Drones over Gatwick

[GingerCat]

They are impressive bits of kit these days. The one we use at work weighs about 12 pounds, can fly at night as easily as in the day, has about 45 minutes of "play time" and a huge range. 

I called it out a while ago and watched it set up and take off in under a minute, he flew it at about 400 metres altitude and it covered a vast area before returning to him. I think it flys at about 50mph and gets to that speed almost instantly. 

He can fly by sight, by gps or even use the on board camera as a live feed and fly like that. 

You will not shoot it down with a shotgun or rifle. 

It's capabilities replace the helicopters we can no longer afford. The new one is considerably more capable. Neither are out of the range of a well off person. 

I suspect there will be a few cheque books opening up this weekend and some anti drone kit being purchased. 

[Dave-G]

Well I'm wondering how many countries who might wish to do us harm are taking note of how we have been unable to knock a potential

dirty bomb out of our skies and how many places they'd be able to do it at the same time.

Its a terrorists or war mongers gift, and they can be built DIY from parts available in shops and online so no radar gets activated about their acquision. The ability and willingness to knock them out without pandering to PC or even, dare I say it, safety groups must be clearly displayed very urgently.

 

What happened to so called laser 'guns' - or were they just for films

 

Putin must be larfin his sock off.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dave-G

[TIGHTCHOKE]

5 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

They are impressive bits of kit these days. The one we use at work weighs about 12 pounds, can fly at night as easily as in the day, has about 45 minutes of "play time" and a huge range. 

I called it out a while ago and watched it set up and take off in under a minute, he flew it at about 400 metres altitude and it covered a vast area before returning to him. I think it flys at about 50mph and gets to that speed almost instantly. 

He can fly by sight, by gps or even use the on board camera as a live feed and fly like that. 

You will not shoot it down with a shotgun or rifle. 

It's capabilities replace the helicopters we can no longer afford. The new one is considerably more capable. Neither are out of the range of a well off person. 

I suspect there will be a few cheque books opening up this weekend and some anti drone kit being purchased. 

Why not? If it is within range it must surely be quite fragile/vulnerable to a well place shot or shots.

[Dave-G]

3 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Why not? If it is within range it must surely be quite fragile/vulnerable to a well place shot or shots.

If I were trying to avoid that I'd keep it going at irregular speeds and never become stationary.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dave-G

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 minute ago, Dave-G said:

If I were trying to avoid that I'd keep it going at irregular speeds and never become stationary.

I agree, but that doesn't preclude it being shot down!

[GingerCat]

2 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

I agree, but that doesn't preclude it being shot down!

Because your have to be the best shot with a seriously good dose of luck on a very lucky day in luck town.

How many rifle shots would have the ability to hit a moving target at 400 metres altitude travelling  erratically at variable speeds in a built up area in an over populated country? Or one that zips over a fence at random at speed in an airport with 10000 people waiting to board a plane and not catch a stray bullet. 

Electronic devices exist to disable them and that's what's no doubt going to arrive. Firearms aren't the answer on this one. If they were you can bet your xmas turkey one of the 20 marksmen would have at least tried if not succeeded and there would by now be a photo of him/her posing with it shot to pieces on the tarmac by now.  

[oldypigeonpopper]

hello, it never seems to happen in other countries or maybe it has ? if so what have the authorities in airports done to prevent this?  

[walshie]

Has anyone actually seen a picture or video of the Gatwick drone? All the news ones seem to be stock footage. There were thousands of people with mobile phones at Gatwick who would have put the footage on Youtube. 

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this lack of footage seems very odd. 

[Lord v]

1 minute ago, walshie said:

Has anyone actually seen a picture or video of the Gatwick drone? All the news ones seem to be stock footage. There were thousands of people with mobile phones at Gatwick who would have put the footage on Youtube. 

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but this lack of footage seems very odd. 

It did occur to me last night about 9:30pm when a Police Spokesman said something along the lines of 'We believe we have identified the sort of drone it is' that there may not actually be one. It was something that made it apparent there wasn't a confirmed visual.

To take that long to actually see it, the only evidence being reported sightings starts to make you think....

A few people with co-ordinated stories reporting an imaginary drone would be all it takes. Reading the timeline on the BBC made it appear that it would only take very few phone calls..

 

[GingerCat]

The daily mail has footage of it flying over the airfield on its website. 

[walshie]

12 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

The daily mail has footage of it flying over the airfield on its website. 

That's what I mean. Thousands of mobile phones and loads of professional cameramen there and a dot that could be anything is the best anyone could muster? If it was a dog on a skateboard, there would be thousands of HD videos of it. 

[sportsbob]

53 minutes ago, KFC said:

I'm piggin' livid about this.

Thousands of people, including me, fly RC planes, not just 'drones', but we all come under the same regulations.

I fly thermal soarers which can fly up to 1500ft. I am a member of the BMFA and have £25m liability insurance. I fly within CAA laws, and when required, with their permission.

The EU has imposed a directive prohibiting flight above 400ft. The BMFA has negotiated a waiver for their members.

In 2019 the EU is imposing a requirement to register as a pilot of RC SUAV's and pass a competency test. The BMFA is negotiating with the EU at the moment to accept that membership of the BMFA, and passing their achievement tests, would be accepted as meeting the EU regulations. At the moment the EU is looking favourably on this idea.

However, I can see this putting the mokkers on everything and, once again, those acting within the law will be punished for the actions of those acting illegally.

Because of one man in Scotland then the legal ownership of handguns was banned. It hasn't stopped killings with handguns but ruined the enjoyment of thousands of sportsmen.

A good birching springs to mind.

Here is a theory,

Handguns were banned for private target shooting because the powers in charge don`t want us to have the ability to defend ourselves against there oppression. It was reported that Hamiltons certificate had expired and renewal had been refused weeks prior to him doing what he did so he was actually in possession of illegally held firearms and not a licensed firearm holder. Weight to this theory is added in the form of current EU legislation and proposals presently being put forward to remove all private ownership of firearms.

Model flying will be banned because they don`t want us to have the ability to use the technology it offers again in the form of defence, reconnaissance or even attack.

Why would the powers in charge want this? simple there are too many people and modern technology keeps us informed of what is really happening even if the media propaganda machine censors the truth.

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, walshie said:

That's what I mean. Thousands of mobile phones and loads of professional cameramen there and a dot that could be anything is the best anyone could muster? If it was a dog on a skateboard, there would be thousands of HD videos of it. 

Gatwick is a huge area - about 1600 acres and over 2 miles long.  The area the public have access to is in one corner.  The runway is about 2 miles long.  To film something fast moving in poor light the size of a drone (say 30" across max) identifiably at even half a mile is way outside all but the most sophisticated long lenses (such as those sometimes used in wildlife filming).  You would not even see a small drone a mile away very easily, let alone film it.

[GingerCat]

11 minutes ago, walshie said:

That's what I mean. Thousands of mobile phones and loads of professional cameramen there and a dot that could be anything is the best anyone could muster? If it was a dog on a skateboard, there would be thousands of HD videos of it. 

It's a restricted area with 10 miles of perimeter fence. The people were in the terminals not on the runways looking for drones.  The runways are some distance from the terminal. Looking out the windows you'd need a pretty good camera to catch the drone zipping about. I'm not surprised there isint many photos. 

New legislation is already planned for November 2019 and I bet it gets a polish due to this incident. 

One thing I bet also happens is a repeat incident or 2. I hope they catch the chap or chaps and punish them accordingly so others think twice. 

 

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, sportsbob said:

Why would the powers in charge want this? simple there are too many people and modern technology keeps us informed of what is really happening even if the media propaganda machine censors the truth.

Pretty much this.

 

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

You would not even see a small drone a mile away very easily, let alone film it.

I see what youre saying, but someone saw it and shut the place down.
Also , there must be multiple surveillance/ cameras on the perimeter , surely one picked up a decent image ?

I saw some footage on the news last night, at first it looked more like a large bird (it appeared to be flapping) Im still not sure.

[walshie]

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Gatwick is a huge area - about 1600 acres and over 2 miles long.  The area the public have access to is in one corner.  The runway is about 2 miles long.  To film something fast moving in poor light the size of a drone (say 30" across max) identifiably at even half a mile is way outside all but the most sophisticated long lenses (such as those sometimes used in wildlife filming).  You would not even see a small drone a mile away very easily, let alone film it.

One news article clearly stated a drone was spotted hovering over the runway. So not fast and not far away.

I'm not saying it;s a conspiracy, I'm saying it's odd.

[GingerCat]

1 minute ago, walshie said:

One news article clearly stated a drone was spotted hovering over the runway. So not fast and not far away.

I'm not saying it;s a conspiracy, I'm saying it's odd.

I guess it depends on what part of the 2 mile runway it was hovering over and for how long. 

Don't forget a criminal investigation is now on going and any cctv etc will be taken by the police for the investigation and not released until they decide they can without damaging that investigation and resultant court proceedings. Nothing  new there. 

[MarcMaxus]

1 hour ago, Dave-G said:

If I were trying to avoid that I'd keep it going at irregular speeds and never become stationary.

Like a pigeon then??? Lol

[TIGHTCHOKE]

53 minutes ago, GingerCat said:

Because your have to be the best shot with a seriously good dose of luck on a very lucky day in luck town.

How many rifle shots would have the ability to hit a moving target at 400 metres altitude travelling  erratically at variable speeds in a built up area in an over populated country? Or one that zips over a fence at random at speed in an airport with 10000 people waiting to board a plane and not catch a stray bullet. 

Electronic devices exist to disable them and that's what's no doubt going to arrive. Firearms aren't the answer on this one. If they were you can bet your xmas turkey one of the 20 marksmen would have at least tried if not succeeded and there would by now be a photo of him/her posing with it shot to pieces on the tarmac by now.  

Oh, I'm not after the job, it is perfect for Dave Carrie and Perazzishot!

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, walshie said:

I'm not saying it;s a conspiracy, I'm saying it's odd.

Definitely odd, also a pretty slow response all round considering the possible terrorist implications.

It does sound though , that its probably just an idiot with a fancy drone, but it certainly wouldnt be unknown for a government to harvest a random event to further its agenda.

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I see what youre saying, but someone saw it and shut the place down.
Also , there must be multiple surveillance/ cameras on the perimeter , surely one picked up a decent image ?

It may have been reported by a pilot, may have been spotted by safety people, may have triggered an alarm crossing boundary, who knows, and I doubt they will say.

Boundary cameras are usually trained along boundaries looking for ground based intruders cutting the wire etc.  Surveillance cameras don't usually look up as there is no need, and strong sunlight can make them insensitive.

[Rewulf]

https://videos.metro.co.uk/video/met/2018/12/20/1621030128090103998/960x540_MP4_1621030128090103998.mp4

Flying straight over a terminal here ?

[GingerCat]

10 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

https://videos.metro.co.uk/video/met/2018/12/20/1621030128090103998/960x540_MP4_1621030128090103998.mp4

Flying straight over a terminal here ?

And it was predictably caught on a  mobie phone camera. 

 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Only needed 23 feet lead!

[amateur]

Just to put a human side on this.

Daughter, SIL and the two youngest grand-daughters were booked to fly today from Gatwick to Lapland to see Father Christmas.

The last message that we had was that they were on a coach from Gatwick to Luton and the littluns think that it is a great adventure.

We've not had an update yet, so we are hoping that the next news will be from Lapland.