Gatwick closed by drones

[anonymous-user]

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

Plus the police one must have had flashing blue lights, battenburg and say "Police" down the side of it, yes?

Thank you
This made me chuckle more than I should have

[wc98]

pingu393 said:

Gatwick bosses did the right thing. Both sides learn things every time there is an incident like this.

have to agree with this. in the day of modern fuel saving twin engined airliners ingesting a large drone on take off has a high chance of ending badly. i would quite happily fly in a 747 in the same situation though,definitely one scenario where four engines is better than two.

[frisbee]

Licencing will definitely stop things like Gatwick from happening, oh wait:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46712041

[hyphen]

E46? looks like LED lights too so one of the last few years of production.

SE rather than Sport suspension which is a strange choice for a break-in, M suspension is ideal for the flat smooth airport roads.

[fatboy18]

hyphen said:

E46? looks like LED lights too so one of the last few years of production.

SE rather than Sport suspension which is a strange choice for a break-in, M suspension is ideal for the flat smooth airport roads.

You need to get out more

[98elise]

PositronicRay said:

bhstewie said:

The Hypno-Toad said:

The more I hear about this now, the more it seems to me that it was almost some form of mass hysteria. But it is interesting that the police have finally decided to apologise to the couple who were arrested. I wonder if they had to wait a few days to do that because they were investigating if any kind of offence had actually occurred and because it maybe dawning on them that it hasn't they have decided to admit they were being a bit OTT in the way the couple were treated.

Two things I think you can safely say after all of this. Firstly, that couple need to move house because someone round were they live clearly hates their guts. Secondly, I would like to see any other UK airport say there's a drone about and we need to close the airport without having a lot of evidence because it would mean some seriously angry people in those terminals.

During th
I think most people would be angrier if they ended up scattered across the airport periphery because their plane ingested a drone on take off.

To all the people demanding "evidence" would you be happy if someone called your employer with a bomb threat and they did nothing because there was no evidence?

Lots of things happen where after the fact there is no evidence of a threat - that doesn't mean the authorities didn't act correctly, if less than perfectly, at the time.

During the 80s we used to get a few bomb threats at work, the procedure was to be aware while carry on as normal.

That's not normal. Every office I've worked in since the 80's has had a bomb threat policy and not doesn't involve carrying on as normal. I current work in corporate real estate and every one of our buildings has a bomb drill.

Edited by 98elise on Sunday 30th December 08:53

[AW111]

EddieSteadyGo said:

La Liga said:

So we know there was at least one drone at the relevant place at the relevant times.

How come we don't have any pictures of it? Or does the lack of photography become less relevant now?

Have to say, that's a fair point - they can't have it both ways...

Still no answer from the "there was no drone" crowd.

[anonymous-user]

AW111 said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

La Liga said:

So we know there was at least one drone at the relevant place at the relevant times.

How come we don't have any pictures of it? Or does the lack of photography become less relevant now?

Have to say, that's a fair point - they can't have it both ways...

Still no answer from the "there was no drone" crowd.

They're busy emailing everyone with apologies. It's what we demand!

[Halb]

Gareth79 said:

I called the head office and managed to speak to somebody quite high up and at first they said it was a team-building exercise and harmless, but eventually after I explained a few scenarios he realised it was in fact a truly terrible idea on multiple levels and said he'd had it reviewed!

What scenarios did you explain?

[Leonard Stanley]

We are the best in the world - top of the tree - at embarrassing cock ups.

Utterly laughable.

[Monkeylegend]

98elise said:

That's not normal. Every office I've worked in since the 80's has had a bomb threat policy and not doesn't involve carrying on as normal. I current work in corporate real estate and every one of our buildings has a bomb drill.

Edited by 98elise on Sunday 30th December 08:53

We had a very clear bomb threat policy at the last firm I worked with. We had several over the years from the ALF.

*If you see a man with "Bomb Disposal" on the back of his tee shirt running away fast, try and keep up.

[turbobloke]

Cold said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

Plus the police one must have had flashing blue lights, battenburg and say "Police" down the side of it, yes?

And the operator would have been doing some weird hand to hand shuffling on the joysticks.

Necessary when eating doughnuts.

[FN2TypeR]

Gareth79 said:

bhstewie said:

PositronicRay said:

Apparantly IRA would use a code word known @ the police station. We recivied a few threats, clearly no code word, so no police, line managers used sweep the store peering in bins and odd corners looking for anything suspicious. ASDA mainland.

Makes a bit more sense but no way that st would fly these days.

A couple of years ago my then-girlfriend worked at a large department store in Guildford and mentioned they were annoyed because their work was disrupted by a "find the bomb" exercise. My eyebrows raised and she mentioned it was just a thing they did every now and then. Apparently at random they would be told to find the "bomb" which was a tennis ball hidden somewhere in the department, and they had to search and find it while appearing to carry on as normal.

I called the head office and managed to speak to somebody quite high up and at first they said it was a team-building exercise and harmless, but eventually after I explained a few scenarios he realised it was in fact a truly terrible idea on multiple levels and said he'd had it reviewed!

what an absolute jobsworth you are, sir

[Monkeylegend]

Gareth79 said:

I called the head office and managed to speak to somebody quite high up and at first they said it was a team-building exercise and harmless, but eventually after I explained a few scenarios he realised it was in fact a truly terrible idea on multiple levels and said he'd had it reviewed!

What were these multi level scenarios out of interest?

When you say he'd had it reviewed, did he change anything?

So many unanswered questions.

[fatboy18]

techiedave said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

Plus the police one must have had flashing blue lights, battenburg and say "Police" down the side of it, yes?

Thank you
This made me chuckle more than I should have

Me too Have another

[AW111]

fatboy18 said:

techiedave said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

Plus the police one must have had flashing blue lights, battenburg and say "Police" down the side of it, yes?

Thank you
This made me chuckle more than I should have

Me too Have another

Did the original drone have battenburg but say "Polite"?

[Rich_W]

pingu393 said:

Not true. PIRA wanted to create mayhem and inconvenience. Death and injury on the mainland, in most cases, were collateral damage.

I spent several years parking my car half on the kerb, not washing it and walking up to it from a distance so that I could see underneath, but I never thought about never using it. Life must go on, but you need to adapt to the threat.

Gatwick bosses did the right thing. Both sides learn things every time there is an incident like this.

What was your job? Army?

[PositronicRay]

pingu393 said:

graylag said:

bhstewie said:

PositronicRay said:

Supermarket

I'm actually shocked at that. IRA back in those days presumably?

Bit of a cliche but times change I guess, it's 2018 and not that you expect it working in a supermarket, but I just don't think you'd get away with taking that chance these days.

Different world with different types of threat. The IRA had agreed code words that were used to verify the threat when phoned into the police. If a code word was used then it was immediate evacuation. I’m not sure why or when they used them though, as their aim seemed to me to be as much death and destruction as possible and I have no time for terrorists.

Not true. PIRA wanted to create mayhem and inconvenience. Death and injury on the mainland, in most cases, were collateral damage.

I spent several years parking my car half on the kerb, not washing it and walking up to it from a distance so that I could see underneath, but I never thought about never using it. Life must go on, but you need to adapt to the threat.

Gatwick bosses did the right thing. Both sides learn things every time there is an incident like this.

Why didn't you wash it?

[HoHoHo]

PositronicRay said:

Why didn't you wash it?

I’m guessing you can see if anyone has brushed against the car, hand marks etc.

[pingu393]

HoHoHo said:

PositronicRay said:

Why didn't you wash it?

I’m guessing you can see if anyone has brushed against the car, hand marks etc.