Design
Counter-drone protection for critical facilities: designing layered defence
Counter-drone systems are often selected from a catalogue. A year later it turns out the radar faces a wall, the optics cannot see a low-flying target, and the operator has no authority to press the button. Design starts with the site, not the hardware.

Contents
Threat model: what exactly are you protecting?3D model and zonesThree layers in heightFive project stepsApplication circuitFour remedies and when to use themCollateral damage and legal frameworkHow to measure effectivenessEach object has its own geometry, its own interference and its own rules. A plant with a tank farm, an airport with civil traffic and a substation in an urban area require different sensors, different means and different rules of application. Therefore, the project begins with a survey, and not with the selection of the “longest-range” radar.
Threat model: what exactly are you protecting?
The threat model does not describe “drones in general,” but specific scenarios: type of device, altitude and flight speed, probable launch points, flight time, presence of optical-electronic payload and warhead. For one object, a reconnaissance quadcopter is critical, for another - an FPV drone with a shaped charge, for a third - a loitering dive munition.
Not only the composition of the system, but also the rules of application depend on the threat model: where can an electronic radar be used, where can a laser be used, and where is kinetic interception the only acceptable response?
3D model and zones
A three-dimensional model is superimposed on the object: relief, buildings, pipes, tanks, power lines, tree crowns. For each point, line of sight, radar background and electromagnetic environment are calculated. This is how zones appear where the radar sees the target, and zones where it will never see it.
The practical result is not a map of “beautiful sectors”, but a list of blind spots and a solution: to close them with a second position, distributed by OES or acoustics. It is at this stage that it most often turns out that one position cannot cover the entire perimeter.
Three layers in height
| Echelon | Height | Typical threats | Means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above the building line | 100–1000 m | Loitering munitions, FPV, reconnaissance | Radar, long-range OES, electronic radar, interceptor, laser |
| Below the building line | 20–100 m | Commercial quadcopters, short-range reconnaissance | OES search, compact complexes, RTR |
| Under the canopies | 5–20 m | Microdrones, fiber optic devices | Distributed OES, acoustics, near suppression |
Five project steps
- Threat model Types of targets, attack scenarios, probable launch points, acceptable reaction time.
- 3D examinationObject geometry, blind spots, radar and electromagnetic background.
- Sensor coverage. Arrangement of radar, EOS, RTR and acoustics with checking of overlaps.
- Selection of means. REP, laser suppression, laser destruction, interception - for each zone and rule.
- Rules and training Who decides which areas are closed, how use is recorded.
Application circuit
Detection, confirmation, evaluation, impact and outcome verification are the five steps the system goes through for each goal. The time for each step is set by the project. In the AEROTEGIS configuration, the cycle from detection to targeting is less than five seconds, but operator participation is configurable at each stage.
A system that does not record its actions cannot be accepted for balance. The application log is part of the architecture, not an optional extra.
Four remedies and when to use them
| Means | Range | Effect | When to use |
|---|---|---|---|
| RAP | up to 5 km | Control and navigation channel suppression | First line, if there is no risk to your connection |
| Interceptor drone | up to 3 km | Kinetic defeat | The target continues to approach, debris is acceptable |
| Laser suppression | up to 2 km | Optical glare | Reconnaissance drone, must be forced to leave |
| Laser defeat | up to 1.5 km | Glider destruction | Last line, line of sight, minimal damage |
Collateral damage and legal framework
Every remedy has its limits. RF jamming can interfere with one's own communication and navigation; laser requires safety zones; interception creates falling debris. The project must contain zone tables, frequency windows, calculated fall trajectories and application approval procedures.
For a critical object, this is not bureaucracy, but a condition of exploitation. A system that cannot be used without additional approval will remain disabled in a real alarm.
How to measure effectiveness
- Probability of detection for a given ESR and weather.
- Number of false alarms per day.
- Time from detection to impact.
- The cost of one interception, taking into account the resource of funds.
- System availability and recovery time after failure.
- Completeness of the log and the ability to analyze operator actions.

