Counter-UAS: From Detection to Response
Detection, tracking, identification and response — engineered as one mission system.
Counter-UAS is not a detection problem. Detection is the part of the chain that is already commoditized — an acoustic array or an RF sniffer will tell you something is in the air. The value sits in what happens in the seconds after: fusing scattered contacts into one track, separating a hostile platform from a friendly one, putting that decision in front of an operator, and closing the loop to an interceptor.
RT Group builds the full chain. Acoustic and RF mesh nodes, EO/IR classification, sensor fusion and tasking in a C2 ground station, human-in-the-loop validation, and integration with the response layer — engineered as one mission system rather than assembled from vendor boxes that do not talk to each other.
The same embedded, RF and edge-AI engineering that underpins our defense and aerospace work carries this platform: real-time software on constrained hardware, signal processing at the sensor, and a system architecture designed to survive the field rather than the demo.
The industry's challenges — and how we answer them.
Detection alone never closes the loop
Most counter-UAS procurements buy a detection layer and discover later that an alert on a screen is not a defense. The gap between "something is in the air" and "the threat is handled" is where programs stall.
We architect the full chain up front — detect, track, identify, respond — and treat the handoffs between stages as first-class interfaces rather than integration work left to the customer.
False positives in cluttered environments
Urban and industrial sites are full of birds, delivery drones, RF noise and reflective surfaces. A system that cries wolf gets muted by its operators within a week, which is the same as having no system.
Sensor fusion across acoustic, RF and EO/IR, plus classification against an authorized drone database, so a track has to survive several independent sensor families before it reaches an operator.
Latency between detection and authorization
A small UAV can cross the useful engagement window while an alert is still propagating through a chain of consoles and approvals. Response value decays second by second.
Processing runs at the edge and the C2 presents a decision-ready picture rather than a raw feed, so the operator spends the window deciding instead of assembling context.
Vendor boxes that do not integrate
Sensors, C2 and effectors are frequently sourced separately and arrive with closed protocols. Programs then pay twice — once for the hardware and again for the integration nobody scoped.
We build the integration layer as the product. Sensors and effectors from other vendors are brought in behind defined interfaces, so the customer is not locked to a single supply chain.
Multi-sensor detection
Acoustic and RF mesh nodes cover the protected volume, so a single spoofed or jammed sensor type does not blind the system.
Sensor fusion and tracking
Scattered contacts from different sensor families are fused into one continuous track and pushed to the ground station at near-zero latency.
AI classification and friend-or-foe
EO/IR and on-device models classify the platform and check it against the authorized drone database before anything is escalated.
Human-in-the-loop authorization
Operator validation is a designed stage of the chain, not an afterthought — with the evidence behind each track presented at the moment of decision.
Response and interceptor integration
Tasking, autonomous deployment and terminal engagement, integrated with the response assets already in the customer’s inventory.
Edge processing under field constraints
Signal processing runs at the sensor rather than in a data centre, so the system holds up on constrained power, compute and bandwidth.
SkySentinel Mobile
R&D platform: multi-sensor counter-UAS detection from a vehicle in motion.
Passive acoustics, radar, panoramic vision, sensor fusionPTZ Perimeter Security
AI video analytics that turn every valid detection into a managed security track.
Computer vision, multi-object tracking, PTZ control, edge inferenceFlight Controller
Project Goal Developing Flight Controller based on atmel SAMA5D36, ARM Cortex A5 using Free Rtos operation system.
Embedded, Real-Time, RFEvaluating a counter-UAS deployment?
Book a technical discussion to map the threat picture, sensor mix, response layer and integration path.
Discuss a Counter-UAS Program ↗Built to the standards this sector is audited against.
We engineer toward the standards your program is measured against, and produce the evidence its certification path depends on.
MIL-STD-810
Environmental engineering considerations for field-deployed hardware. We design sensor and edge units against the relevant method profiles; qualification testing is run with the program and its designated labs.
MIL-STD-461
Electromagnetic interference control — directly relevant where RF direction finding and interceptor links share a site. We support EMI-aware design and pre-compliance work.
STANAG 4586
Interoperability standard for unmanned control systems. Relevant where the C2 layer has to interoperate with existing NATO-aligned command infrastructure.
IEC 62443
Security for industrial and operational technology networks, applied to the C2 and sensor network. Readiness workflows are supported; accreditation remains with the operator.
Need a standard that is not listed? Compliance scope is defined per engagement. Talk to an engineer →
