2024 saw a clear push to put usable electronic warfare and counter-UAS capability into smaller packages that can be carried, slung on a vehicle, or pulled out of a flyaway case. The trend is not merely miniaturization for its own sake. Vendors are balancing size, weight and power with operator workflows, integration with sensors, and compliance constraints. The result is a set of portable kits that are best evaluated by three practical axes: what they detect, how they locate and identify threats, and what defeat or mitigation options they provide.

DroneShield: wearable detection and a lighter defeat tool

DroneShield continued to iterate toward smaller, mission-focused packages in 2024. Two products that exemplify this are the wearable RfPatrol Mk2 family for passive RF detection and the compact DroneGun Mk4 for active defeat. The RfPatrol lineage shows a clear emphasis on AI-assisted RF recognition and wearable form factor for point teams. Its architecture emphasizes edge processing to identify drone and controller signatures without relying on cloud connectivity, which matters in contested or denied environments.

On the defeat side the DroneGun Mk4 represents the class of handheld RF disruptors optimized for rapid, visual engagement in permissive settings. Expect limited band coverage relative to vehicle or fixed-site systems, but a major advantage in tactical agility and immediate operator control. In tactical terms the pairing of a passive detector that does not reveal the defender’s location with a separate, controlled active defeat tool is a sensible operational split. It reduces the risk of telegraphing your presence while still giving a short-notice mitigation option.

Rohde & Schwarz: portable monitoring for spectrum and C-UAS awareness

Traditional test and measurement vendors pushed into portable operational suites in 2024. Rohde & Schwarz promoted products such as the PR200 portable monitoring receiver paired with handheld direction-finding antennas and their ARDRONIS Detect solution for radio-based drone awareness. These units are not offensive effectors. Instead they are high-fidelity spectrum monitoring and DF tools aimed at interference hunting, spectrum clearance, and discreet drone signal detection. For units that need robust, standards-grade RF situational awareness without introducing jamming signatures, this class of kit is highly useful.

Tactically, PR200-style kits shine in contested urban or infrastructure protection missions where accurate geolocation, spectrum hygiene, and evidence collection matter. They integrate well into C2 for rules-of-engagement workflows because they do not themselves apply countermeasures that require strict authorizations.

TLS-BCT manpack: an Army-scale move to dismounted EW

At the high end of the dismounted spectrum, the U.S. Army moved to field a manpack version of its Terrestrial Layer System Brigade Combat Team capability under a contract awarded in mid-2024. The TLS-BCT manpack effort is explicitly aimed at giving brigade commanders software-defined SIGINT and EW tools at the tactical edge. That program-level move confirms that military customers want modular, software-upgradeable manportable packs that fuse SIGINT, EW and cyber enabling functions in one package. Expect government fielding to drive further emphasis on open interfaces and modular SWaP tradeoffs in commercial kits as integrators chase that market.

Blighter and portable radar detect elements

Detect layers remain about more than RF alone. Radar vendors continue to offer ruggedised, tripod-friendly radars with small footprint variants that behave as semi-portable detection nodes for low, slow, and small threats. Blighter’s A800 series and similar products provide a compact 3D multi-mode radar footprint that can be tripod or vehicle-mounted and targeted at small UAS detection with AI-assisted classification. These detect elements pair well with a passive RF detector and a small defeat tool to create a layered portable kit that covers detection modes the RF sensors might miss.

Operational tradeoffs and observations

  • Detection versus signature. If your mission requirement is evidence and attribution, prioritize high-fidelity receivers and direction-finders. If you need stop-gap defeat in permissive environments, a separate, confined jammer or handheld disruptor is appropriate.

  • SWaP and battery management define mission endurance. Many portable kits trade continuous operation for burst capability. In the field plan for battery swaps, standardized NATO battery types where possible, and clear power budgeting for DF sweeps and active blocks.

  • Integration matters more than raw capability. Portable kits that expose APIs or standard data outputs make it far easier to integrate into existing C2 or to aggregate sensor feeds across a task force.

  • Legal and policy constraints. Use of active jammers and defeat tools is tightly regulated in most jurisdictions and often restricted to authorized military or law enforcement operations. Passive detection and recording equipment carries fewer regulatory pitfalls but does not replace mitigation authority and capability.

  • False alarms and signature libraries. The utility of a portable RF detector depends heavily on its signature library and the quality of its AI or signature-matching engine. Regularly updated firmware and the ability to ingest site-specific signal captures dramatically improve field performance.

Practical recommendations

  • For security teams protecting critical infrastructure where legal restrictions limit jamming, build a portable detection kit around a high-quality receiver and direction-finding antenna, and add a ruggedised radar sensor if perimeter geometry requires it. Rohde & Schwarz style receivers or similar are the right fit.

  • For tactical units needing rapid response to hostile UAS in permissive operational areas, a combined wearable RF detector and a compact handheld disruptor package gives the best balance of stealthy detection and immediate action. DroneShield’s direction in 2024 illustrates that approach.

  • For defence programs and integrators, expect government manpack programs to set interoperability expectations. If you are a vendor, prioritize modular software, open interfaces, and SWaP-optimized hardware to be competitive with TLS-BCT-style requirements.

Conclusion

The portable EW and counter-UAS market in 2024 is less about single, catch-all boxes and more about composing a small, interoperable kit that matches mission constraints. Detection fidelity, secure operator workflows, and legally compliant defeat options are the pillars. Whether you are arming a security detail, equipping a patrol, or building a vehicle-deployable flyaway set, think in terms of layered sensors, controlled defeat options, and clear rules for use. The kits released and promoted across 2024 show vendors converging on those lessons, but the right choice always depends on the mission, the legal environment, and the integration points you need to support.