DroneShield latest survey of counter-UAS preparedness at more than twenty airports and critical infrastructure operators worldwide – Airspace Under Pressure: A Global Assessment of Counter-UAS Readiness Across Airports and Critical Infrastructure – has concluded 70% of respondents identified detection capability gaps as a barrier to effective counter-UAS operations and regulatory/legal constraints also hamper counter-UAS effectiveness.
According to the report 60% of respondents indicated that they lacked the legal authority to take direct mitigation action against unauthorized drones, even when the threat to safety is clear and immediate. Other reasons cited as barriers to effective counter-UAS operations include integration complexity (at 48%) and training and preparedness (35%).
Respondents were also asked to describe their organization’s counter-UAS operational objectives: full combination (awareness, detection, tracking and response) – 57%; detection-focused (partial) – 13%; awareness only – 13%; undefined/no formal plan – 17%.
“In particular, the 17% of respondents with no formalized counter-UAS plan represent a specific and acute risk: organizations that will be managing a drone incident for the first time during the incident itself, with no established procedures, no clear escalation pathway, and no baseline situational awareness from which to act,” said the report.
The report introduces a readiness maturity framework mapping respondents across two dimensions: objective maturity and operational capability. The majority of surveys operators cluster in three quadrants:
- Prepared quadrant: 13 organizations had defined operational objectives and moderate counter-UAS capabilities. These are typically larger airports and critical infrastructure operators who have invested in the problem and have structured frameworks in place. But even within this group, capability gaps remain. The Prepared quadrant describes a relative position, not an adequate one.
- Partial quadrant: five organizations had operational objectives in place, but capability has not kept pace with the realities they face. These operators face a specific risk: they have plans that they cannot execute with their current tools and authority.
- Exposed quadrant: A meaningful minority (of three organizations) sit in the exposed quadrant: undefined objectives, minimal capability, and no formalized framework. These organizations are at the greatest risk of managing a serious drone incident reactively, without established procedures, and with outcomes that are difficult to predict or control
Overall, this report argues that the defining differentiator in the years ahead will be whether organizations address these gaps systematically, before an incident forces an unplanned response; or reactively, under pressure, with consequences that cannot be fully controlled.
For more information
The full report includes operator survey data, thematic analysis across five key capability dimensions, and a readiness maturity framework for self-assessment – available for download.
The 2026 Unmanned Airspace Global Counter-UAS Systems Directory is now available. The guide is the world’s only comprehensive, continually updated directory of global C-UAS companies and systems. It itemises over 1,000 C-UAS products and services with performance details, company sales and partnerships arrangements. It is updated every month and broken down into niche sub-sectors (net-capture, missiles, intercept drones, detectors etc) to give C-UAS procurement and industry personnel a unique perspective of global C-UAS technical capabilities and market positions. It is available in word, PDF and excel formats and Unmanned Airspace readers are eligible for a range of discounts. For more information about the Directory please contact the editor Philip Butterworth-Hayes at philip@unmannedairspace.info.