According to Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, Sweden has anti-drone systems around a number of airports. In a TT interview, he states that drone technology has changed the risk picture:
That's why we've installed anti-drone systems, primarily to detect, but also to take them down, says Ulf Kristersson.
But Hans Liwång takes the statement with a grain of salt.
Airport drone protection can mean many things. It can also mean, for example, that staff are tasked with looking up and reporting suspicious events or that air traffic controllers, if they get an echo that is suspicious, should report it, says Hans Liwång.
No clear picture
Despite his expert role, he himself has no clear picture of what the drone protection looks like.
I've heard Arlanda say that they've installed this type of system since last year, he says.
What is needed is radar sensors with very short wavelengths, which can detect and provide detailed information about small targets, such as drones.
You need to place them in well-chosen locations around the airports for it to be comprehensive. The cost is manageable compared to all other equipment available at an airport.
With such systems, it becomes possible to register the drones' takeoff and landing sites, if they are within a few kilometers of the airport. This gives the police greater opportunities to be able to identify those behind it.
It's not particularly expensive and not particularly difficult, says Hans Liwång.
"Involves risks"
There are also fully developed systems to stop drones, including electromagnetic weapons that destroy the drones' electronics, and automatic cannons that can shoot them down with high precision.
But it involves risks for equipment and people on the ground, so it's not certain you want to do it over an airport, says Hans Liwång.
The new information about drones at Danish airports, he describes as "very vague".
It's generally the case that with this type of post-incident, as we've heard about last night, it's much more likely that it's incorrect information or that one has been overly cautious and thus drawn incorrect conclusions.
