Gatwick airport closed due drone reported in area
- Thread starter thousandyard
- Start date
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,350
- Reaction score
- 9,292
Paul Motts, 52, spotted the man “in his 30s and in hi-vis clothing” in a country lane four miles from the runway.
Paul told The Sun: “I was delivering a parcel and drove past a suspicious man in fluorescent cycling gear crouching over a large drone which was all lit up.
It was a big thing with lights on its arms and roughly 4ft across.
He had a smaller drone, about 2ft across, next to him.
He was leaning over and doing something to it. He was totally focused and did not look up when I drove past.
It looked like he was packing the drones away. Two minutes later we turned around and came across him cycling away.
I expect he wanted to disassemble the drone as quickly as possible and get away as fast as he could.
It was pretty weird considering what had happened at the airport during the day.”
Uh-huh .. Two drones, one of them 4ft across, and the villain is carrying them on a bicycle? OK
That's highly suspicious
The report is what's suspicious, not the alleged evil drone cyclist 4 miles from the airport.
What ever happened to Mr Motts' dubious cycling drone villain?
Particularly the psychology of suggestion and mass hysteria?
Lots of things could be done. ;-) But as always, the rules of unintended consequences still apply. For example, you're sitting at home, happens to be inside class B airspace. You get your new drone or you just finished some repairs or modifications, and want to make sure it works before you head out to wherever. Safely from the confines of your home you fire it up, and either it refuses outright, or a zillion alarms go off and the plod show up on your doorstep, even though the only way it could cause a problem is if it had depleted uranium propellers and rocketed through your roof somehow. Thanks but no thanks.
As I went through maiden voyage exercises with my new-to-me P4P at an AMA -sanctioned model air field less than 3 miles south of LGA runway 31 (yeah, check your sectionals, read the rules and chew on that for a moment), with the wind direction bringing planes in on that approach and the heavies all coming in low 'n slow almost over my head before hanging a left for final, you can bet your sweet posteriors that I had this past week's events weighing heavily on my mind, even though they should have at the very least 1100 feet of vertical clearance (maybe more, need to re-check the approach instructions) when they passed even if I was operating at my ceiling, which I most certainly was not.
After a short while I became too concerned and too paranoid and shut it down, deciding my next flight will have to be when the winds are different.
The truth is that if a plane is coming in at an altitude that puts it in danger from an sUAS at that model airfield, that plane has a LOT more problems than just an sUAS. And woe to the people living in Colden Towers. But I don't really like having to feel this way.
Funny how we never saw a pic of the alleged drone at Gatwick and now authorities are coming up with different stories by the hour.
No matter how it turns out, this bell cannot be un-rung.
I only hope that cooler heads may prevail.
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2018
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 1
- Age
- 43
The bottom line is, regardless of whether or not there was an actual drone ever actually confirmed or not, the end result was the same, and thats the main point of all of this, the perceived threat (regardless of whether it physically existed or not) was very very real and justifiably so. It was a clear demonstration of how unprepared the world is for such a threat. I found it all to be quite shocking on a real level. Politics and personal opinions aside on all levels, this was something that happened, and was real, and the whole world watched.
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2018
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 1
- Age
- 43
Does anyone know what kind of bird was being flown over Gatwick? Most likely not a DJI as they have restrictions preventing flight in & around airports.
I think someone out there developed a an antidrone system and to boost sales they have created panic.
It's like that window salesman that sent his son to knockout people's windows early in the morning then he'd come riding his bicycle a few hours later to make a quick buck.
I really doubt that any of the serious players in the counter-UAV business would even think of doing that.
Obviously that is one possible conclusion that might remain at the completion of the investigation. It seemingly isn’t the most likely though.
Explains why 4 police helicopters with millions of £ worth of thermal long zoom cameras failed to record video of any of the drone sightings. All those police, helicopters, military, MOD, plus over 60 "sightings", and they come up with no evidence whatsoever. Arresting and detaining perfectly innocent hobbyists in the process.
More chance of Santa getting sucked into the plane engines than a rogue drone.
I actually think this whole debacle will benefit the drone cause in the UK. It shows how unreliable and incompetent the Police, Public, NATS ,Airport Management, the Army and the UK Government are when it comes to things like this. No-one will ever be prosecuted, simply because there was no drone and so no-one to prosecute, and public annoyance will be deflected away from drone flyers towards the aforementioned. Couple this with previous cases of flying crisp packets being mistaken for drones and there's a lot of potential influencers out there looking rather silly.
Depends where in the world you are sitting in Class B airspace. If you are, it won't be the UK plod that turns up
So are you suggesting a complete ban on Santa in case he invades commercial airspace?
Another one for the conspiracy theorists, perhaps this is a grinch sponsored anti-Santa plot after all?
The problem with many media reports is that things are taken out of context, especially for the sake of sensational headlines and when being re-reported overseas. The police did not say that there were no drones; it was merely a reply to a question about the possibility of there being no actual drones - and it's standard policy to "rule nothing out" before all the evidence is gathered. They replied at the same time that they still have other "persons of interest" and a lot of information to still follow up on.
The airport authorities were convinced and still are that this was a real event. Whereas they are guilty of not spending sufficient money prior to now on deterrent technology, this does not equate to them being idiots. This is a busy international airport. It was closed for 36 hours during the Christmas getaway, just after schools broke up for the holidays.
If you make allowances for how certain newspapers phrase things in their sensational reporting (e.g. The Sun), there was a reliable witness who saw a likely perpetrator. And a damaged drone has been recovered from the airport's perimeter fence.
I'm here in Sussex. I was in Crawley (right next to Gatwick) on Saturday, talking to a number of people. The issue isn't "Did it actually occur?", but rather "Will the police successfully track down the guilty person or people?". And "Will there be a repeat - either from the same person/people or a copy cat?"
The UK has seen serious budget cuts for policing since the banking collapse and subsequent recession in 2008 onwards. And police here in the UK aren't the brightest sparks at the best of times, to be blunt. If this was an individual disgruntled by Gatwick in some way, or an extreme environmental protest, it wouldn't take too much planning to get away with it. That said, there is now a £50,000 reward on offer for information leading to a successful prosecution.
Finally, it should be stressed that the arrest of the two former suspects was unacceptable. There was zero evidence to warrant their arrest, other than a tip off from a previously-upset near neighbour. The male suspect had several witnesses to prove he was elsewhere, working. Their house was meanwhile "ripped apart" by the police looking for evidence that didn't exist. And they were held in custody for 36 hours. Yes, there would be pressure to quickly make an arrest, but this was disgraceful.
The airport authorities were convinced and still are that this was a real event. Whereas they are guilty of not spending sufficient money prior to now on deterrent technology, this does not equate to them being idiots. This is a busy international airport. It was closed for 36 hours during the Christmas getaway, just after schools broke up for the holidays.
If you make allowances for how certain newspapers phrase things in their sensational reporting (e.g. The Sun), there was a reliable witness who saw a likely perpetrator. And a damaged drone has been recovered from the airport's perimeter fence.
I'm here in Sussex. I was in Crawley (right next to Gatwick) on Saturday, talking to a number of people. The issue isn't "Did it actually occur?", but rather "Will the police successfully track down the guilty person or people?". And "Will there be a repeat - either from the same person/people or a copy cat?"
The UK has seen serious budget cuts for policing since the banking collapse and subsequent recession in 2008 onwards. And police here in the UK aren't the brightest sparks at the best of times, to be blunt. If this was an individual disgruntled by Gatwick in some way, or an extreme environmental protest, it wouldn't take too much planning to get away with it. That said, there is now a £50,000 reward on offer for information leading to a successful prosecution.
Finally, it should be stressed that the arrest of the two former suspects was unacceptable. There was zero evidence to warrant their arrest, other than a tip off from a previously-upset near neighbour. The male suspect had several witnesses to prove he was elsewhere, working. Their house was meanwhile "ripped apart" by the police looking for evidence that didn't exist. And they were held in custody for 36 hours. Yes, there would be pressure to quickly make an arrest, but this was disgraceful.
They said 67 sightings were reported, but despite a heavy police, military, MOD, airport security presence, they have no video evidence, no 'official' sightings, and hundreds of thousands of people left to pay the price. Of course they will drag this out and try to cover their arses, who wouldn't ? A classic case of H&S knee jerk reaction from the airport authorities. All it takes to bring a major airport to a standstill is a group of rogues in agreement to phone in drone sightings, no way you can prove them true or false, so no chance of prosecuting for wasting police time, guaranteed perfect way to bring a major airport to a standstill, still open for abuse as we speak.
The only way around it is to only act on official sightings.
The only way around it is to only act on official sightings.
There were photographs and video, shown on BBC 24 news and Sky News repeatedly during Thursday, plus printed in daily newspapers.
The CEO of Gatwick claimed on more than one occasion that a drone was above the airfield as he was speaking live on air. Police around the airfield were "buzzed" by a drone on at least one occasion.
And a quick additional comment about journalism. The majority of senior journalists and TV presenters go on holiday just before Christmas. As of today, and for the past couple of days, the junior wannabees take over. Whereas I'm sure there is sloppiness amongst some of the senior media people, there is undoubtedly inexperience and a lack of attention to detail from the juniors who are often just pleased to have their chance of getting on air or covering (belatedly) a "big story".
The CEO of Gatwick claimed on more than one occasion that a drone was above the airfield as he was speaking live on air. Police around the airfield were "buzzed" by a drone on at least one occasion.
And a quick additional comment about journalism. The majority of senior journalists and TV presenters go on holiday just before Christmas. As of today, and for the past couple of days, the junior wannabees take over. Whereas I'm sure there is sloppiness amongst some of the senior media people, there is undoubtedly inexperience and a lack of attention to detail from the juniors who are often just pleased to have their chance of getting on air or covering (belatedly) a "big story".
I still think there is an agenda to it somewhere try these for size.
Government want to ban these devices As a source of security danger, control,
Greens want to stop the go ahead at Gatwick to use the two runways there.
Upset people at Charlwood. with the same thing about the runway as well.
Some stupid morons without an agenda just out to cause upset to loads of people.
Police go along with itall run around like headless chickens even if NOTHING had happened to actually cause it, They are going to get screwed in court by the couple they arrested wh o do not have a drone only redio controlled model aircraft.
There is actually anther reason that cannot be given out and it is a cover story.
There are a lot of people in the area who wish to stop the varied flight path system working as they get annoyed over th constant flyin overhead. I lived there and I got used to it very quickly.
I doubt the true situation will ever be known but the government story to bring the public onside rings truest to me after what has been going on ohere over the past years.
I forgot to mention the BBC as the world propaganda mcahice has been working overtim on this as a good storym Also those of you who get information from your media, just remember the CNN Reuters and the whole lot of them are lying sods and spread all manner of mistruths all the time.
Government want to ban these devices As a source of security danger, control,
Greens want to stop the go ahead at Gatwick to use the two runways there.
Upset people at Charlwood. with the same thing about the runway as well.
Some stupid morons without an agenda just out to cause upset to loads of people.
Police go along with itall run around like headless chickens even if NOTHING had happened to actually cause it, They are going to get screwed in court by the couple they arrested wh o do not have a drone only redio controlled model aircraft.
There is actually anther reason that cannot be given out and it is a cover story.
There are a lot of people in the area who wish to stop the varied flight path system working as they get annoyed over th constant flyin overhead. I lived there and I got used to it very quickly.
I doubt the true situation will ever be known but the government story to bring the public onside rings truest to me after what has been going on ohere over the past years.
I forgot to mention the BBC as the world propaganda mcahice has been working overtim on this as a good storym Also those of you who get information from your media, just remember the CNN Reuters and the whole lot of them are lying sods and spread all manner of mistruths all the time.
Just after I posted above, the UK Government have effectively rebuked the police officer who earlier answered the journalist's question, causing the current doubts. The suggestion there might not have been any drones was a "miscommunication by the police". It has been agreed and confirmed at Ministerial level that 67 drone sightings were legitimate.
Gatwick airport has spent £5 million on new equipment/technology since Wednesday to prevent/deter repeat and/or copycat attacks.
Gatwick airport has spent £5 million on new equipment/technology since Wednesday to prevent/deter repeat and/or copycat attacks.
Similar threads
