nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Gatwick closed (mod note post 1)

Mebuntu

LGW has been closed for some time. Diversions in progress.

Mod Note added 23/12/2018:

This is not the Conspiracy Theories forum, nor is it After Hours. Posters who do not come here often are asked to read the charter. Conspiracy theory posts are not acceptable here.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

dhaughton99

It’s very strange that with the signal can’t be tracked. I think there’s more to this story.

robinph

mikegermany wrote: »

It's debatable

Drones make headlines and cause disruption but are a visible hazard

Whilst a surface to air missile launcher gives you a good chance of killing a lot of people if you get lucky, it's also more difficult to obtain, more difficult to transport, limited number of attempts before you're out of ammo...and more importantly probably for whoever is doing the current drone messing about, if you are carrying a missile launcher then your chances of getting shot increase significantly.

The guy with the drone at worst is probably going to get jumped on by a dog and or tasered.

mikegermany

robinph wrote: »

Not really. You can't pick them up so easily via Amazon with next day delivery.

It's debatable

Drones make headlines and cause disruption but are a visible hazard

Lustrum

Mebuntu wrote: »

Aer Lingus cancelled their early flight from DUB to Gatwick but Ryanair flew theirs to Stansted instead. Good solution.

Ryanair have a huge base there, Aer Lingus don't. Stansted is also NOTAMed to say they'll only accept emergency diversions as they're at capacity, and also that stobart ground handling have no staff so any aircraft expecting to get handled by them won't be!!

gctest50

You just need an angry farmer with a shotgun on standby for this

lawred2

GBX wrote: »

Been said now that at least one of the drone is a commercial one. Acquired outside of normal channels? Disgruntled operator?

well if you're determined to actually go about doing such a thing - then using commercial channels (i.e. not AMZ) is hardly going to be much of a deterrent..

using commercial channels is hardly akin to buying old Russian arms in the Ukraine

GBX

Been said now that at least one of the drone is a commercial one. Acquired outside of normal channels? Disgruntled operator?

robinph

mikegermany wrote: »

A bigger concern around airports is surface-to-air missiles

Hasn't happened thankfully

Not really. You can't pick them up so easily via Amazon with next day delivery.

mikegermany

A bigger concern around airports is surface-to-air missiles

Hasn't happened thankfully

robinph

Gatwick via Sky News wrote:

Gatwick's chief has said one of the drones is a heavy industrial drone.

Drones normally only have 30 minutes of battery power.

Irish Steve

I just sat through an interview with a UK Minister on Sky News, and the level of ignorance about the capability of a modern drone, and how to deal with it, was mind numbing.

You can have all the legislation you like, and work with drone manufacturers to put in systems to prevent them flying in restricted areas, and it will do NOTHING to resolve the real issue, which is that it is technically totally feasible to launch a drone from a remote location, which will then fly under programme control to a pre programmed flight plan, and the only thing that limits how long that flight lasts is the capacity of the on board batteries. There is no requirement for a ground to air radio link to control it, so there is no easy way to triangulate where the operator is, there is no uplink active.

The electronics to enable this sort of autonomous operation are freely available from multiple suppliers, and so it the software, and it is incredibly cheap to get, and the accuracy that can be achieved with the right equipment is the accuracy of the GPS signals that are used to provide the guidance.

The only thing capable of taking out such a drone will be a very directed Laser style device that will either overload the internal electronics, or cause significant damage to the mechanical parts of the device and render it incapable of continuing to fly, but if such devices are available, they are not being widely talked about, and are certainly not being deployed to the airport operators. Another possible option is to have a directional radio beam that will block GPS signals, but that will only disrupt the navigation of the device, not prevent it from continuing to fly. The problem with disrupting the GPS system to take out a drone is that there are then major problems for aircraft in the area, as they are very likely to also be relying on GPS signals for their navigational accuracy, so for obvious safety reasons, the airspace has to be cleared before a take down system can be used.

Shooting down using traditional weapons is not an option, the potential for injury or worse to third parties at a considerable distance from the airport makes any sort of projectile weapon an impossible solution, and depending on the size of the drone, even aiming such a device would be incredibly difficult to do.

And to make it clear, the potential for damage to an aircraft from a drone is much higher than from a bird, and we've seen on a regular basis the sort of damage that a bird causes.

The mass of the drone is higher, and the density of some of the parts means that they have the potential to inflict much more damage to critical components such as the engines. Fortunately, even with all the technology available, it is still incredibly difficult to put a drone into exactly the right position to impact an airframe in the right place to do damage, because of the closing speeds of the aircraft with the device.

I'm under no illusions, for a person with the motivation, it is incredibly easy to get access to the devices and the technology to cause a huge amount of disruption, and the regulators have been very slow to develop appropriate counter measures that can mitigate the problem. Having said that, the final approach to landing is a problem area, because the way that the aircraft is flown means that it is operating within a very small airspace window, so it is much easier to get the drone into a location where it has the potential to do damage.

glenfieldman

sparrowcar wrote: »

Possibly.
Could also be kids high on energy drinks.
Any Anti government group
Any terror group
A drunk wedding photographer.

LOL

Mebuntu

Aer Lingus cancelled their early flight from DUB to Gatwick but Ryanair flew theirs to Stansted instead. Good solution.

sparrowcar

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Any chance it's some of the locals who are trying to stop the second runway?

Possibly.
Could also be kids high on energy drinks.
Any Anti government group
Any terror group
A drunk wedding photographer.

Padraig Mor

sparrowcar wrote: »

Authorities believe it's a coordinated attack by persons with resources.

Any chance it's some of the locals who are trying to stop the second runway?

lawred2

lol

Tabnabs

All that technology and not a spear in sight...

AGC

Extended now until midday

Nijmegen

Dardania wrote: »

I wonder if they're trying to triangulate any command signals to it, and that's the delay about intervening...

If someone was thinking this through perhaps they'd have the drones programmed to run themselves within the set area of the airfield. Whomever is at it, it's a helluva demonstration of the ease with which bad actors can cause a lot of economic damage.

robinph

lawred2 wrote: »

kinda concerning... what's to stop a worldwide concerted effort to shut airports down?

if all it takes is one man and his drone...

I heard them saying there were two of them, presumably taking it in turns to fly and recharge their batteries.

It's unusual (but good) that there doesn't seem to be any TV cameras out and about around the perimeter or showing footage of the drones. Normally an incident going on this long right next to London and there would be 360 coverage from TV cameras setup.

sparrowcar

fricatus wrote: »

это не правда!!!

I heard it on a conference call this morning..

lawred2

kinda concerning... what's to stop a worldwide concerted effort to shut airports down?

if all it takes is one man and his drone...

Dardania

I wonder if they're trying to triangulate any command signals to it, and that's the delay about intervening...

lawred2

Crash another drone into it

robinph

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

robinph wrote: »

Not like there are many people hanging around the runway area likely to be hit. Not sure what the problem is, other than them finding a bullet on the runway in a few years time and having forgotten that they fired it so there being a security alert due to that.

I don't think you appreciate how far a bullet shot into the air can travel and the speed and unpredictability at which it returns to earth when shot upwards.

Admittedly firing a load of bullets at it would be fairly futile anyway. A souped up tennis ball launcher would be a better way to down the drone, just need to be close enough.

knucklehead6

It's certainly not a one shot one kill situation

https://youtu.be/wmTKktd9xCc

Bubbaclaus

robinph wrote: »

Not like there are many people hanging around the runway area likely to be hit. Not sure what the problem is, other than them finding a bullet on the runway in a few years time and having forgotten that they fired it so there being a security alert due to that.

I don't think you appreciate how far a bullet shot into the air can travel and the speed and unpredictability at which it returns to earth when shot upwards.

robinph

The Black Oil wrote: »

GBX wrote: »

Why can't they take these drones out of the sky. Apparently still flying? Eagles/ hawks or even the army/ RAF?

On BBC Radio 4 they said there was concern about stray bullets.

Not like there are many people hanging around the runway area likely to be hit. Not sure what the problem is, other than them finding a bullet on the runway in a few years time and having forgotten that they fired it so there being a security alert due to that.

Dardania

fricatus wrote: »

это не правда!!!

Just doing some sight-seeing of the very historic Gatwick area

fricatus

sparrowcar wrote: »

Authorities believe it's a coordinated attack by persons with resources.

это не правда!!!