London’s Heathrow airport halts departures amid possible drone sighting
- Thread starter Drestin Black
- Start date
PhantomWetSuits
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2017
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 840
- Age
- 60
Twinkling light caught on video and it looks like a possible drone , however the drone appears to split into two parts , very interesting , and I dont think that drone is being captured anytime soon.
My biggest thought: why would someone do this?
If caught it’s serious trouble so it’s not casual.
If they intend to actually hit a plane I’d think they could do a “better” job of it rather than just mucking about in the area
If it’s to make trouble for drone pilots and the industry ... this is a job for Bond, James Bond 007 Licensed to Kill
If caught it’s serious trouble so it’s not casual.
If they intend to actually hit a plane I’d think they could do a “better” job of it rather than just mucking about in the area
If it’s to make trouble for drone pilots and the industry ... this is a job for Bond, James Bond 007 Licensed to Kill
PhantomWetSuits
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2017
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 840
- Age
- 60
This is coal from Phantom Rain I am going to try to Mimic my Phantom 4 Pro splitting in half like this , , but untill than check out the video of the sighting as I zoom in to it.
Viewers are stating that this a 60 minute delay.
Also here is some context for the video below: Notice the video was taken over the plane.
"I have already spoken to both the Home Secretary and Defence Secretary and the military are preparing to deploy the equipment used at Gatwick at Heathrow quickly should it prove necessary.”
Here is freeze frame of this separation :
Last edited:
I imagine they gave geofencing on the UK, so they?
If so this is very unlikely to be a mistake or accident by a hobbyist who is literally ignorant.
If this is truly a legit drone spotting there must be a reason, and it feels to me like it’s pure maliciousness, not “terrorism” per say
If so this is very unlikely to be a mistake or accident by a hobbyist who is literally ignorant.
If this is truly a legit drone spotting there must be a reason, and it feels to me like it’s pure maliciousness, not “terrorism” per say
Well, this sighting IS literally a UFO at this time.
Given the fog and intensity of the lights plus the appearance of splitting, I think this could be an small jet airplane and the video is going in and out of focus (the splitting) in the fog.
PhantomWetSuits
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2017
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 840
- Age
- 60
That Drone movement is quite the arc, not sure how that could be a jet plane ?
All too easy now to shut down a major airport, just shout "Look a drone", and job done.
I dispair , my hobby is being wrecked.
I dispair , my hobby is being wrecked.
This was just a ploy by the local plods to justify closing Gatters. Just so they could say "I told you so". A bit suspicious that the first to spot it was the plod.
UK Police are called many things, including the Plod, from plodding around on the beat.
Had to look the definition of plodding. I have never seen that word before, but loved the second definition.
Just like a real UFO, there appears to be NO decent footage, hours upon hours of supposed drone flights yet no one with a camera other than the one on their GSM phone? Hmm
Had to look the definition of plodding. I have never seen that word before, but loved the second definition.
View attachment 107225
You tend to hear the term in British English describing someone who does the bare minimum in the work place. The person making the comment is also likely to talk about boiling the ocean, running ideas up the flagpole or having an idea shower.
I have absolutely no knowledge of this Heathrow incident, having just arrived back in South Africa. But I did closely follow what happened at Gatwick, not least as I live nearby.
If there is any doubt about safety, an airport authority must take the precautionary option (which does not extend to 36 hours or so without real cause for concern). The aviation industry has a brilliant safety record.
There's a huge different between public perception and actual reality. On the way to Cape Town the other day, we had unusually bad turbulence for about 45 minutes. Surveys show that the majority of people are fearful or concerned when they experience turbulence. Yet the reality is that an average of only 50 passengers per year (and a similar number of cabin crew) are injured out of approximately 2 billion passengers. Fastening your safety belt is the preventative measure in this instance - and there's effectively no danger to the aircraft. If you do what you're asked to do, there's absolutely no reason to feel in any way worried.
Better safe than sorry is a policy that works. I've been held up at Gatwick in a corridor for over an hour after disembarking from a long-haul flight when there was a fire in the airport. We never even smelt the smoke that was elsewhere and we were never in danger (other than breathing in too much body odour from certain passengers) because the fire alert policy worked seamlessly. I've been temporarily inconvenienced by a suspect package bomb scare on two occasions, when there was nothing to actually worry about in either case. But in 1975, I was on a London Underground train when an IRA bomb actually went off. Again, better safe than sorry.
If there is any doubt about safety, an airport authority must take the precautionary option (which does not extend to 36 hours or so without real cause for concern). The aviation industry has a brilliant safety record.
There's a huge different between public perception and actual reality. On the way to Cape Town the other day, we had unusually bad turbulence for about 45 minutes. Surveys show that the majority of people are fearful or concerned when they experience turbulence. Yet the reality is that an average of only 50 passengers per year (and a similar number of cabin crew) are injured out of approximately 2 billion passengers. Fastening your safety belt is the preventative measure in this instance - and there's effectively no danger to the aircraft. If you do what you're asked to do, there's absolutely no reason to feel in any way worried.
Better safe than sorry is a policy that works. I've been held up at Gatwick in a corridor for over an hour after disembarking from a long-haul flight when there was a fire in the airport. We never even smelt the smoke that was elsewhere and we were never in danger (other than breathing in too much body odour from certain passengers) because the fire alert policy worked seamlessly. I've been temporarily inconvenienced by a suspect package bomb scare on two occasions, when there was nothing to actually worry about in either case. But in 1975, I was on a London Underground train when an IRA bomb actually went off. Again, better safe than sorry.
Similar threads
