Choosing between Tagged, Tagless & Hybrid safety systems
There is no universally "best" option in all circumstances - it depends on understanding the environmental conditions of each site to find the solution that will most reduce your critical risks. This guide walks through how to answer that properly, zone by zone, rather than picking one configuration for the whole site.
What each configuration actually delivers
Three configurations sit on the SonaSafe platform. A Tagged system requires the pedestrian to wear a tag, and gives the most reliable, non-line-of-sight protection in return. A Tagless system needs no wearable at all, but relies on camera-based detection, so it's limited to what the camera can actually see. Hybrid combines both on one system, giving each zone whichever is the better fit.
RELIABLE PREVENTION · ULTIMATE ACCURACY
Tagged
Best for: controlled forklift environments with high pedestrian interaction, where blind spots and non-line-of-sight areas demand maximum detection confidence.
- Sonar + UWB wearable tag detection
- Non-line-of-sight — through pallets and racking
- Vehicle-to-vehicle collision avoidance
- Simultaneous dual alerts: driver and pedestrian
- Slows the Vehicle — an engineering-level safety control, where technically available
- Configurable exclusion zones up to 15m
- Proactive device health monitoring, backed by a dedicated support SLA
SIMPLIFIED VISIBILITY & AWARENESS
Tagless (Proxicam)
Best for: dynamic or contractor-heavy environments without wearable-tag compliance, or well-lit open areas early in a safety programme.
- AI camera-based pedestrian detection via Proxicam, SonaSafe's integrated technology partner
- Forklift-specific proximity zone logic
- Configurable alert logic tuned to real site conditions
- Driver alerts in line-of-sight interactions
- A documented pathway toTagged or Hybrid as the site matures
- Proactive device health monitoring, backed by a dedicated support SLA
FLEXIBLE LAYERED PROTECTION
Hybrid
Best for: mixed-risk sites and complex layouts that need both high-confidence detection and deployment flexibility, zone by zone.
- Combines sonar, UWB tags and AI camera on one platform
- Zone-by-zone detection tuned to mixed and transient workforces
- Vehicle-to-vehicle collision avoidance, plus tagless pedestrian coverage
- Slows the Vehicle — engineering-level intervention, where technically available, across every configured zone
- Behavioural reporting and trend analysis
- One dataset, one dashboard, one support SLA, across the whole site
None of these three is inherently superior to the others. Each is the correct engineered answer to a different physical problem. The question that matters isn't which one wins — it's which one wins for a given zone.
WHY IT WORKS THIS WAY
Why sonar and UWB, and where camera AI wins on its own
Every configuration above sits on the same underlying detection logic. A camera is an optical sensor — it needs an unobstructed view to work at all, and no amount of processing changes that. Sonar and ultra-wideband (UWB) detection work differently: they sense through the obstruction itself, which is why they're the layer used wherever racking, stacked pallets, dust or low light would otherwise defeat a vision-based system.
WHY SONAR AND UWB HAS ITS PLACE
UWB alone gives highly precise distance measurement, but on its own it tends to alert against a fixed zone shape — a bubble around the vehicle that doesn't account for what's actually in that space, which is exactly how UWB-only systems generate the unwanted alerts they're known for. Sonar adds a second layer of confirmation and lets that zone be shaped to match the site itself: not a fixed circle, but a boundary that reflects the vehicle's direction, speed and the layout around it. That combination — sonar's configurability plus UWB's precision — is what keeps the alert rate proportional to real risk, rather than firing on anything that crosses a fixed radius.
WHERE CAMERA AI WORKS BEST
Camera-based detection has a real adoption advantage that's easy to overlook. A wearable device only works if someone remembers to put it on, and that depends on an induction habit and supervision that has to be built and maintained. Where a site's safety culture and systems are still maturing — and worker compliance with a new safety process can't yet be assumed — asking nothing of individual compliance is a genuine strength. Camera AI protects everyone in the zone from day one, while the induction habit, supervision and tracking a wearable-based system depends on are built underneath it.
THE FRAMEWORK
Six questions to ask about the zone
Most buying guides list questions to ask a vendor. Ask those too — but the more useful list comes first, and it's about your own site, not ours. The answer a vendor should give you depends entirely on what's true about the zone in front of you.
Are there blind spots in this zone?
Racking, stacked pallets, a corner — anywhere a worker could be present without the operator seeing them coming, or the operator approaching without the worker knowing.
Best served by: Tagged or Hybrid. Sonar and UWB detect through the obstruction itself; a camera can only alert on what it can actually see.
Who actually moves through this zone?
Your own inducted workforce coming through one controlled entry point, or a rotating mix of visitors, contractors and delivery drivers who won't be issued anything before they walk in.
Best served by: Tagged for a controlled workforce, Tagless where compliance can't be guaranteed, Hybrid where a site has both.
Is there vehicle collision avoidance risk in this zone?
Multiple forklifts, ride-ons or order pickers operating in the same corridor or intersection at once — a different risk from a person on foot.
Best served by: Tagged or Hybrid. Vehicle-to-vehicle detection runs on the same sonar and UWB layer as pedestrian protection; camera logic is built to recognise people, not to reliably distinguish one forklift approaching another.
If someone is detected, who needs to be warned?
Just the operator, or does the person in the danger zone need their own alert — and would they even notice a warning aimed only at the driver?
Best served by: Tagged or Hybrid, where the pedestrian's own tag delivers a real-time alert directly to them. Tagless alerts the driver; without a wearable to alert, the pedestrian's awareness still depends on the vehicle's reaction being visible to them.
Is a warning enough, or does the risk call for the vehicle to slow down?
Some zones are low-consequence enough that an alert and a trained response are sufficient. Others carry enough risk that relying on a person to react in time isn't good enough on its own.
Best served by: Tagged or Hybrid. Slow the Vehicle — an engineering-level safety control, where technically available — is built on the same detection layer.
How would unwanted alerts here be received?
A high-traffic zone with constant, predictable movement needs careful tuning: fire too often and the system gets quietly switched off; tune it too loosely and it stops adding real protection. Finding the right balance between ultimate safety and a low unwanted-alert rate is a configuration exercise, not a fixed property of any one technology.
Best served by: whichever configuration is chosen, this is solved the same way — a structured pilot that tunes zones and alert thresholds to the site's actual traffic, using sonar-assisted zone shaping for Tagged and Hybrid, and tuned AI camera logic for Tagless, rather than a factory default applied on day one.
Worked example
Racking aisle → Tagged. Operators edge around blind corners repeatedly through a shift, in a zone no camera can see into, staffed by a workforce that comes through one controlled entry.
Loading dock → Tagless. Visiting truck drivers are on foot here, on site for minutes at a time, with no realistic way to issue them a device before they're gone again.
Two zones, two different correct answers, on the same site — which is exactly what makes this a Hybrid deployment rather than a single site-wide choice.
The same six questions run across all ten zones covered in 10 High-Risk Forklift Interaction Zones Most Warehouses Overlook — worth reading zone by zone rather than assuming one answer covers the site:
→ Cross-dock reversing paths — much like a loading dock, usually carry external drivers and transient foot traffic. A Tagless-favouring profile.
→ Multi-forklift and mixed-fleet corridors — a different problem again: vehicle-to-vehicle collision avoidance, which points to Tagged or Hybrid, not Tagless.
→ Contractor and visitor entry points — the clearest Tagless case on the whole list. By definition, the person hasn't been inducted or issued anything yet.
→ Doorways opening onto an active travel path — can go either way, depending on who's coming through. The zone doesn't have a fixed answer; the people using it do.
HONEST TRADE-OFFS
What each option asks of you, not just what it solves
Tagged
Asks for enrolment discipline: an induction process, a device estate to manage, and attention when workforce turnover is elevated. Worth planning for up front rather than discovering later.
Tagless
Performance depends on what the camera can see — reduced in low light, heavy dust or severe weather, and it doesn't detect through racking. This is the published position of independent integrators of this camera technology generally, not a SonaSafe-specific caveat.
Hybrid
Two configurations to tune rather than one. A pilot is what proves both zones work well together before committing beyond it.
QUICK REFERENCE
The decision at a glance
| Consideration | POINTS TOWARD TAGGED | POINTS TOWARD TAGLESS |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility | Obstructed — racking, pallets, dust, low light | Open sightlines, well-lit |
| Workforce | Controlled, inducted, one entry point | Transient — visitors, contractors, delivery drivers |
| Vehicle collision avoidance | Built in — sonar and UWB detect other vehicles directly | Not a primary capability — camera logic targets people, not vehicles |
| Real-time alerts | Dual — driver and pedestrian, simultaneously, via the tag | Driver-side, in line-of-sight interactions |
| Response needed | Detection plus engineering-level intervention (Slow the Vehicle), where technically available | Detection and alert, with a documented path to Tagged or Hybrid later |
| Configurability | Zone-tuned exclusion zones, sonar-shaped to the site | Zone-tuned alert logic, same underlying platform |
| Organisational readiness | Induction and supervision habits already established | Culture and systems still maturing — lower-friction starting point |
COMMON MISMATCHES
Where this goes wrong
• Choosing Tagless for a genuinely obstructed zone and expecting non-line-of-sight coverage it isn't built to provide. A camera in a racking aisle has the same physical limitation as a person standing in it — it can't see around a corner either.
• Assuming Tagless covers vehicle collision avoidance. Camera-based detection is built around people in a zone, not two forklifts approaching a blind intersection — that's a Tagged or Hybrid capability specifically.
• Assuming a controlled workforce stays controlled. A zone that's fully tagged today can quietly become mixed as contractor and labour-hire use grows, without anyone updating the configuration to match.
• Committing to Hybrid everywhere by default on a site that's genuinely simple and single-zone, adding tuning overhead without adding protection a single configuration wouldn't already provide.
SOURCES
- WorkSafe Victoria — Forklift Safety Guidebook (May 2024) — hierarchy of controls and blind-spot risk
Want this answered for your actual site, not a
general guide?
This is the same zone-by-zone logic the SonaSafe Safety Survey walks through for your specific site — your visibility conditions, your workforce mix, your priority zones — rather than a general framework applied from the outside. A site assessment goes one step further and confirms it in person.
Talk to our team
