Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market by Platform Type (Manned Aircraft, Shipborne System, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle), Intelligence Type (Comint, Elint, Imint), Sensor Type, Application, End User - Global Forecast 2025-2032
Description
The Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market was valued at USD 8.11 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 9.05 billion in 2025, with a CAGR of 12.34%, reaching USD 20.58 billion by 2032.
Comprehensive orientation to the converging technologies, doctrines and operational pressures reshaping maritime intelligence and surveillance capabilities
The modern maritime battlespace is undergoing a profound transformation driven by rapid advances in sensors, persistent unmanned systems, and integrated data fusion. Naval intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance now sits at the intersection of kinetic operations and information advantage, demanding interoperable architectures, scalable sensor suites, and doctrine that privileges speed and adaptability. Stakeholders across defense agencies, naval forces, coast guards, and specialized contractors must reconcile legacy platforms with emerging unmanned surface, aerial and undersea systems while ensuring secure communications and resilient logistics.
Against this backdrop, decision-makers require a concise yet comprehensive orientation to current capability trends, operational constraints, and acquisition levers. This introduction frames the subsequent analysis by clarifying how platform diversity, sensor heterogeneity, and evolving intelligence disciplines coalesce to determine operational effectiveness. By focusing on how technology adoption, workforce skills and supply chain resilience interact, readers will better anticipate the trade-offs inherent in modernization choices and prioritize investments that deliver measurable improvements in situational awareness and mission assurance.
Detailed analysis of the interdependent technological, industrial and doctrinal transformations that are redefining maritime sensing, decision-making and resilience
The naval ISR landscape is being transformed by a handful of interlocking shifts that redefine how maritime actors sense, decide and act. First, the proliferation of autonomous platforms-airborne, surface and subsurface-extends persistent observation windows and disperses risk away from manned assets, thereby enabling new distributed architectures. Concurrently, advances in sensor miniaturization and multimodal fusion allow diverse sensor types to operate collaboratively, producing higher-fidelity intelligence than any single sensor could deliver. This drives increasing emphasis on data fusion layers, edge compute, and low-latency communications.
In parallel, the pace of software-defined sensors and open-system architectures is accelerating capability refresh cycles, making modularity and standards-based interfaces critical for long-term upgradeability. Geopolitical competition and the securitization of supply chains encourage national industrial base support and selective sourcing strategies, which influence procurement timelines and partnership choices. Moreover, the growing role of commercial space-based and terrestrial data providers introduces new data streams that complement organic ISR, but also raises questions of data governance and integration. Together, these shifts demand that naval planners adopt flexible acquisition approaches, prioritize resilient architectures, and cultivate human-machine teaming that leverages automation while preserving command intent.
Insightful appraisal of how 2025 tariff adjustments reshaped supply chain strategies, procurement behavior and international collaboration in naval ISR
The introduction of tariffs and trade policy adjustments in 2025 created pronounced ripple effects across defense supply chains, procurement planning, and international collaboration frameworks. Tariff-driven cost increases for selected imported components prompted prime integrators and subsystem suppliers to re-evaluate sourcing strategies, with many accelerating supplier diversification and onshoring initiatives to protect critical production lines. As a result, program managers faced trade-offs between short-term cost volatility and longer-term supply chain security, influencing platform sustainment planning and upgrade cadence.
In addition, tariffs influenced partner interoperability decisions as defense agencies weighed the implications of component provenance on system sustainment and certification. Procurement offices increasingly favored suppliers with demonstrable supply chain transparency and dual-sourcing options to mitigate exposure. At the same time, export control harmonization and tariff-related frictions led some multinational programs to revisit industrial participation models and component localization mandates. Importantly, these dynamics elevated the strategic value of suppliers capable of maintaining continuous production through flexible manufacturing, regionalized logistics, and validated quality management systems. For capability developers, the cumulative impact of 2025 tariff policy was to accelerate risk management practices, encourage investment in domestic manufacturing capacity, and prioritize adaptable architectures that can absorb supplier shifts without compromising operational availability.
Comprehensive segmentation mapping across platforms, intelligence disciplines, sensor technologies, mission applications and end-user priorities to guide capability alignment
A nuanced segmentation framework clarifies where capabilities converge and where specialization drives competitive advantage across platforms, intelligence disciplines, sensors, applications and end users. Based on platform type, analysis spans manned aircraft encompassing both fixed wing manned aircraft and rotary wing manned helicopter roles, shipborne systems split into shipborne electro-optical/infrared and shipborne radar suites, and a broad unmanned ecosystem that includes fixed wing UAVs, nano UAVs and rotary wing UAVs, as well as unmanned surface vehicles categorized as large, medium and small USVs, and unmanned undersea vehicles differentiated by autonomous underwater vehicles and remotely operated vehicles. Each of these platform classes imposes distinct payload, endurance and integration constraints that shape mission design and lifecycle support.
When viewed through the lens of intelligence type, distinctions between communications intelligence, electronic intelligence, imagery intelligence, measurement and signature intelligence, and signals intelligence reveal different collection imperatives. Communications intelligence divides into data interception and voice interception requirements; electronic intelligence separates radar-based ELINT from non-radar ELINT; imagery intelligence differentiates between electro-optical, infrared imaging and synthetic aperture radar imaging trade-offs; measurement and signature intelligence focuses on acoustic, chemical and nuclear detection vectors; and signals intelligence emphasizes both signal analysis and signal interception capabilities. Sensor-type segmentation further clarifies the role of electronic sensors-encompassing electronic countermeasures and electronic support measures-alongside electro-optical/infrared sensors divided into short wave infrared, thermal imaging and visible spectrum sensors, lidar in airborne and shipborne variants, radar technology spanning phased array, rotating and synthetic aperture modalities, and sonar options split between active and passive systems.
Application-driven segmentation highlights where mission value concentrates, distinguishing mapping tasks such as bathymetric and topographic mapping from reconnaissance missions that can be strategic or tactical in nature. Surveillance requirements vary between persistent coverage and wide-area sweeps while targeting activities balance electronic targeting and laser designation, and tracking operations require capabilities for on-the-move tracking as well as persistent tracking. Finally, end-user segmentation recognizes differing priorities across coast guard units, defense agencies that include intelligence community elements and research laboratories, naval forces, and contractors organized as tier one and tier two participants. Taken together, this layered segmentation provides a working taxonomy for aligning procurement, integration and training decisions with operational outcomes.
Regional dynamics and sovereign priorities that determine differing naval ISR procurement choices, industrial strategies and multinational interoperability demands
Regional dynamics shape capability priorities and procurement pathways, producing differentiated demand patterns and partnership architectures across the Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, emphasis centers on maritime domain awareness for littoral security, drug interdiction and long-range patrols, driving demand for a mix of manned maritime patrol aircraft, shipborne sensors and medium to large unmanned surface and undersea systems. The industrial base in this region tends to favor integrated supply chains with established primes and a growing set of specialized suppliers focused on persistent ISR and data fusion technologies.
Across Europe, the Middle East & Africa, security imperatives emphasize coalition interoperability, contested littoral operations and expeditionary logistics; as a result, nations prioritize modular sensor payloads, NATO-aligned standards and interoperable communication suites. Procurement strategies in this region frequently balance indigenous production mandates with multinational program participation, and there is heightened attention to countering asymmetric threats through rapid-deploy ISR packages. In the Asia-Pacific, strategic competition and expansive maritime domains push investment toward high-end maritime surveillance, long-endurance unmanned assets, advanced anti-submarine warfare sensors and integrated surface-radar networks. Supply chain resilience and regional partnerships are central concerns, with many actors pursuing domestic industrial capability expansion while engaging in targeted foreign collaborations to access critical technologies. These regional profiles underscore the importance of tailoring capability roadmaps to sovereign requirements, coalition expectations and the operational environment.
Actionable industry insights on how integrators, sensor specialists and software-centric firms are reshaping competitive advantage through partnerships and modular architectures
Leading technology providers and system integrators are consolidating expertise across unmanned systems, sensor fusion, and mission systems to maintain relevance in an increasingly modular and software-driven market. Legacy primes continue to leverage scale and systems-engineering depth to win complex integration programs, while focused entrants and specialized suppliers gain traction by delivering high-performance sensors, secure datalinks and edge compute capabilities optimized for autonomous platforms. Partnerships between primes and innovative sensor developers are increasingly transactionally structured to shorten technology insertion cycles and maintain upgrade pathways.
Where companies differentiate, they do so through demonstrated ability to provide lifecycle support, rapid field upgrades, and transparent supply chain practices. Firms that invest in open architecture frameworks and that publish clear integration toolkits lower the barrier to coalition interoperability and accelerate deployment across diverse fleets. In addition, companies that develop validated live-virtual-constructive environments, robust cyber hardening processes, and certification pathways for unmanned autonomy enjoy competitive advantages when working with naval and coast guard stakeholders. Strategic collaborations that combine platform experience with software and analytics capability are becoming the pragmatic route to delivering operationally useful, deployable systems in compressed acquisition timelines.
Practical strategic moves and procurement adjustments for defense leaders to de-risk programs, accelerate capability delivery and sustain operational superiority
Industry leaders should pursue a coordinated set of actions to translate technological opportunity into sustained operational advantage. First, establish modular open architectures and clear interface standards to reduce integration risk and enable rapid payload swaps across manned and unmanned platforms; this reduces obsolescence risk and eases multinational coalition integration. Second, prioritize supply chain visibility and dual sourcing for critical components, and invest in regionalized manufacturing hubs to mitigate tariff exposure and logistical disruption while preserving program cadence.
Third, accelerate adoption of edge computing and automated data fusion to reduce bandwidth dependency and speed decision cycles, coupling algorithm development with rigorous human-in-the-loop validation to maintain operator trust. Fourth, align workforce development with emerging operational concepts by investing in cross-disciplinary training that blends domain expertise in maritime operations with data science and systems engineering skills. Fifth, cultivate partnerships that pair legacy systems integration experience with agile sensor and software providers to shorten deployment timelines and create clear upgrade paths. Finally, implement phased fielding approaches with defined metrics for operational impact, enabling iterative improvements and ensuring that procurement decisions deliver measurable capability gains within acceptable risk tolerances.
Robust mixed-methods research approach combining primary expert interviews, document triangulation and scenario stress-testing to ensure actionable and validated findings
This analysis synthesizes primary qualitative interviews with program managers, systems engineers and industry subject-matter experts, complemented by rigorous document review of technical specifications, procurement frameworks and published doctrine. Data triangulation relied on cross-verification between procurement records, platform technical briefs and independent validation through expert panels to ensure findings reflect operational realities and current practice. Scenario analysis and stress-testing of supply chain assumptions provided insight into resilience under tariff-induced disruption and component scarcity.
Methodologically, emphasis was placed on traceable evidence, transparent assumptions and explicit articulation of uncertainty where open-source visibility is constrained. The research approach balanced domain expertise with structured analytic techniques, including capability gap mapping, interoperability assessment and lifecycle risk profiling. Throughout, findings were iteratively validated with practitioners to ensure actionable relevance and practical applicability for acquisition, operational planning and industry engagement.
Concise synthesis of strategic imperatives showing how technology integration, supply chain resilience and human-machine teaming will drive future maritime ISR effectiveness
In summary, naval intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance is entering a phase where platform diversity, sensor fusion and resilient industrial strategies determine operational advantage. Autonomous systems extend reach and lower exposure for crews, while advances in sensor modalities and data processing elevate the importance of integration and edge capabilities. Tariff-driven supply chain adjustments in 2025 served as a catalyst for greater emphasis on sourcing transparency, onshoring and supplier diversification, reinforcing the value of flexible architectures and regional manufacturing options.
Decision-makers who adopt modular standards, invest in human-machine teaming, and prioritize supply chain resilience will be better positioned to field persistent ISR capabilities that respond to evolving maritime threats. Strategic partnerships that marry integration experience with innovative sensor and analytics suppliers will shorten fielding timelines and reduce lifecycle risk. Ultimately, success will hinge on the ability of navies, coast guards and industry to coordinate procurement priorities, operational concepts and industrial policies to deliver interoperable, upgradeable and sustainable ISR capability sets.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Comprehensive orientation to the converging technologies, doctrines and operational pressures reshaping maritime intelligence and surveillance capabilities
The modern maritime battlespace is undergoing a profound transformation driven by rapid advances in sensors, persistent unmanned systems, and integrated data fusion. Naval intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance now sits at the intersection of kinetic operations and information advantage, demanding interoperable architectures, scalable sensor suites, and doctrine that privileges speed and adaptability. Stakeholders across defense agencies, naval forces, coast guards, and specialized contractors must reconcile legacy platforms with emerging unmanned surface, aerial and undersea systems while ensuring secure communications and resilient logistics.
Against this backdrop, decision-makers require a concise yet comprehensive orientation to current capability trends, operational constraints, and acquisition levers. This introduction frames the subsequent analysis by clarifying how platform diversity, sensor heterogeneity, and evolving intelligence disciplines coalesce to determine operational effectiveness. By focusing on how technology adoption, workforce skills and supply chain resilience interact, readers will better anticipate the trade-offs inherent in modernization choices and prioritize investments that deliver measurable improvements in situational awareness and mission assurance.
Detailed analysis of the interdependent technological, industrial and doctrinal transformations that are redefining maritime sensing, decision-making and resilience
The naval ISR landscape is being transformed by a handful of interlocking shifts that redefine how maritime actors sense, decide and act. First, the proliferation of autonomous platforms-airborne, surface and subsurface-extends persistent observation windows and disperses risk away from manned assets, thereby enabling new distributed architectures. Concurrently, advances in sensor miniaturization and multimodal fusion allow diverse sensor types to operate collaboratively, producing higher-fidelity intelligence than any single sensor could deliver. This drives increasing emphasis on data fusion layers, edge compute, and low-latency communications.
In parallel, the pace of software-defined sensors and open-system architectures is accelerating capability refresh cycles, making modularity and standards-based interfaces critical for long-term upgradeability. Geopolitical competition and the securitization of supply chains encourage national industrial base support and selective sourcing strategies, which influence procurement timelines and partnership choices. Moreover, the growing role of commercial space-based and terrestrial data providers introduces new data streams that complement organic ISR, but also raises questions of data governance and integration. Together, these shifts demand that naval planners adopt flexible acquisition approaches, prioritize resilient architectures, and cultivate human-machine teaming that leverages automation while preserving command intent.
Insightful appraisal of how 2025 tariff adjustments reshaped supply chain strategies, procurement behavior and international collaboration in naval ISR
The introduction of tariffs and trade policy adjustments in 2025 created pronounced ripple effects across defense supply chains, procurement planning, and international collaboration frameworks. Tariff-driven cost increases for selected imported components prompted prime integrators and subsystem suppliers to re-evaluate sourcing strategies, with many accelerating supplier diversification and onshoring initiatives to protect critical production lines. As a result, program managers faced trade-offs between short-term cost volatility and longer-term supply chain security, influencing platform sustainment planning and upgrade cadence.
In addition, tariffs influenced partner interoperability decisions as defense agencies weighed the implications of component provenance on system sustainment and certification. Procurement offices increasingly favored suppliers with demonstrable supply chain transparency and dual-sourcing options to mitigate exposure. At the same time, export control harmonization and tariff-related frictions led some multinational programs to revisit industrial participation models and component localization mandates. Importantly, these dynamics elevated the strategic value of suppliers capable of maintaining continuous production through flexible manufacturing, regionalized logistics, and validated quality management systems. For capability developers, the cumulative impact of 2025 tariff policy was to accelerate risk management practices, encourage investment in domestic manufacturing capacity, and prioritize adaptable architectures that can absorb supplier shifts without compromising operational availability.
Comprehensive segmentation mapping across platforms, intelligence disciplines, sensor technologies, mission applications and end-user priorities to guide capability alignment
A nuanced segmentation framework clarifies where capabilities converge and where specialization drives competitive advantage across platforms, intelligence disciplines, sensors, applications and end users. Based on platform type, analysis spans manned aircraft encompassing both fixed wing manned aircraft and rotary wing manned helicopter roles, shipborne systems split into shipborne electro-optical/infrared and shipborne radar suites, and a broad unmanned ecosystem that includes fixed wing UAVs, nano UAVs and rotary wing UAVs, as well as unmanned surface vehicles categorized as large, medium and small USVs, and unmanned undersea vehicles differentiated by autonomous underwater vehicles and remotely operated vehicles. Each of these platform classes imposes distinct payload, endurance and integration constraints that shape mission design and lifecycle support.
When viewed through the lens of intelligence type, distinctions between communications intelligence, electronic intelligence, imagery intelligence, measurement and signature intelligence, and signals intelligence reveal different collection imperatives. Communications intelligence divides into data interception and voice interception requirements; electronic intelligence separates radar-based ELINT from non-radar ELINT; imagery intelligence differentiates between electro-optical, infrared imaging and synthetic aperture radar imaging trade-offs; measurement and signature intelligence focuses on acoustic, chemical and nuclear detection vectors; and signals intelligence emphasizes both signal analysis and signal interception capabilities. Sensor-type segmentation further clarifies the role of electronic sensors-encompassing electronic countermeasures and electronic support measures-alongside electro-optical/infrared sensors divided into short wave infrared, thermal imaging and visible spectrum sensors, lidar in airborne and shipborne variants, radar technology spanning phased array, rotating and synthetic aperture modalities, and sonar options split between active and passive systems.
Application-driven segmentation highlights where mission value concentrates, distinguishing mapping tasks such as bathymetric and topographic mapping from reconnaissance missions that can be strategic or tactical in nature. Surveillance requirements vary between persistent coverage and wide-area sweeps while targeting activities balance electronic targeting and laser designation, and tracking operations require capabilities for on-the-move tracking as well as persistent tracking. Finally, end-user segmentation recognizes differing priorities across coast guard units, defense agencies that include intelligence community elements and research laboratories, naval forces, and contractors organized as tier one and tier two participants. Taken together, this layered segmentation provides a working taxonomy for aligning procurement, integration and training decisions with operational outcomes.
Regional dynamics and sovereign priorities that determine differing naval ISR procurement choices, industrial strategies and multinational interoperability demands
Regional dynamics shape capability priorities and procurement pathways, producing differentiated demand patterns and partnership architectures across the Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, emphasis centers on maritime domain awareness for littoral security, drug interdiction and long-range patrols, driving demand for a mix of manned maritime patrol aircraft, shipborne sensors and medium to large unmanned surface and undersea systems. The industrial base in this region tends to favor integrated supply chains with established primes and a growing set of specialized suppliers focused on persistent ISR and data fusion technologies.
Across Europe, the Middle East & Africa, security imperatives emphasize coalition interoperability, contested littoral operations and expeditionary logistics; as a result, nations prioritize modular sensor payloads, NATO-aligned standards and interoperable communication suites. Procurement strategies in this region frequently balance indigenous production mandates with multinational program participation, and there is heightened attention to countering asymmetric threats through rapid-deploy ISR packages. In the Asia-Pacific, strategic competition and expansive maritime domains push investment toward high-end maritime surveillance, long-endurance unmanned assets, advanced anti-submarine warfare sensors and integrated surface-radar networks. Supply chain resilience and regional partnerships are central concerns, with many actors pursuing domestic industrial capability expansion while engaging in targeted foreign collaborations to access critical technologies. These regional profiles underscore the importance of tailoring capability roadmaps to sovereign requirements, coalition expectations and the operational environment.
Actionable industry insights on how integrators, sensor specialists and software-centric firms are reshaping competitive advantage through partnerships and modular architectures
Leading technology providers and system integrators are consolidating expertise across unmanned systems, sensor fusion, and mission systems to maintain relevance in an increasingly modular and software-driven market. Legacy primes continue to leverage scale and systems-engineering depth to win complex integration programs, while focused entrants and specialized suppliers gain traction by delivering high-performance sensors, secure datalinks and edge compute capabilities optimized for autonomous platforms. Partnerships between primes and innovative sensor developers are increasingly transactionally structured to shorten technology insertion cycles and maintain upgrade pathways.
Where companies differentiate, they do so through demonstrated ability to provide lifecycle support, rapid field upgrades, and transparent supply chain practices. Firms that invest in open architecture frameworks and that publish clear integration toolkits lower the barrier to coalition interoperability and accelerate deployment across diverse fleets. In addition, companies that develop validated live-virtual-constructive environments, robust cyber hardening processes, and certification pathways for unmanned autonomy enjoy competitive advantages when working with naval and coast guard stakeholders. Strategic collaborations that combine platform experience with software and analytics capability are becoming the pragmatic route to delivering operationally useful, deployable systems in compressed acquisition timelines.
Practical strategic moves and procurement adjustments for defense leaders to de-risk programs, accelerate capability delivery and sustain operational superiority
Industry leaders should pursue a coordinated set of actions to translate technological opportunity into sustained operational advantage. First, establish modular open architectures and clear interface standards to reduce integration risk and enable rapid payload swaps across manned and unmanned platforms; this reduces obsolescence risk and eases multinational coalition integration. Second, prioritize supply chain visibility and dual sourcing for critical components, and invest in regionalized manufacturing hubs to mitigate tariff exposure and logistical disruption while preserving program cadence.
Third, accelerate adoption of edge computing and automated data fusion to reduce bandwidth dependency and speed decision cycles, coupling algorithm development with rigorous human-in-the-loop validation to maintain operator trust. Fourth, align workforce development with emerging operational concepts by investing in cross-disciplinary training that blends domain expertise in maritime operations with data science and systems engineering skills. Fifth, cultivate partnerships that pair legacy systems integration experience with agile sensor and software providers to shorten deployment timelines and create clear upgrade paths. Finally, implement phased fielding approaches with defined metrics for operational impact, enabling iterative improvements and ensuring that procurement decisions deliver measurable capability gains within acceptable risk tolerances.
Robust mixed-methods research approach combining primary expert interviews, document triangulation and scenario stress-testing to ensure actionable and validated findings
This analysis synthesizes primary qualitative interviews with program managers, systems engineers and industry subject-matter experts, complemented by rigorous document review of technical specifications, procurement frameworks and published doctrine. Data triangulation relied on cross-verification between procurement records, platform technical briefs and independent validation through expert panels to ensure findings reflect operational realities and current practice. Scenario analysis and stress-testing of supply chain assumptions provided insight into resilience under tariff-induced disruption and component scarcity.
Methodologically, emphasis was placed on traceable evidence, transparent assumptions and explicit articulation of uncertainty where open-source visibility is constrained. The research approach balanced domain expertise with structured analytic techniques, including capability gap mapping, interoperability assessment and lifecycle risk profiling. Throughout, findings were iteratively validated with practitioners to ensure actionable relevance and practical applicability for acquisition, operational planning and industry engagement.
Concise synthesis of strategic imperatives showing how technology integration, supply chain resilience and human-machine teaming will drive future maritime ISR effectiveness
In summary, naval intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance is entering a phase where platform diversity, sensor fusion and resilient industrial strategies determine operational advantage. Autonomous systems extend reach and lower exposure for crews, while advances in sensor modalities and data processing elevate the importance of integration and edge capabilities. Tariff-driven supply chain adjustments in 2025 served as a catalyst for greater emphasis on sourcing transparency, onshoring and supplier diversification, reinforcing the value of flexible architectures and regional manufacturing options.
Decision-makers who adopt modular standards, invest in human-machine teaming, and prioritize supply chain resilience will be better positioned to field persistent ISR capabilities that respond to evolving maritime threats. Strategic partnerships that marry integration experience with innovative sensor and analytics suppliers will shorten fielding timelines and reduce lifecycle risk. Ultimately, success will hinge on the ability of navies, coast guards and industry to coordinate procurement priorities, operational concepts and industrial policies to deliver interoperable, upgradeable and sustainable ISR capability sets.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
187 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 AI-driven sensor fusion systems for real-time maritime domain awareness across multiple naval platforms
- 5.2. Deployment of unmanned surface vehicle networks to enhance persistent littoral surveillance and reconnaissance
- 5.3. Adoption of space-based synthetic aperture radar constellations for all-weather naval intelligence gathering
- 5.4. Implementation of quantum magnetometer sensors to improve submarine detection in congested waterways
- 5.5. Development of high-altitude pseudo-satellite platforms for extended endurance maritime ISR missions
- 5.6. Expansion of networked acoustic sensor arrays for covert detection and tracking of undersea threats
- 5.7. Convergence of cyber-physical systems in maritime ISR for automated threat analysis and rapid decision support
- 5.8. Miniaturization and integration of compact hyperspectral imaging payloads on naval drones for enhanced target identification
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Platform Type
- 8.1. Manned Aircraft
- 8.1.1. Fixed Wing Manned Aircraft
- 8.1.2. Rotary Wing Manned Helicopter
- 8.2. Shipborne System
- 8.2.1. Shipborne Eo/Ir
- 8.2.2. Shipborne Radar
- 8.3. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
- 8.3.1. Fixed Wing Uav
- 8.3.2. Nano Uav
- 8.3.3. Rotary Wing Uav
- 8.4. Unmanned Surface Vehicle
- 8.4.1. Large Usv
- 8.4.2. Medium Usv
- 8.4.3. Small Usv
- 8.5. Unmanned Undersea Vehicle
- 8.5.1. Auv
- 8.5.2. Rov
- 9. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Intelligence Type
- 9.1. Comint
- 9.1.1. Data Interception
- 9.1.2. Voice Interception
- 9.2. Elint
- 9.2.1. Non Radar Elint
- 9.2.2. Radar Elint
- 9.3. Imint
- 9.3.1. Electro Optical
- 9.3.2. Infrared Imaging
- 9.3.3. Synthetic Aperture Radar Imaging
- 9.4. Masint
- 9.4.1. Acoustic
- 9.4.2. Chemical
- 9.4.3. Nuclear
- 9.5. Sigint
- 9.5.1. Signal Analysis
- 9.5.2. Signal Interception
- 10. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Sensor Type
- 10.1. Electronic Sensors
- 10.1.1. Electronic Countermeasures
- 10.1.2. Electronic Support Measures
- 10.2. Eo/Ir
- 10.2.1. Short Wave Infrared
- 10.2.2. Thermal Imaging
- 10.2.3. Visible Spectrum
- 10.3. Lidar
- 10.3.1. Airborne Lidar
- 10.3.2. Shipborne Lidar
- 10.4. Radar
- 10.4.1. Phased Array
- 10.4.2. Rotating
- 10.4.3. Synthetic Aperture
- 10.5. Sonar
- 10.5.1. Active Sonar
- 10.5.2. Passive Sonar
- 11. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Application
- 11.1. Mapping
- 11.1.1. Bathymetric Mapping
- 11.1.2. Topographic Mapping
- 11.2. Reconnaissance
- 11.2.1. Strategic Recon
- 11.2.2. Tactical Recon
- 11.3. Surveillance
- 11.3.1. Persistent
- 11.3.2. Wide Area
- 11.4. Targeting
- 11.4.1. Electronic Targeting
- 11.4.2. Laser Designation
- 11.5. Tracking
- 11.5.1. On The Move Tracking
- 11.5.2. Persistent Tracking
- 12. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by End User
- 12.1. Coast Guard
- 12.2. Contractors
- 12.2.1. Tier One
- 12.2.2. Tier Two
- 12.3. Defense Agencies
- 12.3.1. Intelligence Community
- 12.3.2. Research Laboratories
- 12.4. Navy
- 13. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Region
- 13.1. Americas
- 13.1.1. North America
- 13.1.2. Latin America
- 13.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 13.2.1. Europe
- 13.2.2. Middle East
- 13.2.3. Africa
- 13.3. Asia-Pacific
- 14. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Group
- 14.1. ASEAN
- 14.2. GCC
- 14.3. European Union
- 14.4. BRICS
- 14.5. G7
- 14.6. NATO
- 15. Naval Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance Market, by Country
- 15.1. United States
- 15.2. Canada
- 15.3. Mexico
- 15.4. Brazil
- 15.5. United Kingdom
- 15.6. Germany
- 15.7. France
- 15.8. Russia
- 15.9. Italy
- 15.10. Spain
- 15.11. China
- 15.12. India
- 15.13. Japan
- 15.14. Australia
- 15.15. South Korea
- 16. Competitive Landscape
- 16.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 16.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 16.3. Competitive Analysis
- 16.3.1. Acorn Science & Innovation, Inc.
- 16.3.2. Airbus SE
- 16.3.3. AIRtec Inc.
- 16.3.4. Anduril Industries, Inc.
- 16.3.5. Atlas Elektronik GmbH
- 16.3.6. BAE Systems PLC
- 16.3.7. Bombardier Inc.
- 16.3.8. Elbit Systems Ltd.
- 16.3.9. General Dynamics Corporation
- 16.3.10. Hanwha Corporation
- 16.3.11. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.
- 16.3.12. Inmarsat Global Limited by Viasat, Inc.
- 16.3.13. L3Harris Technologies, Inc.
- 16.3.14. Leonardo S.p.A.
- 16.3.15. Lockheed Martin Corporation
- 16.3.16. MAG DS Corp.
- 16.3.17. Northrop Grumann Corporation
- 16.3.18. Raytheon Technologies Corporation
- 16.3.19. Saildrone, Inc.
- 16.3.20. Terma A/S
- 16.3.21. Textron Inc.
- 16.3.22. Thales Group
- 16.3.23. Ultra Electronics Holdings
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.
