Sir, I think that the Arctic is the best fit, I would say. I think we can do surveillance from fairly high altitude and therefore cover quite a wide area. I think it's an area that has sometimes limited coverage from other sensors, from satellites, certainly from ground-based radars and sensors.
It's an area where the air traffic density is quite light and interference of other flying is therefore much restricted.
As to using UAVs along our coasts, I think that's a very ambitious undertaking. It's not a wrong one, but we have such long coastlines that dealing with them would require quite a large fleet, I believe.
I think that's my answer.