The Quantum Institute's

Next-Generation Anti-Drone Digital Fence System (Qi-ADDFS)

Investment Brief

A Qi-ADDFS is a continuous, long-range perimeter defense system (1–25 mi) designed to detect and interdict unauthorized drones as they cross a protected airspace boundary. This contrasts with today’s point-defense C‑UAS systems, which react at fixed locations or short ranges. The opportunity is large and growing: the global anti-drone market is estimated at $4.5 B in 2025, rising to ~$14.5 B by 2030 (CAGR ~26–28%)marketsandmarkets.comts2.tech. High-profile incidents (e.g. Gatwick Airport shutdown, sports venue incursions) have underscored a critical need for scalable defenses. For example, commercial airlines and airports lost tens of millions in one December 2018 shutdown (Gatwick: ~1,000 flights cancelled, airlines ~£15 M loss, airport ~£1.4 M)theguardian.comtheguardian.com.

Consumer drone incursions are skyrocketing (NFL football games saw a 20,000% increase in drone intrusions, 2017–2023ts2.tech) and near-misses with airliners are rising (drones now account for ~51% of near-midair reports at U.S. airportsap.org). These trends drive rapid spending: governments worldwide are investing heavily in C‑UAS research and procurementts2.techts2.tech. In short, Qi-ADDFS C‑UAS meets a gap for persistent, wide-area drone defense – a high-growth market with urgent demand.

Market Analysis – Global & Multi-Sector Growth

• Market Size & Growth:  The global C‑UAS (counter-unmanned aerial system) market is booming. Analysts forecast growth from ~$4.5 B (2025) to ~$14.5 B by 2030marketsandmarkets.comts2.tech. Key drivers include rising security concerns around airports, prisons, energy infrastructure, and military sitests2.tech. Defense & military use currently dominate (military/defense had the largest market share in 2024marketsandmarkets.com) due to battlefield threats from small UAVs (e.g. Russian Shahed kamikazes in Ukrainemarketsandmarkets.com). Allied budgets are swelling: the U.S. alone allocated hundreds of millions to C‑UAS R&D and procurementts2.tech.

  
  

• Sector Breakdown:  Counter-drone demand spans military, civil, infrastructure, and private sectors. Military forces need area denial around bases and battlegrounds. Homeland security and critical infrastructure (airports, power plants, ports, prisons) are increasingly targeted – for example, prisons have seen drone attempts to smuggle contrabandlibn.comlibn.com. Civil aviation and large events see rising incursions: FAA logs 100–160 drone sightings per month near U.S. airportsfaa.govap.org, and media-rights at sports venues are worth tens of millions per gameairsight.comairsight.com. Private and industrial sites (stadiums, factories, oil/gas plants) are also at risk. In sum, the total addressable market across sectors easily reaches billions of dollars over the next decade as every high-value site seeks anti-drone protection.

  
  

• Geography:  Growth is global. The U.S. and NATO countries are leading with coordinated counter-drone programs (e.g. U.S. Joint C-UAS Office, UK/homeoffice trials)ts2.techdronelife.com. In Europe, the EU rolled out a comprehensive Counter-Drone Strategy (Oct 2023) to harmonize regulations, funding and standardsunmannedairspace.infounmannedairspace.info. Asia-Pacific is fast-growing (investments in India, Japan, etc.)marketsandmarkets.com. The Middle East saw accelerated procurement after recent attacks: Gulf nations (Saudi, UAE) have purchased multiple C‑UAS systems following drone/missile strikests2.tech. Meanwhile, civilian drone policy is tightening: e.g., UAE lifted its drone ban in 2022 under strict registration/geofencing rulesdroneshield.com, signaling alignment of innovation with security.

  
  

Problem: Gaps in Current C‑UAS Defenses

Existing counter-drone systems mainly provide point defense or detection-only, leaving significant coverage gaps:

• Detection vs. Interdiction:  Many sites can detect rogue drones but cannot safely neutralize them. Under current law most public/private entities are limited to surveillance (radar, RF, EO/IR)dronelife.com. Only select federal agencies (DoD, DHS, etc.) can employ mitigation (jamming/spoofing/seizure)dronelife.comdronelife.com. For example, a prison or stadium cannot legally jam or shoot down an intruder drone – they can only log the intrusion. A 2016 NY case noted “no cost-effective or legal solution to ‘take over’ a drone once it has been detected”libn.com. This creates an unmet need: a system that can both sense and defeat drones lawfully (e.g. under DHS authority or emergency protocols).

  
  

• Limited Range of Point Defenses:  Handheld or vehicle-mounted jammers and guns operate over short distances. For instance, DroneShield’s DroneGun jamming rifle is effective only out to a few hundred meters (up to ~1–2 km)ts2.tech. Similarly, small radar/optical sensors or interceptor drones cover limited zones. Critical sites with multi-mile perimeters (airports, bases) remain vulnerable beyond these radii.

  
  

• High Costs and Deployment Barriers:  Integrated airport C‑UAS installations (layered sensors + comms + mitigation) have been estimated at >$5M per sitemarketsandmarkets.com. Even wealthy operators hesitate to fully deploy wide-area defenses due to cost and regulatory hurdles. Without a scalable, cost-effective perimeter solution, sites face either blind spots or exorbitant budgets.

  
  

In short, the unmet need is a modular, long-range “Qi-ADDFS” that provides continuous aerial surveillance and interdiction along an entire perimeter – stopping drones before they threaten assets. Existing point-countermeasures leave too much uncovered, as recent airport and venue incidents illustrate.

Technical Differentiation – Qi-ADDFS vs. Point Defense

• Perimeter Coverage:  Unlike a point system (gun, handheld jammer, or single radar site), a Qi-ADDFS is a distributed sensor-effector network. It combines long-range radars, RF sensors, and EO/IR cameras along a boundary to continuously monitor miles of airspace. For example, Rafael’s Drone Dome uses compact radars (~3–4 km range) for 360° awarenessts2.tech. A digital fence extends this concept across an entire perimeter (1–25 mi), creating an “aerial intrusion detection” beltlibn.com. As soon as a hostile UAS approaches or crosses the line, the system detects it.

  
  

• Early Interception:  Because the fence spans outward, interdiction tools (jamming arrays, directional RF guns, or even lasers/microwaves) engage threats at the perimeter, minimizing risk to the interior and bystanders. This contrasts with reactive point-defense which often has to act when the drone is already at the high-value target. Early jamming can force an intruder to land or leave, and emergent directed-energy weapons (lasers, HPM) can disable drones at distance. (By contrast, traditional EW guns suffer collateral jamming and short rangets2.tech.)

  
  

• Multi-Sensor Fusion and AI:  A key feature is integrated data fusion. Sensors feed into an AI-enabled command system (similar to Anduril’s Lattice or DroneShield’s AI predictorsts2.tech) that tracks the drone’s trajectory and optimizes response. For instance, companies like Fortem and Dedrone use machine learning to predict drone paths, giving precious extra secondsts2.tech. The Qi-ADDFS would apply these advances across all perimeter sensors for robust tracking and fewer false alarms.

  
  

• Legal and Safety Advantages:  By acting at the perimeter, the fence can employ non-kinetic countermeasures with minimal collateral risk (outside public airspace). In sensitive areas (airports, stadiums) where kinetic “shoot-down” is unacceptable.

  
  

• This approach maximizes legal compliance (e.g. obeying geofences, not broadcasting harmful jamming into city) while still neutralizing threats before breach.

  
  

 I

Competitive Landscape

The anti-drone industry is crowded with specialized players, but none offer a full “miles-long digital fence (Qi-ADDFS)" solution yet. Major competitors include:

• DroneShield (Australia) – Pioneers of RF sensing and jamming. Known for its portable DroneGun jammers and networked sensors, DroneShield uses AI to fuse multiple inputs for alertingts2.tech. Their systems are used by militaries and high-profile events, but they typically cover point areas or small networks.

  
  

• Dedrone (US/Germany) – A market leader in airspace security software. Dedrone provides passive detection (RF scanners, cameras) and has begun integrating defeat (acquiring DroneDefender jam technology)ts2.tech. They protect venues like airports and prisons with centralized control software, but current deployments focus on detection clusters rather than perimeter-long solutions.

  
  

• Raytheon/RTX (USA) – The defense giant offers systems like the KuRFS Ku-band 360° radar and integrated kinetic deterrents. Their C-UAS can track many targets with military-grade precisionts2.tech (KuRFS radar) and field systems like LIDS with Coyote missiles. These are highly capable, but geared towards military bases and have very high cost/complexity.

  
  

• Rafael (Israel) – Developer of the “Drone Dome” C-UAS: a truck-mounted 360° sensor suite (radar + EO/IR) plus jamming antennas (and optional laser)ts2.tech. Combat-proven (e.g. in Syria), but again a localized point-defense array, not a distributed fence.

  
  

• Fortem Technologies (USA) – Specializes in drone-hunting interceptor drones (DroneHunter) and compact surveillance radar. Their net-toting drones have downed swarms in demos and can engage autonomous threats that jammers missts2.tech. Fortem’s approach is kinetic and localized (e.g. around an event).

  
  

• Other Innovators: D-Fend Solutions (Israel) offers EnforceAir cyber-takeover (hacking drones), Black Sage (USA) has sensor fusion C2 for bases, OpenWorks (“SkyWall” net launcher) adds point-net capture, Epirus (USA) fields high-power microwaves (Leonidas) for area denial, Anduril (USA) bundles AI sensors with Anvil interceptor drones, etc.

  
  

By contrast, our Qi-ADDFS digital fence concept would integrate aspects of these (RF, radar, optical, EW) into a perimeter network. It would out-range portable jammers (DroneGun)ts2.tech and out-cover single-site systems (Rafael’s Drone Dome). We would target large-area deployments – e.g. encircling an entire airfield or base – where current vendors have no plug-and-play solution.

Regulatory Considerations & Enablers

• United States:  U.S. law currently restricts counter-drone defenses. Only certain federal agencies may actively counter UAS (under strict rules)dronelife.com. Most civilian facilities are limited to detection unless special FAA exemptions are granted. However, the regulatory environment is evolving under pressure from recent incidentsdronelife.comdronelife.com. Federal acts (e.g. 2018 Preventing Emerging Threats Act) gave DHS authority to detect, disrupt, or destroy drones over covered facilitiesdronelife.com. New legislation is under consideration to explicitly permit state/local authorities and private sites to employ C-UAS measures. Meanwhile, the FAA is testing detection/countermeasures at airportsap.org and has mandated drone registration/transponders (FAA Part 107 rules) and no-fly zones around runwaysap.org, which will assist systems like a digital fence.

  
  

• Europe:  The European Commission (Oct 2023) issued a Counter-Drone Strategy, aiming for a harmonized EU policy on C-UASunmannedairspace.info. It calls for regulatory measures, shared best practices, and research funding (Horizon, internal security funds) for C-UAS through 2030unmannedairspace.info. National bodies (e.g. UK’s BSI) are developing standards for what qualifies as an effective C-UASosltechnology.com. EU member states are also equipping key events (e.g. G7 summits) and airports with vetted C‑UAS technology. These regulatory moves will broaden the market for compliant systems and may mandate defenses for certain infrastructure.

  
  

• Middle East and Others:  Many Gulf states rapidly procure C-UAS after security incidents. Saudi Arabia and UAE, following drone/missile attacks on oil facilities, have imported systems from multiple suppliersts2.tech. The UAE government has recently liberalized civilian drone use (lifting a 2022 ban) under strict rules (registration, geo-fencing, designated zones)droneshield.com, reflecting a balance of innovation and security. Israel, having extensive combat experience, maintains a multi-layer C-UAS doctrine (Drone Dome, Iron Dome, etc.) and continues to export technology. In summary, global policy trends are moving toward enabling and sometimes requiring robust airspace protection; this “tailwind” will drive adoption of advanced C-UAS like a digital fence.

Use-Case Scenarios & Cost of Inaction

• Airports:  Unchecked drone incursions can halt flights. Case: December 2018, a drone was reported near Gatwick (London) for 36 hours, closing the airport. Over 1000 flights (~140,000 passengers) were disrupted. The airport spent an extra £4 M on anti-drone equipment thereaftertheguardian.com. EasyJet alone estimated £15 M in compensation and lost revenue from the shutdowntheguardian.com. (By comparison, deploying a digital fence around an airport might prevent such closures.)

  
  

• Sports and Public Venues:  A drone crash into a crowd could have catastrophic consequences. For instance, a 2017 MLB game saw a drone crash into empty seats during playairsight.com. Analysts note that a typical NFL game carries $17–30 M of fan-related revenueairsight.com (tickets, concessions) – the Super Bowl could exceed $400 M. Media broadcasting revenues are even higher (~$46 M per prime-time NFL game)airsight.com. A drone-triggered evacuation or cancelation would incur hundreds of millions of dollars in losses (plus legal liabilities)airsight.comairsight.com.

  
  

• Military Bases and Infrastructure:  Drone threats to bases, ports, and power plants are now routine. For example, Ukrainian forces face cheap Iranian-made “kamikaze” drones (Shahed) striking infrastructure daily, degrading power grids and moralemarketsandmarkets.com. U.S. bases in the Middle East have also reported dozens of drone attacks. Without perimeter defense, bases must rely on ad hoc gunfire or barrage weapons. A digital fence could detect and counter drones well before they reach critical assets, potentially saving lives and millions in damage.

  
  

• Prisons and Correctional Facilities:  Jails have reported attempts to smuggle contraband (drugs, weapons) via drones over the fence. Suffolk County (NY) implemented a “digital fence” at a jail – any UAV crossing into the protected zone trips an alarm to guard stationslibn.com. Before such systems, prisons had no effective countermeasure (officials admitted there was “little that can be done legally to remove these drones”libn.com). The cost of ignoring this threat includes increased crime and potential hostage situations, which are hard to quantify but serious.

  
  

• Airline & Public Safety:  Near-misses are becoming alarmingly common. The FAA averages over 100 drone sightings per month near airportsfaa.gov, and an AP analysis found drones caused ~2/3 of near-midair collision incidents at the 30 busiest U.S. airports in 2024ap.org. Any collision could trigger major airspace shutdowns. The “cost of inaction” thus includes flight delays, emergency responses, and in worst cases, loss of life.

  
  

In every scenario, lack of a continuous perimeter defense risks severe economic and safety consequences. By contrast, a digital fence system aims to eliminate blind spots and stop drones well before they cause disruptions.

Strategic Differentiation

VII. Partnerships and Strategic Value

We are seeking:

• VCs and defense-aligned investors focused on frontier security

• Co-development partners for global rollout and product validation

• Defense contractors to integrate Qi-ADDFS into current security platforms

• Sovereign states for direct deployment in border zones, airports, energy corridors