators can act with speed, confidence and precision while adhering to established rules of engagement.
Stay tuned for our next blog where we dive into the BAE Systems Anti Threat System which provides an integrated, end-to-end capability to counter the UAS threat.
BAE Systems Anti Threat System is a new software defined solution, enabled by C2 and decision support, to counter uncrewed threats.
It's a modular, software-driven decision engine that unlocks the full potential of your current and future sensors and effectors. It fuses intelligence, delivers rapid decision logic, and adapts at speed across the entire threat spectrum.