Why the ‘Mystery Drone’ Craze is a Legitimate Concern: A Look into Counter-UAS Gaps

In New Jersey, an ominous hum and flashing lights cut through the foggy skies near Picatinny Arsenal, the home of the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center.

Just weeks earlier, across the Atlantic, eerily similar reports emerged. For nearly a month, unidentified drones—operated by unknown parties with unclear intentions—were spotted near at least four joint military bases in the United Kingdom.

These ongoing “mystery drone” incidents have captured widespread public attention, sparking viral discussions on social media and across virtually all corners of society. 

On Tuesday’s The Pat McAfee Show—the widely popular, high-energy sports talk show celebrated for its candid interviews and Pat McAfee’s signature humor—future Hall-of-Fame quarterback for the New York Jets, Aaron Rodgers, weighed in on the recent drone incidents in New Jersey.

Suggesting the recent sightings might have extraterrestrial origins, Rodgers mentioned he was considering hosting a “CE5” event, referring to a set of meditation protocols developed by ufologist Steven Greer for “initiating peaceful contact with extraterrestrial civilizations.”

“I’m thinking about having a Friday night 5e experience where you have a big kind of meditation circle, then you call in the aliens and use little green lasers to bring them in,“ Rodgers said with a smirk to a bemused McAfee and co-host AJ Hawk. “You know, if it’s a nice night and a clear night might try and have a little 5e experience [and] bring them in.“ 

Rodgers, widely regarded as one of the greatest NFL quarterbacks of all time and known for his sardonic wit and occasionally controversial remarks, also struck a more pragmatic tone. He suggested the drone sightings might simply be “kids messing around“ but acknowledged the events had sparked significant interest and curiosity throughout the New Jersey area.

“There’s some interesting things going on with the drones,“ Rodgers said. “They need to tell us what’s going on. If it’s military or non-military, or UAP [unidentified aerial phenomena], or whatever the Hell it is.“   

In addition to famous sports athletes and concerned citizens, lawmakers have likewise joined the outcry, demanding swift investigations and transparency from military and intelligence agencies on these so-far unexplained drone encounters. 

“Understandably, New Jersey residents are very alarmed at this significant and reoccurring phenomenon – and the tepid response from our state and federal agencies so far is totally unacceptable,“ said Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) in a statement on Monday. “As we saw with the Chinese spy balloon last year, our fiercest adversaries will stop at nothing to surveil our homeland and threaten our national security.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has announced that it is investigating the wave of drone sightings, though the agency admitted, “we truly don’t have much information to provide at the moment.”

Some experts suggest that the recent surge of “mystery drone“ sightings is likely a combination of misinformation, misidentification of conventional aircraft, and a few isolated cases of genuine UAS airspace violations.

Nevertheless, these unexplained sightings underscore a legitimate growing threat that has the potential to undermine national security. Drones, often undetectable by traditional radar systems, illustrate the vulnerabilities of even the most secure facilities and military installations. 

The ongoing situation highlights a burgeoning global issue, as rogue drones are no longer mere nuisances but potential tools of espionage, smuggling, and even terrorism.

And as drones continue to proliferate in civilian and military airspace, the critical question looms: Are counter-drone technologies equipped to protect vital infrastructure, or are defenses perpetually one step behind?

The Drone Threat: Growing and Evolving

The surge in drone technology has revolutionized industries from agriculture to logistics. Yet, this innovation has brought with it an array of security challenges. 

According to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, incidents involving drones near critical airspace have spiked dramatically. Between 2021 and 2023, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) recorded over 2,000 drone sightings near U.S. airports, with some incidents forcing pilots to take evasive action. In the first quarter of 2024 alone, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reported 326 drone-related incidents near planes and helicopters.

Military applications of drones further complicate the picture. From loitering munitions in the Ukraine conflict to surveillance drones over the South China Sea, the strategic use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) has expanded rapidly. 

Drones’ increasing affordability and availability means that even non-state actors and rogue individuals can pose significant threats, including espionage, sabotage, and targeted attacks.

Current Counter-Drone Technologies

To combat the growing UAS threat, counter-drone technologies have evolved into a sophisticated field encompassing detection, tracking, and neutralization systems. These technologies are broadly categorized into kinetic and non-kinetic solutions, each with unique advantages and challenges.

Detection and Tracking

Detection remains the first line of defense against drones. Advanced radar systems, such as Robin Radar’s IRIS, offer 360-degree coverage that can distinguish between small drones and other airborne objects like birds. IRIS’ micro-Doppler technology allows for precise classification of drones even in challenging conditions, such as poor visibility or high noise environments.

Acoustic sensors, infrared cameras, and radio frequency (RF) analyzers complement radar systems by providing multi-modal detection capabilities. RF analyzers are particularly valuable as they can identify and locate communication links between drones and their operators. However, these systems often struggle with false positives in dense urban environments or during adverse weather conditions.

Non-Kinetic Countermeasures

Non-kinetic solutions target a drone’s electronics rather than physically destroying it. Jamming systems disrupt the RF or GPS signals controlling the drone, forcing it to land or lose its navigation capabilities. The U.S. military’s Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office (JCO) has highlighted the effectiveness of systems like D-Fend’s EnforceAir, which takes over a drone’s communication link and guides it to a safe landing, minimizing collateral damage.

Other non-kinetic methods include spoofing, where false signals deceive a drone’s navigation system, and directed energy weapons (DEWs) or high-power microwave (HPM) systems. DEWs emit electromagnetic pulses that disable a drone’s electronics. In March 2024, The Debrief reported that the U.S. Army had deployed its cutting-edge laser weapon, the Directed Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense, or DE M-SHORAD, to the Middle East for real-world testing. 

While promising, these technologies are still in their infancy and face challenges such as range limitations and high energy requirements.

Kinetic Countermeasures

Kinetic countermeasures physically neutralize drones through projectiles, net guns, or interceptor drones. Systems like Raytheon’s Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aircraft Integrated Defeat System (LIDS) combine radar detection with kinetic interceptors like the Coyote missile. The U.S. Marine Corps’ Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS) takes a similar approach, integrating radar, electronic warfare, and missiles into a mobile platform.

Despite their effectiveness, kinetic solutions have drawbacks. High costs and potential collateral damage make them unsuitable for use in populated areas, like where recent drone waves have been reported.

Legislative and Policy Developments

In parallel with technological advancements, regulatory frameworks for counter-UAS operations are expanding. The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has been at the forefront, with the FY2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) including several provisions to bolster counter-drone capabilities. Notably, the Act mandates the establishment of a “C-UAS Task Force“ to coordinate policies and strategies across federal agencies.

Congress has also emphasized the need for low-cost, scalable solutions to address the increasing frequency of drone incursions. For instance, the House Armed Services Committee has urged the development of a “global UAS threat library“ to centralize information on drone threats and mitigation strategies. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has also implemented regulations restricting drone operations near critical infrastructure and large public events.

However, gaps remain. While the DoD, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Department of Justice (DOJ) have the authority to conduct counter-UAS operations, these agencies lack the necessary legal framework and resources to rapidly respond to drone threats. 

In the U.S., the initial response to unauthorized drone sightings or airspace violations typically falls to state and local law enforcement. However, these agencies lack counter-UAS systems, leaving officers with little recourse beyond observing and reporting the incidents. At best, local law enforcement might locate a drone operator, but this outcome depends heavily on public cooperation to report suspicious activity—or sheer luck.

Apart from the 1941 surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and the September 11th terrorist attacks, the U.S. has never experienced an airborne assault on its soil. This historical absence of aerial threats has left the nation without a robust framework or coordinated capability to swiftly defend its airspace. The challenges are further compounded by the inherent difficulties in countering small unmanned aerial systems, highlighting the gaps in America’s apathetic approach to air defense.

Challenges in Counter-Drone Operations

Despite advancements, counter-UAS systems face significant hurdles. One of the most pressing challenges is cost-effectiveness. Using million-dollar missiles to neutralize low-cost drones, as seen in the Ukraine conflict, is unsustainable in the long term. Developing scalable solutions that balance cost with capability is imperative.

Another challenge is the rapid evolution of drone technology. Swarming tactics, where multiple drones operate in a coordinated manner, can overwhelm existing defenses. High-power microwave (HPM) systems like Epirus’ Leonidas are being developed to counter such threats. However, to date, only four prototype Epirus Leonidas systems have been produced, with at least some devices being deployed to the Middle East for real-world testing. 

Additionally, integration and interoperability pose challenges. Many counter-UAS systems operate independently, leading to inefficiencies. The DoD’s “System of Systems“ approach aims to address this by integrating multiple detection and mitigation technologies into a cohesive framework. However, achieving seamless interoperability across different platforms and agencies will require significant investment and coordination.

The Future of Counter-Drone Technology

Looking ahead, experts say several trends are likely to shape the future of counter-drone technology. 

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are poised to enhance detection and response capabilities by analyzing vast amounts of data in real time. For instance, AI algorithms can more accurately predict drone flight paths and identify potential threats.  

Emerging technologies, like XTEND, are already developing AI-driven counter-UAS systems that can autonomously identify and neutralize unauthorized drones. 

Additionally, as drones become smaller and more agile, counter-UAS systems must adapt through miniaturization and portability. Devices like Lithuania’s SkyWiper EDM4S, a handheld electronic warfare tool, demonstrate promising capabilities for mobile operations. The SkyWiper is already being used in the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, with Ukraine’s armed forces successfully using it to counter Russian drones. 

With a unit cost of roughly $15,000, SkyWiper or similar handheld electronic CUAS tools could be a viable option to help local law enforcement combat drone incursions. 

Further development of directed energy weapons (DEWs), including lasers and high-powered microwave (HPM) systems, could also play a significant role in countering drone swarms in the near future. With promises of higher energy storage and beam control, defense giants like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are betting millions that directed energy weapons will emerge as the front-line defense against drones.  

However, doubts persist about whether directed energy weapons (DEW) or high-powered microwave (HPM) systems can fully deliver on their promises. Their greatest challenge lies in a phenomenon known as “thermal blooming.”

When a high-energy laser beam travels through the air, it encounters atmospheric particles like dust, moisture, and gasses. This interaction causes “blooming,“ which means the laser’s energy is scattered and absorbed. As a result, the laser beam’s focus becomes diffused, and its strength decreases by the time it reaches the target.

Adverse weather conditions, such as fog, smoke, dust, rain, or snow, significantly increase the likelihood of thermal blooming. This raises serious doubts about the effectiveness of counter-UAS weapons in real-world conditions. 

Addressing cross-border or joint national threats, like the drones observed near NATO bases in the U.K. and Germany, requires international collaboration on drone regulations and counter-UAS policies. Initiatives like NATO’s interoperability counter-drone framework could provide a blueprint for such efforts.

Lastly, as drones increasingly affect civilian spaces, integrating military and civilian efforts will be essential. Combined defense networks that leverage military-grade systems alongside civilian air traffic management and local law enforcement agencies are vital to combating coordinated and sophisticated drone threats. 

The recent wave of “mystery drones“ likely reflects elements of “moral panic,“ with fears amplified by sensationalized media coverage, misinformation, misidentifications, and even the whimsical musings of NFL quarterbacks about communicating with aliens. 

However, this phenomenon does not amount to “mass hysteria.“ Even if genuine cases of unidentified drones near critical sites are relatively rare, they still highlight the pressing need for robust and effective counter-UAS systems.

Progress has been made in recent years in detection, mitigation, and regulatory frameworks for addressing drone threats, but critical challenges persist. The rapid advancement of drone technology and the increasing complexity of associated risks require a proactive and adaptable response.

As the public outcry over “mystery drones“ spurns politicians and industry stakeholders to seek innovative solutions, the emphasis must be on creating cost-effective, scalable, and interoperable systems.

A comprehensive strategy integrating advanced technology, forward-thinking policy, and collaboration will ultimately be essential to staying ahead of the evolving drone threat. 

Of course, perhaps the real question is whether Aaron Rodgers’ alien-inviting meditation circle might just be the most cost-effective counter-UAS strategy yet. After all, if counter-UAS efforts continue to fall short, a little extraterrestrial diplomacy couldn’t hurt.