Remote ID Mandates Fail to Stop Unidentified Drones: European Safety Legislation Trails Military and Commercial Innovation.

The proliferation of unidentified drones over European airports poses a serious threat, especially given their military use as flying bombs. Despite nearly a century of drone development, identification remains difficult due to a lack of mandatory universal broadcast (Remote ID) and regulatory lag. Legislation protecting citizens and ensuring safety lags far behind the rapid pace of innovation. Remote ID Mandates Fail to Stop Unidentified Drones: European Safety Legislation Trails Military and Commercial Innovation.

Today I had dived into the secret of drones. What I have been wondering for quite some time is: “How can it be that more and more drones are appearing above European airports, and we as Europe, or NATO, cannot identify them?” Why has not a single (military) brain delved into this so far, especially when you consider the threat that could arise from these flying bombs? According to my limited knowledge, they have been used as unmanned flying bombs in the battle between Ukraine and Russia for a long time, right?

Flying bombs, and no one can identify them?

I can still remember the time when the first drones were used as a hobby as electric trains, so to speak, or as children’s motorboats on lakes or in swimming pools. However, I was shocked when I recently read a piece written by Jasper van Vliet, on his website: www.drone-optiek.nl According to this writer/researcher, whom I had the opportunity to speak to briefly by phone, the development of the drone has been going on since the beginning of the last century.Although we are not yet talking about the drones in their current form, or those that are currently being used in the Russian Ukrainian (World) war, I was shocked.

Drones that can and may transport packages and/or bombs.

Jasper did ask me to make this difference clear to you. But still, there has been a development going on in “aviation” for almost a century, which apparently no one has taken very seriously so far except perhaps the major carriers and or Amazon. Com. Founder and CEO Jeff Bezos stated years ago that his company wanted to reduce his company’s costs of delivering products to consumers by deploying Drones. Maybe it’s a crazy idea of mine that if there are companies that think about this form of transport, and that you expect a government to catch on to this, but apparently that’s not the case. The innovation of machines and means of transport is therefore in reality many times faster than the development of legislation and protection against it for you and me.

Will the drone travel the same path as the fat bike?

I’m sure I’m not the only person in the world who is worried. But think about the development of the fat bike and the accident in which three small children died while being transported in a bicycle trailer. The legislation and inspections for the bicycle trailer are now in place, but what about the fat bike and the drone? How long can ministers take to do this, and how many victims are allowed for this, and this causes

What does AI say about the reason why drones cannot yet be “scanned”?

Top reasons for identification challenges:

• No mandatory universal broadcast: Many drones are not equipped with technology that automatically and continuously transmits their identity, location, or intent. Existing identification methods often rely on the manufacturer or the regulations of a specific country, leading to a patchwork of systems rather than one standardized global system
• Anonymity and privacy: Some drone owners want to remain anonymous for privacy reasons or to evade enforcement. This can encourage the use of drones without identification technology.
• Technological limitations: Smaller, less expensive drones may not have the capacity (in terms of weight, battery, or cost) to carry advanced identification hardware.
• Short-term flights: Drones are often only in the air for short periods of time, leaving law enforcement officers with little time to detect and identify them using traditional methods such as radar.

And what does AI say about what possibilities are already available?

There are systems and initiatives to identify drones:

• Remote ID (RID): This is a technology that transmits the drone identity, location, altitude, and speed via radio frequencies or the internet. In many countries, including the United States and the European Union (EU), Remote ID is gradually being made mandatory for most drone owners and manufacturers.
• Voluntary registration: In many countries, owners of larger drones must register with national aviation authorities (e.g. the RDW in the Netherlands) and affix an operator number to the drone. This helps with identification after the drone has landed or been found.
• U-space: Within the EU, work is underway on the U-space regulatory framework, a system that should enable safe and efficient drone traffic in the lower airspace, including mandatory electronic identification.

Why is there not “just” a registration obligation, and why introduce it gradually?

Especially when we as citizens see and hear how drones can be used, I wonder why this registration has to be reintroduced in a syrupy civil servant-like way, do children have to die first? Oh well, of course I forget that there are probably already several (maybe hundreds) of children by drone attacks in Serbia, and whether Russia died before I (we) started to worry, our should we thrust AI?