Iconic Films
2 for 1 tickets to Casablanca, this coming Monday
Navigation - link to other main sections from here
From The Sunday Times
April 20, 2008
Nicked by PC Drone, robot spy in the sky
Pilotless surveillance aircraft are being trialled across Britain, heralding a new era in the policing of our roads, writes Mark Harris
Speeding tickets from the sky might sound like science fiction, but the robot spy-plane technology that is used in the war on terror in Afghanistan may soon be coming to British roads.
Under a government-funded scheme, a new generation of pilotless drones could be patrolling motorways within the next five years. Although they will initially use cameras to record and monitor accidents and provide traffic-flow data, they have the potential to spot speeding offences and identify reckless or uninsured drivers.
Already dubbed “sky gats” after the Gatso speed camera, the new devices will provide a bird’s-eye view of the road and cover far greater areas than a patrol car. However, some motoring groups have warned that they could result in a reduction in traffic police numbers, and mark a further step towards remote road safety.
The technology behind the drones is based on that of the military unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that have been operating in Iraq and Afghanistan for several years to help identify and target insurgents without risking a pilot’s life. Some military drones are also fitted with missiles, enabling them to engage the enemy.
The drones will be operated by police officers from a control hub, who will be able to monitor images from the aircraft’s cameras and direct surveillance.
In America, the idea of using drones for policing roads is already well advanced. The Houston police department is planning to launch a $1m unmanned spy plane to patrol the freeways of Texas as early as June this year. The Insitu Insight aircraft, which has seen military action in Iraq, will cruise for more than 15 hours at a time, gathering information on drivers with the use of on-board video and infrared cameras.
In Britain the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and several regional development agencies are paying £16m towards a scheme, codenamed Astraea (autonomous systems technology related airborne evaluation and assessment), which is working towards UAVs operating in civilian air space. Astraea predicts that UAVs will be a viable form of traffic control and testing of unmanned prototypes is already well under way over Britain. “Since 2005, we’ve been flying UAVs in areas that are relatively remote,” says Simon Jewell, the group’s chairman.
On paper, the advantages of UAVs, which can take off, fly for miles, take high-resolution pictures and return to base by remote control or in some cases on a preprogrammed route are clear. Planes can be made smaller, faster and cheaper without pilots on board, and cameras are not limited to fixed satellite orbits or CCTV poles.
“Electronic systems don’t get bored,” says Jewell. “Long surveillance missions would be unendurably boring for humans, but UAVs are capable of remaining on station for hours, relaying information in seconds and then potentially being able to do something about it. This endurance would be beneficial for policing.”
However, Jewell says the law is lagging behind the technology, and that in addition to pioneering new technology, Astraea is having to lobby the Civil Aviation Authority for regulatory reform.
“You can’t operate a UAV freely in UK airspace,” he says. “Only if your UAV is very light and flying at very low levels does the Civil Aviation Authority allow a high degree of autonomy. It’s a judgment based simply on safety – if a light, low-flying UAV crashes, it’s less likely to hurt anyone.”
However, he believes it is only a matter of time before the restrictions are lifted and more sophisticated UAVs are given the green light. “There’s an analogy here to the Red Flag Act in the 19th century. It took 30 years for motoring restrictions to get gradually lifted and we’ll go through exactly the same route with UAVs.”
The technology is already on standby. Merseyside police have recently finished a trial of £30,000 Hicam microdrones – remote-control miniature helicopters with still, video or infrared cameras that beam images back to officers on the ground. Police have used the microdrones to track off-road motorbikes in public parks and to plan raids in hard-to-reach locations.
Superintendent Ngaire Waine of Merseyside police says: “Following a prolonged trial of the microdrone, the force has identified both the need and the potential of such a device within operational policing. However, certain technical and operational issues need to be addressed to enhance its use.” A spokeswoman confirmed that the first generation of drones suffered from poor battery life and problems in bad weather.
The race is now on among British companies to build a UAV to rival the American Insitu Insight. Qinetiq, a UK-based aerospace company, has already developed a UAV known as the Zephyr, which last year set a record for the longest UAV flight (54 hours), using solar power alone. BAE Systems has Herti (High endurance rapid technology insertion), a 40ft UAV with a range of more than 600 miles, while Thales offers the £15m Watchkeeper, an all-weather UAV that can operate day or night.
Although all three were designed for military use, their makers are keen to develop them for civilian use too: Qinetiq, BAE Systems and Thales are all partners in Astraea.
Not everyone is backing the moves and the AA remains to be convinced of the merits of flying traffic spies controlled from miles away. “Drones could have a role in managing the knock-on effects of accidents, but the biggest improvement to motorway safety comes from having traffic police on the roads. Any enforcement that is remote loses that effect,” says Paul Watters, its head of public affairs.
It’s fair to say that opponents of surveillance, such as the notorious “Captain Gatso” who claims to have sabotaged dozens of fixed speed cameras, won’t welcome spy planes over Britain’s roads either. However, with drones flying far above the range of baseball bats and homemade bombs any potential “Group Captain Gatso” may have to settle for simply paying his speeding tickets instead.
We've lost the plot here - these nutcases should be firmly reminded that they are public SERVANTS and NOT our lords and masters. It's high time they were put in their place. None of these idiotic ideas actually do any good at all for the vast majority of ordinary decent law-abiding citizens.
Mike, Lancaster, England
This Spy drone project clearly shows that the police are pycotic when it comes to roads. There should be a national debate regarding the amount of camera enforcement in the UK. I don't agree with the police spending out on road enforcement when they claim lack of resources regarding other crimes.
John Doo, Sidcup, England
When you draw up your short-list of emigration destinations, keep in mind that dirt-poor countries can't afford this type of first-world, civil liberty and privacy infringement technology. "The Free World", that really dates me.
Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Japan
There is a word for this kind of technology abuse. It is 'Skynet'.
Sarah Connor, LA, USA
These things may be very useful in war zones, but flying them over our country is not acceptable. When one of these things is smacked into by a civil or military aircraft which then crashes to the ground with likely further loss of life there will be hell to pay. Only fools can approve of this.
Amanda, Carlisle, UK
we already have camera that records where people go in Oxfordshire supposedly used only for future investigations.
It is also a case of bad design or a blatant way of getting more money with speed tickets. The real solution is to cap vehicule speed in the vehicule itself.
loic , oxford, oxfordshire
Equip them with some rockets then hand control over to the "Top Gear Trio" and they could lay waste to the caravans of this country. But in the real world i think we all no they will be using traffic control has a guise for other kinds of snooping.
Clive, Dartford, Kent
Mode S transponders for the open skies project means transferring the skies to the military. Personally this is not something I would allow.
D Stanley, Birmingham, England
Such an awful idea, completely morally wrong..
Refuse/Resist..
Sam, Petersfield, England
There's no end to all this is there ? In years to come it will be realised that Britain being forced to join the EU, and then having to swallow all the latest bright ideas being thought up by that European army of lawmakers was the worst days work in the entire history of Britain.
Added to all that gunge is the home brewed iron hand of law enforcement which would have put smiles from ear to ear on the faces of Hitler and Stalin. Just like the dictators of the Third Reich anf the Soviet Union all this excessive law enforcemnt doesn't apply to them. The big problem for the British people is getting rid of the architects of all this state control of the people.
Hitler was gone after about 15 years, the soviet masterminds went after about 50 years, but the masterminds of Europe are still putting the words together for complete state control ably and eagerly abetted by the most incompetent bunch of socialist ex union, back room political research yakkers, and itinerant money wasters .
Philamine Buquet, Newport, England
Hang on a minute!! We are fighting the war on terror to KEEP our liberty and freedom from the bad guys.
Then the government use a weapon of war on the general public and do the terrorists objective for them by removing our liberty and freedom.
Terrorists or the Government... both want to destroy the people's freedom.
Gatz, LONDON, UK
With the advent of Mode S transponders, the UAV's will be able to avoid each other and manned aircraft better than pilots do already. The technology is there to cram thousands of these in the sky without affecting manned aircraft. It's public perception that needs changing.
It would be more wrong to stop them being used to gather valuable evidence against murderers and rapists than to allow them to be used to catch speeding motorists.
Mark, Blackpool, England
Freedom - bought with blood by the heroic brave , frittered away by the complaint and smug
Gavin, London, UK
How depressing to foresee that my grandchildren will never know what freedom is.
Howard, Manchester,
If cameras were in all corridors of power (no secrets) then most of the nations problems would come into view and be solved or disappear overnight. In most instance the latter would apply.
D Stanley, Birmingham, England
maybe they could be fitted with tasers or used to spray the population with sedative drugs in times of civil unrest.
Or maybe to drop food and medicine into war zones or disaster zones like New Orleans, sorry there i go again being an idealist.
peace and love
stu
stuart alexander, liverpool, uk
Another really bad idea and another example of being dazzled by technology and then looking for a need for it.
A £15m Watchkeeper could provide 500 plods (at £30k) on the beat. That could prevent huge amounts of crime and possibly even detect some as a bonus. These calcs exclude training, maintenance, devaluation etc.
I know beat officers are not very glamorous or exciting (I was one) but they are very cost effective and the public have a rather strange affection for them.
R Bingham, Lauzun, France
This is another waste of money system that will not catch illegally registered and unisured drivers.
What will it serve? Simply to raise more revenue by issuing speeding tickets to those who actually register thier vehicles? Static gantry cameras already do this, too well!
More real coppers in cars with number plate readers is what is needed. At least they can catch the dodgers when they spot an illegal vehicle. What good will a tiny aircraft do? Inform a car on the ground? Too late by then, the offender could be long gone.
A computer controlled aircraft can't spot dangerous driving, or drunk drivers.
The millions this is going to cost should be invested in the core Police force, not some fringe 'experiment'
Mike, Kent, UK
This is a seriously dangerous idea which completely ignores the reality of the airspace congestion in the UK. The flight safety issues are substantial. Iraqi airspace is very different and far less crowded, but there has already been an example of one of these drones coming within a few feet of taking out an aeroplane.
Simon, Sunderland,
Another step on the road to big brother britain, when are we all to be microchipped Gorden?
mark jones, london,
This technology will succeed in the US where airspace is relatively uncluttered. In the UK however our skies are already far too busy to allow the proliferation of unmanned airplanes except for in maybe Dumfries and Newquay. The helidrone trialled in Liverpool has far more chance in the UK.
Peter Thompson, London, UK
I agree. I am concerned that the Govt will eventually use it (and the fixed systems proposed recently) to monitor who goes where. Known supporters of the miners strike were stopped in their cars 25 yrs ago, imagine how much easier it would be now. Attending the anti war rally? Stopped. Off to support fox hunting? Stopped.
cliff r, reading,
Not one mention of the civil liberty / freedom of movement implications here?
Adam Neilson, Birmingham,