Joint Interagency Task Force 401 Publishes Counter-Drone Handbook

uly 8, 2026 | By Joint Interagency Task Force 401 |

Joint Interagency Task Force 401 recently published a practical handbook designed to aid audiences across government, industry and academia in building a shared understanding of the drone threat and the basic principles of protecting against illicit drones.

The task force developed the guide, titled "Small Drones, Big Problems: A First Principles Approach to Countering-UAS," as part of its mission to synchronize counter-unmanned aircraft systems efforts across the War Department and federal interagency partners.

The handbook also establishes a common vocabulary and incorporates the latest information about UAS, including lessons learned from operations in the Middle East and on battlefields in Europe. It explains how adversaries can use drones, outlines the key components of a layered drone defense and examines the factors that enable successful counter-UAS operations.

"It is crucial to build a common foundation for counter-drone efforts as we work with the entire government and interagency partners to respond to this growing threat," said Army Maj. Joe Amoroso, deputy chief of strategic initiatives for JIATF 401. "This guide shares vital first principles and direct feedback from warfighters employing [counter]-UAS systems so the entire community has the means, methods and concepts for countering the defining threat of our time."

The handbook emphasizes a layered approach as the most effective defense against illicit drones, with a variety of tools available to counter threats. It reinforces the importance of capabilities that go beyond technological solutions, including training for warfighters that equips them with the knowledge and permissions they need to respond to drone threats in real time.

Through this publication, JIATF 401 continues its mission to expand counter-UAS capability to warfighters at home and abroad.

"While there is no silver bullet to protect against drones, the threat can be mitigated if we are proactive, work with partners across the government and build a layered defense," said Army Brig. Gen. Matt Ross, task force director. "We have faced novel challenges before, and we should not be intimidated by this one. We should lean in and take every possible step to prepare ourselves to dominate on the modern battlefield."

The Office of the Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering Finalizes Lab Review, Aims to Modernize R&D Enterprise

June 24, 2026 |

The Office of the Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering has finalized a set of recommendations to modernize and reform the War Department's vast research enterprise, priming it to ease bureaucratic friction points and to rapidly deliver combat-ready technologies. The recommendations flow from a 90-day comprehensive assessment of the Department's laboratories, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and University-Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs).

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth mandated a sweeping modernization of the U.S. defense innovation ecosystem to keep pace with a rapidly evolving, commercially driven global technology landscape. The Office of the Assistant Secretary of War for Science and Technology is executing on this mandate, completing 30 site visits, which represent nearly a third of the Department's research and development (R&D) enterprise. This assessment provided crucial ground-truth insights into systemic challenges and opportunities for reform across the enterprise.

"On one hand, our findings are reassuring, confirming that the research enterprise is fundamentally sound, with an unmatched concentration of world-class scientists, engineers and researchers who continue to drive capabilities to the tactical edge," said Assistant Secretary of War for Science and Technology Joseph Jewell, whose office led the assessment. "But the findings also show the increasing drag that aging, costly infrastructure imposes on labs and test centers striving to tackle changing missions and pursue emerging technologies. We have researchers pushing the boundaries of 21st century technologies in facilities built when the cathode-ray tube and jet propulsion were the state of the art."

According to Dr. Jewell, a key recommendation of the assessment is asking Congress to establish a dedicated laboratory military construction (MILCON) appropriation specifically for research, development, test and evaluation infrastructure. This would protect these funds from being reallocated to general MILCON needs. A related request to Congress would significantly increase the limit on minor MILCON funds, which labs require to respond quickly to new demands for integrated research and enhanced security.

"This assessment highlights how siloed the R&D enterprise has become as it expanded over the past half century," said Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering Emil Michael. "The labs are more service-centric, and the networks of university and FFRDC partners are not as integrated as they should be. This comprehensive review mandates our path forward to address the overriding challenge of delivering technology from lab to our warfighters rapidly, without sacrificing our rigorous standards for safety and combat effectiveness."

The review does not recommend consolidating or eliminating institutions, concluding that where overlap exists, it tends to be driven by mission need. The findings suggest that the way to reform the research enterprise is to fix the systemic issues surrounding its institutions, focusing on how authority, money and decisions flow, and how the institutions are funded, measured and governed.

Ultimately, the recommendations presented seek to eliminate the largest bureaucratic friction points, optimize resource allocation and empower the Department's unmatched scientific workforce. The report serves as the foundational blueprint to modernize the Department's R&D ecosystem and ensure the Department maintains a dominant and enduring technological advantage.

The assessment team is currently formalizing an implementation plan to address all identified findings and recommendations, with execution scheduled to begin shortly thereafter.