Gatwick Airport (UK) suspends flights due to Drone activity

[Tbredhed]

Do you think that the Part 107 or whatever it is in other parts of the world eventually will be required to fly at all? And, could that not be a good thing? As an instrument certified private pilot and aircraft owner since 1993 I've come to think of the licensing process as the thing that keeps us all flying with the same rules and information, and that's what makes aviation safe. People who love the hobby will make the effort to get the certification, pros will already have it and the jerks will start to disappear. In aviation, the Pilot In Command is ultimately responsible for the safe outcome of his flight. When pilots and aircraft owners (of any kind) are operating with the same rules and information, it makes it safer for everybody. I think requiring the paper will eventually happen anyway, simply as a result of events like Gatwick, and more and more drones being operated by those who don't follow the rules.

A great idea but as numerous people have stated if your sole purpose is to cause chaos then you couldn't care less for the rules and will never get the required licences.

Unfortunately for us the politician that is only concerned with getting re-elected will be more than happy to pass ever more restrictive laws on the law abiding hobbyist, even though we all know what is needed is enforcement of the current laws and not more laws that the criminal element have no problem breaking.

 

[BigCat991]

The best course of action with the two people that have been arrested is, if there is enough evidence to charge them, just put one each in the North and South Terminals lock the doors and let them explain to the people who had their travel plans messed up why they did it. That would save the expense of a trial and prison costs.

 

[BBZ149]

Disagree....... just remove their hands

Would be nice if that was an option!

 

[ReadyKilowatt]

Do you think that the Part 107 or whatever it is in other parts of the world eventually will be required to fly at all? And, could that not be a good thing? As an instrument certified private pilot and aircraft owner since 1993 I've come to think of the licensing process as the thing that keeps us all flying with the same rules and information, and that's what makes aviation safe. People who love the hobby will make the effort to get the certification, pros will already have it and the jerks will start to disappear. In aviation, the Pilot In Command is ultimately responsible for the safe outcome of his flight. When pilots and aircraft owners (of any kind) are operating with the same rules and information, it makes it safer for everybody. I think requiring the paper will eventually happen anyway, simply as a result of events like Gatwick, and more and more drones being operated by those who don't follow the rules.

Upvoted your post, but remember the worst terrorist attack on US soil was performed by unlicensed individuals who overtook aircraft in order to fly them into buildings.

 

[Vimana]

Do you think that the Part 107 or whatever it is in other parts of the world eventually will be required to fly at all? And, could that not be a good thing?
I think requiring the paper will eventually happen anyway, simply as a result of events like Gatwick, and more and more drones being operated by those who don't follow the rules.

I suspect you will be proven to be right, although I agree with Tbredhed that those who want to undermine any system for illegal or terrorism purposes will find a way past any regulation. The first question to ask is if there is already enough legislation in place (which is a different question or issue to whether or not there is enough enforcement in place).

Then, as suggested, part of any new legislation is aimed at satisfying public perception no matter how illogical it might be.

That said, looking at examples in other industries, the issue can be approached in two ways, if it is the case that increased control is considered necessary.

One is to look at controlling the human being (e.g. licensing, registration, insurance, mandatory membership to governing bodies, etc). The other is to control the devices (e.g. Software or hardware locks and presets, geofencing, etc). My personal preference would be to focus on controlling the devices and minimise the impact on the majority of hobbyists who act responsibly.

 

[ReadyKilowatt]

The real problem as I see it is that the public is going to perceive all drones as DJI drones. It is highly likely that the perpetrator was using a homemade drone. In addition to my DJI drones, I also have a 3DR Solo that I use for experimentation with ham radio. It uses Ardupilot software, which is mostly open source, and open source controller hardware (AKA the "Green Cube"). It is a trivial matter to build a somewhat disposable drone with an Arduino flight controller and very inexpensive GPS and IMU. If you're just looking to cause chaos you don't even need a remote control, just pre-program the thing to take off, fly to waypoint X and hover. Or fly a pattern. Even DJI's Ground station Pro software downloads the flightpath into the drone before takeoff, although I believe the aircraft will still RTH if it loses signal with the controller. If the goal was to maximize flight time I imagine using a hex or penta-copter with a very large battery (or several in parallel) would be the way to go.

And it's pretty amazing how long you can fly without a payload in calm air, especially if you're not moving very quickly. A 15 minute flight on my Inspire 1 turns into a 25+ minute flight if I take off without the X5 camera, not just due to the weight but also because the payload camera uses a fair amount of power too.

 

[Vimana]

Then you are talking about enforcement here, rather than new legislation.
For a specialist subject like this, I have always liked the idea of individuals like yourself turning to be gamekeepers... (not saying that you were a poacher before!)

 

[timinator]

Lost a car a couple of years ago because a driver operating an unsafe, unlicensed vehicle with no insurance and a suspended drivers license who crashed into me. All the regulations in the world won't matter.

This is not a legislative matter but a response matter in terms of how can the authorities actively engage rogue aircraft and remove the threat to a given piece of airspace and by extension, the travelling public.

 

[ataraxia]

The best course of action with the two people that have been arrested is, if there is enough evidence to charge them, just put one each in the North and South Terminals lock the doors and let them explain to the people who had their travel plans messed up why they did it. That would save the expense of a trial and prison costs.

Ooh I'd buy a ticket to be in that room!

 

[sar104]

The real problem as I see it is that the public is going to perceive all drones as DJI drones. It is highly likely that the perpetrator was using a homemade drone. In addition to my DJI drones, I also have a 3DR Solo that I use for experimentation with ham radio. It uses Ardupilot software, which is mostly open source, and open source controller hardware (AKA the "Green Cube"). It is a trivial matter to build a somewhat disposable drone with an Arduino flight controller and very inexpensive GPS and IMU. If you're just looking to cause chaos you don't even need a remote control, just pre-program the thing to take off, fly to waypoint X and hover. Or fly a pattern. Even DJI's Ground station Pro software downloads the flightpath into the drone before takeoff, although I believe the aircraft will still RTH if it loses signal with the controller. If the goal was to maximize flight time I imagine using a hex or penta-copter with a very large battery (or several in parallel) would be the way to go.

And it's pretty amazing how long you can fly without a payload in calm air, especially if you're not moving very quickly. A 15 minute flight on my Inspire 1 turns into a 25+ minute flight if I take off without the X5 camera, not just due to the weight but also because the payload camera uses a fair amount of power too.

The police have already stated that they had identified the two drones, and that they were commercial aircraft. It's unlikely that they were DJI aircraft since they had Aeroscope deployed and it was unsuccessful.

 

[warpfactor55]

I have only just landed on htis topic and read the first 4 pages and the last 4 so please excuse if I am covering things that have already been stated.

1. Someone wrote that you wouldn't be able to take a drone out with a rifle. It depends more on the rifle than the drone. A decent quick centre-fire rifle, a .22-250 or a .243 both with the right rounds would smash a Mavic size drone to pieces at 1000ft in a direct hit. But of course the problem lies with the fall-out, especially over populated areas.

2. I don't think there is any doubt that drone owners are going to be heavily regulated in the near future. But, just like legitimate U.K. firearms holders who have to jump through hoops to get a permit it isn't the permit holders who break the law, it's the illegal firearms that kill and main people and it will be the illegal drones and un-licensed owners that will cause problems.

3. It must have been a terrible experience for the many thousands of travellers who have had their Christmas breaks completely wrecked. But some of the comments coming from the public frankly amaze me. One female stated tha the airport had "breached her human rights", presumably by not allowing her to fly. A lot more would have been breached if her flight had departed and the "drone" had downed it. And a lad said that he had been prevented from getting to a wedding that he was looking forward to. If I had been there and my flight had been cancelled, sure, I would have been annoyed, maybe mad, but at the drone operator(s), not at the Gatwick Admin. I would be thanking them for potentially saving my life.

 

[FoxhallGH]

Do you think that the Part 107 or whatever it is in other parts of the world eventually will be required to fly at all? And, could that not be a good thing? As an instrument certified private pilot and aircraft owner since 1993 I've come to think of the licensing process as the thing that keeps us all flying with the same rules and information, and that's what makes aviation safe. People who love the hobby will make the effort to get the certification, pros will already have it and the jerks will start to disappear. In aviation, the Pilot In Command is ultimately responsible for the safe outcome of his flight. When pilots and aircraft owners (of any kind) are operating with the same rules and information, it makes it safer for everybody. I think requiring the paper will eventually happen anyway, simply as a result of events like Gatwick, and more and more drones being operated by those who don't follow the rules.

Well maybe - but it would be nice if somebody who builds / flies a micro-light aircraft had to be as regulated as a recreational drone operator. Not saying that I don't agree with the regulation, but it should be across the board. Anybody can fly off in a micro-light a/c and doesn't even need a birth certificate let alone any sort of license or Code to fly it. Personally, I'm looking forward to the UK getting the same sort of registration process for drones as USA has - but that's not going to stop those who don't give a **** about rules and reg's like these two at Gatwick. I do agree however, that a certification (and renewal) process puts us all on the same hymn sheet ...
Long-term, I think that it would be best for Governments of all countries to put their weight behind the International Standards Organisation, who are trying to get a standard adopted for the manufacture of UAV's. If all UAV's used the same standards for Geo-fencing and data transmission, then all drones would have the same Geo-Fence limits, and systems like DJI AeroScope would pick up every drone - not just DJI.

[Edit: Correction - I wrote about 'micro-light aircraft' above - but was actually referring to 'powered parachutes / paraplanes' - apologies to those who own and pilot ultra-light a/c.]

 

[Jackcutrone]

To al those who have been in denial about this and who have been posting that this is all a hoax, that there were no drones since no one had photographed or video'ed them (despite the photos and videos that were posted here), including a poster who called me an idiot - now that two people have been arrested and presumably the police have seized both the large and small drone that were seen by the delivery driver, I hope you will admit that you were wrong.

 

[Dizzy1971]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

footage of the drone people are saying

Pretty sure that was just a Martian

 

[FoxhallGH]

Pretty sure that was just a Martian

Nope - not red enough! Seriously though - that's not the best of the photo's taken. There is even some suggestion that in this case, this may have shown the lights of a Police helicopter trying to find the drone (no 100% confirm on that). Best sighting of the drone was when the operator buzzed Gatwick tower, and hovered outside the window apparently!!!!

 

[Asgard]

"Well maybe - but it would be nice if somebody who builds / flies a micro-light aircraft had to be as regulated as a recreational drone operator. Not saying that I don't agree with the regulation, but it should be across the board. Anybody can fly off in a micro-light a/c and doesn't even need a birth certificate let alone any sort of license or Code to fly it."

Hold on a minute, I fly microlights, I had to obtain a pilots licence, my aircraft has to be insured and pass an airworthiness test and check flight every year I have to renew my licence rating every 2 years and obey the ANO like any other Pilot, I need to keep a log book of my flying hours and a log of the airframe/engine hours and any maintanance done, any modifications need to inspected and passed of by the BMAA....I could go on

 

[FoxhallGH]

"Well maybe - but it would be nice if somebody who builds / flies a micro-light aircraft had to be as regulated as a recreational drone operator. Not saying that I don't agree with the regulation, but it should be across the board. Anybody can fly off in a micro-light a/c and doesn't even need a birth certificate let alone any sort of license or Code to fly it."

Hold on a minute, I fly microlights, I had to obtain a pilots licence, my aircraft has to be insured and pass an airworthiness test and check flight every year I have to renew my licence rating every 2 years and obey the ANO like any other aircraft, I need to keep a log book of my flying hours and a log of the airframe/engine hours and any maintanance done, any modifications need to inspected and passed of by the BMAA....I could go on

I may have been misinformed then ... What country are you in @Asgard ???

 

[Asgard]

Same one as you

 

[kilomikebravo]

probably to idiots who have moved on from laser pens!

Duff: You may very well be correct. Before I retired, I used to fly a trip through Indy regularly and dang near every night, some moron would shine a green laser at the cockpit windows while we were on downwind. It wasn't blinding and didn't cause any safety issues but I know other pilots who got hit with more powerful lasers and they did have to go see an eye doctor.

It got reported multiple times and eventually stopped.

 

[FoxhallGH]

Same one as you

In that case, I'm very sorry @Asgard and withdraw that comment. I've obviously misunderstood something I heard ... I think that what may have been talked about was 'powered parachutes' - Which of course, are nothing like Microlight Aircraft. Are they under different rules???