Spy balloons that can fly major heights to be developed in UK to keep Brits safe
The UK is developing spy balloons that can fly at double the altitude of a commercial flight to conduct intelligence and surveillance missions.
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said trials of new high-altitude balloons flying between 60,000 and 80,000 feet above the Earth - higher than most military aircraft operate - have been successful.
The balloons offer low-cost surveillance as they don't need a crew on board and can travel uninterrupted at extreme altitudes for long periods.
The future use of such balloons could also include support to operations and reliable communication and fast internet connection to disaster zones or remote areas with no coverage, while also providing information for weather forecasting and climate research.
The MoD will now develop a fleet of this class of balloon, following the successful trials in South Dakota, USA, earlier this year.
It comes two years after the US shot down a suspected Chinese spy balloon that had been flying over its airspace.
At the time, the UK's Tory Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said he would carry out a security review to look at the dangers of spy balloons.
Defence minister Maria Eagle hailed the UK 'pushing boundaries' with its successful trials of spy balloons.
'This innovation is about giving our Armed Forces the edge – better awareness, better communications, and lower maintenance needs,' she said.
'Stratospheric technology like this could transform how we operate in complex environments, keeping our people safer and better informed than ever before.
'This successful trial is another example of UK defence pushing boundaries, with real potential to strengthen our future capabilities.'
James Gavin, head of UK Defence's innovation, prove and exploit team, said: 'These latest trials have been incredibly fruitful and pave the way for more collaborative working with our allies to develop capabilities that will benefit our Armed Forces.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
a day ago
- The Herald Scotland
Why we must keep humans at the heart of AI in warfare
Since 2016, discussions of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons Group of Governmental Experts on LAWS have been ongoing, but International Humanitarian Law (IHL) still lacks any specific, binding regulations relating to AI. As noted by International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) President Mirjana Spoljaric, AI in war is 'no longer an issue for tomorrow', but rather 'an urgent humanitarian priority today', requiring the immediate 'negotiation of new legally binding international rules'. Accordingly, United Nations Secretary General António Guterres recommended, in his 2023 New Agenda for Peace, that 'a legally binding instrument' to prohibit and/or regulate AI weapons be concluded by 2026. Read more The ICRC has stressed that responsibility in warfare must remain with humans. 'Human control must be maintained,' it argues, and limits on autonomy urgently established 'to ensure compliance with international law and to satisfy ethical concerns'. In 2022, the MoD itself echoed this sentiment. It stated that only human soldiers 'can make instinctive decisions on the ground in a conflict zone; improvise on rescue missions during natural disasters; or offer empathy and sympathy.' The then Defence Secretary Ben Wallace added that 'at its heart, our Army relies on the judgment of its own individuals.' A recruitment campaign at the time carried the tagline: 'Technology will help us do incredible things. But nothing can do what a soldier can do.' Colonel Nick Mackenzie, then Assistant Director for Recruitment, highlighted that, while 'technology is really, really important… there is always somebody, a person, behind that technology,' who is ultimately responsible for its use and the decisions it enables. Since then, however, the use of AI-enabled rapid target identification systems in contemporary conflicts has grown rapidly, with notable examples being Lavender and Where's Daddy (Israel/Palestine), Saker and Wolly (Russia/Ukraine). A human being is generally still required in order to engage any lethal effects, but technological capabilities are already being developed to remove human input from the targeting process altogether. Against this backdrop, the MoD's Strategic Defence Review 2025, released last month, calls for 'greater use of autonomy and Artificial Intelligence within the UK's conventional forces' to deliver 'greater accuracy, lethality, and cheaper capabilities'. 'As in Ukraine,' the Review continues, 'this would provide greater accuracy, lethality, and cheaper capabilities – changing the economics of defence.' One example is Project ASGARD, which will help the Army locate and strike enemy targets at greater distances using AI as a 'force multiplier'. This is just one of over 400 AI-related projects being run by the MoD. What remains unclear, but is critical from a legal and moral perspective, is what role human judgment will play in these projects and the military operations they support. Computer scientist Pei Wang has said that while AI can behave like human intelligence in some ways, it is fundamentally different. AI shouldn't replace human intelligence, but rather support and enhance it – helping people make better-informed decisions. Human-robot interaction specialist Karolina Zawieska warns of the need to distinguish between what is human and what is only human-like. AI systems often function as a 'black box', meaning it is not always clear how or why they produce certain outcomes. This creates serious problems for human understanding, control, and accountability. When properly used, AI can support situational awareness and help human operators make better decisions. In this sense, it is a tool – not a decision-maker. But if too much control is handed over to AI, we risk removing human judgment and with it, moral responsibility. Professor Jeff McMahan, moral philosopher at the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, has argued that it is essential for combatants to feel 'deep inhibitions about tackling non-combatants'. However accurate or efficient AI may be, these inhibitions cannot be replicated by algorithms. As political scientist Valerie Morkevičius has pointed out, the emotional and moral 'messiness' of war is a feature, not a flaw because it slows down violence and prompts ethical reflection. Military decisions should be difficult. This is why human judgment must remain at the centre. While defence and national security are reserved for Westminster, Scotland plays a key role in UK defence, from the bases at Faslane and Lossiemouth to the defence research carried out at Scottish universities. The issues raised in the Strategic Defence Review therefore carry particular relevance here. UN Secretary General António Guterres has recommended that 'a legally binding instrument' to prohibit and/or regulate AI weapons be concluded by 2026 (Image: Getty) Scotland's approach to AI, shaped by the AI Strategy (2021) and the Scottish AI Playbook (2024), is notably human-centred. Informed by Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) principles, both documents stress the importance of trustworthy, ethical, and inclusive AI that improves people's lives. They highlight the need for transparency, human control, and robust accountability. Though not military in scope, these principles nevertheless offer a useful framework for a Scottish perspective on the development and use of AI for military purposes: keeping people at the centre, and ensuring that technology supports rather than replaces human agency. The goal should not be the delegation of human decisions to machines, or the replacement of human beings with technology. Rather, AI should support and strengthen human decision-making – a tool for the enactment of human agency: a technological means for strictly human ends. Dr Joanna LD Wilson is a Lecturer in Law at the University of the West of Scotland
Metro
a day ago
- Metro
Full list of 'data hungry' apps that are spying on you
Some of the most popular smartphone apps have been downloaded by hundreds of millions of people. But experts have warned that some of these seemingly harmless apps are in fact requesting 'shocking' levels of access to your personal data. An investigation by Which? found that 20 popular apps, including Ali Express, Facebook and WhatsApp, ask for 'risky' permissions such as access to your location, microphone, or files on your device. This is despite the apps not needing access to this information to function – which means users could be compromising their privacy when rapidly tapping 'agree' to any permission requests which pop up. While most of the apps they looked into are free to download and use, Which? editor Harry Rose warned that 'users are paying with their data'. He added: 'Millions of us rely on apps each day to help with everything from keeping on top of our health and fitness to doing online shopping. 'While many of these apps appear to be free to use, our research has shown how users are in fact paying with their data – often in scarily vast quantities. 'Our research underscores why it's so important to check what you're agreeing to when you download a new app.' The worst offender was Chinese app Xiaomi Home, which asked for 91 permissions, five of which described as 'risky'. Risky permissions include those that access your microphone, can read files on your device, or see your precise location – which mean businesses can target users with 'uncannily' accurate adverts. Samsung's Smart Things app asked for 82 permissions (of which eight are risky), followed by Facebook (69 permissions, six risky) and WhatsApp (66 permissions, six risky). In some cases there are clear uses for risky permissions – for example, WhatsApp may need microphone access to allow for voice notes and audio calls. But in others, the need for these risky permissions was less clear cut. Four of the apps (AliExpress, Facebook, WhatsApp and Strava) requested permission to see what other apps have been recently used or are currently running. All apps require some data to set up an account – usually an email address. However, Which? found Facebook appeared to request the most data to set up an account, requiring the user's first and last name, birthday, and gender. In response to the research, Meta said none of its apps 'run the microphone in the background or have any access to it with user involvement'. It said that users must 'explicitly approve' in their operating system for the app to access the microphone for the first time. A spokesperson for Samsung said: 'At Samsung, we recognise the importance of privacy and data protection. More Trending 'All our apps, including SmartThings, are designed to comply with UK data protection laws and relevant guidance from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). 'Our phones come equipped with Google's Android operating system, which by default helps protect users by giving them control over what data apps can access. 'We fully comply with Google's operating system policies, including SmartThings. SmartThings only uses the permissions needed for the app to function properly and deliver the best possible user experience.' Which? recommends a few ways to increase your privacy when using apps, including: Limit or revoke permissions in the Apps and Permissions section of your device's settings. You can limit or revoke permissions app by app – but revoking entirely could block some app features in the Apps and Permissions section of your device's settings. You can limit or revoke permissions app by app – but revoking entirely could block some app features Use the app settings to check what additional privacy controls are included in the app. You may be able to limit data tracking, revoke some consents, and lock down your account to some data sharing to check what additional privacy controls are included in the app. You may be able to limit data tracking, revoke some consents, and lock down your account to some data sharing Delete the app if you aren't sure about it – and make sure all your account data is deleted too. If you no longer use an app, delete it and stop giving them access to your data if you aren't sure about it – and make sure all your account data is deleted too. If you no longer use an app, delete it and stop giving them access to your data Check privacy information on the App Store or Google Play, which will list all the permissions each app will request on the App Store or Google Play, which will list all the permissions each app will request Read the privacy policy – or if you don't want to read the entire thing, just take a look at the data collection and sharing section Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: The 100-word emergency alert message being sent to millions of phones in weeks MORE: EE, Vodafone and BT down again for second time in 24 hours MORE: EE, Vodafone and BT all go down in signal blackout
Scotsman
a day ago
- Scotsman
Mibro GS Explorer S: rugged AMOLED smartwatch with diving mode for £186
The Mibro GS Explorer S is a premium sports watch without the premium price | Mibro This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement. With a 1500-nit AMOLED display, 10ATM water resistance and 60-day battery claims, this rugged watch is built for anything. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... If you're shopping around for a smartwatch that's ready for some tough times in the great outdoors, you might naturally migrate to the bigger brands like Garmin or Suunto. And if you wanted one with an AMOLED screen, Bluetooth calling, military strength testing and a battery that can last for weeks, you know it's going to cost a pretty penny. But is it? A new watch has just been launched by Mibro, a Chinese tech firm, which packs in some seriously impressive features and you can currently buy it for £186. It's the Mibro GS Explorer S, and its features start with the impressive 1500-nit HBD AMOLED display. It's really bright, which is exactly what you need on an outdoor adventure. It's also seriously tough. Mibro put its new flagship watch through 17 military standard tests, which means it can cope with extremes of weather, bashings from rock faces and, obviously, submersion. There's also dual-frequency five-satellite GNSS for location tracking and a 10-axis motion sensing system, which means it's always tracking your precise movements. It feels great on the wrist, with a chunky bezel, but not too much weight | Mibro And then there's the water resistance. Another of the GS Explorer's stand-out features is its free-diving mode. And its water resistance rating is 10ATM, which can withstand depths of up to 100 metres. And, you have to remember, this is a phone with chunky buttons you can operate with gloves on, and Bluetooth calling. Yes, the Bluetooth calling system actually works underwater. The free-diving mode is one of several customisable setups you can flick over to, and it gives you depth and time warnings, current depth indication, and other tailored data. But there are plenty of other modes for other extreme sports, all wrapped up in an intuitive interface called Galaxy OS 2.0. It's eerily similar to Huawei's operating system, as is the companion app. And that's no bad thing. It feels light on the wrist, but incredibly robust. There are absolutely no build-quality qualms here. There's even a premium titanium version, which takes this to the next level. Battery life is also a strength, with claims of up to 60 days in a restrictive mode, 20 days in a daily mode, and around 15 hours with all the sensors on. I found that's all pretty realistic while using the watch out and about. The Bluetooth calling function even works underwater | Mibro The body trackers, which include heart rate and blood-oxygen monitoring, do take their toll when you use the most accurate settings, but it's possible, with a little careful management, to keep the watch going for over a week in normal use, and that's superb. I did experience a few glitches with the tracking and, comparing it with other watches I have at my disposal, some of the data was a little off. But I've always found they need time to settle in. That said, the overall feel was that the Mibro interface needed some finessing, which can doubtless be done through firmware updates, because it occasionally missed the fact I'd gone out on a bike ride, for example, and I missed a few notifications from time to time. Overall though, it's a seriously impressive piece of kit, especially considering it costs less than £200 at the moment. I'd also go as far as to say it's more attractive than the rivals from Garmin and Suunto, and it feels more robust than most of them. I've always been a fan of Chinese smartwatches and, while there are a lot of rubbish examples out there to sift through, every now and again you'll find a gold nugget. And the Mibro GS Explorer S is one of them.
