The U.S. Air Force is quietly turning a North Dakota unit into a test bed for how to spot and stop small drones before they can threaten runways, fuel farms, or housing on American bases. The effort now hinges on an aggressive search for industry ideas that can reliably track and physically defeat small uncrewed aircraft systems, then turn those lessons into standard operating procedures for base defense.
At the center of this push is The Point Defense Battle Lab, a new organization built around the 319th at Grand Forks and supported by the Kansas Air National Guard’s 184th Wing.
From experiments to playbook
The Point Defense Battle Lab is meant to serve as a collaboration hub that advances counter-small UAS capabilities and supports the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to defend Air Force installations from evolving threats.
According to planning documents, the 319th, with the 184th Wing in support, is scheduled to run exercises every month through 2026 that will stress different mixes of sensors, effectors, and command systems against small drones.
Leaders describe a clear end state: the tactics, techniques, and procedures captured through these events will be synthesized into a set of standard operating procedures for air base counter-drone defense.
Those procedures are meant to be exportable so that a base in North Dakota, a training range in Arizona, and a fuel hub on the East Coast can all draw from the same tested playbook instead of improvising their own defenses.
Two RFIs, one urgent problem
The urgency behind the lab’s work is reflected in two new Air Force requests for information that explicitly seek systems to detect small drones and defeat them with kinetic, or hard-kill, options.
One RFI focuses on tracking the threat, with the Air Force asking for technology that can consistently detect and track all Group 1 drones at ranges of two kilometers or more, even in cluttered airspace.
Group 1 covers the smallest category, typically quadcopters and similar aircraft that can be bought online, modified, and flown at low altitude where traditional air defense radars struggle.
The second RFI turns to the problem of stopping those aircraft once detected, and Point Defense Battle Lab officials are identifying vendors with kinetic hard-kill solutions capable of defeating Group 1 through Group 3 small UAS that threaten USAF installations.
Industry responses will feed directly into the monthly events at Grand Forks, where systems can be run side by side, exposed to realistic weather, and evaluated under common scoring criteria.
What the Air Force wants from sensors
The Air Force’s demands for detection technology are shaped by a broader Pentagon push for counter-drone sensors that can protect critical infrastructure inside the United States.
In a separate effort, defense officials have specified that sensors must detect Group 1 and Group 2 drones flying below 50 meters, a regime where hobby aircraft, commercial quadcopters, and improvised threats all operate.
Those requirements call for multiple and redundant sensors so that a radar, an electro-optical camera, and perhaps a passive radio frequency sensor can cross-cue one another and reduce false alarms.
For the Point Defense Battle Lab, that translates into a search for sensor suites that can be networked, survive on a busy flight line, and still track a small quadcopter that pops up near a perimeter fence or fuel tank.
The Air Force is also watching how those sensors handle weather, clutter from birds and ground vehicles, and complex background environments around bases that sit near cities or highways.
Hard-kill focus and the risk calculus
Soft-kill tools such as jammers and spoofers remain part of the Air Force mix, but the new RFIs highlight a deliberate focus on hard-kill defeat of small UAS.
Point Defense Battle Lab planners are looking for kinetic options that can physically destroy or disable a drone before it reaches a high value area, especially when electronic attack is restricted or ineffective.
That might involve guns with programmable ammunition, small missiles, or intercepting drones, although the RFIs themselves concentrate on performance rather than specific designs.
The battle lab’s job is to understand which of those tools can be safely used over and around U.S. bases, where every shot has to be weighed against the risk to people and property on the ground.
By running repeated scenarios, the lab can map out when a hard-kill engagement is appropriate, how close a drone can be allowed to approach, and how to integrate that decisionmaking into a base’s command and control structure.
Link to broader Air Force research
The counter small UAS push at Grand Forks is unfolding alongside a separate research track inside The Air Force Research Laboratory.
AFRL has issued RFI 2026 for the Counter Long Range Kill Chain, a solicitation that seeks ideas on how to disrupt or defeat longer range threats before they reach a target.
While that effort focuses on larger systems, it shares a logic with the Point Defense Battle Lab: use early detection, smart networking, and tailored defeat mechanisms to break an adversary’s attack sequence.
Together, the two lines of effort give the Air Force a spectrum approach, with AFRL tackling long range kill chains and the battle lab refining close-in defense of bases against small drones.
Industry’s role in a year of experiments
The Air Force has been explicit that industry is central to the Grand Forks campaign.
Officials have invited counter-drone firms to participate in a dozen or more exercises through the year, with each event designed to test specific combinations of detection and defeat technologies.
Vendors are expected to bring not only hardware but also data on performance, integration support, and the ability to adapt quickly as the lab refines its scenarios.
The goal is not to crown a single winner but to identify a menu of options that can be mixed and matched to fit the geography, threat profile, and budget of different bases.
For smaller companies, the Point Defense Battle Lab offers a rare chance to prove their systems in front of operators, acquisition officials, and evaluators in a live environment rather than on a static range.
Conferences and the counter-UAS ecosystem
The Air Force effort is unfolding amid a dense calendar of counter-drone events that keep government, military, and industry players in close conversation.
The IDGA Counter UAS Summit, scheduled as a two day event in Arlington, brings together senior military leaders, government personnel, and industry experts to discuss threats, policy, and technology.
Later in the year, Counter UAS Technology USA 2026 is set to convene for its sixth annual edition, with organizers emphasizing advanced sensors, effectors, and integration with broader air defense networks.
Separate gatherings such as Counter UAS Technology USA 2026 and other defense-focused conferences provide venues for Point Defense Battle Lab representatives, AFRL researchers, and vendors to compare notes outside the test range.
That ecosystem helps ensure that insights from Grand Forks do not stay siloed, but instead inform procurement decisions, training curricula, and joint doctrine discussions across the services.
Lessons from earlier concept calls
The Air Force has experimented with this kind of open call for ideas before.
In an earlier concept solicitation, the service sought input in 12 different areas that ranged from lethality to the use of weather data, with responses due by Nov. 17.
That effort highlighted how quickly small UAS threats were proliferating, including commercial quadcopters within the continental United States.
The new RFIs tied to the Point Defense Battle Lab build on that experience, but with a narrower focus on small drones around bases and a stronger link to near term field experimentation.
From Grand Forks to the flight line
The test events at Grand Forks are only the beginning.
Once the lab has run through its planned schedule, the Air Force intends to turn its findings into formal guidance that can be used to train defenders, shape acquisition, and update base defense plans across the force.