Placement against real terrain
Coverage is computed over the site’s own elevation and structures, so the shadow behind a hangar shows up as a gap rather than as an assumption.
All products
Counter-UAS design & sizing
Dsizing
Rebrand underway — the name will change
Sizes a counter-drone system before anyone buys one: sensor placement, coverage, gaps, and a defensible budget range.
Maturity: PilotAirFixed site
Designed outcome
A site-specific counter-UAS design that states expected coverage, known gaps and budget assumptions before a tender commits the programme to equipment.
Best fit
Airports, critical sites and public-event programmes that need a vendor-agnostic design baseline before procurement, survey and live trial.
Product capability
The most expensive decision in a counter-UAS programme is made before the tender is written — how many sensors, of what kind, standing where. It is usually made from a vendor's coverage diagram, which assumes flat ground, no clutter and a cooperative target.
Dsizing models the actual site. It takes terrain, structures, the airspace being protected and the threat profile being planned against, then places sensors, shows what is covered and what is not, and produces a budget range with the assumptions written next to it. The output is a document you can hand to a procurement team, and requirements anyone can tender against — including people who are not us.
Gaps stated, not smoothed
The output names what is not covered and at what altitude. A sizing tool that reports full coverage on every site is a sales tool.
Budget ranges with their assumptions attached
Cost estimates carry the quantities, the tier of equipment assumed, and the integration and civil work that vendor pricing normally omits.
Vendor-agnostic output
It produces capability requirements and positions, not a parts list. The result is tenderable by any supplier.
Concrete assets for the people who will operate the system.
- 01Protected-area and threat-assumption brief
- 02Terrain and structure-aware site model
- 03Candidate sensor-placement plan
- 04Coverage and named-gap analysis
- 05Budget range with quantity and works assumptions
- 06Vendor-agnostic tender and live-trial requirements
What this product does not claim.
- The name is changing. A rebrand is underway and "Dsizing" should be treated as the current label, not the final one.
- It is in pilot use, not general release. It is currently applied by our own team inside engagements rather than sold as a licence.
- It models coverage. It does not predict detection probability against a specific aircraft, and it is not a substitute for a site survey or a live trial.
- Budget ranges are estimates for planning. They are not quotations and they are not a commitment to supply at that price.
Questions buyers should ask early.
- What is the system expected to protect?
- Assets, approaches, altitude bands, operating hours and threat assumptions define the useful problem — not the site boundary alone.
- Which gaps are acceptable?
- The programme decides which gaps can be mitigated operationally and which require another position or sensing modality.
- What must a live trial prove?
- The model sets test positions and scenarios; the live trial verifies manufacturer performance against the actual site.
- Can another supplier price the result?
- Yes. The output describes required capability, positions and acceptance evidence rather than a proprietary parts list.
Capability domains
Products
Start with the problem, not the catalogue.
A scoping session establishes what you are actually trying to achieve, what is already in place, and whether we are the right people for it. If we are not, we will say so.