AUSA 2025: Lockheed Martin Sanctum gives Army open architecture AI fusion and layered drone defense.

Lockheed Martin has introduced Sanctum, a modular counter-UAS system that detects, tracks, and defeats single drones and coordinated swarms, showcased around the AUSA 2025 meeting in Washington. The approach emphasizes open architecture and rapid AI-driven sensor fusion so armies and site-security units can plug into existing C2 networks without a full rebuild, a priority as drone threats scale.

Lockheed Martin unveils Sanctum counter-UAS system at AUSA 2025 in Washington, DC. The American company positions Sanctum as a software-forward counter-drone layer designed to run on existing customer infrastructure. It is described as an open, modular architecture that fuses RF and electro-optical inputs, ranks threats, and coordinates non-kinetic and kinetic effectors through a single operator display, with learning updates applied after each engagement.
Follow Army Recognition on Google News at this link

Lockheed Martin’s Sanctum counter-UAS system on display at AUSA 2025 in Washington, featuring an open modular architecture that fuses RF and electro-optical inputs with AI-assisted detection (Picture source: Army Recognition)

Sanctum is built around an open and modular architecture. Rather than replacing infrastructure, it connects to command posts and already deployed sensor networks to extend coverage without a full rebuild. Modules are added or withdrawn according to the mission, from close protection of a fixed site to wide area surveillance. The intent is to standardize around a common software baseline while letting users mix third-party sensors and effectors that are already in inventory, which limits integration friction and helps sustainment.

The detection and tracking layer uses AI to process live data from multiple signatures, notably radio frequency and electro-optical inputs. This multi-source fusion improves track correlation and identification quality in cluttered environments where small targets are hard to discriminate. Decision time from first detection to engagement authorization is reduced by ranking threats and filtering out false alarms. The learning loop is continuous: models are adjusted after each engagement so that thresholds and tracking parameters reflect how the threat actually behaves in the field.

On the operator side, Sanctum provides a single pane of glass that centralizes the tactical picture, sensor control, and effector tasking. Operators move through surveillance, alert, identification, and engagement without switching systems, while the chain of command retains the final release authority. Decision aids are drawn from real use cases to present options that match standard procedures rather than ad hoc workflows.

Neutralization options include both electronic warfare and kinetic means. In one case, jamming and deception aim to disrupt control links, positioning, or navigation so that a drone cannot complete its profile. In the other, physical interceptors address small, low signature targets when a non-kinetic effect is not appropriate. The software that manages the fight links sensors and effectors, prioritizes targets, and coordinates layered responses when swarms appear. The package is framed to keep collateral risk low and sustain repeated engagements with adequate depth of munitions.

Three technical points are worth noting for a defense readership. First, the open architecture allows progressive integration with existing C2 systems, removing dependence on a single supplier and easing upgrades. Second, RF and EO data fusion raises the probability of correct identification against small drones that often present minimal signatures. Third, real time model updates adjust detection thresholds and tracking filters as operators collect experience, which is relevant when tactics and airframes change quickly.

Sanctum addresses two recurring problems. For fixed site defense, it enables a dense sensor mesh around critical nodes and allocates effectors based on threat density as it changes over a shift. For mobile units, it keeps continuity of the tactical picture as formations move, handing over tracks across the network and proposing proportional responses that fit rules of engagement. In both cases, the emphasis remains on using existing C2 pathways so that crews keep their normal battle rhythm. The system aims to preserve decision time and to match the effector to the profile, especially when saturation by small drones stresses operators.

The company states that recent field tests show detection, tracking, and defeat of small drones in realistic conditions. These events are described as steps toward broader operational availability and feed the learning pipeline used to refine algorithms. In parallel, the roadmap highlights layered defense against small UAS by assembling sensors and effectors around a battle management core, with the practical option of expanding coverage site by site or area by area without breaking service.

The rapid diffusion of small drones is altering the cost curve on several fronts, from border areas to expeditionary deployments. As more actors field inexpensive airframes and tactics evolve toward mixed swarms, armed forces and critical infrastructure operators will need interoperable counter-UAS layers that can be maintained within coalition environments. An approach such as Sanctum’s, focused on integration and incremental upgrades, sits within export rules and national acquisition choices and may influence how partners share data and coordinate engagement authorities. The broader issue is not only the spread of drones but also the spread of countermeasures; capability planners therefore look for solutions that avoid fast obsolescence, keep compatibility with existing C2 frameworks, and can be adapted as norms, budgets, and threat behavior shift.

Written By Erwan Halna du Fretay - Defense Analyst, Army Recognition Group

Erwan Halna du Fretay is a graduate of a Master’s degree in International Relations and has experience in the study of conflicts and global arms transfers. His research interests lie in security and strategic studies, particularly the dynamics of the defense industry, the evolution of military technologies, and the strategic transformation of armed forces.