We are at an inflection point for electromagnetic operations. The pressures of high-intensity conflict, rapid commercial spectrum change, and pragmatic AI adoption mean 2026 will be about operationalizing capability rather than proving concepts. Below are tactical, technical, and programmatic predictions that engineers, operators, and hobbyists should plan around.

1) AI moves from research demos to the tactical EW stack

Expect machine learning to migrate out of lab sandboxes and into mission software that adapts jamming and sensing in real time. Multiple DARPA programs and industry awards have matured algorithms that can characterize unknown radar and comms waveforms and generate countermeasures autonomously. These efforts will produce fieldable prototypes and tighter integration between sensor processing and RF transmit chains, with mission systems using lightweight models at the edge for fast decision loops.

Operational impact: teams will need model validation workflows, predictable failure modes, and tighter testing-in-the-loop to avoid unintended emissions or fratricide.

2) Spectrum policy unlocks new bands and dynamic sharing prototypes

The U.S. National Spectrum Strategy and its implementation have moved from planning into visible action. Agencies are recommending new allocations for space-to-space links and running demonstrations of dynamic spectrum sharing that include DoD and industry participants. Expect FCC/NTIA coordination to accelerate rulemaking for bands studied in 2024 and 2025, while pilots for dynamic sharing will produce open data sets and coexistence playbooks.

Operational impact: EW planners will need updated spectral occupancy baselines and to factor in commercial users that may be operating in previously quiet bands. Test ranges should add dynamic sharing scenarios to their interference models.

3) GNSS disruption forces hardening and alternative PNT investments

A noticeable rise in GNSS jamming and spoofing incidents during 2024 and 2025 has pushed aviation and maritime agencies to publicize mitigation plans. International bodies called out the risk to navigation and timing, and high-visibility events involving GNSS interference have accelerated procurement and R&D for robust PNT options. In 2026 we will see increased fielding of multi-constellation receivers, tighter anomaly monitoring, and accelerated trials of resilient PNT solutions that pair inertial systems with authenticated signals or local timing sources.

Operational impact: mission planning must treat GNSS as degraded by default in contested regions and include fallback navigation and timing strategies in every system architecture.

4) Counter-UAS legal frameworks will inch forward, but operational limits remain

Debate in Congress and pilot programs in federal agencies have continued through 2024 and 2025. That political momentum will produce limited expansions of authorized mitigation pilots in 2026 rather than broad delegations of jamming authority to state and local actors. The legal complexity around interfering with aircraft, spectrum law, and liability means most active remediation will remain centralized, while approved pilots validate safe procedures for signal-based defeat options.

Operational impact: security teams should budget for detection, attribution, and coordinated remediation options that rely on federal partners rather than unilateral jamming or kinetic defeat.

5) Open architectures and edge EW hardware become dominant buying criteria

DoD investments in modular open EW and sensor architectures will accelerate vendor consolidation around standards that permit rapid algorithm insertion and portability. Contracts in 2024 and 2025 show explicit requirements for hosting EW software on interoperable open hardware. Vendors that supply portable, containerized signal-processing stacks will win the next round of procurements.

Operational impact: engineering teams should prioritize CMOSS and SOSA-compliant designs, continuous integration pipelines for waveforms, and automated certification test harnesses.

6) Civilian spillover increases risk and regulatory scrutiny

Open radio platforms, commercial SDRs, and cheaper jam/spoof toolkits have lowered the bar to experiment with RF effects. At the same time, regulators and aviation safety agencies are raising alarms about real-world interference. 2026 will see both a wave of responsible-hobbyist education and tighter enforcement against unlawful jamming. Expect more public-private programs aimed at training, legal clarity, and safe experimentation.

Operational impact: community labs and makerspaces must adopt standard operating procedures for emissions, and firms should deploy testbeds that isolate intentional interference from general development activity.

7) Drone operations expand while the C-UAS market matures

Regulatory progress on BVLOS and other commercial drone rules is enabling more persistent unmanned operations. As civil UAS traffic grows, demand for scalable sensing and mitigation grows alongside it. Vendors will ship more organically integrated C-UAS appliances, but the legally usable feature set for nonfederal customers will be constrained. Expect more turnkey detection, classification, and mitigation-as-a-service offerings that route active mitigation to authorized federal partners when required.

Operational impact: fleet operators should plan for shared airspace deconfliction services and incorporate remote ID and authenticated telemetry as baseline requirements.

8) Test and evaluation will shift toward realistic, contested-spectrum exercises

With dynamic spectrum sharing pilots, growing GNSS interference, and AI-enabled EW, laboratory tests will no longer suffice. 2026 will bring more multi-domain, over-the-air T&E across distributed testbeds that include civilian infrastructure emulation. Expect standard scenarios that combine contested PNT, commercial traffic in newly opened bands, and autonomous adversary waveforms.

Operational impact: organizations must invest in range upgrades, RF instrumentation that can capture high-fidelity I/Q under stress, and post-mission forensic tools to attribute interference.

What to do now

  • Harden PNT: baseline inertial systems, multi-constellation receivers, and GNSS anomaly monitoring.
  • Embrace open standards: design for CMOSS/SOSA portability and containerized waveform delivery.
  • Prepare ML safety: lock down model inputs, create rejection criteria, and run adversarial tests against generated countermeasures.
  • Update legal playbooks: coordinate with federal partners for any active mitigation and document chain-of-custody for attribution.

These predictions are conservative in the sense that they track capabilities already in motion. The variable that will determine tempo is policy. If regulators and procurement authorities align quickly, 2026 will look like a year when EW capability becomes more agile, more automated, and more integrated with civilian systems. If policy lags, capability will still arrive but in a more compartmented, defense-only form. Either way, practitioners should assume contested-spectrum operations are the default and architect systems accordingly.