Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness

[Mrs Pingu]

So were the drone sightings reported by people with an interest in selling anti drone technology....?

[Chris S]

Yes, of course, large sums will now be spent on dubious technological solutions. No drone or operator will ever be found (seriously, there must hundreds of crashed drones littering the countryside, I've certainly found a few).

You're Blodwyn Pig, and ICMFP

[Wowbagger]

At risk of illuminating the purple light at GCHQ, If I wanted to attack a plane with a drone, I'd use it to deliver an incendiary device while it was on the ground.  Other suitable targets left as an exercise for the reader.

I love the fact that you have spent time (no matter how little of it) considering the best way to trash a plane 

As I have posted elsewhere, quite a few years ago some peace activists got into Fairford and did some very expensive damage to one of their warplanes. They were acquitted on the grounds that their action was in order to prevent a greater crime. I think that verdict was just as it should have been, but I can't see it happening these days.

I've been hunting for a source to corroborate this, but the best I can manage are 3 trials, 3 hung juries and 3 retrials. I'm still looking for the results of the retrials.

https://peacenews.info/node/4184/hat-trick-fairford-activists

Found it.

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

I reckon that sums it up.

[ian]

So were the drone sightings reported by people with an interest in selling anti drone technology....?

Probably not, but I'm sure they'll take the opportunity that's been presented. If I had some clever-sounding anti-drone tech I'd be knocking on their door.

[Vernon]

So were the drone sightings reported by people with an interest in selling anti drone technology....?

Such as BAE Systems, or Lockheed Martin (or some other company largely owned by Philip May's investment group)? Hmmm, <ponders> No, I doubt it. 

[MikeFromLFE]

Or, as we now learn, you can bring one major airport to a standstill with a few mates phoning in reported sightings of drones. Thus, with a few more mates you could simultaneously bring lots of airports to a standstill by phoning in lots of sightings around lots of airports.

[andrewc]

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1076917050130554881


A spokesperson for Birmingham Airport says flights have been temporarily suspended due to an "air traffic control fault" and is advising passengers to check with their airlines "regarding flight departures and arrivals"


Anyone seen Kim recently ? 

[Tim Hall]

Does anyone else think of Bertie Wooster whenever Drones are mentioned? No? Just me then.

[Kim]

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1076917050130554881


A spokesperson for Birmingham Airport says flights have been temporarily suspended due to an "air traffic control fault" and is advising passengers to check with their airlines "regarding flight departures and arrivals"

Anyone seen Kim recently ? 

Sorry.  I coughed too hard and they saw a bogey on their radar screen...

[Cudzoziemiec]

Does anyone else think of Bertie Wooster whenever Drones are mentioned? No? Just me then.

Crumpets for tea is it, Tim?

[Cudzoziemiec]

There was a vid of what appeared to be a drone flying above a place that looked like an airport terminal on a day that was claimed to be yesterday. I'm sure a link to it was posted here.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Or, as we now learn, you can bring one major airport to a standstill with a few mates phoning in reported sightings of drones. Thus, with a few more mates you could simultaneously bring lots of airports to a standstill by phoning in lots of sightings around lots of airports.

But then you could do the same by phoning in sightings of "suspicious packages."

[Peter]

Ah, thanks!

[andrewc]

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1076917050130554881


A spokesperson for Birmingham Airport says flights have been temporarily suspended due to an "air traffic control fault" and is advising passengers to check with their airlines "regarding flight departures and arrivals"

Anyone seen Kim recently ? 

Sorry.  I coughed too hard and they saw a bogey on their radar screen...

 

[Jakob]

I guarantee you that they'll still make even more silly anti-drone laws.
This isn't the first time.

[Giraffe]

Really, that couple shouldn't have been named. The police said that the arrest was 'lawful'. Assuming that those two did nothing wrong and weren't involved in any way, there was no evidence at all against them (an accusation is not evidence, however many people say the same thing), so it was false imprisonment. I hope that they get good compensation.

A far worse case was when that garden designer in Bristol was murdered. Her landlord was charged and named - he didn't do it, but his reputation was ruined.
Yes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but evidence is not proof. In the absence of guilt there is no evidence at all, just incompetence and stupidity.

[De Sisti]

Really, that couple shouldn't have been named. The police said that the arrest was 'lawful'. Assuming that those two did nothing wrong and weren't involved in any way, there was no evidence at all against them (an accusation is not evidence, however many people say the same thing), so it was false imprisonment. I hope that they get good compensation.

A far worse case was when that garden designer in Bristol was murdered. Her landlord was charged and named - he didn't do it, but his reputation was ruined.
Yes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but evidence is not proof. In the absence of guilt there is no evidence at all, just incompetence and stupidity.

There were some on this forum who were happy to post photographs of the couple.

[ian]

Really, that couple shouldn't have been named. The police said that the arrest was 'lawful'. Assuming that those two did nothing wrong and weren't involved in any way, there was no evidence at all against them (an accusation is not evidence, however many people say the same thing), so it was false imprisonment. I hope that they get good compensation.

A far worse case was when that garden designer in Bristol was murdered. Her landlord was charged and named - he didn't do it, but his reputation was ruined.
Yes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but evidence is not proof. In the absence of guilt there is no evidence at all, just incompetence and stupidity.

But that's how it works, there has to be a compelling (and defined) reason for anonymity. Sometimes you don't even need to be charged, the police will turn up with the media in helicopters above your house. That said, gazing into my crystal ball, I see them receiving a financial donation from the chaps in blue. While the police may lack the resources to address ordinary crime, they do seem to have limitless resources for paying off people (and hanging around football matches). That said, I think our entire legal profession is all a bit dim, some senior barrister was bemoaning the fact that people who look nice and present themselves well in the witness box are more likely to get off. Erm, really.

It does seem a mite peculiar that given the resources of the military, police, and airport, the only footage we have of these drones is a couple of unverified videos on the internet...

[fuaran]

With all of the plane spotters sitting around with their telephoto lenses, plus all of the media, you'd think someone could have got a decent photo/video.
And identified what make/model of drone it actually was. Several reports claimed it was an 'industrial' drone,  I'm not sure how they worked that out.

[Jaded]

It was working very hard?

[ian]

The 'we found a broken drone' seems increasingly desperate. 'But the rain may have washed away any evidence...'

Yeah, it might have.

I suspect we'll have more genuine footage of Santa this evening than there will ever be of any Gatwick drone.

[Ben T]

My money is on the authorities in a ruse to get civilian drone usage banned.

Same as bottled water manufactuers being behind whatever caused liquids to be banned.

There was a vid of what appeared to be a drone flying above a place that looked like an airport terminal on a day that was claimed to be yesterday. I'm sure a link to it was posted here.

Thing about the videos is it could have been anywhere - I bet the background was just sky.

With all of the plane spotters sitting around with their telephoto lenses, plus all of the media, you'd think someone could have got a decent photo/video.
And identified what make/model of drone it actually was. Several reports claimed it was an 'industrial' drone,  I'm not sure how they worked that out.

With a telephoto lens I would think you would struggle to get the airport in the background in focus.

[De Sisti]

, some senior barrister was bemoaning the fact that people who look nice and present themselves well in the witness box are more likely to get off. Erm, really.

Unconcious bias ("Forget the evidence, you look like me, so I'm going to find you not guilty").

[ian]

, some senior barrister was bemoaning the fact that people who look nice and present themselves well in the witness box are more likely to get off. Erm, really.

Unconcious bias ("Forget the evidence, you look like me, so I'm going to find you not guilty").

It's not really that unconscious tbh, but it is the obvious outcome of an adversarial justice system.

[Kim]

Actually, I'm changing my vote to the 'there was no drone' and it's one of the 'big cat' style things. They never found the Beast of Sydenham either.

Mine too.  And I'm going to go a step further and suggest that it will still be used as an excuse to install - at great expense - marginally effective anti-drone security theatre.

Nailed it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46670714