Gatwick drone incident

[Bob Cotsford]

Nothing wrong with flying 'near' airports - as long as ATC have knowledge of your activity, have given you clearance and you stick with the airspace limits set for you. One issue is that 'near' is altitude dependant, if you are flying at thousands of feet then 'near' can be a couple of miles. The no-go limit was stated as 1km on the BBC this morning iirc.

I didn't hear anyone put a figure on how close to the airport the drone was reported to be this morning or at what altitude it was estimated to be flying at.

[Erfolg]

It is very strange what is happening at Gatwick, given the event was just a few minutes (11,00hrs )ago reported on television, by an official saying that "the drone has been observed for 10 hours now". He went onto say, just when they think they have homed in on the operator, the drone disappears, to reappear at another point within the airport.

As been suggested, is there just one drone and operator. I would be very surprised if a battery could last 10 hours. Being generous and assuming that a typical hobby battery can last 30 minutes. That is 20 batteries at least, I would be betting on somewhere between 20-30.

Apparently the police believe they have come close to homing on the operator.

What I find perhaps the most disturbing is that this cannot be some one who stupidly wants a close up of a aircraft in flight about to land. The motive has to be very different. Could it be to close the airport? Be a nuisance?

What ever the motive they must have spent some time learning to operate the device. Again i wonder why. On the face of it not to have fun as a hobby, be it just flying, taking pictures.

I can believe they there are issues relating to what is the envelope of normal behavior, as the person seems to be well outside those parameters. To fly so long and avoid detection you must surely need to have undertaken a lot of planning and equipment. Which i itself raises as many questions not just about intelligence at one level, and total irresponsibility and selfishness at another. In addition 10 hours seems a long time for one person to both fly and run about to fly from different locations

Edited By Erfolg on 20/12/2018 12:39:14

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Ben B]

Can I volunteer to be the first resident Gatwick drone hunter? I reckon an air-cannon powered fishing net with weights on attached to an FPV quad should do the trick. Presumably they can't just re-tune their airport radar to 2.4Ghz and look for the thing wizzing round on the runway?

[Bob Cotsford]

12v battery or generator + 3 battery packs = unlimited flying.

[Bob Cotsford]

Posted by Ben B on 20/12/2018 12:42:31:

Can I volunteer to be the first resident Gatwick drone hunter? I reckon an air-cannon powered fishing net with weights on attached to an FPV quad should do the trick. Presumably they can't just re-tune their airport radar to 2.4Ghz and look for the thing wizzing round on the runway?

If they could tune the radar to 2.4GHz they could probably fry the drone, along with any number of consumer wifi devices within a couple of miles.

[Phil 9]

Posted by Peter Christy on 20/12/2018 09:33:09:

Looking at the issue in a slightly wider context, this clearly illustrates a fundamental problem with the coming drone legislation: It isn't worth diddly squat unless it can be enforced!

Enforcement means boots on the ground, and that in turn costs money.

Until now, we've heard a lot about the law, but very little about enforcement. Will incidents like this change things?

--

Pete

 

flying over an airport without clearance is already illegal. the problem is laws only affect the law abiding

Edited By Phil 9 on 20/12/2018 13:12:32

[Cuban8]

Posted by Phil 9 on 20/12/2018 13:10:36:

Posted by Peter Christy on 20/12/2018 09:33:09:

Looking at the issue in a slightly wider context, this clearly illustrates a fundamental problem with the coming drone legislation: It isn't worth diddly squat unless it can be enforced!

Enforcement means boots on the ground, and that in turn costs money.

Until now, we've heard a lot about the law, but very little about enforcement. Will incidents like this change things?

--

Pete

 

flying over an airport without clearance is already illegal. the problem is laws only affect the law abiding

Edited By Phil 9 on 20/12/2018 13:12:32

Ah.... but it ticks all the boxes and demonstrates that the authorities are "working hard" to combat the problem. Apprehending, and convicting those responsible is the weak link, as it is with so many other social ills at the moment. They talk a good talk and then do next to nothing in a practical sense.

Edited By Cuban8 on 20/12/2018 13:21:42

[Cuban8]

Posted by Cuban8 on 20/12/2018 13:20:27:

Posted by Phil 9 on 20/12/2018 13:10:36:

Posted by Peter Christy on 20/12/2018 09:33:09:

Looking at the issue in a slightly wider context, this clearly illustrates a fundamental problem with the coming drone legislation: It isn't worth diddly squat unless it can be enforced!

Enforcement means boots on the ground, and that in turn costs money.

Until now, we've heard a lot about the law, but very little about enforcement. Will incidents like this change things?

--

Pete

 

flying over an airport without clearance is already illegal. the problem is laws only affect the law abiding

Edited By Phil 9 on 20/12/2018 13:12:32

Ah.... but it ticks all the boxes and demonstrates that the authorities are "working hard" to combat the problem. Apprehending, and convicting those responsible is the weak link, as it is with so many other social ills at the moment. They talk a good talk and then do next to nothing in a practical sense.

They're worried about the effect of stray bullets endangering the public, so no shooting the thing down. Stray bullets? how many shots would a trained marksman with a sniper rifle need? Seems to be a reasonable risk, given the massive disruption, costs etc & risk of heart attacks because of the stress on passengers. I hope I'm wrong but I can see this fading away without a conviction until someone else fancies having a go. Thought the bad guys would have been found by now, if they were going to be at all.

 

Edited By Cuban8 on 20/12/2018 13:35:02

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I'd guess they are more interested in apprehending the operator rather than simply stopping the drone. Whether or not it could be shot down electronically - and we're often told that the authorities have equipment capable of the job, a 12 bore would make short work of it unless it's very high.

I watched a programme recently that claimed the radar on the new type 47 destroyers could track a cricket ball sized object at supersonic speed - I'd have thought tracking a drone with military equipment shouldn't present too much of a problem so it seems that perhaps something odd is going on...

Edited By Martin Harris on 20/12/2018 13:36:43

[Peter Miller]

What also worries me can be summed up in one word.

DUNBLANE.

Every single legally owned hand gun was immediately made illegal and had to be handed in at once. Compensation would be paid. I knew one such owner. Don't know if he ever got his compensation.

Of course this had no effect on illegally owne hand guns

Edited By Peter Miller on 20/12/2018 13:52:23

[Tim Flyer]

Sounds like we need airports to be protected by proper military security rather than what seems to be flimsy PR based gimmicks and deterrent. Given terror threats and mass disruption costs the operators of these things need properly dealing with.

[PETER BRUCE - Eastchurch Gap]

All we got to do now is await the authorities “ knee jerk reaction “ which could affect us all - except the ones who want to fly illegally and do such things and to them it will make no difference at all what rules and regs are there...

[gangster]

Given the scale of this perhaps it’s far more complex than the technology we think about. Maybe there isn’t someone out there standing in the freezing cold holding a transmitter. It does not take much imagination to realise that it would be possible to program these things to fly over an area and then when the battery’s get low to go hide somewhere where they can either be collected or abandoned. With internet technology the pilot could be anywhere in the world The implications for terrorism doesn’t bear thinking about. Trashing Gatwick for a day could be a test run

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[ken anderson.]

maybe its someone who is very clever...but a bit displaced in their thinking.....hopefully they'll be caught and dealt with...but I doubt it..they have been doing it for a while now dropping stuff of to the jail lad's....with little deterrent to stop them......where's the trained eagles,the net gun's and army marksmen?

ken anderson...ne..1...wasters dept...

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Cuban8]

Posted by gangster on 20/12/2018 14:45:26:

Given the scale of this perhaps it’s far more complex than the technology we think about. Maybe there isn’t someone out there standing in the freezing cold holding a transmitter. It does not take much imagination to realise that it would be possible to program these things to fly over an area and then when the battery’s get low to go hide somewhere where they can either be collected or abandoned. With internet technology the pilot could be anywhere in the world The implications for terrorism doesn’t bear thinking about. Trashing Gatwick for a day could be a test run

This was more or less something that a tech expert that they had on BBC News at lunchtime said. Apologies if you saw it, but essentially the usual guff about registration and education was asked about by the presenter and the techy's reply was pretty much if anyone was serious about causing trouble.....they could - and all outside of the regs that us poor saps are following. But then WE know all about that!

As for the current perpetrators, unless the cops get lucky then I'd suggest £100,000 reward money be put up for info as to who these people are, is offered, No honour among thieves or rogue dronies, I should think.

[Bucksboy]

Shooting a drone down is not as easy at it sounds. I fly drones /UAV’s, call them what you want, professionally. I fly either the Phantom or Inspire around 100m above the ground. I don’t fly in the UK though. The drone is shot at very regularly where I work, with fully automatic weapons and very often there are several soldiers shooting at it. We’ve only lost 4 uavs in a year, yet we experience shooting twice a week, every week. I accept we never hover the machine but a shotgun would never reach us nor a water cannon. Jamming the GPS signal is the most effective but that doesn’t cause the machine to fall out of the sky and it’s not only us affected by it either.

[Erfolg]

It appears that the authorities now know there are two of them. If that is helpful at all is any ones guess.

From my perspective, there is almost certainly bound to be repercussions, will they affect us (fixed wing/helicopter) flyers is my concern. Legislation or additional regulation entered into with haste, or even after some consideration, could well have unwelcome impact on what i do and I guess most other aeromodelers.

Edited By Erfolg on 20/12/2018 15:15:00

[MattyB]

I can imagine the BMFA must be sitting rather uncomfortably wondering whether their hard won exemption is going to be questioned following this incident. It shouldn't of course - the chances of this being a card carrying member of one of the major associations is minimal - but as others in the thread have observed, a politician tasked to "do something quickly" can be a dangerous and unpredictable animal...

Edited By MattyB on 20/12/2018 15:26:13

[Lima Hotel Foxtrot]

Posted by Peter Miller on 20/12/2018 08:50:45:

I am sure everyone has heard this mornings news. about the Drones over Gatwick all night on and off

I hope they are caught quickly and really clobbered.

Personally I say "Chop their fingers off and say "Now fly your drone""

How very medievel of you. Are you volunteering to be the finger chopper?

Edited By Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 20/12/2018 16:05:27

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Nigel R]

They have shut down Gatwick for a day. A sales pitch.

For a price, they can put items and devices of your choosing right into Europe's landmark buildings, and government establishments, and military facilities.

Got naff all to do with registration. Or licensing. Or hobbyists. This is pro work. Not morons out in force. They are teasing the police, toying with the airport, taking advantage of the fact that Gatwick will not operate with a drone messing about over the runway.

Of course I may yet eat those words. It might be disaffected kids. Seems unlikely though.

Edited By Nigel R on 20/12/2018 16:22:01

[Roo Hawkins]

I bet it was a ? 40 one from lidi. That they had in 3 weeks ago. To easily got by idiots

Edited By Roo Hawkins on 20/12/2018 16:19:48