Detect, identify, decide, defeat. One operator.
Counter-UAS is the detection, identification, tracking, and defeat of drones. DaggerOS does all four on one air picture — fusing radio-frequency, radar, electro-optical/infrared and acoustic sensing into a single track, classifying the threat, and presenting defeat options ranked by the picture. The choice, and the trigger, stay with the operator.
One air picture, from first detection to a decision.
Most counter-drone failures are not defeat failures — they are detection and decision failures: the track arrives late, on the wrong screen, or not at all. DaggerOS closes the loop on one picture.
Detect
Many sensors, one track.
Independent, passive-by-default sources — RF, radar, EO/IR, acoustic — fuse into a single tracked air picture. One sensor gives a bearing; many give a fix.
PASSIVE-DEFAULTClassify & decide
Reduce the false engagement call.
Contacts are classified to cut false alarms, and defeat options are ranked against the live picture and the rules of engagement — with the evidence shown.
PROPOSE-ONLYDefeat
Soft-kill or hard-kill — your call.
The operator authorizes. Whether the effect is non-kinetic or a kinetic intercept, it commits only through a sustained human hold at one gate — and is sealed to the record.
HUMAN-GATEDThe FAA/DoD UAS groups.
The DoD classifies unmanned aircraft into five groups by weight, altitude and speed. "Small UAS" — the drones most counter-UAS systems are built to counter — are Groups 1 and 2, and sometimes the lower end of Group 3.
| Group | Max takeoff weight | Typical profile |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | < 20 lb | Small quadcopters and hobby-class drones — low and slow. |
| Group 2 | 21–55 lb | Larger small-UAS; longer endurance. |
| Group 3 | < 1,320 lb | Tactical UAS; medium altitude and speed. |
| Group 4 | > 1,320 lb | Larger UAS operating at higher altitude. |
| Group 5 | > 1,320 lb | Largest UAS; high altitude, long endurance. |
The drone is cheap. The usual answer is not.
The defining counter-UAS problem is cost asymmetry: a cheap drone, answered with an expensive shot. Fix the detection and decision layer, and the operator spends the costly effect only when it is warranted.
Figures are directional and attributed to their public sources (SASC testimony; CSIS; CRS; RUSI). BlackByrne does not publish DaggerOS performance envelopes. The point is the economics of the decision layer, not a claim about any specific engagement.
A gap in the picture is the failure.
The January 2024 Tower 22 attack in Jordan, which killed three U.S. soldiers, is widely cited as a case where a small drone reached its target through a sensing gap. The lesson is not more sensors — it is one picture that no single operator has to stitch together under pressure.
DaggerOS holds that one picture air-gapped at the edge, passive by default, so the drone is seen, classified and held on a track before anyone has to decide — and the decision, when it comes, is a human's, on a record that holds.
- Fixed-site defense of a base, border or critical infrastructure.
- On-the-move force protection at a disconnected, contested edge.
- Event and installation airspace security for federal and SLTT agencies.
- As an open (MOSA) component inside a prime integrator's architecture.
Aligned to Replicator 2's focus on countering small UAS.
Counter-UAS — common questions.
What is counter-UAS (C-UAS)?
What are the FAA/DoD UAS groups?
Why is the cost asymmetry of counter-UAS a problem?
What is soft-kill vs hard-kill counter-drone?
How does DaggerOS detect drones?
See it hold the air picture.
Bring your airspace problem. We'll show you one operator holding it.