Gatwick closed by drones

Author
Discussion

Vaud

31,226 posts

94 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Shakermaker said:
airport/airline should help. However with widespread disruption there's only so many buses/coaches/trains that are available at short notice. Usually if a flight has to divert for some reason, just one flight, its inconvenient but there will be a coach company near the airport who can spare some drivers the overtime and get them to do Manchester - Gatwick for the passengers if it is clear the aircraft won't be able to take off again soon. But if every flight is delayed, we get the disruption as per today! A very frustrating situation for everyone involved
There is normally enough train capacity outside of peak times (in the day, night flights are different). Manchester can route from Manchester to London, Manchester to Leeds to London, or Manchester to York to London. 3 high speed lines once at the main line station.

El stovey

25,123 posts

202 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Looks like it’s nearly over and Gatwick’s gearing up for action.

CthulhuTheGreat

11 posts

56 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
996owner said:
In my opinion drones should only be sold to current operators with CAA permissions. Thiers's no such thing as a drone licence!

A few simple steps would help
Drones should also be make to hold flight records sent back to a central database (like DJi drones do).
Drones should only be able to take off is valid insurance is linked to the database. (Flock insurance do a pay per flight insurance)
The operator of the drone would also need to be linked to the database.

This would make an operator a little more traceable.

It costs a fortune to get the PFCO (so called licence) from the CAA, many armatures are completing commercial work for a few quid and the CAA/police are doing nothing. As a result we end in in situations like this as Gatwick.

The latest rules ban flying within 1km of an airport boundary.
I Don't believe that regulation would have a massive impact on this type of incident. Yes, sensible operators will follow the rules but do you really think that criminal elements and general morons will follow them? We have plenty of regulations around vehicle use but that doesn't stop idiots driving or riding without licenses, insurance, on off road bikes without plates and so on does it...

Any technological solution that is put in place will ultimately be circumvented in some way making it ineffective if someone really wants to do some harm with one.

rodericb

1,598 posts

65 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
schmalex said:
There are many different options and that is certainly one that has been tested around the world.

I was at an event in Baghdad a couple of years ago where, amongst other things, there were all sorts of weird and wacky ways of denying UAS being demonstrated. There are all sorts of different methods of denial but each has various limitations.

For example, take the vehicle that carried the exploding payload into the Venezuelan PM’s speech zone.

If that had been jammed, it could have fallen into the crowd and done even greater damage

If it had been knocked out of the sky by birds of prey (actually quite a viable option), the same could have happened

You can’t really go round firing off rounds in public spaces and then, when it crashed, it would have still potentially exploded.

They are a pain to deal with.

Edited by schmalex on Thursday 20th December 09:43
Are things that binary in the UAS denying world that you can't have two or three UAS denying methods at ones disposal? "Sorry Bob, you can have either two of the drone nets or one of the bazooka net guns and that's it.....we pick one anti UAS denying platform and stick with it!!!" Anyway, I have a suspicion that the Venezuelan president isn't giving a speech off to the side of runway 08 right now so one would be pretty safe in using any number of UAS denying methods to shut this problem down yes?

TurbosSuck

151 posts

21 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
I can't believe the trouble this has caused, definitely not just a moron faffing about. I just hope this does not lead to a stupid knee jerk reaction that affects proper RC enthusiasts. Unless *dons tinfoil hat* the idea is to cause so much disruption the government can push through anti-drone legislation...

Still not sure why they can't just sniper it out of the sky?
Advertisement

Thankyou4calling

6,733 posts

112 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
When the dust settles we will see what a massive over reaction this has been.

It’s the usual British disease, H and S regs, fear of being accused of negligence, compensation culture.

If it happened in many other countries it’d be done with in 30minutes.

Jakdaw

290 posts

149 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Wow still ongoing? It's amazing how unprepared they are for this sort of thing.

The BBC makes it sound like they're being run by such a group of muppets:

"Gatwick chief operating officer Chris Woodroofe said police had not wanted to shoot the devices down because of the risk from stray bullets."


If they're scared about bullets, why couldn't they have gone and bought their own drone 12 hours ago, and whilst they've diverted all the planes anyway just fly it into whatever is causing the problem?


Legislation is going to do nothing - the popularity of these devices now means that miscreants have understood the potential that they have. But you can't ban the technology now..... after all people have been building remote control aircraft in their garages, without the need for specialist equipment, for many decades now.

El stovey

25,123 posts

202 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
So who’s responsible?

-General moron(s)
-Jihadist
-Environmentalists
-Brexiters/Remainers
-Dark forces looking to cause “so much disruption the government can push through anti-drone legislation...”
-Kids on sleep over gone wrong.
-Russians

ETA Russians.

Edited by El stovey on Thursday 20th December 10:31

Hoofy

68,315 posts

221 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Wobbegong said:
tonker said:
Surely it’s the environmentalist anti plane idiots. Because they got next To no punishment last time ?
I’d go with crusties too. “Preventing a higher crime against the planet by committing this one” seems to be their get out of jail card.
Wouldn't they hit Heathrow instead? I thought that was the one being argued over.

p1stonhead

17,947 posts

106 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Police say they think it’s deliberate sabotage of the airport. Presumably a big distinction in terms of what could be charged.

olimain

687 posts

74 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
TurbosSuck said:
Still not sure why they can't just sniper it out of the sky?
A bullet travels miles and miles, extremely high risk. Shotgun would be fine - if they could get close enough!

S100HP

9,373 posts

106 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
El stovey said:
So who’s responsible?

-General moron(s)
-Jihadist
-Environmentalists
-Brexiters/Remainers
-Dark forces looking to cause “so much disruption the government can push through anti-drone legislation...”
-Kids on sleep over gone wrong.
Pesky Ruskies

Oakey

23,807 posts

155 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
You'd think they'd wait patiently with their own drone, then, after about 10 minutes or so (when they know the battery must be starting to get low), they send theirs up and follow the other drone back to base?

Shakermaker

8,229 posts

39 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
El stovey said:
So who’s responsible?

-General moron(s)
-Jihadist
-Environmentalists
-Brexiters/Remainers
-Dark forces looking to cause “so much disruption the government can push through anti-drone legislation...”
-Kids on sleep over gone wrong.
I'd go with either "General morons" or "Environmentalists"


Vaud

31,226 posts

94 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
TurbosSuck said:
Still not sure why they can't just sniper it out of the sky?
1) Its a moving target in low light conditions (or rather dark earlier) and a very small object.
2) Sniper rifles are high velocity, long range (up to miles)
3) The sniper would be shooting upwards
4) A high velocity, say 0.50 calibre bullet could reach a populated area (or damage something critical)

Like shooting guns out of people's hands, it's more for films.

El stovey

25,123 posts

202 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Thankyou4calling said:
When the dust settles we will see what a massive over reaction this has been.

It’s the usual British disease, H and S regs, fear of being accused of negligence, compensation culture.

If it happened in many other countries it’d be done with in 30minutes.
I wouldn’t want to hit a drone on take off or landing.

Pretty hard to find someone flying the drone at night time,

How would other countries have handled this in 30 minutes?

Trevatanus

10,031 posts

89 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
El stovey said:
So who’s responsible?

-General moron(s)
-Jihadist
-Environmentalists
-Brexiters/Remainers
-Dark forces looking to cause “so much disruption the government can push through anti-drone legislation...”
-Kids on sleep over gone wrong.
I was reluctant to use the "J" word, but if the idea of "terrorism" is to cause disruption, they certainly did that.

eharding

9,162 posts

223 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Vaud said:
TurbosSuck said:
Still not sure why they can't just sniper it out of the sky?
1) Its a moving target in low light conditions (or rather dark earlier) and a very small object.
2) Sniper rifles are high velocity, long range (up to miles)
3) The sniper would be shooting upwards
4) A high velocity, say 0.50 calibre bullet could reach a populated area (or damage something critical)

Like shooting guns out of people's hands, it's more for films.
Quite. There's only one way to ensure a high probability of shooting these things down, although I can imagine much twitching of curtains from homes in the vicinity when they install these little beauties at Gatwick.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsVUISS8oHs

(Warning, contains bad language)

RJG46

980 posts

7 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
Welcome to the Terror Drone

schmalex

12,641 posts

145 months

Thursday 20th December 2018
quotequote all
rodericb said:
schmalex said:
There are many different options and that is certainly one that has been tested around the world.

I was at an event in Baghdad a couple of years ago where, amongst other things, there were all sorts of weird and wacky ways of denying UAS being demonstrated. There are all sorts of different methods of denial but each has various limitations.

For example, take the vehicle that carried the exploding payload into the Venezuelan PM’s speech zone.

If that had been jammed, it could have fallen into the crowd and done even greater damage

If it had been knocked out of the sky by birds of prey (actually quite a viable option), the same could have happened

You can’t really go round firing off rounds in public spaces and then, when it crashed, it would have still potentially exploded.

They are a pain to deal with.

Edited by schmalex on Thursday 20th December 09:43
Are things that binary in the UAS denying world that you can't have two or three UAS denying methods at ones disposal? "Sorry Bob, you can have either two of the drone nets or one of the bazooka net guns and that's it.....we pick one anti UAS denying platform and stick with it!!!" Anyway, I have a suspicion that the Venezuelan president isn't giving a speech off to the side of runway 08 right now so one would be pretty safe in using any number of UAS denying methods to shut this problem down yes?
Who’s going to pay for them? And how many do you put where? Done properly, these things aren’t cheap and can only be controlled by properly trained people. Then there’s the cost of constant updates for the different types of drone etc.

I can’t go into detail, but it’s not as simple or as cheap as shoot it down or knock it out of the sky