Drones shut down Dublin Airport

[Mazdaman323lx]

Ryanair calls on Eamon Ryan to take action to prevent further drone disruptions at Dublin Airport

Ryanair has called on Transport Minister Eamon Ryan to take action to prevent further drone disruptions at Dublin Airport after it said hundreds of passengers saw flights diverted again for a second day.

www.independent.ie

 

[Ty Pilot]

Another "report" of drones spotted without actually "reporting" who it was that saw the drones. Perhaps interview the person that claims they saw a drone and "report" that. But nope they'll just run with it as the gospel.

 

[sar104]

Another "report" of drones spotted without actually "reporting" who it was that saw the drones. Perhaps interview the person that claims they saw a drone and "report" that. But nope they'll just run with it as the gospel.

Do you actually think that the airport operators would shut down flight operations, with significant costs, without reasonable evidence that the "confirmed sightings" were real? And I don't see that they have any responsibility to offer up witnesses to be cross-examined by news agencies just to satisfy public curiosity.

 

[Phantomrain.org]

I agree , they need to identify the type of Drone as it just to vague. Most likely alien.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain. Land on the Water

 

[Ty Pilot]

Do you actually think that the airport operators would shut down flight operations, with significant costs, without reasonable evidence that the "confirmed sightings" were real? And I don't see that they have any responsibility to offer up witnesses to be cross-examined by news agencies just to satisfy public curiosity.

I am reminded of the 'sightings' that happened at Gatwick (I believe), a while back.

Do I think the airport operators would shut down without reasonable evidence? Possibly, yes. If I were in a restaurant with my family and the fire alarm went off, I would not wait for proof of a fire, I would leave immediately because the repercussions of being wrong and waiting too long would be of a magnitude that warrants it.

If I were in charge and got a 'report' of a drone over a runway I probably would have diverted flights as well. Are these pilots that are seeing something on approach, and possibly misidentifying as a drone? Perhaps. Well then the report can at least say that. But the way that report reads, it leaves almost no doubt that there were drones over or near runways on 2 occasions.

 

[AZDave]

Another "report" of drones spotted without actually "reporting" who it was that saw the drones. Perhaps interview the person that claims they saw a drone and "report" that. But nope they'll just run with it as the gospel.

Did you read the article? It (as well as several other articles I found) states that there were two confirmed drone sightings. If the flight tower is sufficiently satisfied that the sighting is valid to justify diverting aircraft I think the reasonable reation from us would be to believe they had reasonable cause to do so.

 

[AZDave]

I am reminded of the 'sightings' that happened at Gatwick (I believe), a while back.

Do I think the airport operators would shut down without reasonable evidence? Possibly, yes. If I were in a restaurant with my family and the fire alarm went off, I would not wait for proof of a fire, I would leave immediately because the repercussions of being wrong and waiting too long would be of a magnitude that warrants it.

If I were in charge and got a 'report' of a drone over a runway I probably would have diverted flights as well. Are these pilots that are seeing something on approach, and possibly misidentifying as a drone? Perhaps. Well then the report can at least say that. But the way that report reads, it leaves almost no doubt that there were drones over or near runways on 2 occasions.

That's because as the article states, the sightings were confirmed. I don't really think that we should need to disbelieve that just because as drone hobbiests we're hoping it wasn't true.

 

[Mazdaman323lx]

Could be revenge flights for theNew Runway that opened recently. Many Many unhappy locals complaining about noise levels that they were assured would not affect them ? .

Dublin Airport apologises over noise as North Runway flights to be rerouted

Dublin Airport has apologised and said flights departing from the new North Runway will be rerouted after local communities were “unexpectedly overflown”.

www.independent.ie

 

[Ty Pilot]

Did you read the article? It (as well as several other articles I found) states that there were two confirmed drone sightings. If the flight tower is sufficiently satisfied that the sighting is valid to justify diverting aircraft I think the reasonable reation from us would be to believe they had reasonable cause to do so.

Yes and Yes. As I said above, had I been in charge at that airport I would have done the same.

My beef is with the report - the one linked in the OP.

That's because as the article states, the sightings were confirmed. I don't really think that we should need to disbelieve that just because as drone hobbiests we're hoping it wasn't true.

But see, thats just it - just because the 'article states' something does not make it fact. It may very well turn out that two drones made runway incursions at Dublin Airport and I have no skin to loose there - really wouldn't surprise me at all.

But media sensationalism is also a fact and reality of the world we live in. There is a reason more and more people are tuning out of main stream media.

 

[DoomMeister]

According to other articles in the Irish press there are a lot of folks unhappy with the new runway expansion and the inherent noise associated with it.

I would lay odds that the ‘drone reports’ may well have a source in those complaints. Still not an excuse for interruptions to flight operations and safety, but when protests and lodging complaints don’t work people usually resort to other tactics.

Edit:
Looks like @Mazdaman323lx was reading and writing about the same articles I did.

 

[Walleye Hunter]

The reports could be hoaxes or could be real but I could see them shutting the airport down, real or not. The downside to not err on the side of caution could be ugly.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Could be revenge flights for theNew Runway that opened recently. Many Many unhappy locals complaining about noise levels that they were assured would not affect them ? .

Dublin Airport apologises over noise as North Runway flights to be rerouted

Dublin Airport has apologised and said flights departing from the new North Runway will be rerouted after local communities were “unexpectedly overflown”.

www.independent.ie

And don't eliminate climate change protesters, for example ER are total nutters and love disrupting anyones lives to try and make their point (right or wrong).

Extinction Rebellion Heathrow activist charged over drone plan

Roger Hallam declared Heathrow expansion "a crime against humanity" as he appeared in court.

www.bbc.com

 

[Mazdaman323lx]

According to latest Article , the incident yesterday wasn't two drones rather than two confirmed sightings of a drone

 

[123taff]

Here we go again. The "precautionary" closure of an airport due to sightings of drones causing "upset" among us drone enthusiasts.
Of course the airport MUST act on such sightings however unlikely, do we REALLY expect them to do otherwise.

It doesn't matter what the validity of those sightings were OR the cause of those sightings, be it irresponsible drone owners actually violating closed airspace, or malicious intent by someone or an organisation with an axe to grind.

I can remember when the IRA were in the height of their UK mainland bombing campaign and the numbers of bomb hoaxes that I attended which caused immense inconvenience and were nothing more than high kick experiences for hoaxers!

Unfortunately, our "hobby" has the potential to excite these idiots and give protesters an idea weapon for civil disruption, and we wonder why our "hobby" seems overly regulated of late?

 

[Walleye Hunter]

Here we go again. The "precautionary" closure of an airport due to sightings of drones causing "upset" among us drone enthusiasts.
Of course the airport MUST act on such sightings however unlikely, do we REALLY expect them to do otherwise.

It doesn't matter what the validity of those sightings were OR the cause of those sightings, be it irresponsible drone owners actually violating closed airspace, or malicious intent by someone or an organisation with an axe to grind.

I can remember when the IRA were in the height of their UK mainland bombing campaign and the numbers of bomb hoaxes that I attended which caused immense inconvenience and were nothing more than high kick experiences for hoaxers!

Unfortunately, our "hobby" has the potential to excite these idiots and give protesters an idea weapon for civil disruption, and we wonder why our "hobby" seems overly regulated of late?

It is a problem that needs a cure. Here in the USA, schools have bomb scares all too frequently. One of them near me had two or three in one week.

 

[Don Testme]

Another "report" of drones spotted without actually "reporting" who it was that saw the drones. Perhaps interview the person that claims they saw a drone and "report" that. But nope they'll just run with it as the gospel.

You're definitely right. IT'S LIKE CALLING IN A FAKE BOMB THREAT. Everything shuts down. Now it's all about fake drone sightings. I'm calling b.$ on these sightings.

 

[gordonglg]

Do you actually think that the airport operators would shut down flight operations, with significant costs, without reasonable evidence that the "confirmed sightings" were real? And I don't see that they have any responsibility to offer up witnesses to be cross-examined by news agencies just to satisfy public curiosity.

Yes I do think they will overreact when someone screams “DRONE”. No real evidence. Two supposed airport sightings turned out to be plastic bags.

 

[shma2]

Do you actually think that the airport operators would shut down flight operations, with significant costs, without reasonable evidence that the "confirmed sightings" were real? And I don't see that they have any responsibility to offer up witnesses to be cross-examined by news agencies just to satisfy public curiosity.

I agree & in a perfect world, you are correct.
However, that is exactly what did happen at Gatwick.
As far as I'm aware, to this day there has never been any proof of a drone flying anywhere near the airport, yet they did shut it down.
I think there are reports that there was a helicopter lying around the perimeter & the police eventually put there own drone up, but that's it.
The press in the UK have a lot to answer for.....

 

[sar104]

I agree & in a perfect world, you are correct.
However, that is exactly what did happen at Gatwick.
As far as I'm aware, to this day there has never been any proof of a drone flying anywhere near the airport, yet they did shut it down.
I think there are reports that there was a helicopter lying around the perimeter & the police eventually put there own drone up, but that's it.
The press in the UK have a lot to answer for.....

And nor was there proof that there were not drones involved in the LGW incident. But, in any case, consider the logical conclusion of your argument - that they should not take any precautions unless the existence of the danger can be proved, which is a high bar. A pilot sighting of a hazard is never ignored, even though some may be mistaken.

Can you even begin to imagine the consequences if a collision occurred after a drone sighting was called in and the report ignored due to "lack of proof"?

 

[sar104]

I am reminded of the 'sightings' that happened at Gatwick (I believe), a while back.

Do I think the airport operators would shut down without reasonable evidence? Possibly, yes. If I were in a restaurant with my family and the fire alarm went off, I would not wait for proof of a fire, I would leave immediately because the repercussions of being wrong and waiting too long would be of a magnitude that warrants it.

If I were in charge and got a 'report' of a drone over a runway I probably would have diverted flights as well. Are these pilots that are seeing something on approach, and possibly misidentifying as a drone? Perhaps. Well then the report can at least say that. But the way that report reads, it leaves almost no doubt that there were drones over or near runways on 2 occasions.

If the sightings were confirmed then they were likely real. Somehow I don't think that you are in a position to decide otherwise.