Gatwick airport closed due drone reported in area

Joined
Nov 17, 2016
Messages
1,061
Reaction score
470
Age
62
Location
Utah, USA
Reference?
Gatwick Airport drone incident - Wikipedia (Read "Investigation" section)

Gatwick drone inquiry: 93 'credible sightings' "
Police previously said it was "possible" there was no drone at all - though they later backtracked."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/uk-police-drone-at-gatwick-airport-suspects-released.html

The thing is, the story is all over the place with reports, during the event, that included pictures of a drone yet the police say they have no pictures of it. Mind you, I'm not one of those suggesting that it couldn't be a drone and have said so in this very thread, but with each of these 'drone sightings' that result in no confirmation one has to question what percentage of these drone sightings are this era's UFO sightings. Interestingly, the number of UFO sightings has dropped from about 2014 on -- perhaps coincident with the rise of drones.

Drones Are the New Flying Saucers


Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: loadpin
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
506
Reaction score
310
Location
UK/South Africa
And now the same police are saying they're not sure there even was a drone -- so what do we make of that?

There were pictures and video during the event but the police are now saying they're not sure -- how do we reconcile those statements?


Brian
Brian: I've answered that question further above in the thread. This is repeating it all perhaps too briefly/simplistically, but the Sussex officer was asked a series of questions by a journalist, including a hypothetical possibility. His answer wasn't the best and the 24-hour media immediately leapt on it and took the story in a "new" direction for a while - surprise, surprise - until a Government Minister rightly issued a rebuke. I saw the original interview "live" in its entirety and watched the resulting misinformation balloon into a mess. It should be used as an example to teach psychology students (and PR students) what can and does go wrong if people are loose or inexact with the facts.

The two US journalists who famously worked diligently to expose Watergate many years ago have subsequently despaired at the dumbing-down of present-day journalism. In small ways, I have been misquoted by journalists; in one case, for example, she made up an international airport that I was apparently flying into that simply does not exist. (Supertramp could easily have alternatively named their classic album "Crisis? What crisis?" as "Sloppiness? What sloppiness?")

And out of the 93 "credible" sightings, two thirds of these were by professionals - with members of the public, including passengers, reporting the other third. (There were approximately another 25% of reported sightings that were deemed "less credible".)
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
629
Age
52
Location
Canada
I'm surprised this is still even being debated. I think the bottom line is the police are trying to be on the fence cuz they got no leads on who did it. But let's agree, IT HAPPENED!!!!
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2016
Messages
1,061
Reaction score
470
Age
62
Location
Utah, USA
Brian: I've answered that question further above in the thread. This is repeating it all perhaps too briefly/simplistically, but the Sussex officer was asked a series of questions by a journalist, including a hypothetical possibility. His answer wasn't the best and the 24-hour media immediately leapt on it and took the story in a "new" direction for a while - surprise, surprise - until a Government Minister rightly issued a rebuke. I saw the original interview "live" in its entirety and watched the resulting misinformation balloon into a mess. It should be used as an example to teach psychology students (and PR students) what can and does go wrong if people are loose or inexact with the facts.

The two US journalists who famously worked diligently to expose Watergate many years ago have subsequently despaired at the dumbing-down of present-day journalism. In small ways, I have been misquoted by journalists; in one case, for example, she made up an international airport that I was apparently flying into that simply does not exist. (Supertramp could easily have alternatively named their classic album "Crisis? What crisis?" as "Sloppiness? What sloppiness?")

And out of the 93 "credible" sightings, two thirds of these were by professionals - with members of the public, including passengers, reporting the other third. (There were approximately another 25% of reported sightings that were deemed "less credible".)

And once again I make no claim whatsoever that there was no drone only that we are seeing a rash of "drone sightings" that don't result in any confirmation. And, as I've said, also repeatedly, the idea that a pilot or police officer is an expert drone observer is, frankly, laughable. Pilot reports his plane was hit by a drone -- turns out it was a plastic bag. In the case I mentioned earlier about a wildfire in southern Utah a year or so back where numerous reports of drone sightings over a couple days had aerial crews grounded but there was never a drone captured on video or pictures and no person was ever caught in spite of the fact there were many reporters with cameras and the area, sparsely populated as it is, makes hiding harder. When folks are asked to keep an eye out for drones and they see a Hawk half a mile away what do they do -- well, unfortunately, they may well report seeing a drone as that's what they're looking for. The same goes for pilots and police around an airport.

When UFO buffs head out along NV-375, AKA the Extraterrestrial Highway, in search of, well what else, UFO's, is it any surprise that the lights they see in the sky are deemed to be visitors from another world?

In the early to mid 80's, in the upstate NY area known as the mid Hudson Valley, there were a prolonged series of UFO sightings and I personally witnessed them a half dozen times. The sightings always occurred right around dusk and what was seen was usually described as a Chevron craft. Again, I saw it myself 6 times. My first sighting was on my way back home after visiting my mom and as I turned south onto 9D in the town of Hughsonville I saw the chevron thing in the sky and moving eastward. I pulled off the road onto a side road, shut off my engine and got out of the car and as I looked up I could barely make out about 6 objects with a small amount of relative motion between them. It was just a bit too dark to see anything more than that but the other thing I noted was what sounded like a small plane at quite a distance.

Over the next 3 years I witnessed the event 5 more times and in a couple of them it was just light enough to discern, barely, that there was a formation of small aircraft flying in formation -- the whole thing was a prolonged and very effective hoax. Here's the thing ... the area was home to several of the largest IBM facilities in the world and there were many reports from "IBM engineers" that went into great detail about how it had to be an alien craft and that as engineers they were not going to be fooled. Well, they were fooled, every stinking one of them.


Brian
 
Joined
May 2, 2014
Messages
8,741
Reaction score
3,043
Location
Palm Beach Co.- FL
How many suspicious packages turn out to be harmless?

How many bomb scares turn out to be bogus?

I believe just about all.

Hysteria is a human condition.
Just go fly!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3rdof5
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
629
Age
52
Location
Canada
Conspirators will conspire, haters will hate, the open minded will see reality.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
506
Reaction score
310
Location
UK/South Africa
Chris Woodroofe, Gatwick's chief operating officer, has admitted that the drone pilot(s) "had a link into what was going on at the airport". Sussex Police agree that the possibility of it being an inside job is a "credible line of enquiry". The recent comments have come to light prior to a BBC Panorama documentary.

As a local (when not in South Africa) who followed this new story closely, these latest comments would fit in with what we know of what happened last December. It was clearly an intelligent and sustained assault on the airport, keeping ahead of the police (often called "plod") and airport security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: With The Birds
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
7,734
Reaction score
3,026
Location
Australia
Chris Woodroofe, Gatwick's chief operating officer, has admitted that the drone pilot(s) "had a link into what was going on at the airport". Sussex Police agree that the possibility of it being an inside job is a "credible line of enquiry". The recent comments have come to light prior to a BBC Panorama documentary.

As a local (when not in South Africa) who followed this new story closely, these latest comments would fit in with what we know of what happened last December. It was clearly an intelligent and sustained assault on the airport, keeping ahead of the police (often called "plod") and airport security.
Seems a little more has been shared as to the nature of the claimed abstractions in the recent media also “recorded 130 separate credible drone sightings by a total of 115 people, all but six of whom were professionals, including police officers, security personnel, air traffic control staff and pilots“....
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
506
Reaction score
310
Location
UK/South Africa
It became obvious early on in the Gatwick disruption that the many reported sightings were by credible professionals. The media frenzy/farce that followed was typical, not helped by the fact that most experienced journalists were on holiday. Then the conspiracy brigade got their fangs into the story, further twisting/obscuring reality.
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
133,605
Messages
1,383,516
Members
97,495
Latest member
justaschmidt