Advanced Protection Systems: radar products and counter-drone customer programmes
APS’s radar and software business, Poland’s SAN procurement role and PLN450 million financing package, with workforce and turnover evidence kept in scope.
Counter-drone / Archive
Counter-drone reporting
Page 1 of 2
MyDefence: detection products and international distribution
MyDefence’s accounts, HighCom contracts and Terma cooperation show how a Danish counter-drone business combines equipment, software and international delivery partners.
NT Service: communications engineering and specialist security products
NT Service combines local engineering, communications integration and specialist security products. Its public record distinguishes a national buyer contract from current catalogue evidence.
Robin Radar Systems: bird and drone detection in institutional markets
Robin Radar’s ownership, workforce disclosure, Dutch IRIS contract and US expansion, plus the aviation and wildlife business behind its partner network.
Sensofusion: detection products and counter-drone customer adoption
Airfence remains Sensofusion's core product family, while an aircraft acquisition and new development programmes broaden the Finnish company's commercial scope.
UK opens counter-drone development competition with up to £5m available
Outline proposals are due on 23 September. The funded output is an evidence-backed development plan, with a separate registration step and an invited second stage before any award.
The UK’s £3.16m LCADE awards are a development step, with manufacturing next
Three UK awards turn LEAP’s February launch into funded development work. Commercial X, national competitions and suppliers’ manufacturing plans explain where the next business decisions sit.
NATO’s counter-drone marketplace plan is a demand signal with implementation still to follow
The July marketplace proposal sits alongside concrete NSPA framework contracts announced later that month. Five named contractors make the purchasing picture clearer, while wider marketplace access still needs its own rules.
NATO TIE26: what an interoperability exercise establishes for suppliers
NCIA’s May exercise led into Baltic Trust in August. The sequence gives suppliers a more precise reference: technical evaluation followed by assessment with military users, with purchasing decisions still separate.
The prison counter-drone competition maps a different set of buyers
The £1.85m research competition joined justice, policing, defense and infrastructure stakeholders. Its two development routes and later clarifications show how the customer context changes a supplier’s proposition.
UKDI’s fibre-optic UAS enquiry was market engagement, not a funded award
The closed March enquiry asked about maturity, existing customers, supply-chain dependencies and production capacity. Those questions reveal how UKDI was assessing the market before any funded procurement.
Poland’s SAN award makes the industrial roles as important as the contract value
Kongsberg disclosed a NOK16 billion share of the SAN contract. Suppliers should map the consortium and support chain instead of treating that figure as total programme spending.
The Giraffe 1X order shows why a radar sale is not a complete counter-drone system
The US Army order names Saab’s radar and a security-cooperation role. French vehicle integration and UK support records show why product scope, contracting customer and lifecycle services need separate treatment.
SAPIENT: the counter-drone standard a sensor supplier needs to understand
BSI Flex 335 defines an interface, while Dstl supplies development tools with their own version and support limits. For sensor businesses, the commercial question is who owns integration and acceptance.
The next drone deal is about more than the drone
Integration, evaluation and a credible route to delivery are becoming central commercial questions. Three public signals show where to look.
AerialX: a Canadian drone specialist with sandbox evidence
AerialX’s public catalogue spans drone-related products, while Canadian government records verify participation in the 2019 and 2022 counter-drone sandboxes.
Allen-Vanguard: receivership, electronic systems and customer support
Allen-Vanguard entered receivership on 1 September 2026. Its electronic systems, earlier contracts and support business now need to be read alongside the current court record.
Alpine Eagle: Sentinel and airborne counter-drone systems
Alpine Eagle supplies Sentinel counter-drone technology and works with DeltaQuad on platform integration. Its March 2026 release separates existing relationships from a planned production facility.
Blighter Surveillance Systems: radar products and counter-drone integration partners
Blighter combines radar hardware with licensable integration software and regional partners. Public accounts reveal a smaller company behind its international customer references.
Boresight: target-aircraft services and training-market customers
Boresight reported A$6.38 million FY2026 revenue after its June ASX listing. Its target-drone business combines repeat equipment demand, local production and training-market partners.
CHAOS Industries: radar products and the evidence behind industrial growth
CHAOS Industries combines radar products, government-funded development and a growing private capital base. Official award records help distinguish its research activity from the broader claims around commercial expansion.
Counter-drone event records: what a buyer needs to review an alert
A useful event record explains what the system reported, what a reviewer saw and how the conclusion changed. Storage capacity alone tells a buyer little about that capability.
Defining availability in a counter-drone service contract
A powered sensor, a responsive interface and a staffed monitoring service measure different things. Availability commitments become useful when the contract identifies the customer function being kept available.
Detection, tracking and classification are different supplier claims
A product may report that a drone is present without establishing its model or unique identity. Procurement comparisons need to separate those claims and the evidence supporting each stage.