Airborne Radars Market by Operation (Onboard, Pod), Technology (Aesa, Mechanical Scanning, Pesa), Frequency, Platform, Function, End User - Global Forecast 2025-2032
Description
The Airborne Radars Market was valued at USD 15.87 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 17.32 billion in 2025, with a CAGR of 10.60%, reaching USD 35.56 billion by 2032.
Framing the contemporary airborne radar environment by linking operational requirements, platform constraints, and technological priorities to mission effectiveness across civil and defense domains
Airborne radar technologies sit at the intersection of operational necessity and rapid technological innovation, driving capabilities across defense, civil aviation, and dual-use applications. This introduction frames the current landscape by unpacking the core drivers that influence procurement, integration, and lifecycle support of airborne radar systems. It emphasizes how mission requirements, platform constraints, and evolving threat environments converge to prioritize radar performance parameters such as detection range, resolution, revisit rate, electronic resilience, and size‑weight‑power considerations.
Over the past decade, sensor architects have shifted focus from raw range figures toward multi-functionality, sensor fusion, and software-defined agility. As a result, radar programs increasingly emphasize modular designs that can accommodate phased upgrades, new processing chains, and advanced algorithms. These imperatives have significant implications for systems engineering, interoperability, and sustainment planning. The introduction concludes by positioning airborne radars as strategic enablers for situational awareness, force multiplication, and safety-critical civil functions, thereby establishing the thematic foundation for the subsequent, evidence-driven analysis.
How advances in array hardware, digital processing, intelligent algorithms, and open systems are collectively reshaping airborne radar capability, integration, and sustainment practices
The airborne radar landscape is undergoing transformative shifts driven by parallel advances in hardware, signal processing, and operational concepts. First, the maturation and wider deployment of active electronically scanned array architectures have altered expectations around beam agility, multifunction operations, and graceful degradation under contested conditions. This hardware evolution pairs with breakthroughs in digital backends, where higher computational density and efficient power architectures allow more sophisticated waveform generation and real‑time adaptive processing.
Second, algorithmic progress-particularly in machine learning and sensor fusion-has enabled radars to extract context-rich information from increasingly congested electromagnetic environments. These capabilities manifest as improved target classification, clutter suppression, and anomaly detection, which directly benefit maritime surveillance, ground moving target indication, and weather characterization. Third, the growing emphasis on open-system architectures and standardized interfaces is reducing integration friction across platforms and enhancing the prospects for rapid capability insertion. Finally, geopolitical developments and shifting defense doctrines are accelerating interest in resilient, exportable radar solutions and responsive support ecosystems. Taken together, these shifts are catalyzing a market that prizes modularity, software-driven flexibility, and lifecycle agility.
Analysis of how 2025 United States tariff actions introduced supply chain friction, prompted regional manufacturing strategies, and reshaped procurement and sustainment priorities across airborne radar programs
The imposition of tariffs can create immediate and downstream effects across procurement, supply chains, and platform sustainment, and the United States tariff actions in 2025 introduced notable friction points for vendors and end users that rely on complex international supply webs. In the near term, tariffs elevated the cost base for subsystems and components that move across borders, prompting some prime contractors and subsystem suppliers to reassess sourcing strategies and to accelerate qualification of alternative vendors. This shift increased the administrative burden of compliance and extended lead times for critical parts, which in turn influenced program schedules and inventory policies.
Beyond procurement timing, tariff measures amplified incentives for vertical integration and for strategic localization of key manufacturing capabilities. Firms with scale responded by diversifying supplier portfolios and building regionalized supply nodes to mitigate exposure to trade policy volatility. For militaries and civil aviation authorities, the tariffs prompted closer scrutiny of total lifecycle costs and logistics chains, particularly for radar systems with long operational tenures. These dynamics have elevated the importance of contractual flexibility, long‑term spares planning, and technical data package access. Collectively, the tariff environment underscored the need for resilient acquisition approaches that account for policy-driven cost and availability fluctuations while preserving mission assurance.
Detailed segmentation-driven insights showing how end-user roles, operational mounting, radar technology types, frequency bands, platform categories, and mission functions dictate distinct radar design and procurement choices
A robust understanding of airborne radar dynamics requires segmentation across multiple orthogonal dimensions that reveal differing technology demands and procurement behaviors. When viewed by end user, civil aviation requirements emphasize safety, weather resilience, and air‑traffic integration, while military customers prioritize range, detection of low‑observable targets, and multifunction mission sets. By operation mode, onboard systems embedded within airframes must meet stringent SWaP constraints and EMI compatibility, contrasting with externally mounted pod solutions that offer flexibility for rapid role changes and organic mission expansion. Technological segmentation further distinguishes AESA architectures for their beam agility and reliability from mechanical scanning platforms that retain advantages in simplicity and cost, with passive electronically scanned arrays providing an intermediate option.
Frequency band selection remains a core design tradeoff: Ka and Ku bands enable high resolution and data throughput suitable for mapping and precise targeting, whereas L and S bands offer superior long‑range detection and penetration through foliage and weather, and X band balances resolution and range for a broad set of surveillance tasks. Platform differentiation drives integration strategies: fighter aircraft demand compact, high‑power density sensors, helicopters require radars tolerant of vibration and clutter, transport aircraft prioritize wide‑area surveillance and robustness, and unmanned aerial vehicles-both fixed wing and rotary wing-seek scalable sensors that fit diverse endurance and payload constraints. Functional segmentation maps sensors to mission outcomes, from airborne early warning and control to ground and maritime surveillance, terrain mapping, and weather monitoring, each placing distinct performance, processing, and interoperability requirements on radar system designs.
How regional industrial capacity, policy regimes, and strategic priorities across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific drive differentiated procurement strategies and collaborative programs
Regional dynamics exert a powerful influence on procurement pathways, industrial policy, and collaborative programs in the airborne radar ecosystem. In the Americas, a mature defense industrial base and advanced aerospace supply chain favor high‑performance AESA programs, close integration between primes and Tier‑1 suppliers, and an emphasis on sustainment readiness and interoperability with allied systems. Policy frameworks and export controls in the region also shape cross-border collaborations and the prioritization of sovereign manufacturing capabilities.
In Europe, the Middle East and Africa, procurement patterns vary widely, ranging from collaborative multinational programs and indigenous upgrade projects to selective procurements aimed at capability gaps. This region places a premium on modularity and interoperability given the heterogeneous fleet mix and multinational operations. Meanwhile, the Asia‑Pacific region is characterized by pronounced investment in modernizing air capabilities, rapid adoption of new radar architectures, and an increasing focus on domestic production and technology transfer. Nations in this region often pursue dual tracks of import‑driven capability acquisition and indigenous development to achieve strategic autonomy. Across all regions, geopolitical tensions, alliance structures, and export control regimes influence partnering strategies, industrial co‑production, and the pace at which new radar capabilities enter service.
Competitive dynamics and supplier roles explained to reveal how primes, specialized subsystem providers, and technology entrants collaborate to deliver integrated airborne radar capabilities and sustainment solutions
The competitive landscape within airborne radar technologies reflects a blend of established primes, specialized radar houses, and emergent technology providers that bring capabilities in software, signal processing, and systems integration. Major suppliers typically offer vertically integrated solutions encompassing arrays, transmit/receive modules, and mission processors, whereas niche vendors often contribute specialized subsystems such as digital backends, low‑size RF electronics, or missionized pods that enable rapid capability insertion. These provider roles influence risk allocation in programs, where primes assume system integration responsibilities and niche firms supply high‑value components or algorithmic enhancements.
Strategic partnerships and teaming arrangements are common, with prime contractors forming consortia to meet complex performance and liability requirements. Additionally, original equipment manufacturers and defense primes are increasingly collaborating with software firms and artificial intelligence specialists to deliver enhanced detection and classification capabilities. The interplay between legacy players and startups creates a dynamic innovation ecosystem, where acquisition offices must weigh proven reliability against the potential mission advantages offered by newer entrants. Intellectual property, technical data rights, and long‑term sustainment commitments remain decisive factors when selecting suppliers for operationally critical radar programs.
Practical strategic steps for suppliers and program managers to implement modular architectures, supply chain resilience, and targeted R&D investments that accelerate capability delivery and reduce integration risk
Industry leaders must adopt a set of actionable strategies to remain competitive and ensure resilient delivery of airborne radar capabilities. Prioritize modular open systems architectures that decouple hardware from software life cycles, enabling fielded platforms to receive frequent capability updates without disruptive hardware changes. Invest systematically in digital engineering and model‑based systems engineering practices to reduce integration risk and compress qualification timelines while maintaining compliance with airworthiness and military certification regimes.
Build diversified and regionally aware supply chains that reduce exposure to trade policy shifts and component bottlenecks, and consider strategic partnerships or co‑production arrangements to localize critical manufacturing capability. Allocate R&D resources to areas with high operational leverage-beamforming architectures, low‑SWaP transmit/receive modules, and resilient waveforms that perform under contested electromagnetic conditions. Finally, establish robust data governance and verification processes for machine learning pipelines to ensure operational transparency, traceability, and ease of certification. These recommendations aim to balance near‑term delivery pressures with sustained investment in architectures and partnerships that deliver long‑term mission agility and affordability.
Transparent research approach combining primary interviews, technical literature review, and capability mapping to construct an evidence-based analysis of airborne radar technology, supply chains, and procurement dynamics
This research synthesizes primary and secondary evidence sources, structured interviews, technical literature, and program documentation to build a comprehensive view of airborne radar developments and their operational implications. Primary inputs included consultations with system architects, platform integrators, procurement officials, and sustainment specialists to reconcile performance requirements with real‑world constraints. Secondary research incorporated peer‑reviewed technical papers, standards documents, and open‑source defense publications to validate technological trajectories and interoperability frameworks.
Analytical methods combined qualitative scenario analysis with capability gap mapping and supplier capability assessments. Attention to methodological rigor guided source triangulation and the prioritization of evidence where multiple independent confirmations existed. The research also accounted for policy considerations, export control frameworks, and known procurement timelines to contextualize findings. Limitations include restricted access to classified program data and varying levels of transparency across geographies; where necessary, anonymized practitioner insights supplemented public documentation to preserve analytical integrity while protecting sensitive information.
Synthesis of insights showing how technological innovation, procurement resilience, and industrial collaboration must align to secure sustainable airborne radar capability and operational advantage
In conclusion, airborne radar systems are at a pivotal juncture where hardware innovation, advanced signal processing, and evolving procurement realities intersect. The shift toward software‑defined, modular sensor suites enables rapid capability insertion and extends platform relevance, while algorithmic advances enhance the operational utility of existing apertures. At the same time, policy and trade dynamics necessitate more resilient sourcing and industrial collaboration to mitigate schedule and cost risks associated with globalized supply chains.
Decision‑makers should treat radar capability development as a systems problem-one that requires alignment across architecture, platform integration, sustainment planning, and industrial partnerships. By doing so, organizations can manage short‑term disruptions while investing in scalable solutions that deliver sustained operational advantage. The analysis underscores that success will come to those who integrate technical excellence with pragmatic acquisition and supply‑chain strategies, ensuring airborne radar capabilities remain responsive to fast‑moving operational and geopolitical requirements.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Framing the contemporary airborne radar environment by linking operational requirements, platform constraints, and technological priorities to mission effectiveness across civil and defense domains
Airborne radar technologies sit at the intersection of operational necessity and rapid technological innovation, driving capabilities across defense, civil aviation, and dual-use applications. This introduction frames the current landscape by unpacking the core drivers that influence procurement, integration, and lifecycle support of airborne radar systems. It emphasizes how mission requirements, platform constraints, and evolving threat environments converge to prioritize radar performance parameters such as detection range, resolution, revisit rate, electronic resilience, and size‑weight‑power considerations.
Over the past decade, sensor architects have shifted focus from raw range figures toward multi-functionality, sensor fusion, and software-defined agility. As a result, radar programs increasingly emphasize modular designs that can accommodate phased upgrades, new processing chains, and advanced algorithms. These imperatives have significant implications for systems engineering, interoperability, and sustainment planning. The introduction concludes by positioning airborne radars as strategic enablers for situational awareness, force multiplication, and safety-critical civil functions, thereby establishing the thematic foundation for the subsequent, evidence-driven analysis.
How advances in array hardware, digital processing, intelligent algorithms, and open systems are collectively reshaping airborne radar capability, integration, and sustainment practices
The airborne radar landscape is undergoing transformative shifts driven by parallel advances in hardware, signal processing, and operational concepts. First, the maturation and wider deployment of active electronically scanned array architectures have altered expectations around beam agility, multifunction operations, and graceful degradation under contested conditions. This hardware evolution pairs with breakthroughs in digital backends, where higher computational density and efficient power architectures allow more sophisticated waveform generation and real‑time adaptive processing.
Second, algorithmic progress-particularly in machine learning and sensor fusion-has enabled radars to extract context-rich information from increasingly congested electromagnetic environments. These capabilities manifest as improved target classification, clutter suppression, and anomaly detection, which directly benefit maritime surveillance, ground moving target indication, and weather characterization. Third, the growing emphasis on open-system architectures and standardized interfaces is reducing integration friction across platforms and enhancing the prospects for rapid capability insertion. Finally, geopolitical developments and shifting defense doctrines are accelerating interest in resilient, exportable radar solutions and responsive support ecosystems. Taken together, these shifts are catalyzing a market that prizes modularity, software-driven flexibility, and lifecycle agility.
Analysis of how 2025 United States tariff actions introduced supply chain friction, prompted regional manufacturing strategies, and reshaped procurement and sustainment priorities across airborne radar programs
The imposition of tariffs can create immediate and downstream effects across procurement, supply chains, and platform sustainment, and the United States tariff actions in 2025 introduced notable friction points for vendors and end users that rely on complex international supply webs. In the near term, tariffs elevated the cost base for subsystems and components that move across borders, prompting some prime contractors and subsystem suppliers to reassess sourcing strategies and to accelerate qualification of alternative vendors. This shift increased the administrative burden of compliance and extended lead times for critical parts, which in turn influenced program schedules and inventory policies.
Beyond procurement timing, tariff measures amplified incentives for vertical integration and for strategic localization of key manufacturing capabilities. Firms with scale responded by diversifying supplier portfolios and building regionalized supply nodes to mitigate exposure to trade policy volatility. For militaries and civil aviation authorities, the tariffs prompted closer scrutiny of total lifecycle costs and logistics chains, particularly for radar systems with long operational tenures. These dynamics have elevated the importance of contractual flexibility, long‑term spares planning, and technical data package access. Collectively, the tariff environment underscored the need for resilient acquisition approaches that account for policy-driven cost and availability fluctuations while preserving mission assurance.
Detailed segmentation-driven insights showing how end-user roles, operational mounting, radar technology types, frequency bands, platform categories, and mission functions dictate distinct radar design and procurement choices
A robust understanding of airborne radar dynamics requires segmentation across multiple orthogonal dimensions that reveal differing technology demands and procurement behaviors. When viewed by end user, civil aviation requirements emphasize safety, weather resilience, and air‑traffic integration, while military customers prioritize range, detection of low‑observable targets, and multifunction mission sets. By operation mode, onboard systems embedded within airframes must meet stringent SWaP constraints and EMI compatibility, contrasting with externally mounted pod solutions that offer flexibility for rapid role changes and organic mission expansion. Technological segmentation further distinguishes AESA architectures for their beam agility and reliability from mechanical scanning platforms that retain advantages in simplicity and cost, with passive electronically scanned arrays providing an intermediate option.
Frequency band selection remains a core design tradeoff: Ka and Ku bands enable high resolution and data throughput suitable for mapping and precise targeting, whereas L and S bands offer superior long‑range detection and penetration through foliage and weather, and X band balances resolution and range for a broad set of surveillance tasks. Platform differentiation drives integration strategies: fighter aircraft demand compact, high‑power density sensors, helicopters require radars tolerant of vibration and clutter, transport aircraft prioritize wide‑area surveillance and robustness, and unmanned aerial vehicles-both fixed wing and rotary wing-seek scalable sensors that fit diverse endurance and payload constraints. Functional segmentation maps sensors to mission outcomes, from airborne early warning and control to ground and maritime surveillance, terrain mapping, and weather monitoring, each placing distinct performance, processing, and interoperability requirements on radar system designs.
How regional industrial capacity, policy regimes, and strategic priorities across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific drive differentiated procurement strategies and collaborative programs
Regional dynamics exert a powerful influence on procurement pathways, industrial policy, and collaborative programs in the airborne radar ecosystem. In the Americas, a mature defense industrial base and advanced aerospace supply chain favor high‑performance AESA programs, close integration between primes and Tier‑1 suppliers, and an emphasis on sustainment readiness and interoperability with allied systems. Policy frameworks and export controls in the region also shape cross-border collaborations and the prioritization of sovereign manufacturing capabilities.
In Europe, the Middle East and Africa, procurement patterns vary widely, ranging from collaborative multinational programs and indigenous upgrade projects to selective procurements aimed at capability gaps. This region places a premium on modularity and interoperability given the heterogeneous fleet mix and multinational operations. Meanwhile, the Asia‑Pacific region is characterized by pronounced investment in modernizing air capabilities, rapid adoption of new radar architectures, and an increasing focus on domestic production and technology transfer. Nations in this region often pursue dual tracks of import‑driven capability acquisition and indigenous development to achieve strategic autonomy. Across all regions, geopolitical tensions, alliance structures, and export control regimes influence partnering strategies, industrial co‑production, and the pace at which new radar capabilities enter service.
Competitive dynamics and supplier roles explained to reveal how primes, specialized subsystem providers, and technology entrants collaborate to deliver integrated airborne radar capabilities and sustainment solutions
The competitive landscape within airborne radar technologies reflects a blend of established primes, specialized radar houses, and emergent technology providers that bring capabilities in software, signal processing, and systems integration. Major suppliers typically offer vertically integrated solutions encompassing arrays, transmit/receive modules, and mission processors, whereas niche vendors often contribute specialized subsystems such as digital backends, low‑size RF electronics, or missionized pods that enable rapid capability insertion. These provider roles influence risk allocation in programs, where primes assume system integration responsibilities and niche firms supply high‑value components or algorithmic enhancements.
Strategic partnerships and teaming arrangements are common, with prime contractors forming consortia to meet complex performance and liability requirements. Additionally, original equipment manufacturers and defense primes are increasingly collaborating with software firms and artificial intelligence specialists to deliver enhanced detection and classification capabilities. The interplay between legacy players and startups creates a dynamic innovation ecosystem, where acquisition offices must weigh proven reliability against the potential mission advantages offered by newer entrants. Intellectual property, technical data rights, and long‑term sustainment commitments remain decisive factors when selecting suppliers for operationally critical radar programs.
Practical strategic steps for suppliers and program managers to implement modular architectures, supply chain resilience, and targeted R&D investments that accelerate capability delivery and reduce integration risk
Industry leaders must adopt a set of actionable strategies to remain competitive and ensure resilient delivery of airborne radar capabilities. Prioritize modular open systems architectures that decouple hardware from software life cycles, enabling fielded platforms to receive frequent capability updates without disruptive hardware changes. Invest systematically in digital engineering and model‑based systems engineering practices to reduce integration risk and compress qualification timelines while maintaining compliance with airworthiness and military certification regimes.
Build diversified and regionally aware supply chains that reduce exposure to trade policy shifts and component bottlenecks, and consider strategic partnerships or co‑production arrangements to localize critical manufacturing capability. Allocate R&D resources to areas with high operational leverage-beamforming architectures, low‑SWaP transmit/receive modules, and resilient waveforms that perform under contested electromagnetic conditions. Finally, establish robust data governance and verification processes for machine learning pipelines to ensure operational transparency, traceability, and ease of certification. These recommendations aim to balance near‑term delivery pressures with sustained investment in architectures and partnerships that deliver long‑term mission agility and affordability.
Transparent research approach combining primary interviews, technical literature review, and capability mapping to construct an evidence-based analysis of airborne radar technology, supply chains, and procurement dynamics
This research synthesizes primary and secondary evidence sources, structured interviews, technical literature, and program documentation to build a comprehensive view of airborne radar developments and their operational implications. Primary inputs included consultations with system architects, platform integrators, procurement officials, and sustainment specialists to reconcile performance requirements with real‑world constraints. Secondary research incorporated peer‑reviewed technical papers, standards documents, and open‑source defense publications to validate technological trajectories and interoperability frameworks.
Analytical methods combined qualitative scenario analysis with capability gap mapping and supplier capability assessments. Attention to methodological rigor guided source triangulation and the prioritization of evidence where multiple independent confirmations existed. The research also accounted for policy considerations, export control frameworks, and known procurement timelines to contextualize findings. Limitations include restricted access to classified program data and varying levels of transparency across geographies; where necessary, anonymized practitioner insights supplemented public documentation to preserve analytical integrity while protecting sensitive information.
Synthesis of insights showing how technological innovation, procurement resilience, and industrial collaboration must align to secure sustainable airborne radar capability and operational advantage
In conclusion, airborne radar systems are at a pivotal juncture where hardware innovation, advanced signal processing, and evolving procurement realities intersect. The shift toward software‑defined, modular sensor suites enables rapid capability insertion and extends platform relevance, while algorithmic advances enhance the operational utility of existing apertures. At the same time, policy and trade dynamics necessitate more resilient sourcing and industrial collaboration to mitigate schedule and cost risks associated with globalized supply chains.
Decision‑makers should treat radar capability development as a systems problem-one that requires alignment across architecture, platform integration, sustainment planning, and industrial partnerships. By doing so, organizations can manage short‑term disruptions while investing in scalable solutions that deliver sustained operational advantage. The analysis underscores that success will come to those who integrate technical excellence with pragmatic acquisition and supply‑chain strategies, ensuring airborne radar capabilities remain responsive to fast‑moving operational and geopolitical requirements.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
196 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.4. Currency
- 1.5. Language
- 1.6. Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 3. Executive Summary
- 4. Market Overview
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning for adaptive clutter suppression in modern airborne radars
- 5.2. Adoption of active electronically scanned array technology for enhanced targeting resolution and multi-beam capabilities
- 5.3. Development of low probability of intercept and low probability of detection radar waveforms for stealth mission profiles
- 5.4. Advancements in cognitive radar systems enabling autonomous spectrum management and environmental awareness
- 5.5. Shift towards software-defined and modular open architecture platforms for rapid capability upgrades in airborne radars
- 5.6. Miniaturization of radar components for integration into small unmanned aerial vehicles and tactical drones operations
- 5.7. Fusion of radar data with multisensor inputs including infrared and electronic warfare systems for comprehensive situational awareness
- 5.8. Implementation of synthetic aperture radar imaging enhancements for high-resolution reconnaissance in contested environments
- 5.9. Integration of 5G and satellite communication links to facilitate real-time radar data transmission to ground control stations
- 5.10. Focus on cybersecurity measures to protect airborne radar software and data links from increasing electronic attack threats
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. Airborne Radars Market, by Operation
- 8.1. Onboard
- 8.2. Pod
- 9. Airborne Radars Market, by Technology
- 9.1. Aesa
- 9.2. Mechanical Scanning
- 9.3. Pesa
- 10. Airborne Radars Market, by Frequency
- 10.1. Ka Band
- 10.2. Ku Band
- 10.3. L Band
- 10.4. S Band
- 10.5. X Band
- 11. Airborne Radars Market, by Platform
- 11.1. Fighter Aircraft
- 11.2. Helicopter
- 11.3. Transport Aircraft
- 11.4. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
- 11.4.1. Fixed Wing
- 11.4.2. Rotary Wing
- 12. Airborne Radars Market, by Function
- 12.1. Airborne Early Warning & Control
- 12.2. Ground Surveillance
- 12.3. Maritime Surveillance
- 12.4. Terrain Mapping
- 12.5. Weather Monitoring
- 13. Airborne Radars Market, by End User
- 13.1. Civil Aviation
- 13.2. Military
- 14. Airborne Radars Market, by Region
- 14.1. Americas
- 14.1.1. North America
- 14.1.2. Latin America
- 14.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 14.2.1. Europe
- 14.2.2. Middle East
- 14.2.3. Africa
- 14.3. Asia-Pacific
- 15. Airborne Radars Market, by Group
- 15.1. ASEAN
- 15.2. GCC
- 15.3. European Union
- 15.4. BRICS
- 15.5. G7
- 15.6. NATO
- 16. Airborne Radars Market, by Country
- 16.1. United States
- 16.2. Canada
- 16.3. Mexico
- 16.4. Brazil
- 16.5. United Kingdom
- 16.6. Germany
- 16.7. France
- 16.8. Russia
- 16.9. Italy
- 16.10. Spain
- 16.11. China
- 16.12. India
- 16.13. Japan
- 16.14. Australia
- 16.15. South Korea
- 17. Competitive Landscape
- 17.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 17.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 17.3. Competitive Analysis
- 17.3.1. Ainstein AI Inc.
- 17.3.2. Airbus SAS
- 17.3.3. Aselsan A.S.
- 17.3.4. BAE Systems plc
- 17.3.5. CEA Technologies Pty Limited
- 17.3.6. Cobham Advanced Electronic Solutions
- 17.3.7. Echodyne Corp.
- 17.3.8. Elbit Systems Ltd.
- 17.3.9. Elettronica Aster SpA
- 17.3.10. Hensoldt AG
- 17.3.11. L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
- 17.3.12. Leonardo S.p.A.
- 17.3.13. Lockheed Martin Corporation
- 17.3.14. Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
- 17.3.15. Northrop Grumman Corporation
- 17.3.16. Raytheon Technologies Corporation
- 17.3.17. Saab AB
- 17.3.18. Thales S.A.
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
