In December 2023, a drone was observed hovering over a sensitive area of Langley Air Force Base for almost three weeks, highlighting a significant issue that U.S. authorities weren’t well-equipped to tackle. There was confusion over who should investigate the intrusion and what actions could be taken.
A recent report from the Pentagon Inspector General indicates that these gaps in authority and coordination are still prevalent throughout much of the Pentagon, even as drone activity around U.S. military sites increases regularly.
This oversight document warns that the Pentagon does not have a clear and cohesive policy to manage counter-drone operations at domestic facilities. Many bases are uncertain about their authority to respond to drone sightings, which backs up longstanding concerns voiced by defense officials and external experts. While the military often detects drones, misunderstandings regarding jurisdiction and approval protocols can slow or even halt necessary actions.
The report emphasizes the need for “immediate attention” to safeguard Army assets from drone incursions. It points out the issues of unclear guidelines, conflicting procedures, and insufficient operational approvals across various installations.
Michael Heelander, CEO of Airspace Link, mentioned that the inspector general’s findings mirror the difficulties he’s witnessed in collaborating with military and civilian authorities over drone airspace awareness.
Airspace Link is involved with the FAA, local governments, and some military sites to monitor approved drone activity, signal unidentified drones near bases, and enhance collaboration in the airspace shared by civilians and the government.
“Reading the report, it became clear that this is a challenge we are beginning to tackle at some military bases,” Heelander explained. “It’s crucial to grasp the rules and regulations specific to each base, especially regarding drone ownership and how airspace awareness is managed.”
The challenge of identifying if a drone near a military site is authorized, errant, or potentially hostile involves more than just detection technologies; it’s also about effective coordination in a busy domestic airspace, according to Heelander.
“The technology is available,” he stated. “But there’s no consistent framework, and it seems to vary from one base to another.”
The inspector general’s findings show that the Department of Defense has not provided clear and uniform guidance on which facilities qualify for anti-drone protection, leading to inconsistencies across the Department. Certain high-value bases engaged in significant missions have been excluded because their activities didn’t align neatly with the narrowly defined mission categories established by federal law. Consequently, many facilities are left unsure about their authority to act during a drone intrusion.
This issue is not limited to just a few areas. Gen. Gregory Guyot, commander of U.S. Northern Command, remarked last year that drone activity near Pentagon sites occurs nearly every day.
During a briefing, Guyot noted that there are “no more than one or two break-ins a day” at Pentagon facilities.
According to Heelander, the situation can become chaotic when drones are spotted outside a base’s perimeters, where military jurisdiction intersects with FAA-regulated airspace and local enforcement zones.
“What happens if there’s a drone beyond the fence?” he asked. “Most military bases don’t have jurisdiction there.”
Modern identification systems for drones, including those that capture remote identification signals and radar inputs, can often trace the origins of a drone and determine if it’s registered. However, without a standardized set of rules governing who runs these systems and how information is exchanged, mere detection doesn’t guarantee timely responses.
“If we integrate these technologies, we can track where the drone is coming from,” he mentioned. “The key is ensuring that these bases have a consistent framework to rely on.”
The report also revealed that the approval procedures necessary for facilities to utilize counter-drone systems are fragmented and cumbersome. Often, facilities are required to secure and test systems before receiving approval, which has led some bases to avoid seeking permission altogether after a breach.
Pentagon leadership had established Interagency Task Force 401 last year to enhance coordination on counter-drone measures across the department, but the report indicates that recommendations for streamlining policies and authorities are still pending.
Heelander suggested that enhancing situational awareness and coordination is becoming increasingly critical as civilian, commercial, and public safety drone activities grow around military bases, making an already congested low-altitude airspace even more complex.
“The first step is getting organized and understanding who is operating where and under what authority,” he advised.
