The tail-end of 2024 and first half of 2025 have seen the increasing use of drone & GPS jammers throughout the U.K Midlands, even though their use by private individuals or commercial concerns is strictly prohibited under the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006.
Within this geographic area, their use has been registered around football stadiums six hours before any match and six hours after, probably under the pretext of "...concerns for public safety...", but in all likelihood the concerns are more geared towards stopping any unlicensed filming of action or players... so the reason for the deployment is purely commercial.
While the 'public safety' excuse is actually valid within the confines of the stadium: what is not valid is the repeated use of high power RF and GPS jammers with a range of between 6 and 10 kilometres, which have repeatedly inhibited GPS-reliant systems such as in-vehicle SatNav devices from operating reliably in and around two major cities within the central Midlands of England.
While the actual case-use of these jammers is obviously legal: there being relevant CAA registered NOTAM (NOtice To AirMen) warnings posted, what is questionable is the sheer (and completely unnecessary) output power being fielded with each system deployment, which threatens the safe flight of legitimate drone deployments within 6 or even 10 kilometres of the specific area that 'requires' this protection.
The mobile app: Drone Assist shows these NOTAM backed flight warnings on average, 24 to 48 hours in advance and if you don't physically check the details of the graphically drawn TFRZ area: you will have no idea that flying within, or even close to the area will expose your flight to the significantly increased risk of RF interference that is specifically designed to down your drone.
Not something to worry unduly about if you're in a wide, rural area... but if you're flying in complete accordance with existing CAA drone regulation in an urban, or semi-urban environment that falls under the umbrella of one of these over-powered drone jammers, the chances of your drone becoming a significant menace to public safety has just increased exponentially through no fault of your own.
So the question becomes: In these circumstances - who is to blame if your drone goes haywire and either damages private property... or drops from a height on top of someone's head?
By curing one 'problem', the people who have decided to bend the Law to their own commercial advantage have created a situation where their actions have the potential to cause an increased risk to the very public safety they have cited as being their principal reason for using this tech.
Within this geographic area, their use has been registered around football stadiums six hours before any match and six hours after, probably under the pretext of "...concerns for public safety...", but in all likelihood the concerns are more geared towards stopping any unlicensed filming of action or players... so the reason for the deployment is purely commercial.
While the 'public safety' excuse is actually valid within the confines of the stadium: what is not valid is the repeated use of high power RF and GPS jammers with a range of between 6 and 10 kilometres, which have repeatedly inhibited GPS-reliant systems such as in-vehicle SatNav devices from operating reliably in and around two major cities within the central Midlands of England.
While the actual case-use of these jammers is obviously legal: there being relevant CAA registered NOTAM (NOtice To AirMen) warnings posted, what is questionable is the sheer (and completely unnecessary) output power being fielded with each system deployment, which threatens the safe flight of legitimate drone deployments within 6 or even 10 kilometres of the specific area that 'requires' this protection.
The mobile app: Drone Assist shows these NOTAM backed flight warnings on average, 24 to 48 hours in advance and if you don't physically check the details of the graphically drawn TFRZ area: you will have no idea that flying within, or even close to the area will expose your flight to the significantly increased risk of RF interference that is specifically designed to down your drone.
Not something to worry unduly about if you're in a wide, rural area... but if you're flying in complete accordance with existing CAA drone regulation in an urban, or semi-urban environment that falls under the umbrella of one of these over-powered drone jammers, the chances of your drone becoming a significant menace to public safety has just increased exponentially through no fault of your own.
So the question becomes: In these circumstances - who is to blame if your drone goes haywire and either damages private property... or drops from a height on top of someone's head?
By curing one 'problem', the people who have decided to bend the Law to their own commercial advantage have created a situation where their actions have the potential to cause an increased risk to the very public safety they have cited as being their principal reason for using this tech.
