Gatwick airport closed due drone reported in area

Almost makes you wonder if the drone pilot is a disgruntled former employee of Gatwick airport. There's nothing worse than being sacked at Xmas time, I could see someone saying "gonna ruin my xmas? I'll respond in kind"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3rdof5
The possibilities as I see it are:

1. Idiot drone pilot(s) that had no idea flying around a large international airport would be a problem -- sadly, we have some of these idiots right here.

2. Some form of protest that intended to cause a disruption but upon realizing the police and military effort to find them thought the better of coming forward after the fact.

3. Terrorists looking to disrupt and possibly training for a more impact-full event.

4. Nation state action -- highly unlikely though possible.

Of these I think 1 and 3 are the most likely though 2 is not out of the question.

Sadly, no matter who or what was behind this it will almost certainly result in greater restrictions on drones and drone pilots. Even sadder is the fact that right here on this board we continue to find idiots that insist they should be able to whatever they please -- they paid good money for the drone and they think that entitles them to fly when and where they wish. This mindset can easily end our right to fly at all.


Brian
 
The scariest part is this has actually been possible to do for years and no one has ever even considered it. I'm inclined to believe its a local with a grudge against that particular airport. Organized terrorism would likely have targeted multiple airports simultaneously. There have been no demands that we know of. Clearly this isnt some noob/inexperienced pilot flying into the wrong space unknowingly. This is clearly a deliberate and planned event. And what scares me the most is, how many other "copycat" criminals will see this and do the same thing. This is far from over in my opinion and it scares the heck outta me!!!! The fact that practically any one of us in here could easily do this as well had never occurred to me until this story broke and it concerns me greatly.
 
Yeh be interesting to know what sort of drone,it look like a phantom but didn't seem restricted on height so whoever must been using the app,?just my thoughts,sure flight is restricted without app--I think...? If such a Idiot I wonder if he sync his flight,dji will get him I hope before the public does,imagine the cost of loss to airport let alone the traveler's,,going to be good sentence for him
 
Lol wow,I just noticed when reading new email of this story they got a drone for sale add right in the middle of story,,,
Screenshot_20181221-100508.jpg
 
Yeh be interesting to know what sort of drone,it look like a phantom but didn't seem restricted on height so whoever must been using the app,?just my thoughts,sure flight is restricted without app--I think...? If such a Idiot I wonder if he sync his flight,dji will get him I hope before the public does,imagine the cost of loss to airport let alone the traveler's,,going to be good sentence for him
For the sake of argument, say the drone is actually a phantom, we know its possible to hack the GEO fencing as well as any other restrictions, the pilot could also be using a Litchi waypoint mission which would also make the phantom immune to a jamming signal to force it to initiate RTH. In reality this drone could be flying completely autonomously. And there is nothing anyone could to stop other than shoot it down.
 
There is something the military could do apart from blast it out the air. I used to be in the UK armed Forces and work in bomb disposal, we had a signal guy attached to us and we could jam any frequency within a 2 mile radios. It would be quite easy to jam or interfere with any signal the drone or the transmitter was giving out. To me it seems strange that they let this drone stay in the air for so long causing so much disruption.
 
Unless they catch this person/persons the only thing at the moment that will stop it is if it rains !
but they have the ability to launch and land undetected go to ground for hours and recharge batteries.
assuming its not waypoint travelling and being flown from a remote control the lowest height it appears to fly at might be an indicator as to how far away the operator maybe i.e the further away the operator is the higher altitude he would have to fly at to have a good signal.
I really think the police should be asking local residents to report any unusual sounds from above i.e swarm of bees type sound this may help to locate where the drone is travelling from, if this flys over your house your going to hear it especially as the local airspace is closed, I think this whole episode is going to be stopped on the ground by old fashioned police work catching the operator/s and not trying to stop the drone in the sky.
trying to Shoot down a small fast moving target that appears very intermittently and at height i.e above shotgun range is a virtual impossibility unless some automatic firepower is used and lets face it that's just not realistically going to happen, so rule out this being shot down
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JohnGleeson
There is something the military could do apart from blast it out the air. I used to be in the UK armed Forces and work in bomb disposal, we had a signal guy attached to us and we could jam any frequency within a 2 mile radios. It would be quite easy to jam or interfere with any signal the drone or the transmitter was giving out. To me it seems strange that they let this drone stay in the air for so long causing so much disruption.

There are several anti-drone systems out there that utilize RF jamming to disrupt the drone operation -- if done properly it should result in loss of signal and RTH which might permit the police to find the operator. Even if the operator moved from the launch point to thwart capture the hundreds of traffic and other closed circuit cameras in England could be used to locate the perp. It's my guess they will catch him/them and if they do it is likely that CCTV is how they do so.


Brian
 
That was considered, but rejected because of the danger from the stray bullets.
They're called shotguns because they fire "shot", not bullets.

Well actually they could fire slugs too but those won't be much use against a bird/drone.

Shotgun - Wikipedia

Handgun bullets have been shown not to possess sufficient energy to hurt anyone when falling from altitude. Moreso the tumbly little NATO bullets of which that Register article speaks when fired seventy degrees up over the horizon. Unless of course someone's looking up at just the right moment and it puts their eye out. Slugs though, could weigh up to around an ounce so those could injure someone on the way down.

Thanks to Capposteve for the Register article. I like it mostly for teaching me "embuggerance". I already knew faff from my relatives north o' the border. And, well, who doesn't know plod by now...

I know nothing about the laws east of the Atlantic but it seems odd that certain branches of law enforcement - especially in this day of epic paranoia where we here in the 'States have to take our shoes off just to walk into a federal building - would not already have in place regulatory exemptions for jamming gear. And who gives a rat's rear if a drone dings someone's roofing or patio.

I hope at least this kerfluffle might wind up getting the authorities to come up with cohesive plans for addressing the menaces.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,086
Messages
1,467,528
Members
104,965
Latest member
Fimaj