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
Agree. Zap the buggers! On the surveillance side we are assuming and hoping that there’s already sufficient radar and satellite coverage everywhere with backup and overlap. Of course you can’t have GBAD under every tree but how about something a bit more substantial and deployable to cover key sites, bases and ports when needed and obvious benefits of shared inventories between the forces? Enhance the AAW of the T31s or buy a few more to complement the T45s. Countries in Europe seem to be taking more action on their GBAD more urgently than the UK. If you’re relying on your ships and planes to defend your airspace and their bases themselves are not defended how absolutely stupid is that?!
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?
When one drops a nasty on a football crowd? People like you will shot for bans. You cannot compare a phone to a drone can you? Rather laughable.
Well you can considering phones are the go technology for setting bombs off and other terrorist led activities. Indeed much of the wireless capabilities overlap. So maybe we should just ban gps. Such things simply are not practical in a modern society. Drones are becoming integral to modern life to ban them for anyone other than official bodies would have very serious implications for the economy certainly over the next 20 years or so. Imaging the UK banning iPhones 20 years ago when everyone said you don’t need a fully interactive communication device because Blackberries did everything you needed, because they did and where are those people today.
Well said. Sadly, our government has been very happy to ban things without any discourse, and when that happens, idiots leap on stuff they don’t like and start demanding bans. It’s easy to ban instead of thinking of a solution.
A package to set off has to be placed, by a human. That means risk, to the placer or the package being discovered. So thats a riskier strategy. Very few Provo types of package placements are used nowadays as coverage by CCTV is fairly blanket on targets. A drone is the exact opposite, it can be launched from a distance and at very short notice and risk of detection, it also is more flexible than a placed device. So if a person wants to inflict harm? Drones are the easier option. Also do not forget the harmful agent does not have to be just explosive in nature. Liquid and airborne substances of harm are another option for a crowded target. Fairly simple concept to understand. Still, sometimes sadly it takes human suffering to actually happen before some people wake up eh?
I waiting for John to claim to ban knifes.
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.
That’s interesting as I was about to comment that there was an article a few days back about the state of the art equipment the RAF are employing around these bases that can detect, jam bring down, take control of and/or return them to their precise point of origin. The same day that further drone incursions were taking place at that very airbase. It would certainly be interesting to know if any success in intercepting these drones has actually taken place. Surely the Americans would be bringing in their own kit by now indeed if red tape isn’t obstructing that.
The bigger picture which deeply concerns me is that publicly available drones have been available for most of this century and certainly for 15 years yet there still seems to be a considerable technological weakness in being able to handle even pretty basic drone incursions of this nature despite various companies and forces boasting of their capabilities to do so. Surely defence companies and Govts should have been seriously investing in such capabilities over that period, if so the apparent lack of proven success appears concerning, if not then how short sighted do you have to have been not to have done so.
The other more off the wall thought is that at least some of these reports might not have a logical explanation. When a US surveillance drone (amongst other examples) clearly detects and follows via camera a metallic sphere that has no earthly explanation though does arguably adheres to concepts that has some foundation in science just not our science level, one does at least have to open one’s mind a little to other possibilities.
Those possibilities are:
Black program, so one of “ours” There are plenty out there.
An earth lights/earth energy phenomenon of some kind.
ET.
I’m a believer of all three, having studied the subject for 34 years. Not off the wall to me at all, and I enjoy when people debunk people who comment on the subject, it just reinforces their ignorance .
Fear of ridicule, fear of what is not understood, and conventional wisdom of what is the accepted scientific norm used to hold the subject back.
Not so much now.
Erm…
I try to keep an open mind on this sort of thing, but any reasonable discussion about UAPs usually ends up getting hijacked by sensationalist social media types looking to make a quick buck. Makes it difficult to tell revolutionary truth from made up fiction.
My personal leaning is towards the black program end, if only in wishful thinking that we have some really cool kit cooking up!
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
Good question, there are certainly anti drones drones developed and available out there but obviously not usable in this sort of scenario but less aggressively ballistic types focused on spotting and following even interfering with them if close seem very much much a rarity. I presume an active airbase isn’t the ideal spot for flying your own drones but still there is massive areas in and around them where they would be safe to operate one presumes. Could operate like a flying guard dog or Spot the robot dog.
And indeed as the zapper to block mobile phones has long existed but illegal in this country why can’t some form of that be utilised in these drones as Mr Greenhorn suggests.
This has occurred to me me before as well.
Seems so simple. If these are Russian, Chinese, cranks, they will have to come back down somewhere, their range must be limited.
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?
Surely the gov already know where these drones are from so less chatter and more action is needed. Just look at Ukraine and the situation there now in.
Interesting just watched a YouTube video from a guy I follow who was at Mildenhall Thursday and Friday nights and recorded some ‘events’ and also spoke to locals and journalists who were there. On Friday he saw an obvious drone over the base and was indeed able to follow it towards its likely control point at which point the light immediately went out. Suggests that it is possible to follow and locate some of these drones though he witnessed no effort of military personnel or police to do so. On the previous night Thursday he saw various activity planes included, however one of which did not to him look like a drone. A few he saw could have been reflective effects from the Sun on satellite solar panels which apparently you get as light turns to dark, he’s quite expert on satellites. However there was one incident which could not have been that in his opinion due to its inconsistent movement and neither did it look like a drone to him (it was very windy and not good drone conditions) it was appearing and disappearing over a period of time. It appeared similar in his view to the spherical objects that seem to be appearing all around the world these days like the one I mentioned on another thread earlier that was caught on camera by a US surveillance drone in Iraq a few years back. All speculative of course but an interesting account of a couple nights watch nonetheless.
The prison service has no fly zones on all its jails for drones, and on a number of CAT A and B jails full anti drone capabilities using ECM! Surely this is an obvious initial solution for most military sites, if not already in use?
A very good point. 🤔
Maybe once a morning the army could task a suitably Red faced “shouty” Colour Sergeant and order him to visit the Chief Secretary of the Treasure, get in his face and yell “STILL NO GROUND BASED AIR DEFENCE YOU F****** MUPPET!”.
I’m a great proponent of improving communications between departments.
😆