Recent reports of drones flying over RAF bases in East Anglia have raised significant security concerns, prompting a robust response from the Ministry of Defence (MOD) and its partners.
These incidents highlight the growing challenge posed by illegitimate drone operators to national defence and critical infrastructure, as well as the need for coordinated action to counter this emerging threat.
The MOD is actively addressing the situation in collaboration with US visiting forces, Home Office police, and other partners. Speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Coaker, Minister of State for Defence, stated:
“We take any safety issues seriously and maintain robust measures at Ministry of Defence sites, including counter-drone capabilities.”
While Lord Coaker refrained from commenting on specific security procedures, he assured the House that the MOD is committed to prosecuting those responsible for illegal drone activities:
“We will work with the civil authorities to prosecute those responsible. We are working with our international partners, including the United States, to ensure that we have all the equipment needed to tackle any of these attacks.”
The Minister also confirmed a civilian drone was observed near HMS Queen Elizabeth but did not come closer than 250 metres. He stressed the seriousness of such incidents and the MOD’s commitment to safeguarding its assets.
Baroness Goldie underscored the importance of integrating air defence systems into a comprehensive national security strategy. Lord Stirrup further spoke on the broader implications for national resilience, highlighting the lessons from Ukraine’s hybrid warfare:
“We cannot mount air defence systems around every single part of our critical national infrastructure… Ukraine has shown us the importance of hybrid warfare.”
Lord Coaker acknowledged this challenge, stating:
“The ability to defend against physical and cyberattack is crucial to withstanding the threats we will face in the future. That has to be a part of any future defence review, and it will be.”
Legal Framework and Enforcement
The National Security Act 2023 prohibits drones from flying over or near prohibited sites, including military bases. Lord Purvis of Tweed called for greater community awareness and stringent enforcement of these laws.
Responding, Lord Coaker confirmed:
“People should be aware… there are penalties of up to 14 years for this sort of activity, and all agencies will work to ensure we identify and address these acts.”
Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate raised concerns about the growing number of illegal drone operators, calling for more proactive policing.
No ground based air defence. These things should have been engaged and destroyed and their operators found and arrested.
Yes, it.s Farcical. Same with the mod s cyber security defense systems. Russia, China always knocking on the door. So many sleeper & active agents in the UK, we can’t keep up. Madness. Wait til they harness their quantum computers.
Carnage inbound
Some UAP, identified by the US military, may or may not be drones. These objects often lack visible rotors or discernible sound. While the U.S. is taking UAP investigations seriously, the UK government should do the same, rather than assuming a simple, prosaic explanation. The inability to track remotely controlled drones in coordinated actions over military airbases represents a significant national security failure. Suggesting these could be something beyond drones is a discussion the UK seems reluctant to have.
We have been here before. In 1980 the line from MoD was “No Defence Significance” when UAP, or more accurately, UFOs, were in the airspace of
Bentwaters and Woodbridge.
Why it was of no defence significance even Wood Hill Norton, and ex CDS, could not discover.
The radar tapes showing some of these events were erased at RAF Neatishead.
It actually took a FOIA within the US, as we lacked such at that time, to get a movement to investigate these events moving.
On a personal level, I was postman to a chap who worked in Main Building at that time and he told me concern at those events in the higher echelons was c8mmin knowledge amongst staff, who knew the DIS was involved.
Trust thr official line from government? You must be joking.
From the very first time I saw a drone, I thought, ‘What a simple way to deliver either good or bad packages.’ What dumbfounded me was how you could buy these things without many restrictions. Today, drones pose the biggest threat to our freedom as they can deliver ordinances virtually anywhere and anytime. Countermeasures must be developed and kept ahead of drone improvement if we are to stand any chance of controlling this blight.
I will say it again. Ban them from civilian use. Any found in possession? Treat them as terrorists. Problem solved.
The number of people who have malicious intent is minimal. There are a lot of people who enjoy the hobby of responsibly using pilot IDs or having them for commercial use. People who want to recklessly wield the ban hammer because they disagree need their heads checked and need to stop licking government boot.
There’s a reason why restricted airspace maps are available to the public.
Terrorists etc use mobile phones. Ban them too? What sort of state do you want to live in?
People keep suggesting “shoot them down”. Shooting them down in a time of war is one thing, shooting them down when we’re not engaged in active hostilities with the risk of debris landing on British Civilians and their homes causing damage and possibly deaths is simply a non-starter. The cure would be worse than the disease and simply give “ammo” to the disarmament lobby who would argue with no US Bases, indeed no bases of our own we wouldn’t be a target in the first place. Sometimes it pays to think more than one move ahead.
Yes, they’re more jammed down than shot down I believe.
A witness has stated she saw one “shot down” near Mildenhall.
The RAF Regiments 2 C UAS Wing have kit for this.
Just because our leaders look like imbeciles and talk like imbeciles, don’t let that fool you ! they really are imbeciles.
😉❤️✌️
Why can we not set a drone to catch a drone and just carefully follow the intruder back to its homebase
How about introducing a law requiring all to be fitted with transponders with some kind of linked GPS device into all civilian drones? If they go near restricted spaces they can be detected and the GPS will shut them down automatically. Anything with these systems overridden or not fitted will be fair game to any “defenders”, the automatic assumption that they are not “innocent or friendly” and the owners who could likely be detected via GPS history prosecuted / banned from owning them?