UAVs to Replace Police Helicopters?

[ORAC]

From POLITICO.....

Also on Priti’s radar … is this announcement (https://www.npas.police.uk/news/national-police-air-service-assess-uav-technology-national-future-fleet) slipped out last night revealing ministers are considering using drones to replace police helicopters in England and Wales. Early trials of the Israeli Elbit Hermes 900 drone have been a success and the Home Office is determining whether police should be able to use them in the skies instead of choppers. One to ask the home secretary this morning....

[Rigga]

Anyone not expecting this is a bit deluded to be honest...

[TCAS FAN]

With the aircraft manufacturer, Elbit Industries, having also apparently solved the Holy Grail of UAS operations in Class G airspace, a "detect and avoid" capability, the flood gates could finally be opened for general use of UAS.

[RMK]

Must agree with Riga above. In general, if the helicopter flight does not reed/require the pilot/crew then that type of flying will be UAV in the future.

Example: looking at a pipeline – UAV; actually fixing the pipeline – helicopter.

Regarding police units; how often do police pilots land their helicopter and get out and do “police stuff”. I think the answer results in increased UAV police flying in the future. An EC145 is an expensive way to just to have a look.

[ApolloHeli]

I wonder how they'll deal with separation if a particular tasking requires the drone to be flown inside a CTR...

[OldLurker]

I don't think they can mount a gun or a Taser on the Elbit Hermes 900, but no doubt the Reaper is under consideration.

[OldLurker]

Regarding police units; how often do police pilots land their helicopter and get out and do “police stuff”.Never - or hardly ever - in the UK anyway. The pilots are civilians but the police crew are Tactical Flight Officers, qualified cops who know what the cops on the ground are doing and why, so as to help and guide them. Agreed that a UAV can do the observing equally well so long as it has the horses to carry the necessary equipment - high-power light, steerable camera and so on - but it'd surely need to be able to hover over a crime scene, so I don't see why they're using the Elbit Hermes 900 in this role, unless orbiting is good enough

[Evil Twin]

An EC145 is an expensive way to just to have a look.

Exactly! Don't get me wrong twins are great but it's bloody hard to get past the capability and versatility of a B3 squirrel (of which you could fund at least a couple for the price of a 145). We may well have priced ourselves out of the market sadly.

[Ascend Charlie]

In 6 years of police flying, I landed the chopper once to grab some juvenile escapees from a prison farm, who had stolen an RX-7 and had ended up in a semi-rural dead end street. Landed on the street to block their exit, the observer (who was a real cop) detained them until ground support arrived to do the actual arrest.

[TCAS FAN]

The reason for a certified "detect and avoid" system is that the UAS can detect and avoid conflicting traffic/bird concentrations/parachutists/ para gliders etc, just as if it was being navigated visually. If it can do that in Class G airspace, Class D presents no problem for UAS to be operated in accordance with VFR, albeit it will be able to do it more efficiently than the MK1 eyeball of a manned aircraft pilot. The UAS is controlled by a Remote Pilot who communicates with ATC on the appropriate RTF frequency to obtain CAS entry clearance.

[[email protected]]

So, all they will need to do is have not quite enough UAVs in not quite the required locations with not quite the needed response time and they will have replaced NPAS completely:E

[OldLurker]

An EC145 is an expensive way to just to have a look.Exactly! Don't get me wrong twins are great but it's bloody hard to get past the capability and versatility of a B3 squirrel (of which you could fund at least a couple for the price of a 145). We may well have priced ourselves out of the market sadly.Police helicopters often need to hover at low level over populated areas. In many countries twin engines are required for that category of operation.
By the way, police nowadays tend to use the H145 with fenestron.

[Bell_ringer]

Hopefully they are cheaper than the military variants which seem to be in the region of $42M each.
Suddenly an H145 seems like a real bargain.

[Sloppy Link]

Police helicopters often need to hover at low level over populated areas. In many countries twin engines are required for that category of operation.
By the way, police nowadays tend to use the H145 with fenestron.
Not in UK they don’t. Mainly EC135P/T2+ and some BK-117 C2

[hoistop]

This has been debated over and over. Go see NPAS forums etc.
On first glance, it might look tremendously cheaper than "real" chopper. But, please, has someone made a realistic calculation of the cost and compare it with the capability of such UAS system? There still needs to be quite a number of people on the ground, to operate and maintain it, there are operational limitations (can someone explain further how to operate in controlled airspace which is plenty in UK?) I seriously doubt this (or any comparable) UAS will last thousands and thousands of hours, so please include realistic lifespan in calculation too.
Am sure UAS will come in bigger numbers (Canada RCMP "mounties" operate by far the largest police UAS fleet, not to mention Turkish police, that runs serious UAS outfits, albeit in a way that might not work in EU airspace/legislative standards...) but are not (yet) a direct replacement for manned police aircraft.

[sandiego89]

Another "benefit" of a UAV, is that the politicians can't use it as a taxi. Some years ago I knew some folks at the police aviation unit for a major US city that were well overdue for helo upgrade, but they deliberately stuck with their clapped out twin seater, because they knew that if they upgraded to a nice multi seat turbine, the Mayor would summon it as their personal taxi to jaunt off to the capital.

[helisdw]

A cautionary tale about mixing airborne law enforcement resources:

UAV / Helicopter Midair Collision (https://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/2/cadors-screaq/rd.aspx?cno%3d%26dtef%3d%26dtet%3d2020-09-15%26otp%3d-1%26ftop%3d%253e%253d%26ftno%3d0%26ijop%3d%253e%253d%26ijno% 3d0%26olc%3d%26prv%3dBC%26rgn%3d-1%26tsbno%3d%26tsbi%3d-1%26arno%3d%26ocatno%3d%26ocatop%3d1%26oevtno%3d%26oevtop%3d 1%26evtacoc%3d3%26fltno%3d%26fltr%3d-1%26cars%3d-1%26acat%3d2%26nar%3d%26aiddl%3d-1%26aidxt%3d%26optdl%3d-1%26optcomt%3d%26optseq%3d%26optxt%3d%26opdlxt%3dResults%2bw ill%2bappear%2bin%2bthis%2blist%26mkdl%3d-1%26mkxt%3d%26mdldl%3d-1%26mdlxt%3d%26cmkdl%3dC%26cmkxt%3d%26rt%3dQR%26hypl%3dy%26c num%3d2020P0775)

[TCAS FAN]

A cautionary tale about mixing airborne law enforcement resources:

UAV / Helicopter Midair Collision (https://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/2/cadors-screaq/rd.aspx?cno%3d%26dtef%3d%26dtet%3d2020-09-15%26otp%3d-1%26ftop%3d%253e%253d%26ftno%3d0%26ijop%3d%253e%253d%26ijno% 3d0%26olc%3d%26prv%3dBC%26rgn%3d-1%26tsbno%3d%26tsbi%3d-1%26arno%3d%26ocatno%3d%26ocatop%3d1%26oevtno%3d%26oevtop%3d 1%26evtacoc%3d3%26fltno%3d%26fltr%3d-1%26cars%3d-1%26acat%3d2%26nar%3d%26aiddl%3d-1%26aidxt%3d%26optdl%3d-1%26optcomt%3d%26optseq%3d%26optxt%3d%26opdlxt%3dResults%2bw ill%2bappear%2bin%2bthis%2blist%26mkdl%3d-1%26mkxt%3d%26mdldl%3d-1%26mdlxt%3d%26cmkdl%3dC%26cmkxt%3d%26rt%3dQR%26hypl%3dy%26c num%3d2020P0775)

The subject report refers to a 2.4 KG RPAS (drone), something akin to what you'd buy online or at Curry PC World. It bears no relationship to the Hermes 900 that is referred to in this thread.

As I have already stated the current Holy Grail is a "detect and avoid" system which enables the UAS (or RPAS as it may referred to, "UAV" is an obsolete term) to detect a confliction and then avoids it. Note the UAS takes the avoiding action to resolve the confliction.

There is no way that a 2.4 KG RPAS is equipped with anything resembling a detect and avoid system. It relies on the Remote Pilot to keep it within visual line of sight (VLOS) so that traffic conflictions can be resolved.

[helisdw]

The subject report refers to a 2.4 KG RPAS (drone), something akin to what you'd buy online or at Curry PC World. It bears no relationship to the Hermes 900 that is referred to in this thread.

As I have already stated the current Holy Grail is a "detect and avoid" system which enables the UAS (or RPAS as it may referred to, "UAV" is an obsolete term) to detect a confliction and then avoids it. Note the UAS takes the avoiding action to resolve the confliction.

There is no way that a 2.4 KG RPAS is equipped with anything resembling a detect and avoid system. It relies on the Remote Pilot to keep it within visual line of sight (VLOS) so that traffic conflictions can be resolved.

Taking your argument to it’s logical conclusion, then this report is equally not applicable as it involved a single engine AS350 / H125 / Squirrel / Ecureuil / AStar (delete obsolete term as appropriate) and not a helicopter type representative of current UK police aviation services.

My only intention of highlighting the Canadian accident was the mixing of technologies, both novel and established - nothing more, nothing less.

If the UAS / RPAS that are used in the UK are sufficiently advanced that midair collisions are guaranteed to be avoided then this is certainly reassuring and a development that is to be applauded.

[[email protected]]

With the aircraft manufacturer, Elbit Industries, having also apparently solved the Holy Grail of UAS operations in Class G airspace, a "detect and avoid" capability If that were the case one might expect it to be trumpeted on their website somewhere. I can't find it - is it like a certain PM's 'moonshot' ?

Would be interesting to see the public's reaction to constant surveillance by drones - sorry UAS - it's one thing having a copper looking into your back garden but quite another to have an anonymous sensor with data going to who knows where overhead so much of the time. That is what the LE stands for in MALE isn't it? Long Endurance?

[TCAS FAN]

If the UAS / RPAS that are used in the UK are sufficiently advanced that midair collisions are guaranteed to be avoided then this is certainly reassuring and a development that is to be applauded.

Current UK CAA policy is that UAS/RPAS up to 20 KG (referred to as Small Unmanned Aircraft) can only be flown VLOS (from the Remote Pilot) and up to 400 FT AGL unless specific permission is granted otherwise by CAA. If it is intended to be flown Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) it must either be equipped with a certified detect and avoid system (which currently there are none) or it has to operate within segregated or controlled airspace (Class A-D) whereby there is a known traffic environment and ATC can apply separaration.

While a detect and avoid system may never be available for SUA it is beginning to appear on larger UAS, as with the Elbit 900 Hermes, albeit the one demonstrated in Wales had only ADS-B and a SSR transponder. Elbit do advertise a detect and avoid system on their website, if they can get it certified, as mentioned in a previous post, the flood gates will open for commercial/law enforcement and other operation of UAS in UK.

The recent demonstration of Hermes 900 in the UK was accordingly currently only possible in segregated airspace (most established temporarily to accomodate it) and controlled airspace (Class A), the latter being necessary to accomodate a transit to an offshore search area south of Ireland.

[Sky Sports]

On first glance, it might look tremendously cheaper than "real" chopper.

And thats all the bean counters and decision makers need to know!!!

[TCAS FAN]

If that were the case one might expect it to be trumpeted on their website somewhere. I can't find it

Try this
https://elbitsystems.com/landing/starliner/

[[email protected]]

Thanks TCASfan - I looked all through the PR stuff but didn't check the Hermes Starliner. They say they have a detect and avoid system so why wasn't that demonstrated in UK?

[TCAS FAN]

Thanks TCASfan - I looked all through the PR stuff but didn't check the Hermes Starliner. They say they have a detect and avoid system so why wasn't that demonstrated in UK?

The need was to demonstrate the capability of Hermes 900, they did not bring over the Starliner. I suspect that the budget did not stretch to securring certification and/or more especially that the time scale required to acheive it was not realistic.

[Maoraigh1]

Following a missing person report, a Police Scotland van parked and a guy operated a small drone to search cliffs and bushes along several miles of coast near my home. Several days were spent on this. Not cheap, and without that unit nothing would have been done after the initial helicopter and RNLI search, lasting a few hours.
PS The body was washed up miles away some time later.

[nomorehelosforme]

More gov.uk information regarding similar trials

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/innovation-call-for-urban-drone-technology
Innovation call for urban drone technologyThe Ministry of Defence is seeking new ways to assist military drone operators in urban environments in a new funding competition.

Published 15 September 2020From:Defence and Security Accelerator (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/defence-and-security-accelerator), Ministry of Defence (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-defence), Defence Equipment and Support (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/defence-equipment-and-support), and Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/defence-science-and-technology-laboratory)https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/image_data/file/104898/s300_20200915-UAS_Urban_Drones_GOVUK.jpg The Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) and Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) are seeking innovative and novel solutions to assist military drone operators to improve usability in challenging and complex urban operations.

This cross-departmental requirement between DASA and DE&S is designed for the rapid exploitation of technology and is the first of its kind.

Up to £900,000 is available for successful proposals that can help the Ministry of Defence overcome three challenges.

The first challenge is the development of an optimised Unmanned Air System suitable for use in urban environments.

The second challenge is to develop a human-controlled lethal payload that could integrate with a platform outlined in the first challenge.

The third challenge is to demonstrate a full Unmanned Air System with an integrated payload, bringing together the separate elements of challenges 1 and 2.

We are looking for ideas that reduce the mental strain on operators and to improve performance – but solutions must ensure that they remain under full human control at all times.

It is envisaged that these innovations could in future contribute to a new capability that can remove service personnel and military dogs from complex and dangerous urban warfare situations where their lives are put at significant risk.

This competition will be run using a framework agreement. To be considered for inclusion on the framework, suppliers must first complete the compulsory Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ) and Cyber Risk Assessment, by Thursday 15 October at midday BST.

Full details can be found in the competition document (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unmanned-air-systems-in-urban-environments-pre-qualification).

[EEngr]

The first challenge is the development of an optimised Unmanned Air System suitable for use in urban environments.

The second challenge is to develop a human-controlled lethal payload that could integrate with a platform outlined in the first challenge.



I certainly hope this has drifted away from the original topic of police helicopters. Or I'm going to have to be extra careful about the parking restrictions downtown.:eek:

[msbbarratt]

While a detect and avoid system may never be available for SUA it is beginning to appear on larger UAS, as with the Elbit 900 Hermes, albeit the one demonstrated in Wales had only ADS-B and a SSR transponder. Elbit do advertise a detect and avoid system on their website, if they can get it certified, as mentioned in a previous post, the flood gates will open for commercial/law enforcement and other operation of UAS in UK.

If the basis of the detect and avoid tech is going to include ADS-B, isn’t that just going to give the more dedicated criminals an advantage? For a start it’s surpassingly easy to hop onto Flight Radar 24 (or whatever) and see where it is. But it would also be very easy for a more professional criminal to have an ADS-B receiver, to get an instant warning of the presence of a police UAV free of any internet delays (and no internet trace either). Such a thing is well within the scope of the technical ability of organised crime gangs.

If that became a regular problem they might try using a random ADS-B id. But that mustn’t match another aircraft’s number and it would be trivial to spot new ADS-B ids in comparison with the entries in public databases.

Basically it’d be a tech arms race between cops and robbers, but the advantage would always be with the robbers. The UAV cameras wouldn’t ever find a single professional criminal because they’d be able to know it was coming into their area long before it could see them.

I don’t know if police helicopters emit ADS-B, but they’d probably have the option of switching it off if this ever became an issue.

What I fear may happen is that the lure of cost savings will override any concerns like this, and in years to come we’ll start seeing parliamentary reports about the ineffectiveness of police airborne operations against organised crime, drugs smuggling, etc.

[[email protected]]

Just like NPAS was all about cost-saving and not operational quality

[TCAS FAN]

If the basis of the detect and avoid tech is going to include ADS-B, isn’t that just going to give the more dedicated criminals an advantage? For a start it’s surpassingly easy to hop onto Flight Radar 24 (or whatever) and see where it is. But it would also be very easy for a more professional criminal to have an ADS-B receiver, to get an instant warning of the presence of a police UAV free of any internet delays (and no internet trace either). Such a thing is well within the scope of the technical ability of organised crime gangs.

If that became a regular problem they might try using a random ADS-B id. But that mustn’t match another aircraft’s number and it would be trivial to spot new ADS-B ids in comparison with the entries in public databases.

Basically it’d be a tech arms race between cops and robbers, but the advantage would always be with the robbers. The UAV cameras wouldn’t ever find a single professional criminal because they’d be able to know it was coming into their area long before it could see them.

I don’t know if police helicopters emit ADS-B, but they’d probably have the option of switching it off if this ever became an issue.


ADS-B was used in the recent trial but is not part of the detect and avoid system that requires certification. In the operational environment ADS-B could be disabled. Operation within CAS can be acheived by use of the onboard Mode S SSR.

The Starliner variant of Hermes 900 is the model aimed at operation in Class G airspace. Using the link I provided on post 23 compare pictures of the Starliner and other Hermes 900 variants. The piggy backed radome houses a radar based detect and avoid system which is what requires certification, completely independant of other EC devices.

For the benefit of thread readers, please do not confuse current SUA (drones) used by emergency services with the Hermes 900. The current SUA/drones are not in the same league when it comes to search and detection capabilities, quite apart from the fact that Hermes900 has around 30 hours flight endurance if fully fuelled, not the endurance of minutes as is currently the case with SUA/drones.

[4468]

It was, and generally still is the case that a fixed wing police resource can ‘cover’ about 3/4 of tasks (some less well) at about 1/2 the cost of a rotary wing. Commentary of ground pursuits being one particular challenge associated with a platform that is unable to hover, requiring considerable mental gymnastics from a commentator constantly in motion over the ground. Of course the majority of police assets are twins, which gives them flexibility over altitude. (As well as increased safety in the eyes of the public) Make them a single engined drone, and the required altitude increases. Not good when suspects are running/driving between or into buildings, that then require containment pending arrival of ground resources.

if the Elbit was going to be cheaper than a helicopter, then accountants would overlook it’s inferior prospects for effective policing. Make it the same price, or more expensive than a helicopter, and I have to ask, what’s the attraction?

The technology for military drones is not the same as that required for policing. It will be some time yet before drones can effectively replace helicopters. Remember also, in this country we police by consent. Tell the residents of Manchester or Liverpool, the police are using the same drone used by the Israelis over Gaza, and you may see a breakdown in that consent?

Of course the Home Office proves day in, day out, they have no understanding whatsoever of effective police air support. So who knows?

[PANews]

The Elbit is clearly going to be cheaper in terms of a DOC.... it only has one engine. But one engine is deemed not to be enough when operating over people in a town or city.

What the Elbit (Watchkeeper) also does not have is 'sense and avoid'.... just how long have we been promised that and waited for it? BAE used to have the Jetstream they were trialling sense and avoid in.... when did they announce complete success? They did not.

It, an unmanned system with sense and avoid, will come in time but I bet your retirement will come a darn sight quicker.

Operating a light quad drone over a city is one thing but the Elbit is a big lump and no risk averse politician or Chief Constable is going to put a single engine flying brick over a city when the pilot has a field of view that is akin to a toilet tube. So what happens when the engine fails? Any volunteers to land a ton of metal in Hyde Park on a sunny day [and not kill someone] or better still try it at night guided by a GPS reference and that toilet tube view. Nightmare on.

In the meantime, perhaps, the Elbit will work fine over the North Sea [English Channel] , the Scottish Highlands and Dartmoor but unfortunately there is little or no crime there to make such a massive investment worthwhile. After all Police Scotland baulked at the idea of buying into a far cheaper and more flexible manned fixed wing to cover the northern areas just a handful of years ago.

The NPAS role is not to fly over water. Current activity flying drones and fixed wing (including Watchkeeper) in support of the MCA effort to halt migrant boat arrivals is a necessary step in the development of drones over cities but do not get to thinking this is going to happen before 2030. At the moment the powers that be cannot even get the Emergency Services Network (ESN) a 'simple' radio system to work on time let alone stuff that flies!

[TCAS FAN]

The Elbit is clearly going to be cheaper in terms of a DOC.... it only has one engine. But one engine is deemed not to be enough when operating over people in a town or city.

What the Elbit (Watchkeeper) also does not have is 'sense and avoid'.... just how long have we been promised that and waited for it? BAE used to have the Jetstream they were trialling sense and avoid in.... when did they announce complete success? They did not.
............
The NPAS role is not to fly over water. Current activity flying drones and fixed wing (including Watchkeeper) in support of the MCA effort to halt migrant boat arrivals is a necessary step in the development of drones over cities but do not get to thinking this is going to happen before 2030. At the moment the powers that be cannot even get the Emergency Services Network (ESN) a 'simple' radio system to work on time let alone stuff that flies!

We are not talking about Watchkeeper (nee Elbit Hermes 450) this again is a differant UAS, that requires considerably more ground support than Hermes 900. You can look at Hermes 900 as son of Hermes 450/Watchkeeper - it does may things that its father cannot, requiring minimal ground equipment including not requiring arrestor cables, Hermes 900 has brakes and can be taxied similar to a manned aircraft.

[[email protected]]

Hermes 900 has brakes and can be taxied similar to a manned aircraft. that'll help the night emergency landing in the middle of London..................................................

[Bell_ringer]

that'll help the night emergency landing in the middle of London..................................................

Don’t panic, for another $30M per unit, they will add another engine :E

[Tashengurt]

I can't see the Hermes being good for anything other than open area searches or perhaps pre planned events like protests.
For your bulk standard 'intruders on' shout at 2am a smaller officer deployed drone makes more sense.
The main barrier to effective use of air support now is lack of ground units to contain areas prior to their arrival and during the search.

[PANews]

I reckon that for the Elbit PR Department this has been a very good day at the office.If nothing else this press release by NPAS and Elbit have caught the imagination of the media. The story, in many variations, has been in a very wide range of publications. Most write up the story as if it’s a done deal and due for introduction in a month or so and a site called PoliticsHome say that ‘Plans by the National Police Air Service (NPAS) to use Israeli military-grade drones to replace helicopters and aeroplanes have raised concerns among privacy campaigners.’ Then they contrast the mission profile of a DJI Mavic 2 with its 29 minute battery life and need to be in sight of the operator with the Hermes 900 that can fly for up to 36 hours at altitudes of 30,000 feet. Not quite the same mission profile or indeed a related threat to privacy! If the protest industry gets their hackles up this could be like a good meal with many repeats!

For Elbit I reckon they have got their name up in lights across a large swathe of the media for very little cost.

[TCAS FAN]

I reckon that for the Elbit PR Department this has been a very good day at the office.If nothing else this press release by NPAS and Elbit have caught the imagination of the media. The story, in many variations, has been in a very wide range of publications. Most write up the story as if it’s a done deal and due for introduction in a month or so and a site called PoliticsHome say that ‘Plans by the National Police Air Service (NPAS) to use Israeli military-grade drones to replace helicopters and aeroplanes have raised concerns among privacy campaigners.’ Then they contrast the mission profile of a DJI Mavic 2 with its 29 minute battery life and need to be in sight of the operator with the Hermes 900 that can fly for up to 36 hours at altitudes of 30,000 feet. Not quite the same mission profile or indeed a related threat to privacy! If the protest industry gets their hackles up this could be like a good meal with many repeats!

For Elbit I reckon they have got their name up in lights across a large swathe of the media for very little cost.

Agree with the sentiment. Elbit actually invested a considerable amount in making this happen, transporting the Hermes 900 from Israel to West Wales Airport and back together with its GCS and other support equipment needed quite a number of shipping containers. Added to that was the cost of securring CAA approval for Hermes 900 to fly in UK airspace and setting up the demonstration missions, UK consultants don't come cheap!

This could be a significant step towards routine operation of UAS (rather than toy drones) in UK airspace, just the detect and avoid system to certify.

[cattletruck]

I recall the words spoken to me by a former criminal investigator who changed career after giving up because of the frustrations of the job. Company X would sell them the latest and greatest in intercepting radio calls from targeted criminal activities. In order for company X to maximise its profits they would then sell the criminals a new bit of kit to defeat the previous system. And on it went.

Why are UAVs any different.

[Fortyodd2]

Spending 36 hours at 30,000 feet is all very clever but of no use whatsoever when the cloud base is at 1500 feet. Doesn't matter how good a Thermal imaging camera you fit, it can't see through cloud.
Before spending millions on high-tec gadgets, what's needed first is a machine that can give clear skies over the UK 100% of the time - then, you might be on to something.

[[email protected]]

This could be a significant step towards routine operation of UAS (rather than toy drones) in UK airspace, just the detect and avoid system to certify. you sound like the PM talking about track and trace or Covid testing................operation moonshot anyone?:E