Drones and Airports

[rifleman 70]

Sussex police have now admitted that some of the sightings reported to them may have been the drone deployed by the police to search for the offenders.

https://www.itv.com/news/2018-12-29/some-gatwick-drone-sightings-may-have-been-police-device-officer-admits/

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[gowlerk 2,249]

And they are attempting to justify holding the guy they cleared without charge by saying that it was somehow better for him to sit in jail than to be released under suspicion. The Sussex police are showing definite signs of limited competence.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[jakee 1,562]

rifleman

Sussex police have now admitted that some of the sightings reported to them may have been the drone deployed by the police to search for the offenders.

https://www.itv.com/news/2018-12-29/some-gatwick-drone-sightings-may-have-been-police-device-officer-admits/

Well, yeah. That's inevitable, isn't it.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,562]

gowlerk

And they are attempting to justify holding the guy they cleared without charge by saying that it was somehow better for him to sit in jail than to be released under suspicion. The Sussex police are showing definite signs of limited competence.

That's kinda my point. They were incompetent, because apparently it's something no-one had prepared for or trained for. They're pretty much making it up as they go along, thus making the massive vulnerability even worse.

Just remember though, that it wasn't the Sussex police who first saw the drone or who shut down the airport because of it.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[gowlerk 2,249]

Any word on the investigation? Still strangely silent.

https://www.cinema5d.com/dronegate-what-actually-happened-at-gatwick-airport/

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[jakee 1,562]

gowlerk

Any word on the investigation? Still strangely silent.

https://www.cinema5d.com/dronegate-what-actually-happened-at-gatwick-airport/

Which makes your blase dismissal of any similar threat to local DZs "because they wouldn't get away with it' all the more naive, right?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[gowlerk 2,249]

Quote

Which makes your blase dismissal of any similar threat to local DZs "because they wouldn't get away with it' all the more naive, right?

Do you mean blasé? No, it is not naive to believe that no one would use drones to shut down a drop zone because they don't want to go to jail. For the same reason Kimmy types don't just shoot down the aircraft neither will they use drones. It would just not be worth it.

You may be suffering from drone hysteria.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[jakee 1,562]

Quote

Do you mean blasé?

Obviously. The accent is implied

Quote

No, it is not naive to believe that no one would use drones to shut down a drop zone because they don't want to go to jail.

But why would they go to jail? No one can catch them.

In mountain biking circles there are numerous cases of trail use nazis sabotaging runs with things as lethal as neck high wire and covered pits with punji sticks. They risk going to prison for GBH, or even attempted murder. They still do it, because they're so confident they wont get caught.

As you just demonstrated so perfectly, noise abatement nazis can feel the same way with drones - with the added bonus that they don't even need to risk having someone's death or paralysis on their conscience.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[gowlerk 2,249]

Drones definitely are going to be used to do evil. But not this evil. Noise abatement Nazis would be caught for the same reason most criminals are caught. Investigators will look to see who has a motive, then who has opportunity, and then they will tie the two together. And the penalty will be quite severe.

Drones will be employed by terrorists to deliver explosives. Probably in the very near future. The military and intelligence services have already shown the way.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

jakee

Quote

Do you mean blasé?

Obviously. The accent is implied

Quote

No, it is not naive to believe that no one would use drones to shut down a drop zone because they don't want to go to jail.

But why would they go to jail? No one can catch them.

In mountain biking circles there are numerous cases of trail use nazis sabotaging runs with things as lethal as neck high wire and covered pits with punji sticks. They risk going to prison for GBH, or even attempted murder. They still do it, because they're so confident they wont get caught.

As you just demonstrated so perfectly, noise abatement nazis can feel the same way with drones - with the added bonus that they don't even need to risk having someone's death or paralysis on their conscience.

I would think that the situational differences would be significant.

For instance, Gatwick is a huge place. There are virtually tens of thousands of people would be potential suspects.

If it were to happen at Mile-Hi, for instance, the suspect list would be a lot shorter.

For an Otter at 70 or 80 knots, vs an airliner at 150 or more, the threat of damage and ability to avoid it are a lot different too.

Besides, at a DZ, there are often a few drones around. Using another drone to follow the intruder back to it's home wouldn't be all that hard. Using one as a Kamikaze would also be possible, but would have potential consequences, and may not provide any usable info.

And, as far as the 'silence' on the investigation goes, the Brit cops are far less willing than Americans to share that sort of stuff with the press. And the press seems to be more willing to accept that. Not saying it's good or bad, just a difference between the two cultures.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Erroll 80]

wolfriverjoe

.... Using another drone to follow the intruder back to it's home wouldn't be all that hard.

I can state with great conviction that that would be almost impossible to do.


As was said earlier, I also believe that drones will be used to deliver "payloads of warfare", such as explosives, gases, poisons, etc and it will be very, very difficult to prevent.

I am very familiar with DJI's Phantom series of drones. The software needed to fly these drones already have built-in exclusion zones over airports, big sports stadia etc. These drones are also registered with DJI and have unique identifiers. To legally fly them they also have to be registered with the FAA (or local equivalent).

Third party apps exist which do not have these limitations. With some of these one can literally plot a mission sitting at one's lap-top, launch the drone and go drink a beer, while the drone flies the mission completely autonomously.
I have flown missions of over 5km away, with the only reason for turning back was fear of running out of battery. An autonomous mission does not need remote control contact, and if one is not concerned about retrieving the drone, missions of beyond 10km - one way - are easy to accomplish.
The above is not a big deal technically and has been done for years with large, expensive drones. The problem now is that these small drones can be bought relatively cheaply at any good toy store by anybody (without so much as a background check )

The only real solution is regulation - regulation of both the hardware and software, and we have seen how efficient regulation of firearms has been.....

[kallend 2,106]

gowlerk

Drones definitely are going to be used to do evil.

When drones are used to kill 1% as many Americans each year as guns, I'll start worrying about them

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 235]

kallend

***Drones definitely are going to be used to do evil.

When drones are used to kill 1% as many Americans each year as guns, I'll start worrying about them

I think that ignores the real possibility of an explosives packed drone flying into an aircraft or into a crowd but yes, as far as current common usage goes that's fair to say.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[gowlerk 2,249]

On the tenth anniversary of the "Miracle on the Hudson" it may be instructive to understand that a goose weighs about eight pounds. Aircraft hit them often. How does a sighting of a small drone justify shutting down an airport but a bird hanging around is no big deal? I know, airports do what they can to shoo them away, but unless there is a flock of them on a runway they do not close.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[yoink 321]

gowlerk

On the tenth anniversary of the "Miracle on the Hudson" it may be instructive to understand that a goose weighs about eight pounds. Aircraft hit them often. How does a sighting of a small drone justify shutting down an airport but a bird hanging around is no big deal? I know, airports do what they can to shoo them away, but unless there is a flock of them on a runway they do not close.

Because we don’t test jet engines and windscreens by firing drones into them, so they represent a much more unknown threat?
Because it’s more likely a drone is being operated around an airport with a deliberate malign intent than a bird?

[billvon 3,068]

>How does a sighting of a small drone justify shutting down an airport but a bird
>hanging around is no big deal?

1) Birds tend to avoid airplanes and airports when possible (google all the research going into making airports less hospitable to birds to help with this.)

2) Birds don't intend to harm aircraft.

3) Bird impacts are well characterized.

[gowlerk 2,249]

More news on the drone situation.

 

https://hackaday.com/2019/01/28/drone-sightings-a-new-british-comedy-soap-opera/

[gowlerk 2,249]

Still no closer to sorting this out. But at least they have humour...

https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/d3m4v7/five-questions-about-the-gatwick-drone-conspiracy-theorists

[jakee 1,562]

39 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Still no closer to sorting this out.

But you’re still sure that no one would try it near you because it’s be so easy to find and arrest them?

[gowlerk 2,249]

8 minutes ago, jakee said:

But you’re still sure that no one would try it near you because it’s be so easy to find and arrest them?

I didn't say that. What I said was that this would never become a way for someone to shut down a DZ operation for more than a very short time. And that if someone like Kimmy used it as method to do so they would be found out in the usual way police figure things out. Namely investigating those with motive and opportunity. Also, despite what the local police claim, there is still no reliable confirmation that a threat really existed at Gatwick.

[jakee 1,562]

3 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Also, despite what the local police claim, there is still no reliable confirmation that a threat really existed at Gatwick.

You mean the local police, the airport operators, and everyone else who was actually involved?

[gowlerk 2,249]

6 minutes ago, jakee said:

You mean the local police, the airport operators, and everyone else who was actually involved?

Actually involved in what? A wild goose chase?  92 sightings of a drone from "credible people". Not one single photograph, even though almost everyone now carries a Hi-res camera. This was mass hysteria.

Edited February 22, 2019 by gowlerk

[jakee 1,562]

6 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Actually involved in what? A wild goose chase?  92 sightings of a drone from "credible people". Not one single photograph, even though almost everyone now carries a Hi-res camera. This was mass hysteria.

Mass hysteria from who? You keep wanting to blame the police, you keep wanting to blame the public... it was the airport operators shut the runway down before anyone else was involved.

[gowlerk 2,249]

46 minutes ago, jakee said:

You keep wanting to blame the police, you keep wanting to blame the public... it was the airport operators shut the runway down before anyone else was involved.

No, but you have said that I do. I blame the police for the fiasco of locking up the innocent couple. This is the second time in this thread that you have misquoted me or accused me of saying things I did not. The mass hysteria I refer to does extend to airport management and to the public through the media.

[jakee 1,562]

9 hours ago, gowlerk said:

This is the second time in this thread that you have misquoted me or accused me of saying things I did not.

Really? Look at the post you made on Dec 22nd and the first post you made on Dec 29th.

 

Sorry, I don't think it's worth continuing this conversation if you're going to flat out lie about things you've said.