r4nd0m

the article clearly says: The police received 92 sightings of a drone from "credible people". No videos or photographs of the drone were handed to the police. The lead investigator from Sussex Police questioned whether there had been a drone at all.  Giles York, Chief Constable, later said police thought that original sightings were of an unauthorised drone, but it was possible that later sightings may have been of a drone used by Sussex Police.

I still question this people have their phones on everything these days but werent able to get a single shot of the drone or light in the sky?? 92 sightings??

I agree but those idiots wont be deterred by regulation ... which airport got shutdown by a drone? to my knowledge there is still no prove while pilots seem to claim they can identify a small dji drone at 500mph when they cant even spot a goose in the air before its too late ... just saying

the issue is people needing to regulate something they dont understand and especially dont share - if you look at the BMFA and how it worked with the CAA before all these regulations came out enforced by the government without clear steer and especially little proof of the conditions that shows a lot.

further consider big companies like amazon and others - as referred to in various papers that were submitted as part of the request for comments - wanting to implement mass fleets of areal delivery vehicles, potentially taxies etc ...

and the main driver security - people who adhere to the new regulation are pretty much the ones which would have anyway - so it pretty pointless if you ask me and I agree its milking the wrong people ... over £2M to maintain a pilots database? there are forums on the web and other pages with more users/information integrated with various other systems running for pennies or on free infrastructure eg free EC2s as they hard use any compute ...