complete shutdown, London’s Gatwick airport has finally reopened. Following multiple drone sightings within the proximity of the airport, officials declared it unsafe for any flights to take off. Due to the hundreds of grounded flights, a total of 110,000 people stranded in the airport and some 2.6 million people missed their flight. After this period of chaos, the Sussex police have begun searching for the drone pilots and implemented several countermeasures for dealing with such situations. The incident is a cause for worry for some passengers as the cancelled flights leave catastrophic repercussions for the upcoming holiday.

According to the Sussex police, the drones that were used for the airport inference were of  “industrial specification.” They also mentioned that these drones have limited battery power, but have a range of approximately 10 miles (16 km). Due to large search radius, the pilot of said drones cannot be easily located. According to UK legislation, drones are not allowed to be within a kilometre of an airport. It is not clear as to whether this act was intentional or accidental as there was no message or manifesto released onto the internet after this event.

After the cancellation of all flights departing from Gatwick, a number of passengers demanded compensation which was expectedly supposed to be at the expenditure of commercial airlines. The UK aviation control considered this situation to be of  “extraordinary circumstance,” therefore commercial airliners were not obliged to pay for the compensation.

This event brings to attention the possibility that any slight change or interruption can set into motion a chain-reaction of chaotic repercussions. From a governmental standpoint, one would view this transit issue with grave seriousness as it was costly to deal with, and it greatly impacted the comfort and mobility of passengers. Additionally, this airport closure may have inconvenienced passengers due to missed appointments that are business, medical, or family related. Due it also being the holiday season, one can possibly understand how heartbroken families felt that they would not be able to make it back to their families in time.

Speaking of the consequences of this incident, one must also consider if the countermeasures and legislation for drone usage are sufficiently adequate to deal with such problems. The Sussex police mentioned that additional constraints and stipulations for drone piloting would be related to flight permits and licences; however, should people have access to industrial drones. Such technology in the hands of inept individuals could prove to be catastrophic as they may disregard any of the restrictions related to piloting such drones. Let’s just be true to ourselves: nobody ever reads the terms and conditions. Drones are a fairly recent development in society, but based on the results of this event, it is apparent that stricter stipulations and legislation be enacted.

China, specifically Guangzhou, is also known to be one of the leading countries in drone development. According to the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC), there are approximately 770,000 registered drones in China; however, there is an even greater number of unregistered drones. This is primarily the reason why law enforcement cannot efficiently track drone users. Governments have not yet developed the technology necessary to moderate and restrict the use of drones, and it would be difficult to implement effective countermeasures when so many drones have already been sold. If China would like to avoid the occurrence of situations similar to that Gatwick, they should modify their drone permit and licence registration policies so that they can effectively track the use of all drones in the country. With the development of any experimental technology, it has become well established that it will take time for a country to adjust to the use of such technology.