Airports too?
Will/is there be similar legislation for civilian airports too? The mess at Gatwick a few years ago was pretty disruptive...
British military to get legal OK to swat drones near bases
Britain's defense personnel will be given the authority to neutralize drones threatening military bases under measures being introduced in the Armed Forces Bill, currently making its way through Parliament. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) claims that reported sightings of unmanned aerial intruders near sensitive UK military …
-
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 10:05 GMT breakfast
Re: Airports too?
The really intriguing thing about the situation at Gatwick is that no subsequent investigation has found any compelling evidence that there were any drones involved. There were reports but no actual proof, which is wild for 2018 when most people had smartphones with cameras in them.
Per Wikipedia: "The investigation was closed on 27 September 2019, citing lack of new information. No culprit or evidence of drone use was found. There are no known photographs or videos of the drone, and authorities have no official description of the drone."
-
-
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 10:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
Now make it legal for drones
to be swatted when they hover outside bedroom windows especially if the occupants of those bedrooms are children or women.
There are a bunch of [redacted] squatting in a property near me who fly their drones every day. There has been a significant rise in B&E since they moved in. Drones are perfect for casing targets. Capturing women in their bedrooms in states of undress is an unwelcome bonus. The Police? Are nowhere to be seen.
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 12:27 GMT Blazde
Re: Now make it legal for drones
If only there were some kind of concealment device one could use to cover windows from the inside while in a state of undress. It wouldn't need to be very complicated or expensive. A piece of sufficiently thick fabric for instance, and a simple-ish mechanism for attaching it above windows so it could hang down yet also be removed or re-deployed with relative ease.
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 10:36 GMT andy the pessimist
be careful what you wish for
A squaddie sees a drone flying over the airbase. Gets the rifle out.....ordered to use the top secret anti drone tech.
The drone is flying over the hangars.....no don't shoot you'll damage the only f35 we've got.
The drone is flying over a bunker...no don't shoot you'll blow up the bombs.
Ok sir when can i shoot?
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 10:53 GMT parlei
Re: be careful what you wish for
One of the problems is that what goes up must come down.
As we have seen in Ukraine it is possible to hit small, nearby and slow drones with normal military rifles, in particular of some sort of round with multiple projectiles is used (like a shotgun shell, but for rifles). But in a closely populated area and no shooting war going on this might be frowned upon.
-
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 14:15 GMT ChrisC
Re: be careful what you wish for
If your weapons storage bunkers are sufficiently poorly constructed that there's a risk of setting off the stuff stored within by opening fire with small arms, then you've got *much* bigger problems than having an unauthorised drone buzzing around your airbase...
Similar for the "hangars", which on most bases (especially those out of which high value airframes such as F-35 would be operating) are more likely to be hardened shelters (HAS) as opposed to the more flimsy hangers you might be thinking of, suitable (mostly) for sheltering aircraft from the elements, and also from the prying eyes of satellites/recon aircraft, but really not designed to offer much if any level of protection against anything else.
-
-
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 11:51 GMT Graham Cobb
Anything threatening national defence should be dealt with
swiftlyproportionately.In particular, collateral damage must always be considered. And anything involving any possible risks to public would have to be completely illegal unless a shooting war was currently underway and even then require a clear order from a senior commander who would need to be held personally responsible for damage or injury to non-combatants.
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 12:38 GMT Blazde
It was widely reported that new-fangled jammers were deployed to Gatwick/other airports when there were drone sightings a few years back so presumably there are some powers, but perhaps MoD need to phone the police when it happens near a military base?
It's right that military powers on home turf are scrutinised quite carefully because 'anything threatening national defence should be dealt with swiftly' is an argument not too many steps removed from soldiers gunning down CND protesters getting in the way of a lorry full of rations trying to enter an RAF base or whathaveyou.
-
Wednesday 4th February 2026 10:52 GMT Johnb89
A drone isn't so different from a plane
I'm not sure why powers that allow MoD staff to deal with a rogue plane or helicopter can't be applied to drones, such that new powers/law is required. Or was the old law so badly written?
Obviously shooting things down / blowing things up over nearby residential areas should be avoided, but that's HOW you do it, not IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT to do it.
-
Friday 6th February 2026 19:19 GMT Blazde
Re: A drone isn't so different from a plane
It's difficult to find a good analysis but at the least they're subject to normal civilian criminal law. So the shooting down of something in self defence (or defence of others) with necessary and proportionate force would be allowed. Even when not in a war-zone, if a rogue unidentified helicopter gunship is unleashing all hell on you then it would seem proportionate to go ahead and blow it out of the sky if you happen to be on an RAF base with the capabilities to do so.
It gets sightly murkier where protecting property is concerned because, I believe, that's outside primary legislation detail and instead relies on a mix of internal MoD rules and international/NATO law. Interesting reading here: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/42315/documents/210416/default/
Where there's just a loitering drone suspected of collecting intelligence - a 'Hostile act not constituting an actual attack', the response should be informed by local rule of engagement but also intelligence on the person(s) controlling the drones and the threat they pose, and that might be very difficult to judge when an unidentified drone shows up out of the blue in the British countryside near a base. Is it a kid flying a toy drone badly, is it a protest group looking to give a red tinge to the engine of a cargo plane, or is it about to put a large explodey hole in an F35 parked out in the open?
What they don't have are normal police powers, including the new-ish powers to seize (but not destroy) drones given in the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021. In particular when flying in restricted zones, which already includes all airbases (and probably other military bases?), since that's a criminal offence whatever the intent of the drone flyer. That seems an oversight to me.
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 20:57 GMT Boris the Cockroach
Re: The Jet-Propelled Guided NAAFI flies again
They got nothing on civil service catering organisation rock cakes. only material hard enough to cut super alloys. used to leave them to soak in the tidal basin for 4 weeks for them to get soft enough to break a piece off.
And then there were the meat pies (we assume it was meat) sold with the slogan "Has the bottom fallen out of your world? then eat a CSCO meat pie and have the world fall out of your bottom"
Icon for those who were stuck with CSCO
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 10:58 GMT Anonymous Coward
FFS! Let the airport security/squaddies have a bit of target practice. So long as they are not firing in the direction of buildings.
One bullet for the brains of the drone, and one bullet for the leg of the flyer (if they can be identified).
Posting anonymously as I have taken out a drone that was flying over my garden (the fact that it was with a catapult and frozen Gooseberry, shows how close it was).
Obviously the perp knew where I lived, but they never came knocking on the door asking for the pieces back.
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 12:54 GMT silver_fox
This is just going to become a new sport
Drone spotted? Squaddie has a loaded rifle? Pop!
Threat neutralised
You can see the whiteboard on the wall of the naafi now showing most drones downed this month.
This alone will keep the "auditors" away purely because they won't be able to afford to keep buying new drones
-
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 14:19 GMT IceC0ld
one would have hoped that the ARMED forces, already HAD the option to take out anything that intruded over / around their bases
and I AM aware that even at Buck House, the only ones carrying weapons and ammo, are the police, as the services are not allowed to carry on the streets
but there has to come a point, where our national security interests are best served by stopping intrusions ASAP
what was the old saying ? better to ask for forgiveness, than to ask for permission :o)
we live in hope that when the inevitable day arrives, that the forces clear it away, clean and fast, and, ideally, no witnesses
as I can only imagine the storm the MSM would create from anything they perceive to be not good
-
Wednesday 4th February 2026 04:39 GMT Bebu sa Ware
Permitting the destruction of "unmanned" drones ?
I can imagine those on the UK government backbenches that normally vacation with the pixies asking "isn't it discriminatory restricting it to unmanned drones ? There could be a woman not in it."†
Presumably if any destructive response is restricted to unmanned (unwomanned etc if you wish) threats then manned etc threats may not destroyed summarily which leaves the question of how to determine whether a vehichle is manned or unmanned.
Ultimately the only reliable determinant is size. If it is below a certain size it must be unmanned.
So the smart option for a hostile party would be to deploy a remotely controlled or autonomous vehicle like a waymo or specially outfitted cessna to deliver their goodies.
The pixielanders might bomb your tanks with donkey dick pink paint.
† Yes I know. L. manus — n(f) hand.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
