The dynamic of the homeland security market is much like that of the broader mil/defense landscape. That is, technology in and of itself does not a market player make. OTOH, airport security and perimeter protection is actually a hotbed of innovation. I did a story early last year on a little-known effort by IBM, which I still find fascinating (the effort, not my story). Take a look at "IBM Patenting Airport Security Profiling Technology."
The detection system itself is of marginal benefit unless it is linked with an action element able to stop the incursion.
To prevent hostile incursions I would suggest a copy of our Navy "PHLANX" system, which provides an awsome level of protectionm against incoming "anything". Because most of the information is classified, there may not be much more information available than what I have already mentioned. However, the term awsome is certainly applicable.
It's not marketed at the home market but at the "homeland security" market -- high-value domestic targets like dams, airports, power plants, air traffic control centers, prisons, borders, etc. My term of choice would have been domestic, rather than homeland security, but some government person post-9/11 chose homeland security (which always sounds vaguely Nazi-esque to me), so we are stuck with it.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.