ARTICLE
3 January 2019

Gatwick Meltdown: Drones In A No-Go-Zone

CC
Clyde & Co

Contributor

Clyde & Co  logo
Clyde & Co is a leading, sector-focused global law firm with 415 partners, 2200 legal professionals and 3800 staff in over 50 offices and associated offices on six continents. The firm specialises in the sectors that move, build and power our connected world and the insurance that underpins it, namely: transport, infrastructure, energy, trade & commodities and insurance. With a strong focus on developed and emerging markets, the firm is one of the fastest growing law firms in the world with ambitious plans for further growth.
The serious and extended closure of Gatwick Airport because of the suspected deliberate use of a drone infringing the airport airspace ...
Worldwide Transport
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The serious and extended closure of Gatwick Airport because of the suspected deliberate use of a drone infringing the airport airspace, has brought to a head the warnings of many in the industry.

This latest event is a stark reminder of the ease with which drones can currently be used to cause massive disruption at a global level. This is a problem for today, not something to be passed off into the future.

Here are some key observations arising from this latest event:

  • There have been renewed calls in the UK and elsewhere for stricter controls on drone operations, including widening airspace exclusion zones around airports, increasing penalties for illegal use, and introducing mandatory registration for operators. While they are to be encouraged and will certainly act as a deterrent, one queries whether such measures would prevent an event like this where the conduct is premeditated. Indeed, the rate of near misses between drones and commercial aircraft has tripled from 29 in 2015 to 92 in 2017 according to monitoring body the UK Airprox Board. A significant concern is finding a means by which airspace can be protected through the use of enforced geofencing or other virtual technology, and/or identifying a safe and efficient way of bringing a drone to ground so that it can be properly identified and the offending operator sanctioned; in other words – means of enforcement.
  • Risk of business interruption from drones both from a financial and reputational perspective is critical. That applies not just to airports and the community of airlines, but to all businesses vulnerable to such interruptions. By reference, the December 2010 snow closure event at London Heathrow cost US$60 million for the airport operator alone. Cancellation of flights on the US Eastern seaboard during Hurricane Sandy in October 2012 cost airlines an estimated US$250 million in lost revenue.
  • Airports are now firmly on notice that this is a very real risk and those failing to take any adequate steps to guard against such disruptions could face crippling claims from negatively impacted airlines.

The risk of events such as at Gatwick Airport will only increase as drone usage continues its rapid growth. The potential for a deliberate, coordinated disruption event using drones at a global level cannot be ignored. It is important that regulators, insurers, aviation participants and other stakeholders take heed of the significance of that disruption threat and prioritise collaboration to prevent and manage that risk.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More