Gatwick closed by drones

[Not-The-Messiah]

I don't have a drone but if I did and I was flying somthing like a 50 gram drone about outside. The sort of thing you buy in Tesco in the toy section the size of you hand. And a cop comes up to me and asked "Have you got your registration to fly that?" I will more than likely reply "Have you got your registration for being such a sad ?"

Stupid and retarded law made up by people who just feel they need to tell everyone how to do everything.

You would need to register something like this I bet the registration will cost more that the drone.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/i/112924862053?chn=ps&u...

Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Tuesday 8th January 02:15

[TeamD]

Not-The-Messiah said:

You would need to register something like this I bet the registration will cost more that the drone.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/i/112924862053?chn=ps&u...

It's only 50g so proposed legislation wouldn't require registration.

[Cold]

There was no drone.

[Not-The-Messiah]

TeamD said:

Not-The-Messiah said:

You would need to register something like this I bet the registration will cost more that the drone.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/i/112924862053?chn=ps&u...

It's only 50g so proposed legislation wouldn't require registration.

Me being stupid read it as grams not Kg

[98elise]

TeamD said:

No, you aren't missing anything.

This is yet another example of how the hard of thinking approach problem solving. It is the self same approach that results in "turn in off and turn it on again" dullard solution in the IT industry.

That's a weird comparison. Rebooting fixes a lot of problems for good reasons. If you want systems that work error free with every other system on the planet then it's going to get very expensive.

[TeamD]

98elise said:

That's a weird comparison. Rebooting fixes a lot of problems for good reasons. If you want systems that work error free with every other system on the planet then it's going to get very expensive.

I disagree, you won't have solved the problem, you've just postponed the symptom...until next time it goes wrong. A truly amateur approach to problem resolution.

[Biker 1]

Cold said:

There was no drone.

God I hope you're wrong, but this is looking increasingly likely.
My flight was delayed by some 6 hours the day after 'security measures' had been put in place, so it was a very irritating long slog, but not the end of the world. Poor buggers who had Xmas basically cancelled by all of this deserve better. As for the wrongly arrested couple from Crawley: I don't normally think much about milking a situation financially for all its worth, but on this occasion, they should be suing the st out of the media & offered reasonable compensation by the apparently totally inept plod, who appear to have been totally out of their depth on this one.
What is interesting is that passengers were not entitled to compensation as the matter was out of the airlines' hands. However, if it transpires that there were indeed no drones whatsoever, would compensation then not be due from the authorities? The people running Gatwick....??

[poo at Paul's]

Not-The-Messiah said:

I don't have a drone but if I did and I was flying somthing like a 50 gram drone about outside. The sort of thing you buy in Tesco in the toy section the size of you hand. And a cop comes up to me and asked "Have you got your registration to fly that?" I will more than likely reply "Have you got your registration for being such a sad ?"

Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Tuesday 8th January 02:15

As mentioned, your 50g drone is below the weight limit propsed, but ignoring that, I am old enough to have had to purchase a Licence under the wireless telegraphy Act to operate a radio controlled car in the 1970's. Even without the instant online access and tech we have nowadays, it was not an issue, nipped in the post office, showed some id / address proof, paid them their pound for whatever it was, was given licence, carried it with me.

So when the country, roads and airwaves were far less crowded, we had to be licenced, why not now?

Edited by poo at Paul's on Tuesday 8th January 08:46

[TeamD]

poo at Paul's said:

Whilst you say that, i am old enough to have had to purchase a Licence under the wireless telegraphy Act to operate a radio controlled car in the 1970's. Even without the instant online access and tech we have nowadays, it was not an issue, nipped in the post office, showed some id / address proof, paid them their pound for whatever it was, was given licence, carried it with me.

So when the country, roads and airwaves were far less crowded, we had to be licenced, why not now?

And what did this magical piece of paper achieve? Other than keeping some bureaucrats in a job that is.

[Penelope Stopit]

Cold said:

There was no drone.

Laws will have been changed to deal with virtual drones by virtual MPs that work for a virtual government

[The Hypno-Toad]

Because I'm old and senile now, I have been wracking by brain to think what all of this story reminded me of. And then I finally remembered....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angele...

[croyde]

The Hypno-Toad said:

Because I'm old and senile now, I have been wracking by brain to think what all of this story reminded me of. And then I finally remembered....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angele...

Interesting read.

Did at first thought you meant the film with a similar name that had the US Army fighting aliens

[aeropilot]

fatboy18 said:

Bigends said:

Arrested couple look like theyre bailing out https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1067916/gatwick-...

I really hope they can get a good solicitor and take the media for all their worth.

Media don't give a fk though, and are more than happy to ruin people's lives first and then write a token cheque afterwards.

[abzmike]

Rich_W said:

The fact that the government even considered this a "solution" to potential illegal drone activity (and the 250g things a bit light by the sounds of it!)
The fact the media aren't asking "wtf is that going to solve"
The fact that no one has been arrested and charged with all this.


Is everyone utterly useless or am I missing something?

Amidst all the other blithering incompetence this government is displaying on an almost hourly basis, this pales into insignificance.

[2Btoo]

TeamD said:

Rich_W said:

The fact that the government even considered this a "solution" to potential illegal drone activity (and the 250g things a bit light by the sounds of it!)
The fact the media aren't asking "wtf is that going to solve"
The fact that no one has been arrested and charged with all this.


Is everyone utterly useless or am I missing something?

No, you aren't missing anything.

This is yet another example of how the hard of thinking approach problem solving. It is the self same approach that results in "turn in off and turn it on again" dullard solution in the IT industry.

The problem is that politicians and bureaucrats have no ability to creatively come up with a sensible approach to anything. I'm heartily fed up with this bone headed, knee jerk attitude that results in the punishment of the law abiding whilst completely failing to address those that don't obey the rules.

For example, what difference will extending the exclusion zone around airports actually make? Answer: Absolutely freaking Nothing!

Yet another example of stupid legislation designed by stupid people.

EXACTLY my thoughts. This legislation is utter, utter tosh which will achieve nothing, other than allowing the government to appear to have done something. Where and when did the complete inability to think about a problem and come up with an effective solution come about? I was utterly incredulous when this appeared on the BBC yesterday and am astonished the more I think about it. The only conclusion I can come to is that doing something properly would cost a lot of money and we all know how keen the government are to spend money on things that matter - i.e. not at all. Telling everyone that they need to register their drone and aren't allowed to fly it within 5 miles of an airport is however very cheap indeed.

The worrying thing is that the populace, you and me, will fail to be protected by this. If someone wants to eff up Gatwick again they now have some clear guidance on what to do - buy a drone, don't register it, fly it around at 20 minute intervals - and there is NOTHING that anyone can do about it!

This is a complete joke.

Edited by 2Btoo on Tuesday 8th January 09:56

[Cold]

Biker 1 said:

Cold said:

There was no drone.

God I hope you're wrong, but this is looking increasingly likely.
My flight was delayed by some 6 hours the day after 'security measures' had been put in place, so it was a very irritating long slog, but not the end of the world. Poor buggers who had Xmas basically cancelled by all of this deserve better. As for the wrongly arrested couple from Crawley: I don't normally think much about milking a situation financially for all its worth, but on this occasion, they should be suing the st out of the media & offered reasonable compensation by the apparently totally inept plod, who appear to have been totally out of their depth on this one.
What is interesting is that passengers were not entitled to compensation as the matter was out of the airlines' hands. However, if it transpires that there were indeed no drones whatsoever, would compensation then not be due from the authorities? The people running Gatwick....??

Shouldn't really have to post this again, but it seems increasingly closer to the truth than the sarcasm suggests:

[Thankyou4calling]

Cold said:

There was no drone.

Hang on mate, that’s my line!

[HoHoHo]

2Btoo said:

TeamD said:

Rich_W said:

The fact that the government even considered this a "solution" to potential illegal drone activity (and the 250g things a bit light by the sounds of it!)
The fact the media aren't asking "wtf is that going to solve"
The fact that no one has been arrested and charged with all this.


Is everyone utterly useless or am I missing something?

No, you aren't missing anything.

This is yet another example of how the hard of thinking approach problem solving. It is the self same approach that results in "turn in off and turn it on again" dullard solution in the IT industry.

The problem is that politicians and bureaucrats have no ability to creatively come up with a sensible approach to anything. I'm heartily fed up with this bone headed, knee jerk attitude that results in the punishment of the law abiding whilst completely failing to address those that don't obey the rules.

For example, what difference will extending the exclusion zone around airports actually make? Answer: Absolutely freaking Nothing!

Yet another example of stupid legislation designed by stupid people.

EXACTLY my thoughts. This legislation is utter, utter tosh which will achieve nothing, other than allowing the government to appear to have done something. Where and when did the complete inability to think about a problem and come up with an effective solution come about? I was utterly incredulous when this appeared on the BBC yesterday and am astonished the more I think about it. The only conclusion I can come to is that doing something properly would cost a lot of money and we all know how keen the government are to spend money on things that matter - i.e. not at all. Telling everyone that they need to register their drone and aren't allowed to fly it within 5 miles of an airport is however very cheap indeed.

The worrying thing is that the populace, you and me, will fail to be protected by this. If someone wants to eff up Gatwick again they now have some clear guidance on what to do - buy a drone, don't register it, fly it around at 20 minute intervals - and there is NOTHING that anyone can do about it!

This is a complete joke.

Edited by 2Btoo on Tuesday 8th January 09:56

I'm not disputing this is a complete joke and to be honest I have no answers how to solve the problem..

What would you do in this instance and moving forward?

[jdw100]

2Btoo said:

EXACTLY my thoughts. This legislation is utter, utter tosh which will achieve nothing, other than allowing the government to appear to have done something. Where and when did the complete inability to think about a problem and come up with an effective solution come about? I was utterly incredulous when this appeared on the BBC yesterday and am astonished the more I think about it. The only conclusion I can come to is that doing something properly would cost a lot of money and we all know how keen the government are to spend money on things that matter - i.e. not at all. Telling everyone that they need to register their drone and aren't allowed to fly it within 5 miles of an airport is however very cheap indeed.

The worrying thing is that the populace, you and me, will fail to be protected by this. If someone wants to eff up Gatwick again they now have some clear guidance on what to do - buy a drone, don't register it, fly it around at 20 minute intervals - and there is NOTHING that anyone can do about it!

This is a complete joke.

Edited by 2Btoo on Tuesday 8th January 09:56

Just thinking about this - do you have to present in the same area to run a drone?

Obviously the military can sit in a shed in the UK and strike Taliban type chaps several thousands of miles away...satellite link?

Anything to stop me leaving a drone set up near Gatwick and then popping home (to Indonesia) and running it from there?

I have a security camera thing in our lounge that I can access from anywhere in the world over wifi or mobile phone - can move the camera around talk through it etc anywhere I can get phone signal.

Fundamentally could I sit at home here with my feet up a good few thousands of miles away and play havoc with Gatwick until someone shoots me (well, my drone) down?

[996owner]

As a Pfco holder (some call it licenced operator) right from the start I had doubts about this story.

Funny how there's been no photographs of the so called damaged drones found yet their happy to name and shame 2 people publically before proven guilty... Slightly off topic but how come people involved in other crimes aren't named and shamed before being proven either way?


I think this whole thing has been blown out of all proportion and now we will see a new laws stating drones must be registered (and that wont be free). I also think they'll dream up some other reporting system where anyone who intends to fly must file some kind of flight plan and again at a cost per flight.

I said right from the start of this its all about raking in some cash.

A quick google states a plane will be 300ft per nautical mile from the runway end so an exclusion zone of 3 miles would put an aircraft at say 900ft. Drone laws state that we can't fly more than 400ft altitude anyway so yet again this new set of rules doesn't help and criminals wont care anyway.

CAA approved drone operators have to review every year at a cost of £182, I think theres currently 3k permitted operators, nice little income for the CAA

Edited by 996owner on Tuesday 8th January 12:33