Summary: Drones are increasingly used to smuggle contraband into correctional facilities, forcing prisons to rethink perimeter security and airspace awareness.

Because prisons cannot legally interfere with drones, detection, documentation, and coordination remain their best defenses.

Choosing the right mix of technology and procedures ensures early detection, reduces false alarms, and helps correctional leaders maintain control of their airspace and security operations.

Define Prison Facility-Specific Needs

Before evaluating or purchasing drone detection technology for one of your prisons, it’s important to define needs. Different correctional/prison facilities face different risks for how drones are used in prison airspace, and a single prison facility’s risk can change with as little as an inmate population change.

Balancing Risk With Budget

Drone detection sensor type and configuration depend in large part on the risk assessment for each correctional/prison facility, but let’s face it, budget is always a challenge.

Super-Max Facilities: High-Risk Scenarios

For example, super-max facilities housing the most violent offenders present a different, much higher risk profile related to drone-borne contraband deliveries than low, medium or juvenile facilities.

Because of the super-max facility’s heightened security concerns, they may determine they need a permanently installed full coverage drone and pilot detection system with radio frequency detection, radar with integrated pan-tilt-zoom camera multi-layer deployment that extends pretty far beyond the prison grounds.

Lower-Risk Facilities: Remote ID Solutions

Other facilities may only need a Remote ID-based drone airspace awareness solution.

Some may question whether Remote ID will prove effective in environments where bad actors are at play. In reality, it takes a highly skilled criminal with advanced technical knowledge to attempt to bypass Remote ID. While no system is completely immune to exploitation, Remote ID still provides a strong foundation for awareness, accountability, and deterrence. We explored this in more detail in our blog, which explains why Remote ID is tougher to evade than many might assume: Remote ID for Drones

Dynamic Risk From Inmate Populations

Even lower-risk facilities must stay alert. A high-level gang member’s transfer into a prison can quickly escalate the need for advanced drone detection measures.

Prison Drone Detection Sensor Types

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) divides the four (4) drone detection sensor types into two (2) categories: Primary and Secondary.

According to the FAA, “Primary detection sources are those sensors that have a greater level of system autonomy, providing alerts to be generated upon a detection, prompting further investigation by the detection system operator.”

In other words, primary sensors are able to detect drones with high enough accuracy and low enough false alarm rates to operate as standalone solutions. That is, they do not require data from other sensor types in order to validate their detections.

Primary Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location Sensors

• Radio Frequency (RF)
• Radar

Secondary sensors need additional data from other sensor types in order to accurately detect drone threats. These additional sensor types can be used to enhance the accuracy of – or provide more detail about – drone threats, but they should not be used as a standalone system.

Secondary Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location Sensors

• Acoustic
• Camera/infrared

RF  Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location (Primary)

RF sensors emerged as the leading drone detection technology because they are the only type that reliably detects both the controller and drone, require little maintenance and operate in all weather conditions.

Since RF-based systems operate in different ways, there are several important considerations to determine which system will be the best fit for your facility. 

To help you to assess drone detection systems, read our article 7 Must-Ask Questions When Choosing a Drone Detection System.

Radar  Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location (Primary)

Radar detects non-RF drones. While the vast majority of drones on the market use RF, some drones can operate without RF communication, and well-informed contraband delivery operators may use shields to attempt to mask the RF signals.

Radar detection is a transmitting technology so facilities must ensure the radars will not interfere with any other equipment. The facility must apply for the proper authorizations to deploy transmitting radar technology.

Radar requires a line of sight, which can make sensor placement at a corrections facility a challenge.

Birds, plastic bags, and even wind that makes tree branches move and flags fly briskly can be a source for radar false alarms. 

Frequent false positives can desensitize staff over time, leading them to treat alerts with less urgency or overlook a real threat. In high-stakes environments like correctional facilities, false alarms can also create significant resource strains—triggering unnecessary responses or even lockdowns that disrupt operations, divert personnel, and undermine trust in the system. 

Radar systems are moving to deploying camera systems as a validation method. The problem with this is that it’s likely cost-prohibitive for most facilities.

When radar and RF are combined, they can complement each other. Radar can detect non-RF drones and the RF system can detect and locate the pilot and drones potentially before take-off. 

Camera/IR  Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location (Secondary)

Because drones are so difficult to see, most cameras have a fairly short range of under 300 meters and require some primary alert system to notify the operator of drone presence.

Cameras coupled with Artificial Intelligence to detect drones work well on a clear blue-sky background. Once the drone moves to a cluttered background, such as trees or buildings, the systems struggle substantially.

Weather and lighting conditions can adversely affect camera operations. Once the sun goes down, infrared camera capability would be required to see anything typically outside a prison boundary. Inside, of course, it’s still bright enough to see day or night.

Since most existing camera networks are pointed to the ground, they will not be very helpful to see drones in the air, and should not be used as a standalone drone detection system.

One way to leverage existing camera networks to get eyes on the drone pilot is for an RF or radar drone detection sensor to automatically tell a Pan, Tilt, and Zoom (PTZ) camera where to point to see both the drone and the pilot, either in real-time or video review.

Acoustic  Prison Drone Detection and Pilot Location (Secondary)

Acoustic drone detection may not be ideal for prisons since background noise—from the facility itself or nearby trains, buses, and jackhammers—can easily mask drone sounds. Even in quiet areas, the detection range is limited. However, most drone deliveries to prisons happen in the middle of the night, when it’s much quieter. Combined with advances in AI-based sound recognition, acoustic detection could become a more practical option for prisons in the future.

Drone Detection in Correctional Facilities/Prisons FAQs

Why are drones such a growing problem for prisons?
Drones give criminals a way to bypass walls, fences, and guards to smuggle contraband like drugs, phones, and weapons. They can also be used for surveillance or to coordinate escape attempts. Because drones are cheap, quiet, and easy to fly, prisons face an increasingly complex airspace challenge.

Do all prisons need the same type of drone detection system?
No. Each facility’s needs depend on risk level, inmate population, and location. Super-max facilities may require multi-layer detection (RF, radar, and cameras), while lower-risk prisons may only need a Remote ID-based awareness system or proximity alerts.

How reliable is Remote ID for stopping prison drone incidents?
Remote ID is like a digital license plate: it broadcasts a drone’s identity, flight path, and pilot location, giving security teams immediate, actionable awareness. Most off-the-shelf drones broadcast Remote ID by default, so detection and attribution happen quickly. Bypassing Remote ID is possible but not trivial — it requires specialist hardware, technical know-how, and planning that puts a high barrier in front of opportunistic or casual offenders. In short, Remote ID provides an effective first line of defense and deterrence for facilities facing drone threats.

How can prisons balance tight budgets with drone detection needs?
Facilities should start with a clear risk assessment and scale solutions accordingly. Lower-risk facilities might deploy a Remote ID or direction finder system for basic awareness, while high-risk prisons may require full-coverage, layered solutions. Many systems can be scaled over time as risks evolve.