Experts Blast UK drone IDs (RID) business justification

Another smashed it out of the park FOIA by Ian Hudson (https://x.com/UAVHive), this time exposing the backward thinking and money already spent on RID in the UK, this is wasteful expenditure. Let’s hope the new UK labour Government picks up on this and stops it in its tracks.

This statement irked me, the UK has already fallen well behind other countries RID is not a magic bullet.

I have reached out for comments from knowledgeable folks and will add their thoughts to this.

By doing nothing, the UK will fail to meet the regulatory requirement to implement RID within the UK. There will be impacts on safety, security, and growth of the drone sector within the UK.

RID is the finest snake oil to date, I have seen many ideas come and go but this one is seeming to be winning around the world. It will do nothing for safety and security, bad actors won’t fly with RID. But it will put up more barriers to entry for young model aircraft flyers and continue the decline of aviation engineering skills in young folks.

I am getting too angry thinking about this, Ian has emailed me his thoughts, as ever he has done a marvellous job of shining a light on things done in big businesses interest.

This is an American idea bought in by American vendors (Amazon, Wing) who should have no seat at any UK regulators table.

I’m ranting, over to Ian –

While this document is from September 2022, and some details may be outdated, it raises questions about the CAA and Home Office’s plans for the Remote Identity (RID) scheme.

• Publicly, both agencies have denied any intention to monetize RID. However, this document suggests otherwise from the very beginning.
• The redacted directorate and department responsible for this document are particularly interesting, as they could provide clues about who was involved in these potential monetization plans.

I find it very interesting the directorate and department have been redacted:

They’ve used section 23, security bodies, I’ve gone back to argue that.

This document seems to ignore existing technologies like AeroScope and the national drone array. This omission raises concerns about the document’s accuracy in assessing the true capabilities of the Remote Identity (RID) scheme.

• The document presents RID as a new solution, but existing systems already provide some of the functionalities it claims.
• Since most drones in the UK are made by DJI, which might already have identification features, the urgency and justification for RID as presented here may be overstated.

There are an estimated 350,000 drones in use in the UK. Drone operators are required to register with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), but there is no way for an external party (such as law enforcement) to read this registration remotely.

This is an absolute lie:

In practice, drones effectively fly anonymously

This line suggests the data is being shared beyond law enforcement:

RID would also provide information and data for the CAA, Police, DfT and other authorities to carry out their jobs more effectively.

£1.8 for 6 months work from consultancies?  That’s a nice slice of taxpayers cash…

Sounds like bullshit to me…

There are no other suppliers able to provide this service

About the only true thing in the document is this, which we all know is the real reason it’s being pushed for:

Here is the start of the document, the entire thing below

This Business Case is for £600k to contribute to the programme of work to implement Remote ID (RID) for drones in the UK, to meet the regulatory requirement by 1 January 2026.

There are an estimated 350,000 drones in use in the UK. Drone operators are required to register with the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), but there is no way for an external party (such as law enforcement) to read this registration remotely. In practice, drones effectively fly anonymously. Some use is careless, inconsiderate or criminal, with 13,000 incidents reported to-date, including smuggling, illicit photography, harassment, and infringement of sensitive sites.

RID will remove this anonymity, and thus provide significant security benefits, allowing police to identify malicious and/or incompetent operators, leading to reeducation, fines, or convictions. RID is therefore analogous to number plates and Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) for road vehicles. Crucially RID allows the police to identify and address unlawful behaviour at the earliest opportunity. RID would also provide information and data for the CAA, Police, DfT and other authorities to carry out their
jobs more effectively.

CAA estimate the cost to fully implement RID is c. £10-15m over 18-24 months. The design phase will cost £1.8m to complete, which will include technical, commercial and regulatory/legislative design.

£600k from the Home Office will be paired with £1.2m from DfT, making up the £1.8m required to run the design phase. This phase includes:

• Complete design of technical components, standards and interfaces (e.g. RID data, Drone
  and Model Aircraft Registration and Education Service’ (DMARES) development).
• Complete design of new regulation and legislation to give CAA powers to operate RID, and place obligations on manufacturers and users
• Draft wording of regulation and
  legislation
• Initial scoping on how to buy
  relevant components, ensuring
  value for money
• Engagement with suppliers – Establish a new work programme,
  including reporting, governance,
  RAID management and planning.
• Draft and deliver the Outline
  Business Case and Full Business
  Case, in line with HMT Green Book
  principles
• Key design decisions finalised

Here is the document in full –