Resources

Last week, a new report landed that I keep thinking about. IQAir analysed air quality data from 9,446 cities across 143 countries. Their conclusion: only 13 countries in the world currently breathe air that meets World Health Organisation (WHO) safety guidelines. In Europe, that's just three: Andorra, Estonia, and Iceland.

91 per cent of countries fell short. And the situation is getting worse, not better.

The report points to one of the fastest-growing contributors to poor air quality: wildfire smoke. 2025 was the worst wildfire year on EU record. Blazes swept across Europe through the summer, destroying farms, woodlands, and homes. The world's 25 most polluted cities were all located in India, Pakistan, and China. And across the globe, extreme weather caused at least €43 billion in short-term economic losses.

I've seen this up close.

We've been working with Bombeiros Portugal, Portugal's national fire brigade, for several years now. Portugal consistently faces some of the most destructive wildfire seasons in Europe. The Bombeiros operate under enormous pressure: vast terrain, fast-moving fires, limited situational awareness, and crews on the ground who need accurate information immediately.

That's exactly where drone technology changes the equation.

With drones deployed as part of a coordinated aerial response, fire commanders gain real-time visibility of fire fronts, wind behaviour, and areas at risk. Crews can be positioned more accurately. Evacuations can be triggered faster. Decisions that used to be made on incomplete information are now made with a live operational picture overhead.

The Bombeiros are already doing this.

The link between wildfires and air quality is direct. Fine particulate matter from smoke, known as PM2.5, is one of the most harmful pollutants we know of. Particles smaller than 2.5 micrometres travel deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream. They're linked to respiratory disease, cardiovascular conditions, and long-term illness. When a major wildfire burns for days, the effects on air quality extend hundreds of kilometres beyond the fire itself.

Containing fires faster isn't just an operational win. It's a public health intervention.

At AirHub, we build the software that makes drone operations structured, compliant, and scalable. Whether that's a single drone team supporting a local fire brigade or a national Drone as a First Responder (DFR) programme, the underlying need is the same: reliable coordination, clear data, and the ability to act quickly when conditions change.

The IQAir report is a reminder that air quality is a safety issue. One that gets worse every time a major wildfire goes uncontrolled for too long.

The technology to respond more effectively already exists. What it needs is the infrastructure to deploy it at scale.

That's the work we're doing, together with teams like the Bombeiros, every year.

Thomas Brinkman is co-founder and co-CEO of AirHub, drone operations software for public safety, critical infrastructure, and security organisations worldwide.

Want to learn how AirHub supports aerial first response operations? Book a demo.

AirHub has announced a strategic partnership with Joost Tuinman of Gardener Consultancy. Joost brings 27 years of experience as an officer in the Dutch Army, including senior roles at the Korps Commandotroepen (KCT) and SOCOM (the headquarters for special operations), followed by years at the Ministry of Defence in The Hague. Today he operates at the intersection of defence, security, industry, and innovation. We spoke with him about the market, the role of technology, and what this partnership means for the future of AirHub.

A career built at the intersection of strategy and operations

After nearly three decades in the military, Joost made the transition to the private sector about a year ago. Through Gardener Consultancy, he now supports organisations and leaders in making sharp strategic choices and turning them into real results.

"My approach is what I call 'from strategy to tactics'," he explains. "It is not just about thinking, but about doing. Actually building capabilities, services, and products."

His focus areas include unmanned systems, sensor-to-shooter chains, data-driven operations, and public-private collaboration. "My role is often that of a connector and accelerator: making sure government, industry, and technology find each other and arrive at concrete solutions, with real momentum in decision-making."

From experimentation to operationalisation

The drone sector is changing fast, and Joost sees a clear shift in how security organisations are approaching the technology.

"What you see is a move from experimenting to operationalising. Drones are no longer an innovation project. They are becoming an essential part of operational deployment, business operations, and intelligence gathering."

Conflicts like the one in Ukraine have sharpened that awareness considerably, he says. "They make it painfully clear that speed, scale, mass, and technology working together are decisive. Drones play a key role in that."

But technology on its own is not enough. "The real insight is that technology only works when it is integrated, not just technically, but also organisationally and doctrinally, and compatible with other systems and platforms. Organisations that get that right have a strategic advantage."

Why AirHub and Gardener Consultancy are a natural fit

The partnership between AirHub and Gardener Consultancy grew out of a shared understanding of where the market is heading.

"AirHub has built a platform that directly addresses the need to integrate control, compliance, and scalability of drone operations into daily practice," Joost says. "And it also serves as a planning tool for future operations, which is often overlooked."

What makes the collaboration work, according to Joost, is the complementarity between the two parties. "AirHub brings a strong technological foundation. I bring the context of defence, security, and decision-making. Together we make sure technology is not just functional, but actually applied where it matters."

The biggest opportunities: Europe and strategic autonomy

Looking at the market, Joost sees significant potential for AirHub both in the Netherlands and internationally.

"Within the Netherlands, there are opportunities to further professionalise drone deployment within defence and security services. Internationally, and initially within Europe, I see the same possibilities, but with an additional dimension: strategic autonomy."

Organisations are increasingly looking for European solutions that are reliable, secure, and interoperable. "That is where AirHub can position itself strongly."

His broader vision goes further. "The real growth lies in developing AirHub as part of a wider drone ecosystem in which data, sensors, and command and control come together. Not as a standalone application, but as a valuable platform within an operational system."

Bridging the gap between public and private

One of the recurring challenges in the security sector is the collaboration between public authorities and private technology companies. Joost knows the terrain well.

"Public-private collaboration is essential, but in practice it is often complex, slow, and bureaucratic. The public sector operates from compliance and risk management, while the private sector brings speed, innovation, and decisiveness. Those two worlds need to find each other, and that does not happen automatically."

A significant part of his work involves bridging that gap, which is sometimes referred to as the Valley of Death. "Making sure collaboration becomes concrete, with clear goals, governance, and mutual understanding. Only then can you bring technology to operations much faster and more effectively. And ultimately, that is what it is all about."

Software as the critical layer

When it comes to why drone software specifically is so relevant to the challenges security organisations face today, Joost is direct.

"The real value of the AirHub platform is not in the flying itself. It is in the ability to plan, direct, and understand operations, in real time and at scale."

Software, he argues, is the critical layer that brings planning, execution, monitoring, and analysis together in one integrated environment. "That creates overview and control over operations that are becoming increasingly complex."

Scalability is another key factor. "Defence and security organisations are no longer working with a single drone. They are working with multiple systems simultaneously, often in dynamic and high-risk environments around the world. Without robust software, that becomes uncontrollable."

"The strength lies in bringing planning, execution, data processing, and management together in one system. Then drone deployment is no longer a standalone activity, but an integral part of operational conduct."

Want to see how AirHub supports operational drone deployments for defence and security organisations? Book a demo with one of our experts.

When organisations start thinking about drone threats, the conversation almost always gravitates toward hardware. Which radar? Which RF sensor? How many cameras? It is a natural instinct. Technology is visible, tangible, and relatively straightforward to procure.

But a sensor is not a solution. And that distinction matters far more than most organisations realise.

The gap between a C-UAS system and a C-UAS solution

A C-UAS system is a set of technologies designed to detect, track, or neutralise unmanned aircraft. A C-UAS solution is something broader: it is the combination of technology, processes, trained personnel, legal frameworks, and stakeholder coordination that allows an organisation to actually manage drone-related risks in a sustainable and proportionate way.

The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) made this distinction explicit in its 2023 Handbook on UAS Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Public Space. The conclusion is clear: organisations that focus on technology procurement while neglecting the operational and procedural layer will have gaps in their capability, regardless of how sophisticated their sensors are.

The JRC identifies a set of foundational minimum measures that every C-UAS solution should have in place before any detection technology is deployed. These are not optional extras. They are the foundation.

What the foundational minimum measures actually cover

The foundational minimum measures span six areas:

UAS geographical zone management. The organisation must understand the regulatory and operational airspace environment around its site. This means knowing which flights are authorised, which are restricted, and how those boundaries are communicated and enforced in practice.

Event logging. Every detected incident, every alert, every operational decision must be recorded systematically. Without structured logging, there is no baseline to work from, no way to assess whether the threat picture is changing, and no audit trail for regulators, insurers, or incident investigators.

Physical protection. Perimeter measures, access controls, and physical hardening remain relevant even in a drone threat context. A drone can be a vector for physical intrusion, not just surveillance. Physical and digital layers must be designed together, not independently.

RF monitoring. Radio frequency awareness allows organisations to understand the electromagnetic environment around their site. This is both a detection input and a baseline calibration tool. Without it, distinguishing normal activity from anomalies becomes guesswork.

Stakeholder interaction. No organisation manages drone threats in isolation. Law enforcement, aviation authorities, neighbouring operators, and emergency services all have a role to play. Defining those relationships, communication channels, and escalation pathways in advance is what makes a response proportionate and coordinated when something actually happens.

Cybersecurity. C-UAS systems are themselves digital infrastructure. Command and control links, sensor feeds, and data storage are all potential attack surfaces. An adversary who understands your detection architecture can attempt to exploit or blind it. Cybersecurity must therefore be embedded in the solution design from the start, not treated as a separate workstream.

Why technology feels like the solution but usually is not

Detection hardware is the most visible part of a C-UAS deployment, which is why it tends to dominate procurement discussions. Radar specifications, detection range, probability of identification: these are measurable, comparable, and easy to present in a tender document.

The operational layer is harder to quantify. How do you measure the quality of your escalation procedures before you need them? How do you demonstrate the maturity of your stakeholder relationships in a proposal? These questions do not lend themselves to a feature comparison table, but they determine whether a C-UAS capability actually works under real conditions.

The JRC handbook is explicit on this point. Event logging and stakeholder interaction are consistently identified as the two elements most frequently underestimated during implementation. Organisations invest in sensors, run a successful proof of concept, and then discover during an actual incident that they have no agreed procedure for notifying law enforcement, no log that supports a criminal investigation, and no clear ownership of the response.

Technology without process is situational awareness without the ability to act on it.

What a complete solution looks like in practice

A well-designed C-UAS solution integrates five layers:

Detection. Multi-sensor architectures combining radar, RF analysis, electro-optical and infrared cameras, and acoustic sensors give organisations a fused picture of airspace activity. No single sensor is sufficient across all environments and threat profiles.

Classification. Knowing that something is flying is not enough. Understanding whether it is a compliant operator, an unaware recreational flyer, or a deliberate threat determines the appropriate response. Classification capability is what separates actionable intelligence from noise.

Coordination with authorised operations. Critical infrastructure and public space operators often have legitimate drone activity around their sites: inspection flights, delivery operations, authorised surveillance. A C-UAS solution must integrate with drone traffic management data to distinguish cooperative from non-cooperative traffic. Without this, every detection looks like a potential threat.

Defined response procedures. The detection of a drone should trigger a structured workflow: who is notified, what information is communicated, which authority has decision-making power, and what actions are permissible under national law. In most European jurisdictions, active countermeasures such as jamming are restricted to specific state actors. Knowing this in advance prevents organisations from designing response procedures that are either illegal or unenforceable.

Continuous evaluation. Drone technology, threat actor behaviour, and regulatory frameworks all change. A C-UAS solution is not a one-time deployment. It requires regular review of its performance against a defined set of indicators, updates to procedures when the threat picture shifts, and the organisational discipline to treat counter-drone capability as a living function rather than a completed project.

Site specificity is not a complication. It is the starting point.

One of the strongest conclusions from the JRC methodology is that there is no universal C-UAS solution. A solution designed for an airport will not map directly onto a chemical plant, a port, or a public event. Population density, airspace classification, the regulatory environment, the nature of potential threats, and the stakeholder landscape all vary. Each deployment requires its own analysis.

Rather than complicating the process, this site specificity is exactly what makes upfront risk and threat analysis so important before any technology is selected. Organisations that reverse this sequence, choosing sensors first and then attempting to justify the decision through a risk assessment, typically end up with capability that does not match the actual threat profile of their site.

The JRC's five-phase methodology addresses this directly. Phase one is about establishing the business mandate and legal framework. Phase two is dedicated entirely to risk and threat analysis. Technology selection does not begin until phase three, once the threat profile has been defined.

How AirHub fits into this picture

AirHub supports organisations in building C-UAS capability that goes beyond sensor procurement. Our platform integrates drone operations management, airspace awareness, and detection system inputs into a single operational environment. This means that authorised drone traffic, regulatory airspace data, and detection alerts can be viewed together, giving operators the context they need to make informed decisions quickly.

From a consultancy perspective, we help organisations work through the foundational layer: defining stakeholder relationships, structuring event logging, aligning operational procedures with legal frameworks, and embedding C-UAS considerations into broader security governance.

If you are assessing your organisation's drone security posture or planning a C-UAS deployment, we are happy to support both the strategic and operational dimensions.

Book a demo to see how AirHub can support your airspace awareness and drone security operations.