General Atomics touts UK breakthrough in drone airspace integration
The so-called Military Type Certificate means the Royal Air Force's Protector RG Mk1, which also goes by the designation MQ-9B, has passed a rigorous airworthiness assessment, a General Atomics statement reads.
In practice, the drones now have the blessing to operate 'without geographic restrictions, including over populous areas,' the company said.
The achievement has been a long time coming for the U.S. drone vendor, which has pitched its drones' ability to fly safely in civilian airspace as a key selling point for its business campaign in Europe.
Military drones must normally stay within protected corridors when flying over land, especially in densely populated areas found in many parts of Europe. That is because unmanned aircraft were traditionally designed with military objectives in mind, giving little consideration to fail-safe propulsion or collision avoidance in mid-air, for example.
'This April 29 decision was a first-of-its-kind milestone for a large, unmanned aircraft system,' General Atomics said in the statement, referring to the date the UK Military Aviation Authority passed its judgment. 'It's a huge accomplishment for the UK and a technological watershed in the history of unmanned aircraft systems.'
At the heart of the certification lies a NATO standard, dubbed STANAG 4671. The idea is that drone airworthiness achieved to these specifications is transferable across alliance members.
Linden Blue, the CEO of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, said the company had spent $500 million over 11 years to have the the MQ-9B certified to the NATO safety standard.
Besides the British Royal Air Force, the company said it has MQ-9B orders from Belgium, Canada, Poland, Japan Coast Guard, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Taiwan and India.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
What Trump Can't Achieve in Ukraine
On July 14, President Donald Trump announced that Russia and any country purchasing Russian oil would be hit with severe tariffs in 50 days if Moscow failed to sign a cease-fire with Ukraine. Two weeks later, during a trip to Scotland, he shortened the timeline to 10 days, arguing that Russian President Vladimir Putin's cooperation was virtually absent. Despite Trump's claim that U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff's fifth meeting with Putin was 'highly productive,' the deadline will hit on Friday. Much of the commentary to date has focused on Trump's U-Turn on the war in Ukraine—understandably so. Unlike his predecessor Joe Biden, Trump had no love for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who he called a 'dictator' and falsely blamed for instigating the Russian war. And unlike Biden, Trump was more willing to tighten the screws on Zelensky, who often demanded terms—like Russia's full withdrawal from Ukraine, including Crimea—that were not tethered to facts on the ground. His highly-publicized dressing down in the Oval Office this past February, in addition to Washington's temporary suspension of military and intelligence assistance to Kyiv, may have helped scare Zelensky into watering down his position and agreeing to peace talks without preconditions. Now Putin is the one on the hot-seat. The Trump Administration's attempt to negotiate a 30-day ceasefire in March went nowhere, as did an effort to strike a similar accord in the Black Sea weeks later. The Russians have dropped substantially more ordinance on Ukraine during Trump's first six months than they did during the last six months of Biden's term, and Trump has grown increasingly critical of Moscow. His tariff threat, alongside his decision to allow Washington's NATO allies to purchase U.S. arms for Ukraine's benefit, is as much a sign of extreme frustration with Putin's antics as it is about injecting life into moribund talks. Yet assuming Trump follows through with his own deadline, will the pressure tactics actually work to change Putin's war calculus? The answer: highly unlikely. First, the tariffs on Russia won't have much of a financial impact. U.S.-Russia trade last year was an abysmal $4 billion, as sanctions the Biden Administration put together continue to penalize Putin's war of choice in Ukraine. Instead, the real meat on the bones is secondary tariffs of 100% on importers of Russian energy, such as India and China, who indirectly provide the Kremlin with tens of billions of dollars that finance its war effort. India, which traditionally received most of its oil from the Persian Gulf, has exponentially increased cheap Russian crude since Moscow was locked out of Europe's energy markets. Trump is betting he can browbeat India into stopping, or at least substantially reducing, its purchases of Russian oil through the threat of 50% tariffs. With less money, the argument goes, Putin will have trouble paying the big salaries he has relied on to pad the Russian army's ranks and finance the 40% of the Russian budget that is now earmarked for military spending. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, however, is an ardent nationalist who doesn't roll over easily and his country still relies on Moscow for a significant chunk of its military equipment. Indian officials quickly struck back at Trump's latest tariff threats, with the Foreign Ministry calling the decision 'extremely unfortunate' and hinting at possible retaliatory tariffs. Even if Modi does cave to pressure, one can't expect the same from Putin. The Russian strongman doesn't bend to foreign pressure easily—particularly when it comes at Washington's hand and concerns a subject like Ukraine that he's maniacally obsessed with. The blunt reality is that the war in Ukraine is now so synonymous with Putin's legacy that he is unlikely to budge. Evidence for this is strong. Putin has been willing to take a lot of pain, including a warrant for his arrest issued by the International Criminal Court, as well as place Russia's entire geopolitical position in jeopardy, for the sake of the war. Russia's economy has been relatively resilient in the face of a large-scale Western sanctions regime, but some Russian economists now warn of a recession. Moscow's ties to the West are essentially broken, which means the Kremlin's only true option is to get closer to China, even if this means handing Beijing an enormous amount of leverage it can lord over Moscow in the future. All in on Ukraine, the Russians are losing their near-abroad; unable or unwilling to uphold security commitments, countries like Armenia are now seeking to lessen their dependence on Moscow by broadening relations with alternative power-centers. If Putin cares about any of this, it seems to be taking second fiddle to his Ukraine aims. Finally, although Trump's turning of the economic screw on Russia might look dramatic, it's hardly a novel idea. The U.S. has leaned heavily on the stick ever since Russia launched its war of aggression in Ukraine. Washington has sent Kyiv more than $66 billion in weapons; enacted a list of sanctions on the Russian economy; and helped the G-7 push through an unprecedented price-cap scheme meant to limit Russian oil revenues—all in the hope Moscow would sue for peace. None of it, though, has convinced Putin to change course. Russia's goals for the war—cap the size of the Ukrainian army; fully capture the four Ukrainian provinces Putin annexed in September 2022; prevent Ukraine's admission into Western security institutions; and keep Ukraine in Russia's sphere-of-influence—are the same today as they were in February 2022. The bottom line is downright depressing: short of a direct U.S. military intervention that no serious analyst would contemplate, Trump's toolkit to will a Ukraine peace deal into existence is bare. Whether it's the carrot of a presidential-level meeting next week or doubling down on sticks like sanctions, tariffs, and military aid to Ukraine, Trump is learning the hard way that it's the combatants, not the mediators, who are driving the train.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
BOXXER set to announce new broadcast deal following split with Sky Sports
Ben Shalom's BOXXER will announce its next broadcast deal this week. The British boxing promotion recently split with television giant Sky Sports after Sky opted not to renew its exclusive four-year contract worth £36 million. BOXXER has now teamed up with the BBC to be its next TV partner, sources close to the situation told Uncrowned. BBC iPlayer and a BBC linear network will be involved in showing BOXXER boxing events. The BBC has not been a regular player in the British boxing scene since the mid-'90s, following the end of their "Sportsnight" midweek program. For much of the 20th century, the BBC was the prominent network in the sport, but its boxing output reduced in the '90s after ITV and Sky became more active players in the market. BOXXER's two primary rivals, Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Boxing and Frank Warren's Queensberry, have existing agreements with sports streaming service DAZN. The deal with the BBC keeps boxing on linear television in the UK at a time when it is struggling to garner the interest of networks on both sides of the pond. Although prime-time slots on BBC linear television and iPlayer will likely command a significant audience, the financial elements of the deal are expected to be dwarfed by the agreements Matchroom and Queensberry have with DAZN, making it difficult for BOXXER to compete. Uncrowned understands that multiple key-name fighters have held conversations with other promoters in recent weeks. Two BOXXER representatives denied knowledge of the announcement Wednesday morning, which is contrary to what multiple sources have told Uncrowned.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Neil Woodford to keep selling investment tips despite City ban
Disgraced former fund manager Neil Woodford is set to keep selling stock tips to customers despite being handed a lifetime ban from the City. The 65-year old's new business venture – a stocks and shares tips service known as W4.0, which charges up to £100 a month for 'access to Neil's investment strategies' – will remain in operation despite the City watchdog censuring the former fund star. On Tuesday, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) banned him from either managing funds or holding senior roles in the City after the implosion of his flagship Woodford Equity Income Fund in 2019 saw over 300,000 investors lose millions. Mr Woodford and his company, Woodford Investment Management (WIM), have both said they 'strongly disagree' with the FCA's decision, which they are currently seeking to overturn. However, Mr Woodford is to carry on offering investing tips to consumers because of a loophole which means his W4.0 app does not qualify as 'financial or investment advice'. Because the site is not regulated, and he does not manage any client funds, the FCA ban does not apply to the venture – meaning he will continue to instruct the public about their investments. A spokesperson for Mr Woodford's company, WIM, said: 'Nothing announced today affects W4.0.' 'Unreasonable and inappropriate' James Tyler, a regulatory lawyer at Peters & Peters, said: 'The FCA's oversight is limited by its statutory powers. As is often the case with the FCA, this appears to sit just outside of its reach. It remains to be seen whether or not the FCA takes a different view and thinks it's something they have the power to resolve.' The W4.0 app itself gives paid subscribers access to 'followable investment strategies, designed by Neil Woodford' and based on his 'long-term approach'. In a blog post outlining the W4.0 app, Mr Woodford insisted it was not a trading platform and instead said it provided subscribers with stock tips that they can then replicate independently through their own brokers or trading platforms. The W4.0 app also offers access to 'updates and commentary' from Mr Woodford in the form of videos, live sessions and discussion groups, through which he will offer his views on the best ways to build an investment portfolio. The launch of the W4.0 app in April this year marked Mr Woodford's first return to the world of investing since the collapse of his flagship fund. Once hailed as one of the UK's most successful stock pickers, the value of Mr Woodford's eponymous venture crashed from £10.1bn in May 2017 to £3.6bn immediately before it was suspended in June 2019. In its decision, the FCA said Mr Woodford made 'unreasonable and inappropriate investment decisions' in managing the fund. The watchdog fined the former star fund manager £5.9m personally and fined WIM an additional £40m. The FCA declined to comment on W4.0. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
