Published on: 2025-09-29

Intelligence Report: Falcon Peak highlights need to counter UAS threat – Globalsecurity.org

1. BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)

The most supported hypothesis is that the Falcon Peak exercise is a crucial step in developing an effective counter-UAS strategy for the United States, with a moderate confidence level. The exercise aims to enhance detection, tracking, and mitigation capabilities against unmanned aerial systems (UAS) threats, particularly those targeting military installations and critical infrastructure. Recommended actions include continued investment in advanced UAS countermeasures and fostering interagency and industry collaboration.

2. Competing Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1: Falcon Peak is primarily a defensive measure to address immediate UAS threats to U.S. military and critical infrastructure, reflecting a reactive posture to emerging threats.
Hypothesis 2: Falcon Peak serves as a strategic initiative to establish long-term UAS countermeasures, positioning the U.S. as a leader in counter-UAS technology and policy development.
Using the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) 2.0, Hypothesis 2 is better supported due to the emphasis on collaboration with industry partners and the development of new technologies, indicating a forward-looking approach.

3. Key Assumptions and Red Flags

– Assumption: Current UAS threats are significant enough to warrant large-scale exercises like Falcon Peak.
– Red Flag: Lack of specific data on the nature and frequency of UAS incursions, which could indicate either an underestimation or overestimation of the threat.
– Potential Bias: Confirmation bias in interpreting the success of Falcon Peak without comprehensive metrics.

4. Implications and Strategic Risks

– Cascading Threats: Failure to effectively counter UAS threats could lead to increased vulnerability of critical infrastructure and military assets.
– Economic Impact: Investment in UAS countermeasures could strain defense budgets if not managed efficiently.
– Geopolitical Dimension: Enhanced UAS capabilities may provoke adversaries to develop more sophisticated UAS technologies, leading to an arms race.

5. Recommendations and Outlook

• Invest in research and development for advanced UAS detection and mitigation technologies.
• Strengthen interagency collaboration to ensure cohesive policy and operational responses.
• Scenario Projections:
  • Best Case: Successful implementation of counter-UAS measures deters adversaries and protects critical infrastructure.
  • Worst Case: Ineffective countermeasures lead to increased UAS incursions and potential attacks.
  • Most Likely: Gradual improvement in UAS defenses with ongoing challenges in adapting to new threats.

6. Key Individuals and Entities

– Kelley Stewart
– Mark Massaro
– Gregory Guillot
– Anduril (technology provider)

7. Thematic Tags

national security threats, cybersecurity, counter-terrorism, regional focus